The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that the planned in-service date for the Spear Capability 3 air-to-surface weapon has been pushed to the early 2030s, according to a draft timeline.
This delay comes as the programme undergoes re-baselining, with a review expected towards the end of 2025. In response to a parliamentary question from Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty, Defence Minister Maria Eagle stated:
“The Spear Capability 3 air-to-surface weapon programme is currently undergoing re-baselining, with a Review Note expected towards the end of 2025. Until that is approved, dates are considered draft and of low confidence. The estimated current timeline for in-service capability is expected to be early 2030s.”
This update reflects a significant shift from earlier projections. The SPEAR 3 missile was originally planned to enter service in 2025. However, challenges related to development and coordination with international partners prompted a reassessment.
Similarly, integration with the F-35B has also been delayed. Initially, the Ministry of Defence aimed to complete the integration by 2025. However, as of early 2025, the timeline had already shifted due to technical challenges linked to the F-35’s Block 4 upgrade – an essential software update required to accommodate new weapon systems like SPEAR 3.
Prior to the re-baselining announcement, the RAF and Royal Navy had anticipated that SPEAR 3 would be fielded on F-35s by the fourth quarter of 2028. This plan has now been postponed, with the integration likely to align with the new in-service date in the early 2030s.
The Ministry of Defence is expected to finalise a new timeline for SPEAR 3’s introduction by the summer of 2026. Until then, the early 2030s remains the most likely window for the weapon to become operational on the UK’s F-35B fleet.
Spear 3
SPEAR 3 is an air-launched cruise missile developed by MBDA UK for the Royal Air Force, designed to deliver precision effects at range against mobile and relocatable targets. Part of the SPEAR family, it also includes the SPEAR-EW electronic warfare variant for jamming and decoy purposes. The missile measures approximately 1.8 metres in length, weighs under 90 kg, and is powered by a Pratt & Whitney TJ-150 turbojet engine, providing an operational range exceeding 140 km. Its guidance systems include millimetre wave active radar homing, semi-active laser guidance, infrared homing, GPS-coupled inertial guidance, and a two-way data link for real-time targeting adjustments.
SPEAR 3 is being developed for integration with the F-35B Lightning II as part of an upgrade programme, with testing also carried out on the Eurofighter Typhoon. The missile’s design prioritises low-collateral damage and high accuracy in all weather conditions, making it suitable for targeting in complex environments with restrictive rules of engagement. Its modular nature allows for future adaptability, and the inclusion of advanced guidance systems ensures precision against a wide range of threats.
This comes as zero surprise. F35B may not even get a Block 4 upgrade now. So What Mod are not saying is for F35 integration 2035 at the earliest or maybe never
And then there was block 4
In at number 3 “Oops, we did it again!”.
Britain Spears.
Everyone talks about SPEAR 3 in relation to F-35B, but I take it there must be problems with the recently reported SPEAR3/Typhoon testing?
As far as I recall, Spear 3 isn’t expected to operate from Typhoon. It’s just being tested there.
Really, geez then it may not get into service till Tempest or perhaps never as it may well be near obsolete before it gets to that point. Not sure even F-35s will be widely operable at 140km range by then geez no certainty this decade. Very worrying.
The Yanks waited till they got their own equivalent didn’t they?
You miss nothing.
Why can’t they at least integrate into the Typhoon then? Get it made and happening sooner? Why the issues when aren’t they progressing either the Meteor?
Lockheed et al Don’t like Competition do they?! Upgrading F35 to head off Tempest.
Not unexpected, but no less annoying. Sea Venom and FC/ASW are now even more critical, but additionally I’m now thinking that an interim purchase of TLAM Block V for ASM duty may be necessary, to enter service alongside the Type 26.
NSM purchases should be able to cover some of the gaps, but there will be a continued vulnerability.
Id say air launched NSM- JSM would be a better option as its cheaper than Tomahawk, more stealthy and can be carried as a polyvalent unit saturating an attacker with 3-4 missiles vs just one big slow target with tomahawk, LRASM might be a better option but I doubt the UK could get onto the production cycle for LRASM for the next 10-15 years as they are selling as many as they can build as fast as they can build them to the USAF and USN and USMC.
