The UK has formally moved ahead with a new tactical ballistic missile effort after the Ministry of Defence published a notice for Project NIGHTFALL.
The notice, published on 9 December, confirms that the MOD is seeking industry partners to deliver a short term development programme, following earlier confirmation in November that officials were reviewing responses to an initial request for information. Defence Minister Luke Pollard previously told Parliament that the department expected to launch the competition before the end of the year, after assessing industry feedback.
According to the contract notice, the MOD is seeking to “procure a future tactical ballistic missile through a short-term development programme”, signalling one of the most ambitious missile requirements pursued by the UK in decades.
The programme is structured around a Competitive Development Phase, during which up to three suppliers may be awarded funded contracts to develop and mature their proposed solutions. This phase is expected to last around 12 months, after which the department will assess options for potential further development or production.
The published notice provides unusually detailed insight into the performance expected from the NIGHTFALL system. The MOD states that it requires a cost effective, ground launched ballistic missile with a range greater than 500 kilometres, capable of operating in high threat and contested environments.
In the words of the notice, the system must be “capable of being safely ground launched from a mobile platform in a high threat tactical environment, navigating to and accurately striking a user-programmed fixed target co-ordinate.” It must function day or night, withstand harsh physical conditions, and remain resilient in complex electromagnetic environments, including degraded or denied satellite navigation.
Each effector is required to carry a high explosive payload of around 200 kilograms and travel at supersonic speed on a ballistic trajectory. The MOD specifies that the missile must achieve a circular error probable of 10 metres for 50 percent of strikes, stating that it should “strike within 10m of a provided target co-ordinate 50% of the time.”
The system is also expected to support salvo firing. The notice requires the ability to launch multiple effectors from a single ground vehicle, with all missiles fired from the same launcher. Once launches are complete, the launcher and crew must be able to withdraw rapidly, with the MOD stating that they must leave the area “within 15 minutes of launching all effectors.” Strike timelines are also tight, with each effector expected to hit its target within 10 minutes of launch.
Looking ahead, scalability is a key consideration. Subject to any future contract, manufacturing must support production of at least ten units per month, with the ability to increase output further. The MOD also stresses the importance of upgrade potential, noting that designs should allow future improvements to range, accuracy and manoeuvrability.
The notice adds that systems should minimise reliance on foreign government restrictions such as export controls, and that suppliers must be able to deliver at least five complete units within nine to twelve months for trials.
While Project NIGHTFALL sets out a clear and demanding requirement, the MOD also reserves the right to amend or cancel the process at any stage. As the notice states, “the Authority reserves the right not to award any Contract to any supplier at any stage during the procurement.”
Impressive
Another Ajax project 8 years in planning still not in use and as much use as Ajax why not buy a system that works from Israel iron dome or Arrow think the Germans have bought we need these missiles now not in 10 years time
This isn’t an air defence missile.
No it’s not
You might mean LORA from Israel which is ground launched and air launched BM.
The issue is we would be reliant on foreign supply and politics , same as would the case with Korea, turkey or even Germany.
Having UK manufacture capability for BM also gives the option of nuclear warheads, should we feel the need in future
A truck mobile BM also lends to shipping container options for naval or auxiliary vessels.
Yeah I mean it’s not ‘rocket science’ to comprehend that a missile system from Israeli is barely less likely to be bricked as an American one, considering Israel is compliant in American policy making, has an increasingly fractious relationship with Europe and Britain and now owes the US more than a few favours, as reflected in its compliance to US pro Russian UN voting of late. As Russia is becoming Trumps new bestest friend (creating a breach of its friendship with China is now his overwhelming, if deluded policy) while Europe is on his list of competitors to tramp over for daring to have a voice, how could we possibly imagine either the US or Israel would be a reliable supplier in times of conflict against Putin and co. Jeez Russia even before this was Israel’s second closest influencer in all matters as a large part of its population originate from there.
Apart from it being a totally different kind of weapon I assume that you didn’t notice the requirement to “minimise reliance on foreign government” – I think that rules out an Israeli system.
The specifications look very similar to Brakestop. Why have 2 separate projects to deliver much the same effect?
This is ballistic and Breakstop is cruise/LM.
While they both make big craters in far off lands, in terms of defending against them they are very different.
Either you devote more resources defending the same area or something will get through.
