The Storm Shadow missile, a long-range, precision-guided weapon supplied by the United Kingdom, has played a not insignificant role in Ukraine’s fight back against the invasion by Russia.
Developed as a Franco-British project, the missile is designed to strike high-value targets, including command posts, military infrastructure, and logistical hubs, at extended ranges.
Following the United Kingdom’s announcement on 11 May 2023 that it would provide Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine, the weapon was first used operationally shortly after delivery. The missile has been employed to target Russian military assets in occupied territories, let’s take a look at where and why.
On 13 May 2023, Storm Shadow missiles were reportedly used in an attack on industrial sites in the Luhansk region of Russia. The targets were believed to be of military significance, disrupting essential Russian operations. This was one of the first confirmed instances of Storm Shadow being used in Ukraine’s counteroffensive efforts.
In June 2023, the Storm Shadow missile was used to strike a Russian command post in Zaporizhzhia Oblast, resulting in the death of Major General Sergey Goryachev, the Chief of Staff of the 35th Combined Arms Army.
On 22 June 2023, Storm Shadow missiles were used in a strike against the Chonhar road bridge, which connects Crimea with Kherson Oblast. The attack significantly hampered Russian logistics and transportation.
In July 2023, a Storm Shadow/SCALP missile was shot down by Russian air defence and captured. This marked one of the few instances where the missile was intercepted, and the wreckage was later studied by Russian forces to develop countermeasures.
Later in July 2023, Storm Shadow or SCALP missiles were used to strike the Chongar Strait railway bridge linking occupied Crimea with Kherson Oblast, damaging the vital transportation route between the regions.
In September 2023, Storm Shadow missiles were used in two high-profile strikes. On 13 September, the missiles targeted the Sevastopol port in Crimea, damaging the Rostov na Donu submarine and the Ropucha-class landing ship Minsk. On 22 September, Storm Shadow missiles struck the Russian Black Sea Fleet headquarters in Sevastopol, resulting in the deaths of at least 34 officers, including the commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, and wounding at least 100 others.
On 26 December 2023, Storm Shadow missiles were reportedly used in a strike on the Russian-occupied port of Feodosia. The strike targeted the Russian landing ship Novocherkassk, causing it to catch fire and disabling it.
In 2024, both the United Kingdom and France continued to supply Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine.
On 28 May 2024, French President Macron announced a significant shift, permitting Ukraine to use SCALP missiles to strike targets inside Russia. This marked a departure from previous guidelines that restricted the use of foreign-supplied weapons only to occupied territory. This expansion of use was still restricted to the neutralisation of military facilities being used for attacks on Ukraine.
In July 2024, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer confirmed that the British government would allow the defensive use of Storm Shadow missiles on targets inside Russia.
On 25 September 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned the West that if attacked with conventional weapons, Russia would consider nuclear retaliation, in an apparent deviation from the no-first-use doctrine. Putin went on to threaten nuclear powers that if they supported another country’s attack on Russia, they would be considered participants in such an aggression. Experts said Putin’s announcement was aimed at dissuading the United States, the United Kingdom, and France from allowing Ukraine to use Western-supplied long-range missiles like the ATACMS and Storm Shadow in strikes against Russia.
On 20 November 2024, Ukraine was reported to have fired British Storm Shadow missiles into Russia for the first time. The use of Storm Shadow missiles came after Russia launched a counteroffensive in Kursk, which had been invaded by Ukrainian troops in August. It also followed the Biden administration’s decision to give Ukraine the green light to use US-made long-range missiles inside Russia earlier that week. Kyiv first used ATACMS to strike a military facility in Bryansk on 19 November.
It was later reported that the 20 November strikes allegedly hit a command post, killing Russian General Lt-Gen Valery Solodchuk and North Korean troops.
