The U.S. State Department has approved a £533 million sale to the United Kingdom of a Ballistic Missile Defense Radar and Command and Battle Management and Communications equipment.
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale yesterday.
“The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested to buy one (1) Ballistic Missile Defense Radar (BMDR); and two (2) Command and Control Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) user nodes (with network capability required to connect to the C2BMC System to support radar operations).
Also included are design and construction of a combined radar-equipment shelter; encryption devices, secure communication equipment, and other required COMSEC equipment to support radar operations; spare and repair parts, support and testing equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support. The total estimated program cost is $700 million.”
The proposed sale will improve the UK’s ability to meet current and future ballistic missile threats.
When will this enter service?
As part of cost-saving measures outlined in the recent ‘Defence Equipment Plan 2021-2031’, plans for a new ground-based ballistic missile defence radar have been delayed to 2029. The Ministry of Defence recently published its tenth annual summary of the defence equipment plan.
The document contains a great deal of technical information about the projects and the management/funding side of them and you can read that for yourself here but the detail on this project is scarce, the document simply makes mention of the decision to “Defer Lewis BMD radar” as part of a cost saving exercise designed to save between £100m to £199m. Further detail was revealed in the National Audit Office report on the Defence Equipment Plan, which mentions the following:
“Delayed construction of a radar system to detect ballistic missiles (by three years) to 2029.”
This, the NAO say, is part of measures which the Ministry of Defence expects will save £3.8 billion over 10 years, but which will affect military capability.
Back in 2017, the MoD issued a Request For Information regarding radar technology and capability for a new ground-based ballistic missile defence radar system. The information came to light thanks to a question asked in Parliament by Mr Kevan Jones, MP for North Durham:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to paragraph 4.16 of the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, what progress has been made on his Department’s plan to invest in a ground-based BMD radar.”
The question was answered by Harriett Baldwin, the then Under Secretary of State for Defence Procurement:
“Since the Strategic Defence and Security Review announcement, the UK missile defence community has been undertaking detailed scoping of the options for the future ground-based ballistic missile defence (BMD) radar. A Request For Information was issued to Industry in June this year to gather information about radar technology and capability. We expect the radar to be in service by the mid-2020s.”
The UK’s current and only ballistic missile defence radar is at RAF Fylingdales (pictured at the top of this article), speculation suggests that either a site in the UK or Cyprus will house the system. While the radar station at RAF Fylingdales remains a British asset operated and commanded by the Royal Air Force, it also forms one of three stations in the United States BMEWS network.
The other two stations in the network are Thule Air Base, Greenland and Clear Air Force Station, Alaska. The data obtained by Fylingdales is shared fully and freely with the United States, where it feeds into the US-Canadian North American Aerospace Defence Command at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs.
Silly question but why does this article refer to it as a “ballistic missile defence system” when it is just a detection system? It won’t improve our defence, it just gives more notice of impending doom so the elite can hide in their bunkers.
I would have preferred the money be spent on glaring capability gaps and uplifts in numbers.
My thoughts as well on detection but I is one part of a system. Then hopefully we do the next part with aster NG or sm3 missiles. Aegis onshore anyone at least the rocket part?
I wonder how many sm3 batteries we’d need to cover the UK, too many for us to afford I’d wager. Can you imagine the political fallout (pun intended) if it was just London. Also sm3 doesn’t deal with ICBMs does it?
SM-3 has demonstrated capability against ICBMs
Protect just London ? Business as usual
They already discussed about putting a type 45 in the mouth of the Thames to protect London. Stuff the rest of the country.
That sounds about right.
This would be a bad use of a mobile platform using it as a shore battery.
We should buy ASTER 30 1NT/2 and put them in strategic areas. The fact that we have no organic land defence SAM is a disgrace. France has land based SAMS as does Italy and other NATO countries. Turkey even has a Russian SAM system… we have no equivalant.
But, this and previous governments always use short-term solutions for long-term problems.
Question is protect it from how many? 1 missile you would want at least a couple to be sure of a hit. 10 at once is going to be very challenging if not impossible to hit them all. Anymore than 10-20 and it becomes extremely difficult. If 1 missile then spit out 5 warheads and 30 decoys, there’s 35 targets. If 10 missiles do it 350 targets etc etc. I’m not sure if this is worth the money. There is no defence and we already have flyingdales and other detection systems. Can help but think this money could go else… Read more »
It does seem rather a waste of time spending money on it when you say it like that. We’d need thousands of missiles to make it worthwhile, then watch as they were rendered useless by adaptations made to the ICBMs.
Hi Rob ,there is a programme on Yestrday Channel sky 155 called Abandoned Engineering on one episode they showed an ICBM radar detector that was built in the states just like this one but from the 1970ts cost 1 billion dollars when completed it was switched on then 2 days later switched off and never switched on again ,So there is a billon Dollar Croncrete Pyramid sitting Abandoned now that’s wasting money
Lined a lot of pockets with dollars though. They’re masters of that. Corruption!
