Britain has approved the release of classified UK missile technology to help France and Ukraine establish local assembly of the Storm Shadow long-range cruise missile.
Britain has authorised MBDA to release classified technical information on UK components used in the Storm Shadow/SCALP missile family, removing a British-controlled barrier to plans for long-range cruise missiles to be assembled inside Ukraine, the UK Defence Journal understands.
The decision was announced ahead of Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s visit to Kyiv on 24 August, his first overseas trip since entering Downing Street. Under the approval, MBDA will be permitted to share protected information covering British elements of the Franco-British missile design so that France and Ukraine can move forward with plans to establish local assembly lines.
Storm Shadow is the British designation for the long-range air-launched cruise missile, while France operates the closely related weapon as SCALP. Both are designed to strike important fixed targets at considerable distance, allowing the launch aircraft to release the weapon well away from the target area before the missile flies towards it at low altitude. The UK became the first country to provide Ukraine with Western long-range strike missiles when it supplied Storm Shadow in 2023.
The latest move goes further than simply transferring completed weapons from existing stocks. By allowing protected British information to be released, London is supporting French and Ukrainian efforts to establish part of the missile’s assembly process inside Ukraine itself.
According to a Downing Street news update, the decision will allow France and Ukraine to proceed with Ukrainian assembly of the missile. It follows efforts by Kyiv and Paris to expand local production of long-range weapons and is intended to give Ukraine greater ability to sustain its strike capability without relying entirely on deliveries of complete missiles from abroad.
The Government said the decision also complements Project Brakestop, a separate UK-led effort to rapidly develop lower-cost advanced long-range strike weapons for Ukraine. That gives British support two distinct missile-related strands: helping Ukraine gain access to the technology needed for local assembly of an established Franco-British cruise missile, while also pursuing newer weapons intended to be produced more cheaply and at greater scale.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham said: “On Ukraine’s 35th anniversary of independence, the Ukrainian people should be in no doubt: the UK is behind you today and for as long as it takes.”
He added: “I am proud of the contribution our country has made to Ukraine and I want the Ukrainian people to hear it directly from me that our support will not waver. After all, Ukraine’s security is our security.”
Burnham is expected to meet President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv and co-chair a meeting of the Coalition of the Willing alongside other leaders attending Ukrainian Independence Day events. Britain and France jointly lead the coalition, while the UK says its support for Ukraine has so far included £25 billion in funding, including £16 billion in military assistance.
Burnham said: “Russia should be in no doubt of our resolve. We will not back down until there is a just and lasting peace.”
Excellent, they might need to try and integrate it on other platforms, I believe they are running low on airworthy Fencers now.
Could it be integrated on a Su27,Mig29, F16 or Mirage 2000?
I would think Mirage would be the best bet.
It’s already integrated on the Mirage 2000 – that’s what Ukraine are currently using to provide the majority of strikes with the system.
I find this Fr/UK initiative slightly surprising. Storm Shadow is a superbly effective system given that it was designed 30 years ago. But, unless a lot of redesign has been undertaken recently, most of the electronic subsystems must have a high degree of obsolescence and be large, heavy and expensive compared to modern equivalents. The Broach warhead is a specialist bunker-buster, and complex/expensive for general purpose use. Finally Storm Shadow has no ground launch variant, and relies on the handful of Su-24 remaining to Ukraine. One might have thought that Ukraine might be better off building one of the Brakestop designs that are explicitly designed for low-cost mass production with modern electronic subsystems. Or perhaps the French MdCN (SCALP Navale).
Wasn’t there redesign work done under the SPEAR 4 upgrade?
Very little in public domain. Reportedly they added a datalink. Apart from that they only talked about a midlife refurbishment – overhauling the engine, drain, clean and new seals etc in fuel system, replace batteries, new squibs and initiators, check for cracks in warhead fill etc. Replace the rubber bands and sticky tape. All the normal mundane things. But it’s possible they did more. There might also have been some obsolescence redesign for some of the later export production runs.
I’m delighted that we in the UK are continuing to support Ukraine on various levels during her hour of need – I do sincerely hope Ukraine remembers everything we have donated when the war ends (in a Ukrainian victory 🤞) and acts appropriately like giving the U.K access to rare earth minerals and resources.
Also giving us access to their sensitive military equipment and information.
The way things are going between the U.K and Russia British forces could soon be fighting alongside our Ukrainian friends on the Ukrainian battlefield 🥷🏻
This is an interesting move now.. essentially Russia put the UK specifically on warning over the last few days and have recalled their ambassador without naming a replacement.. now they have not downgraded diplomatic standing.. but the withdrawal is a big message. I suspect the timing of this is essential HMG going “fuck off”.
Not to be to blunt but Russia is putting massive focused intimidation on the UK.. I have noticed the social media posts going through the roof about the UKs position and how bad it is ( lots of Putin bots ).. as well as messaging from experts about how the US will not support the UK again Russia..