Dare I say it… what about air launched exocet?- its been continuously updated and would suffice for the antishipping role.
My preference would be JSM and a big order. something off the shelf and able to be delivered rapidly and in decent numbers to equip typhoon and F35B- its probably the only currently available stand off weapon that fits into the F35B internal weapons bay- approach to target, fire off weapon from +340 miles away- far out of interceptor SAM range
Crucially we will have interoperability with the USN/ USMC, Japanese and Italian navy/ air forces who have all recently selected JSM. Cost is currently £2.6 million each but price is coming down with new customers from allied nations agreeing purchases. An interim order of say 200 missiles for £600 million would cover the RN and RAF standoff attack requirements until SPEAR 3 does eventually come online.
JSM doesn’t fit into the F35Bs weapons bay unlike the other F35s. Has to be carried externally, compromising stealth.
Norway integrating JSM on P-8 tho’
Does that matter, so long as the pylon+missile combination doesn’t affect the detection range too much?
Can still launch from standoff range beyond what any modern system can shoot down an F35 at.
Agreed, I honestly think this is less of an issue than many think it to be.
Definitely worth buying some JSM, if we aren’t going to put a bigger rocket booster on Sea Venom and call it Sea Eagle 2!
I’d like to think that getting them integrated onto Typhoon wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world either, given they’ve got that secondary land attack capability. That said, if there was a choice, SPEAR 3 should definitely be on Typhoon over JSM.
Sorry. I stand corrected
I agree the JSM also has low observability, so the stealth compromise would be small.
What a shock. Now all we have to look forward to is a non event SDR.
Indeed, Ive got my written response already drafted and ready to send to my MP, the defence secretary and the prime ministers office.
We all know its going to be a complete fudge, full of management speak and spin vs reality.
Doubt there will be a single thing in the defence review that will allude to the government reversing decades of cuts, investing adequately in the armed forces and crucially adding firepower, units and attritional reserve capacity back.
Force levels have gone to stupidly low standards, inadequate deployable forces across all 3 services which only emboldens the UKs enemies.
Once Russia finishes with Ukraine, which eventually it will do- be that in 3 or 5 years time then what, the UKs only strategy for facing a new axis of Russia, North Korea, China and Iran with some South American and African nations likely to get ever closer to these countries seems to be keep Ukraine in the fight and drag out a costly war of attrition which Ukraine and Russia will pay for in blood, Ukraine with little to no prospect of victory and European NATO not providing them with the tools and equipment needed to gain a victory.
I hope and pray SDSR delivers tangible improvements but the mood music (and rumours coming out of Whitehall) indicate it isn’t looking good.
You’ll have to wait for the Defence Command Paper, which is now to be timed with the budget/comprehensive spending review in the autumn for any of the detail you clamour for.
Don’t panic, don’t panic. Were probably not getting anything so don’t worry !!
What a ****ing joke.
They need to look at integrating a wing kit on paveway IV as a matter of urgency now and integrating spear EW on typhoon. We can’t keep waiting forever for this.
Isn’t the paveway already a wing kit on a dumb bomb?
No, Paveway is its own weapon, it is the US that attaches guidance kits to existing bombs.
I think what Jim is suggesting is to add a folding glide wing like on the JSOW or SDB.
Is this a Spear 3 problem or a Spear 3/F35B integration problem, the article is not clear?
It appears its both, delay in making the weapon means they can’t integrate it on F35 then there is a massive further delay to integrate on F35 once weapon is finally ready.
Can we produce anything on time and on cost in this country? It’s so depressing.
Plenty, it’s just the Brits like whinging, as our Australian cousins have observed.
Suggest the project is being baselined to match the integration progress. No point building an inventory of missiles that start eating shelf life if they can’t be launched.
The exact words were ” additional challenges stemming from interdependencies with international partners”. Doesn’t explain much but I assume the problem is with F35S integration. What else?
Is integration on Typhoon being made dependent on integration on F-35B?
