The deployment of the French state-of-the-art MAMBA weapons system and an air defence command post to Romania is designed to “augment NATO’s Integrated Air and Missile Defence” said the Alliance.
The MAMBA surface-based air and missile defence system is operated by the French Air and Space Force as a theatre antimissile system to protect tactical sites against airborne threats, including cruise missiles, tactical ballistic missiles, manned and unmanned aircraft. The system’s main components are the Aster 30 interceptor missile and the Arabel multi-function radar. MAMBA can operate in an electronic warfare environment and is interoperable with other NATO air defence systems.
“In a collective effort, several Allies are providing both fighter aircraft and missile systems for an increased defensive posture on the eastern flank following Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. With the deployment of a surface-to-air missile defence system to Romania, France has further increased its forward footprint in support of NATO’s enhanced vigilance towards potential threat from the East.”
Besides the French deployment to Romania, Germany and the Netherlands have deployed PATRIOT batteries to Slovakia and the United States sent two PATRIOT batteries to Poland in April 2022.
“The French MAMBA deployment shows France’s capacity and will to protect her own interests as well as those of her Allies,” said Colonel Pascal Ianni, French Chief of Defence Staff spokesperson.
“It permits to reinforce the strategic partnership that has united France and Romania since 2007, especially in the field of air defence. The MAMBA deployment is firmly embedded in the multinational Forward Presence Battle Group which France, supported by the Netherlands and Belgium, established in Romania under NATO’s aegis.”
Aster 30 on a truck. Why can’t the UK have the same and share missile inventory with the RN? Are there any further updates on SkySabre or CAMM-ER for GBAD for UK ports, bases, critical facilities?
Hear, hear.
And thanks for your vote Chris! 🇦🇺 🇬🇧
To protect against what?
Missile attack or air attack?
If you are defending against cruise missiles it would be CAMM that was needed in a quantity with a localised auto cannon solution like the 40mm.
If you are defending against planes with medium range standoff weapons you need A30 but given the range of A30 you don’t need them at every base or facility just overlapping rings of coverage.
I am not sure how the CAMM-ER version would help with static defence as it is more expensive and doesn’t have the range to reach the firing point of the stand-off weapon?
The ER version however does have utility in making Sky Sabre a better battlefield system as it enlarges the ring of coverage from each battery.
The plane firing the missiles is much more likely to be dealt with by an F35-B / Typhoon than anything else ATM?
More the point with such a system is radar and fire control.
We do need a similar truck mounted system for the field, no question, but it is a very expensive thing to field but a marvellous capability to have. Then that takes the conversation round to NATO and do we need such as system for sovereign ops or would it be a NATO only ask? Which then takes the conversation over to French politics…..which is its own subject ATM…..
Hi SB,
Thanks for above and I agree that threats will vary, could be air, sub surface, sea and even space. You choose and place the system for the anticipated threat. It’s just that the UK doesn’t seem to have any protection of its naval ports, let alone its airbases and radar facilities. All those assets and people potentially exposed. The UK is such a small country surrounded by sea and I’d imagine as we have so few subs available, small number of P8s and drones that not all areas/UK approaches could always be covered adequately plus, there’s the real and close threat from Kaliningrad. If there was ever a sudden “hot exchange” you can just imagine the huge amount of immediate damage and loss. Something which INHO can be mitigated by some sensible level of GBAD in the right places. Radar/satellite coverage first! With the Aster 30 NG and any future developments, some land based/shared inventory type model with the RN might be a win-win.
I think that there should always be some sovereign decision making within a shared and coordinated defence environment within NATO.
typo…INHO…IMHO
Defence against missile attack seems like a good idea to me given the current state of affairs.
Besides GBAD I’d like to see a couple more Astutes in the fleet so there’s a good number at sea to keep a very good eye on Russian subs, our undersea cables and especially those nasty sounding Poseidon nuclear drone carrying subs. I hope they’re watched extremely closely and maybe they might blow up in their home ports and give them a taste of their own creation!
