A new contract worth £135 million will equip the Royal Navy with new decoy launchers to counter missile and drone threats.
Following the signing of the new contract, Trainable Decoy Launcher technology will increase the protection of Royal Navy ships and sailors, further strengthening the Navy’s ability to defend Britain’s interests across the world, including the Red Sea.
According to a news release:
“It comes as new missile and drone technology creates greater threats to the UK’s fleet and the latest decoy launchers will help counter this, providing optimised manoeuvrability that provides the capability to defend warships without the need to alter course.
The innovative new system, which uses high-end technology, will be manufactured in Systems Engineering & Assessment Ltd (SEA) site in North Devon and Chess’s facilities in Sussex, sustaining up to 150 jobs to help grow the economy. Both SEA and Chess are part of the UK-based Cohort plc group. “
Minister for Defence Procurement, James Cartlidge said:
“In a time of global instability, it is vital we protect the Royal Navy in the best possible way to ensure national security. With recent attacks towards HMS Diamond and HMS Richmond in the Red Sea, it’s crucial our sailors have the latest technology to best defend themselves and the fleet. The new Trainable Decoy Launcher technology is an improvement on speed and agility and highlights more excellent work from UK companies in backing UK defence.”
The contract for the Trainable Decoy Launcher will see Type 26 and Type 31 frigates and Type 45 destroyers fitted with a new trainable countermeasure launcher system.
Trainable Decoy Launchers use an improved decoy launcher technology and enables a decoy to be rapidly deployed against modern missile threats, without the need to manoeuvre the vessel itself. The launcher fires a range of countermeasures, which includes chaff, flares and ‘corner reflector’ rounds to target hostile missiles.
The contract, procured by Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S), was awarded to SEA and will see a fully UK-designed and built solution. SEA have partnered with Chess Dynamics and Frazer-Nash Consultancy (FNC) to deliver the product.
Richard Flitton, Managing Director of SEA said:
“Being awarded a contract of this nature demonstrates the Royal Navy’s trust in SEA which is based on our proven track record of delivering, upgrading, and sustaining high-end maritime capabilities over many years. The knowledge and maritime domain expertise within our UK-based team has enabled our long-standing partnership with the Royal Navy, and we’re delighted that this will allow us to support the UK’s defensive capabilities against modern and complex naval threats.”
DE&S CEO, Andy Start said:
“This contract is an excellent example of how dedicated DE&S teams work with our partners in industry and across defence to deliver innovative and agile equipment to our Armed Forces that can be upgraded to keep pace with ever-evolving threats.”
One of the most overlooked and underrated systems in modern naval warfare. Still think Nulka is probably the best decoy system out there
Nulka is the decoy Ancilia is the decoy launcher. Both are NATO 130mm standard.
Nulka has a relatively large footprint and its a fixed position launcher, much like the current Sea Gnat. Siren rounds do the same job for the RN via a parasail deployed electronics package
Agreed Gunbuster. But my point is that Nulka can replicate the trajectory of a ship, in whatever direction, while Siren’s relative movement is subject to the whims of the wind. That’s why I believe Nulka has the edge. If you want to seduce a missile away from the ship you’d probably want the decoy to move faster or slower than the target, but in the same general direction. So you’d have to turn the ship first in the direction you think the wind will impose on the parasail. Or is the parasail steerable?
Siren, Seduction and Distraction Chaff, IR and DLF3are all there to decoy away an incoming threat. DLF is probably the best decoy for seduction around. Radar homers love it. The launch of it adjacent to the vessel produces a massive target. As the ship moves ahead and the DLF moves aft (Relatively) the massive target reflection is still there. It really is very good. Siren produces offboard jamming so is good for a missile that switches from radar homing to home on jam. All the wind bit is calculated and programmed into the round prior to launch automatically. Wind Speed… Read more »
👍 I still think Nulka is such a clever system able to deal, at least in theory, with crossing rates/doppler measuring seeker heads. I would see DLF3 working better if it was towed behind the target with the tow being let out gradually increasing the distance between the two. Otherwise a sophisticated seeker might reject a stationary target? Anyway, thanks for your insight
Fanbloodytastic! And don’t they need to go on the Carriers too?! Can these launchers be adapted to carry Starstreak and LMM?
