A British StarStreak anti-aircraft missile has been used to shoot down a Russian helicopter in Ukraine for the first time, according to a report.

A Ministry of Defence source told The Times a video (you can see it below) showed Starstreak being fired over Ukraine. The source added that the system had been used by Ukrainian forces for almost a week.

The footage circulating online shows a high-velocity Starstreak projectile destroying an aircraft in the Luhansk region of Ukraine.

According to the manufacturers Thales, STARStreak is a short-range, man-portable, air-defence system manufactured by Thales in the UK and is optimised to provide defence against air threats including fixed-wing Fighter Ground Attack aircraft and late unmasking Attack Helicopters.

“Depending on customer requirements, it can be configured in both man-portable and vehicle-mounted battlefield roles and is the fastest missile of its type in the world, highly accurate and resistant to countermeasures. STARStreak multi-mission remote weapon systems can be mounted on armoured or protected mobility vehicles to support Divisional, Brigade and Battlegroup level manoeuvre or can be deployed in both Shoulder-Launched (SL) and Lightweight Multiple Launcher (LML) configurations that are suitable for use in the light-role, including for Air Assault and Commando forces. A proven in-service missile, STARStreak first saw active service during the Iraq conflict in 2003 and over the last 19 years it has been deployed on multiple operations by the UK and Global users.”

Recently we reported that in addition to thousands of NLAW anti-tank missiles Britain was 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 sending anti-aircraft and Javelin missiles to Ukraine

According to the Defence Secretary’s statement to the House of Commons on Ukraine recently:

“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.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

148 COMMENTS

  1. What was it used against in Iraq? Was there even an Iraqi airforce by the time the British army stepped foot on the ground?

  2. The first helicopter seen which carries out the lob the missiles is a Ka 50 or 52 , that is easily identified by its twin rotors and tail, the one that comes next (Escort???) is a Mil 28 Havoc , which some say is the Russian equivalent of the AH64 Apache. Interestingly just before it get hits, they popped flares. (hard to see in the vid) apparently the pilots survived . Tell you what, I was most suprised by how it was split in 2

    • Starstreak uses a laser beam-riding guidance system so it’s not affected by flares. The missile carries three dart-like projectiles which can embed themselves in the target and detonate inside it, using a delayed action fuse. That’s probably what caused the helicopter to split in two like that.

    • Flares, chaff, IR jammers, decoys are all useless against this missile. It is also very fast so you do not have time to evade or run away. It at least 2 out of 3 darts hit on average. The vehicle mounted air defence variant with automatic tracking and engagement is said to be 100% accurate…. the man portable one is almost as good.

      It is good to see a Northern Irish export that has escaped the EU….

      • P.S. each dart is made of Tungsten and has a delay High Explosive core that fragments the dart. That way you get both penetration damage and then fragmentation damage.

    • Radar aids picked up the rapidly closing missiles and auto deployed flares?

      Amazed the pilots survived. Almost unbelievable.

      I suspect one of the missiles hit a structural member – it is the only way to cleave something like that.

      • I suspected something along those lines, I can only presume that the sheer speed of Starstreak is why it hit so soon after. Tell you what after the losses the Russians have faced, and that aircraft pilots tend to come from airbases sitting down at Meal times must be a sobering experience. 

      • Each of the darts has 450g of RDX in, fused to detonate after penetrating the airframe skin. So you’ve got a tungsten dart, with huge kinetic eneergy (its going twice as fast as a normal AA shell) but with the same amount of explosive filling as a 40mm Bofors round….nothing is going to stop that. Any structure inside will be wrecked by the explosion alone, let alone the impact.

      • The Mil-28 Havoc depending on the version, has a radar warning receiver along with a UV based missile approach warning system (MAWS). It is the same one fitted to the Ka-50/52s and some fixed wing aircraft like the Su35s. A lot of the early marks didn’t have any MAWS. These were fitted retrospectively following their first engagements in Syria.

        UV MAWS in particular recognises the exhaust pulse when a missile’s rocket engine initially fires. Depending on the quality of the system, it can also recognize the type of missile, by comparing the rocket exhaust pulse to library data. MAWS will automatically fire off countermeasures as soon as it detects a threat. Against Starstreak, flares and chaff are useless. The Havoc also uses an electronic countermeasure, used to jam radio command guided missiles, again it will have no effect against Starstreak.

