Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Lord Jim »

Adding Starstreak/LMM launch tubes to 30mm mounts should be an easy win for the RN and RFA, adding to the air defence and close anti surface capabilities of numerous ships.

GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 86
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by GarethDavies1 »

Shame the MOD/RN doesn't see it that easy.

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by KiwiMuzz »

Lord Jim wrote:Adding Starstreak/LMM launch tubes to 30mm mounts should be an easy win for the RN and RFA, adding to the air defence and close anti surface capabilities of numerous ships.
Not to mention the 40mm and/or 57mm mounts on the Type 31s... :)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Timmymagic »

KiwiMuzz wrote:Not to mention the 40mm and/or 57mm mounts on the Type 31s...
Probably cheaper, and far easier, to add the standalone 4 round Martlet launcher recently seen, than hang it on the side of a closed mount of a larger gun.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Repulse »

It is interesting that the Seahawk Sigma platform has dropped from 5 to 4 missiles, there must be a reason for it? Perhaps the trials on HMS Sutherland a couple of years ago highlighted an issue?

Image
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by RichardIC »

Repulse wrote:Perhaps the trials on HMS Sutherland a couple of years ago highlighted an issue?
Like this could do considerable damage to your ship?

Image

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Repulse »

RichardIC wrote:
Repulse wrote:Perhaps the trials on HMS Sutherland a couple of years ago highlighted an issue?
Like this could do considerable damage to your ship?

Image
Would agree with that - at best a very limit arc of fire. What I'm not clear on is why go from five to four? The rocket exhaust would still strip the paint (and melt a new window).
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by mr.fred »

That picture looks dramatic, but doesn’t indicate how long that fire trail lasts. It’s the duration that will determine how much energy is transferred and thus how much damage is done.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by RunningStrong »

Repulse wrote:It is interesting that the Seahawk Sigma platform has dropped from 5 to 4 missiles, there must be a reason for it? Perhaps the trials on HMS Sutherland a couple of years ago highlighted an issue?

Image
I expect it's a performance issue. That's a fair bit of imbalance weight to be hanging off a gun system that's supposed to be quite rapid moving.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Timmymagic »

Repulse wrote:It is interesting that the Seahawk Sigma platform has dropped from 5 to 4 missiles, there must be a reason for it? Perhaps the trials on HMS Sutherland a couple of years ago highlighted an issue?
It was originally 7 missiles....

Image

The 7 missile set up was the same as was originally proposed for Wildcat.

Image

I think that was changed due to the new Wildcat Weapons Wing, and potential ground clearance issues of the bottom 2 canisters when a heavy landing occured, particularly aboard ship. The 5 missile canister seen in the trials aboard HMS Sutherland was borrowed from that programme. I suspect the reason for the switch to 4 missiles is far more prosaic, it looks like a more durable, 'sea ready' setup rather than the lighter, air focused 5 missile container used in the trials.

And that might be a good sign....if MSI are prepared to invest to create a more, permanent, integrated solution than the previous 7 or 5 missile lash-ups it looks like they may have confidence in orders coming...

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Timmymagic »

mr.fred wrote:That picture looks dramatic, but doesn’t indicate how long that fire trail lasts. It’s the duration that will determine how much energy is transferred and thus how much damage is done.
It's a kick motor so its measured in milliseconds. Main motor ignition is c15 metres from the firing platform.

Even in this slowed down footage its over in an incredibly short space of time..you can see the main motor ignition when the missile has cleared the Wildcat.


donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

MISTARL missile is used worldwide. The initial stage motor backdraft is common, and they are all "properly handled".

- SADRAL 6-missile launcher
- TETRAL 4-missile launcher
- Simbad/Simbad-RC 2-missile launcher

So the initial stage motor backdraft is clearly an issue which can be easily handled.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Timmymagic »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:MISTARL missile is used worldwide. The initial stage motor backdraft is common, and they are all "properly handled".

- SADRAL 6-missile launcher
- TETRAL 4-missile launcher
- Simbad/Simbad-RC 2-missile launcher

So the initial stage motor backdraft is clearly an issue which can be easily handled.
That will be the case for Mistral or Martlet(LMM). If we ever want to use Starstreak on the mount though (which may be dependent on whether the missile can be 'gathered' into the remote E/O sight in good time) we might need to do a bit more work. Starstreak firing is a lot more energetic than other MANPADS, particularly the blast and shock behind the firing post.