Mick thanks for your post, that place is in North Dakota where the hardware store must sell Hammers at $ 1000 each and a box of Nails for $ 2000 so someone is pocketing $2950 We call people who would pay that much” Shadow Chancellor “
The analyses I’ve seen of the US’s ballistic missile defense systems concluded that it would probably be effective against 20-30 missiles at once, enough to secure the west coast against North Korea but certainly not a more credible nuclear power. And that’s with Aegis-equipped ships in the Pacific, Cold-War interception missiles from silos and SAMs, not to mention their much more extensive radars. We might be able to shoot the odd missile down with Aster 30, but I don’t think this radar is going to accomplish much except give people a few more minutes to get to their basements and… Read more »
Thanks too the False ending of the Cold War, we lost the ROC ,our Warning Sirens, the 2min Beep Alarm in fire Stations and most of our Bunkers sold off for peanuts converted into Canabis farms but at least we still have Pamistones Follies too fall back on Michael
Agree about any BMDsystem like US THAALD being ineffective against a massive inbound missile salvo. But a simple BMD with interceptors might be able to defend against a rogue state firing eg Iran or North Korea who might only have a small number of ICBM . Interceptors….we would need probably 5 or 6 batteries strategically located around the UK. Ideally on mobile launchers so they can de dispersed.
TOO late, by time the warheads reach our airspace! Intercepted needs to take place well before reaching UK airspace.
Remember Russians don’t have many, 1500 total warheads deployed but very few active at any one time.
Obviously it has only limited use against for example Russia but I think it’s more for defence against rouge states that wouldn’t have many missiles with multiple warheads
Much easier to destroy ICBM’s in boost stage or in early mid-course stage, before separation of nuclear warheads and decoys from the warhead-bus.
Or even easier to destroy the warhead-bus at mid-course stage by a space based laser before separation of the warheads.
Fortunately we know the likely direction of a launch, and SM-3 has a publicised range of 2500km. For reference, that’s the distance from London to Moscow (although that’s obviously not the effective range of the weapon).
An SM-3 battery anywhere in the UK could do the job, but because most of Russia’s SSBNs are north of us, a battery in Scotland could likely shield the whole UK pretty well.
An SM-3 battery with how many missiles? It seems we’d need an awful lot to defeat multiple ICBMs, each with their decoys and warheads.
This depends on when the interception takes place. If during the missile’s transit phase, where the Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) has yet to deploy it multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) and decoys. A single SM-3 can take out the whole missile assembly. If they MIRVs and decoys have been deployed it makes it much harder to intercept and a space based laser weapons system would be more beneficial.
Excuse my ignorance, but is that what the new radar is designed for do you think, to pickup the ICBM early to allow it to be intercepted during transit?
I don’t think Fylingdales range reaches that far east of the Urals. A site in Cyprus, for example, could. I believe mobile IRBM, ICBM deploy in that area?
Launch is 1st detected by IR satellites I believe.
IR is a spectrum.
The spectrum can be observed and recorded with an IR spectrometer.P
Each material has a distinctive IR spectrum.
The spectrum from rocket fuel is not the same as magnesium.
The spectrum from a large heat shield in re-entry would be different from a lower mass decoy that had less mass and therefore slowed differently and had a lower thermal output.
This is all in any MSc Analytical Chemistry course.
I’ll take your word for that! Over my head. 😆
Better dust my books off then…..oh sorry they were magazines of a certain entertainment based subject….
Troodos Mountain Cyprus.
Daniele, good point yet I would have thought that an escalation up too the point of a Nuclear launch those IR Sat’s would probable have been taken out thus given the element of suprise back too the aggressor
Other than one or two rogue missiles forget intercepting them.
With decoys etc there would be hundreds of targets. With a close to zero percent chance of not killing the target being the only acceptable outcome it would involve 3 or 4 missiles per target. Hundreds if not thousands of abm weapons being needed.
That’s not even close to being affordable, even for the US.
The Russians don’t have that kind of armament any more and don’t have the budget to rebuild it.
Incoming from around the Equator in the Atlantic?
You want to be intercepting them much closer to the launch site not above the uk in terminal phase deploying warheads and decoys.
we would need 10,000 SM3 or other intercept missiles to cover the worst case scenario of Russia launching all its nuclear missiles solely at the UK.
this is based on the practice of 2 SM3 per intercept + spares.
no idea how many launchers etc, but its a hell of a lot of missiles
Apparently the SM-3 Block IIA missiles cost around $36m each!
That assumes that all of the Russian missiles work? Realistically, even on Russian statistics, half the missiles they list are not operational. What % do you think actually function? 10% at best I would guess? Allowing for the Kleptocracy/corruption factor? Then you have the usual maintenance and operation cycles….. Then a lot of them are Cold War crud with minimal modifications……honestly anything like the decoy units found in Ukraine will be totally useless – stuff straight out of 1990’s electronics projects. Whilst one nuc slipping through would be a disaster I don’t think status it’s favour then Russian systems over… Read more »
Those decoys relate to the Iskander and if they get within range we are in deep trouble. As regard to accuracy, they seem to be doing pretty well in Ukraine, as do the Russian’s various cruise missiles.
The words
Well; and
Russian;and
Ukraine,
don’t belong in the same sentence.
Dream on if you think that sort of junk is going to work against modern electronics.
🤣🤣👍
Try this
WELL, the thing this proves is that RUSSIAN weapons in UKRAINE are INACCURATE.
There FIFY John.
If they’re that accurate then it just proves that the Russians are deliberately targeting maternity hospitals, schools, residential blocks and theatres full of women and children.