        Looking at some better images, it looks like one of the Starstreak darts hit the joint between the main fuselage and the tail boom. Luckily for the crew, the helicopter wasn’t too high and the slabby sided fuselage slowed down the torque reaction. The aircraft is fitted with very high energy absorbing suspension and crash worthy seats. All these combined would have helped save the crew. Also having the main rotor gearbox well behind the cockpit, means that in a crash, the gearbox doesn’t crush the pilot. Surprised they didn’t go down the same route as Kamov by fitting ejector seats.

        • I know about MAWS. I’d be doubtful that the Russian version was that sophisticated.

          If it did pattern recognition it wouldn’t have launched against an IR guided missile?

          • Exactly, I doubt they have a data on the Starstreak’s exhaust pulse, so its probably not is a library data set. The MAWS would have seen the exhaust pulse and reacted straight away by chucking out flares.

          • Hi Davey, I always enjoy reading your comments.

            Personally, I can’t see any decoy flares on the video.

            But in an attempt to limit their exposure to MANPADs, I think Russian helicopters have been recently “loft” firing unguided rockets towards Ukrainian positions.

            That tactic has certainly been seen on other combat videos from the battlefield.

            I think that’s maybe what we’re seeing here at 0.05 – 0.10 seconds …..

    • The single seat Ka 50 Back Shark series is used for light attack and escort whie the two-seat Ka-52 Alligator is for armed recce and targeting, smaller than AH-64, the nearest equivalent to Ka 50/52 is something like the Augusta A129. There are both single and two seat versions. Ka-50/52 very quick an has a lightweight 30 mm cannon as well as the ability to carry rockets and ATGMs. Mil 28 Havoc is a dedicated heavy attack helicopter for use against armoured formations, like the AH-64 – slower than KA-50/52, but better armoured and with a heavier payload.

    • Starstreak is not fire and forget like Stinger, the operator needs to track the target until the missile hits. However the very high velocity ensures that this takes only a couple of seconds at useful ranges. The system uses a 60x thermal sight and paints target with a laser that the missile ‘rides’ to the target. Startstreak can be linked to the Thales ADAS, which is the same passive EO/IR tracker as used on Typhoon – ADAS can identify and track targets and alert the operator or slew the Starstreak launcher onto them, after which the operator uses the thermal sight to track the missile. ADAS is incorporated into the self-propelled version and a portable ADAS is provided for the LML batteries (lighweight mulitple launcher). The handheld launcher does not use ADAS. LMM can be fired by the launcher – it is a slower missile (Mach 1.5 compared to Mach 3.5 for Starstreak) with a single larger warhead designed for use against ground targets, but has terminal IR guidance, so fire-and-forget.

  3. The UK is doing a great job taking the lead in supporting Ukraine. As a US civilian, I sure wish the US would do more. Our brave leaders don’t seem to have a problem fighting to the last Ukrainian.

    • Your courage is because you are not going to be killed, but you are better off than my country, at least you are not a slave to Russia and China. ):

      • EW?
        Stuffing up GLONASS?
        ELINT?
        Messing up various other systems

        Although the one thing the Russians messed up better than we could have dreamed was the logistics……

        I did day dream the other day that the best way of stuffing logistics would be to switch destinations for munitions. 150 -> 125mm locations 57 -> 75mm. Sorting that out is at least 3N (N being the transit time to the front). Looks like total incompetence and fat fingered errors…..

        • There was a great analysis of logistics done in a RUSI piece recently. I cant find the link to share. In essence each Russian combat battle group or combined arms unit of circa 1500 men had enough logistics from “launch” to sustain themselves for 5-7 days combat. Thereafter the supply situation deteriorates exponentially due to a lack of logistics troops but crucially trucks. The Russian army has a massive deficit in trucks and fuel tankers. This is their achillies heel and precisely where the Ukranians have hit them.
          14 trucks and 5-7 fuel tankers for each armoured unit of 1500+ combat troops is not enough.
          By comparison the British army has 30-40 trucks and 15+ fuel transports per unit of that size. So 3-4 times the logistic support. The US army is a lot more. An army advances with logistics and the Russians went into Ukraine. A large country with only supplies to last 5 to 7 days being carried by frontline units. Once used. These supplies couldnt be replenished as the Rusdian fuel and truck convoys had been ambushed and destroyed.

    • Your country has done a lot mate, just have to look at the number of USAF C17s that landed at Rzeszow prior to the invasion.

      • Read today they are surreptitiously supplying tanks from the ex soviet stock dotted around Eastern Europe though despite losses it seems the Ukrainians have more now than at the start thanks to generous Russians.

    • Its the first time it has officially taken out an enemy aircraft. It was taken to Gulf War 2, but there weren’t any aircraft to shoot at.

