RN anti-ship missiles

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 395
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 512 times
Been liked: 58 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Not sure if this is the right thread as Tomahawk is Land Attacl cruise missile, but hopefully a good sign of UK Govt belatedly addressing RN overall lack of offensiv missile capability:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/britain ... e-support/

I beleive this is to upgrade to Tomahawk Block 5. I think currently only usable by RN SSN, but I think could be launched from T26 via Mk41 VLS, (or potentially T45 if they upgraded Sylver to longer A-70 VLS but I am not sure if that was ruled out by future adding of Sea Ceptor instead).

I still have faint hope that RN might be able to upgrade the Harpoon on T45's to Block II+ by purchasing the upgrade kit.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2424
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Has liked: 48 times
Been liked: 19 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Caribbean »

Will that impact co-operation with the French? :shock:
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2235
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 35 times
Been liked: 60 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Caribbean wrote: 05 Apr 2022, 19:40 Will that impact co-operation with the French? :shock:
Its difficult to see the point of running two hypersonic programmes concurrently. Where would this leave MBDA and to a lesser extent Thales? It’s a bold move that’s for sure.

The UK has always retained one foot in each camp (US/France) but perhaps France now wants to reduce usage of US parts/systems in the next generation of MBDA missiles to remove future export issues similar to Rafale/SCALP.

MBDA offerings have undoubtedly helped with French fast jet sales in recent years. Could the UK be positioning carefully to ensure that Tempest has the widest possible technological advantage?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7105
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 237 times
Been liked: 278 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

The upgrade and maintenance of the Tomahawks will hopefully keep them relevant until FCASW enters the scene, It has range and is accurate, but is fairly vulnerable to modern air defences. The French Navy want a sub launched version of the FCASW to replace their current SM39 Exocets so it could be seen as the obvious Tomahawk replacement. What would be interesting is if we converted a number of our Tomahawks into the Anti Ship variant as the USN is doing. I also agree upgrade our existing Harpoons with the available modification kits is the simplest and cheapest option to give the RN a viable AShM.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
wargame_insomniac

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1255
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Has liked: 10 times
Been liked: 21 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by RichardIC »

Lord Jim wrote: 05 Apr 2022, 21:37 The upgrade and maintenance of the Tomahawks will hopefully keep them relevant until FCASW enters the scene, It has range and is accurate, but is fairly vulnerable to modern air defences. The French Navy want a sub launched version of the FCASW to replace their current SM39 Exocets so it could be seen as the obvious Tomahawk replacement. What would be interesting is if we converted a number of our Tomahawks into the Anti Ship variant as the USN is doing. I also agree upgrade our existing Harpoons with the available modification kits is the simplest and cheapest option to give the RN a viable AShM.
The main problem with sub launched Tomahawk is that it completely blows the location of the submarine, so only really suitable for use against the most primitive of opposition. Why do you think RN subs didn't take part in strikes against Syria?

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1096
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 12 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by NickC »

Any thoughts on which type of hypersonic missile Australia, UK and US thinking of.

DARPA April 5th reporting successful test flights with both variants of its HAWC, Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept, a big step forward in proving scramjets viable (two teams Lockheed Martin-Aerojet Rocketdyne and Raytheon-Northrop Grumman).

The Lockheed/USAF having technical problems with their hypersonic AGM-183A, ARRW, Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon, a pure rocket powered missile with gliding body, Congress zeroed procurement funding in FY2022.

https://insidedefense.com/insider/darpa ... wc-variant
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4443
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 112 times
Been liked: 130 times
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Worth taking look. Later half of the vid is filled with new options/ideas for anti-ship missiles.


Jdam
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 64 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »



New anti ship missile for the Australian Navy by 2024 :think:
These users liked the author Jdam for the post (total 2):
donald_of_tokyowargame_insomniac

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7105
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 237 times
Been liked: 278 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

RichardIC wrote: 06 Apr 2022, 10:58
Lord Jim wrote: 05 Apr 2022, 21:37 The upgrade and maintenance of the Tomahawks will hopefully keep them relevant until FCASW enters the scene, It has range and is accurate, but is fairly vulnerable to modern air defences. The French Navy want a sub launched version of the FCASW to replace their current SM39 Exocets so it could be seen as the obvious Tomahawk replacement. What would be interesting is if we converted a number of our Tomahawks into the Anti Ship variant as the USN is doing. I also agree upgrade our existing Harpoons with the available modification kits is the simplest and cheapest option to give the RN a viable AShM.
The main problem with sub launched Tomahawk is that it completely blows the location of the submarine, so only really suitable for use against the most primitive of opposition. Why do you think RN subs didn't take part in strikes against Syria?
One has to ask then why the USN is still so heavily committed to the Tomahawk in both land attack and anti ship roles?

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56
Has liked: 22 times
Been liked: 49 times

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Phil Sayers »

While I do accept that launching Tomahawk from a submarine will give away the submarine's location it seems to me that this is still much better than launching from surface ships where the enemy will already know (and a sophisticated enemy be able to target) the ship's location and be able to calculate which land targets are in range and which are not.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4443
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 112 times
Been liked: 130 times
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

RichardIC wrote: 06 Apr 2022, 10:58The main problem with sub launched Tomahawk is that it completely blows the location of the submarine, so only really suitable for use against the most primitive of opposition. Why do you think RN subs didn't take part in strikes against Syria?
Your point is valid, but it applies to ALL launch systems.

