The UK is set to procure a new interceptor missile designed to counter drone threats, with a British start-up expected to supply systems to both UK forces and Gulf partners, according to the Ministry of Defence.
Defence Secretary John Healey announced that Cambridge Aerospace will provide the “Skyhammer” interceptor and associated launchers, with initial deliveries expected as early as May, subject to contract.
The missile is intended to counter threats such as Iranian-designed Shahed drones and reflects a wider push to field lower-cost air defence systems at pace, according to the government.
The system has a reported range of around 30km and a top speed of approximately 700km/h, according to the company. The first tranche of missiles and launchers is expected within weeks, with further deliveries planned over the following six months.
The announcement was made at the London Defence Conference and forms part of a broader effort to accelerate procurement from smaller, innovative firms and apply lessons from conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.
“We are accelerating contracts with the most innovative British businesses to rapidly expand support to Gulf partners and equip our own forces with anti-drone tech,” Healey said.
The Ministry of Defence said the deal is expected to support more than 175 jobs at Cambridge Aerospace, including the creation of around 50 new roles.
According to the company, the system is designed to provide an “affordable mass” approach to air defence, prioritising cost-effective interception against large volumes of low-cost drones.
“Skyhammer was designed to do exactly that – bringing affordable mass to protect our skies,” said CEO Steven Barrett.
The contract is expected to include integration, technical support and training, according to the Ministry of Defence. The procurement remains subject to final agreement.
Any idea of cost per unit?
Please ignore. I don’t think there’s much information along those lines.
Its estimated at cost of £20-£30,000, see breakdown below
That figure is based on industry reports and analyst projections circulating around the DSEI 2025 defense exhibition and recent procurement discussions in 2026.
While Cambridge Aerospace CEO Steven Barrett has officially stated that their interceptors will cost in the “tens of thousands” of dollars (to compete with the price of a Shahed drone), specific industry breakdowns from defense forums and journals like the UK Defence Journal and EDR Magazine have pinpointed the targets for each system:
The Price Breakdown
• Skyhammer (~£20,000 – £30,000): This is the high-subsonic, turbojet-powered model. Because it is designed to take down slower drones, it uses a slightly less expensive propulsion system, leading to that lower £20k-£30k entry point.
• Starhammer (~£30,000 – £40,000): You likely saw the £20k figure as a baseline for the company’s technology generally, but the Starhammer specifically is more expensive. It is a supersonic, rocket-powered interceptor designed for higher-speed targets (Mach 2+). The increased cost comes from the Nightstar solid rocket motor and the more robust airframe required for supersonic flight.
Where these numbers come from:
1. DSEI 2025 Briefings: During the product unveiling, the company emphasized a price point that is “a fraction” of existing systems like the LMM (Martlet) or CAMM.
2. Comparative Analysis: Analysts derived these figures by looking at the cost of the internal components—specifically the X-band radar seeker and the in-house manufactured motors—which Cambridge Aerospace produces vertically to bypass the typical 300% markup of traditional defense prime contractors.
3. Government Backing: Recent 2026 reports regarding UK government interest in “affordable mass” for air defense have frequently cited the £30k–£40k range for Starhammer as the target price for the MOD to achieve a sustainable “cost-exchange” ratio.
Clarification: If you see a £20,000 figure, it is almost certainly referring to the Skyhammer (the subsonic drone-killer) or the company’s early “target cost” for their base platform before rocket propulsion is added.
Starhammer’s probably more than that. It only has to achieve cost parity with cruise missiles so I’d estimate £70-100k and solid rocket motors are more expensive too. CA have said a lot about what they want to be able to sell for but that won’t be achieved for a long while yet.
Good post, Jim.
👍
martlet has a range of 3.7 miles might it be easier to employ those?
This is how we should be doing procurement for new technologies like drones. Buy batches of them, test them out, be prepared for stuffs that’s doesn’t work and be ready to ship it off to Ukraine.
No clever classical Greek acronyms, endless committees, over paid MIC contractors or endless gravy train’s required.
This system seems ideal to tackle a range of emerging threats and at £20,000 – £30,000 a piece it is very affordable. That fact we can make something jet powered and radar guided for that price is amazing and a real testimony to British industry.
There’s a big shake-up going on with regard to defence procurement from SMEs.
I wouldn’t hold your breath. D.I.P. is now NOT gauranteed for June as promised and the Defence Readiness Bill has now gone altogether this year. Now probably nexy spring.
and yet even without the DIP you can see procurement from SMEs actually taking place.
While good news, I’m prepared to bet that this procurement is being funded by the Gulf states and that next to nothing is being purchased to protect the UK. If there was a significant UK buy, surely the money would have to come from that elusive, mythical creature the Defence Investment Plan.
Healey said today the DIP delay is not delaying decisions. Let’s hope this at least is one example that he can point to.
Mmmm did his lips actually move?