Try looking beyond the MSM. Any pictures of injured and bodies coming out of the theatre yet? You are aware that the locals were posting on Facebook 3 days in advance what was going to happen?
Oh and another Facebook post of a Ukrainian SAM fired in Kiev decided to hit a building in Kiev appeared today, its good that they leave trails.
The Russians destroy a lot but not everything they are accused of.
Look beyond MSM to what? Sergei Lavrov ? Peskov ? Sputnik news? How many burned and shattered bodies would you like to see? What on earth would you know about what locals in Mariupol were posting on Facebook?
Quit your gaslighting, Ukraine would not have to fire any SAM if Russia hadn’t invaded, and let’s be clear, it’s Russian ordinance that’s falling on Ukrainian hospitals , schools, housing and shops. Directed by Russian military commanders as they are militarily incompetent.
But yeah, MSM . FFS.
✌️👋
“Try looking beyond the MSM” – funny that’s what the anti-vaxxers, plandemic, WEF, flat-earther, conspiracy theorists all say 😂
But I’m sure you’ll have lots more time to make up stories like this now that you can’t contribute to RT anymore 😏
Msm same lazy acronym as Andrew…..oh dear oh dear yet again caught out! Hilarious.
Well the main thing I took out of that was Kiev not Kyiv…just saying is all.
You know you are letting your guard down russkie boy, as your getting angry and showing your agenda more and more, come on Andrew, sorry JohninMK, sort it out son.
I for one are more than tired of your bull. Considering the current situation your bias is not only tiresome…its now insultery.
Direct blatant targetting of civillians is a war crime. Keep peddling your line and I say your an accessory to it.
Strike you off this site someone please?
Agreed mate!
Cheers trying very hard to bite my lip mate…cant say what I really wish I could.
You have not got access to normal media than Ivan lots of crispy dead Russian troops and tanks daily , it really is not going well for you guys , no major progress in 2 weeks , you sound a bit desperate there Ivan as you should do lol.
That’s an outrageous thing to say JohninMK. The Russians are doing what the Russians have always done. Whether it was Afghanistan, Chechnya, or Ukraine, the Russians murder innocent women and children, while destroying any city that stands in their way. It’s in their form book and strategy.
War crimes have been committed, Putin and his cronies need to stand trial in the Hauge when all this is over.
George, can we please just ban John in Moscow, as he’s clearly a Putin mouthpiece, time to shut him down……
Please google Lord Haw Haw, we strung him up for giving succour to the enemy by his propoganda. Just saying.
Spot on John ,Civvies seem too be the only targets that can’t hit back how brave of Spewtin the war criminal
You’d need a combination of SM-3s for exo-atmospheric interception and SM-6 or THAAD for atmospheric interceptions for full coverage. Even Patriot and SM-2s can be used in the lower atmosphere. But you are correct, for a full onslaught, you would need a shed load of missiles to counter the attack.
Perhaps an optimal solution for us is ground based Thaad and then 5 BMD destroyers with a 144/196 load out that we can use as the uk escort (1 north – 1 south) in a 1 off/on config with 1 in maintenance.
This would probably give us the best value overall solution from a value proposition
Does MDBA have a similar product to SM3?
It did or does with the Aster BMD. But information about its progress has gone very quiet over the last 5 years, so it may have been shelved. MBDA have been paid to investigate a ballistic missile defence system that can be in service by 2030. Used to replace Aster. The program is called TWISTER and uses a next generation interceptor that can counter manoeuvring re-entry vehicles, hypersonic glide vehicles, anti-ship missiles and next generation aircraft. The description is for an endo-atmospheric missile in the same league and capabilities as the SM6. Trawling through MBDAs Twister blurb, there is next… Read more »
There is zero chance of any current system stopping a full onslaught by any of the major nuclear powers. In a couple of decades?……maybe. The Russians certainly think that it’s only a matter of time before the US makes a breakthrough in ABM technology and that’s why they keep experimenting with more exotic delivery systems. Think nuclear torpedo. One thing that bears watching closely is the new LRDR (Long Range Discrimination Radar) built by Lockheed. This thing is an absolute monster of a radar, supposedly for the first time ever in any radar, able to accurately and reliably tell the… Read more »
I wonder is the AN/SPY-7 (LRDR) the same radar that the ABM statement is talking about? This operates in the S-band (2 to 4GHz) with a wavelength of 15cm down to 7.5cm. This is the same as the T45’s Sampson radar. But is significantly more powerful, being ground based and not needing to worry about top weight. S-band is a very good compromise between target resolution and effective radiated power. Especially for ICBM detection distances. If money was no object, you’d use X-band. As this has even better target resolution, but suffers more from atmospheric attenuation. So you have to… Read more »
It’s roughly the same cost as the Alaskan LRDR radar, so it’s certainly possible.
Depends on what you want to do. Japan was going to have Aegis Ashore. I think they only needed two or three batteries to cover the whole of Japan. A high end SAM is good for resisting nuclear blackmail, when the other side threatens to fire only one or two missiles, thinking we would not fire a boatload of Trident in response (mistake). However, MAD/CASD is the response to deter a large scale attack.
