The Royal Navy has abandoned plans to conduct tests of a directed energy weapon aboard a Type 23 frigate.

This information surfaced through a written parliamentary question and response, presented below.

John Healey, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the DE&S press release entitled ‘DE&S negotiate contracts to put lasers in hands of British Army and Royal Navy’, published on 14 Sept 2021, when his Department plans to undertake the first tests of a directed energy weapon onboard a Type 23 frigate.”

James Cartlidge, Minister of State (Ministry of Defence), responded:

“The Ministry of Defence announced three Directed Energy Weapons Capability Demonstrator contracts in 2021, which were designed to increase knowledge and understanding in the military on how to operate, maintain and integrate Directed Energy Weapons onto complex platforms to inform future capability decisions. These were ambitious projects in both time and scope, and the specific T23 demonstrator contract was concluded early in order to focus resource on the wider Directed Energy Weapons Programme, as outlined in the Integrated Review Refresh 2023. Live firing will be conducted from the Land-based demonstrators in 2024, which will also inform Navy Programmes.”

This contrasts sharply with the initial ambitions revealed a couple of years ago in which the Royal Navy had planned to pioneer the testing of a laser weapon aboard a Type 23 frigate this year. The system was intended to detect, track, engage, and counter unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) as part of a trial process.

UK to arm Type 23 Frigate with laser weapon

However, the recent shift in focus, as indicated in the parliamentary response, suggests a strategic reassessment. The decision to conclude the Type 23 frigate demonstrator project prematurely, reallocating resources to a broader Directed Energy Weapons Programme, reflects a recalibration of priorities within the Ministry of Defence’s approach to integrating and advancing DEW technology within the naval operational context. It doesn’t;t mean they’ve given up, just changed pace.

The land-based side of testing, at least, remains intact. The recent successful test firing of the DragonFire laser directed energy weapon (LDEW) in Scotland was conducted at the MOD’s Hebrides Range and was the first high-power firing of a laser weapon against aerial targets in the UK. Additional forthcoming live firing tests from land-based demonstrators are set to inform future Navy Programmes.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

94 COMMENTS

    • or we have to wait (some considerable time) for there to be a suitable frigate available for long enough to have it fitted and to do the tests

      The real problem may actually be the power requirements – which T23s actually have the necessary power reserve to run Dragonfire? A maximum of 11 T23 were going to have Power Generation Machinery Upgrade (PGMU) – and apparently that number is now much lower. So, which frigates are currently in the active fleet and physically available for Dragonfire testing? and have they had the lifex/PGMU? that is almost certainly what has forced the cancellation of this test.

      • They’ve had more than time enough to get issues like power addressed but the project doesn’t seem to have had the level of importance, cable guard ships with questionable job descriptions.i.e if it. Finds tampering going on what will it do? Make a phone call? Motherships. When vessels given necessary alterations could used echo and the enterprise were ideal candidates to d the mothership game.

      • The system is undergoing testing against representative real world targets. We don’t know how those tests have faired which means we don’t know the rationale for rethinking the plan. Power generation is not likely to be an issue for testing because the power draw is not substantial: ca. 50 kW firing for a few seconds. That means maybe 100 kW when the inefficiency of the laser is accounted for, which you could run by e.g discharging a capacitor bank weighing a few kg.

        • That assumes it was an indirect draw?

          I agree a capacitor bank and a dedicated power pack would be the answer.

          Personally I’d have been testing that sort of thing on Albion as it has Artisan and a full CMS. As well as loads of space.

          • It is an indirect draw. There’s some ongoing work to develop a flywheel-based energy storage device in preference to a capacitor bank, but I don’t know how far along it is. If you needed to draw that kind of power continuously then it would imply that you wanted to operate the laser continuously, at which point the heat dissipation problem becomes a lot harder.

          • Flywheels were used at JET for precisely that reason.

            I agree the recycle time will thermally limited.

      • Exactly so.

        It might be that the RN tests move to T45 or QEC which do have the required power levels?

        That said if the DE weapon isn’t powerful enough there isn’t a lot of point wasting insertion periods on it?

      • T23 has had 2 x 9 ton trackers removed from fwd and aft and replaced by a couple of fridge sized cabinets and small data link domes. There is more than enough power available for an installation. It would need some rewiring and alterations to the vessels structure . Above deck Dragonfire is well reported, Whats below decks isn’t. I would suspect its a cooling unit, stored energy system and electronics. Hopefully it would fit within the confines of the legacy Sea Wolf Tracker office and can use the 440V, 115V and cooling system pipework left over from the old trackers.

