Ground Based Air Defence

[Timmymagic]

I've read that it takes as many as 2000 simulated launches to learn to use Starstreak effectively, whereas LMM can be used effectively after a couple of hours of instruction. I've no idea how long it takes to train on Javelin, but I believe that it is more complex to use than nLAW. Both those systems are better suited to specialists - though I suppose the argument is whether or not those specialists are RA, or integral to the infantry unit.

I suspect the UK's huge number of simulated launches includes complex scenarios, target recognition and use of linked sensors like ADAD and IFF. Also when you're assigned to an RA or RM Air Defence Troop in peacetime their standards are going to be at an exceptionally high level. They're not going to be doing live firings that often, and they have access to simulators so may as well use them relentlessly...I wouldn't be surprised if they applied the same standards to LMM/Martlet as they do Starstreak.

[wargame_insomniac]

Personally I think that the lighter simpler MANPADS (and Anti-Tank Missiles) should be pushed down to the Infantry Battalions, and held at Platoon or Company level.

Tracked or wheeled GBADS such as Sky Sabre should be kept with the Royal Artillery.

What about Boxer APC armed with likes of Starstreak, Spike or Brimstone? I'm not so sure. I lean towards they should be pushed down to the Infantry Battalions, and held at Company or Battalion level.

[SW1]

We are buying a lot of RS rws and they’re manufactured in the U.K. by Thales. I would integrate lmm/starstreak with that rws and give the commanders the option to configure the system as they see fit for where they operating.

[sol]

What about Boxer APC armed with likes of Starstreak, Spike or Brimstone? I'm not so sure. I lean towards they should be pushed down to the Infantry Battalions, and held at Company or Battalion level.

Seems like there is a tendency to push more and more stuff on battalion level, at the time when the Army size is actually shrinking and lot of battalions are undermanned. Sure it would be nice for battalion have all those things on its own, but do you think that you are overburdening battalions and their logistic by giving it all these capabilities, basically converting them into ... mini brigades? Is this the most effective way of managing limited resources? What is a point of having BTC with it is actually consisted of many smaller BattCTs?

[RunningStrong]

We are buying a lot of RS rws and they’re manufactured in the U.K. by Thales. I would integrate lmm/starstreak with that rws and give the commanders the option to configure the system as they see fit for where they operating.

I wasn't aware that Kongsberg manufacture in the UK. The agreement is for systems integration and the sensors.

[SW1]

We are buying a lot of RS rws and they’re manufactured in the U.K. by Thales. I would integrate lmm/starstreak with that rws and give the commanders the option to configure the system as they see fit for where they operating.

I wasn't aware that Kongsberg manufacture in the UK. The agreement is for systems integration and the sensors.

I was under the impression Thales uk also assemble the RWS in the uk could be wrong.

[sol]

I was under the impression Thales uk also assemble the RWS in the uk could be wrong.

As part of the contract Thales, as a strategic partner to Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace, will fully assemble and integrate around 500 RWS and deliver and integrate circa 500 Thales Acusonic® systems onto the Boxer vehicles over the next 10 years, as part of the UK MOD’s Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) programme.

Not only will Thales integrate Kongsberg’s RWS onto these new armoured vehicles but as an additional bonus Thales also supplies several of the components used in the PROTECTOR RS4 creating a double win for Thales. The Catherine EZ Thermal Imaging Module as well as the CELT3 Laser Range Finder, both products that are made at the Glasgow site and form crucial elements for the completed RWS, giving them their cutting edge ‘situational awareness’ capability.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/united-k ... on-success

Remote stations will be assembled in Glasgow where some components of it are produced. But it does not mention that whole station is manufactured there.

[wargame_insomniac]

What about Boxer APC armed with likes of Starstreak, Spike or Brimstone? I'm not so sure. I lean towards they should be pushed down to the Infantry Battalions, and held at Company or Battalion level.

