The UK’s SPEAR-3 missile, a next-generation miniature cruise missile, has successfully completed its first guided firing trial.
Developed by MBDA in the UK, SPEAR was fired from a BAE Systems-operated Typhoon jet at the Vidsel test range in Sweden.
The trial marked the first time the missile engaged a target, demonstrating its ability to navigate autonomously and strike with precision using advanced radar-seeker technology. The missile is capable of targeting threats over 100 km away, including air defences, ships, armoured vehicles, and fast-moving platforms.
Planned for eventual integration with the UK’s fleet of F-35B fighter jets, SPEAR will enable flexible strike capabilities from land or sea, including operations from the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers. However, the clearance process to use SPEAR on the F-35 is not expected to be completed before 2028, a delay that could limit its deployment in the near term. Furthermore, while the missile’s compact design allows for versatility, its warhead size of less than 50kg and range of around 100 miles are modest compared to other modern weapons systems.
Matthew Brown, SPEAR Team Leader at DE&S, highlighted the significance of the trial, stating: “This trial was a key step on the way to delivering SPEAR to the UK frontline, where it will provide a new capability to defeat the most complex air defence systems, enabling pilots to fly and fight wherever they’re needed in defence of the UK and its allies.”
The missile programme supports hundreds of jobs within MBDA’s UK operations, with design and development centred in Stevenage and Bristol, and manufacturing in Bolton.
Defence Minister Luke Pollard described the achievement as: “a significant leap forward in UK Armed Forces’ capabilities, ensuring our Royal Navy and Royal Air Force personnel are equipped with cutting-edge technology to protect our nation.” He also noted: “This achievement not only strengthens national defence capabilities but also boosts the UK economy, by supporting high-skilled jobs and innovation.”
The SPEAR programme is part of a £6.5 billion MOD investment in UK weapons development over the next decade, which includes projects such as Brimstone, Sea Viper, and Storm Shadow.
Chris Moon, BAE Systems’ UK Delivery Director for Typhoon Capability, commended the collaboration behind the trial: “This successful firing from Typhoon is as a result of the hard work and outstanding collaboration between MBDA, MoD and BAE Systems personnel over many months.”
At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!
Great to hear, it will significantly improve the UK F-35B strike capability, anyone know when the software update is available to allow them to carry it ?
With Typhoon able to carry just about every weapon we have, should we not be buying more in the current climate ?
What do we have now…..140 fast jets ?
Most days, we have less RAF fast jets available world-wide, than the USAF have at RAF Lakenheath……
It’s not a fair comparison. The US is what five times the size of the UK, and prefers to spend a much higher part of their GDP on weapons at the expense of many things people in the UK take for granted and would sourly miss if we spent as much
And the rest…
“…sourly miss…” 😁👍
A fairly accurate description, I think, whatever was meant 😂
This! The armchair generals in here don’t factor in our country is skint and public services are on their knees. We just need 3000 of everything and to hell with the cost.
It is a perfectly reasonable comment. It’s not the amount spent…but what is available for the amount spent that is the issue. Other nations achieve more capability/ punch for less pro/rata spend.
US have far more commitments overseas and far larger population and area to protect. 800 bases for a start.
The 800 bases are a means to an end. They exist because the US wants the influence that comes with them. The existence of the bases isn’t a justification for their military size
You won’t to build a defence policy based on how many planes your closest ally has instead of how many your likely enemy has?
I think the name for that type of policy is **** measuring.
You might build a strategy on gauging your enemies capability and then overmatching it by 2X? The RuAF would be totally incapably against and NATO or UK/Italy/Poland/Norway/Sweden/Finland/Holland as an alliance. I have left out France [they will want to do it their way with their leadership]; Germany [who will sit on the fence and promise to do a lot and then discover their constitution prevents them from following through]; Spain [who will do whatever is in their best interests at that moment]; Belgium [who will only fight Monday – Thursday 9-5]. Part of the downside of the Ukrainian war is… Read more »
Thoroughly enjoyed your characterization of probable Belgian, German and Spanish responses to possible RuAF threat/action. Believe, however, that you may have been overly solicitous re probable French response. The French have demonstrated before that they are perfectly content to fight to the last drop of American and/or British blood. 🤔😁
The French just like to do things their own way. In some ways you can’t blame them. From their perspective, in the past, American and/or British blood has been kept well away from the battlefield for a variety of reasons whilst the French were in the ****. Everyone in NATO has their own perspective however united we stand divided we fall.