Nope. Already integrated for testing. won’t be integrated for service deployment just to save money
Soon to become 2040 no doubt. By the time its operational others will be fielding weapons a generation newer. The farce show rolls on as normal…
Its because of piss poor procurement and project management, continuous interference and changing of specifications and the MOD and Top Brass always insisting on GUCCI equipment when good enough is good enough. It shouldn’t be too difficult, you fit a seeker head onto a relatively modest missile and launch it at your enemy. as long as the guidance, tracking and seeker head do their jobs as designed it should hit its target.
Why its being pushed back to 2030s is anyone’s guess. Im thinking its probably a lack of funding to push the integration through now whilst last minute changes to specifications have been added throwing the contract off its timeline.
You really couldn’t make it up.
I think an interim purchase of 200 JSM’s would be a good idea at this stage. At least they can fit into the weapons bay of an F35B and are a proven off the shelf design already in service with the USAF/USN and USMC and now selected for our allies in Italy, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands. It is fast becoming the default weapon of choice for the western F35 fleets.- cost for 200 missiles- around £600 million- so substantial sum of money but not a deal breaker.
Sorry, once again, a JSM can’t fit in the weapons bay of an F35B
As SB pointed out it can go under the wings. No too stealthy but no other option. Can go on P8s.
The Italians plan to carry JSM on their F35Bs using the external weapons mounts.
It’s been posted here before, they have the Marte ER on their Typhoon’s and Merlin’s which is something the UK could do. Not Spear 3 but available now.
Morning Mr. B.. I think you’re right. A lot of verbiage as usual, a delay and then nothing. I picked up another post of yours about the T26/T83. I can’t help but think that again we’re going down the wrong route How many potentially hugely expensive 83’s are we really going to able to afford? Two, three ? Bae have already put forward a proposal for a T26 AAW ship with 96 cells. Following on from the T26 with a lot of commonality surely makes sense. Eight ASW T26 and eight AAW T26 makes good sense.
Too simple, but if you increase beam which you may need, you need more power and end up with twice the power and a bigger gearboxes, etc etc. Bigger ship maybe an extra 2000t. Mind you I’d like to see the sports version.
Always too simple Jonno. Too many politicians, too much talk and no cash. The story of defence for thirty years now.
Not convinced the ‘War Time Mentality’ as sunk in.
The MoD talks a good game on war time mentality if it means a fat increase in spending.
They are somewhat quieter if it means eradicating staff officer positions and the revolving door between the military and industry.
That is seriously bad news. The complex weapons team had had a pretty good record up until now, so I wonder how much of this decision is driven by platform issues..?
Cheers CR
Squeezed out of the budget by FC/ASW? Tyhoon will have Brimstone 3 soon and Paveway. Plus there is promise of lots of gucci artillery…ATACMS, Project Brakestop…I’m losing count. Maybe they feel it’s not urgent.
Well as our F-35s pretty much only have Paveways and self defence missiles at the moment (and not even the preferred one at that) it’s not clear exactly what their truly effective role will be till then, pr probably its prime function despite the brave talk… oh but that is pr.
With Paveway 4 they have all weather night/day precision strike capability against fixed and moving targets. AMRAAM/ASRAAM provides air to air capability only matched by F22.
From 10km !
Like a glowing lightbuld to any half decent IR detection system
Mprming Robert, some questions on this. If the Paveway’s are just free fall – why not have a powered version for extra reach? Can they adapt the ASRAAM into a Spear 3 type variant? And what’s happening with the Meteor integration then? Is this progressing? Will the F35Bs be able to carry the Meteor under the wings for extra load out if needed?
@quentin
If you add an engine to Paveway it won’t go on the F-35 any more and will have to sit in LM’s integration queue behind Spear 3.
What bollocks. They need to get in radar detection range to drop a paveway. It’s a piss poor option for a platform intended to attack heavily defended targets.
Air to air capability only matched by the f22? Meteor on the typhoon would tend to disagree. As with paveway, short range means getting dangerously close to a target.
All the spin in the world didn’t hide the fact the F35 for the UK promises far more than it actually delivers.
And yet there will still be many (inc. on here) who will maintain that Spear3 on F35B will make it a great plane..whilst sticking their head in the sand regards any issues or timeliness.
I’m going to nail my colours to the mast and state I don’t believe this will ever happen.- and if it does it will be too late to make.any bloody difference.
