MBDA and PGZ have unveiled a Tank Destroyer armed with the Brimstone precision strike missile.

According to a release, PGZ Companies and MBDA also signed a statement of co-operation at MSPO to confirm readiness to co-operate on offering this solution to Poland and export markets.

Sebastian Chwałek, Deputy CEO of PGZ, said:

“We are growing our co-operation with MBDA into new areas. We have agreed on the ways of offering those solutions in export markets. By combining our competences with the experience of our British partners, we are able to achieve a lot and deliver the most modern solutions to both Polish and allied armed forces.

Adrian Monks, MBDA Sales Director in Poland, said:

“Pairing the combat-proven MBDA Brimstone missile with the diverse range of current and future Polish platforms provides the ability to deliver rapid military capability for Poland and for wider markets, whilst strengthening our co-operation with PGZ Group on missiles.

The development comes in response to Poland’s requirement for a Tank Destroyer able to counter massed armour formations. With its long-range, all-weather performance, ability to defeat active protection systems (APS), salvo-firing and moving target capability, Brimstone is uniquely able to meet this challenge.

The system is reportedly capable of engaging line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight targets, with a choice of engagement modes using digital targeting data provided over standard secure military networks fully interoperable with NATO.

51
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
39 Thread replies
23 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
18 Comment authors
Daniele MandelliAirborneDAveyBPeteMonty Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Callum
Guest
Callum

Is that thing really packing 32 missiles? Lord almighty, a company or two of those things would definitely make Russia think twice about an armoured offensive

BB85
Guest
BB85

24, looks like the missing section is for the driver to get in and out. There is a version with 2 box launchers on the back.

RoboJ1M
Guest
RoboJ1M

What would be really cool, is if multiple dismounted teams could reach request for from a platoon of these.
Have a dozen troops with targeting equipment, mark 16 targets and fire a salvo of 16, destroying a lot of them.
Then fire again at the remaining targets.
Also, they should use that new BAE (I think) box-of-missiles.
It was designed to be bolted to any ship and be reloaded by mk41 vls canisters, the short point defence type.
Hell, then you could fire anything from it, CAMM, brimstone, all sorts of things.
Launch one shot drones each armed with 2 SDB2 glide bombs.

Rudeboy
Guest
Rudeboy

You don’t need to mark the targets with Brimstone.
The MMW seeker does it all for you. All you would need is a target box, say a grid square, and just tell them to head there. After that they pick off the armoured target in order of priority themselves.

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

Love this concept, now to get it on our Boxers and to make a tracked version of Boxer so we can really start standardising the modules.

Scrap Warrior and Challenger Lifex and lets get new kit like this.

John Clark
Guest
John Clark

This is the sort of innovative equipment that would destroy an armoured offensive in its tracks when added to a balanced force mix.

It would be a positive addition to our own inventory, offsetting the small numbers of Challenger 2’s available.

You can certainly see why a country like Poland
(perhaps the Baltic States too) would find these an extremely useful asset to have.

mark Trundle
Guest
mark Trundle

Exactly, if they (an enemy) saw Poland as a soft touch, this would make them think again and restore equilibrium. Isn’t that kind of what we did in the cold War. But of course, we aren’t in one now are we if you believe our lovvies in Parliament!

Cam
Guest
Cam

Russia wouldn’t invade Poland lol! Even if Poland was weak!

Cam
Guest
Cam

Russia won’t invade Poland! More chance of America banning fire arms. But the older polish population have been bent over and screwed by Russia so I can see why they are concerned, but Russia won’t invade any sovereign nation they can’t afford it for starters!. Ukraine and Crimea are different! The Russians believe that’s Russian. And the majority Russian population there wanted to stay Russian. Even if it’s illegal and Ukrainian disagrees.

Mark
Guest
Mark

Thinking out of the box – literally.

Herodotus
Guest

Nice to think that our inept and cowardly European Allies can come up with something that meets approval on this website!

