SHARE

MBDA’s Land Ceptor air defence system is making its show debut in the outside vehicle park at DSEI 2017 in London.

Land Ceptor utilises the Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM) and will be brought into service by the British Army as a replacement for the Rapier air defence system.

Compared to Rapier, Land Ceptor has over triple the range (25 km+) and is able to intercept ‘most targets in any weather conditions’ say MBDA, including cruise missiles and precision guided munitions.

According to a press release, six nations have already chosen CAMM to provide their future air defence capabilities in both the maritime and land domains.

In Royal Navy service the system is known as Sea Ceptor – which is also making its debut at DSEI 2017 off the back of successful first-of-class firings from the Type 23 frigate HMS Argyll. By purchasing the same missile to meet the air defence needs of both the British Army and the Royal Navy, development costs are significantly reduced and both services are able to utilise a common stockpile that will significantly reduce procurement and support costs.

The Land Ceptor present at DSEI, which has been undertaking qualification trials for the British Army, features a substantially revised design to initial development prototypes and incorporates numerous new features. According to the company:

“The decision to utilise the in-service HX-77 as the base vehicle for Land Ceptor enables the capabilities of the system to be expanded, whilst minimising the overall fleet size.

A key new feature of the new design is its modular launcher. It features a palletised loading module enabling rapid reload of a full ‘magazine’ of munitions, and a self-mounting/dismounting capability allowing for a wider range of air/sea/rail transport options and for dismounted operations in fixed/semi-fixed locations. A common interface module means the launcher can be easily integrated onto a wide range of vehicles.

The increased payload space provides greater flexibility in mission equipments carried, including – power generation, fire control electronics, on-board command and control (C2), missile datalink, radio communications and optional EO/IR sensor modules all available for installation.”

These systems are supposed to provide flexibility for the launcher to act as an independent fire unit, as well as in a networked battery configuration. This increased payload could also be used to carry the extended range CAMM-ER interceptor, providing air defence out to 40km+.

Land Ceptor is the launch configuration of the Enhanced Modular Air Defence Solutions (EMADS).

24 COMMENTS

  1. On the MBDA page the vehicle appears to have two masts. I wonder if the second could be for a ADAD sensor like on the SP HVM, allowing the firing units a way to target independently from a radar.

    • More likely to be connected with communications between the various components of the air defence system or maybe IFF than a thermal sensor

      • Well their page does say that a EO/IR sensor is an option and will allow for them to operate independently. Although hard to say if that is what that second mast is.

        “The increased payload space provides greater flexibility in mission equipments carried, including – power generation, fire control electronics, on-board command and control (C2), missile datalink, radio communications and optional EO/IR sensor modules all available for installation. These systems provide flexibility for the launcher to act as an independent fire unit, as well as in a networked battery configuration. “

  2. Six nations who I think have chosen CAMM.

    UK, NZ, Brazil, Italy, Spain and Chile.

    Interestingly Chile chose Lockheed Martin canada to upgrade its t23 frigates which will include the switch from seawolf 2 to sea ceptor.

    Hopefully land ceptor will enter service with the RA quickly, as the rapier is well beyond its sell by date.

    • Indeed. Hope we buy enough for home defence. Pinpoint cruise missile strikes on key locations would wreak havoc on our ability to respond.

      • Line them up along the Dover coast.
        On a serous note the UK needs to hurry up and order THAAD or Aster Block 2 to provide UK wide area defense, if the EU offers better divorce terms we could even offer to station it in the channel so they could free ride some more off our defense commitments.

        • BB85, A couple of weeks ago Barnier had the stupididty to threaten the UK with removal of security co-operation in a crass attempt to intimidate the British people. He appears to have no idea that withdrawing co-operation would endanger EU citizens more than UK citizens. Is the EU so detached from reality to think that this spiteful threat to expose the UK to danger can be taken seriously?

          • John – Basically in a word ‘Yes’. The EU has never been challenged before so they react in kind as they have lived in a world of total subservience to the ‘Project’ since the early ’50s (although the true nature of the beast was not made public until the EC / EU of the 1990s).

            Let them threaten all they want. What they just do not understand is we are a mild bunch of people until threatened and pushed around. And then a different part of the British character comes out …

  3. Any new about the radar system for land captor? The capacuty of the missiles are very good but without and radar… his capabillity will not be a 100%.

