In addition to thousands of NLAW anti-tank missiles Britain is planning to send Starstreak anti-aircraft missiles and an additional “small consignment” of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine as Russian forces close in on Kyiv.
Britain has already given Ukraine 3,615 of the portable missile systems – nearly double the 2,000 figure previously mentioned.
According to the Defence Secretary’s statement to the House of Commons on Ukraine today:
“For our part, the United Kingdom continues to play a leading role in supporting Ukraine. On 17 January, I announced to the House the Government’s intention to supply military aid to the Ukrainian armed forces. The aid took the form of body armour, helmets, boots, ear defenders, ration packs, rangefinders and communication equipment, and for the first time it also included weapons systems. The initial supply was to be 2,000 new light anti-tank weapons (NLAWs), small arms and ammunition.
In response to further acts of aggression by Russia, we have now increased that supply. I can update the House that, as of today, we have delivered 3,615 NLAWs and continue to deliver more. We will shortly be starting the delivery of a small consignment of anti-tank Javelin missiles as well. I want to assure the House that everything we do is bound by the decision to supply defensive systems and is calibrated not to escalate to a strategic level.
Britain was the first European country to supply lethal aid. I was pleased that not long after a military aid donor conference I held on 25 February, many more countries decided to do the same. From right across Europe, the donations came. In particular, I want to highlight the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Poland, Romania, the Baltic states, Belgium and Slovenia for their leadership, and we should not ignore the significance of the German Government joining us, in a change of stance, and donating such aid.
Donations are not enough; the delivery of aid to the front line is just as important. Here, again, Britain is leading, because alongside Canada, the United States and Sweden, we have invested in building Ukrainian military capacity since 2015, and we find ourselves able to co-ordinate the delivery alongside our partners.
As the conflict intensifies, the Russians are changing their tactics, so the Ukrainians need to, too. We can all see the horrific devastation inflicted on civilian areas by Russian artillery and airstrikes, which have been indiscriminate and murderous. It is therefore vital that Ukraine maintains its ability to fly and to suppress Russian air attack.
To date, the international community has donated more than 900 man-portable air defence missiles and thousands of anti-tank guided weapons of varying types, as well as various small arms. However, the capability needs strengthening, so in response to Ukrainian requests the Government have taken the decision to explore the donation of Starstreak high-velocity, man-portable anti-air missiles. We believe that this system will remain within the definition of defensive weapons, but will allow the Ukrainian forces to better defend their skies. We shall also be increasing supplies of rations, medical equipment, and other non-lethal military aid.”
Where do things stand today?
The illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine is continuing.
The map below is the latest Defence Intelligence update on the situation in Ukraine – 09 March 2022
Find out more about the UK government's response: https://t.co/zcQSvPZZtb
🇺🇦 #StandWithUkraine 🇺🇦 pic.twitter.com/qO5xkAcmKX— Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) March 9, 2022
The British Ministry of Defence provided the following intelligence update earlier today.
- Fighting north-west of Kyiv remains ongoing with Russian forces failing to make any significant breakthroughs.
- The cities of Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Sumy and Mariupol remain encircled by Russian forces and continue to suffer heavy Russian shelling.
- Ukrainian air defences appear to have enjoyed considerable success against Russia’s modern combat aircraft, probably preventing them from achieving any degree of control of the air.
Good. ‘Make their eyes water’.
I’ve heard these require pretty extensive training to use, anyone here have any experience using the system or knowledge of how that training works? And can the Ukrainian forces be trained quick enough?
Yes. The system is pretty straight forward. Someone with as little as 1 hour of training would be able to engage a lot of targets. It will take longer to get the full benefits of the weapon system and how to set it up and maintain it. I won’t give too much away!
It’s a short range air defence system (SHORAD), so anything within 10km is game. You basically line up the optical sight with the target, fire the missile at it, then continue tracking the target with the optical sight. It uses a variation of the semi-automatic command line of sight (SACLOS) guidance system. The command unit paints the target with a pair of modulated lasers. When fired the missile assembly releases the three darts. Each dart measures the delta between the command unit’s tracking angle and the missile. It will then steer the dart to minimise the delta angle. Where it will then hit the target with the darts.
