During a parliamentary session on 18 November 2024, Labour MP Damien Egan raised concerns about the state of the UK’s domestic air defences.
Noting increased scrutiny of the nation’s air defence capabilities, Egan asked Defence Secretary John Healey for updates on efforts to strengthen them and assurances that adequate resources would be allocated to secure British airspace.
Egan queried: “With our domestic air defences under increased scrutiny, will the Secretary of State update us on the work being done to strengthen them and give assurances that our Government understand that our forces will need the resources available to secure our skies?”
In response, Healey highlighted the critical role of the ongoing strategic defence review in addressing the nation’s air defence needs.
He explained: “This is one of the areas that the strategic defence review is looking at closely: it has set up 26 review and challenge panels and is drawing in almost 150 external experts from the whole range of defence.”
Healey emphasised the importance of adapting to rising threats and taking a comprehensive approach to assessing the UK’s future defence needs, “With rising threats at this point, this is part of the long, hard look we have to take at the capabilities we need in order to keep Britain safe in future and to be strong abroad.”
The strategic defence review is expected to play a central role in shaping the nation’s approach to ensuring security at home and maintaining strength on the international stage. Egan’s call for assurances reflects broader concerns about whether the UK’s defence strategy and funding will adequately address evolving challenges in an increasingly complex security landscape.
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!
Surely the solutions to this issue are either purchase SAMP/T, ideally improving the existing radar, or develop CAMM-MR very quickly and get it into service soon.
There isn’t really another option when it comes to European missile defence systems.
SAMP/T would be a quick off the shelf solution, we already have stockpiles of missiles good to go.
Shared inventories with the Navy and maybe then having a greater pool of missiles. Common sense. Same for CAMM, too.
CAMM-MR seems like the better solution to me, seeing as we already have a land based CAMM system, integration and training would be easier as well.
Domestic air defences need to cover various ranges. CAMM and SAMP/T cover a limited area and might be fine for SHORAD and even out to medium range, but if you are worried about longer range missiles, you need longer range responses. We saw Germany picking the Israeli Arrow missiles. Looking at the layered Israeli solution stack should tell us that CAMM(ER/MR) and Aster 30 B1/1NT aren’t enough. It was developed for a far smaller country than us, and they still don’t see Iron Dome as the be all and end all. Nor should we see CAMM or Aster that way.
The UK military. Fitted with review panels but only for actual weaponry.
Well they need to do something quickly other countries are making plans for war Germany has already started making plans briefing Business and checking there lorry drivers that they have enough. Sweden sending out leaflets to all there citizens UK no plans We defiantly need more Air Defence and soon Other than putting a type 45 in the London area we only have short range and if they send over 100 drones all of them would get through Ok we have Sky Sabre but I am sure that wouldn’t last long before we run out of missiles
Colin the thought of the UK going up against Russian is frightening given the state of our armed services and our nuclear deterrent…look at the recent test of the deterrent and how it plopped into the ocean…Hmmm type 45 how many of those are fully operational? You really think the type 45 could deal with MERV warheads…we will be a smudge on the map. Moreover, don’t forget the early warning systems in the UK are designed to warn the US of imminent nuclear strikes (which country do you think they will wipe out first). Quite why we hosted early warning systems for the US without a reciprocal air defence system from the US is beyond me…. I would like to see more effort put into diplomacy to end the Ukraine/Russia war…I would add that Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a former comedian but the joke appears to be on us. I’ll get castigated by the usual suspects on here as a Russian apologist but I’m not…If the EU and NATO had not pushed up to Russia’s borders Ukraine could have been a neutral country…but no they had to keep pushing the Russian’s…this is similar to the Cuban missile crisis which the US did not like in their own backyard so why expect Russia to be happy when the EU and NATO comes right up to their front door. The use of US and British missiles against Russian soil is a very bad idea indeed – only a brain dead politician like Biden and an equally brain dead midmit like two-tier Sir Kier could have dreamt this up.
Well we would need air defences in the next couple of weeks with these insane decisions to allow US and British missiles to be used in Russian territory….Our moronic politicians are intent in dragging us into WW3. I’m no fan of Putin but quite why we don’t have peace missions and dialogue is beyond me (it would save the lives of many young men). The UK will be a smudge on the map if we push this to WW3 (us with it). Why do our politicians continue to drag us into these foreign conflicts that have nothing to do with the UK. We should make sure we are self sufficient, having a military capable of defending ourselves and enough manufacturing, energy and a medical and pharma industry to support ourselves…..wait on a second yes we sold all of that to China, India, the US and many other countries. Lastly, our last nuclear weapons test failed badly with the missile plopping into the ocean….this is meant to be our insurance policy and it couldn’t function properly…..probably due to underfunding by our UK government. Therefore, we don’t have the funds for proper air defences unless we joined the US in some form of global defence umbrella…too late for that now unfortunately. Although, the US will base early warning systems in the UK (for the benefit of the US). It’s ironic that the most vociferous people in favour of these kinds of wars are unpatriotic liberals like Tony Blair, David Cameron, Michael Gove and their acolytes. Centre right patriots are always very careful how they deploy our armed services or get into wars. Look at the decisions of the Thatcher government with the Falklands conflict…they deliberated about the need to go for war…they gave the armed services what they needed and they allowed the armed services to do their job and the war was purely in the national interest. However, Margaret Thatcher training in the Physical sciences (Chemistry) so she could analyse things in great depth…something modern politicians cannot do. We are all doomed if the midwit two-tier Sir Kier gets his way….
I’m confused, what’s the difference between Ukraine using Chally 2 in the Kursk region of Russia and them using Storm Shadow over the border. Both are U.K. made weapon systems.
It seems Russia can dish the dirt but can’t take it! When a country such as Ukraine has been invaded by Russia. Surely they should be allowed to use any weapon at its disposal to defend itself?
Theoretically you might be right but all that really matters is what Russia will do as a consequence…How about something novel like diplomacy to resolve the conflict? When were the last peace negotiations? Russia is a vast country so they might take the gamble they can survive a nuclear conflict (they land is sparsely populated so they probably could even if Moscow and St Petersburg were obliterated). However, the UK would be a charred smudge on the map if were involved. I just cannot see what is beneficial in pushing Russia to the brink. I’ll put it another way the US threatened Russia with nuclear war in the Cuban missile crisis (similar situation in that NATO and the EU are knocking on the Russian front door). That was averted because the Russian’s pulled back….in that case the missiles were nuclear tipped. We are playing a dangerous game of Russian roulette when we allow our missiles to be fired into Russian – even if these are conventional missiles. Have you contemplated the fact that the Russian warning systems cannot distinguish between conventional and nuclear tipped missiles. The chance for a misunderstanding is massive and this could lead to WW3 that the US would survive but the UK specifically would be a charred smudge on the map. I say this as someone with a vested interest as I live in London and don’t fancy reaching 10’s of millions of Kelvin in a few milliseconds.