That’s the issue with CASD, it’s only real purpose is in response to an all out war. The CASD with its 10 to 16 Tridents can have up to 8 multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) per missile. Each with a 100kt thermonuclear warhead. So if some muppet launched a single weapon at the UK. The UK wouldn’t be able to use the CASD due to proportionality. If one missile was launched some MIRVs could be programmed to not be armed leaving one to hit the primary target. But that would be a massive waste, plus organizing the recovery of the… Read more »
I am more worried by firing a single missile & thus giving away where our Trident boat is. Which is why, I would rather have a high end SAM to deal with one or two incoming missiles.
There’s always one Vanguard class boat in reserve at Faslane, in case there’s an issue with the CASD.
But you’re right in that the Country should have some means of protection, against a rogue state launching one or two missiles at us. But we should also have a means of proportional pay back.
Russia has 6000 warheads/bombs not 6000 missiles and only 1500 deployed. They would need most if that to wreck the USA. We are a small potato so would not get many targeted.
In the days of the Soviet Union, they would have attacked UK with 60 warheads. Probably still their planning today.
They had 27,000 active then now just 1500 but only a fraction of those will be available I.e 25% of subs at sea etc. who knows how many of their land ones work and how many would survive NATO counter strike. Not saying we would get every Russian warhead but ABM shield may get a lot. It’s worth a few billion out of the defence budget.
I have long wanted the UK to have one or two batteries of a high end SAM, to defend against one or two missiles coming our way.
What’s a nuclear weapon dropped on London between friends…
Manchester and the North would get the rail investment it needs.
It’s one way to do levelling up.
Does London need a glass car park?
10,000? No, the way defensive weapons are going is direct energy burst. The systems that the UK and US are going down the road on will be laser systems, including any aerial defence system..
I didn’t say I would buy them. I said that what we would need for a worst case scenario
if you are talking lasers than that would need to be a space based system as it’s no use having these things explode close to our shores
others have rightly pointed out a more balanced approach and I am sure we could get a version of ceptor that could off the ballistic capability.
directed energy will take over there is no doubt in my mind about that but when is another thing entirely
At the time of the Cold War, it was estimated the USSR allocated about 60 warheads for the UK. The rest, the USA and Europe.
SAMP/T £ 500 million each with a coverage of 150 Km one in central Scotland, one NE England, one for Liverpool/Manchester, one for Yorkshire, one for west midlands and East Midlands, one for London and one for Bristol Channel area. That’s most of the major cities covered then. Very doable.
Like it. And Aster/Samp/t missile inventory can be shared with the Navy’s T45/T83s.
An Aegis ashore battery with SM-3 can cover a land radius of 310 miles. That was from Japan’s study, they would need 3 to cover the whole of Japan. So one in East Anglia and one on the Scottish Borders would cover the UK , and provide protection for RN forces in the North Sea Both Belgium and the Netherlans have considered it for their frigates, so potentially these new UK radars could provide tracking data to Nato allies. It depends of course if the UK feels the need to fund SM3 when there is a European wide system already… Read more »
Aster 1NT
I suspect it’s main purpose is to protect the US, they have the interceptors. We are incidental beneficiaries.
Yes, I know what you mean. Good to have, but needs some force behind it.
Totally agree, just let’s us track ICBM’s obliterating our cities. I was thinking the other day, given the densely packed nature of the UK and the limited number of Russian launched SLBM and ICBM that a ballistic missile defence system is now much more viable for the UK. Russian launched missiles travelling shorter distance travel at slower speed more like intermediate range ballistic missiles. SM3 and Aster 30 blk 2 can both intercept 3000 mile range missiles and just 7 SAMPT/T launchers could cover the majority of the UK population centres. Russia is no pt the Soviet Union. At best… Read more »
The picture shown is of Fylingdales early warning system. The purchase is for a completely different package of hardware capable of taking down missiles. That’s my understanding anyway.
It certainly sounds as if it is going to be part of a future proper layered defence system. The extended range CAMM, Iron Dome and Arrow3. Fixed and mobile land systems. Naval systems etc.
Fantastic news. As important as everything else is, (and there is a lot of important stuff that we either want or need to upgrade/replace legacy systems) this is something I don’t think we can do without. The proliferation of ballistic missiles and the ability for many potentially unstable or unfriendly nations to operate them make this vital. It would be very nice to have some way to shoot the blighters down to go with it as well. Asap please. Ships are our best bet to carry them as we re an island, but as unrealistic as it probably would be,… Read more »
I bet first missiles are heading straight for the radar then. Or fire shorter range supersonic cruise missile at radar followed by the large fixed missile silos followed by the ballistic missiles.
What the point in this massive expense and running costs? Give government a few minutes warning. Certainly no one lower than the top tier will have any time to duck and cover.
Who is this attack coming from and more importantly what is the point of an extra early warning. We have one and are linked to the the USA systems.
Is this one mobile?
I share your enthusiasm, this is an absolute priority in defence-up there with our own nuclear weapons program.
The more assets related to this the better, the only disappointing part of this is another purchase off the states but hey if there making it right.
Also with them potentially basing this in Cyprus are they keeping tabs on China?
If it is based in Cyprus it not going to help UK defence very much but it will help the US. If it does go there it looks like a UK contribution to the US defense budget with the associated political contributions over there.