When you add in the large number of NATO air exercises around Kaliningrad you get the feeling something is coming and NATO knows it.. and where it’s coming to ? Well Putins political pressure is hitting the UK, goes that mean the mote kinetic grey warfare will hit the UK or somewhere else ?
Honest to god felt less in need of a fallout shelter during the Cold War…
You’d think HMG would be pulling the stops out for; fitting out of Glasgow and Venturer. Did I miss the announcement of another few Squadrons of Typhoons and air launched anti ship capabilities? HMG are talking and acting tough but carrying a very weak stick.
Feel the same way .
Why when it doesn’t work anymore and we can’t build them in any quantity.
Thank you Ivan
So they can build them dip shit, that seemed obvious from the article 🤡
Wouldn’t it be better for us to build them…..and sell them to Ukraine…….or will those be yet another tax payer funded handout?
Has the Storm Shadow Giovanni amti-ship capability? And correct me if wrong, if Scalp is sub launchable wondering why the Storm Shadow isn’t or wasn’t made the same? And talking of these types will the UK increase its TLAM stocks from the next 7k production run for its subs and ships?
*Giovanni???? My phone just came up with that! Meant to be…has any anti-ship capability?
No. They can’t. (Don’t confuse SCALP-EG with MdCN.) Who knows?
Well, as long as the ship is stationary alongside for the entire flight time of the missile, then it does just fine against ships…! But yes, strictly speaking it’s not capable of being an AShM.
Personally, I’d not be buying more TLAM than we already have, when we’ve got Stratus LO on the way. It’s too expensive to be unstealthy, so wouldn’t be able to do its intended job. The big question would be the subs- do we want a land strike capability from them going forward, or are we switching that responsibility completely over to the surface fleet? Astute still launches TLAM from tubes, but SSN AUKUS is supposed to have VLS- which means a new weapon presumably?
This must be unprecedented? Our new PM might just be playing with fire. I wonder how Putin will respond. Is Burnham ready for the consequences?
Totally OT…hopefully George might publish something. Did anyone see the latest list of the UK’s major equipment holdings from MoD? It was published in forcesnewsdotcom under their ‘The Download-Most Popular’ tab. Just to whet the appetite here is the Air systems (platforms) list:
AIR
The UK has 507 fixed-wing platforms.
Despite a continued decrease, the Typhoon is the most common, with 124 aircraft.
The CH-47 Chinook is the most common type of rotary-wing platform, with 45 of the UK’s total of 249.
The uncrewed aerial systems listed are those which are technologically complex and operate beyond visual line of sight with high levels of risk.
The list does not include “mini-drones” – those below 25kg operating up to two kilometres.
Fixed-wing platforms – 507
A400M – 22
Airseeker – 3
Avenger – 4
C-17 Globemaster – 8
Envoy IV – 2
Hawk T1/T1A/T1W – 24
Hawk T2 – 28
Hercules C-130J – 0
Phenom – 5
Poseidon – 9
Prefect – 23
F-35 Lightning – 47
Shadow R1 – 8
Texan – 14
Tutor – 91
Typhoon – 124
Viking – 81
Voyager – 14
Uncrewed aerial systems – 189
Desert Hawk-III – 0
Reaper – 0
Watchkeeper – 44
Puma AE – 75
Puma LE – 15
Wasp – 39
Protector – 16
Those lists are notoriously unreliable.
They also show unit totals, various Corps somehow manage to end up with more “Regiments” than are reality through, I guess, a mix of incompetence, lack of knowledge from those compiling, or even downright exaggeration! The latter MoD/HMG seem to specialise at.
Very true mate. The Land equipment list shows 285 CR2s, down from the 288 from last year. This clearly includes tanks on the Inactive list that were placed on that list in 2010 and will have had no maintenance done on them for 16 years. They are highly likely to have been heavily cannibalised for parts.
The military seems to be run on smoke and mirrors, some of the FOIA responses I get for quite mundane ORBAT questions regards known units and organisations are obstructive at best and absurd at worst.
A sad attempt to make out we have more tanks than reality.
A bit like the RAF counting gliders in the fixed wing lists and renaming orgs with old flying Sqn numberplates which then magically doubles the Sqn lists.
Technically, fine, but it’s misleading by design, and they didn’t see the need when the RAF was double the size to include gliders in one big total, previously RAF Strike Command, RAF Germany, and RAF Support Command had their assets listed separately.
The Army is the same, they list 3 separate DRSB now. They’ll not note that the assets of one were split to make two and that the third, 9 DRSB, is a phantom with nothing under command, which was admitted to me in my last FOIA request.
More relevant is that France has granted Ukraine a licence to manufacture Aster.
Definitely more important for Ukraine. UK has some great capabilities to offer through LMM (supplied in the thousands) and Storm Shadow – especially 2-3 years ago these would have been absolutely game changing. High end air defence is the priority for Ukraine at the moment though and UK can’t offer it unfortunately.