      • Given we are in a war already then putting some generators on a ship can’t be that difficult, certainly not when you can allow the crew to choose the paint scheme

    • That was similar to the line they gave on cancelling Mosquito (your version is shorter and written in English). LANCA isn’t dead, it’s resting. We’ve learned lessons and we know a better/faster/cheaper alternative. Except it appears the RCO had a chat with industry looking for alternatives, didn’t find any, and promptly dropped the whole thing. I expect team Hersa to do the same here with ship-based lasers.

      At least in this case there is an alternative in Dragonfire.

    • Could mean a number of things

      1. It didn’t work, and so project abandoned

      2. Money redirected / never existed

      3. Not enough frigates

      4. Better project came up

      5. Value for money wasn’t adding up

      6. Was all political spin and dreams rather than an actual plan

      Etc etc

      My money is on 1.

    • There is plenty of money, they are pouring millions into making sure people who identify as martian trees are fully integrated on the home office and aren’t discriminated against by the nhs

    • Yeh, I bet that made the decision easier for the RN to go along with…

      Nevertheless, there will need to be trials on board a ship and I would prefer to see more comment on at least an outline plan for accomplishing this. The fact that there isn’t suggests an open ended delay…

      Cheers CR

    • Think I will go along with that one Jacko .There again two Type 23s just been retired could not one of these be provide for testing ,if not capable of the high seas no more with a limited crew ? 🤔

  3. The US navy has the HELIOS laser deployed on at least 6 arleigh burkes which are made to take out drones and small craft, im curious if any of those are deployed in the red sea. In the age of drones this is a must have capability on every ship… I shudder to think what would happen if the houthis launched a massive salvo at a destroyer and simply due to running out of missiles one gets through… Its simply impossible and uneconomical to produce enough expensive missiles to keep swatting these these things. The US seems to be way ahead in laser development- they’ve just brought into service an anti-drone Stryker with a 50kw laser… seems like one of those programs like hypersonics we should work together on instead of spending years developing the same capability.

    Unless something changes (hopefully not after a disaster) it looks like it’ll be a few years before ships get a serious capability. power generation is the big issue, flight III burkes’ radars require so much energy the HELIOS is only going on flight IIA, but any future ships need to build around this capability, I read this recently about the arleigh burkes replacement:

    “previously-released prospective configurations for the next-generation destroyer — intended to replace both the Arleigh Burke and Ticonderoga classes starting in fiscal year 2030 — to have dual 600-kW lasers on its stern for missile defense and a single 150-kW laser for small UAVs and watercraft on its bow”

    I hope the future RN boats keep this in mind. Nuclear powered destroyers might need to make a come back!😉

  4. If a warship is damaged by a drone because they have used all their missiles then maybe the powers that be will speed up the pace, to late as usual.

  5. This is pretty dismal news. Events and Ukraine and in the Red Sea have shown there is a pressing, perhaps even urgent need to get a directed laser weapon into service. We cannot be spending £2 million on Aster missiles to shoot down cheap and easy to produce drones. Being able to field a weapon that can destroy $20k drones for $10 would flip the economics of what is going on in the Red Sea and give us even more of an upper hand against the Houthis and other potential proxies.
    RN escorts would be able to stay on station for longer if they are able to use a laser weapon as opposed to a weapon than comes from a VLS with at best 48 cells that cannot be reloaded at sea.
    Maybe if we got Dragon Fire operational at sea sooner it would be a nice little export product?

    • I’m not sure it’s a solution to the Red Sea problem, the lasers are relatively short range and designed for close range defence, I don’t think they’d be suitable for intercepting missiles attacking ships many miles away.

    • “cost endless billions of dollars.” – The entire Dragonfire project, including all the R&D was £100 million. Lasers aren’t expensive. “that still look like an Ms paint edit” – You do realise that is an image created by the author of the article right?

      • The reason it looks like an MS paint edit is that it probably is, to be honest. Surprised people like that find these sites.

    • One of the main reasons people die from poverty and homelessness is because democratic nations are unable to stand up to dictators who care nothing for their people.
      The Armed forces would be transformed if one month of the NHS’ budget were given to them in a lump sum.