  6. You can actually see the missile as it fires the three darts. On the slow motion view you can see the flash to the rear slightly lower of the heli, then a split second later yet another learning curve is given to the Russkies!

    • The Mi28 was certainly Starstruck!

      There’s no escaping systems like Starstreak, if you are inside it’s engagement envelope and the operator knows what he’s doing, you are riding a vibrating bucking bronco into the ground ….

      The only counter to beam riding weapons like this, is extremely fast and low routing to the target area, using as much terrain masking and pop up for your attack at the last possible moment….

      Absolutely terrifying for the Russian crews…

      • The major negative to the SS is the amount of training needed for an individual to become proficient in using it. It’s also very heavy and only very strong soldiers are capable of wielding it.

        • Careful. We don’t want it put about that Russian aircraft are being downed by SS missiles. The Krem Trolls are an excitable bunch. 🤗

        • As someone who has fired Starstreak, I will have to disagree. It is not that heavy and can be used by a noob in hours. It is not designed to be used by someone standing alert waiting for a target all day. But is more a reactionary system when using the shoulder launched option. When using the tripod, then it becomes a true static system used to protect an area. Becoming proficient with it takes longer, especially recognising engagement parameters. Hence the use of the simulator and use of UAV target drones.

          • Out of interest do you know what the upgrades to it were going to be last decade that I believe were cancelled in order to finance Martlet? These things were incredibly advanced for when they were designed that’s for sure, the three darts aspect just seems like sci-fi in concept.

          • Some of the upgrades went ahead and were incorporated into the missile. These were improvements to the guidance system. The missile was supposed to get a new 2nd stage engine and fuel to extend its range. It would have kept the high impulse speed but the range would have been over 10km.

            Thales were looking at giving the system a multi-shot capability. Where it could engage two targets nearly simultaneously. From what I remember they had to be within the same sector, for the command unit’s lasers to cover. The other improvement was a better resolution air defence alerting device (ADAD). I could be wrong but I believe it was going to use both short wave and long wave IR to improve target detection.

          • Out of curiosity Davey the laser targeting control is it visual alignment, or by hand (thumb button control and holding it on target ?

          • I can’t go into to much detail. But the system is pretty much totally automatic. The command unit fires two lasers. One sweeps across a fixed sector vertically, whilst the other does the same horizontally. The two lasers paint a matrix over the sector. The operator through their optic follows the target. The matrix follows where the operator is looking. Much like a red dot sight, the operator keeps the target centred in their optic.

            When the missile fires, the rear facing sensors receive the modulated “laser pulses”. From this the missile can work out the error between where the operator has the target centred and the missile’s location within the matrix. It then steers to correct the error.

          • Thanks Davey , the only reason I asked was that alot of systems hand held are Right shoulder orientated if sight on target for the duration of flight is required not fire and forget though just looking out for the Left handers poor Chaps I never meet a Left handed Seacat Aimer in my time in the Navy

        • How did we train the Ukrainians on Starstreak? I believe we issued it to them weeks after our training team departed.

          • I have read that the support package includes a simulator and a training team, which have been set up in a “secret location”. Which is probably just over the border from Ukraine.

      • John don’t give the Ruskies information like that , I doubt if they had thought of Terrain masking their concept for Attack Helo ops is be seen ,it scares the opposition who being Civilian won’t shoot back .Well now they do looks like Flares are no Longer in fashion so too speak

  8. Excellent, good news 🙂

    I really hope we are training Ukrainians on weapons such as Rapier and Sky Sabre. They could be deployed into west Ukraine where there is little chance of the Russians capturing any equipment and used to shoot down missiles.

      • We only replaced it earlier this year, I would have thought they are in a storage warehouse somewhere in the UK.

        • Indeed I have been thinking would those now redundant Rapier systems be offered to the Ukrainians, if so being kept quiet so far.

        • Probably but I bet that not all items will be in tip-top condition – and this is a very complex system to be trained for.

          • The argument against this at the start was ‘it will be too late for the Ukrainians by the time they are trained up’. But a long drawn out war seems the more likely scenario now. Get them trained up and in the field asap.

            And yes, I would imagine not all the Rapiers will be in good condition. The Sky Sabres are brand new though.

          • There are mixed views about the likely duration of the conflict with most analysts betting on a short war. I doubt we will offer our brand new Sky Sabres.

  9. Right, as Starstreak is the only SHORAD system we have, there had better be replacement missiles being procured for the limited AD assets we have.

