The Ministry of Defence has begun engaging with industry to explore options for a new specialist counter-drone capability for the British Army.
A preliminary market engagement notice published by Defence Equipment and Support seeks information from companies able to contribute to the development of Specialist Counter Uncrewed Air Systems under the Army’s Land Ground Based Air Defence (Land-GBAD) programme.
According to the notice, the Land-GBAD programme was established to deliver a fully integrated air defence network capable of countering a broad spectrum of aerial threats.
“Land-GBAD must provide sufficient, effective capability to warn, inform, deter and defeat selected air threats (including aircraft, missiles, munitions, and UAS), in order to prevent adversary interference from the air inhibiting Joint Force freedom of manoeuvre,” the document states. The programme is designed as a “system of systems” approach that will be delivered through incremental capability improvements over the next decade.
Officials say the programme will bring together several different air defence elements within a layered architecture. These include Short-Range Air Defence (SHORAD), Medium-Range Air Defence (MRAD), specialist counter-uncrewed air systems and broader counter-small-UAS capabilities intended for wider Army use. The capabilities will be delivered through multiple contracts over time and will require a high level of integration and system testing.
The specific capability currently being explored through the engagement is a Specialist Counter-UAS system mounted on an armoured vehicle. The notice explains that the system is intended to defeat aerial threats at short range and operate across both forward and rear areas of the battlefield. “Spec C-UAS will be an armoured vehicle mounted cannon capability, that can defeat aerial threats in the forward and rear area of the battlespace at short range,” the document states.
The capability is intended to operate alongside other air defence systems, forming part of a layered approach to countering drones and similar threats. “It shall supplement SHORAD and MRAD, providing cost-effective layering and a multiple engagement capability,” the notice explains.
The design requirement also states that the system must be capable of operating independently while integrating into the wider air defence network. “Spec C-UAS will need to operate in a stand-alone mode and be able to network with SHORAD and MRAD.”
The Ministry of Defence also notes that the engagement does not represent the start of a procurement process and does not commit the government to issuing a contract. Responses from industry are due by 10 April.
Perhaps the Mk4 Bofor’s on a Boxer would be good seen it truck mounted and a common production line with the other forces would be good 3P ammo could be available quickly in numbers.
They would just get the BAE Systems Bofors Tridon Mk2
Looks just like the Mk4 I assumed (yes I know assumption is) and it would seem to be that with a nice fire control system and I guess that it will have some use in the Ukraine to inform the decision making process.
It is rhe mk4. The fire control is from chess dynamics.
Good UK company looks like it would make a positive buy for the UK, so I won’t hold my breath.
When will any of this enter service, we all know the MOD is great saying things, looking in to things, have projects and industry open days not so good at buying any thing. Its right to look in it but is this another be in service about 2031 the year when every thing will be in service yes although none of the kit to be in service then has been ordered.
For those drones that get through the frequencies used for jamming?
What type of enemy drones are we expecting …a 10″ FPV or Shahed? It could be anything
Are we looking for a one-size-fits-all Big gun strapped to the back of a vehicle?
Because we have the same issue as the £1 million RAF missile use on tiny targets…Expensive overkill
“Officials say the programme will bring together several different air defence elements within a layered architecture. These include Short-Range Air Defence (SHORAD), Medium-Range Air Defence (MRAD), specialist counter-uncrewed air systems and broader counter-small-UAS capabilities”
That doesn’t sound like one-size-fits-all to me.
Anything on tracks and wheels, and we will need thousands of them potentially to match the huge numbers of opposing drones.
For CR3, a 12.7mm coax should be considered, cheap and cheerful with canister ammo already available and prox fuze technically feasible if not already available (MKE, Rheinmetall?). Gives close in protection 300-1500 metres +, with good accuracy using latest turret sighting/tracking systems.
Should never have got rid of the 12.7mm coax on Chieftain. No doubt all of the necessary design work IPR is archived, available and should be, was, MoD owned.
Why not just use what we’ve designed and pro en in Ukraine. No further development costs and available now. Add on Dragon Fire or the Bofors gun and it meets all requirements.
Are they only just starting looking at this requirement now? And the Ukrainian war has neen going on 5 years now. Why so slow? How long before the UK actually gets anything? There’s already a C-UAS capable Boxer variant. And as Munro mentions but i think the CR3s maybe should be getting a 12.5mm RWS for the top of their turrets for C-UAS or 7.62mm RWS if that can do the job.
Before everyone jumps on the Bofors Tridon bandwagon. There is another option which uses the CTAS 40 in the Rapidfire mount. Like Tridon, it can be mounted on the flatbed of a truck or dropped off at a static location. However, unlike the Bofors 40, it can use the same ammo as used by Ajax (If it ever reaches service!). Like the Bofors, it can fire 3P ammo, or use a dedicated anti-air shell. Logistically it would make more sense to use the CTAS40.
The gun wears out faster however and with the difference in ammunition between navies and armies there’s a good chance we’ll end up with more Bofors ammunition anyway.
Well the UK has been a great nation for exploring, thinking about, looking at, having a project for. Under assment, re viewing options, but not much else. There are fully working systms out there tried and tested and platforms we have or have on order.
Lets see if we buy any off the shelf or get a gold plated one made that takes 10 years to get in to service and is so expensive we can only by a few and limited ammo.
Which will it be?
It’s critical that the Ministry of Studies engages in a Study using the insights developed over decades in the Department of Studies whilst ensuring – and this is crucial – that government Studies are informed by real-world, on the ground experience with deployable Studies.