      • Some people will never be convinced that defence is necessary that money spent on it would solve all our other problems simply because that is what they want to think, not that there is any evidence to back it up or any knowledge of how little is spent compared to trying to solve poverty, housing et al. These are the same people who think Russia is like a caged bear surrounded and so hitting out when even a quick glance at a map shows it’s the biggest Country in the World due to expansionist regimes has the Arctic (half of which it claims) to the north its biggest ally to the south plus many friendly Asian nations and much of Africa and the Middle East on its payroll, on the other hand Europe is a mere pimple on the end of its landmass and if one really wants to think of surrounded Countries imagine how Finland Japan, the Philippines and South Korea must feel. Many esp on the left are just totally deluded sadly even when statistics like Russia probably outnumbering the whole of Europe militarily in ‘peacetime’ numbers many times over on paper. Europe is the threatened ones not Russia, nor China for that matter.

      • Sailor Boy wrote:

        “”The Armed forces would be transformed if one month of the NHS’ budget were given to them in a lump sum.””

        London is around 47% white, meaning that a vast majority are fairly recent imports. and here is a news headline from 2013:

        London’s £36bn benefits bill is bigger than the UK’s whole defence budget

        London’s benefits bill has soared to more than the British defence budget, a new report warned today. The study by the Centre for Social Justice highlighted that £36 billion went on working-age welfare payments in 2011/12 in the capital, compared with defence spending of £33.8 billion. The benefits bill in Croydon alone was £1.7 billion, followed by Newham and Enfield, both £1.6 billion, and Barnet and Ealing on £1.5 billion, according to the analysis. Barking and Dagenham had the highest welfare spend per head of just under £6,000 a year, followed by Newham with £5,256 and Enfield on £5,161 — with the lowest being Kensington and Chelsea at £2,695, apart from the City of London. The report by the think tank, which was founded by Iain Duncan Smith before he became Work and Pensions Secretary, argued Britain is blighted by “welfare ghettos” where large numbers of people have been abandoned on unemployment benefits.

        I’ll now grab a shower (just been training) open a beer, put on my tin lid and prepare for the incoming.

        • We don’t have enough ships period, not by at least two orders of magnitude. As for crew, if you were 20 and someone said join the navy you would expect redundancy by 22 or being shit out of the water when the rules of engagement didn’t allow you to fire back without being prosecuted. Would you join? Time to reverse the cuts, stop the prosecutions of all military personnel and realise that at 60 i am capable of fixing a navy engine and don’t need to be 20 and able to run up and down Gibraltar in my lunch hour

          • lol, yes, well, I understand running to the top is quite a challenge. Yes, when the royal navy is down to two carriers we cant afford to equip with planes or send out of harbour and a wooden ship in dry dock then I guess we dont visit Gib very often

      • Test-bed first like when Seawolf was first trialed out on a Leander Hms Penelope before the 22 class .A 23 would have been ideal for trials at sea rather than whack them on a new vessel and trials don’t forefill great test results ,

        • True. That could be done this year on Patrick Blackett and installed on QE as well. “Failure” shouldn’t be a dirty word. It definitely won’t work if we don’t try it.

          • The Patrick Blackett could as a test bed remaining static for firing which looks good for data analysis but I doubt if it could conduct tests in an environment akin too real world defensive scenarios .I’m not putting P B down what I am putting across is a 23 at speed altering course acquiring a target and firing real world input for Data analysis rather than flat calm ,ship stationary target aquired data collection

          • i don’t understand. What’s inherently static about PB? It can reach >20kn and has a range of over 3000 Nm. Not frigate class, but certainly enough to to get out of the harbour on a windy day.

          • I just can’t see th p b having all the kit for dragon fly being embedded on a new Hull for that when there’s old hulls such as the 23s which can be cut and chopped conduct the trials after trialing the 23 chosen would undoubtedly be on the disposal list

          • A ship designed to demonstrate new technology ought to have decent power generation and stabilisation. The design is for maintaining wind farms, which needs excellent sea keeping.

          • So I should see the PB around rampian 1 wind farm if I get my Binos out on a clear day seastate 1 and Bognor beach is free of shitehawks Hee hee 😜

          • Why bother cutting hulls around at all stick in containers and you can test it on any hull with enough deck space or deploy ashore for other testing.

          • Fair comment Expat so if containerized it would sit on the flight deck ? If so setting out a polar chart area’s of firing arcs and blind arcs would be hampered unless the flightdeck is going to be the ultimate mounting position for Dragon Fire

          • We’re taking about trials so optimum position is not required. But ultimately any system that needs a sight line will be mounted in a compromise position

  7. They may jump straight to putting them on Type 26/31 though wouldnt be surprised if there was a plan to rapid install the prototypes on the QE’s if a conflict broke out.