    As to the footage, amazing to see.

    Glory to Ukraine, smash the invaders.

    • Mate have you had any info yet in what vehicles are being sent by HMG? They said “long range Arty” but none of my sources have heard much. Although the word on the street is some of the GLMRS which we have in store. If so this must have been a bit of a long term plan as there will certainly be a training requirement, even for already trained GRAD rocket trained Ukrainian lads. Also heard CVRT?

      • Evening mate.

        No idea of much beyond your own info, but will keep eyes and ears open.
        I did read the long range artillery referred more to munitions, though that’s weird as their artillery is in better state than our shit state RA!
        I’d not read of GMLRS being involved myself. If so hope that does not impact on our own plans as a 3rd GMLRS regiment is forming and front line launchers increased slightly.
        Vehicles, I’ve only seen old Saxons being painted white for use as ambulances. We have plenty of CVRT lying about. Indeed, they’re slated to go out if service in a few years long before Boxer and Ajax replace them! Typical army MoD LUNACY.
        I’ve also read of ASM.
        Proud of our contribution to Ukraine, both in weapons supplies, veterans, and most importantly Intel.

        • We were selling them antiship weapon equipped patrol boats before the war, first week Boris said the deal wasnt being cancelled, suppose they could send them unmounted before hand as will be a while before Ukranians can use boats again. (They scuttled their frigate that was in maintenance and a few patrol boats were taken out in initial strikes and as far as I know remainder have never sortied during the war).

        • There were also a few Saxons sent some time ago, wonder how they have fared! Yes mate, supporting Ukraine militarily was a sound call by HMG, and one of the few countries which had the nads to make the call and set the ball rolling. As for long range arty, could be the older MLRS, not the GMLRS, and with some GPS munitions. But as you said our own RA are in such a shit state we could be getting donations of kit from the Ukrainian lads!!! Let’s wait and see but whatever we do in regard to kinetic support, I’m all for it. One of the best things old Boris has done. Cheers.

        • They had the Saxons (Qty 75 apparently) a while back – late 2014/early 2015. [I wonder when we replace that Saxon fleet, as Boxer was initially meant to replace residual 432 and Saxon years ago!]

          Aussies are sending Bushmaster by C-17 and a Brit company H&O aka Venari Group are converting ex-British Army wheeled vehicles to supply in the ambulance role, to evacuate wounded civilians and military alike.

          I could believe we would supply CVR(T) as we must have lots – but before they are replaced!!…and maybe some of the PM UOR vehicles that were not taken into core use. Very hard to suppose what long-range artillery we could supply as you and Airborne say – maybe just 155mm ammo.

          Not specifically about Ukraine, but I have just read about a private company specialising in selling ex-British Army kit – https://www.govsales.co.uk/
          A lot of what they are selling looks to be in excellent condition and not all of it is that old ie MAN trucks. I hope we have got a good attrition stock of vehicles for our own army in Ashchurch (which MoD threatened to close down a few years back!!!).

          • Yes, and with no other suitable CHE locations in the UK to store 7000 plus vehicles! Idiots. And with rail access.

            Luckily it’s been shelved.

          • Some of the sales on there and Withham are odd choices, I can see why they rid of the Bedfords & Leyland trucks and they are old and there no support. Also sine we supposedly only have 93 tanks transporters it seem and odd choice to be dumping tractor units and trailers

          • I had not spotted we were selling off tank transporters. Insane. There is a need to move armour long distances by road and not rely on rail.

          • HETs were bought, owned and operated by Fasttraxx as I remember and were available to MoD as primary user but were available for renting out to others. I wonder what now prompts a sale, unless they are worn out, and there are more HETs coming. MoD, as primary user, must have OK’d the sale by Fasttraxx.

          • 1,000 – 5,000 kms on the clock for the tractors, Doesn’t say how old they are. There was 2012 Man 4×4 trucks for sales with 100 to 300km on the clock

      • I heard that and wondered if it was in error as long range artillery starts to wander into non defensive territory. I was if it was indeed true, thinking it might refer to L118 light guns which I imagine would work well for the Ukrainian tactics easy to move and easy to keep away from prying eyes and quickly redeploy-able once they are used and position revealed. Would they really supply GLMRS?

        • Not sure about the GMLRS but normal MLRS rockets could be a possibility if any left with a Reg worth of wagons from stores! Could be the LG, we still have shed loads in store and plenty of ammunition. But, while I think it’s a good gun, and it’s 24/7 supported us in Afghan, its a smaller calibre than most Ukrainian and Russkie arty which could put it at a disadvantage. But it’s accurate with the APS, it’s quick and it’s mobile and it’s plentiful. You could be right!