It will make it a great plane, but I think a 5+ year timeline requires an interim option.. AGM 154 would give a greater stand off range with some submunition options.
If you read what what was said and what was not said it’s pretty clear it’s a Lockheed Martin issue, not so much a spear 3 issue.
The thing is the RAF really does need an anti ship missile of some description if spear three and the new anti ship missile are not going to be around until the 2030s then they need an interim option, maybe get MARTE ER as most of the integration work on typhoon has been done.
It may be worth as an interim biting the bullet and getting a long range interim ground attack weapon for the F35Bs such as the AGM 154 variants.
I agree, we need a rethink and options. It’s all rather like having a McLaren with a moped engine as things stand, it looks like it’s top notch and races but in action anything but and indeed pretty useless in its originally planned roles. Embarrassing. What are other B version users planning we can’t let this continue 6 years plus, the F-35 is supposed to be the point of the spear taking out SAMS and infrastructure so lesser aircraft can follow through later not simply be an expensive version of those aircraft. The Bs range and internal capacity already limits such capability so this hardly helps matters.
Its a disgrace that Meteor is on Hold while a US equivalent is perfected. That’s the truth face it.
Unfortunately when you give up your sovereign control and accept another nations offering this is what you get… it’s why it’s worth spending money on supporting your own sovereign industrial independence… we reap what we sow.
5 years from now? hope it still relevant by the time it’s ready for serial production
Are we better off finding an alternative 🤔
Hate to say it but that question has to be asked but what serious alternatives are there for the B?
The JSM. Mounted externally. It’s got a range of +300 miles meaning the aircraft doesn’t even need to get close
The one that we could buy in numbers tomorrow is AGM 154.. 130km range comes in a unitary 250kg breaching warhead or a bomblet soft target/sead/DEAD variety.
JSM is in another class. Low observable, completely passive, IIR/RF seeker, land & maritime targeting. A warhead big enough to make anyone pay attention. Production being setup in US & Australia along with existing production in Norway. Submarine launch version in the wings. Yes it’s expensive. Quality always is.
Quantity also has its own quality as they say. But if you have the money- JSM. AGM 154 puts the attacking aircraft in the frame from multiple long range AAM if you want to maximise range.
Unfortunately the JSM like everything else is not yet integrated and will not be until the block four so it’s in the same place as all the rest. AGM 154 is the ONLY long range guided weapon system that is currently available and integrated now.. essentially the MOD could buy it and deploy it immediately.. JSM is a 2030s missile not a 2020s missile
Well what a surprise, who’d thought.
I think at present the only long range option is the AGM 154
Tell Vlad and his autocratic allies to hold off on starting any new “special military operations” for 5 years or so then.
Yep, and IF the russians were to take Ukraine successfully, then they have already said they will attack other countries
Why stop at the border, eh!
We could always drop leaflets instead of bombs!
The threat by russia is not being taken seriously by Politicians and the Military
WTF is F-35 using for anti-shipping more to the point? A bloody JDAM????
A laser bomb with 10km range or so… that is the silly world we have been.
The f35 in uk service right now is of limited use against any sort of peer. It’s in detection range before it can engage a target making its stealth worthless. Frankly, with there being no sign of this changing, we might as well have thrown money at integrating more weapons on the typhoon to give it more standoff capability and pinned our hopes on tempest being our proper next gen fighter.
Where this would leave the carriers god knows. Keep the harrier. Its still good for bombing goat herders in the 2020s which is all I’d trust our f35s for in their current guise.
What a shambolic waste of money.
You’re missing a very big point of carrier aviation.. it’s to allow your ships to operate and do their job, even if at present the f35 has limited ground attack options it’s still the most potent beyond visual range combat aircraft on the planet..
What does that mean.. well it means a UK/nato carrier battle group can stay in the high north and dominate the air space, removing Russian maritime aircraft from the equation.. which would allow European maritime and ASW aircraft to act with impunity, European submarines to act without worry of attack from the air and the same with NATO surface action groups.. the RN are the masters of killing surface vessels with small ship flights..the rotor sneaks below the radar horizon pops up and kills the surface vessel , but it can only do that where there is fast jet air cover.