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

Poland is one of those countries which understand the danger, with Russia on the border and a history of invasion and being let down by the rest of Europe.I have many Polish colleagues at the moment , have worked with Polish fellas in the job and afterwards in the sand pit, and all have a wilko attitude in regard to defending Poland and being in NATO. Poland is the tip of the spear! Look at the Polish procurments over the last 5 years and you will see how they think. However, yes, most other European NATO countries do nothing but… Read more »

Mark
Guest
Mark

Good point.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Spot on.

RoboJ1M
Guest
RoboJ1M

Mate, MBDA are savage.
They’ve come up with some seriously deadly missiles.
They specc’d a concept that was a ramjet powered 200km Mach 5 stealth cruise missile, which, in addition to its own warhead, launches two rocket propelled outriders with ECM functionality in top of THEIR own warheads…

Rudeboy
Guest
Rudeboy

That was the Perseus concept. It was nothing but CGI.
The actual supersonic cruise they’re designing for FCASW doesn’t have the effectors (and doesn’t appear to be hypersonic).

BB85
Guest
BB85

Looks like Poland is going in for Camm and Brimstone. Hopefully they put in a good order and the UK gets some export work out of it.

Cam
Guest
Cam

Let’s sell them new typhoons instead of them buying second hand F16s. The F16s are far cheaper though.

BB85
Guest
BB85

That would be great but I don’t see anyone else buying the Typhoon now the F35 price has dropped below it. Any further Saudi sales seem to be dead in the water too so after the Kuwait and Qatar deliveries are complete I think it will be end of the line unless the UK or Germany throws in a late order.

Rudeboy
Guest
Rudeboy

Actually I think the Saudi order will go ahead. Doesn’t appear they’ll be getting F-35A any time soon, so they might not have that much choice. The MoU for 48 has been signed in 2018 and these things always take time. I’d love for the RAF to put in another 24 order for FGR.4’s to keep the production line active to link up with Tempest a bit but I can’t see there being any space in the EP unless there is a significant uplift. BAE keeps touting to Malaysia, but I think that’s a lost cause…but they have had some… Read more »

T.S
Guest

The great thing about this system is it can be easily integrated onto a variety of base vehicles. If we don’t upgrade Warrior, maybe we could simply stick some of these box launchers on a couple of dozen for a huge uplift in capability. I’ve often thought this, once an armoured vehicle becomes too vulnerable for the front line stuff, simply reuse the chassis and integrate artillery guns or long range precision fire power. Cheap way to maintain a good level of heavy firepower rather than buying new state of the art vehicles when they will just sit at the… Read more »

Cam
Guest
Cam

Hell Arm all Ajax and warriors with just one of these 8 launchers lol, heck even MBTs.

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

Get a version of this on boxer, make a tracked version of boxer and then push comes to shove we can put a couple of these on the carriers.

What’s not to like, bet they are cheaper than our Warrior and Challenger upgrades as well

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

One of the MBDA pictures shows a BMP with two box launchers fitted on the rear. You certainly don’t want to be in a BMP when bullets start flying, as it has armour like tissue paper. Using it as a missile carrier is a very good idea, as it can stay well behind the contact zone, but offers a cheap reliable chassis.

T.S
Guest

I was wondering if a navalised version of this might be possible. Stick a couple on top of the hangers? Big uplift in firepower for not much money. Anyone know the range of brimstone launched from one of these?

Kev
Guest
Kev

I would have thought the biggest issue with a naval variant is tying it into the command and control system so it’s embedded with the sensor suite.
You could have it stand alone but that’s just a PITA to manage and probably inhibits it’s effectiveness.

Pete
Guest
Pete

I assume the blueprint for naval integration would not be too dissimilar to typhoons who operate ASRAAM and Brimstone. If type 23 / 26 and 31 all have Asraam based CAMM then it should be relatively simple to integrate Brimstone, with a +/- 40km range, for sea launch. Similar for onshore integration…. And especially as i understand it… you nominate a target box and let the missile find the target in the box.