Due to the Mach 4+ speed of Starstreak, the closure speed is enormous, so the time of flight to hitting the target is relatively short. This means that a target flying over you will remain painted by the command unit and not have much chance of evading it. The system was predominantly designed to counter attack helicopters that do pop-up attacks from cover. As the WARSAW PACT Mil24s used wire guided missiles (much like TOW), this meant they had to hover in place when firing at a target. Therefore, the missile’s high speed was required to hit the helicopter before it could track the target. Once the helicopter was hit, the wired guided missile would go ballistic and miss the moving target. The missile’s high speed also meant that high speed low flying fixed wing aircraft, were easier to defend against. Roll on twenty years, Starstreak has been given more range. It is still very deadly against attack helicopters, but also against UAVs.
As it uses lasers to paint the target, unless the aircraft has a laser warning system, it won’t detect the launch. The missile does not leave a noticeable smoke trail, so a visual warning is also not likely, unless you are flying directly or looking at the right spot when its launched. The system is very difficult to jam and next to impossible to decoy.
As Ukraine will only be getting the MANPAD version. This system uses predominantly the operator’s visual searching to detect targets. It does have a thermal detection optic. I don’t know if they will be getting the additional air defence alerting device (ADAD). The ADAD is a development of the Typhoon’s PIRATE IRST. It provides the operator with both day and night passive searching and extends the search range.
The tripod mounted control unit can also fire the LMM Martlet missile.
If Ukraine get the system, it will be the first time its really been used in anger. It was taken to the Gulf War 2. Though I can’t remember if was used? During training days, the system was very reliable in both use and hitting the target.
Unlike Stinger, Starstreak is not a fire and forget weapon system. The operator must remain tracking the target all the way until it hits. However, the missile is nearly twice as fast as the Stinger and has double the range. It is also a lot more robust, as you don’t have be so careful handling it, due to the lack of cryogenic cooling for the Stinger’s IR sensor.
In Ukraine’s hand Starstreak will be deadly to Russian manned aircraft and UAVs.
Great explanation.
I’m still wondering though how you can lase a fast mover flying very low in such a small amount of time it must be very hard to keep a laser pointed at it?
Not really. It is not much different to tracking a target with a “red dot” sight. I really can’t say more than that. Part of the solution is the use of the two modulated lasers. It works differently to how you lase a target for dropping a munition on for example.
time of fight measurement maybe, using the results from both lasers ?
Great explanation, thank you. More power to their elbow!
Pirate, double the range of Stinger and day or night capability sound like just what the Dr ordered.
Stinger has an optional thermal night sight. The Swiss bought them for a their Stingers.
🙏 Thx
Great explanation. What I haven’t managed to get a handle on yet is the LMM version that also can be used with star streak and is an air defence weapon but slower. That’s as much as I know about it. Do u know anything about this. I heard it’s been used by the British army alongside star streak
The LMM Martlet is a completely new missile. It does not use the same motor or booster stage, hence its huge exhaust flame and lower top speed of Mach 1.5+. Thales say it has a range greater than 6km. It still uses the same guidance system though and has a small IR sensor in the nose for the terminal phase of the engagement.
It can be used against aircraft, but these will need to be fairly slow or heading straight towards the firing post. Against helicopters and small UAVs no problem. Rather than three individual darts that hit the target, Martlet is a one piece missile that has a dual effect warhead of blast fragmentary or fires a shaped charge. It will be effective against any vehicle that doesn’t use explosive reactive armour (ERA) for protection. To get through ERA you need a tandem shaped charge warhead.
I never got the opportunity to fire Martlet.
Daveyb
I thank you for all your informative explanations on this site
Ian
There must be some advantage to the air defence troops using both. I hadn’t realised it was the same missile that is used by the wildcat and the air defence troops.
The U.K. seems to like it’s shorad missiles to be a man in the loop instead of the fire and forget. As much as people bang on about long range air defence or lack of in the U.K. it does seem very vulnerable. It’s the first thing anyone aims at. Where as with highly mobile you never know where they could be.
Fire and forget can be spoofed by counter measures a man pointing a Mach 4 missile riding a laser is hard to spoof and at Mach 4 the time the operator is exposed is minimal. Stinger is a great system but it’s for closer in this is a lair beyond that at 10KM almost like point air defence.
The one issue is the lack of fire and forget.
The operator can be distracted by random incoming being sprayed around.