- Land-based SSM system (like NSM and TLAM, US Marine Corp is buying)
- Land-based hypersonic system (US Army)
- Ship-launched land-attack missile and ASMs (worldwide)
- All land-based SAMs and ship-based SAMs (worldwide)
- mobile SRBM/IRBM system Iraq operated (Squad), and N. Korea operates. Also Russia?

SSN launching missiles in blue-water (thanks to its TLAM's long range) can easily escape from the launch point, much easier than many land-based missile system can escape. Of course, the SSN will deploy several decoys to mimic their own signal (soft-kill).

Mercator
Member
Posts: 448
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 40 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Mercator »

Jdam wrote: 07 Apr 2022, 09:31

New anti ship missile for the Australian Navy by 2024 :think:
Xavier's video above also tells us that Kongsburg is looking to integrate the NSM to MH-60R as well. Another option for Australia down the track.
These users liked the author Mercator for the post:
wargame_insomniac

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2235
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 35 times
Been liked: 60 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Looks like the UK is going to supply Ukraine with Anti Ship Missiles.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... volodymyr/

Jdam
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 64 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

Nobody seems to know what missile we are giving them, obvious reasons for this is security but still we don't have a lot to choose from that they can just use out the box :think:

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2235
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 35 times
Been liked: 60 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Jdam wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 20:02 Nobody seems to know what missile we are giving them, obvious reasons for this is security but still we don't have a lot to choose from that they can just use out the box :think:
Surely it can’t be Harpoon?

I was thinking Sea Spear was most likely.

https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/ma ... brimstone/

Unlikely I suspect but it may even be NSM.

Regardless, it’s a massive step up in lethal aid.

One thing is for sure, if you provide systems like these to the Ukrainians they will certainly use them.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 64 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

What information does the ship feed to harpoon before launch? And how much of the targeting is done by the missile?

Like you said Surely it can't be harpoon. :shock:

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7105
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 237 times
Been liked: 278 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

Could we be working with the Swedes and sending a number of their ground launched Hellfire, the ones developed by them in partnership with the OEM to equip its anti invasion detachments. These operate out of CB-90s to protect the multitude of islands that are Swedish territory. Having highly mobile vehicle born units equipped with this weapon, able to rapidly respond to an invasion threat may be useful to the Ukrainians along the coast near Odessa.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 3057
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 93 times
Been liked: 110 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Repulse »

We really need to start getting the Martlet and Starstreak ship mounted.

These users liked the author Repulse for the post:
wargame_insomniac
”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

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 395
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 512 times
Been liked: 58 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Repulse wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:52 We really need to start getting the Martlet and Starstreak ship mounted.

Well the Martlett was tested a couple of years back as an add-on launcher on the 30mm DS30M Mark 2 automated gun. Until the T31, this was becoming the main secondary gun on all RN escorts and the primary gun on River B2's. It seemed perfect as additional firepower against fast moving small boats, helicopters and drones. I don;t yet know if this Martlett launcher has been approved for full operational service yet?

How does the Starstreak compare to CAMM? With T45 due to get CAMM on a future refit, this will make CAMM the main short range (15 mile) AAW defence for RN escorts. Will Starstreak either give RN a capability that CAMM does not or similar capability at lower price?

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56
Has liked: 22 times
Been liked: 49 times

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Phil Sayers »

From what I remember of seeing the video released of that trial it did seem that firing Martlet from one of those mounts resulted in fairly significant backblast which could potentially damage the ship, not to mention injuring or worse any personnel stood in the wrong place. It may be that this was just how it appeared to me and in reality there was no issue at all there.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 3057
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 93 times
Been liked: 110 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Repulse »

It did look a lot of exhaust heat, but at the time the challenge was that it would be for a very short period of time. My view is that there is more space at the front of a B2 River so no issues there… :thumbup:
These users liked the author Repulse for the post:
Phil Sayers
”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: 1250
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 31 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by mr.fred »

Phil Sayers wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 18:33 From what I remember of seeing the video released of that trial it did seem that firing Martlet from one of those mounts resulted in fairly significant backblast which could potentially damage the ship, not to mention injuring or worse any personnel stood in the wrong place. It may be that this was just how it appeared to me and in reality there was no issue at all there.
Normal speed video isn't the best measure of such things, but also consider that being in close proximity to a rapidly moving automated mount for a cannon with a muzzle brake isn't healthy either, so it's not like anyone would be anywhere near it when it's firing.

User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 69
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 9 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by ETH »

Repulse wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:52 How does the Starstreak compare to CAMM? With T45 due to get CAMM on a future refit, this will make CAMM the main short range (15 mile) AAW defence for RN escorts. Will Starstreak either give RN a capability that CAMM does not or similar capability at lower price?
Starstreak has a significantly shorter range and is fundamentally a different class of missile. For ship mounting it would need an entirely new launcher and doesn’t have any of the fancy guidance or 360 degree coverage that CAMM has.

And seeing as CAMM already has a notably small minimum engagement distance, I don’t see Starstreak filling in any sort of gap.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7105
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 237 times
Been liked: 278 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

Comparing Sea Ceptor to Starstreak is the same as Sky Sabre to the same weapon. Starstreak is a MANPADS, and whilst very effective has a significantly shorter range. For naval use, it would only really be applicable to ships that do not have Sea Ceptor.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post (total 2):
Repulsewargame_insomniac

GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 11 times
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by GarethDavies1 »

Would LMM/Starstreak be a better alternative to Phalanx?
These users liked the author GarethDavies1 for the post:
wargame_insomniac

Post Reply