If uk isnt prepared to back its own technology then dont expect exports to flood through

Pete

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

There is a naval version of Brimestone called Sea Spear. This has successfully been tested on fast inflatable boats. The problem for Brimestone/Sea Spear is that the Navy have Martlet and Sea Venom. Brimestone kind of fits between these two missiles in range and capability. The Sea Spear can be fully integrated with the ships system as its uses similar software protocols with Sea Ceptor.

Pete
Guest
Pete

Aware of Sea Spear (as opposed to Spear 3). Standalone Concept is proven. My main observation is sea spear / brimstone is a class above sea venom in terms of range and quantum leaps ahead of Martlet in termd if both range snd impact.

The technology exists, integration would be straight forward, the threat (gulf) is real snd brimstone would allow a T23 T31 to provide fast response over an 80km circumference.

P

T.S
Guest

Seavenom also does not appear to be box launched, helicopter only. I would think a couple of large box launchers contains both brimstone and spear 3 would be a great way of firing multiple missiles at a target at reasonable range with a fairly high chance of a successful hit.

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

Sea Venom is canister launched as well. MBDA built the canisters first to make sure the missile worked before fitting them to helicopter test aircraft.
The Sea Venom actually has a longer range than Brimestone, the Wiki page is incorrect. The main difference between the two is that Brimestone is supersonic whilst Sea Venom is subsonic.

Pete
Guest
Pete

If Sea venom has a longer range fantastic but the MBDA fact sheet simpmy states ±20km class.

BRIMSTONE 2 is quoted by same manufacturer as 60km+ jet launched and 40km+ helo launched. I assume naval launch would be similsr to Helo.

If Sea Venom can be integrated for merlin and vessel launch then navy would be better protected and capable. Otherwise were simply hoping johnny bad guy does the right thing and attack the assets that can deal with him.

P

DAveyB
Guest
DAveyB

It does make sense to have a layered capability on the ship, starting with Martlet, Sea Venom, then NSM if it gets chosen, so a measured response can be used against varying threats. I have seen different range specs for both Sea Venom and Brimestone 2 by the manufacturer, surely theyshould knows what they’re making, but why do they use different range specs? If Brimestone does have a longer range, the Sea Spear version would be really handy. However, the Merlin needs to have at least Martlet and Sea Venom integrated beside just torpedoes. There definitely needs to be some… Read more »

OldSchool
Guest
OldSchool

Mmm. They seem nice but you’ve got to wonder about first, cost (Brimstone is expensive which by definition limits utility). The army already has Javelin so there is a case for that to be on a vehicle before buying a new toy. Secondly, what are possible enemy countermeasures to it. I also notice some advocating dumping the Chally upgrade. Most unwise. Tanks are still needed and studies show they reduce your infantry casualties etc. Tanks are still versatile and as a personal preference Chally’s HESH is still a very useful round (anti infantry and good for doing bad things to… Read more »

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

Totally agree, we need an upgraded Chally 2 and not in the piecemeal numbers they have been talking about. The tank is still the best asset for dominating ground either for defence or offence. It still has a massive physiological effect on friendly and opposition troops. The chassis on the Chally is still good with its hydro-pneumatic suspension just needs a better engine and gearbox. The turret could do with improvements, should we go to the 130mm or keep the 120mm, but up the firing pressure with new propellent? If the tank was fitted with the Iron Fist system, firstly… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Not just British. On the Russian front too the Germans were the masters of luring mass tank formations onto their line of 88’s, Stugs, and other Jagdpanzers.

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

Yes, Rommel’s Africa Corps did the same against the 8th Army in North Africa. It was one of Rommel’s favourite tactics against the numerically superior commonwealth forces.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

At least at Medenine we got our own back somewhat! Played the Desert Fox at his own game.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Impressive.

Reminds me of the old concept of 24 Air Mobile Brigade in the Cold War. ( I think it was 24 AM? ) which morphed with 5 Airborne into the current 16AA in 98 time frame.