Still with a determined operator, which the Ukrainians appear to be, there could be good results.
I think we’d best draw a discrete veil over the later versions of Stinger?
Agree, hence the Stormer. Though for targeting a single firing post, someone has to spot you!
Starstreak could be made fire and forget, whilst still using laser guidance. I have an idea for this!
Agree with the Stinger, especially the latest version.
If I can re-hash a bit… looking for the ER version… Star Streak-ER…and integrate it into the RAM mount for a naval version?
“Starstreak could be made fire and forget ”
some form of optical recognition software, when the operator tags the image the software tracks it. I think commercial DJI drone software (Litchi) can do this, you tag something and the drone and camera gimble will keep the drone on the target 🙂
I have an understanding of the system. It is also used on missile approach warning systems (MAWS). It works by pixel counting. A program monitors how the pixels representing a target move across the sensor. This allow the system to not only track the approaching missile’s movements, but also predict it track. It can also give a rough estimate on how close its getting by watching the pixel count increase. If you had a number of sensors all looking in the same direction, you could use triangulation to give you a better range resolution. This is what the F35 does by networking its sensor with another F35. Thereby allowing a passive system to give you range and bearing onto a target.
This works great at distance, but struggles with close up targets. The Tesla optical autopilot being a good example.
This is why for the best target resolution and tracking you will always need an active system. That transmits a signal at an object and then measures its time of flight back to the receiver.
There was a project to make the self propelled Starstreak launcher auto-tracking, but like so many other projects fir the Royal Artillery, it was cancelled.
Excellent post Davey b , thanks very much
Excellent description thank you sounds like we should get these over there asap then
Brilliant cheers for that, really instructive.
Great explanation I think it’s safe to say the Russian have little or no laser warning systems. Their SU34 have been seen to rely on car GPS system tapped to to their console.
It makes you wonder if as it uses SACLOS whether it could be improved by using an NLAW style predictive guidance at least for terminal homing.
I’m not sure that would work. Predicted aiming needs about 2 to 3 seconds locked on to the target to work out the predicted intercept point. Which may be enough time for a low level attack aircraft traveling at 500mph or 223.5m/s to locate its target and drop/fire ordinance at it. Starstreak has a terminal velocity of Mach 4+ or 1372m/s+. This means it can be fired pretty much as soon as the target is located and get there before the aircraft can use its weapons.
The fastest missile along with the shortest target acquisition and lock on time is what’s required for SHORAD. Where threats can be really fast low flying aircraft or helicopters doing pop-up attacks.
Thanks daveyb. My understanding is that unlike stinger or mistral, starstreak cannot take on a crossing target. It’s designed only for pop-ups and things coming straight at you which of course is not always the case. I wonder how useful it will actually be to Ukraine. On another note, do we have any ATMs left for when Ivan attacks us?
I never had any issues hitting a crossing target when on a live fire exercises. But if that’s the party line, then yes Starstreak cannot hit crossing targets. Muh ha ha.
That’s good to know. I worked on the competitor that lost out to starstreak and the buzz was that HVMs don’t like turning corners much and laser beam riders are not as good at fast crossing targets as other forms of guidance. But hey, if you actually fired the thing I happily stand corrected 👍
That may have been true for Starstreak when it first came out. When it was updated to become HVM, a lot of the missile systems were replaced and the command unit was significantly improved, plus it got a longer range. I never fired the early version, only the later version that had the thermal sensor improvements. From memory I can’t remember anyone missing any of the aerial drone targets.
Yep, Daveyb, I agree, it generally only took a few hours for the average 20 year old to become very proficient with them. A great deal of the additional training with these things was sighting and ensuring you didn’t get your head knocked off while getting one off.
Anyone got any idea of how good these are?
Very few international users of the system, have we ever used them in an actual combat situation?
Well they were developed to replace Stingers back in the late 90s and on paper are rather less susceptible to counter measures and theoretically easier by its unique laser targeting method to keep on target than traditional laser methods but never used in anger though it was in Iraq just never required. Only thing is not sure how much it’s been updated or whether the improvements Thales planned for it including updated sensor and range a decade ago, were followed through as much funding was transferred to Martlet which uses some of its tech and in theory in part a replacement for it in non hand held versions anyway. So how good by world standards it is now I don’t know but at Mach 4 and 9g manoeuvrability it sure ain’t something you would want to be engaged by.