          • Hi Airborne, as signatories to the Montreal (or Toronto?) treaty banning cluster munitions we (the MOD) got rid of the M28 bomblet MLRS rounds (644 bomblets per rocket) and moved the fleet over to M270 B1 standard to enable it to fire the M31 guided Unitary round ( a single HE warhead).
            cheers

        • If we gift L118 LG to Ukraine, maybe we will replace them in our own army with the 155mm Ultralight gun, M777 – like the Americans did 20 years ago!

  10. Just thinking aloud. Harpoon 1C goes out of RN service soon. In 1982, the Argentines jerry rigged an Exocet ship based missile, to be fired from land on the back of a truck. If something like that was to arrive in Odessa?

    • Yes, as they’d not have to worry about civilian vessels being targeted by the missile once it launches. A dozen Russian ships just over the horizon I believe?

      • If memory serves, the Argentines used the generator from a WW2 search light, to power the launch of the Exocet. I wonder what bits would be needed to improvise the shore launch of a Harpoon?

          • DM, I think there is a big difference between a dedicated shore battery, designed that way from the factory, and an ad hoc bodge up to fire shipborne missiles from land.

          • No doubt. Hope something comes of it soon though if it does I don’t want to see it publisised until it’s sinking Russian ships.

          • That one used Exocet. Both systems have been used in shore-launched platforms anyway (harpoon from trucks, I’m pretty sure) but as mentioned there are changes that would need to be made from a ship-launched one.

    • Geez wouldn’t that be great, would love to see a few of their frigates taken out though I note the Ukrainians have already claimed several vessels destroyed without any further details however.

    • I wonder why we’ve heard little or nothing about Ukraines own indigenous AShMs being used to target Russian warships bombarding?

    • From what I remember with Exocet ( Its been well over 2 1/2 decades since I was last hands on it) required 2 or 3 fridge sized cabinets and a big fridge freezer sized SFC for voltage conversions. Harpoon is even worse with an SFC and control cabinet about the size of 3 fridge freezers stood next to each other and a 2 x fridge freezer sized control cabinet for mission planning.

      As exocet and harpoon where air launched capable they optimised the designs for using the usual, exotic aircraft power supplies from the outset. Things like 3 phase 115v 400hz, 28 vdc, 115v single 400hz and other such weird voltages that aircraft use. Ships have lots of space so they can easily carry the power supply conversion machinery SFC’s to make the aircraft type power supplies from the regular 440v 60Hz and 115v.

      Bolting them on a truck is not that straight forward. Mission planning needs to be done as well. Doglegs to be planned to get the things coming in at different bearings to make ASM Defence that much more difficult. Homing head turn on range, Home on jam enabling, pop up or sea skim (Harpoon) terminal phase.

      From experience with some of the last Exocet the RN used for a shoot the older they are the more temperamental they get. We tried to fire all four that we carried and only 3 went Woosh! The last one sat there and would not go. The doors opened but the motor wouldnt fire.

      • Only one needs to fire, to give the Russian ships a hell of a scare, so they stay far offshore. Salvage the cabinets from a retired T23? Voltage was why the Argies used a WW2 searchlight generator. The power requirements matched.

  11. I always get a false sense of how quick these missiles are from watching video footage, and films. Films especially as you need to see the missiles flying in order to know it’s there and up the excitement factor. Video images of tests from a static viewpoint at the firing post also seem to make the missiles take ages to hit the target.
    However, in reality, Even NLAW at 440mph is virtually unseen as it flies over a tank (or whatever). Martlet missiles fired from Wildcat (Long range footage of the tests) just simply vanish as they leap to supersonic speed when the boosters fire.

    Did I read an average flight time of Starstreak is in the 2-3 second bracket? Simply outstanding, and we need to complete the Martlet build and buy some Mk2 versions.
    AA

    • Well I believe SS is 3000mph isn’t it and has a 7 mile range. Been trying in my head to work out a time to target at any given range my maths isn’t very good mind and it’s late but is that 6 or 7 secs to max range? So you average wouldn’t be far off I suspect.

      • Best to convert the figures into something more manageable. If we said Starstreak has a terminal speed of Mach 4, this is equivalent to 1372m/s. So basically 1.4km per second. Which is a shade under 1 mile per second. At Starstreak’s published max effective engagement range of 7km, the missile will take roughly 5 seconds to reach the target.