That Brigades Battalions were furnished with many, many more Milan FT than in a standard Battalion, to be heli’d in and put down in the path of the Soviet Tank Army breakthrough.

Modern tech is so impressive.

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

Yes mate 24 Airmobiles concept was to deploy to Germany on mobilization and using Lynx and early versions of 4 wheeled light strike vehicles, drop as many Milan teams in front of the main Soviet Tank Army, and hit them, then extract quickly to new firing positions. If memory serves me a Battalion was issued with 24 firing posts (but could have been 48, I’m sure some other posters will put me straight lol)

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Hi mate.

Funnily enough those were the numbers I too recall, though I may be wrong.

A Light Role Infantry Battalion had 6.
A Mechanized Battalion 24.
And the Battalions in 24 AM had 48.
A big punch, depended on available helis though to move quickly.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

What chassis have they used in that photo?

What is stopping the UK putting that sort of set up on old Scimitar Spartan vehicles as they leave service?

OldSchool
Guest
OldSchool

I don’t know much about vehicle and weapon systems integration but I’d wonder if putting Javelin on Scimitar Spartan would be possible (at least the Army already has it). A sort of new- age Swingfire. Brimstone costs at least £100k a shot (and possibly up to £175k with reaseach costs included). So for a 24 missile loadout you are talking BIG money.

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

The Army have been discussing a new version of a dedicated anti tank missile carrier armed with non-line of sight missiles. There have been a number of missiles mentioned for the system ranging from Brimestone to the Israeli NLOS. There have also been a number of different vehicles banded about ranging from a Foxhound derivative, FV432, an Ajax chassis and Boxer. With DSEI this week and MBDA doing a number of big press releases, could their be something on the cards. If I was a betting man, I’d say strike brigade has the most urgent requirement with a Boxer module.… Read more »

Monty
Guest
Monty

Looks like they reused the drive train from the BWP-2000 IFV which got cancelled in the late 1990s. Hull looks different though..

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

I believe a Javelin has been trialled on the turret for the Warrior (or could have been Ajax) although only as a singletons missile. The strike Brigade would be the units to require a bit of ATGW to increase fire power and punch. While I don’t agree with the strike Brigades in their current form, any effort at increasing fighting power has got to be seen as a good thing. Although I do hope the whole concept of mixing wheels and tracks, pretending a recce vehicle is a light tank, having limited dedicated logisitc/Sig units, bugger all Arty aside from… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Now we’re talking. An all Boxer Brigade, with all the variants, with the Ajax Armoured Recc Regiments returned to the Armoured Brigades.

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

Where they should be Daniele!

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Exactly. I don’t understand why General Carter thought it a good idea. The Armoured brigades will now be bereft of a dedicated recc formation, save the integral recc platoons in the Armoured regiment and Warrior battalions. I hope there will be another U Turn. Nothing I have read on the subject of Strike Brigades impresses. Even the name is crap. What are they striking? And with what? Towed Light guns, a battery of Starstreak LMM, and battalions with basic Boxer variants with the firepower in Ajax mascarading as light Tanks in “Medium Armour” regiments. As mentioned before I don’t believe… Read more »

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

Yes Daniele you are correct, the HETs in service number about 90 I believe, and are always in demand by NATO forces, and I think about a dozen are leased by the American formations in Europe long term. Carter must have been concerned about his pension and earning a few quid on the speaking circuit, as while the Strike concept is sound, we have just about zero, zilch, nil, none of the correct equipment in service, none of the OS assets, nor the spare logistic formations equipped to support . Yet again we are fitting equipment to the role, not… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Cheers mate. I guess they should be called Mechanized Brigades, which is what they are, and abandon the Strike Concept of them operating independently.

I had also read, not sure how true it is, that one of them is to be the recc formation for our deployable Division, with the 2 Armoured Brigades, forming the standard 3 brigade formation.