France has ordered four additional SAMP/T NG firing units, taking its total order for the ground-based air and missile defence system to twelve, according to eurosam.
The Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, known as OCCAR, placed the contract on behalf of France with eurosam, the Franco-Italian grouping formed by MBDA France, MBDA Italy and Thales. The units will be delivered to the French Air and Space Force in a multi-layer configuration combining Aster and MICA VL missiles.
The company said: “This order is an additional step towards the renewal of the European Long-Range Air and Missile Defence ground capabilities, following the SAMP/T NG development launched in 2021.”
It added: “OCCAR-EA, eurosam and its members, MBDA and Thales will continue to lead the way in state of the art and sovereign air and Missile defence systems for the benefit of European defence. These advanced air defence systems are crucial in the current global context to respond to increasingly challenging threats.”
A SAMP/T NG firing unit holds up to forty-eight Aster missiles ready to fire, carried across up to six launcher modules of eight rounds each, alongside a multi-function radar and identification module able to detect and identify targets beyond 350km, and an engagement module. The whole system is mobile and eurosam says it can be operational in under thirty minutes, offering 360-degree coverage and engaging targets beyond 150km.
The system is designed around the Aster 30 B1 and the newer Aster B1NT. The B1NT uses a Ka-band seeker and new interception algorithms to give what the company describes as a hit-to-kill capability against short and medium range ballistic missiles, low manoeuvring targets and hypersonic missiles.
Britain has a stake in the wider programme, since the United Kingdom is a participant in the FSAF-PAAMS arrangement that OCCAR manages, and the fourteenth amendment to that contract, signed in Paris in January 2024, covered supplementary procurement of equipment allowing Britain to carry out mid-life upgrades to its own Aster missiles. Aster is the weapon carried by the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers as part of the Sea Viper system, which HMS Diamond used against Houthi missiles and drones in the Red Sea.
France and Italy have supplied SAMP/T systems to Ukraine, where the type has engaged Russian ballistic missiles.
The order lands while Britain has no ground-based long-range air defence system assigned to the defence of the United Kingdom. Luke Pollard, the Minister of State for Defence, confirmed this week that a further £790 million will be invested in homeland integrated air and missile defence, covering enhanced command and control, improved sensing and radar systems, counter-drone capabilities and more effective layered defences.
The Defence Committee reported yesterday that anti-strike capabilities for shooting down ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles and drones are among the capabilities European NATO members lack in sufficient numbers, and that replacing American military capabilities with European weapons has been costed by the Kiel Institute at an extra €50 billion each year over the next decade.
Sky Sabre gives the British Army a medium range ground-based system, currently deployed in Poland and the Falkland Islands. This publication has reported on continuing work on the potential of British destroyers in the ballistic missile defence role and on when those destroyers will receive their missile upgrades.
The DIP also ‘commits’ the UK to procuring long-range ballistic missile defences in the 2030s.
SAMP/T NG isn’t ideal for the role; we’d want something more akin to THAAD or Aegis Ashore. But as a starting point, with Aquila hovering in the future, it becomes more viable.
Realistically, though, our best path forwards for a true BMD shield is distributed naval launchers controlled by a mesh of land-based early warning radar, and medium-sized terminal defence guidance platforms.
Don’t disagree with having naval launchers however land based mobile launchers seem to me to be a simpler solution for most scenarios.
Precisely this. It’s the Robert Watson-Watt adage “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.” At least with Aster it’s also less dependent on temper-tantrums from the White House, and exploits our experience of the system(s) in the naval realm.
Aster is not a good ABM for UK. UK is too distant from Russia. The most recent Aster B1NT can only intercept BM with up to 1500km range. Current Asters in service with RN are said to be able to intercept BM with up to 600km range.
It depends where your troups or forward air bases are.
We are hard pressed to put one destroyer to sea, so the chances of the UK ever having a subtantial air defence system is nil. Better to spend the money on benefits and have a “we surrender” message available online.
I don’t t think it’s ever been the case that the UK is ‘hard pressed to put one destroyer to sea’. Having one routinely deployed at all times seems to be the baseline so hardly an effort, with 2-3 available over the past few months. You might be thinking of the workup of HMS Dragon but being hard pressed to deploy a specialised warship to a specific area isn’t the same as not having any at all.
I also don’t want to overstate things as if the UK is flush with surface combatants at the moment by any means, but this statement was a bit farfetched.
Twelve seems like a small number to me. Twelve hundred seems like you can protect France effectively.
A single SAMP/T unit usually has 6 trucks carrying 8 missiles, giving a battery 48 ready missiles. With 12 units, that could be 576 missiles ready to go.
Point taken. However France is what, maybe 250,000 sq miles, of potential juicy targets.
Ukraine has endured years of near constant attack.
A satisfactory deterrent would be to be able eliminate all attacks whilst at the same time being able to replace the missiles used.