Much American and British blood was spilled on the beaches of Normandy in 1944, and beyond.
Yes Graham some of it belonging to my relatives. This is not quite the point I am making. The French generally split into two camps on this subject with some understanding that after Dunkirk the British stood alone and needed to retreat and regroup if they were to retake Europe – they also understood we really needed the support of the Americans who were at the time in denial that freedom is worth fighting for. This in turn made them look weak and the Japanese decided to see if they could take advantage. Some French did not see the reality… Read more »
To be honest, I don’t think they’ll ever forgive us for Agincourt, Trafalgar or Waterloo. Why don’t they feel like that about Norwegians, they sailed up the Seine, burnt Paris and said give us Normandy and a title or we’ll be back next week to burn the rest ! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣
In many ways I simply think they do not necessarily trust us. I suspect the old battles are accepted as part of history it is more the times when we have been allies that have caused the most harm. Will the Brits & the Yanks be there for us next time. This is obviously where the Russians & others try to drive wedges.
To be fair the French have been pretty active in supporting Ukraine and have just finished training a new Ukranian brigade. Not a small contribution. I think France would definitely stand alongside the others. Germany of course have been the largest single donor of military hardware to Ukraine besides the US. Even if the US were not involved Russia would be hard pressed, especially given the current state of its forces after 3-years in Ukraine, to defeat even a subset of those countries working together. Putin knows this which is why he’s been relying on diplomacy and information ops to… Read more »
That’s a great list of allies. With the exception of Finland I have experience of all those countries. You are in for a shock if that’s your back up in a shooting war. Norway is an army of reserves with very few professionals. Frankly a shambles in uniform. Italy really. As for the Dutch. Srebenica tells the story.
We were talking about air force.
The Norwegians bought a nice set of F35A to play with.
I would say that the pilots will be well trained to international standards.
You only have a lot more planes and be an order of magnitude less of a shambles than RuAF [admittedly a very low bar] to be pretty confident of winning!
I would say overpowering smell of “turtle heads” now Biden has authorised long range missile strikes inside Russia. 💩
I would say overpowering smell of “turtle heads” now Biden has authorised long range missile strikes inside Russia.
RAF don’t need as many planes as USAAF because RAF ARE BETTER
USAAF acronym slightly out of date, transformed into USAF, circa 1947.
Hmmm…even if possessing somewhat dated a/c, imagine the RAF would appreciate the support of USAF (e.g., B-1, B-2, B-52, F-15, F-16, F-35, etc. ) during a conflict.
We have allies left ? I thought Lammy Henry had taken care of all that.
Nice one I’ll have to remember that one
Typhoon is not going to get SPEAR and I think SPEAR is going to rapidly become the most important weapon in the inventory.
Surely we will put Spear on Typhoon?
It has already been integrated for the test programme and MBDA produce CGI of carrying it in a Brimstone-style triple launcher alongside other weapons.
Would be a waste to only have them on F35.
you overestimate the governments desire for common sense and inter-service budget fighting. If anything money should be spent on the absolutely dire recruitment and retention situation, particularly the RN and Infantry
Yes but No unfortunately, no plans for spear on typhoon even though it’s the test aircraft.
SPEAR is too short range for typhoon, typhoon will use FC/ASW / Stormshadow for the same missions in contested air space and Brimestone in non contested.
Contested vs non-contested.
Yeah, real life is so clear cut (eyes roll).
If it is test fired from Typhoon then it is already capable of being installed! I hope that the over 100km range is a security understatement, but does it suit a niche target that are inadequately covered by existing weapons I wonder.
Its main advantage is in the destruction of enemy air defence systems, something that is limited to the very expensive Storm Shadow at present.
The cost ratio may also be favourable for some tanks and for most naval vessels as a means of achieving a mission kill.