Like Martlet it does have an anti tank capability as well though as it’s not armour piercing it’s really only effective against softer skinned vehicles and IFV.
Such as a BUK launcher……?
Or their thermostatic nightmare……hit one of the rounds on the back and let it self destruct?
I can see lots of uses for it outside of denying the battle space to helos.
The Russians will be hoping for clouds and flying very high…..dropping dumb bombs with their famous Russian accuracy……
Considering =/= sending Starstreak.
I don’t doubt their willingness to do so of it we’re practical but the headline seems pretty misleading, unless I misread and it has been confirmed now.
I read that the US manufacturing base for various reasons is struggling to keep up with the production demand for stinger and Javelin, such was the relaxed Post cold War mindset
Nlaw etc will be complex, engineered to high standards and probably complex to restart production.
Systems need to be simple and easy to manufacture. I saw footage of Ukraine special forces engaging tanks with RPGs. The latest version will easily penetrate side armour and defeat ERA.
Could European industry basically manufacture RPG grenades in great enough number ? They are basically a Heat warhead with a small rocket.
Potentially the west needs to arm a long and bloody insurgency. Old artillery rounds and timers to create IEDs would help, claymore, anti personal grenades etc etc can bleed the Russian army enough to risk Putins position.
I tend to agree back in the 90s there was a tendency to over complicate in fear that Russia was going to increasingly improve their weapons but in reality in most sectors they barely have and most of their equipment can be defeated by relatively simple weapons which is a bonus for reliability in environments like this and a downright cheaper. Starstreak is a stunningly complex missile certainly for when it was developed but I suspect it’s complexity could be the reason there is a question mark over supplying it. Could the Ukrainians be trained to use it effectively. Plus I don’t think we have that many of them ourselves and don’t know beyond Martlet in some circumstances if, what or when it might be replaced if there is a plan at all, or whether producing more is even still an option. From what one sees with Martlet it seems we are keen on something simpler and no doubt cheaper to produce or acquire, so no doubt that question arising would be a consequence of releasing them.
I think Germany and other nations have supplied a lot of Panzerfaust 3
If there is a shortage of Stingers and reports that the Russians are flying SEAD missions against their Soviet AA then Ukraine needs Starstreak.
If they are flying Sead missions , they are probably going to be able to fly well above the max engagement height of Starsteak.
They could do more with the Greek S-300 and the numerous Nato nations that use Bul, Kub and Osa to replace their stocks.
There will be a reluctance to put top drawer kit like Nasams, due to the complex Nato radar systems that cue them, but they would be more use.
Rapier as they get replaced by Sky Sabre might be useful , but also would require lots of training.
Thx. Lots for me to Google there. Understand reluctance to ship top drawer technology. I’m guessing that the SEAD will know how to suppress Soviet systems. Understand the SEAD altitude point; was thinking the aircraft dropping the dumb bombs would be vulnerable to Starstreak if you knew where they were.
How large is the UK’s stockpile of these weapons? Will it have a negative effect on UK operations? And are there plans to replenish stockpiles?
According to wiki only 156 launchers ordered for uk and 7000 missiles but that doesn’t account for hos many missiles other nations ordered
As with most missile type items they have a use by date. Countries are as well to ship items that a close to that. The items would either require a refurbishment or replacement. Also it takes away the worry of them getting into the wrong hands and being used some time in the future.
That is quite a bit of kit if it is tactically located……sure it wi t deny the who of the county but that was mercer the point?
Surely the issue is that it is there to sow doubt in Russian pilots minds that they might be fling into a missile trap? Only requires a few Downing’s to do that. Mind you Stinger us doing that very well already.
The 156 figure was for self propelled launchers. I think only 40 of those remain of which 36 are in front line service.
The UK could replenish them easily enough just need to cough up the cash.
While it is sad that thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers are needlessly losing their lives in this war it does show the necessity to have decent stock piles of munitions even if the hope is they are never used.