Unlike France and Italy the UK has just ignored home defence. Sky Sabre is intended for defending the army. We have no UK SAM system.
As we are getting ASTER 30 block 1 for the T45 (the same missile as used in the French system above), we should land base a few batteries to protect key locations. We should also upgrade Sky Sabre with CAAMM ER and buy some extra to supplement UK air defence.
The UK government appears to think the UK mainland will never face a conflict again… this view of the world appears entirely driven by trying to save money…. doing national defence on the cheep. We are not a poor country so this is all down to politicians not taking defence seriously.
I can only hope that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will be a wake up call for HMG.
I think the UK has a need to defend against Iskander & even evolved Scud type ballistic missiles. The improved version of SAMP-T due in 2027 would be ideal for that. Existing versions are 500m euro a battery. UK only needs 2-3 batteries. Not a fortune in the grand scheme of things.
Hear hear
In 1922 we urgently need to thinking out of the box to which we seem trapped regarding defending the Home Base. Imagine if we thought like we do now in 1940. Britishers- for you ze war is over. OK!
Maybe neither the defence arms wants the job. Over to you RAF time to step up on a historic basis. The Navy does the nuclear deterrent.
2022, sorry about that!!
Oops, I think I may have accidentally red flagged you. Fat fingers problem, my apologies
Ukraine has made clear that ballistic missile defence is now essential to conducting an operation. It’s a capability the UK must poses on land and sea.
Sky Sabre started entering service last year with the Royal Artillery. Given we are integrating CAMM with the RN’s Sea Viper system I would think it is entirely possible to integrate the Aster 30 with the Sky Sabre system. My only question would be if the Girraffe Radar can operate with the Aster 30 or if there would need to be any software changes to allow the radar to provide the data uplink..!
Cheers CR
No it needs a different radar, more along the same SAMPSON radar fitted to T45, France and Italy use pretty much the same radar for their SAMP T as they use on their Horizon class frigates just land based. We could buy there’s or develop our own from SAMPSON.
Hi Martin,
I do wish we had used the a land based SAMPSON with a view to integrating Aster 30 later as it would allow on going development of what is a very good radar. Although it would have been much more expensive initially it would have proved cost effective over several progammes for which SAMPSON and its potential future derivatives would / could be applied T83 destroyer being top of that list.
Cheers CR
Morning CR, not sure about SAMPSON however, as a fixed radar yes but for mobility its a bit big. If I understand correctly ARTISAN share a lot of the capability of SAMPSON. If that is correct then possibly that is the way to go. That would though give limited range. The Dutch seem to be using the SMART-L MM for mobile land based air defence. So I suppose we could go in a few diffrent directions for example give RAF bases in the UK the same radar suite as the carriers and a fixed ASTER 30 battery, or mobile radars and missile batteries which would cost more but are more resiliant to detection. I do agree that we here in the UK need to do something for missile defence.
Yes, both CAMM and Aster are radar agnostic. It only needs a radar to illuminate a target for the combat management system (CMS) to work out the interception. The CMS is the key thing here, so long as it is fed with reliable data that it can read, it can work out the interception point, but also give course correction updates. As soon as Aster or CAMM gets in range of the target, its on board active radar takes over the guidance to the target.
The Arabel radar is OK, its on par with the Artisan radar. It is a better system than Saab’s Giraffe as its a passive electronically scanned array (PESA) rather than a mechanically scanned pulse doppler as per Giraffe. Giraffe is more akin to the Searchwater 2000 used in the Merlin Crowsnest. There are potentially better radars available.
Thanks for the good info on your post too DB.
Thanks Daveb, helpful as always mate.
Cheers CR
Hi CR, just finding some time to reply to the replies. I really like the idea of Sky Sabre Giraffe capability supporting both CAMM/Aster 30, even as a mix, for a GBAD.