The video below really illustrates what a monster of a missile Starstreak is in comparison with other MANPADS (which are no slouch themselves, but look positively pedestrian in comparison..).



You can contrast it with LMM..



18 successful shots, then Army trials...plus Navy trials on Martlet and ASCG, made up of a whole lot more firings (particularly the Wildcat shots)....you have to wonder how many of the original 1,000 missiles ordered we actually have left...

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by mr.fred »

Timmymagic wrote:Starstreak firing is a lot more energetic than other MANPADS, particularly the blast and shock behind the firing post.
Doesn’t look that bad to me.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Lord Jim »

Agreed. Interesting that they seems to be a programme to push the MANPADS further forward and include them in Infantry Companies or be part of the Battalions Support Weapons Company etc. Does this means the non SP Starstreak/LMM launchers will be removed for the Reserve Royal Artillery Air Defence Regiment that currently hold the Army's Weapons, and be given to Infantry Battalions? Maybe the Regiment could then become a second such unit to operate CAMM is additional systems are ordered?

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Ron5 »

Timmymagic wrote:I think that was changed due to the new Wildcat Weapons Wing, and potential ground clearance issues of the bottom 2 canisters when a heavy landing occured, particularly aboard ship.
For real or just a theory?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Timmymagic »

Ron5 wrote:For real or just a theory?
Just a theory, but it was 7 rounds for an age, the 5 round launcher arrived with the weapons wing. Could be a host of reasons, aero related or weapons handling perhaps. But when you look at a Wildcat on the ground with the new wing and a 5 round pod they're only just lower than the main fuselage (the radome is obviously as well, but the Wildcat squats somewhat to the rear so its not as pronounced). The original wing seen with the 7 round pods held the missile pack higher and had an upwards camber (see the pic on previous page) so the bottom 2 canisters were still above the bottom of the fuselage. The switch to the larger weapons wing brought the munitions closer to the ground at rest. I suspect it was related (plus the ability to carry 4 packs, with a total of 20 missiles, rather than 2 with a total of 14 missiles).

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Ron5 »

Timmymagic wrote:
Ron5 wrote:For real or just a theory?
Just a theory, but it was 7 rounds for an age, the 5 round launcher arrived with the weapons wing. Could be a host of reasons, aero related or weapons handling perhaps. But when you look at a Wildcat on the ground with the new wing and a 5 round pod they're just lower than the main fuselage (the radome is obviously as well, but the Wildcat squats somewhat to the rear so its not as pronounced). The original wing seen with the 7 round pods had an upwards camber (see the pic on previous page) so the bottom 2 canisters were still above the bottom of the fuselage. The switch to the larger weapons wing brought the munitions closer to the ground at rest.
Makes sense to me. Saves weight too :thumbup:

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Lord Jim »

It is also interesting to see the difference in the launch tube between LMM and Starstreak. For example the four missiles on the Seahawk are Starstreak, the giveaway is the tube is the same diameter its whole length and the three bumps on the cover that coincide with the three darts. LMM's launch tube has a larger diameter for the first third of the tube.

GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 86
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by GarethDavies1 »

There is a video on YouTube which shows Starstreak having a 12 second launch sequence. Surely this is too long. Does anyone know if this can be over ridden?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by Lord Jim »

Starstreak is much faster than that. It whole reason for being was to engage helicopters conducting "Pop up" attacks with little or no warning and low level fast jets that were only visible for a short time, though more effective against the former.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by mr.fred »

GarethDavies1 wrote:There is a video on YouTube which shows Starstreak having a 12 second launch sequence. Surely this is too long. Does anyone know if this can be over ridden?
What does “launch sequence” mean in that context? Trigger pull to launch? detection to impact? You can see that these represent extreme ends of the scale. Can you share which video states this?

GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 86
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by GarethDavies1 »


GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 86
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by GarethDavies1 »

Not sure what is is meant by the 12 second timer start

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Martlet/Lightweight multirole missile

Post by mr.fred »

GarethDavies1 wrote:
It states that there is a 12s timer (and a 7.8s one) but it doesn’t indicate what that timer actually does. It could be a safety timer that cuts launch signal power after the launch window or breaks up the darts to reduce the danger area.
Given the other videos out there or the intended mode of function I cannot see any way that there could be a 12s delay between trigger pull and launch.

Post Reply