One of my ‘hobby horses’ is how well our armed forces are trained, and how in the right environment there is plenty of scope for development in the UK armed forces – and of course when you have high quality personnel, with an ability to learn you can have complex weapons systems, and be sure that they can be used effectively. I do wonder whether Starstreak might be a rather steep learning curve for forces with a different doctrine to ours; from what I have heard it is rather complex, and I am not sure it is the type of thing that can be learned ‘on the job’ so to speak. That being said, I hope that it is, or the contact between UK and Ukraine armed forces are good enough that there can be some useful instruction given – we trained 22,000, so there is a good chance there is a familiarity with our training methods, and a feeling for how our kit works.
Apparently the Russian pilots are using iron bombs, and naturally these have to be dropped from lower altitude and at lower speeds, so they are placing themselves right inside the envelope of something like Starstreak.Russia have poorly trained pilots with low flight hours, and ability to make an economical run on target, spending as little time as possible in FHW is not something you learn with 20 minutes in the air every 6 months.
Exactly and quite.
Surface to surface Brimstone would be far far more important for the Ukrainian’s. It was already set up with them in 2019 to equip the missile boats we were going to build, so it’s not like the Russian’s can justify escalation over it now.
I’ve seen those boxer modules with 24 side mounted Brimstone missile launchers.
Imagine a few 40ft containers smuggled into Ukraine over the last 8 years hiding dormant along the border. They would take out half a brigade as soon as they crossed the border.
Exactly. Or just fit them large numbers of light armoured, high mobility vehicles. That way the Russian’s can’t get lucky with an airstrike and take out half the capability. They’d operate safely behind Ukrainian lines, be hard to locate and almost impossible to fix. With good radios they’d have great targeting data and could co-ordinate to still deliver massive strikes. Pairing a Brimstone vehicle with a SHORAD vehicle would make it even harder for attack helicopters/drones to try hunt them down.
Little known fact, Brimstone can be used against helicopters!
Or something similar. Hopefully the UkAF with some new aircraft can take out the Russian vessels in and around the southern ports and make them look over their shoulders a lot more. Strength to Ukraine 🇺🇦 and its people. The coverage on our news is awful. I really hope in truth that the tide will truly turn for the better and that 🇷🇺 gets pushed out and their evil leader is dealt with.
Ukraine’s fast attack craft are essentially useless now. They haven’t got air cover and the ships themselves have very little if any air defence.
All well and good to equip them with missiles and send them out but if they get engaged by Russian air-launched missiles straight away, it doesn’t mean much.
They could be deployed as coastal batteries but there are longer ranged missiles which might be better for this situation.
It wouldn’t be for their ships, it would be for their army to smash high value targets from range. Tank columns, forward air defence units, BTG command vehicles etc.
It was originally going to be for their patrol craft which are a little irrelevant now, but proves that we were happy to transfer them Brimstone tech without thinking it would start WW3.
Food for thought: How many Challengers would remain today after 13 days of war if UK would ever have to fight an enemy washed with ATGW’s like Ukrainians?
Would that be Challenger 2s or 3s? I would say that we would be doing much better. As the Challys would have infantry in close proximity, who would then root out ambush points on the flanks etc. Which would help protect them against RPGs and NLAWs etc. Against Javelin, that would be a frightening prospect for a Challenger 2. The Challenger 3 would be deployed with the Trophy APS. This can defeat top attack and diving anti-tank weapons.
Okay with APS but maybe only enough reloads for 2-3 ATGW’s?
The original Trophy only had one reload per effector turret. The crew would then need to get out and reload it manually. The newer version has more reloads. Rafael the manufacturer, won’t say (obviously) how many reloads it has now. The newer version is also supposed to be able to provide mutual defence for other vehicles that are close to it.
Thanks Daveyb
Depends if C3 gets an active protection system (Trophy?).
I would really be tactics. Would the U.K. send 20 challengers on there own down a road if that threat was known? No is the short answer. If the main threat is troops with missiles then tanks is not the best attack. U would use other systems to take out the threat. The challenger is a different machine than a Russian tank. Look at some of the hits they took in Iraq and just kept going. Don’t quote me but I’m sure upwards of 10 RPG didn’t make a dent. A Milan missile as well. When one threw a track I recall it being hit with a lot of bullets. Perhaps 100+ RPG and a Milan anti tank missile or 2. Don’t quote me as my memory is awful. Everyone inside was fine. Still every weapon has a weakness so you have to use that to your advantage.
Exactly.
You don’t drive a tank into an obvious ambush point without a lot of hard thinking and checking.