Do you reckon the MOD would be interested?… Lol 😁
It has been mentioned before. The fire units of the Sky Sabre use a datalink that is either Link-16 based or similar. The MoD have mentioned an intra-operability between say a T45 and a Sky Sabre battery. They haven’t gone into details, clearly. But it’s likely that radar target data can be sent between the two units allowing an interception solution to be worked out. Whether this means that one unit can control the other’s missiles is debatable.
It’s more likely that continuously updated radar data can be sent to the shooter, for it to update the course correction. This will be the easier (cheaper) option. In time I’m sure they’ll develop a coherent and networked capability.
Agree, a combines CAAMM ER and ASTER 30 system would be optimal – however we need some of these systems for the UK. We need to defend key military sites and cities.
I think the French have 10 of the land ASTER systems we should buy at least the same.
Put one in the Falklands, one protecting our nuclear sub base, one protecting our ICBM warning site, London, Glasgow, Birmingham, Cardiff, one in NI….
Hi Rob,
I have been thinking about our lack of effective Air Defences for a few years and I agree entirely with your list of sites.
I would give those weapons to the RAF Regiment as the RAF is obviously lead service for UK AD duties. However, I would give the Royal Artillery some extra systems as well and give them the lead in defending deployed forces. All systems would be mobile.
We haven’t had SAM’s defending the UK since Bloodhound left service in 1991, although most of them were in fixed installations there was one mobile squadron with its radar being mast mounted. So we have operated large mobile SAM in the past, but it was a long time ago now…
Cheers CR
Yes it is time to take air defence seriously. We need UK systems not just to protect the UK but to free up T45 for what it was designed for carrier defence.
I do not know why we just abandoned UK SAM air defence after Bloodhound… especially when other NATO and European countries have SAMs.
Same reason why we are always missing cool stuff with strategic capability we leave it to the USA to provide.
“cool stuff with strategic capability”
SSN? SSBN/Trident? Rivet Joint? UKSF? C17? The RFA? GCHQ? Overseas bases bristling with antenna? GOSCC? DIFC? Pathfinder? F35s?/QEC?
All the Cyber/EW stuff you don’t read about but know is out there ( see GCHQ )
We don’t always miss cool stuff, and all of those could be called strategic.
We have a small stake in many many areas.
EO and SAR satellites, most nations in our weight class had these twenty years ago. SIGINT satellites (Zircon in the 80’s cancelled) our electronic warfare capability that’s so super secret that no one can actually tell you what it is outside of escort jamming pods. This is because it does not exist on a theatre level. Our complete inability to launch large scale precision strike to the point that we build Uber submarines and destroyers and don’t put a VLS on it and theatre level air defence. These are not including the capabilities that we gapped for decades and are only just getting back now carrier strike, strategic airlift, CSAR and SEAD. Ballistic Missile defence is now the most glaring. It’s not like 1991 where it was a theoretical nice to have. Any nation the Russians are willing to equip with Iskandar would make mince meet of or C4 capabilities and logistics if we had to fight on our own. Britain’s military policy is purely based on making contributions to US coalitions. That’s fine on a grand strategic view however when we are paying $60 billion a year with the worlds third biggest defence budget and we have been consistently in the top two spenders since 1991 we should expect strategic capability that can be employed independently of the USA or NATO.
The capability of those satellites we get via UKUSA, though I agree we should have our own. The new mini sats coming for SpCom should help here.
Zircon cost too much money, we pay NSA for one third of their satellites time.
Strategic airlift we’ve had for years. Agree regards SEAD, CSAR we still lack despite the effort 42 have put into this, it’s very ad hoc with any spare CHF Merlin.
I’m in agreement regards BM defence and a SAM capability for the UK homeland, as mentioned below. It is an area we need something more.
Regards my earlier post, as said, all strategic capabilities we have which you said we “are always missing cool stuff with strategic capability” and that was a sample that that’s not all strictly true, we do have plenty of strategic assets others lack, capability gaps accepted.