A former senior British soldier, speaking on the condition of anonymity to the UK Defence Journal, commented on the significance of the Storm Shadow missile strike:
“British missiles are Putin’s nightmare. This is precisely the kind of action we need to see more of. The Russians are running out of options, and every well-placed strike like this chips away at their ability to command and control on the front lines. What’s clear is that the Ukrainians are taking the fight to the heart of Russia’s military infrastructure, and we’re starting to see real results. If the UK and our allies keep pushing these systems into Ukraine’s hands, the Russians will feel the pressure. No one ever thought they would be on the defensive inside their own borders, but that’s exactly where we’ve got them now.”
Storm Shadow
The Storm Shadow is a Franco-British long-range cruise missile designed for precision strikes on high-value strategic targets. Developed since 1994 by Matra and British Aerospace, and currently manufactured by MBDA, the missile is known as Storm Shadow in the UK and SCALP-EG (Système de Croisière Autonome à Longue Portée – Emploi Général) in France. Its main mission is to engage critical infrastructure such as command centres, airfields, ports, power stations, and other high-value targets.
The missile is powered by a Microturbo TRI 60-30 turbojet engine, allowing it to reach speeds of up to Mach 0.95. With a range of 550 km (342 miles), it is capable of striking targets at long distances. The Storm Shadow is equipped with a multi-stage BROACH (Bomb Royal Ordnance Augmented Charge) warhead, designed for maximum penetration. Upon approaching the target, the missile uses GPS and infrared guidance systems to accurately hit its target. The missile follows a semi-autonomous flight path, initially staying low to avoid radar detection before climbing to a higher altitude for target identification. Upon reaching the target, it uses a thermographic camera to confirm its location before diving for the strike.
Originally developed to destroy high-value infrastructure, the Storm Shadow is a fire-and-forget missile, meaning once launched, it cannot be redirected. Its pre-programmed target information is not alterable during the flight, ensuring a highly focused strike.
Additionally, the missile’s low-level flight path, guided by terrain mapping and GPS, allows it to evade enemy radar systems effectively. In situations where the missile cannot locate its target, it is programmed to divert to a crash point to prevent collateral damage. Recent upgrades have enhanced its capabilities, including the ability to relay battle damage assessment information back to the launch platform, further improving its operational effectiveness.
And it is just the beginning… Now the production is increasing and M2K are in Ukraine or will be within weeks. I can’t imagine them being used for CAS just now, since pilotes are still green and numbers are low. But but but… Numbers, you know… impossible to get any report on Rafale production, French generals wants French delivery first, etc, etc etc… The limiting factor to send more M2K to Ukraine is the number of Rafale delivered to the armée de l’air et de l’espace. We have a bunch of Mirage 2000-5 and Mirage 2000D that could be sent. The number of pilotes Ukrainien pilotes in training has not diminished. The Numbers of AASM and Mica produced are up. I wait for two more élément: the more of mecanics and technicians and air defense battery…
Hi Math, happy New Year bud.
I have heard that the Mirage 2000s going to Ukraine are having their defensive aid systems upgraded. I’m also wondering if they are also going to rush through additional weapons integration?
As far as I know, Mirage 2000s were only cleared for Mica, the previous Super 530 and Magic air to air missiles. This may be a problem, as it depends on the stocks and what France are willing to give Ukraine. I would suggest that the previous generation of Super 530 and Magic missiles, will put a Ukrainian pilot at a severe disadvantage if facing off against a Russian Su 30/35. Only the Mica will kind of level the playing field. Even then, the MiCA’s beyond visual range is average and is quite a bit less than the standard Russian AA-10 Alamo.
So could we see an urgent AMRAAM integration to give Mirage a bit more reach? Plus there’s a significantly larger stockpile of AMRAAMs available.
I’m not sure if Scalp was ever integrated on the Mirage 2000? But the Mirage does have the 1553 databus plus Link 16. So perhaps we will also see it being used for this role?
Personally I’d keep launching Storm Shadow from F16 and legacy jets.
The big problem UKR suffers from is too many platforms.