    • A video which directly contradicts articles here, numerous MOD press releases, and written answers to parliamentary questions, including the fact tat it passed a successful weapons test and downed a drone in trials.

      The video has to be taken with a pinch of salt. There is a large element of “Not Invented Here” in that video, and a large dose of him not liking Uncle Sam being upstaged. After all, they have managed to upscale the laser from 30kW to 300kW and are aiming for 500kW – but they still haven’t delivered a genuine, working, weapon system of any power.

      Sounds like jealousy to me.

      • Indeed it was a generalised look at laser weapons and their potential using DF as a useful clickbait as it’s in the news.

    • Yes saw that and it’s a ridiculous clickbate video (like so many on YT for obvious reasons) that builds up expectations (based on Daily Mail like super weapon myths) so that it can be shot down in their patronising way. It’s a test platform that has started out considerably more powerful than US test beds did (though that was a decade back admittedly but they can afford to commit earlier as with almost any new technology). Already been stated that Dragonfire is scaleable. Can’t remember if it was that vid or another where ironically but quite logically stated in contradiction of that take that you don’t test your set up with ultimate power in mind, but sensibly by testing tracking, focusing and all the other complex aspects that make a laser weapon work effectively BEFORE you start to build up the power. Building up the power is a far more linear process many of the others anything but.

      The criticisms in fact though, an article regarding Dragonfire was really related to Laser weapons generally which it failed to make clear of course preferring by omission to suggest it was specific against DF in the viewers mind. That is that around 5 times the power of Dragonfire is deemed necessary to be effective against missiles and would need to strike the side of a missile to be effective give as the nose cone will be far more immune to heat damage. It stated even such a weapon would be effective it is thought perhaps only up to 10 miles. Of course if that is the case then any laser weapon may well be almost useless against missiles or fast flying cruise missiles. But then the father of the jet engine thought it would only produce enough thrust to drive a propellor so let’s see how development works out and you do that in the way DF is being tested. It of course neglects also to consider laser defence against less complex and speedy drones which as we see is increasingly a danger that missiles are not best suited to deal with. Effective lasers against such targets may well need to be a lot less than 300kW but again only testing will tell.

      The only other point in my mind was what were these cancelled tests going to actually ‘test’. If it’s related to the article on here some time ago referring to the MoD call for laser proposals from interested parties and (mentioning was it General Dynamics?) there was nothing in that relating to Dragonfire and various speculations here were made as to why there seemingly competing programmes. So one again can make different calls as to why this present announcement has been made not all by any means negative.

      When you think of the complexity of tying even an effective laser defence system into the ships systems and sensors and the likely years before it will be fit for active service (and certainly won’t be in my view on a T-23) maybe this is indeed just a matter of re-arranging funds to more immediate needs. Still a shame mind as testing on a T-23 would still be useful no doubt.

    • Looks like the US and Israel have moved on to more powerful systems, if he is right then we need to upgrade the system 150Kw.

  9. Laser weapons are the weapons of the future. This is where the bulk of the money reserved for development should go. Once operational it is deadly, accurate, cheap to install and certainly cheap to run . Hardly any manpower required. One or two per ship is all that is required. This is the weapon to put against hypersonic missiles.

      • Yes. When people talk about needing to deploy lasers ASAP to avoid using very expensive missiles against much cheaper drones what they seem to me to be overlooking is that if a drone is in range of the laser systems currently under development then it would also be very comfortably within the range of a 40mm presumably using 3P/airburst ammo so the cost saving isn’t really laser vs missile, it’s laser vs 40mm airburst rounds snd that technology exists in production form right now.

        • Yes. A 40mm airburst is way more effective against a drone or a small fast craft. I forgot about that 35mm is an option with the Oerlikon Skyguard 3 Air Defence System. Depending on the material a laser still takes longer to melt through the skin.

          • Reluctantly I agree, having seen the new radar controlled gun systems effectiveness against multiple drones and indeed even drone based anti drone systems that are far cheaper than using missiles and with the added option of just investigating not committed to a kill once launched or can survive a kill, so they are not wasted, they seem to be the immediate priority even as laser systems should be developed and tested longer term.

      • I thought 10 miles but either way doesn’t look hopeful against supersonic let alone hypersonic missiles, though the latter generally if it’s anti ship anyway, has to slow to supersonic or slower speeds to effectively use its terminal guidance. Short term I suspect anti drone is going to be its main use, over time who knows, Ai and Robotics have seemed to have progressed 50 years in the last 10 and few would have seen that advancement so quickly.