But being slow is a fast way to loose a war.
I’d prefer the words steady and considered to be in any plan……
No plan survives… i hope you know the rest… 🙂
No plan does.
That is why training professionalism and nous are required.
That takes lots of exercises to hone.
So are armoured banana charges against ATGMs.
If you are the aggressor you have the benefit of planning beforehand, but either way there’s some balance between spending a month deciding how to you want to advance your tank column and just moving ahead without any planning whatsoever.
Any RPG and even more a Milan can take a Challenger(or other tank) out if fired from side or rear (or top in cities/mountains). without APS.
Yes this war shows that APS are crucial and must be in any AFV.
There’s more to it than APS though. There’s a lot more cheap RPGs around than MBTs but with the right protection and tactics (infantry support, etc.) it isn’t as simple as a couple soldiers with rockets wandering over to some tanks and freely picking targets.
Why?
If the commander says so – some idiots arrive to that positions -, there is time schedule, you can be sure that it could happen. And the idea that in war all operations are by rule book and information is always complete is unrealistic.
Nope.
British commanders crews are trained to think.
We can leave the Russians to blindly follow timetables.
A few companies of Paras were sent on a “raid” on Goose Green when wiser heads at HQ apparently offered some 105mm artillery and a squadron of Scimitar.
Welsh Guards officers ignored a Royal Marine who said it would be wise to get the troops off Sir Galahad due to risk of air attack.
I wouldn’t be so sure that in the chaos , a perfect set of decisions would be made.
Troops were sent out in Land Rovers to jihadi infested areas. Etc etc etc
I agree with that.
But the global level of stupidity and lack of imitative shown in the Russian operation is special.
Perhaps that is what Vlad means?
Also the battle group of tanks should have warrior with dismounts and Ajax the should hopefully know where the enemy is or likely to be. Add in to that the micro drones looking near by.
I would say it would have to be a lucky hit from an RPG to make it through challenger
Lack of imagination? 7th Brigade has to move to close a breach and stop a NATO Division from being encircled…
The idea that time can’t trump operational security is preposterous.
mass/firepower
time
security/information
maskirovka
All of these are factors that are in conflict.
StarStreak launches nearby, you have 1 maybe 2 seconds to live. Some people are asking how good are they considering the lack of exports. Well, they can’t be jammed, if the operator has you in sights, your done, fin. The Stormer HVM mounted units are the perfect point defence counterpart to SkySabre (I know where not sending vehicles, but just saying).
I’m sure they are if hidden in a tree line with a view of a road. They would anticipate escorting helos would be flying around and may take one out. Just as stinger or igla crews could get lucky.
They might allow some ukraine units to move more freely which could be a bonus.
Focusing them on Odessa might be useful, particularly should the Russian navy launch an helo and amphibious (suicide) mission.
However it’s a short range system, if it was used ro defend a city, the Russians will just counter it, by erasing any streets with artillery or bombs dropped from altitude
The Ukraine army really needs a way of suppressing artillery , and there are not many options unfortunately unless Nato was going to give them GMLRS or some 155 mm with excalibur rounds and that seems unlikely.
Yes, the priority need is suppression of artillery for all cities especially Mariupol and anti-ship missiles for Odessa. It seems Ukraine have a home grown MLRS which has taken out a corvette near Odessa. They divided the approach waters into squares and waited for the ship to enter the co-ordinates. Clever. But their MLRS is fairly new and I don’t know that they have that many where they are needed.I think NATO would be reluctant to supply them- difficult to classify them as a defensive weapon. We should send shore based ASM.
Their TB2s seem to be doing a good job. I think they need more of them.
Can I ask… why the bloody hell are we telling the Russians and the whole world exactly what we’re sending… all the time! Don’t we want the Ukrainians to get as many tactical advantages they can? Do we think this may deter Russia in some way, maybe? Can’t we just shut up a bit , send what’s useful, needed, advantageous and hope and pray that the 🇺🇦 can keep giving Russia one hell of a bloody nose and they can bugger off back over their side of the fence!
Or, am I seriously missing something here, maybe something more subtle, political, messaging?
On the plus side, if British weaponry performs well in combat then that is all good news for our forces, industry and future sales.
• Possibly to encourage/embarrass other nations into doing the same. As I recall most European nations didn’t send anything until the Russians rolled over the border.