Simply put it would be great if the RN had fast jets that could launch ASMs from long range.. but as long as its carrier can proved air cover its wider battle group and long range land based maritime patrol craft can kill anything Russia has.
As long range land strike there is a perfectly good 130km range guided glide bomb in AGM 154 that we could purchase for the F35.
I don’t think he’s really missing the point at all. The fact is, Argentine aircraft were better equipped to meet an enemy fleet at sea in 1982, than the RN AND RAF are today.
In a hotly contested environment against near-peer opposition, we have no credible air-launched strike options against surface combatants of any kind. In fact, for many years the only real anti-shipping option has been ship-launched Harpoon, which ironically is about as useless as ship-launched exocet was in 1982. It’s alarming.
If, in the next 40-50 years, it becomes necessary to challenge a Chinese task force at sea – then we’d better hope Astute is all it’s cracked up to be, because if you think they’ll turn up with a modernised gliding bombs and short range helicopter-launched missiles – you’re sadly mistaken.
What Chinese task force will the RN be facing off against now… ? And how will that Chinese taskforce attack a CBG which it could not gain air superiority over and most definitely could not gain sub surface superiority?
The same projected fleets that are giving US defence planners sleepless nights. It’s not that dramatic to imagine a confrontation with China within the lifetime of these ships/aircraft. They are currently mass producing war-ships at a rate the US could only dream of, after all.
I think we’d be underestimating the Chinese if we assume they won’t be able to match the F-35 within their projected lifetime. But even then, you don’t need local air superiority if you can sling long range ship-killers from hundreds of miles away – I suppose that’s kind of the point.
It brings be back to my Falklands example – did Argentina have air superiority when they sunk Sheffield with an Exocet? Make no mistake, if they’d had more of those weapons we would have lost that conflict.
The fact remains that F-35, for all it’s advantages, is not that far removed from WW2 Mosquito using it’s guns when it comes to anti-ship work.
So, my understanding was that Spear 3 was conceived for long range ( longer than Brimstone and SDB) precision strike against land targets, rather than as an AShM. So, in the scenario of a Russian advance in Europe, Typhoon would have the choice of Paveway, Brimstone and Spear 3 as precision strike weapons depending on target and range. What with developments in drones, guided artillery and missiles it could be that there has been a rethink on its relevance. For their part I think prior to their Damascene conversion to heavy AShM, the navy saw the target / range spectrum as Martlet > Sea Venom> submarine i.e. if we need to sink a peer level frigate we are probably at war. The RN are now putting Mk41 on every frigate and waiting on FC/ASM which does seem to be on track and I suspect is envisaged more for use against littoral targets rather than in the open sea. NSM is the interim missile. I agree that it would be good idea to give F-35B a stand-off missile. I can only assume that we are hoping that its stealth and radar endow it with a Klingon invisibility cloak.
I honestly don’t understand why they don’t as an interim buy AGM 154.. a good solid and cheapish 130km range ground attack weapon that is already integrated with F35.
I’m sure that’s what LM would prefer 😉
Indeed, but unfortunately they have everyone by the short and curlies for the next 5 years.. not a great place to be.. but
The main issue is the integration schedule with Lockheed Martin. As a non-US weapon it does seem we are getting bumped off the priorities list, e.g. AIM-260 is now on the priority list. But it is also dependent on the TR 4 software update. Which itself is getting further pushed to the right. The mission parameters that are fed to the Spear-3 are significantly bigger that what legacy systems used in the past. So the software upgrade is a must for Spear-3, especially if the F35 is carrying two four packs internally. With each getting individual mission parameters and targets. Not to mention Spear-3 will also get a back up target, if the primary is not available.
Both Spear-3 and FCASW are muti-use weapons. In that they can be used equally well against both land and maritime targets. But they also compliment each other by the tier applicability. Where FCASW will be expected to carry on the mission profiles used by Storm Shadow, but also include the ability to hit moving targets, such as ship. So it will carry a similar warhead in capability and size. Whereas Spear-3 is a longer ranged Brimstone, that can engage pretty much anything you tell it to, with pin point accuracy due to its active radar. But should also be very good at neutralising SAM systems, especially when paired with Spear-EW.