Brakestop has not specified a delivery method with one option being a ballistic trajectory. See UKDJ article dated 12 December.
Nightfall focuses on a traditional tactical ballistic missile, offering very high accuracy and extremely short flight times (minutes to target), but at a higher unit cost and lower production volume.
Brakestop is aimed at mass-produced one-way effectors that are cheaper, more flexible, and intended to be available in significantly greater numbers.
They could provide layered long-range strike options: Nightfall for rapid, pinpoint ballistic strikes; Brakestop for lower-cost saturation effects and more adaptable attack profiles.
Anybody who wants an American view on the trump/vance strategy could do a lot worse than a look at Warren Buffet on the ‘Think Vest’ site on YouTube.
He explains how projects like this are a loss for American companies.
O dear, another loss for the RAF
Righto I’ll bite just this once!
a: I have never made any posts about the RAF getting this or that!
b, As I served in the Army I have little interest or knowledge of how the crabs (or navy) operate other than general knowledge picked up on here!
Sooo if you want to continue to be a very silly little boy you just carry on👍😉
Many apologies, mixed you up with Jackinoco.
No bother👍
Thanks!
Jacko was RE. So why do you have this thing about him and the RAF???
Because I’m an idiot 🙁
I doubt it. In all seriousness, I see the RAF as having the UK GBAD role, if we ever expanded that, and these offensive assets being in the Army.
I might be influenced by the old RAF Reg Rapier and RAF Bloodhound Sqns there though
Grinch, if this is ground launched then the RAF lose out. It should be army operated.
My point exactly but expressed in dumb terms to wrong person.
Thank you for that tip. Great video.
Oh an other project, add it to a very long list. We must be the world leader in projects and talking and meetings and wish lists, but a bit short on the bringing in to service or ordering part.
We urgently need a strategic bomber! Without Vulcan we lack the ability to hit long range targets conventionally. We have tomahawks however we’re constrained by SSN avails.
We very urgently do NOT need a strategic bomber. Tomahawk from an SSN is currently only one option; Storm Shadow from Typhoon is an existing capability, and Tomahawk/FCASW from the T26 and T31 will be with us shortly.
Strike fighters, drones, and VLS are all better delivery options than trying to develop our own or buy the B21 Raider
Which of these would reach the Central and Eastern Military Districts?
From the sea? All of the above, minus Typhoon. From the UK or Europe? You’re talking about overflying the vast majority of Russian air defence capability, which is what you want a munition for, not a manned bomber.
A strategic nuclear bomber is a lovely option to have, but it doesn’t make sense for us. We haven’t got the manpower or the budget, and what we have of both would be far better spent reinforcing existing or planned capabilities.
What benefit do you think a strategic bomber gives us that we don’t already have or have plans for, that actively contributes to UK defence?
Reach and ubiquity.
We credibly dont have the capability to hit targets in the CMD or EMD from the sea. SS doesn’t have the range, whilst our SSNs are barely able to be fielded to hunt the RU boomers
Somehow I am not convinced that if Ukraine had B-21s that it would make its strike capability much more lethal. You need the resourses of the US to make it truly effective and o ly true conflict will test even that. Also worth noting that most of the seriously tempting targets in Russia are in its European zone, which if Ukraine were allowed to attack as freely as Russia is Ukraines major Cities would make the cushy life and shielding from the true effects of war for the European Russians a totally different story. The poor shucks from central Russia are already far and away the ones suffering in this war but have little influence upon its leaders which is how Putin is getting away with it.
Brave to assume the B-21 could survive a trip into the Russian interior.
That’s what stealth’s for
Stealth doesn’t make your plane invisible. The Russians have plenty of LF arrays.
They seem to struggle to defend against basic drones from Ukraine im sure a B21 would have no issues flying through the mythical all seeing Russian defences.
You do know that new radar and sensors are being developed that very much reduce the effectiveness of current stealth technology, yes still far better to have it than not but by the 30s (when any such capability would take to come online for Britain) we have no idea how effective such aircraft will even be even if we could afford and support them, money would be far better spent elsewhere I would say on long range rocketry. A lot of a B21s capability in that environment relies and ever more so, on all manner of US capability beyond it to suppress defence and likely make a strike successful and risk acceptable against a tier 1 opponent. In reality we would need to operate within that umbrella which tends to make the whole idea of independence pretty redundant.