Now clearly Aster would not be needed on drones and other lessor threats.
Would France not also want to distribute some of these asset to other allies.
It seems to me that we need a production line of these assets being shipped to all NATO allies which need them.
Those types of systems just dont and wont ever exist. Maybe Isreal with Iron Dome but no chance with a country like France. Its just too expensive. The amount of ordnance needed would take Frances entire state budget.
Maybe. However the French and Italians have found that the costs come down significantly if you buy in bulk.
France is buying more of these batteries than Israel has Iron Dome, so bulk doesn’t seem like the issue you make it out to be. They cover 70,000km2 each so 12 should give plenty of coverage for a 550,000km2 territory (granted that will vary on a number of factors).
Even iron dome as an extreme example of air defence covers a fifth of this area and is designed for much simpler threats. SAMP/T is more comparable to Patriot PAC-2 or Barak MX used by Israel, with some overlap in role with Arrow/David’s Sling for Block B1NT. Israel is obviously a smaller nation but for reference it only has a few batteries of each of those systems at most.
“France is buying more of these batteries than Israel has Iron Dome”
That is completely incorrect.
How many do you understand them to have? Most sources I’ve heard say 9-10. Considering they cover a 140km wide area in a country that is only half that width and 400km tall, that seems to make sense.
How many batteries do you understand them to have?
And obvious shared inventory pool. Can’t believe why the UK doesn’t even consider some SAMP/T batteries which at a pinch could be able to handle CAMM/ER/MR and other missile types too. Are even the less capable Sky Sabre batteries 6×8 for 48?
Not un true, but not completely true either. Russian Cruise missile have a long range. And we have to protect our self against an attack from the sea (a cargo or a submarine), from the air (a bomber), etc…This thing can happen as demonstrated by Ukraine surprise attack on bombers. Our nuclear air bases and our two main port cannot be taken by surprise. With twelve batteries, we will cover 540 000 square kilometers. The Metropolitan surface is about 550 000 square kilometers, so not so bad. I know things are different depending on speed, bearing and so on, but you have to start from something with air cover. Besides, any troups deployed in Romania or Estonia or any country close to the Russia border, troupes or bases in Persian Golf all need such cover. With 12 batteries, we will be able to increase our readiness level…
Well, they are some areas with no target or few: one can bomb the Alpes or limousin but not sure what to bomb besides cows.
Yeah, but compared to France’s 12 units with 6 launchers each firing 8 long range SAMs each, the UK is aiming for 12 units each with a single launcher of 8 medium range SAMs – our GBAD is woeful next to theirs.
A lot more than we have.
Any Country needs as many as they need. I’m merely suggesting we all buy that number plus maybe a few spares.
Come on UK. Do something…
There’s still a lot that can be done with Aster in the meantime. The latest Aster NT puts it in the same ballpark as Patriot PAC-3 SME, so should be good to engage targets up to 80,000ft (25km). However, Aster should retain more energy as it’s a two stage system (1st stage booster which separates from the 2nd stage Dart), unlike the PAC-3’s single stage which includes a dual pulse rocket motor. Meaning Aster even with the strakes should have less wetted area than the PAC-3. But because of the strakes should be more manoeuvrable at higher altitudes, as the strakes help to generate lift. Though the PAC-3 is a wider and longer weapon at 290mm diameter & 5.3m long vs Aster’s 180mm diameter dart 2nd stage and 380mm diameter 1st stage & 4.9m long. Means the PAC-3 stores a bit more fuel, allowing it to reach a higher altitude. Additionally, having the reaction jet paced around the CofG of the Dart, means it should be more manoeuvrable, when operated at much higher altitudes.
But Aster could be made to go much, much higher! The Aster 30 1st stage booster is 2.3m long, making the Dart about 2.6m long. If the Dart’s overall length can’t be changed, the 1st stage booster, most definitely can. The Aster 30 is fired from the Sylver A50 vertical launcher. This is a launch cell with a depth of 5m. The longer A70 or even the strike length Mk41. Would allow for an additional length of 2m for the 1st stage booster, if the 10 cm difference was kept. Thereby Aster could be made to be 6.9m long.
The 1st stage has a burn duration of only 3.5s, yet propels the missile to around Mach 4 at separation. If an additional 2m worth of propellent was added to the first stage, this would almost double the burn time. The additional time on boost will significantly raise the terminal speed, the predictions say over Mach 6. Which would give the missile an effective range of 250km to 300km. Perhaps more crucially, an interception altitude of 50 to 70km (165,000 to 230,000ft). Which is higher than THAAD and on the threshold of going exoatmospheric. So c’mon MBDA pull you finger out, there’s a quicker option available!
ASTER has a tiny 11kg hit to kill warhead
Yes, but pif-paf is enabling a direct contact. This will happen at Mach 4 plus the speed of the inbound threat…
The PIF is the standout part, all missiles have/use PAF.