I’d not be so negative about M2000 with upgraded DAS provided it isn’t being used as a fighter but as a bomb truck which is what UKR really needs.
Hi, the Mirage have access to Mica IR and EM. They are not as good as the meteor, but they are not bad, cheaper to produce. A double pulse Mica has been introced to increase agility in the final phase. I don’t know if they are part of the package send to Ukraine. The special trick of M2K in fox 3 scenario is the Girafe attack (fly low, get to max altitude in less than a minute, lock, shoot and get away. Unlike Russian side, Ukraine has access to some early warning. So this mission is kind of doable, but risky. The range of the missile is about missile performance, launch altitude and speed. Mirage is not bad in this exercise. Though Russians are not bad either. I guess, for the time being, bombing is the priority.
Happy new year to you too!
Yes, they upgraded defensive system as well, but not the radar. And passive sensor are only on pods, so it remain to be seen how well it will work.
Though it is cheaper to convert a mirage 2000-5 to ground attack than a 2000-D to air supériorité.
We will see…
using Stormshadow for CAS would be quite a flex
So Luhansk is in Russia now? Who needs enemies when you have friends giving your land away.
And Germany sits quietly back and refuses to supply Taurus, re generates its AFV Industry and happily awaits the good old days of cheap Russian Gas.
Except Ukraine has quite rightly turned off the gas supply through its Country. Which has seriously pi**ed off Slovakia and their Putin leaning Prime minister. I’m surprised that Ukraine honored to the pipeline supplying contract. Instead they have let it lapse and are extending it. They were getting a revenue from allowing the gas to pass through their country, but only 1/5 of what Russia were getting. The pipeline supplying Slovakia also provided gas to other countries. Now that winter is here and there’s no gas, I’m wondering how solid their support for Ukraine will remain?
At some point they had to cut off the gas supply.
Ukraine honoured the contract and the contract was not renewed so the supply stopped.
Nobody can be surprised and Slovakia had years to make alternative arrangements.OK the Russian gas prices were a bargain.
Germany does not have nukes and it is close to Russia, whereas the UK has nukes and is further from Russia.
If Russia starts to use nukes (which they won’t) then their targets will be US, France & the UK in the first instance. Putin has mis-calculated and should find some pretext to withdraw. Germany are on the side of the good guys and should behave in a consistent manner.
Why would Putin target nuclear powers that don’t boarder Russia when he can attack non nuclear powers that do? Every scenario we have seen from Soviet planning in the late Cold War was for strikes on non nuclear states like west Germany and The Netherlands under Soviet assumptions that Britain, France and the USA would only retaliate if struck themselves.
Perhaps we are getting confused here. If the Russians started using battlefield nukes on the battlefield then yes that would perhaps confine the response to said battlefield – which in the cold war would have included West Germany. Now Putin is a long way from Germany and if Putin started attempting to use long range ICBMs or even medium range against population centres I’m finding it difficult to believe that NATO would not respond in kind – regardless of the target.
The whole point of NATO is that an attack on one is an attack on everyone. Every member knows this as does Putin. NATO has lasted a long time on this principle and many world leaders have accepted power knowing that conflict is possible but not knowing if they will have to take that decision. Putin knows full well that if push comes to shove NATO will come together and respond.
He might.
Russia’s claim that NATO and especially the USA have gone back on handshake agreements and ignored missile treaties is true.
Russia does have massive mineable resources and might survive a lengthy war of attrition with NATO via Ukraine….Russia does, though, have a severely shrinking birthrate (beyond global norms)which hints that it was a nation in severe trouble.
Putin might not be bluffing
There is as internatiol missile treaty that limits the range of storm shadow/ scalp and would surely equally apply to Taurus.
The UK and France have provided reduced range missiles to confirm with the missile treaty. Taurus would be no different.
OT;
According to Navy Lookout in their round up of 2024, the Robertson led committee sent in their first draft in which they said more than 3% of GDP would need to be spent on Defence in order to create a credit defence posture.