We are not the USA and cannot cover every base. Covering all as a medium, major power as we are with the 30 billion plus Successor/Trident/ AWE capability in core budget is impossible bar a huge increase which the politicians, of all sides, won’t fund. The option of removing Trident to fund other strategic capabilities is a no no, as that is one area that keeps the UK at the top table that is a total non starter.
On EW, Cyber, I think many would be surprised and it’s secret for a reason. I’m talking GCHW here not an EW jamming pod on a Tornado.
For sure GCHQ has some secret tech that can probably reset Putin’s alarm clock and turn all the traffic lights in Moscow purple but all branches of the armed forces have had a near complete lack of offensive EW capability for decades. Countries with massively smaller budget than ours like Australia and Israel can do this and we literally have some of the best tech in the world at Leonardo in Edinburgh while BAE (USA) does almost the entire US EW capability. It’s been embracing that the best we had was sky shadow pods. Praetorian is great but it’s a pure defensive system with some ELINT capability. We have zero wide area airborne capability, limited ground level and limited maritime capability. Virtually all communications jamming and zero radar jamming.
Love the idea of “purple traffics lights”, hopefully pulsating too. 😄
At a more basic level we have potential problems with GPS. The link is to the Times yesterday.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FTkAlTcVUAAV98L?format=jpg&name=large
Agree 100%. For the amount of spending the UK has a ridiculous number of gaping holes.
Nope. 16 Regiment RA is to defend the Field Army on deployment. It could be dispersed around the UK instead and in some cases/exercises has been, such as G7 in Cornwall and the 2012 Olympics, but that leaves the army with just SHORAD.
And I agree with you, a home based SAM system with some BM capability too should be a priority.
That was once the job of the RAF, before they binned all the Bloodhounds.
There should be an opportunity to share Aster and CAMM between the RA and Navy. The French and Italians and Singaporeans must be doing exactly that with their Asters.
So what do you cut to pay the billions for air defence missiles for the defence of U.K. home ports bases etc.
typhoon? F35? Carriers? Type 26/31 New medium helicopter? Wedgetail? Half army numbers?
Static targets are so easy to hit. Air defence network is always hit first.
Mobile is the way to go. As with the olympics it can be set up on U.K. soil if needed.
Nobody thinks the U.K. will be attacked and if it was a surprise attack the illusion that ground defence missiles would stop them all isn’t realistic. Some will get through. We must be talking about Russia or China attacking?
Either of them would launch 100s at once from multiple directions and would need to be able to take out the rest of nato at the same time.
some low level sub sonic cruise, supersonic cruise, short ballistic missiles, medium ballistic missiles, manoeuvring warheads etc etc.
£10 billion still wouldn’t cover the costs and again some would still get through. It’s also very unlikely an attack would come out of the blue.
Now if the goal is to protect against a couple of missiles launched by someone that could be easier for a small area but who is this country launching that type of attack and what is there goal? But if that is the defence much better to have mobile systems that can be used anywhere.
I just can’t see what defending the U.K. from missile attack is going to achieve and what is the U.K. losing to pay for it?
“So what do you cut”
Nothing. We increase the defence budget, as we should have done five years ago.
Have you seen the rate of inflation or heard about the cost of living crisis? Big increases in defence spending are unlikely to come anytime soon when millions are struggling to pay for the gas bill. I’d love to see the defence budget go up, and we still might in the Autumn budget. But with the current financial situation, it’s not a good look for the government to splash out on new toys for the Armed Force’s when millions are struggling. That’s not what anyone whats to hear, but that’s the reality of politics.
Nothing is as expensive as losing a major war.
Exactly. Look at the devestation in Ukraine. Our forces are way too small & ill equipped(glaring gaps). We need more wealth going into investment in the UK rather than offshoring where it does little good.