So Spear 3 can fit in and be launched from the internal bays of F35 ??
It can carry 8, 4 aside internally, along with 2 meteor.
When teamed with the stealth, detection and jamming capabilities of the F35, a flight of 4 aircraft could cause an enormous amount of damage in a single strike.
Still seems like a very up close and personal weapon to launch from an £85million platform, still, beggars can’t be choosers, and I suppose range will evolve, as always. 👍
That’s where the stealth comes in.
F35 can get a lot closer to air defence systems than non-stealthy jets. I suspect 140km would be well outside the danger area for even S400.
We fire Brimstone with a range of c.30km from Typhoons, so this is a very useful extra boost of range.
I thought the US had concluded that stealth was already an ageing technology and their next generation tactic was based on speed. Go so fast that by the time a radar had identified you, confirmed non friendly, locked on and launched missile, you were already past your hypersonic missile launch location and on your way home ?
Stealth is a scaled thing. You can increase the resolution of your radar and so detect jets further and further away, but that also effects non stealth jets. You can use a long wave radar and nullify stealth to a certain extent, but you still can’t use the targeting radars to shoot the thing down. The issue with hypersonic flight will always be maneuver. To avoid over-G, a 180 degree turn at hypersonic speed would have a radius on the order of hundreds of miles. That means that you are always going to overfly the enemy and you are easy… Read more »
I think the concept is based on long range fly through rather than fly around, so no sharp turns envisaged, with the maneuvering done more by the missile than the launch platform. Intercept missiles would be, generally speaking, chasing the target, with the idea being that they run out of range before intercepting the launch platform. I think their idea is sort of an advanced SR71 tactic. Enemy interception missiles may have the altitude capability, the maneuverability to chase, and the speed, but not all three at once. They run out of juice before catching the target. Not sure it… Read more »
You can’t always assume that the interceptor is on a tailchase when attacking a target.
By definition you will have to head towards the target and allow the missile a head on shot.
The Blackbird suffered a lot from the turning radius at Mach 3. In Vietnam they could do strips across the peninsula and so it wasn’t so much of a problem but when they were tracking the Soviet fleets near Norway there were a couple of times when they nearly entered Soviet airspace because they had misjudged the turn.
140km is what they’ve published….but….its got a range far beyond that in reality. SDBII is the same size, weight and shape…and has a range of 111km (60 nm) by gliding alone, albeit from a high altitude and high subsonic release at a fixed target. Spear has a warhead slightly less than half the size of SDBII, with the remaining volume filled with a turbojet and fuel.There’s no way you add a £50k+ turbojet and halve your warhead to get a 30km range increase… Remember Spear will be powered, but when the engine has exhausted its fuel it will have the… Read more »
The government announcement on the test firing mentions only integration on F35. Other Typhoon users might be interested though.
I think the real range is probably in excess of 100 miles. Baring in mind, it’s highly doubtful that even a an S400 system could detect a F35 in full stealth mode outside 30 miles, then it’s going to be an absolute killer. Imagine 4 F35’s approaching a well protected target, perhaps a layered air defence system with an S400 battery at it’s heart. They would split up and the battery would suddenly face 32 Spear 3 missiles from all points of the compass, each missile deconflicting with each other and pounding every missile/ gun system and all the support… Read more »
Spear will be integrated on Typhoon. Spain (who don’t use F-35) have already requested Spear ground equipment…Germany too.
Why would they not as the British government have already spend the money to integrate spear 3 into UK typhoons. There is no indication anywhere that typhoons will not carry spear 3 and as it’s been integrated and a contract in place to purchase in large numbers it’s very likely it will be.
spear is a weapon ranged for a 5th Gen aircraft to attack high end air defences.
FC/ASW will do the same for non stealthy platforms.
For everything else there is Brimestone
Brimstone is not any use for naval engagements, the UK has a fundamental need for its fast jet squadrons to have a naval strike option being as every squadron and front line aircraft is based on one of three strategicly based islands . Spear three would give that.
I suppose the other side of the coin is that SPEAR 5/FCASW/FOSW/TP15/RJ10 will be along not long (in MoD thinking) after Spear gets into service, potentially giving Typhoon full anti ship capability.