Thats not the case. They are dealing with threats from the middle east. Fylingdales would already be feeding data from anything launched from the far East of Russia over the poles. EvenThose ground based systems “see” 5000km. The truck based AN/TPY-2 has a massive footprint , said to be able to send its search kods 2900 miles at a max search. From Japan they spy into North Korea, From South Korea they scan Chinese airspace, much to China’s annoyance. Even Austalian OTH arrays are deployed to the northern states, far away from they population centres. A missile launched from Iran… Read more »
Oh dear your strategic consideration assessments are limited, typical amateur russkie. Good job Poop Tin has shown to the world how inept your military is, as not only will it increas NATO unity and budgets, he has made us realise that the scary Russkie bear is actually a rather underfed, smelly, scraggy ginger tom cat which is losing most of its fur.
A Ballistic Missile Detection system, not a Missile Defence system. There’s a BIG difference!! Now we actually need to obtain a Defence system…….
Great news. Now let’s get some way of actually shooting them down so that we’re not just watching our demise coming towards us like some twisted reality TV show.
How about we increase Sky Sabre to 30-40 units at least and fit at least a dozen of them with Aster 30NG? Might as well go the Aster 30 route to have some commonality with the Type 45s.
That would require a vastly more complex radar and command and control system than Sky Sabre has.
You could work the other way round ir buy an off the shelf mid/upper tier air defence system and then integrate camm missiles.
Area defence and ABM.defence requires a system far more complex than Sky Sabre.
You need land based SAMPSON. Doable but expensive. We actually already have one for testing
Upgrade the T45s in all respects – then we’d have our BMD system.
No we wouldnt Barry. 6 destroyers that have a primary task of air defence of surface fleet and primarily carrier battle groups. If we had order 12 type 45s then yes we would have enough. 6 is an inadequate number to be relied upon to provide a uk wide BMD interceptor capability.
Maybe add this capability to type 45 but ensure until tupe 83 enters srrvice ideally in large numbers that uk plc has a land based BMD solution
Accelerate the T83, upgrade the T45 then position the hulls around the UK. Decommission anything not needed for BMD and dry dock if possible.
Even if it was incorporated with a anti missile system, I should imagine that Russia would be able to launch a saturated attack of conventional missiles first to deplete the defences and then Nukes. Even if Nuclear missiles were intercepted en route I should imagine that their detonation at altitude would cause fallout over a huge area. A Nuclear War is too frightening to contemplate and as i have said beforeit might only take one mad man on his way out…
On that note scary to hear this morning that only Putin and 3 very close aids actually knew about his plan for invading Ukraine even the defence staff and Generals were kept in the dark till the order was given. Subsequently a very close FSB associate and ideologue who told him taking the Country would be a doddle is under house arrest and up to 12 Generals sacked. No wonder there was a lot of shocked faces to be seen around him. All sounds historically very familiar.
The issue is with the conventional warhead missiles that are launched first. How do you tell they aren’t nukes? Once they have hit there targets perhaps. But the standard counter is to launch ours as soon as their trajectories have been worked out. Then hoping the other side realizes we have also launched and transmits the abort codes. Even the USA cancelled the conventional warheads program that Trident was going to get. They realized Russia would interpret them as nukes if they were launched. There are no ICBMs with conventional warheads for this reason. The method they would likely use… Read more »
I’m not sure I like the sound of some of the mood music around what could be a negotiated settlement. Putin is basically just reiteration is demands for the splitting of Ukraine and the disarming of the rump Ukraine, what worries is that a U.K. defence minister has said if there was a deal in which Ukraine disarmed The U.K. could act as it’s defence guarantor. WTF, NATO will not guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty but we will….that makes no sense what so ever as the U.K. land forces would simply end up being a tripwire for article 5, which in that… Read more »
Not so sure our land forces would end up being just a tripwire. From what we’ve seen in Ukraine a single UK armoured brigade with some artillery, Apaches and a squadron of Typhoons, alongside Ukrainian forces, would have massacred the Russian forces they came up against.
im sure British army Brigade would be be able to hold its own, but Ukriane is a vast county and needs a vast army to cover the ground that needs defending. It would be the same old story, it does not matter how good you are, you can still only be in one place at a time.
Very true, just as you would need a vast army to quickly invade a country that size.
And an army which was able to actually fight in a modern, skilled combined way, which the Russkies have shown they certainly are not.
Aww, don’t put yourself down, the PARA that have retired could handle the Russians 😉
However, no way I’m stagging on for traffic control in the RCZ – huge distances.
On a serious note, seeing images of civi trains in daylight – is that another tragedy waiting to happen?
Mate once I’ve took my ibuprofen and PARAcetamol (see what I did there) us old gits could rev up and bitchslap a few russkie conscripts, you could come along as I’m sure the car park will need organising….🤣😇!! Again mate seriously I’m sure there will be more pain to come before we get to a better place! Poop Tin is genuinely off his rocker and the more he gets pushed into a corner the more we need some professional Russkie top brass to remove him!
Ooh, you nasty beast you, we won the Battle of the Ratpit sometimes… albeit the Germans were with us.
German Shepherd Dogs that is.
Something is seriously wrong with MilInt if this cluster is really the great Russian army – I don’t understand how they can get it so wrong.
However, you’re right, the Russians will have to remove the tosser; the world must move on and China is the real threat.
(Did any PARA serve in Korea 50 – 53?).