Yet the West’s and NATOs response to Ukraine has demonstrated we have far more resolve then many gave us credit for, especially Russia. China, like Russia has nothing to gain from all out conflict with the west, except economic ruin and isolationism from the rest of the world.
Yes much joint resolve in response which is fantastic to see and right. Greater defence capabilites prior might have prevented some of the sheer scale of the destruction.
Totally. Ukraine could have been very different if they had plenty of decent GBAD plus a bigger airforce.
The FIRST duty of any government is defence of the realm. No one thought we would have a major war in Europe, yet here we are… the world is getting more dangerous and unpredictable not less. We must rake UK defence seriously. We are vulnerable to cruise missiles and ballistic missiles in the UK we need to close that gap.
With Iran getting more and more help from North Korea developing their ballistic missiles. It is only a matter of time before one of the nut job supporting factions, get their hands on one and launch it. Perhaps not at the UK directly but Cyprus is just within range of Iran’s medium range ballistic missiles, when launched from Yemen!
I’m not against a defensive missile system just I see so much else that is needed more than U.K. protection.
Say £10 billion to set a up a limited U.K, Cyprus system that could hopefully catch 10-20 ballistic missiles Fired at once. What if the enemy launch 50 or 500. Then if they are fixed, massive long range radars/missiles they are the first targets. To have shorter range smaller systems you have to intercept nearer their intended targets and that is more difficult and needs more systems. I’d rather that cash got spent on ship board defence, fighters, more mobile air defence, logistics etc.
add in the manning for these systems and you have to lose somewhere.
Iran has enough to worry about in its region it’s not targeting the U.K mainland.
Russia would be nuclear massive strike and can’t defend against that yet.
North Korea is to far away.
China I think has more than enough targets already in its area of interest. Who else would launch an attack on the U.K?
A Sky Sabre system with ASTER 30 1NT and CAAMMs ER could be mobile – not fixed and still do the job.
All true. I used to hold your position as obviously the MoD/DIS did with their threat assessment making it a very low priority compared to our expeditionary capabilities.
Now, I’m not so sure and feel greater emphasis in this area is required.
It need not be a fixed installation like rows of Bloodhound, just more Land Sceptre that cam relocate.
Oh yes I’m for more mobile air defence, land ceptor, starstreak etc and drone defence. cover will be essential to all areas of troop deployment in the future.
My main point about the U.K. protection is people seem to think u put a Sam down and are safe. It can’t catch everything. Even to try and catch all threats over multiple locations would cost a lot.
Cut all the politically correct non-jobs in government, plus their gold plated pensions.
Gold plated pensions ended years ago.
Well that is relative. In comparison to most private sector pensions now, the public sector is still gold plated & unaffordable in projections going forward a couple of decades.
If you mean “Guaranteed to receive one” then yes, but they can and have changed the terms mid contract.
And how many ‘politically correct non-jobs’ are there….
How about we just clamp down hard on tax evasion instead and make sure everyone pays a fair rate…
I assume you are referring to tax avoidance rather than evasion? The tax man is very hot on tax evasion.
No HMRC are not ‘Hot’ on tax evasion…
Investigation and enforcement teams have been cut back drastically, despite the fact that they collect many times more tax than their costs..
There should be areas where shared missile inventory across RA and Navy could be expanded. Land and sea bases radars would be different but should have some ability to interface with the same missile types. There’s always land, sea, air and space radar/satellite coverage going on and I imagine this Intel is then fed and shared on down the line where needed. Sorry for my inexperience with terminology and lack of technical knowledge here.
Sure hope there’s enough Sky Sabre systems to go around for the UK. I know we talked about this before but is there any definite numbers on this?
“ So what do you cut to pay the billions” how about the Civil Service? For starters.
The Civil Service has had real terms pay cuts for decades and will probably get 2% this year so the idea of a smug overplayed sector is just not the case.
Yes I can understand that, however it was more the size of the organization rather than its pay scales that I was implying could be drastically pruned.