Aster is classed as a “hit to kill” interceptor, the warhead is there as a back-up. Where if it misses a direct hit, the proximity fuse will detonate the warhead, so that the shrapnel cloud will at least damage the incoming threat. Hopefully either using aerodynamic forces to cause the threat to break up or outright destroy the threat. The Patriot PAC 3 missiles is also classed as a “hit to kill” interceptor, though it does have a fragmentary explosive as back up. Though they call it a “Lethality Enhancer”! The explosive charge is tiny compared to Aster’s at 330 grams.
The thing is not only to increase the rocket capabilities. The entire system including the flat panel antenna must be upgraded.
Aquila, from Twister project is the program for high altitude interception.
The current Ka-band (26.5 to 40GHz) active radar the Block1 NT uses, will be sufficient to begin with. The Ka radar even though using a traditional mechanical scanning planar flat plat antenna, will produce a much narrower beam shape that the previous Block 1’s Ku-band (12 to 18GHz) radar. Thus target discrimination will be significantly better and allowing it to reject decoys much easier. If time and funding allows, the radar could be upgraded to an electronic beam steering array (PESA or AESA). Though AESA would be the gold standard, due to it inherent low probability of intercept. But you must be mindful of how good you want the radar to be, as that will dictate the cost. Especially when you consider that the radar will be only used once.
Hope MBDA are reading your post here! 🚀
Well at least they have some SAM cover whilst the UK has ZERO (discount the Navy, were only 2 of 6 fitted vessels are operational at best). The UK needs something together with other Air Defence systems to protect our vital infrastructure like power stations and military bases etc. Just where does the MOD spend all its money? Oh on folks that shine their trousers in nice warm comfortable buildings whilst service personnel suffer with shortages in every field. The non uniform numbers need to be cut by at least 50% and the funds used to fund the UK’s actual defence and kt to keep the expensive kit working.
Still I have a long bow, will that help?
The question really is should the UK opt back into the programme and go for aster as its ground based long range air defence missile.. to be honest it’s probably worth while..
I’m not sure I would trust US supplied options anymore if we got into a shootout with the Russia as the US now has a clear history of using critical supplies as a lever against its own allies if it thinks it’s to its geopolitical advantage.
I find it amusing that apparently the UK doesn’t need GBAD due to our geographical location, yet France, equally in the rear of ENATO is getting off its backside trying to defend itself.
The UK meanwhile has:
A handful of Rapid Sentry and, I assume,Skyhammer.
A “Regiment” of Sky Sabre, half of whose Barreries reportedly don’t have the kit, so in reality half a Regiment.
And a Regiment of SHORAD, so elderly HVM Stormer, less than 30 active reportedly, when once we had them in the hundreds. Alongside a few Batteries of LMM in the same Regiment.
Labour talk of an integrated system at £700 odd million that won’t even tickle the problem, and Stormer replacement is delayed as the money isn’t there, by Charlatan Pollards own words a few weeks ago.
Is it any wonder that forces veterans and other voters are turning away from the uni party?
Words, more words, then words.
Bravo, France.
And France does this, and a lot more than the UK generally, on a smaller defence budget. Something is very, very wrong with the MoD….
If you’ve ever worked for a MOD HQ. You’d know the astonishing levels of grift, incompetence and sheer indifference at work.
I would love to see the UK acquire some of these systems. We are much smaller than France so we would be able to cover a vast majority of the UK with 6 or 7 systems. They wouldnt cover every square inch but would go a long way to covering the main UK bases and larger population areas.
The aster pool could be shared with the type 45 to reduce cost and increase the numbers available rather than going for another system like Patriot. We could even try for an aster 30 production line in the UK. If this was combined with the Seaceptor/land ceptor its a very formidable system.
Stormer: 53 on the equipment list
On the equipment list. I hear less than 30 work.
HMG gave over 200 tanks on the list months ago, Healey blathered that we had 17 Escorts.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Mr Healey needs to ensure that Project FREYA is successful, that UK ensures it can be made at scale and that UK forces get that system in all the places at risk from Ballistic missiles.
The current exquisite systems in limited production do not make economic and military sense as has been shown in the Gulf. So cheap, effective and available are the key attributes.
It is hard to say without I guess being in the unit operating them or working at Ashchurch ( assuming that’s were they are stored) . Again they could be missing parts or anything else. Challenger 2 288 in 2025 to 285 in 2026. again that’s very odd
The biggest problem we have is the whole CASD coming out of the defence budget; the amount of money given to the MOD has increased in the last 15 years, but due to the CASD being transferred to the same budget instead of coming out of the treasury, overall defence spending has gone down. It drives me insane to think of all the cuts that have been made due to this one decision. 25% could’ve gone towards more Challenger 3s, more F35s, more E7s, more P8s, more Type 26 and 31s. But no. The navy, the biggest benefactor of the transferral, don’t care in the slightest, yet the Army and RAF have had to struggle, scrimp and save while the “senior service” gets it’s own way. If we’re doomed, it’s because of this. Sorry, had a few drinks.