In the Ukraine War, drones now account for 70% of all fatalities. But it doesn’t mean that air launched weapons are no longer relevant. As this is more a failing of Russian air power, where they don’t have modern air to ground stand-off weapons. On paper, the Russian Air Force should have by now dominated Ukraine’s air space especially over the battle lines. But Ukraine has massively adapted their small air force along with a steady supply of Western SAMs and now Western fighters (F16s & Mirage 2000s), to mitigate Russia’s ineffectiveness or difficulty in adapting to change.
We have seen on the UKDJ, new methods are being built to combat the drone threats, that can counter the new breed of AI guided or fibre optic linked drones. Such as RF DEW and Dragonfire, which are in admittedly in their infancy and have pretty short ranges. But have shown to be deadly against the types of drones being used in Ukraine. In time their effective range will increase. This may mitigate some of the issues the Drone War has highlighted so far. But in reality drones are just another tool to use in a conflict. Air launched weapons still have their part to play, as they offer better flexibility, can get to a target much quicker, which may be needed for time sensitive targets and they usually carry a much bigger warhead. Delivery by aircraft just enhances how they can be employed, as the aircraft can cover great distances to separate targets.
Thanks Davey, I have wondered for a while why Spear 3 couldn’t be integrated with Block 3 software- I’ll admit it still confuses me a bit. If it works with Typhoon (test integration only, admittedly at present), then don’t see why not Block 3 F-35. But hey ho, not my expertise!
I do think that it should get full integration on Typhoon though, it’s very much a useful weapon as you say. I do also think that Paveway should get wing kits, so we’d have a clear range/warhead set of options from FC/ASW, Spear 3, Brimstone, Paveway IV; depending on the target.
Hi Joe,
Replied here to avoid the thread length limit, but your “Sea Venom ER” comment got me thinking.
The largest weapon that fits internally on an F35B is the GBU32, which has a diameter of about 400mm. That leaves plenty of room for Sea Venom’s 200mm diameter, with extra for a bigger motor and wing folding.
The F35B has room for about a 3.5m weapon, which is much more for Sea Venom’s (very weirdly shaped) 2.5m body. That means what I think is needed would be an entirely new rocket motor section (without a booster, because it’s being launched from a jet) and a slightly bigger warhead, paired with the seeker and guidance from Sea Venom and folding fins. Davey would be able to tell you more about the sorts of ranges that would give, but from a jet’s speed and with the option of a high altitude launch the advantage over Sea Venom would probably be very significant.
I know that this wouldn’t be going straight onto F35 so it’s less important, but as a useful side effect if you keep the diameter down with the wing folding, you might just be able to fit two on each pylon for Typhoon and so have a full loadout of 8 or even 12 missiles!
So for (probably) not all that much money, we could develop a useful sovereign alternative to JSM, which would be better balanced as the lightweight alternative to FC/ASW as the air launched anti ship missile.
No worries, I can live with the thread limit as long as I’m now getting response notifications!
If we could do that with Sea venom (I think it’s more a case of will that technical feasibility), then I imagine there’d be a fair amount of interest- as none of the current AShMs are good for internal carriage on the F-35B as far as I’m aware.
The only technical question is, if we have ~1 m of additional weapon on the Sea Venom frame, can we get sufficient additional range out to ~100 miles as well as a bigger warhead? We may have to choose, and I think the range will probably be the preference- as the warhead is already big enough to kill a corvette.
It’s not a big deal ..140 km range is NOT world leading . It sounds like a long range Brimstone to me .Why bother when potential enemies air to air ( even the older missiles) will intercept our launch aircraft ..before it has a chance to engage the ground target . What was the point in low observable NATO aircraft…when it won’t use that stealth feature to ‘Sneak’ in undetected…it will be as was known all along ..Fire a Super BVRAAM at extreme distances BEFORE ANY aircraft type can launch either air to air ..or air to ground. I mean without closing speeds etc. You could release a Super Extended Range Meteor from Bae Hawk 200.& still have the desired effect .Spear 3 sounds more like a potential decoy swarm ..with a ground attack profile as well . So just like the Artillery..the aerial domain is & always was a Shoot & Scoot. Environment…Only my opinion.