The more time elapsed after the last dismantling of a Russian air defence network, the more impressive they become.
Spy, stealth is a two way door. Very much in the same context as the continual battle between shield and spear.
As you develop better radar and signal processing. The materials and processes to make radar absorbent materials (RAM) gets better. Compared to 10 years ago, RAM has significantly better bandwidth capabilities and can be manufactured a lot lighter than before. It is only a matter of time before RAM that can counter low frequency radar, is more easily packaged to be embedded into an aircraft. Similarly it only a matter of time before quantum radar becomes available outside a laboratory.
Not to mention Cessna type drones if the Ukranian experience is anything to go by. Ultimate stealth I would say unless you want to close down all commercial and private aircraft movements.
Doesn’t have to be manned – a long-range stealthy drone bomber armed with either paveway or standoff missiles for deep strike missions. A Son or Taranis.
Tempest will offer the range of Vulcan , ,Vulcan was a medium bomber , 1500 miles range, if you discount 13 inflight refueling missions to get bomb run in 1982.
We probably can’t wait for tempest the threat is in the next 5 years
If we can’t wait for Tempest, do you think designing a strategic bomber would be any quicker? Even if the US was willing to drag some B1s out of the boneyard to lease to us, finding the crew, training and building the ground support would take a decade and sink an already struggling defence budget.
Operating 8 or 12 B1’s would take every penny and every ground engineer the RAF has…
We would have to withdraw everything else to afford it!
They better be good😂😂🤣🤣
So what aircraft do we get in the next 5 years though to provide the offensive capability you are requesting? If there is a solution it has to be a non new aircraft platform solution until Tempest arrives.
It’s an UOR. As you say SITS it might be a non new aircraft solution. I just think we need a strategic bombing option as without it and without the US as a reliable ally we’re at a serious disadvantage
🤦🏻♂️
yes, you have no idea
🤪
We already have a ready made strategic bombing capacity with A400M and C17 rigged to carry storm shadow. The US knocked out rapid dragon in about a year. We should do the same. Even if we never use it a simple test gives us enough of a capability to serve as a deterrent. One C17 packed with storm shadows could knock out all of Murmansk and the northern fleet. Look what four storm shadows did to the Black Sea fleet.
Srsly??
Probably the easiest solution with the highest sorry rate would be from carrier based aircraft..
So as a quick interim get a ton of AGM154c, range is 130km, BROACH warhead, it’s got internal navigation and infrared terminal guidance as no external dependencies.. it will do and could provide very swift strategic range sortie of the back of a carrier.. ground based aircraft wise the RAF need to maximise typhoon and storm shadow stocks.. if you have a carrier ensuring sea and air control your mid way tankering is secure and you can generate a lot of sortie that way..
If the UK can use it CBG to gain air superiority over the Norwegian Sea area.. it makes hitting Russia with air power easier and harder for Russia to hit back…
😂
other than banal responses what’s your UK solution to hitting strategic airbases in the middle of Russia (which is about 1500 miles from the Norwegian Sea)?
Hang on. I got this, Spock would use his Vulcan Mind Melt powers, or maybe bore them to death with his total lack of humour,
Or how about a deadly raised eyebrow ?
Other than using emoji’s like 🤦♂️ (deadly that one is) or 😂 (laughing with intended superiority complex) or even resorting to hit and run comments, not a lot else springs to mind !
🤔🫡🙄☺️
Blimey Halfwit, kitty’s got claws😂🤣😂😂🤣
Assuming you’d want to waste the munitions,
• Milanion Group’s FP-5 Flamingo – 3,000km could be fired even from the U.K.
• Tomahawk’s with a warhead of around 150kg will give a range of up to 2,500km.
But if I was targeting the EMD with Tomahawks I wouldn’t be doing it from the Norwegian Sea. I’d do it from the Arctic, Pacific, or even Black Sea to reduce travel times to target and improve mission success.
Alternatively instead of plastering a airbase in the hope you hit something. You don’t bother and you just blast the ponderous strategic bombers that fly from there with either your air force or GBAD as they get within range.
Ah some constructive dialogue – UK SSNs arent going to get access to the Black Sea and with just max 3 available theyll be needed hunting the boomers and tracking RU SSNs and surface vessels and won’t be sent to the Pacific?