Discussed many,many,times on here previously. Still, at least that meant we could meet NATO’s minimum GDP spend, even if if fucked up, and continues to fuck up, our conventional forces, so , all in all a hearty slap on the back and a ‘well done’ to those right pair of tossers Messrs Cameron & Osbourne.
Daniele, we know that the UK does not have a “Regiment” of Sky Sabre. Last time I looked we only had 6 systems ie 6 launchers. Hardly a Regiments-worth. But 7 more systems are on order. A far cry from the numbers of Rapier Fire Units that we used to have. Why are some in Poland? Why not Estonia? Did a launcher or two find its way to Akrotiri?
We need to keep telling people that these are for the deployed field army plus one or two overseas RAF bases and are not for the defence of the UK homeland.
But only CAMM. What about ER and even MR? Anything happening there? And even NASAM’s to take AMRAAM, Meteor and ASRAAM?
Morning Graham.
Op Stifftail has ended. I assume they were in Poland for the usual politics trumps military reasons.
We know there isn’t a Regiment, but HMG and the Army are happy to pretend that we do, it is their complicity that needs exposing, and our enemies are not stupid.
Yes it’s reported that some launchers ended up at Akrotiri, how many isn’t public. And Saudi too.
The notion that these assets are for UK homeland defence is one encouraged by HMG own lies, when they grandstanded the additional launchers, and even gets mentioned here. Yes, these were bought forvthe deployed Field Army. If they’re diverted for political expediency then again that is the failing of HMG not providing enough to defend the Army which they were bought for.
Like all else in minimal numbers, they cannot be in two places at once no matter how good they may be.
The Army effectively isn’t deployable in it’s current form unless it hides behind NATO GBAD cover, with next to no effective 155mm artillery and shameful lack of GBAD of every kind.
But I’m sure the CGS and Army “can do” attitude means they do what they must anyway while HMG lie, delay, and consider their options.
It is auite obvious we need to get SAMP/T NG as a stopgap ASAP. As currently we have NOTHING to counter a ballistic missile attack – quite frankly that is unacceptable. We need to buy 12 systems like the French and some Shysabre for dedicated homeland defence… not have more committee meetings. We need to stop being a soft target.
Medium range ballistic missiles are classed as 1000-3000km
The most western point of Ru is 2000km away , exception of Kaliningrad ( you would assume NATO air power would wipe launchers out.
So Aster NG would be useful in small numbers for some Ru BMs
Russian aircraft can launch them but you would hope Nordic and RAF would kill them before launch.
Would be useful for Akritori , but I read there was some treaty restriction on long range GBAD
Aster NG would be of little use against middle eastern launched med-ling range BM. We would need to hope Romanian, polish and German based Arrow would hit them.
We are unique in being an island , so would need a higher tier system like SM3 or future Euro missile.
Sea based would help. Potentially 6 ships with high end radar to keep 2 on station. Could T31 with Mk41 be modded for a UK sentry ship?
Freya might be a cheap option, we are part of the coalition I believe. S300 tech , modded by Ukraine with composites and euro sensors and seeker.
Supposedly gives patriot PAC,3 like performance at sub €1 million a shot.
Polish and Romanian based aegis ashore SM3 and German Arrow 3
When the UK troupes are deployed… what does cover them?
Math, it’s Sky Sabre at medium range/altitude.
ASTER can never take fast crossing SRBMs, MRBMs or ICBMs. It’s simply not fast enough and its tiny 11kg warhead has near zero proximity effect. It’s strictly a tactical and low end SRBM level system.
It depends where your troups are.
Even head on, can’t do it. Too slow, needs to be M8+, too low an alt ife, needs to be exo atmospheric, to hit MRBMs/ICBMs. Aster is slower and lower that Patriot PAC3
How did you work that out? Even CAMM or Martlet could be used in theory against a head on ballistic missile (BM), irrespective of missile’s size. You “just” have to make sure the interceptor is in the right place ahead of the incoming threat. Giving it a head on interception path, the conservation of energy law will do the rest.
In fact it would be interesting to see what Martlet’s 3kg shaped charge high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) warhead would do, to a BM head on or from the side. Would it have the stand-off time to form the liquid jet? As I suspect the jet will penetrate very deeply through the BM. As the only “armour” the BM has is the protective nose cone, which are generally less than an inch thick and made of a ceramic material.
Crossing threats are a different ball game, as you have to work out the predicted interception point against a lot more variables, but can be doable. But you are right if planning to do a tail chase interception with CAMM, it will be significantly more difficult if at all feasible.