You do get the impression, a few someone’s just got a phone call that effectively said……charge….apparently they did not even keep their battle groups in any cohesive form….just threw everything. They could as fast as they could into a n Easter. European mud pit. From reading it seems that only Putin and a couple of others knew they were actually going to invade, until it pretty much happened….so all those Russian army units had no idea they were invading Ukraine until they were told to go and invade…..which would explain a lot. I know a few respected observes of Russian… Read more »
They have certainly proved to the world that we no longer need to fear the Russkie mil, just it’s crazy head shed and it’s nukes! The Russkie mil is still conscript heavy, no matter if they get jiffed to stay on for another 12 months and be called professional! The lack of combined arms manoeuvre and basic skills and drills, is shocking! The longer it goes on the harder it gets for the Russkie lads as Ukraine gets more weapons and support from NATO. The easy days for the Russians are over…..if they ever had any! Cheers.
All we have to hope is that Putin does not try and burn it all down with nuclear weapons.
Didn’t we already do that back in 1993 in Bucharest? Ukraine saide they would give up there nukes and we and the US would provide security to them…🤔
As always, the devil is in the detail. The 1993 wording was very weak, and boils down to little more than an obligation to consult in the event of Ukrainian security being jeopardised.
The US, UK and Russia agree to refrain from attacking Ukraine. In the event of a nuclear attack or threat of nuclear attack on Ukraine they will act to get the UN Security Council to provide UN assistance. Worthless where it is the signatory and Security Council member doing the attack/threat……
Not just signatory, I believe Russia was a sponsor! But equally worthless, I agree. I wouldn’t wish to see the U.K. offer protection to Ukraine alone… too risky.
The Defence Minister probably thinks the 5th Loamshire’s could handle the Russians at this stage; they do love talking up our capability, don’t they?
I’m curious as to the details.
Another poorly worded article on defense. It is not a defense system, but a detection system. It’s as if there were the Chain Home radars, but no AA or fighters. Hopefully though this just the first step.
It depends on just how much is to be defended but sadly, to be effective, a defence system would likely cost a large part of our military budget.
“Our military budget”? Is Russia offering the UK an S500 battery as a gift?
🤣👍
Well, yes, with the present anemic budget. 
Depending on the type of ballistic missile and its targeting system, ie is it a warhead that uses radar ground mapping and a manaoevering body ( which boost glide vehicles may need), then potentially a multiple megawatt powered beam from an ground based AESA might actually have a defensive impact by frying the inboard sensors.
NATO already is deploying SM3 for instance, if it can provide targeting data to Aegis ashore in Poland , that by nature makes it a defence system.
Not sure how this classes as a defence! All it means is we see destruction coming. Since our deterrent is sea based its not like we even need to launch before a first strike wipes out a large chunk of the force.
Reassuring to know that just like everything else the mod circus is responsible for its going to arrive late.
Stick with is bbc radio on air? If not we are all dead. Sub captain it’s up to you now. Much cheaper than a fancy radar
Given the depth of radar expertise in this country, I’m surprised we had to go to the seppos for this
This isnt a BMD system. Just early warning and detection. It wont enable the uk military to intercept an incoming ballistic missile threat. Unless this is just first phase of a package to deliver that capability? No word on that.
Nothing like a Russian invasion of Ukraine to open the eyes of our European allies. Funny how just a few years ago President Trump told Europe to start pulling their own weight and invest more into defense. And most European countries, not all ignored him and made fun of him. Now they are all rushing to arm themselves and pleading for US troops, aircraft to protect themselves.
Funny how Trump said a few weeks ago that Putins invasion of the Ukraine was a genius move LMAO!!!! Sorry dan but you even out trump the Russian trolls with your retarded views , Russian trolls have a excuse , maybe you are one or you just were not brought up right lol.
Thank you for reminding him. I guess the Trumkins didn’t think the rest of us saw their leader calling Putin a genius when the invasion started.
The trouble is with these trumptards any sense deludes them , they are more dangerous than any Russian troll who I’m sure baited them with ease , it all comes down to nice and white and Christian like with these c#nts.
Few on here sadly blinded by their Trump derangement syndrome. Clearly not grasping that Trump was merely referring to Putin’s act of genius(that he warned us of, but was mocked, no one is laughing now thoughi see) ie. that Putin got the west to dance to his tune, Biden to declare that he wouldn’t act to stop a Russian aggression or invasion of Ukraine, as long as he didn’t go any further pretty please, and Putin got mainland Europe, especially the Germans, totally dependent on his oil and gas, pretty much funding his invasions of Ukraine,not to mention allowing him… Read more »
Maybe you should read Machiavelli – all books…
👍👍👍
Trump called Putin a genius for invading Ukraine. What world are you living in?
£533 million – and that’s just the cost of American supplied equipment and services. What would be the full cost of building the facility in say Cyprus – £1 billion? That is serious money when the equipment budget is already over committed. So where is this money coming from, three obvious options:
The RUSSIA STRONK! Is strong in this thread.
For all the dimwits screaming about what’s the point of a BMD radar in Cyprus.
it will cue the 4 BMD mission Arleigh Burke DDGs based in Spain.
Didn’t Romania(??) sign up to the system as well?
Why place in Cyprus?
It will see further into Russia and the Middle East than Fylingdales?
Even more so if they use Troodos as the location.
Would it be better to delay projects like the flagship? Something tells me that the ballistic detection system is more important.
Boris needs a floating wine bar. Less Press intrusion.