  4. I would very much like to see the ER version, the more coverage the better. Air defense missiles are relatively cheap and a grt way to defend large areas of airspace.
    Its about time we sorted out the BMD situation. No excuse for not having this capability its in the nation’s interest as a Nuclear power and as such must be funded no matter the cost.

  5. A bit capability boost and much needed, here is hoping we buy enough of them to cover the major locations should something go bad.

    The only draw back appears to be its size, meaning it can’t be helicopter lifted into location like rapier, but hopefully the RAF can provide enough air coverage for any land action.

    • Gabriele asked MBDA on twitter if it a Chinook could lift it, but I don’t think he got a reply. However it seems likely that one could. The HX77 is reported to have a normal maximum load of 15 tons. Not that much more than a Chinook could lift, and it seems unlikely that this is reaching that maximum. So I would think there is a chance that it could be lifted. Of course that is without the truck, but as it it can mount and dismount itself, it could at least be used in a fixed position until the HX77 arrives.

  6. Hopefully the networking of these systems will allow missiles based on land to be given targeting information by ships in the littoral thereby increasing the number of targets that can be engaged.

    • Considering the wildcats don’t have the ability because it was too expensive, i kinda suspect it will be the case here also. Being able to network multiple radars and missile systems to combine abilities does on paper sound like a sensible investment, but so does linking up a surveillance helicopter with its host ship.

    • Joe,

      Russia will be broke in a few years. So its irrelevant what Russia thinks! The only decent kit they have are mostly defensive and whatever else they have are in too few numbers to be an effective threat.

      • – Russia is no more broke than the UK is
        – ALL SAMs are defensive!
        – All of their SAM kit is superior to that of the UK, 40 S400 Battalions, over 30 modernised S-300 battalions, more still BUK/Panstir derivatives….. all superior to anything the UK has and as mentioned in far far greater quantity.
        And that is before anyone dares compare the UK now having fewer MBTs than Switzerland & a couple hundred IFVs that don’t carry ATGMs….. lol.
        And then there are the old, short barrelled short ranged & SPHs & Towed artillery.

        Pray the UK is never in a war near the Russian frontier.
        It is outclassed everywhere.

        • Doesn’t Russia spend close to 10% of its GDP on defense. They certainly get more value for money, considering we are a small Island nation it should not be difficult to provide 100% air defense coverage similar to Israel. I would just buy whatever they have off the shelf to save all the R&D we are not going to beat them in the export market so just join them on that one.

        • Joe.
          In Russia’s defence NATO and the US Air Combat Command are the only potential enemies with the air power to threaten them. That, along with their vast landmass, is why they put so much into their troops of air defence, which used to be a separate service.
          What would be the point of the UK having 40 Battalions of CAMM??
          We got rid of our home defence SAM assets after the end of the Cold War.
          The media gets all excited at their ageing Bear’s flying around our coasts and that is all they are sending our way at the moment.
          This equipment for the British Army I highly doubt is for any home defence role.

        • Not to mention their current Zapad exercise has more men than our entire army.

          Russia plays to its strengths – it knows it can’t compete across the spectrum so it focuses on areas it can dominate.

          Nukes – most in world
          Tanks – most in world
          SAMS – enough to **** any air force

          BA shouldn’t be anywhere near Russian front, with its current size it’s a domestic defence force only – which I wouldn’t risk in any near peer conflict abroad.

          • The British Army is *expeditionary*, as part of a larger multi-national force.

            The British Army doesn’t currently need to be a home defence force because our direct neighbours are our allies, and both the Atlantic Ocean and the European continent defend our borders with the greatest defence of all … distance.

            Typhoon and Meteor is a much more efficient and effective weapon against Russian agression than any SAM.

        • Russia has a GDP smaller than South Korea. It spends over 10% on its defence and we spend barely 2%. I don’t share your enthusiasm for the Russian military machine because when if comes down to a conventional war the US alone has enough military might to destroy any effective threat. Most of the hype about Russias military has been whipped-up by the Russians and while some of their defensive kit is good, most of it isn’t and completely outclassed by NATO. Russias economy is in free fall and no-one will support them so comparing our high debt economy to their economy is fruitless as we can borrow money – they can’t!

  7. This is needed fast , but l doubt it will happen soon because we have committed
    so much on our vanity Carriers there is no money. When things start to implode
    in russia (and they will) our boys will be in the firing line with out any protection.

LEAVE A REPLY