Just to show how daft your suggestion is.
You’re the one obsessing with sea-borne solutions. Personally I’d just launch from Ukrainian or any NATO territory that’s closer to the target.
Clearly you’ve not heard about the AUKUS commitment to base an Astute on rotation in Australia.
Thinking about the immediate practicalities;
– We don’t/ won’t likely have a spare SSN and crew anytime in the next 5 years.
– A direct flight from Poland to Kazakhstan is 2100 miles.
My preference remains an urgent requirement for a strategic bombing solution (air or artillery) – given the distances I think the former.
My assumption is the US under Trump is out of the equation and so we need a more urgent solution.
We have 6 Astutes with another in build. Availability has been low due to lack of shore facilities for maintenance. That’s now being addressed.
Why are you quoting we firing ranges to Kazakhstan? Haven’t you heard, the USSR has collapsed. It’s a separate country and not part of Russia.
For a strategic bomber you’re looking at 10 years to design and build from scratch. Or buy a B21 from the US, at the same cost as a T26 frigate – assuming they’re available for export.
Or, long-range missiles that are cheaper and don’t place irreplaceable aircrew at risk.
“denied satellite navigation” are we trying to get away from a US veto over the use of this missile ?
Absolutely.
Absolutely not, it’s about working when the bad guys degrade GPS.
GPS jamming by the Orcs.
V2 !
Pretty much the modern equivalent, yeah.
Or Iskander if you want a slightly more contemporary example.
Morning TJ, yup, history repeats itself even If the UK is 80 years behind !!!!
Not sure If you saw but I’m in Portland currently, yesterday I saw the Triton again in the port, she’s not moved and looks like nothing has been done since the last time.
Currently getting the cooking stuff out ready for a nice “English”.
Van Life is such fun !
Might pop over to your Isle on the journey back, maybe we could have a meet up and I’ll let you pilot my Sur-ron !!!!
I don’t live on the IoW Halfwit, it’s full of retired people!
And even so I’m on holiday at the moment, just like you.
Oh !
Retired People are just so boring !!!
Are you anywhere nice ?
Present company excepted, of course.
I’m skiing in France, it’s not very cold though so not much snow.
See, that’s where a Motorbike comes in handy, you can go off and explore whilst waiting for the snow !
Have a great one, don’t break anything, I heard it’s pretty dangerous.
I hope one day you can afford a proper home instead of living in a van. Can your local council not help with your homelessness situation?
But I love driving around exploring new places, It’s fun and it’s even got a toilet and everything. Councils don’t like us Travellers though so seldom do you find nice 9m pitches for free, but that’s not really a problem, we always find somewhere to park for the duration.
Might be doing it full time soon, it’s not like we actually need such a big house now that the “Kids” have gone.
Fancy renting ? There’s no Teleport but there is a telly and you get to drive a nice big sit-on mower most weekends.
Something similar in size to Iskander would be about right for the distance required. Any further and you want to add another booster stage. But the design they are requiring is relatively simple. That can be accomplished by a unitary rocket, with a separating maneuvering and targeting warhead. Additionally, the targeting they are looking for is also quite simple as its only going for a fixed coordinate.
Several hundred of these and a similar no. of Brakestop OWE together with GBAD & SHORAD would be a good start in rebuilding UK defences.
Extra Typhoon, T31, E7, P8, NMH, CV90 to complete the picture.
Agreed.
Good, but we should be prioritising procurement of long-range GBAD
Russia still has around 1200 cruise missiles and some 300 (conventional warhead) Ballistic missiles they can lob at us.
Given Putin’s declared hatred for “Anglo-Saxon Culture” I think the UK would be a priority target should hostilities break out.
France and UK going back to the triad it seems
This seems to have at least some crossover capability Precision Strike Missile, which I believe is ballistic? Wonder if this is us trying to get away from US control over how we use our weapons systems- although we’d presumably still need this comparable with our M270s.
Will be interesting to see how that plays out.
I’m amazed that, if UKDJ is to be believed, that compatibility with M270s isn’t specified. We don’t need another launch vehicle, just something that will launch from our existing ones. 🤷🏻♂️
I don’t think a missile that meets the requirements would fit in an MLRS pod, PrSM is only 100kg and ATACMS is only 300km.
