MBDA has used DSEI 2025 to showcase a new concept for a non-line-of-sight (NLOS) missile designed to be fired from NATO-standard 120mm smoothbore tank guns.

The proposed AKERON MBT 120 would give main battle tanks a fire-and-forget missile capability that extends engagement ranges out to five kilometres. Unlike conventional gun rounds, it carries its own seeker, rocket motor and warhead, intended to provide tanks with the ability to strike beyond line of sight and to reduce reliance on supporting artillery.

The company says the missile is dimensionally identical to existing 120mm rounds, allowing it to be stowed and loaded without modification to current tank designs. The stated aim is to give operators a higher on-board missile loadout without altering vehicle signatures.

The design incorporates a passive seeker, a boost rocket motor with low-smoke propellant, and an armour-defeating warhead. MBDA also points to the use of commercial off-the-shelf components and AI-enabled targeting software as a way to speed development and keep costs down.

The missile is pitched as filling a gap between shoulder- or vehicle-mounted weapons such as AKERON MP and ENFORCER, and heavier overwatch systems like Surface-Launched Brimstone.

Chief executive Eric Beranger said the project reflected lessons drawn from current conflicts and an intent to spiral-develop the capability. “This latest addition to our AKERON family offers our customers a solution for rapid development to an initial capability, spirally developed to enhance the efficiency of their existing platforms in a new way,” he told reporters.

Whether AKERON MBT 120 proceeds beyond concept stage will depend on customer interest. No launch customer has been identified.

George Allison
George Allison is the founder and editor of the UK Defence Journal. He holds a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and specialises in naval and cyber security topics. George has appeared on national radio and television to provide commentary on defence and security issues. Twitter: @geoallison

26 COMMENTS

    • Not really, the Americans have worked on this idea several times and given up. It is a huge engineering challenge to design a missile that can tolerate the 200+ G’s involved with firing it from a gun, whilst a maximum diameter of just 120 mm requires everything to be expensively miniaturised and the warhead will be tiny or non-existent (i.e. kinetic energy kills only). The likely final cost is about £1 million for each “round”! The Yanks concluded that you can get far more capable and longer range traditional missiles for same money. Physics hasn’t changed so I cant see this project going beyond the demonstration phase at best – the business case just won’t stack up.

      • The Russians have had gun-launched ATGMs for their MBTs since the 1980s.

        You don’t use a conventional powder propellant with gun-launched ATGMs, as it wouldn’t be a missile at that point, but a conventional shell.

        A solid-fuel rocket motor affords you even greater range than conventional tank rounds. The Russian 9M119 has a 5km range, which far exceeds the 2-3km effective range of 120/125mm APFSDS and HEATFS rounds.

      • The Americans have paused various weapon systems on the basis they don’t work or don’t do so financially only for others to show otherwise leaving them to playing catch up, hypersonics and full flow staged combustion rocket engines being the most blatant examples. So I wouldn’t simply accept any decision they make without question.

    • I believe the Sheridan had to have line of sight to the target and was laser guided I think this one is more like the switchblade it goes up tracks then comes down but I could be wrong

      • Akeron MBT 120 will have the same specifications as a classic 120 mm shell to NATO standards, with a length of less than 1 meter and a mass of the order of 20 kilograms. Thus, it can be stored and loaded into the turret without any difficulty.

  1. At last, industry is seeking innovative and practical solutions to enhance lethality at pace and hopefully, cost effectively.
    Could still do with more C3s, but that comment is pretty worn out on here.

  2. The Challenger 2 has 48 rounds, and I believe with the Challenger 3 its dropping to 31. This is already much lower than most MBT’s, so how many are they willing to sacrifice for something that may or may not be fired every once in a while?

  3. Wont it cause excessive barrel wear.? A better option, must be working in combination, with a armoured AT weapon carrier? Something, along the lines of Swingfire/Striker etc

      • Right, but this gun missile has a greater range than either the DS30M, Phalanx, and the Bofors 40mm. And, a helicopter is only good if its already in the air.

        • The 40mm outranges it against ground targets, I think.
          And if we really wanted missiles, a decent Martlet launcher would be much easier to design and install than an entirely new 120mm turret.

        • Martlet and 40mm are already around the same range as this. If we wanted a missile based solution with more punch, we would be better off using Brimstone than grafting 120mm turrets onto ships.

    • Richard, RUSI research stated that the most effective armoured divisions have 170 to over 300 tanks. Ours will have just 116. But the ARRC will not turn down 3 Div. It will be
      all hands to the pumps in the next war.

  4. I do wonder if it would be more practical just to mount an armoured box containing a couple of ATGMs to the side of the turret? Especially as these ATGMS would be full size and not the smaller one to fit the guns barrel. Thereby having an increased range, but also a larger warhead.

  5. So this is to engage enemy armour that is beyond line of sight. So how would the crew initially locate the target and pass target information to the seeker? Or do recce assets further forward locate the target and pass coordinates to the tank crew so they can ‘set’ the missile seeker.

    • If I remember correctly, there was a trial done with a quadcopter drone mounted to the back of a Ford Ranger type vehicle. Trying to remember the name, but the drone was launched from a container, that also recharged it after it landed back on. Perhaps if the Army are looking at a NLOS ATGM like Akeron, then perhaps the tank will have its own drone reconnaissance asset as well, where the container is strapped to the engine deck?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here