        PS – it can go further.
        PPS – it can teach a higher terminal speed.

        Hope this helps?

  12. Gratifying news.
    More good news is that some IFVs are on their way to Ukraine.
    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germany-okays-sale-former-gdr-infantry-fighting-vehicles-ukraine-2022-04-01/
    And also reported is that the US is facilitating the transfer of T72 from former Soviet eastern block countries,
    The UK Venari group is fabricating armoured ambulances and Australia is sending Bushmaster patrol vehicles.
    Ukraine is asking for some AA to intercept cruise missiles and longer range artillery.

    • There is a Youtube video, saying Boris may send some AS90 to Ukraine. Do we have any spare that are functional?

      • AS90, ah is that so, there are many sat in stores as the original buy was 179 I believe, with about 90 or so remaining, and half operational at Regt level.. ,

          • Is this still technically possible? If so would it make more sense than buying brand new…UK jobs; levelling up .. etc?

          • BAE is upgrading US 155mm SPG, so maybe share some components to upgrade AS90? 58 calibre barrel + more automation?

          • Not now mate they are pretty much shagged! It makes sense to buy new, but the requirement will be low numbers, as only 2 armoured Regts/tracks are now required, let’s say 3 x 6 Gun batteries x 2 equals 36 with maybe another 12 -18 for training at Larkhill and Reserves. So sadly very low numbers as we don’t know what platform they I’ll be choosing for the LG replacement yet mate.

          • Agreed mate.
            The requirement was for over 100 guns until Strikes demise, and the program has effectively been cut by stealth because of that and the standing up of a second regular GMLRS Regiment.
            I’d add it’s hoped a 3rd gun regiment may get the new SPGs as hopefully 7 LMBCT will get the same gun.

        • Most common will be the D30, 122mm and some 122mm SPGs. The 155mm will give them an extra 5-7 km range and that’s important, but it’s a different system and would take time to become proficient. Might be better for ex WP countries to dig out their old russkie SPGs and donate them to the Ukrainian lads.

          • Thx. Have to say, ithe Ukrainian lads look like quick learners if that’s the way things go.

    • There is that U.K. defence equipment sale website. It often has ex army vehicles on it so there must be spare vehicles around to send.
      Perhaps the older towed 155 guns are in storage aswell as light guns.
      Might be more difficult keeping shells supplied. I thought Ukraine only used soviet sizes

      • Some interesting psychology and diplomatic thinking going on in US State Dept….well above my pay grade. If a choice had to be made then armour is the way to go; with ‘defensive’ AA missiles to intercept the long range cruise strikes. Wonder if we will send Land Ceptor?

  13. I tip my hat to the workers in N.Ireland. With NLAW and now Starstreak they’re doing us all proud. 👋👋

  14. Well done Starstreak. Ukraine will need heavier equipment though if they are going to try anything really offensive. Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and the Czech Rep can all supply various derivatives of the T72 and 122mm SPGs (in there 100s if necessary). Patriot might not be available but certainly supplies of S 300 are coupled with ever more Manpads and EW radars. They will need plenty of ammunition, rations and fuel too. Some game changers would be GMLRS & those Polish MIG 29s. With the MIGs, surely they need to be dismantled in Poland, trucked over the border and reassembled?

    • My thoughts entirely, have wondered if that is or will happen that would really be a big boost to the Ukrainians if it did. On another note anyone have any theories about who how that attack on the Russian oil storage facilities took place? Claims now suggest it originated within Russia which poses some interesting questions.

      • Reminds me of the Bomber Harris speech saying Hitler entered WW2 thinking it could bomb everyone else without being bombed itself. No idea if it was a Ukrainian or false flag Russian op. However, I’d rather see Russia stopping its massacre & destruction of Ukrainian cities, towns & villages than Russian ones getting some pay-back. Take gloves off & throw them out of Ukraine will do.

      • There are a few theories out there. The most likely, given the hilly geography with many rivers, is flying nap of the earth along the valleys. Others are they went in slow along roads so below the AD speed threshold, or on the tracks usually used by RuAF helicopters. However they did it, all comment on the outstanding crew professionalism and superb mission planning.

        That the Ukrainians claimed that it was a Russian self hit is put down to an attempt to deflect the post event criticisim that the UkAF risked now very scarce Mi-24s on an undefended mainly civilian use target for PR purposes rather than hit targets that would help their military in Ukraine.

    • Madness to leave Russia with carte blanche choice of systems while we tie Ukraines hands afraid of upsetting Putin. Those Migs should never have been blocked.

