The Ministry of Defence has published its tenth annual summary of the defence equipment plan.

According to a statement:

“Building on the 2020 summary, it sets out our plans for the next 10 years to deliver and support the equipment our armed forces need to do the jobs we ask of them.”

The document contains a great deal of technical information about the projects and the management/funding side of them and you can read that for yourself here but below I’ll try and present the most pertinent information relating to the project in question.

SPEAR Capability 3 – Equipment Background

The project is described as follows:

“SPEAR Capability 3 is a medium-range missile due to enter service in 2025/26 as the primary air-to-surface weapon for Lightning II. Guided by GPS, laser or advanced radar scene matching, its miniaturised turbine engine gives it a substantial range advantage over equivalent sized unpowered weapons.”

In Year Progress Update

“The first ‘design definition’ missile was built ready for robustness testing and the first
guided firings are scheduled to begin later this year on Typhoon. These firings will derisk
integration onto Lightning II. However, the anticipated entry into service on Lightning II of 2025 is likely to slip to 2026, on account of the overburdened integration schedule.”

You can read the report here.

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

19 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ChariotRider
ChariotRider
2 years ago

“Overburdened integration schedule”.

Sounds like there are too many customers wanting their own kit integrated onto the aircraft. Nevertheless, there is a significant unlift in capability on the way, which is much needed by the frontline.

At leats the missile programme seems to be progressing.

Cheers CR

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 years ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Perhaps the USA does not want competition for their SDB II Stormbreaker?

Jonno
Jonno
2 years ago
Reply to  John Hartley

Can anyone tell us what UK Kit has been cleared for use on F35B?

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 years ago

F-35B still needs a heavy stand off weapon. Spear 3 is too light.

Louis
Louis
2 years ago
Reply to  John Hartley

I guess FC/ASW will fill that requirement and storm shadow until it’s retired. It is a shame that FC/ASW won’t be hypersonic.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
2 years ago
Reply to  Louis

Storm Shadow isn’t being integrated into the f-35 last I heard.

Last edited 2 years ago by Tomartyr
Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
2 years ago

Get it on Typhoon quickly then! This a nifty missile with many uses, it’s anti ship utility notwithstanding…considering we have no RAF launched anti ship weapons or is storm shadow capable?
Gosh..once we used to have dozens of Buccaneers armed to the teeth with sea eagle Ashm JUST for maritime strike!
AA

Challenger
Challenger
2 years ago

I don’t think the variant of Storm Shadow in UK service has any anti-ship capability. Only the French with their SCALP derivative.

Agree that it’s a major omission from the RAF/RN arsenal. There hasn’t been a heavyweight AShM since Sea Eagles demise back in the halcyon days of 20 years ago when the Russian threat seemed a thing of the past and a top tier China a hazy possibility in the far distance.

Sea Venom, Spear and Sea Brimstone if pursued are all too light.

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 years ago
Reply to  Challenger

The Typhoons for Qatar will be armed with Marte ER. Not the greatest anti ship missile, but if it is already integrated on Typhoon, perhaps a small buy for one sqn of RAF Typhoon?

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
2 years ago
Reply to  Challenger

Not if they are accurate enough.You don’t need to sink a warship to remove it from the fight.

Tommo
Tommo
2 years ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Happened too the Glasgow the ship with the hole 82 Robert

Mark
Mark
2 years ago

We won’t be getting any F35bs block 4 till 2028 earliest or later so how can they say 2026? First they got to release software then roll out a upgrade maintenance schedule then start field testing then pilot training so all this talk is BS. We’re not supposed to be getting the last of the initial 48 dumb aircraft by 2025-6. This info was posted on an earlier article on here. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/more-f-35b-jets-being-delivered-to-the-uk/ This weapon can only be operational once our F35bs have either been upgraded to block 4 or we have taken delivery of new block 4 aircraft which we… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
2 years ago

Correct on all points. The Russians took their proven surface to surface not quite ballistic path following Iskander, max 500km missile, tinkered with it and bingo they have a Kinzhal air launched Mach 10 ASM, with a range when launched from the Mig-31K cruising at 2000mph of around 2000km, unknown how much lower when launched from a slower Tu-22M3. Its mass/speed at impact would do serious damage with a concrete warhead but they fit 480kg of HE for good measure. As more Mig-31s are converted to K standard the Russians are starting to co-locate both Mig-31K and Tu-22M3 on the… Read more »

JohnH
JohnH
2 years ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Can someone explain to me the kinematics involved with the Kinzhal missile? From what I can see from Wikipedia et al. it is a gross 1000kg mass missile with a 500kg war head, that is supposed to travel at Mach 10 for 2000 miles. Wikipedia states on cruise kinetic energy of 17.2GJ. I don’t see that – I calculate terminal KE ~3.9GJ (I assume no significant propellant left at max range) and warhead to be 3GJ. Nowhere near the quoted value. Looking at it this the warhead seems to be roughly the same warhead size as a 1000kg bomb, give… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
2 years ago
Reply to  JohnH

I have asked and this is the answer, hope it helps. -Max speed is mach 10-12 not mach 10 -Terminal speed is mach 6 or above. Terminal speed based on the fact that there is no fuel left is a very complicated task and needs specialists with appropriate equipment. The value given above is given by official sources but may be softballed for secrecy. – Weighing 4 tons empty, and moving at mach 6, terminal energy is 8.5 G. -Cruising at mach 10 obviously leads to that colossally high energy -There is no guessing warhead power without knowing the mixture… Read more »

Marked
Marked
2 years ago

In summary absolutely everything delayed, overbudget and every service lacking the kit they need to meet their most basic requirements! UK defence is an utter embarrassment in how so much can be spent with nothing whatsoever to show for it!

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
2 years ago
Reply to  Marked

Any Defence must be quite a bit of an unwieldy beast to manage well. There must be a lot that is going right, right? It would be more uplifting to see more things coming in sooner and in sufficient quantity and our ministers/people in charge being held more to account rather than seeing their smiley faces and more photo shoots from all over the place.

Jonno
Jonno
2 years ago
Reply to  Marked

As far as I can determine the following can’t be used on our F35’s:

Brimstone
Meteor
Spear
Stormshadow (SCALP)

Does anyone see a pattern?
I cant see anything except Paveway, is a remotely useful Air to Ground weapon.
Naturally Meteor can’t be used either.
Why dont we play with these integrations ourselves and get this stuff working?
This is shocking. When did this thing first fly?

Jonno
Jonno
2 years ago

The big question to ask about the F35B is why is there NO UK weapons as yet integrated to fire from the aircraft? It seems the UK F35’s are as good as scrap and wont be any use in any present conflict unless we Buy US stuff to fire at the ‘USSR’. Why is this? Is the UK taking this up with Lockheed?