Yes that’s why they are making FC/ASW
Yes but it will not be integrated onto typhoon for a decade. Spear three is integrated and will be ready sooner.. even if it’s an intermediate capability it’s just a sensible action..
RAF love Typhoon particularly its latest coming iteration. It is a mature platform that they have all the toys for. Whereas F35B is amazing from an ISTAR PoV it won’t deliver its potential until a point in time outside of direct UK control. So I do actually suspect that we will get the 74(odd) F35B but I do think EAF need a buy of Typhoon to make sure they have enough frame hours. The issue is that with a thin frontline it is easy to calculate the frame hours and for the malicious to work together to use them up.… Read more »
indeed, it’s a big problem with a limited fleet and a 6th generation replacement that I suspect will not be out to front line squadrons until at least 2045.
Complete rubbish – your Russian-influenced disinformation is tiresome and tedious.
The typhoon factory is currently sitting idle I would think ordering a few more and putting the first tranche into storage to cover combat losses would be the way ahead
There’s a deal brewing with Turkey for a load. First tranche of of typhoons will have a lot of hours on the airframe and won’t be as capable as new ones. UK gov is also leaning towards more F35s instead. Budgets are a real thing unfortunately
Yes I read about the turkey deal having some in storage would be a good idea though
Problem is when planes cost £100 million each having some in storage is not really viable.
Also they are so delicate and require such high level of maintenance and upgrades that even in storage they cost a fortune and reactivation is also expensive.
Yup your right ashchurch couldn’t even keep a landrover in a servcable condition let alone an As90 or warrior
I’d like to see a Typhoon there. 😀
I was generalsing I know aircraft aren’t stored there but our record of storing equipment isn’t the best I assume you know central fleet management at ashchurch is an absolute joke
Yes, I did think that, I wasn’t suggesting otherwise.
Yes, I’ve discussed with Dern and Graham on here the leaky sheds, lack of CHE buildings and vehicles rusting away.
At last, the site is being modernised.
Yes a bit late for the armoured vehicles full of water and rust the annoying thing it’s been like that for years there and nothing was done a shameful waste of equipment poorly stored
And I’m not a fan of JAMES either, I see it as a way to buy less kit.
Some of the RAFs fleet is in storage.
At Shawbury.
Tranche 1’s of Typhoons, have limited capabilites, mainly air defence, and still vulnerable to airfield denial munitions.
lol, every plane “on the ground” is vulnerable to airfield denial, weather it a Sopwith Strutter or a F-35 🙂
The main reason for retiring Tranche1 is that they are fundamentally different to Tranche2 and so OCU, engineering are separate streams as well as widening the parts #.
Unfortunately, given how tight budgets got after 2010 and the hollowing out that then occurred all of this was effectively set in motion back then by the budget curves.
Trenche1 is mostly gone anyway stripped for common parts to keep the newer frames operational.
We can thank the Germans for that, stalling a Saudi order that would kept Worton busy…
So how to Labour react to this, by starting a new joint loyal wingman venture with them …. That
(assuming it ever gets built), they will block foreign sales too.
Only Labour, give me strength….
Yup labour has put the army against the wall as well
Yes we should. Another 20/25 Typhoons with ECR/SEAD kit and a similar number of F35’s would set the RN and RAF up for the next decade plus. Chances of it happening? Almost zero.
As the article states,integration of Spear 3 should be completed by 2028,likely 2030 given how these upgrades have been delayed.
I know it’s still Jam tomorrow but with Block IV finally moving and Meteor and SPEAR being incorporated onto our F35B’s, they are going to be quite possibly the most capable weapons systems on the planet.
What’s the latest thinking on when Block IV will be available and is that the same sate as SPEAR3 & Meteor will be integrated – i.e. on the release date due to the integration happening as part of Block IV development – or will there be S & M integration work still to be done after the official release date in which case when do we expect those weapons to be operational on the UK F-35Bs?
2027 ish I believe but provisions are being made for a slip to as late as 2030.