I got a bit confused there for a moment. I saw Mamba, and my immediate thought was “Counter Battery Radar”.😀
Took them long enough. France’s inaction and attempted appeasement of Russia has been thoroughly humiliating, doubly so given their reputation
Manger du fromage singes d’abandon?
Night and day difference between before his re-election and after.
The silence after is deafening.
Having taken Russian donations our government hardly has the high ground.
CAMM and sky Sabre is probably the worlds best mid range system but it’s a crime that the UK has never had a theatre level capability and with modern precision guided ballistic missiles no army will be able to fight even a mid level player without ABM capability. We cannot continue to be in the position on leave it all to America. We either need to develop our own system, get involved and buy SAMP T with block II aster and NT or buy THAAD from the USA.
Indeed it’s a bit late to trade the ‘oh well it will never happen so let’s not bother and save the money’ excuse. Ironic that even France with its endless cosying up to Putin policy still feels it’s needed while we who are happy to tug on the bear’s tale seem to think it’s not.
Thaad is probably to limited from the U.K. point of view, any balistic missile fired at the U.K. will probably be outside of Thaads capability. In reality the best system out there which is not GMD ( which cannot afford) is the SM3 as that can defeat intermedia range missiles, Aster NT is an option but SM3 has the better engagement envelope.
Sure a SARMAT launched from Siberia at the UK is going to be outside of THAAD capability however a big fat liquid filled ICBM’s in Siberia will be the first thing the US Pacific based trident subs launch on. Russia has a limited number SLBM’s most of which would be close to the UK at launch so may well be an intermediate ballistic missile profile or each of those SSBN may have an astute or Virginia right behind it. The Russians have 2 SSBN on station at best. Russias number one concern would be hitting as much of the USA’s nuclear arsenal as possible before it glassed them. How many missiles could they target on Britain? It’s not like the 1980’s where we might have to intercept 1000 weapons headed for the UK. It might just be a few now in a limited tactical strike. You can launch an ICBM designed to go 10,000 miles at a target 1,000 miles away but the only way to do this is to not burn fuel at which point the weapon becomes and intermediate ballistic missile and that’s very doable for something like THAAD of Block II Aster. It’s well worth a couple of billion pounds over a decade out of the 40 billion we spend every year. The UK is seen as so insignificant in strategic Arms talks that out missile shield would not even register.
Would their SSBN be close to the UK at launch?
Depends what one defines as close, I believe they spend most of their time under the arctic in the far N east which is why the Russian navy is most concerned with their bastion defence of the White and Kara seas.
Anyway, yes we need BM defence.
On a ballistic missile basis that’s relatively close to the UK. It’s potentially intermediate range anyway which is more interceptable , it may not go extra atmospheric. If Russia has two subs up there with 16 missiles each 32 total but it’s got to take out all of North America and Europe how many get targeted at the UK? I’m guessing 4 maximum current ABM systems would be useful against that level of threat. No chance against their heavy stuff coming in from Siberia but that may all be taken out by NATO counter strike and they will probably want to target US land based ICBMs with them as much as possible. If the ABM system can keep the RAF and QRA capability intact we can probably defend against air launched weapons. WW3 projections I have seen have NATO loosing about 10% of its population with Russia more like 60%. Russia would loose very fast if we can survive the first 24 hours then the UK may well be safe in such a scenario.
Just counting the Borie and -A there are 2 in the Northern and 3/4 in the Pacific Fleets so there are 5/6 for NA and E with 6-10 MIRV on each of the 16 per missiles. Assuming 2/3/6 that’s 480 warheads from which I suspect that we would be worth maybe 50+. Then there are the GLBM and goodness knows how many air launched or GLCM. Given the state of our Civil Defence, after its cuts, the lucky ones will be those vapourised on impact.
Even the ground based ABM shield the US has in Alaska is limited, offering no defence to the Sarmat ’round the World’ missile. MAD is very alive and well.