So keen to throw away your money 🤷🏻♂️
Make sure they are container/NavyPODS-compatible, stick them on the back of as many trucks and XV Patrick Blackett-type/HMS Stirling Castle-type as possible*. At the very least this starts to give us some more options against UAVs and cruise missiles at a reasonable scale to protect bases, critical infrastructure, convoys, and naval task groups.
Now that just leaves ballistic missile defence… not sure that’s something that small start-ups can handle unless I’m wrong, so might have to go to MBDA with a big bag of money. Would make sense in terms of European-allied economies of scale.
*Not the 100% gold-plate solution but something that starts to deliver, then we can iterate.
We could be integrating SAMP/T NG with Aster 30 Block 1 NT, as the missile (Block 1 and Block 1 NT) is already planned on the Type 45’s.
ESSI covers ballistic missiles.
Ah fair point, forgot about that. I’d say that needs some progress but that goes for just about everything!
Some good news for once! We need to order thousands of these.
My thoughts exactly.
Now, who operates them?
I’d be forming a Civil AD Corps along the lines that J suggested weeks ago, seeded with military.
Good idea, If they raise the minimum age to 50 + to join a civil AD corps then there may be a lot of volunteers.
This would make sense, and you’d get a fair amount of sign-up interest (whether or not that would be CAPITAlised on – see what I did there – is the next question).
This is good as CA are the standout startup in the UK for air defence. I could see a combination of Starhammer and Skyhammer, given a good sensor system and mounting, being able to do a lot of the Naval counter-drone PODS stuff that has been advertised and perhaps even a vehicle based role too (talk to Moog). It’s also good to have another missile manufacturer in the UK to have a bit of a stick to beat Thales and MBDA with to bring down their prices too.
Does it work?
They test fly drones weekly by running off their initial huge investment, if it didn’t by now they would be terrible engineers.
I meant if they were sent to Ukraine and/or other combat zone to be battle tested.
IIRC Barrett has said that he didn’t want to give the Ukrainians a half-baked weapon system before CA knew it was finished, so no it hasn’t been battle tested. It’s not hard to get a target drone to mimic a Shahed though, they don’t evade at all.
It will be interesting where they find the soldiers to operate them if there is no growth in the army. Some units being re rolled I assume.
Any/everyone, almost a personal weapon.
For those who don’t know what Skyhammer is, especially as the picture above doesn’t really give enough detail.
Cambridge Aerospace have two surface to air weapons, the Skyhammer is a subsonic surface to air “missile”. It is turbojet powered, has a take-off mass of around 18 kg, and is less than 1 metre long, with a 1.3 metres wingspan. It has a range of up to 30 km and a speed of up to 700 km/h. Skyhammer is tube-launched, the interceptor has two wings that fold forward and an inversed-V tail plane, whose surfaces fold forward from along the fuselage body. Skyhammer uses an active X-band radar seeker to give it better all weather capability. Skyhammer has completed a number of successful drone interception trials.
The second product, which I don’t believe has been trialled yet is called the Starhammer. This is a supersonic rocket powered missile. It is also tube-launched, and fitted with a radar seeker, where it can reach a speed of around Mach 2, and has a range of 20 km and an envelope of 10 km in altitude. Its take-off mass is around 90 kg, and its length is estimated at around 3 metres. The outer profile has a close resemblance to the Martlet missile, but sidewise is similar to CAMM.
Cambridge Aerospace is quite a new company that was founded in 2024, with Skyhammer concepting starting in January 2025.
Overall there is very little information about the two products publicly. For example what is the launching mechanism to throw it out of the tube and get the turbojet up to speed? As it is likely not powerful enough to accelerate the missile from zero airspeed. Secondly there is next to no information on how it initially finds a target to lock on to. Clearly it will have some form of lock on before launch (LOBL), but will it have target up dates once its left the launcher, thereby implying it uses a data-link?
Thanks for the summary DB. One thing I have noticed is that in the marketing images from today Skyhammer it has a pair of cameras in the nose rather than the original round radar seeker. It’s been suggested to me on other forums that there might still be a small AESA radar in the bulge under the chin (forwards-facing square panel) making it a dual seeker. If so that’s useful for IFF as IIRC the target discrimination for active seekers is terrible.
The spec on Starhammer says 3 metres long ,99 kg, radar seeker, tube launched , 20km range and 10km altitude.
One article suggests they think it could deal with ballistic missiles..
So within the CAMM spec but cheaper?
Similar to Tamir in iron dome.
Interesting that a private company can do something that complex.
“ Interesting that a private company can do something that complex.”
Is it that complex?
These things were being done in the 1970’s when Sea Dart was being developed. It is just that the solid fuels, guidance and software are now comparatively trivial.
Isn’t the radar seeker and data link the complex bit to develop in house, unless it’s an OTS purchase.
The difference is 700kmh speed vs Mach 3.
Good see some orders and the right thing to do, low coat ish drone defence. Plus selling it to Gulf countrys always good to see exports and jobs. Any idea how many base systems or even what a base system is ie tracker/command/launchers?
Look at whos involved and then tell me its not jobs for the boys
Im sitting here hoping the army gets this, could explain the recent order of G1X aswell.