      • I also read that ,1 mile effective range then the target has too be continuously hit for any effect not like it being hit by any calibre weapon over 20mm HEI HEIT which detonates on contact or proximity fuses rds .so 1 mile doesn’t give you much time systems would have to be stood too continually regardless of threat

  10. It basically means we haven’t got a my spare frigates because we,ve just retired 2 and the new ones are years away

    • And Russia/ China are watching very closely – just waiting for the ideal opportunity …
      Rocking horse politicians never learn by their mistakes – 80plus years ago, to the present day.

  12. Do you have to be a school dropout to wrangle a job at the MOD. Every UK defense article I read is this has been cut back, that has been delayed or whatevers been cancelled. Maybe we should just disband the armed forces and spend the money buying gifts for Putin and Xi.

    • Seems to me you just have to be an idiot. Especially at the top of the food chain. AND have a total disregard for tax payers money.

  13. Our armed forces are now a joke this government has time and time again reduces our forces ,reduces planned equipment procurement and cancels orders like the fares with two aircraft carriers without enough planes

    or a supply ship . What next charge the tax payer £10.000000 for a bat to send our troops to a coming war or give gliders to the RAF and bath tubs to the navy what a joke this country cannot even stop immigrants never mind keep our armed forces supplied properly.

  14. I’m fed up with excuses from the government. We need to do so much more too protect this country. Stop spending money on woke and spend it on defending us . We are so low that we have 2 new aircraft carriers stuck in Portsmouth because we do not have the ships to protect them. Just get on with what needs doing . Complete joke .

  15. We, once again will end up being left behind. We will then buy American kit for commonality UOR. We will find the US kit isn’t as good as they said it was, but have no contractual protection. So, we will go back to Dragonfire to find that elements of the system have been bought by US defense interests and are now covered by ITAR …. Situation normal

  16. “It doesn’t mean they’ve given up, just changed pace.” We have run out of money and must keep instep with a low budget constraint.

  17. Ship born/ground based lasers= waist of money. We have had the ability to destroy things with Lasers for a very very long time. The most powerful/expense Laser in the world is pretty much useless if it is raining or foggy or there is a sand storm. And in the best of weather if the target has the right coating! it wouldn’t do any damage anyway. BUT in space.

    • Yep our ship had an Argon Laser fitted during OP Corporate 1982 not very good when cloudy it was a Dazzler not a Burner .I do believe that blinding an adversary is against the UN/ Geneva convention passed in the Nineties

  18. How much was the naval side of the programme to “inform decisions”?
    Hopefully not another few hundred million now lost for any real benefit to the military but in fat cat industries pocket.

    • £72.5 million for three programmes. My guess is that Project Tracey, the one that got scrapped, sorry, prematurely ended having learned ever so much, will have had the biggest budget of the three. Say ~£30m. I doubt it was all spent.

  19. Did anyone seriously expect this to lead to anything productive? The money has gone to its intended recipient which was the sole aim of the project.

  20. Ok- say directed energy weapons aren’t going to work as we either: 1) don’t have the funds available (likely) or 2) the technology isn’t mature enough yet or 3) perhaps the power production requirements for the system cannot be met by a frigate.
    Whatever the cause of this climbdown or is it another Tory rowing back? we should just go back to tried and tested guns- cheap and effective and in terms of a Bofors 40mm mount or the BAE 57mm mount capable of being fitted onto the type 23, 26, 45 and potentially additional mounts onto the type 31.
    I’d like to see the MOD realising some common sense and fit more of these systems to as many platforms as possible.

  21. So the anti British civil service continue the work of making the UK defenceless ready for their Kremlin master to invade. Urgent that we have such weapons to deal with the swarms of cheap drones we are facing. The act dismissed torpedo’s and submarines .. didn’t end well

  22. It’s got the same ‘sparkling’ MOD whiff to it that Thypoons grindingly slow Radar 2 integration has, i.e potentially extremely capable tech, rolled out as slow as a molasses spill at huge expense, it will likely never be fielded and the technology overtaken.

    • Dont forget dear boy ( I know you don’t 😉 ) what the priority is with the MoD budget to politicians eyes.
      It isn’t the military.

      • 😂😂😂 too true, can’t we line up parliament, get them to bend over and fire up the Dragon fire, might as well get some bloody use out of it….

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here