Seems like there is a tendency to push more and more stuff on battalion level, at the time when the Army size is actually shrinking and lot of battalions are undermanned. Sure it would be nice for battalion have all those things on its own, but do you think that you are overburdening battalions and their logistic by giving it all these capabilities, basically converting them into ... mini brigades? Is this the most effective way of managing limited resources? What is a point of having BTC with it is actually consisted of many smaller BattCTs?

I gather a British Mechanised Infantry Battalion would have approx 690 men.
How many Boxers would a British Mechanised Infantry Battalion have? Around 80 - 90?
How many Boxers in said Battalion would be uparmed with the likes of Starstreak/Spike/Brimstone??
I was assuming a limited number and therefore assumed that they were most likely to be assigned to a specialist support Platoon in the Fire Support Company.

https://uklandpower.com/2019/01/25/achi ... attalions/

If you have more detailed information on Boxers uparmed with the likes of Starstreak/Spike/Brimstone, how many there would be and to which formation they would be assigned, then I look forward to it.

[Lord Jim]

Don't Starstreak and LMM use the same guidance and control unit? All one has to do is keep the cross hairs of the control unit on the target and the missile closes on its target. It should be slightly easier when using Starstreak due to its speed and therefore shorter engagement time, whereas LMM has the advantage I believe fo a proximity warhead? I had a go on a Javelin MANPADS training launcher back in teh day, and it was simple to use. The only real issue was the rapid shifting of weight when the missile was fired making the launcher suddenly very nose heavy, so you had to reacquire the target quickly. That took a bit of practice.

Having a couple of two an teams at platoon level should be easily done. They would be specialists but still infantrymen first and foremost. Other nations have shoulder fired MANPADS integral with their infantry units I believe. The teams could each have a pedestal launcher for use, when possible, possibly stored on the outside of whatever transport they are in.

On a larger scale I would like to see the purchase of a number of SAMP-T batteries for either the RAF or Royal Artillery, enough to equip a single Regiment. It has been shown that SAMP-T is readily integrated with Land Ceptor and CAMM-ER, to provide an integrated layered GBADS. This would provide commonality with the Royal Navy and the militaries of France and Italy. Its radar provides 360-degree coverage whereas the current Patriot radar only provides around a sixty to seventy degree coverage, though this is being modified initially to provide 360-degree coverage and a new radar is on the way as well. Not a problem when you know what direction the enemy is likely to be coming from. Adding CAMM-ER to the mix would produce a solid layered defence with overlapping capabilities, as Italy is aiming to do.

I do think we need a gun-based system using a thirty to forty millimetre auto cannon with a radar FCS as well as good EO capabilities. I would like to see any system mounted in a Boxer Mission-Module.

Where there is a will there is a way. The UK can easily procure a fully integrated GBAD System if the need is prioritised, and funding made available. We should not just go for a ABM capability as this could lead to very expensive SAMs being used to engage simpler targets. But we will have to wait and see what results from all this recent chatter about a European GDAD System.

[sol]

How many Boxers would a British Mechanised Infantry Battalion have? Around 80 - 90?

Depending on which vehicles in the battalion they will replace. If just replacing Warriors, than 67, if replacing every other armoured vehicle, than over 80. But FV430 has its own replacement program and so far it is unknown how would mechanised battalion on Boxer be equipped.

How many Boxers in said Battalion would be uparmed with the likes of Starstreak/Spike/Brimstone??
I was assuming a limited number and therefore assumed that they were most likely to be assigned to a specialist support Platoon in the Fire Support Company.

None. But there will be some Boxers equipped with Javelin on RS4 in infantry companies and anti-tank platoon which will have dismounted Javelin teams.

https://uklandpower.com/2019/01/25/achi ... attalions/

Not sure what is a point using someone's proposal how battalion should be organised. I can only talk about how battalions are now structured as, as far as I know, there is no intention to change it in the FA, or at least it is not announced if there is one.