I believe these are called “Ancillia”? Good news for SEA and UK industry and hope they win some export orders.
NL showing as “Ancilia”.
Does look a lot like the LMM tube, doesn’t it?
Yes, I was wondering that too. Looks a very neat design and 2*6 is a very useful load out.
You’d need some sort of turreted laser designator, though. Doubt the mount itself has the precision of turn rate necessary.
???
Its a fully auto system taking inputs from the command system and EW set…the same way that Sea Gnat does now.
Quentin and I had pointed out how similar the mount looked to a StarStreak or LMM tube, so I was wondering what would be needed to convert into a basic missile pod thing. No sense of scale though, would you happen to know how wide the tubes are?
Its basically Sea Gnat tubes in an elevating mass. It would need a completely different elevating mass to carry anything else
Ok then, I don’t know what elevating mass means but I think that’s a no, thanks for the info
Afternoon SB, they’d be able muscle up this launcher to take 2*3*2 Starstreak /LMM with whatever extra bits are required. It looks ready made for it!
That’s good news, especially noting that the T31 will get the same soft kill/decoy system as the T26/45.
Trainable, like the old 3inch Chaff then along came Super Rboc which wasn’t and now we’re back to Trainable
Missed out all the other variables in between. SRBOC was the US made, post Falklands decoy launcher for Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff. Close in Chaff cloud for seduction. The RN used it with 3inch Corvus launchers and the 2 inch Barricade launchers ( Remember them?) It then got developed into Sea Gnat which used similar fixed launchers but with a different electronics and sensor input pack. It automated the system and added IR, Seduction, Distraction and Active decoy rounds all fired by induction , no firing cables required. There was a bit in between where we added fixed 3… Read more »
Remember well 2inch paraillum 3inch 3000,yrd 30.000ft Run,Stow,Load electric ignition through cable ,right hand twist of barrel with metal guides bloody awkward too cover when alongside
Oh, happy days…and the same rubbish Honeywell micro switches on the barrel loaded indicator as were used on the Mk8 Mod 0 gun. Always got salt encrusted and stuck in either position or just simply stopped working because they could from their own volition ! One of the major reliability increase on the Mk8 Mod 1 was as a result from getting rid of those things…
Cold fingers didn’t help plugging them and 2 ratings tòo slide the rockets down they always seemed too lose a tube cover
Forgot Matilda on Hunts that probably been updated
What about the carriers? Surely the priority target for any enemy needs some protection too!
The carriers don’t have an ESM fit, they would need that added as well.
Emperor Class carriers come equipped with no clothes.
Very dazzling too, early esm?? 😳 😅
Carriers don’t have an ESM fit?
I find that very hard to believe. I don’t see ECM antenna and it is already bad but ESM is another kind of bad.
You have to admit the English language is amazing in its ability to say 2 very different things at once
mMm, sorry that you think that I am. 😵💫🕳️
Sort of related… just seen on the YT something about Ukraine tracking and shooting down 80 out of 84 drones, by having a network of mobile phones stuck on poles 6ft in the air. The sound of drones is then picked up by the phone’s mic and then relayed to a central control to obtain location and heading to prep air defence for the kill. Low cost and useful. Sea-borne variant?
That’s not exactly a practical option in an environment distinctly lacking in telephone poles and overflowing with an abundance of background noise and rough conditions.
Obviously. I just thought the concept good and possibly the germ of an idea to help counter air and sea drones. Also harking back to the old WWII sound detection, and the film “Battleship.”