2030 earliest, plans to integrate up to 12 per Typhoon
Its more complicated than that and even my response here doesn’t do the complexity justice. All our F-35s (or anyone’s for that matter) are TR2. Weather we bother “re-fitting” our existing fleet with TR3 hardware before “installing” BlockIV software, remains to be seen. We might end up with a fleet of fleets with latter orders for F-35 being TR3 & BlockIV+ and the older airframes slowly relegated to lesser roles.
It’s some small progress but I’d rather see NSM being bought for & integrated into F35s & Typhoons. Spear is quite a small missile compared to normal strike/ASMs.
This is the one weapon I’m most interested in. In theory it should be as capable in saturation attacks against high value assets, as it is versatile against low value targets.
Imo the typhoon should not be retired by the late 2030s. Typhoons are probably a better asset than the F35 in most scenarios we’d face. They also are able to carry more weapons to the f35. Why doesn’t the government order 24 more typhoon’s as both platforms suit different types of scenarios we face. Look at the American’s and they still ordering f15s despite having more modern aircraft
Because were not america, which means were broke. Only new fighter jets being ordered are another 20 or so F35s.
That depends on the defence uplift that The Donald forces on us. Paying for 24 Typhoon over a 6 year production isn’t really the issue. £340m / annum uplift to RAF budgets won’t really have that much impact on public finances and it is the same sort of money as a T31 every year. The thing we are all forgetting is that uplifting numbers isn’t linear in costs. You don’t simply divide the running costs by the number of units and linearly scale. Once you have established OCU etc increasing throughput is a lot cheaper. Binning Typhoon T1 saved money… Read more »
You are broke not for the lack of money, you are broke because you spend a lot of money in crap.
We are not broke at all.
You are absolutely right but that term ‘budget’ and how best to use it is the bugbear sadly. Just can’t see Typhoon, F-35 and Tempest development all getting funding as much as it’s all desirable. We may recognise the threats, the Govt might recognise the threats even but as Andrew says selling the idea of ideal defence expenditure to a public demanding investment in things closer to their immediate (real or perceived) needs is near on impossible and an eye of the next election is constant to politicians certainly beyond the 1st 6 months in power and the honeymoon period… Read more »
Unfortunately all three go hand in hand.
More F35B is necessary for QEC and stealthy RAF work; and
More Typhoon is necessary to keep the line open for 6th Gen; and
6th Gen is necessary as we need something that we can actually control rather than being in 3rd party hands. There has been a lot of good UK defence planning derailed by LM’s inability to deliver software properly.
There is no chance the typhoons are being retired in the late 2030s. Any realistic assessment and risk around the introduction of a 6th generation replacement for typhoon will would clearly put the likelihood of tempest being ready for front line deployment by 2035 as very unlikely to rare…its more likely to have a 2040 date..then its got be introduced first in a test and evaluation squadron, then as an OCU finally the first front line squadron can be in place…if the RAF is lucky it will get a first front line squadron by 2045…And have maybe 30 airframes…then let’s… Read more »
You gotta be right, even if all goes perfectly and started to be operational 2035/6 it would be a very slow process getting many into service before the 40s and that’s an unlikely best case scenario I suspect. A complex aircraft like this isn’t going to be shooting off the production lines and as it will need to be a very long programme like the F-35 will need a controlled and manageable long term production levels certainly unless there are serious export orders to build in but then that too has its own effect on demand and supply issues.
If you look at typhoon it was 84 when the tec demonstrator flew, 96 when the first prototype flew, 98 for the production contract, 2003 for the stand up of the test evaluation squadron, 2006 for the OCU and 2008 for the first front line squadron to be declared initial operational capability… that was 24 years from first flight of demonstrator to first front line squadron… so 3035 is not when they will have a front line squadron… infact my timeline is a conservative one…
That was slowed by:-
Tech demonstrator
– was built by BAe largely privately; then
– handwringing about costs; which lead to
– a multi national project; which lead to
– tec wrangles with France; and
– leadership wrangles with France;
Production
– arguments with France leaving the projects; and
– arguments with Germany over workshare and tech; and
– deliberately slowed due to peace dividend
Typhoon was far from a linear process as the spectator forces and political football effect were far stronger than the military drive fir the plane.