If you have more detailed information on Boxers uparmed with the likes of Starstreak/Spike/Brimstone, how many there would be and to which formation they would be assigned, then I look forward to it.

So far UK did not ordered a single Boxer armed with Starstreak/Spike/Brimstone and therefor there is no such info. As I said, some Boxers in infantry companies will have Javelin mounted on their RS4 and that is all. There was/is a requirement for overwatch variant equipped with Brimstone but so far the Army did not placed any official order on those.

[Caribbean]

It should be slightly easier when using Starstreak due to its speed and therefore shorter engagement time, whereas LMM has the advantage I believe fo a proximity warhead?

The other way around LJ.

Starstreak is said to require much faster reactions and a higher degree of hand-eye co-ordination, in order to track the target - presumably you need to be able to follow a manoeuvring target much more closely when the darts are travelling at Mach 4.5 than when the warhead is travelling at Mach 1,5, as even a momentary lapse in tracking would mean it is much more likely for the darts to pass the target, needing it to expend a lot of it's energy in manoeuvring to re-acquire it and the attack potentially failing

Don't both have proximity fusing as an option?

[SW1]

I was under the impression Thales uk also assemble the RWS in the uk could be wrong.

As part of the contract Thales, as a strategic partner to Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace, will fully assemble and integrate around 500 RWS and deliver and integrate circa 500 Thales Acusonic® systems onto the Boxer vehicles over the next 10 years, as part of the UK MOD’s Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) programme.

Not only will Thales integrate Kongsberg’s RWS onto these new armoured vehicles but as an additional bonus Thales also supplies several of the components used in the PROTECTOR RS4 creating a double win for Thales. The Catherine EZ Thermal Imaging Module as well as the CELT3 Laser Range Finder, both products that are made at the Glasgow site and form crucial elements for the completed RWS, giving them their cutting edge ‘situational awareness’ capability.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/united-k ... on-success

Remote stations will be assembled in Glasgow where some components of it are produced. But it does not mention that whole station is manufactured there.

This what they say not sure how accurate mind.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwid ... tation-rws

Thales has a teaming agreement with Kongsberg to manufacture and sell its PROTECTOR RWS

[sunstersun]

IRIS-T apparently is doing fantastic in Ukraine. Not a huge surprise given it's literally brand new technology, but it's still good to see Western tech work in war time conditions.

Hopefully NASAMS is as effective.

[leonard]

And we have now first video from litteraly inside the vehicle itself from a Stormer SAM system shooting down Russian UAV in Ukraine.

[mr.fred]

And we have now first video from litteraly inside the vehicle itself from a Stormer SAM system shooting down Russian UAV in Ukraine.

The missile hitting the target hasn’t come from the observing vehicle though, and the exhaust plume suggests it isn’t Starstreak.

[Phil Sayers]

It's an SA-8 Osa that shoots it down apparently, just viewed from the Stormer. Good to see Ukraine combining the platforms IMO.

[Halidon]

It's an SA-8 Osa that shoots it down apparently, just viewed from the Stormer. Good to see Ukraine combining the platforms IMO.

The Stormer's high quality tracking makes it a good choice to spot for other vehicles shooting at drones whilst holding onto its missiles for more difficult targets.

[NickC]

Assuming the Stormer using the Starstreak HVM upgrade part of the Future Air Defence Availability Project, F-ADAPT, which includes a thermal imaging surveillance sensor system which enables 24 hour use of Starstreak as said can act as an IFF so as not to target friendly a/c, helos etc?

[mr.fred]

The original Stormer HVM includes a thermal surveillance sensor and thermal imaging sight for 24hr operation.
An update will almost certainly be better, but the original has the capability.
IFF is kind of challenging when both sides use similar aircraft and helos.

[leonard]

In this photo from the frontlines of Ukraine we can see the way that the Ukranian Army put the payload of Martlet/LMM missiles and the Starstreak missiles on their Stormer HVM .