I’m sure there’s a few lance carrier’s floating around we have one at larkhill
I have to say I’m pretty sure this is the UK reversing a decision it made 70 years ago and is its first step to regaining medium range balance missiles..
If the UK can get a medium range ballistic missile force it will give Russia conniptions and make us very nasty to mess with.. a medium range mobile ballistic missile that can reach out to 3000km and carry a nuclear warhead if needed makes the UK a whole new threat..
Really when you think the UK is already working on a 500km conventional ground launched long range precision fires ( a strategic strike option for the army ) and a 2500km long range conventional strategic weapon that it could use to launch strikes from UK soil.. so why does it need a 500km tactical ballistic missile.. it would seem to be a nice to have for the army.. but why all that work for a nice to have when they already working on a 500km range air breathing option..
Personally I think it’s because the UK has decided it’s getting into medium and possibly intermediate range ballistic missiles.. because Russia will actually respect that..
Well, It’s all rocket science to me.
With an eye perhaps towards having a credible indigenous option to discourage any shenanigans around Trident.
We need to move from ‘Hedghog’ (defence) to ‘Honeybadger’ (attack). When Putin is ready to attack us we will face thousands of drones, missile delivered cluster munitions – anything – against schools, hospitals, power stations, prestige cultural targets, it will be V1 and V2 on steroids. We need to be able to deter with a large inventory of tit for tat missiles which we are clear we will use against any target category deployed against us. Including warhead type. It needs to be able to hit anything of value West of the Urals with a large warhead and take advantage of our crowded island to hide amongst our towns, industrial estates, etc with a rapid deployment TEL. This whole of UK air defence concept is worthy but won’t work unless the retaliatory mechanism is present.
Yeah !
(puffed out chest, fist in the air)
you need to realise your being trained to hate an individual, regardless of the consequences for many other people
Yep, we all hate Putin just like we all hated Hitler. The world will be a better place when P joins H.
so we can expect it to be operational in the latter half of the century, if all goes well !
Based on the success of Russia’s use of the Iskander-M against Ukraine. I fully understand why the MOD would want this as a long range ballistic missile fires option. Since the supposed software upgrade, Iskanders have been more successful at bypassing Patriot, though this isn’t guaranteed. Apparently against the SAMP/T system is has been not very successful even with the upgraded software. Why the software upgrade makes a difference, is that it gives the re-entry vehicle more manoeuvrability in the terminal phase. Where its been alleged to perform a series of bunt manoeuvres, that throws of Patriot’s predictive interception. Which becomes very expensive the more missiles you throw at it, trying to make the interception. So far when Ukraine has fired its few Tochka ballistic missiles at Russian targets, none have been intercepted. The Tochka is a much simpler and shorter ranged ballistic missile, that was replaced by the Iskander-M. The one that took out some Su-30s at the Russian airbase at Millerovo (East of Ukraine), was supposed to have been protected by the S-400 system.
Iskander-M is a unitary (one piece and non separating warhead) rocket, that is classed as a short range ballistic missile (SRBM), which is supposed to have a range no more than 500km (310 miles). However, according to some from Ukraine, the measured range has been further. The missile can follow a true ballistic path or a quasi-ballistic one, where the apogee is flattened off. The speed has been measured between Mach 5 and 6, so is a hypersonic weapon and generally carries a fragmentary high explosive warhead, weighing between 500 and 700kg. It has a an optical sensor that can be used to recognize targets, rather than being used against a fixed coordinate. According to wiki, the missile is 7.3m long, 0.92m in diameter and weighs around 3800kg. The Transporter Erector Vehicle (TEL) can carry and launch two of these weapons.
The Nightfall missile, will need to be similar in size to the Iskander-M, if the MOD want it to reach around 500km. To go further it will need to be bigger, either as a simpler unitary design or a more efficient multistage design, with a separating warhead. The simpler option will be quicker and cheaper to build and test. Whilst the more complex option will be more expensive, take longer to build and test, but will be more efficient range wise, as well as being more difficult to intercept.
It is reported today that, provided ‘Europe’ can provide security guarantees, Zelensky would abandon Ukraine’s membership of NATO as a condition of settling a peace deal with Russia. Brake-stop and Nightfall would be essential I think, to deter further Russian advances.