Remember that the thing only weighs 100kg, costs approx. £250k and you can fit 8 inside an F35 alongside Meteors…
If there’s one thing that F35 is supposed to be really, really good at, it’s evading enemy attempts to shoot it down, so it can close to a much shorter range than legacy fighters, though still not close enough for the unpowered Paveway.
What’s wrong with super long range Brimstone? It’s just about the best air launched anti tank weapon there is, so an excellent base capability.
Would a low observable super fast helicopter with cooled ,masked nacelles popping up over the horizon to engage surface threats not be just as effective & cheaper than high altitude attack profile from aircraft . Why not develop a large missile carrier? Something the size of Bae 146 with some stealth coating & ECCM features .. Data linking to powerful all aspect AESA radar with overwatch search & destroy aircraft .Yes a stealthy missile truck carrying 20 BVRAAM’s ( no ASRAAM needed) as the mission set is saturation of the enemy at extreme distances with Active + IR capabilities..guided by any designated aircraft .
You want a low observable, super fast VTOL for air support?
Now, if only there was a programme like that. They could call it the Joint Support Fighter…
You may be too young to remember, but a super-fast helicopter strike platform immediately has me thinking of Airwolf…!
Dammit, Joint Strike Fighter!
You’ve pretty much described one of the future roles the USAF is looking at for the B21. Due to its stealth, very long range a large weapons bay. They are considering if it could be armed with AIM-260 and act as a missile truck for F35s, F22 and the forthcoming F47.
What do you mean by super fast helicopter? Helicopters due to aerodynamic effects on the rotor tips and rotor blades, are generally limited to speeds under 200mph. You can make them go faster using brute force, like the Boeing-Sikorsky SB-1 Defiant, with its massive pusher propeller. But even it reached a brick wall due to blade tip stalling when it was going nearly 250mph.
To make a helicopter go faster than 250mph it needs to be a compound aircraft. Which is where the drive to the main rotor is slowed down thus slowing down the rotor blades. However as the main rotor provides most of the lift and momentum. The aircraft has to be reliant on lift provided by a supplemental fixed wing and pusher/pulling propellers/jet engine.
By slowing down the main rotor, you are trying to prevent the tips from going supersonic or from being in the transonic zone. Which dramatically increases drag and significantly reduces lift. Two aircraft that I know that have successfully done this is the Airbus X3 and the Fairey Rotodyne. I believe Airbus are using an X3 based concept for the future European medium helicopter.
According to number of publications, the RAH66 Comanche was significantly radar and IR stealthy, plus it had a very low acoustic footprint compared to other helicopters. It could have been a helicopter that stood a better chance of survival against today’s air defences.
I would say AGM-158 and LRASM are the best option and wonder why we haven’t gone for these already, rather than hanging with delay after delay for other options. There seems to be a reluctance to buy weapons we clearly need and could transform our capabilities off the shelf
Again these are still not integrated into F35 and suffer the same issue as spear 3 in that they will be a 2030+ missile for F35.
A hybrid of Airwolf with it’s detection,evasion & situational awareness DNA’d with Roy Shneider’s. Blue Thunder with new multi facetted angled armour protection & incorporating future proof stealth masking + all aspect laser suite ..& big rotary 40mm cannon for the enemies Toyota Hi- Lux ..I am old enough to remember watching Space 1999 & Also the itv comedy show ‘Get Some in ‘ about lads in the RAF .Both had absolutely nothing in common..except ‘Flying ‘ the irony is Space 1999 was about chilling out on a Moon base Alpha in 1999 ( aired about 1977 ? ) Get some , in was just life & shenanigans at a bog standard RAF base between any conflicts ..They couldn’t have been more far apart in their story lines ..but as young boy I loved them both ..Sometimes just dreaming of exciting weaponry of the future can musters a sense of nostalgia…of the weapons we did eventually see in the Falklands & Gulf Wars etc that were a mere blue print when I was born in 1968
SPEAR Capability 3 cleared its initial design review with the MoD in 2011
Surprised no news story about the announcement of the new missile development program with Germany. Seems to overlap with the one with France.
Maybe by then they will have figured out what this combination of shortish range, not much warhead and high cost is for other than keeping MBDA in money.