Even in the event of a conventional war we would have real problems keeping the RAF in the air as their airfields are surprisingly few now – a rarely mentioned area of Government cuts. With no AD, apart from their own aircraft, they, or their fuel/munition dumps in particular, are very vulnerable.
No matter the comment the continuous snide little remarks you insert (thinking it’s clever) against a capability of the west, regardless the subject matter, and trying to big up one of the Nazi Russia capabilities is so common it’s sad! Anyway any condemnation of Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine yet Putin poodle!
Both THAAD and SM6 are getting a larger diameter 1st stage section. This is to boost the engagement altitude to over 120,000ft, where the hypersonic glide vehicles are supposed to operate. The guesstimated maximum height is around 160,000ft. Any higher and they will need reaction jets to control their intercept direction.
SM3 has intercepted medium altitude orbital targets, which represent intercontinental ballistic missiles, before they release their re-entry vehicle payload. With the upgrade both SM6 and THAAD will be able to engage re-entry vehicles a lot higher, before they start doing bunt manoeuvres. SM3 can engage targets from just in low earth orbit to medium height orbits.
Aster 30 in its current form has a range more likened to SM2. The NT version is still a long way off the range or height capabilities of the SM6/THAAD. It needs a much larger booster to compete with SM6 or THAAD.
I would think the SM6/SM3 option would be best for the U.K. due to coverage ( we would need around 4 active Thaad systems to cover the key infrastructure sites). SM6 also has a anti shipping, Anti land attack capability which would be helpful with limited numbers of MK41 silos.
Yes, I would argue the SM6 is the more versatile missile, due to its wider target set. Whereas THAAD has only be tested against ballistic targets (as far as I’m aware). Not forgetting SM6 is just a hot rodded SM2.
The Aster BMD is very quietly been forgotten about. There hasn’t been any press releases for a couple of years. Perhaps they are finding it too complicated, i.e. to costly to develop?
The main benefit THAAD has is its radar. The AN/TPY-2 is a beast of a radar. Being X-band it has a very high target resolution which is good when trying to discriminate between a re-entry vehicle and its deployed decoys. Wouldn’t want to pay for the fuel bills for that radar’s generator!
The navy must be listening as they are getting aster block 1 for type 45😂😂😂
You could then even utilise the 2 MK41 spaces on the T45s for SAM 6 in combo with Aster and CAMM can go down the sides…as I like saying.. 😏
Why, the clues in the name. Terminal high altitude area defence (THAAD). If the ICBM is following a mid orbital altitude, then it can’t intercept it, as it’ll be over well 200,000ft. However, once the ICBM has dispensed its MIRVs and these enter the upper atmosphere. THAAD can be launched to intercept them.
It doesn’t matter if the missile is a SRBM, MRBM or ICBM, once the re-entry vehicles are within the atmosphere THAAD can intercept them. The monstrously powerful AN/TPY-2 X-band radar makes sure it tracks objects up to low earth orbit. The smaller X-band frequency will help the system to better differentiate between the real warhead and decoys.
On 17 January 2022, THAAD made its first real-world intercept against an incoming Houthi medium range ballistic missile over the UAE. A missile most likely supplied by Iran, as the Houtis wouldn’t have the technology or manufacturing ability to build such a missile.
Hi Davey, THAAD can engage short and medium range BM as well as possibly some of the shorter range intermediate range BM, but it cannot manage an intercept of the longer range Intermediate range weapons or ICBMs. It’s an almost impossible task to do a terminal intercept on these have a velocity of missiles 4.3 miles a second or Mach 21. It just not a realistic proposition to make that intercept, which is why the US has spend 10s billions on GMD and will be spending 10s of billions more…just to gain the ability to intercept a handful of ICBMs. And longer range IRBM.
