Share.

    5 commenti

    1. tree_boom on

      As always, there’s some confusion in what’s _actually_ happening. The [government announcement](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-jobs-and-air-defences-boost-with-purchase-of-new-missile-launchers) says:

      > The UK is buying six Land Ceptor air defence missile **launchers**

      Which implies 6 more of the [launcher vehicles](https://www.army.mod.uk/media/15475/apowmid-official-20210428-016-0258jpgicft44o-mwataaci62zxvcpp.jpg) (the one on the left). But it also says:

      > UK buying six new Land Ceptor air defence missile **systems** to bolster national security and defence.

      Where the term “system” would ordinarily refer to a fire group, each of which has 3 of those launcher vehicles, a radar and an command and control vehicle. The announcement later says:

      > This three-year contract will deliver six brand new MRAD (medium range air defence) Land Ceptor missile launching systems for use by the British Army at home and anywhere in the world. These launchers can be used on their own and are also a key component of Sky Sabre, a ground-based air defence missile system used to intercept cruise missiles, aircraft and drones. The system is comprised of three main elements: radar, command and control, and missile launcher.

      Which I think probably cements this as being a purchase of just 6 launcher vehicles with no additional radar or C2 vehicles…but honestly, who knows? If it’s 6 new launchers only that gives the British Army 30 of them total, plus 8 each of the radar and C2 vehicles (currently we have 8 fire groups). It’s a bit of an anaemic capability to be quite frank. There’s more purchases to come according to the goal the government states:

      > The UK is doubling the number of deployable Sky Sabre systems operated by the Armed Forces in a drive to reinforce our air defences.

      But whether that’s a doubling to 48 launchers, or a doubling to 16 fire groups (and so including more radar and C2 as well) is anyone’s guess.

    2. Odd-Metal8752 on

      Perhaps as a sponsorship for the next War Thunder update?

      In all seriousness, this is a small but useful step forward. Approximately £1 billion was set aside for IAAMD in the SDR, so further spending can be expected. This perhaps precludes further eupgrades to the overall system in the autumn – CAMM-ER has long been speculated.

    3. So we have a total of 12 launchers? That sounds like basically one generous deployment to cover something like a single airfield.

      I would have thought we’d at least want to be able to protect a wider theatre – must really limit what ops we could do abroad on our own if we can’t protect troops outside of a very small umbrella over their base.

    4. Harmless_Drone on

      Gonna be honest here: missiles are not what we need right now.

      Russia/ukraine has shown you cannot deal with drones on a cost effective or production level with missiles. If you shoot down a 200 dollar flying lawnmower with a 100k missile that takes 200 times as long to make, you are going to be running out of missiles and money before the enemy runs out of drones and then you’re toast.

      By all means keep the missiles for larger targets like planes but we *need* to be developing advanded anti aircraft gun systems and the corresponding gun laying controllers and interfaces (again) to deal with drones on a cost basis that’s comparible. Shooting down a drone with a reusable AA gun with a 20 quid versus a 100k missile is no contest.

    5. LiveLaughLockheed on

      Good news for MBDA. They’ve had success with Sea Ceptor and CAMM-ER abroad and at home. Good news for the manufacturing teams in Bolton and Henlow. Good news for the UK really. Job sustainment, keeps the knowledge base in-house and falls into line with the “Always-on Defence” capability we’ve wanted for a while.

      This, coupled with big improvements up at Barrow for BAE, and the growth across the UK in “Made in Britain” contractor work through Tier 1+ suppliers is great news for UK Manufacturing.

    Leave A Reply