Indeed but the reality is all that still has to be taken into account with this programme.. discussions are already causing delays around contracts being signed.. and none of that impacts on how quickly it can be adopted and once the RAF get their hands on the first production models it will still be 5-6 years before the first front line squadron would be ready to deploy.. so even if they get the first prototype in 2035 as planned then start production it’s still well into the mid 2040s before the first front line squadron could be deployed.. best case… Read more »
A superior solution would be to buy more F-35.
From a pure capability point of view maybe. But defence of a nation is not just about the kit it’s about the nations ability to arm itself and its industrial capacity and if we ever want to actually build a 6th generation fighter we need to keep the typhoon production line running. So if your thinking tactics then f35 is good if your thinking geostrategic advantage then typhoon is the correct decision and a nation that does not think strategically is on the way to lossing the next existentixal war.
Also cheaper believe it or not. From what I see the f-35 is $40 million cheaper than a Typhoon so you can actually get 3 F-35’s for the same price as 2 Typhoons.
The thing is though. The industrial knowledge and experience from F35 will bring more benefits to Tempest than Typhoon. We have that 5th gen experience now. The advantage of being a Tier 1 partner regardless of how many F35s we eventually purchase. Typhoon development is important to Tempest, especially to de-risk certain systems. But the F35 industrial experience is truly priceless for the success of Tempest.
Gobbledygook. There is no imperative that any nation has to manufacture all its weapons and kit in order to defend itself.
The major reason for the push for Tempest is aerospace’s large contribution to UK’s wealth.
I’m sorry did I say we needed to manufacture everything.. no just keep the major sovereign capabilities.. it matters not if we buy a squad support weapon from nation xx but it does matter that we can manufacture and have control over the fast jet capability. Why is that ? Because every major existential war ( a war for our existence) that we have had to fight in the last 250 (as well as the Ukraine war as a contemporary example) evidences that one of the fundamental factors in victory or defeat is a nation’s industrial complex. The truly existential… Read more »
Another superior solution would be a Typhoon Mk.2 with redesigned air intakes, to side style intakes, like F-35?
The headline cost of an F-35 aircraft, excludes the jet engine, it’s just airframe only.
You are 10 years out of date. For LRIPs 1-8 (up to Nov 2014) you find airframe only costs. After that engines costs are included. Beginning in December 2016, DOD’s Selected Acquisition Reports split the flyaway cost of the airframes from the engines, but always give the totals. Looking at the numbers, those we get today include the engines. If you look at the numbers on Wikipedia (article: Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II procurement) you can see the prices jump from 2014 to 2015 and it states explicitly that they now include the engines. If you don’t like trusting Wiki,… Read more »
More of an aircraft we have used once in a combat mission than Typhoon which is in regular use for both strike and air to air missions?
We need to order more Typhoons – just like Germany, Italy and Spain.
So buy more Sopwith Camels because they’ve seen extensive action?
Does this new missile fit in the weapons bay of the F35B? Otherwise if its pylon mounted it defeats the reason to buy a stealth jet. Look at another way if you have 4 of these hanging from the wings it will make the jet much more easily detected. Also the article talks as if it is just a small step to get it integrated into the F35B system . Unless there is a much wider demand for its integration (USAF would help) it will take years for Lockheed (and DOD) to put on the critical list for integration. Also… Read more »
8 will fit internally in the F-35B, as well as 2 Meteors but that does mean any ASRAAM will have to go on the wings. Integration will happen under the block 4 update. Yes our current F-35Bs will need to be retrofitted with update.
Asraam never got integrated internally
Originally ASRAAM was suppose to go on stealthy wing mounted pylons but those got dropped along with the stealthy fuel tanks.
And yet UK F35b carry ASRAAM on Stealthy Wing mounted Pylons !.
There are images online of our F35s carrying ASRAAM on the wings, on those funny bent pylons near the wingtips.
What makes you think those have been cancelled?
Search “UK F35 Beast Mode”
SPEAR has been in the critical list along with Meteor for 15 years now, it was always slated from Block IV integration.