I think what people are missing here with regard to “how many missiles” is important. The best time to intercept an ICBM is right after launch, and while it is in transit. A missile launched from a ballistic missile submarine, could be close enough to intercept in its launch phase. You would also have a high chance of interception in its transit phase. 3 minutes to launch, and maybe 10 minutes to transit. ICBM’s launched from silos or mobile launchers, deep within Russia, would not be possible to intercept at launch, as the range would be far too great. They… Read more »
It’s got to make you smile when there are all these deferrals to save a £100m here, £200m there, that sounds great considering how many millions or even billions are being potentially squandered elsewhere but surely ABM systems like this need to be brought forward or even held to their original schedule? I’d like, I think we would all like to see the T45 PIP/Camm-Aster upgrades all brought forward a tad too! This has got to be affecting the RNs ability to have another CSG anytime soon? But good on the UK for purchasing this. I’d like to see 2-3… Read more »
As someone above has mentioned Australia already does have OTH Radars (Jindalee?) in the north already and there’s Pine Fap in central Australia. I’m not sure if either are used for ABM coverage.
And I Expats comment about bringing forward the T83 five years – no need to wait until mid-late 30s. Have two batches if need be.
*Fap…Gap
Hi Quentin, Jindalee can track an aircraft landing at Karachi airport from central Australia. I can’t comment on its ability to track an ICBM. But satellites were always our first warning system of a launch. They detect the exhaust plume whether land or sea launched. It’s basically instantaneous. If there are not two Vanguard subs on station right now then why aren’t we working 24/7 to get a second one out there?. Only one person keeps threatening a nuclear war and that is his only option if he see defeat, a coup, or assassination looming. He would rather take everyone… Read more »
Greg
I am led to believe that a 2nd boomer is on standby, ready to replace the one on station at relatively short notice, if required. There are not enough to keeps two at sea all the time. For surface ships, it’s generally the rule of three, for submarines, it’s generally a rule of four.
DJ,
my take and I hope I am wrong is Putin has put his Strategic Deterrent on 15 min standby. He has moved his immediate and extended family to underground bunkers in Siberia etc. He has threatened to use Nuclear weapons. He can not afford to loose, backdown and fears being replaced either permanently or to retirement. The nuclear option is very much alive. Hence I don’t care what it takes UK needs two Trident subs on station now. It’s also time to max the number and size of the warheads each Trident carries.
Land based BMD?
Pinch me.
Edit: ah detection not defence, back to reality.
Perhaps there’s a better value solution. The T45 has demonstrated BMD capability. Advance the T83 program by say 5 years then decommission the T45 except systems required for the BMD and position the hulls around the UK, dry docked if possible.
Good thing nobody’s likely to nuke us in the next 7 years eh?
As a side note, does anyone know of we have deployed a second Vanguard boat? We should, to make absolutely sure Putin understands we are calling his bluff. France should do the same. It’s supposed to be the reason for having 4, deploy two in the event of a growing crisis… 30 years of constant defence cuts and ‘Western issues’ such as obsessing over the rights of men to put on frocks and call themselves Brenda etc etc have absolutely given Putin the green light… The Russian head shed thought the West has grown weak, decadent and filled with self… Read more »
I asked that question upwards of 4 weeks ago.
You’d hope they would get them out if possible.
Something had gone seriously wrong if they don’t or can’t David, we need four European SSBN’s on patrol at the moment, just in case things go seriously wrong….
Putin has to clearly understand that Europe is capable (and will if necessary) of delivering a devastating nuclear retaliation, independent of the US.
That sort of information is obviously above the paygrade of the likes of us – but i would have thought 2 RN SSBN’s out on Patrol is possible, but with only 3 available impossible to sustain for any length of time.
Evening Paul, that’s the point of four boats, one on patrol, one armed and ready to deploy at shot notice, one in alongside maintenance and one in refit.
Four European ‘bombers’ on patrol gives Europe a big stick, independent of US control.
The current situation shows the absolute necessity of a robust nuclear deterrent….
Well… 4* T45 tied up alongside, the T23 fleet hollowed and the Astutes have issues… I’d put money on only one Vanguard being at sea.
Evening John, very much doubt that we have two SSBNs at sea in a patrol posture. Vanguard is still in refit, so we only have 3 available and have only had the 3 for several years. This means that they are being run hard. I think you will find we only have the one at sea, one having got back from patrol and in some form of maintenance, whilst the third is getting ready to relieve the on patrol SSBN. There are currently at least three NATO SSBNs at sea in the Atlantic, more then enough firepower to focus Putin’s… Read more »
Need to know, and I don’t, but there are probably a couple in the Pacific as well.
The boat programmes need to be increased in pace, irrespective of budget and that means not nicking new parts to refit in-service boats, as was the case with Anson and Astute, but funding the 3 programmes properly; and if an extra Astute could be squeezed in… I’ll get my coat.
