RN anti-ship missiles

[Tempest414]

With the above said do we think a Aster 30 could make a high supersonic hit on a ship at 100+ km I would think a 450 kg missile going at Mach 2+ hitting a ship may bring a mission kill

[Jdam]

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/nava ... -programme

UK confirms cancellation of I-SSGW programme

And there it is the option we all feared has happened. To be replaced with a program that has not even started yet

[Defiance]

Realistically if the ISD estimate of 2026-2027 is accurate then I can see why they canned it. Why spend £200mn on something you only plan to get 3-4 years use from.

Of course, that relies on FC/ASW sticking to the timeline.

[Rentaghost]

Isn't it the case that the RN only got serious about AShMs when the CV-01 programme got canned and all of a sudden they bolted Exocet to any thing that would float?

Isn't RN doctrine that the primary ship killer is the SSN, followed by carrier strike and then, a distant third, escort fired missiles?

Over the horizon missile shooting still analysis relied on something to cue the target, right? In a properly peer contested environment that always felt a bit of a stretch in terms of survivability.

Until we have a proper sovereign persistant ISR capability, we won't get the maximum use out of an over the horizon missile, hypersonic or not.

[GarethDavies1]

All a bit of a fudge for me. The capability for a Type 23 or Type 26 to protect it's self from hostile ships has not gone away, especially if the ship is carrying a Merlin with no anti ship capability. Even with a Wildcat embarked this is a major risk as I assume its primary role will be to attack SSNs with Stingrays especially if it is correct that Type 23s no longer carry torpedoes.

[Rentaghost]

Lacking a decent SSM for the escort fleet is also nothing new. Harpoon is generally agreed to be obsolete, and probably for a few years now.

Any capability holiday you incur doesn't start when you get rid of hardware, but when that hardware is no longer competitive. Arguably, we've not had a realistic SSM capability for a while now.

[Defiance]

Isn't RN doctrine that the primary ship killer is the SSN, followed by carrier strike and then, a distant third, escort fired missiles?

It is (or was) back in the day, but the RN today is a different beast. My issue with SSNs is we just don't have enough of them, we can't guarantee they can provide that anti-shipping capability to the fleet. Certainly not to the level of using them to remove that capability from the fleet.

F-35B eventually will have SPEAR 3. That side comes down to the old debate of many small weapons vs fewer large weapons. It probably won't see FC/ASW this side of 2035 considering the grief that putting Meteor on it has been.

IMO surface launched weapons are probably the easiest and cheapest way of getting that ship-killing capability back in the near-ish term.

[inch]

Makes you think in any conflict would our escort fleet be considered a hindrance and liability in any future conflict ,not even able to take the fight to the enemy and needing other nations asset's to defend our frigates and destroyers by actually taking out the opponent's ?

[jimthelad]

I guess if the need arises then a UOR would occur, Harpoon BlockIII would be the logical choice due to the missile interface being there already.

[SW1]

[Jdam]

Well that's not a coincidence

The General Delegate for Armaments Joël Barre, the Director @DefenceES & the CEO @byMBDA, launched the preparation work for the future anti-ship missile and future cruise missile (FMAN-FMC) after signing a state agreement and notification of contracts

How long does it usually take for 2 nations to build a new missile from the ground up?

[dmereifield]

Can the ASM come in the timeframe of the cancelled interim ASM timeline? What was that, 2026/2028?

[wargame_insomniac]

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/nava ... -programme

UK confirms cancellation of I-SSGW programme

And there it is the option we all feared has happened. To be replaced with a program that has not even started yet

I believe the RN currently has Harpoon Block IC on four of the six T45's and five of the T23's.
It is a shame that we can't upgrade enough missiles to Block II+, even if just enough to outfit all six T45's (by stripping the extra sets from T23's as they come out of service), or even go for the NSM as a cheaper option.

[Lord Jim]

One issue that is bugging me is that the Royal Navy seem to be willing to wait for a weapon system that is on the absolute cutting edge of technology in order to get ahead of the opposition. However this is taking considerable time and money with no results except a number of development stages being met as a very slow pace. We are years away for even seeing a test firing. Also the Navy seems to forget that the Opposition are also developing their next generation ASHMs as well as improved counter measures.

Of interest is seems that the Royal Navy's requirements seems to be closer to that of the French and further away form that of teh RAF. Could this force the latter to look elsewhere for a Storm Shadow replacement?