  15. Great news. I can understand however western countries not wanting their technology to fall.into Russian hands. I suspect the western weapons sent to ukraine are older technology. Recently the Ukrainians got their hands on sophisticated Russian mobile radar technology, which could be a goldmine for western countries that receive such abandoned technology.

  16. There’s an awful lot of carry on over this one helicopter kill. It’s only one! There are more than one helo’s in this clip. Where they shot at too? Let’s hope there many more! I’m a bit uncomfortable with all this media coverage over this. Just wish there was a lot more done hush hush.Why do we have to tell the whole bloody world, Russian’s included, what we’re doing, how much, where and even when!? It’s a “media driven World” and maybe it’s overt signalling to the Russians, the UK showing leadership etc, but hope all this weapons aid from everyone actually helps contains the Russian’s and even push them right back to their borders.
    There must be a kind of moral and even humane satisfaction of us being able to give surplus weaponry from our storage for direct use to the Ukrainian’s in a very live and pressing war zone for a “justified purpose” fighting off this Russian aggression. Hope the Russian war machine gets literally stopped even blown off its tracks and Putin and Co are held to account for all of this disgusting war. God knows what the general Russian public are thinking their political leaders have got their country into! Strength to the Ukrainian 🇺🇦 people and may they come through this hell even stronger!
    And the UK can now re-stock it’s armament’s!

  17. While it’s good & proper we’re supplying all sorts of aid & weapons to Ukraine it is rather cold & callous to leave Ukraine to actually do the fighting alone when both us & the Americans are supposed to guarantee their soveriegnty. We left Ukraine fighting with hands tied while Russia freely went all-out. It’s been a blood bath & only Ukrainian tenacity & Russian incompetence has avoided dismembering or even the annexation of all of Ukraine. Both could still happen.
    We’re just one of the chief coat holders while Ukraine fights for its existence.

    If or when Russia starts negotiating seriously, we need to be very careful not to appease/reward Putin as it will only encourage him & others to further foolish criminal expansions at huge costs to nations & lives. Further security guarantees seem pretty weak given we should be doing far more than we are under our 1994 guarantees. Putin at the least will see they’ve been no deterrent thus far, even if Ukraine doesn’t.

    Good to see Starstreak is viable & effective after Blowpipe, its predecessor, being fairly hopeless.

    • I sympathise with that view it pains me to say that Macron will jump at the opportunity to cosy up again the moment opportunity allows under the duplicitous guise of being THE European leader and peacemaker par excellence. Surely no one can now seriously believe trade and culture exchange with Russia is in any way going to change attitudes and allegiances there even I fear after Putin’s demise, but I doubt that will stop French (and others) opportunism. Depressing as Russia has destroyed 20 years of slow but sure progress for its people after a horrible 90s and the appalling Soviet era, but if over half the people it seems don’t appreciate it and the bonds to the civilised World and revert to type, I’m sadly not sure what one can do but lock them out.

      • It’s astonishing that the much oppressed Soviet era Russian population, supposedly so good at reading between the lines of the Soviet propaganda, are so thoroughly duped by Putin.
        Grandstanding while fighting to the last Ukrainian seems the attitude across all “friends” of Ukraine.

      • A bit of positive news on that front.

        Mons. Macaron is only President of whatever he is President of over at the EU until the end of June.

        Then it goes Cz, Swe, Sp, Be, Hu, Po, Dk in 6 month chunks.

        Though Hu may get nobbled somehow if Mr Erdogan wins his domestic election.

  18. Correct me if I am wrong but is not Thales a French Company so the missile should be referred to as a French missile or at least Anglo-French?
    Also off topic,George it would be nice if you could do an article on the 40th anniversary of the Falklands conflict.
    Regards from Durban

    • No entirely developed within Britain by Thales UK in fact before Shorts missile Div became part of Thales. It’s not quite as delineated but your argument would be like saying all the stuff produced by Bae in the US is British when virtually none of it is. Same as MDNA some of the stuff is jointly produced between the various National entities to different degrees, there will be some overlap esp in more recent programs but much is specific to the separate member Nations who start, monetarise and control those programmes separately within the Corporate structure. It’s why the Carriers and the design thereof for example are completely under UK control and can be exported or IP transferred (within any normal parameters) despite the original selected design being from Thales. I’m sure the relations between these various subsidiaries and national programs are quite complex and do vary, but it isn’t simply a matter of if it’s a French (or indeed any other) registered/headquartered company then any product they produce is automatically French. Britain would control, design and produce virtually nothing if that were the case.