Hi Jon, I will have to disagree with you there. During the launch and boost phases, a ICBM can reach speeds up to Mach 15, once it has reached low earth orbit. Some may have another boost stage to push them high like Russia’s Satan II , but a lot of them only have a manoeuvring stage. So some top out at at terminal velocity of Mach 15. Those with the extra engine stage will go faster, as they climb to a higher lower earth orbit. These are the ones that can reach Mach 20.
As the missile transits parallel to Earth its velocity will decrease minutely due to Earth’s pull. But this is only noticeable in the e long term and the missing is only transiting for a few minutes. Even though it is still traveling at Mach 20, it’s travel path is predictable. It won’t be able to make any wild manoeuvres. During this phase it is vulnerable. So long as you put the interceptor in the missile’s path or can work out an forward oblique angle interception. Then it’s possible to take it out. This is how SM3 can intercept lower orbiting missiles. Though with the new larger 1st stage it should be capable of intercepting these medium altitude missiles as well. Even SM3 cannot do a tail chase interception.
The interception concept is no different to how something like Sea Ceptor, can intercept a hypersonic cruise missile. So long as you place the interceptor in the predicted path of the target missile. You stand a chance of a direct hit. With an active radar or infrared seeker. The interceptor can steer directly towards the missile’s path. It’s a bit more complicated when using semi-active radar homing due to the separation angles of the radar transmitter and receiver, but it has been done, SM2 for example.
THAAD has the capability to intercept all ballistic missiles and ballistic re-entry vehicles. But only as soon as that body enters the atmosphere from space. The atmospheric drag will slow it down. As it drops into denser air, the speed drops off fairly proportionally. So an unguided re-entry vehicle will hit the ground at speeds of between Mach 4.5 and 6 depending on the entry altitude. A one piece missile such as SCUD, has a significantly larger surface area, so it will hit the ground at speeds just over Mach 4. A guided re-entry vehicle that maneouvres to its target, performing barrel rolls etc to through of air defenses, will loose even more speed. So it may hit the ground at speeds as low as Mach 4.
It is only in the terminal phase that systems such as THAAD can realistically engage ballistic threats. Though if THAAD was close to the launch point, it may have the acceleration advantage to make the interception during the launch phase.
Well Germany said that they wanted Israel Arrow 3.
With you Martin. We seem to like looking into the air and space around us with nothing much on land to shoot anything down with and sea based is limited in numbers but developing.
Oh. I’ve heard about these …when they detonate they spray the target aircraft with cheese…..it’s like France is sending a weapon to Ukraine to gain kudos but cheese doesn’t damage anything so it doesn’t upset the Russians……
Manger du fromage singes d’abandon?
Cheese? That has to grate.
That’s very cheesy 🧀
We could have installed shore-based SAMPSON and Aster 30’s years ago. It would have provided at least some protection for our long range radar sites, airfields and ports.
Like they installed the land-based Aegis and VLS in Romania, Poland and Japan.
Yes, that could be an option linked in with Fylingdales and the rest of the UK radar network. Talk about a big fat target that is.
I’m not sure how “at-risk” Fylingdales is. An attack on that could be viewed as the first move of a pre-emptive nuclear strike; twitchy bum time all around.
I wonder if they first asked Putin if it was OK? lol
We should have this for land air defence with update aster 30 1NT which RN type 45 was also look for upgrade. It is Would be good replace our lost art long range SAM Zone “bloodhound mk2 should be mk3” at RAF
(We need consider look at booster meteor lunch to common raf and RN as option) with Giraffe 8a or TPS 77radar for pair with these. Even with straight get sm6 for RN and land VLS
With 4 layer protection with Sky Sabre short-medium and this should be called Sky claymore, medium-long range, even starstreak 2 & LMM as SHORD roles sky Seax. SM6 for anti icbm or Dragon fire ideal laser defence for ABM and Drone, cruise missile might that reason we don’t need long range anti ballistic missile weapons
we need this protection coast and protect port and RAF base for any inbound future war or deployed out sea base protection. Against bomber or missile SRBM or cruise hypersonic, other threat.
Buy these should be priority.