We also seem to be reinventing the wheel whilst leaving our major Warships with a serious capability gap when there are many very effective weapon system out there, and any of these would allow us to develop a AShM that would enter service with more stable and tested components.

Finally I have been reading the usual internet sources and something popped up regarding the Royal Navies Wildcat. It seem that the weight of the Sea Venom will allow the Wildcat to carry only two missiles, one each side rather than the four originally envisioned. This means that a mixed load out with the Martlet would be one Sea Venom and ten Martlet. Still a very effective missile load out regardless of the combination carried though.

[xav]

Future Cruise And Anti-Ship Weapon FC/ASW Program Reaches New Milestone

The head of the French DGA, his British DE&S counterpart and the CEO of MBDA signed a bilateral agreement and contracts for the continued preparatory work for the Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon (FC/ASW) Programme. The kick-off meeting was held on 17th February 2022.

The objective of the FC/ASW Programme is to replace from 2028, the capabilities currently in service within the Royal Navy, the Royal Air Force (RAF), Marine Nationale (French Navy), and Armée de l’air et de l’espace (French Air Force) for anti-ship and deep strike missions.

Preparatory work has been underway since 2017 culminating in two weapon concepts. With these new contracts, MBDA, the European missile company, and its industrial partners from the two countries, will continue to work on the definition of two missile designs and will assess their performance to counter future threats and to deliver operational advantage through long-range strike.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... milestone/

[Jdam]

Just to be clear these are 2 different weapons, a cruise missile replacement and a anti ship missile replacement, its not a dual mode weapon?

[inch]

And uk mod will announce and field them in the buck Rogers 25 th century

[Rentaghost]

Just another thought, and probably a hopelessly optimistic one, but would saving a few hundred million from I-SSGW allow rhemcto get the mk.41 cells on the T31s?

[Tempest414]

As said could the RN use Aster 30 for anti ship two or more 450 kg missiles slamming in to a ship at Mach 2.5 + is going to have the effect of a mission kill given the damage to HMS Sheffield by a 780 kg Exocet going at Mach 0.9 with the war head failing to go off

[Timmymagic]

Just to be clear these are 2 different weapons, a cruise missile replacement and a anti ship missile replacement, its not a dual mode weapon?

At present there is no information either way. Both mock-ups have been seen for years (Le Bourget 2019 I think was their first outing), the announcement also doesn't make it clear. It could well be that a decision has still not been made on the way forward, I suspect we're still in disagreement over the type of missile it will be.

[donald_of_tokyo]

...Finally I have been reading the usual internet sources and something popped up regarding the Royal Navies Wildcat. It seem that the weight of the Sea Venom will allow the Wildcat to carry only two missiles, one each side rather than the four originally envisioned. This means that a mixed load out with the Martlet would be one Sea Venom and ten Martlet. Still a very effective missile load out regardless of the combination carried though.

Really?

Stingray torpedo weighs 267 kg each, and I think Wildcat can carry two of them.

Sea Venom weighs 100 kg each, why cannot Wildcat carry at least 4 Sea Venoms?

[Lord Jim]

I cannot find the article again but I am pretty sure it quoted a weight for Sea Venom greater then 100kg. The writer was also very sure that the weight meant only two could now be carried. Does the 100kg figure include the Rocket Booster?

[donald_of_tokyo]

Official document states 120 kg now.
https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/sea-venom-anl/

But it is still less than half of Stingray?

I know there are issues with carrying 4-sets of 5 LMM on Wildcat (it can, but has limitation and not yet certified), but not yet heard of anything on Sea Venom.

If Sea Venom is too heavy, I shall propose make it more heavy to achieve 100+ km range, so that it can replace some part of Harpoon/I-SSGW gap.

[GarethDavies1]

I'd prefer a small buy of JSM missiles to be launched from F-35B.

[Tempest414]

I cannot find the article again but I am pretty sure it quoted a weight for Sea Venom greater then 100kg. The writer was also very sure that the weight meant only two could now be carried. Does the 100kg figure include the Rocket Booster?

Leonardo were testing Wildcat with the new wings and 4 Sea Venom around Yeovilton only the other week, they wouldn't be wasting their time on that if it couldn't carry them. It sounds like there is only clearance at present for 2 missiles on the inner wing stations because the full flight envelope hasn't been cleared yet (hence why Leonardo are doing the tests). The Wildcat's have also been up with asymetric loads of Sea Venom which very much indicates a test campaign that is still underway. I'd suggest that someone may have seen a temporary release of Sea Venom on inner wing pylons only and extrapolated from that that it is a permanent position..