Give me £50million and I could probably come up a system of remote craft doing fleet protection, carrying audio detection and centralised AI-software based location and track info. 😊
Indeed that would be the only way it could work at sea. Depends how well low flying drones can be picked up by major warships, must admit I certainly can’t answer that.
Obviously. I just thought the concept good and possibly the germ of an idea to help counter air and sea drones. Also harking back to the old WWII sound detection, and the film “Battleship.”
Give me £50million and I could probably come up a system of remote craft doing fleet protection, carrying audio detection and centralised AI-software based location and track info. 🙂
🤣🤣
“not exactly a practical option in an environment distinctly lacking in telephone poles”
That sarcky comment brightened up my morning !
BZ
…my posts are usually a bit “out there” so I expect a few sarky comments. 🙂
And possibly not even true?
The big smear went out with radar.
Now if you said mobile phone mast lobes I might believe you…
Eh?
Obviously take with a pinch of salt but check out source: General James Hecker Air & Space Forces Association. (WSJ). “8,000 cell phones” used.
Thnx for the link – appreciate that.
But what were the cell phones doing?
I’d be really surprised if the microphones were the key……I think it is something else…..it might be something else connected to the microphone port?
Check out the General’s talk, and the film “Battleship” for the sort of targeting grid.
He said it was 8,000 cell phones each with a microphone attached (presumably uni-directional). I suspect there must have been an App in each phone filtering for drone sound, and then dialing into a central network which must be running some sort of tactical software to call up nearest AAA crew.
The Ukrainians also have a similar mobile phone-based system where members of the Public, or whoever, can point their phone at a drone if they see one. This then informs a central targeting system.
Presumably also similar to NATO and Russian seabed listening systems for submarine detection.
In theory you can use the mobile phones as a radar array. There’s at least two options. The first is that you use the “array” to form a basic bi-static PESA either transmitting a fixed non steerable lobe. Where a passing drone will cause a reflection that is picked up by a receiver. The other is a bit more complicated. Where you time delay the phone’s transmissions. Thereby creating a steerable love. Which can sweep the sky to detect the drone. Receiving can still be done using the bi-static technique. Another option is an active-passive radar. Where you set up… Read more »
Hence, my comment, in my original reply, on lobes!
…thank you DaveyB for you excellent input, as always.
Indeed good to hear well thought out replies to something that initially seems admittedly impractical, over instant snarky patronising ones. Probably why Brits are so often deemed eccentric being so prone to probe the unlikely, after all Edison laughed at Bell’s idea for the telephone so in good company. Good to hear just how innovative on limited resources the Ukranians can be too. More strength to their elbow.
Thank you SpyITS. My sporadic posts are usually a bit fantastical and I expect the usual British disease reaction from nay-sayers – even from those well informed. However, I have a broad experience of stuff and history and the blue sky thinking comes easily to me. (N.B. I am available for HM Gov contract at reasonable £rates, but with several noughts on the end).😉 We Brits have always done the back of envelope/men/ladies) in sheds thing. WWII for example is littered with examples of privateers and out of the box thinking. Thank goodness we used to have that capability as… Read more »
I assumed it was going to be the centurion trainable decoy launcher.
I liked the look of centurion as it had a stealthy cover over it. The new one doesnt look so stealthy but is probably simpler without the clever covers and 360 degree rotation. Does look as if you could load LMM into it….
AA
I was impressed that the centurion could load a Javlin launcher.
Is what’s shown above actually what is going to be installed? Centurion would be preferable. Also doesn’t say when it will be installed.
Still, a very welcome addition and I’m glad to see it.
Looks like it. There’s a video on their site.
I wonder if the powers that will be have included RFA’s this time? They feel very naked with limited guns and decoys!!
Always having been surprised that RN have and had non rotating launchers..
People often overlook the importance of the need of decoy systems to be improved as quickly as the threats they are used against
About time… we should have had this upgrade sooner. I hope it is an urgent operational requirement and will not take years to be implemented.