Assuming that you mean Astute Dreadnought and SSN(R) when referring to the ‘3 boat programmes’? What makes you think that the builds are not currently funded adequately? After the build issues between last V boat and the first A boat, we are building at a steady rate. Yes we could have had an extra A boat before the Dreadnoughts came in, but we didn’t, and won’t be getting another one either. The question we should be asking is what comes after SSN(R) if we are only building more then 8? As the Dreadnoughts are scheduled to last some 40 odd… Read more »
The answer to your question is that the build rate is slow. Why? Now, it was reported that Astute was not adequately sourced for spares; they robbed the in builds which delayed them. It’s already been reported that Astute class is delayed and this will impact the delivery of the Dreadnoughts – that’s in the public domain. Late delivery of the Dreads will increase costs of in-service Vanguards. Follow on impact on the Astute replacement and Australia want some of that too. Treasury thinking has to adjust to a new way of defence thinking and that means funding defence properly… Read more »
Well this is a new development. I was under the impression the US had given up on rail guns, but it’s seems all is not lost on the tech. A new and different use for them. Reminds me of the defense of Atlantis in Stargate.
https://www-thedefensepost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thedefensepost.com/2022/03/17/general-atomics-railgun-test/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16476900395550&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedefensepost.com%2F2022%2F03%2F17%2Fgeneral-atomics-railgun-test%2F
Yes, the US Navy have shelved BAe’s rail gun project. As they couldn’t solve the rail erosion problem.
The sabot rounds they developed for the rail gun are also guided. They were developed on the back of the collaboration they did with Leonardo developing the guided DART round.
At least the guided rounds called hyper velocity projectiles (HVPs) are being developed for 203mm, 155mm and 5” powdered guns. The US Navy have been testing them since 2018. In 2020 the HVPs were fired from 155 and 203 guns. They destroyed Coyote drone targets during flight, simulating cruise missiles.
Back in the days of Ronny Raygun’s “Star Wars” defence shield, the Americans were concerned about a Rooskie alternative, which was long-range cruise missiles being launched from the Atlantic, or elsewhere. The US Navy counter to that was to try and come up with a long-endurance airship (British) that was on station for a week and equipped with Westinghouse AWACS gear. I don’t know what ultimately became of that, but the UK will also need something reliable to cover this in the 21st Century. What we then do about shooting down is another question…
Ditto re no ABMs, but are HMPG saying that the RAF/US would not notify us of impeding doom or that f y l in g Dales is not adequate in some way ? The MOD need to justify this spend.If a member of parliament reads this please ask a question in the house. It’s looking like a vanity project to me.
Is this a fact? Russia ‘launches hypersonic missile against Ukraine’ Russia said the hypersonic missile Kinzhal hit a warehouse in the western Ivano-Frankivsk region. Mr Putin has previously described the missile as “an ideal weapon”. It is said to travel at 10 times the speed of sound, with a range of 2,000km (1,200 miles), and is nuclear capable but this was a conventional strike. Defence analyst Professor Michael Clarke told Sky News the weapon was developed “for the prospect of apocalyptic war between the superpowers”. He said: “You can’t defend against it. You can’t see it. You can’t prepare for it.”… Read more »
I wonder who Professor Michael Clarke is? As he seems to think this missile defies the laws of physics!
“Professor Michael Clarke is a Fellow of King’s College London. He was Director General of the Royal United Services Institute from 2017-2015 and is now a Distinguished Fellow at RUSI. Prior to that, he was Professor of Defence Studies at King’s College London and Deputy Vice-Principal for Research Development. In addition to his Visiting role at KCL he is also a Visiting Professor at the University of Exeter, where he is Associate Director of its Strategy and Security Institute. He is Fellow of the University of Aberystwyth and in 2019 was made a Fellow of the Royal College of Defence… Read more »
So clearly someone who is out of touch with military technology – lol.
Why did he make that statement though, about the Kinzhal missile? As his statement is incorrect.
Every time a Russian Aircraft flies towards the UK and QRA Typhoons are sent up to intercept I feel uneasy because it seems the publicity given to these events by our Media harks back to the days of RAF Fighters intercepting Luftwaffe Bombers en route to Blitz our cities. Trouble is that no self respecting Russian Air Force General intends to send waves of Bombers over when sitting in their silos or at sea he has Ballistic or Hypersonic missiles to do the job with much less risk of failure. For too long Britain has been without a ballistic missile… Read more »
Does anyone know what radar this will be? Haven’t found anything about what model it is.
Question how knackered will the newest vanguard be be when dreadnoughts come into service? Would it be able to be converted into a guided missle boat like the Ohio’s for cruise/hypersonic land attack quad packing them into the silos. It doesn’t have to be deployed often just maintained and crewed for training with the occasional deployment. This will give us a huge capability for land strike. I think the converted Ohio’s carry 154 cruise missiles but have 4 more silos. Just something on the with list.
I suspect the Vanguards will be unable to carry on past the Dreadnoughts coming into service. Better to build a transition boat i.e. cross between a SSBN & a SSN. Say a Dreadnought shortened to 4 Trident tubes + 4 Virginia payload Tomahawk tubes.
The UK’s missile defense system needs immediate installation !
What is the point of a ballistic warning system that has no means of stopping missiles other than shouting duck!
Horse and bolted springs to mind 🤔
When I read reports on the Uk armedforces I am appalled at inadequate defense of the Uk. The British Government and its MOD are a sham, always to little too late, under protected ships, little or no air defense 103 aircraft to defend nearly seventy million people, and so few ships. Poorly paid troops who,s married quaters are Dickensian and over paid MOD senior civil servants who make serious mistakes in procurement but never take responsibility for their actions it make me sad my grandfather died in WWI serving in the RN and my father fought in WWII. For God… Read more »