      • Thanks for the info Spy. The structures of these large international corporations are indeed enormously complex so gone are the days when one could assign a specific ‘nationality’ to much of the kit in production in the’Free World’. Intuitively though, I feel that ownership is the ace in the pack as that gives the final say to those that hold the majority of the stock. Your last sentence is telling and reflects my unease at just how much of the UK is owned by foreign corporations

    • I need to understand Thales a bit more.

      Perhaps we need to buy 26% of it on the Paris stock exchange, then we become the biggest shareholder.

      Incidentally, it may be a good time to buy EDF shares, since Mons. M just crippled them by making the company share price – 85% owned by the State – take the hit for his energy subsidy programme.

  19. I wonder if we will add these to any future purchases of Boxer?

    “Thales has signed a contract with Krauss-Maffei Wegmann for the delivery of four Panoramic Above Armour Gimbals (PAAGs) to the German armed forces, the company announced on 30 March.

    The PAAG will be fitted on German Boxer vehicles as part of the Joint Fire Support Team (JFST) contract.

    Four prototypes will be manufactured in 2023, with a follow-on production contract anticipated in 2025, the announcement stated.”

    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/defence/latest/german-boxer-vehicles-to-get-thales-surveillance-system

  20. Morning all
    As an island nation, do we have any land based anti ship missile capability, if not why not, or is that a stupid question

    • Not had any land based and fired from shore. In the Cold War and after we did have Sea Eagle on land based jets. If the Cold War had gone hot no Soviet vessel would be getting anywhere near. The Northern Fleets primary assets were submarines. The Soviet Baltic fleet would be destroyed trying to exit, as would the Northern Fleets assets trying to go further from the Barents into the Norwegian or North Sea’s.

      Since then the focus was on expeditionary forces fighting in the Middle East wjile cutting the forces to the bone. With Russia’s resurgence now we all see the need for at least an air launched ASM for fast air.
      I still see no need for land based and UK based ASM myself. I’d rather buy SAM batteries for the UK mainland.

      • DM. Dover is a classic choke point. As France is only 20 miles away, we do not need a fancy long range missile. Marte-ER is in production for shore based batteries. It is also integrated on Typhoon.

      • Hi Daniele, I don’t think the RAF replaced Bloodhound all those years ago with Rapier actually permanently set up on RAF airfields, seeing them as for expeditionary use, but I may have that all wrong.
        So GBAD in the UK homeland died a death when Bloodhound did?
        I guess faith was then put into having a large air force that could prevent enemy penetration of UK airspace. Trouble is we have a small air force today and a smaller number of air superiority fighters.
        So is it time to bring back permanently deployed GBAD aka SAMs in the UK? We need more than just a few Sky Sabre batteries and need to determine which areas to cover.

        • Absolutely. I’ve counted at least 25 locations that could do with a battery. There are hundreds of sites as you well know. I just thought of critical ones.

          Yes, there was no replacement for Bloodhound. But alongside it RAF Regiment Rapier Squadrons were at Lossimouth and Leuchars permanently. And 4 more regiment squadrons defended USAFE sites.

          Other than those Rapier was indeed expeditionary.

          There was also a RAux AF Reg Sqn with captured Argentine AA at Waddington.

          • BAE, or whatever it was then, tried to get HMG in the 1970s, to order Land Dart (land version of Sea Dart) to replace Bloodhound. When I was a lad, I remember a model of it, at one of the Farnborough airshows.

          • That’s interesting, I’d not heard of that. I was a lad then too, maybe too young a lad to remember!

          • After Desert Storm, there was talk of the UK making a small buy of Patriot, as many other close US allies bought Patriot then. Sadly never happened. In the late 1990s, one of the MoD high ups, really wanted the UK to buy THAAD. That also did not make it into 1998 SDR, though I think that might have been a close call.

    • Coastal artillery died a death in the UK in 1956. But I accept you are talking about missiles, not guns.
      I assume we trust the RN and RAF to deal with enemy shipping approaching home waters. A land-based array of anti-ship missiles would be extremely expensive (manpower and equipment and support) given the length our our coastline – and would not have a secondary role to help justify the cost.

  22. It’s good this sort of weaponry is making its way over there, but I think its providing a huge wake up call to the manufacturers and I hope the pen pushers in the MOD if a full hot war were to kick off they are getting a better appreciation for how long weapon stocks will last and hopefully be boosting production to cope with demand

  23. Russia have probably only got 5/10 k well trained professional troops thay need to settle for a weak forced score draw and go home .

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here