• Possibly to put the fear of god into the Russian army that they are going to keep getting more of the same?
• Maybe to get the senior Russian army officers thinking that rasPutin rather than the Ukrainian army is the easier problem to get rid of?
Probably why they sent in all those conscripts first, cannon fodder for JAV/NLAW, at least the professional army would know what they are up against.
I agree.
We really need to be sending them theatre level air defence systems. The threat of their S300 is keeping the Russian Air Force Low and vulnerable but won’t last for ever. **** plausible deniability what’s Putin going to do. Send them Patriot and Sky Sabre. Let the Ukrainians enforce their own no fly zone. Send them SAMP/T and use our AWACS to target it. We need to be thinking lend lease not Afghanistan the Ukraine government is a legitimate European government no weapon system should be off the table.
Putin ,now threatening tòo hold Civillian Aircraft as a Hostage bargaining chip as Sanctions seem too be Biting Daily telegraph
I’m genuinely shocked to learn we had so many in our inventory anyway. That is a serious amount of firepower that the Army are sitting on
Would it be worth sending Rapier systems? Stinger and Starstreak are probably going to be struggling against jets (then again, there’s been reports that they have actually downed such) whereas Rapier should be a death sentence for low flying fighters. If they still have longer range missile systems active that might help restrict the airspace somewhat.
Rappier is out of service.
Yes, that’s rather the point. We aren’t using it, the Ukrainians could do with more GBAD, it increases the danger zone for Russian jets thereby forcing them to fly higher and faster which should decrease the capability of bombing runs. Training might be a bit difficult but you take what you can get.
If it is out service it is not anymore available, maybe cannibalised for components it was a system from 80’s unreliable.
Can we send our Rapier missile system, maybe it is not of use against fast jets but helicopters a diffrent matter. I really do wish that we could send to the Ukraine something like Land Ceptor.
Yes this war for me is personal, whilst I am at home here in the UK my son Ukrainian by birth is on the front line. As an ex British squaddie I understand NATO cannot get involved, as a father I would love a few squadrons of A-10s and every Mig in the NATO inventory being handed over to the Ukrainian pilots.
Don’t Know yet waiting for confirmation but a breaking Skynews story is that Russian forces have just used Phosphorous weapons in the East of Ukraine if so its a War crime
If there is one thing that is evident from the war in Ukraine is that more needs to be done to secure the UK home base.
There really needs to be a serious effort to provide ABM defence and reconstitute the Observer Corps and a meaningful form of Seaward Defence, uparming our OPV’s. There is a shocking neglect here and we might pay dearly for its omission. Already we see tens of thousands reach our shores illegally. Who knows who these people are? Putin’s Syrian Mercenaries. Does anyone in Government care?
Why are we limiting Defence weapons to the Platoon level? By that limit you are prejudiced against the Ukraine.
If you take the Crimean War as an example; the fortress of Sevastopol had the same cannons as the besieging army.
My point being the defending nation is entitled to the same weapons as the aggressor.
In this war Ukraine is undoubtedly the defending nation.
I say give them anything legal and whatever they want to defend themselves. Howitzers, Bombers, Tactical Ballistic Missiles, infact anything they need to kick the Russians out. We had this order of weaponry to push back against the Germans.
You enjoy dragging this out do you or are you listening Sleepy Joe?
A little bit off topic but hint of a significant decision by Germany. Purchase of F-35 would kill the French – German deal for a 5/6 Gen fighter. Good news for Tempest?
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germany-decides-principle-buy-f-35-fighter-jet-government-source-2022-03-14/
Thought this was a new weapon for UK what happens if these get taken by Russia surely they can get reverse Engineered and fall in Russian hands
Yes, always a risk. It’s been sold in will be manufactured to/by India too that has relations with India. I wish their was less broadcasting of what the UK is sending into Ukraine. Stupid stuff! They ought to let it be a surprise for the Russian forces. Why tell everyone upfront!? It’s a serious war, invasion and Ukraine needs all the advantages it can get! Just seen in the news that Ukrainian forces have attacked a large cargo vessel, I think in one of the main ports, hope they can take out many more ships that are in dock. And also if Russian forces gave paused their advances it could be time to strike and take them out. Strength to the Ukrainian people!
*India…has relations with Russia.