The USAF cannot help with such programs as it’s completely outside of DoD control and entirely up to LM.
” ..completely outside of DoD control and entirely up to LM”
Don’t be ridiculous.
The US are waiting for weapons too
A deal of excitement for weapon that is at least 30 years out of date.
Enlighten me?
he may be talking about something like the AARGM-ER which the US, Poland and other countries are going with which has a 300km range, mach 4 speed, internal carriage on F-35 and capable of homing in on radars or any ground target (recently used to take out a houthi hind on the ground) in its stand-in-attack-weapon role. the spear 3 will likely be much cheaper, but won’t be as useful against many targets due to its slow speed.
But it doesn’t need to defeat high threat targets. That’s the job of Storm Shadow or Spear-5. Against well-defended targets, this missile is cheap and small enough to be shot in large volleys to drain SAMs, as they have shoot each one down. A single Spear-3 strike on a radar onboard a warship or serving a SAM is a mission kill. You can’t achieve the same effect with AARGM-ER.
The issue is WRT F35 is; firstly TR3 is in all sorts of trouble with multi year delays – The first aircraft only have a training capability with no confirmed timescale for full TR3 deployment, other than some time in 2025.
As TR3 is the ‘Backbone’ for Block 4 deliveries and the integration of newer weapons, sensors data processing etc everything is being pushed back. This also means that newer US weapons such as AIM260 will be integrated before Meteor and SPEAR £ which will probably not be operationally cleared until 2030+
The issue here is that US will not integrate a superior foreign weapon on F35 (and open the user base to foreign competition) until the US has cleared a competitive weapon. By this simple methodology they effectively control the market for any of their platforms. The UK faced the same issue when ASRAAM was fitted and launched from F16. The US suppressed and refused to release any information to prevent anyone buying a non US solution. Apache is the same! the UK was forced to buy JAGM as the quote for Brimstone installation on Apache was astronomic. At that juncture… Read more »
Is dissapointing the trial was conducted in Sweden, and not on the UK’s own MOD air ranges, further utilising sovereign test and evaluation capabilities within our supply chain.
There are good reasons for that.
The range will have already been set up for other trails.
Setting up, calibrating and clearing g a range for things that go bang is an expensive and time consuming business.
Everything moves so slow.
A precisely targetted 50kg can be more effective than a broad 250kg one off target. It also reduces the amount of collateral damage which nowadays (iin the democratic countries anyway) is unjustified. I trust that the range of ‘over’ 100km is a strategic misdirection masking the real capability! We need more of these.
It is a 90kg weapon, i very much doubt it will range much more than 100km and that will be launched from high altitude.
Versatility, MOD code for “cheap and cheerful, but to small and short range to be much use.”
Even Storm Shadow “only” has a range of 250km.
This is very much a tactical weapon and can be carried in unusual numbers on both F35 and Typhoon. Essentially anywhere you can fit a Brimstone you can fit a Spear.
Full capability against moving targets, too.
Is Brimstone too small? How about LMM/Martlet?
Whatever modern Weapons are, i wouldn’t describe them as being ‘ cheap and cheerful ‘ but credit to your optimism.
Don’t forget Paul, that quaint suit of armour in your local antiques shop, was once an Abrams M1a2, with depleted uranium shells . 🤣😂🤣😂
Why do these 8 fins at their arse end. I know some are directional and some might be fences but hell 8!
I think a lot of them are actually antennae, for the various data links. That’s Spear-EW in the picture so I imagine it has more than the standard variant.
I though we moved from spears long ago. Boyonet coming next? LOL
Serious question.
Can this use Galileo Satnav, in case Mr Chump goes rogue and the USA goes isolationist, plus for exports to European countries?
Is it ITAR dependent, or a sovereign capability?
Please don’t test over my home 😜
The UK has enough money problems without you what sending a f****** missile in the sky and try to blow everyone up so as a person that pays your taxes I am telling you if you carry on doing this s*** I want to be fast before to make everyone and sign a petition so we get you out of your job’s cos we have got struggles as it is there’s more bigger effects and what you need for a rocket hello we pay you money to look after those not to say rockets in the f****** sky and waste… Read more »