They were told to go away and think again…
Madness.
Happy New Year
CR
If HMG doesn’t want an expert independent report, they really shouldn’t have asked for one.
Actually it is a clever political move. Let them come up with a report and then quietly reject the first draft and move the goalposts. Few if anyone in the mainstream media will notice, let alone report. The politicians will get to claim they had an independent authoritative committee writing the report whilst conveniently neglecting to say they predetermined the outcome by placing artificial political constraints on the final report… No doubt the committee members will have had to sign the Official Secrets Acts – so no whistle blowing!
Simples, if typical political dirty tricks.
Cheers CR
Good, well researched article which has clearly provoked some thought on this issue
I’m actually semi relaxed about this, it will take a while to work itself out but with rumours the new US administration is going to push for higher spending within NATO and it will come out that the SDR worked out 3% even if the treasury tries to suppress it – especially if the defence secretary has to announce any more embarrassing cuts the pressure will come. The other thing is the current PM will hate going into NATO conferences on the back foot so my belief is there will be a lot of noise but the money will be found to get to 3% or nearer that region, something like 2,8 or 2,9 %
I agree that it will be around 2.75% which is the real number of merit – the main thing is how rapidly we can get there.
I predict that Robertson will come up with 2.75% and that Starmer will fund 2.5% in this parliament with the 2.5% left to his successor. Whatver political colour you are of, Wet-Weekend-Starmer with Rachel-from-complaints-who-gingered-up-her-CV-to-makie-it-look-like-she-was-from-accounts has not been a raging success. I am no supporter of Farage or the dubious people who surround him but UK politics is due a very large shake up as none of the parties provide a platform that a decent chunk of the electorate can get behind. Whoever, provides that platform and has some vague interpersonal skills will clean up.
The Tangerine Tinted Buffoon was right to go a bit ballistic when we were trying to slide under 2%.
Classified documents can get left by a bus stop or on a train…..and the tabloids find them…..terribly sorry Minister….long day at work….drinkie?….no hard feelings…..truth will out….
Always remember that The Official Secrets Act is to protect the Officials and not the Secrets!
Remember the treasury are still battling to keep it under 2.5% at this present time so they don’t want a report out saying 3%.. Number 10 will (even in this government) set what they’re comfortable selling to newspapers and I think that’ll above 2,5%.(good news story, we pledged 2,5 but as the situation deteriorates we’re not going with the minimum).. later in the parliament to show the fruits of the ‘improvement’ in the economy we’ve managed to increase spend.
How very cynical of you to disbelieve in the sanctity of the Official Secrets Act! And, sadly, how true your comment is.
Hi Adrian,
I hope you are right as I believe we are taking huge risks with defence.
The country is in a tight spot economically and socially pressures are growing as well, but many other countries are in a similar state.
Those cans that politicians have kicked down the road for as long as I can remember (and I’m no spring chicken, sadly) are finally coming home to roost and there are no simple answers. Worse still the clock could well be counting down to a time when we find ourselves needing an effective defence force supported by an industrial base capable of maintaining an effective supply chain and we are a very long way from having either. Unfortunately, many of our NATO allies, including the US have similar problems.
Cheers CR
👍👍
CR,
Agree w/ your assessment. Occasionally wonder about the apparent apathy of the majority of ENATO publics re rearmament, in the context of a land war in progress w/in Europe. Presume that it is human nature to resist any reduction or curtailment of a social welfare benefit, in favor of preparations for mortal combat w/ an undeclared foe. Additionally, the first hand lessons learned from epic conflicts such as WWIl, have almost completely faded from the consciousness of ENATO publics (w/ the exception of most former Warsaw Pact countries, whose populations have living memories of Soviet domination). Then there is perhaps the cynical calculation of perceived distance between threat and homeland, w/ the expectation that Uncle Sugar will always be immediately available to ride to the collective rescue, as portrayed by the cavalry in old western movies. Forewarned is forearmed: Quite simply, the US no longer possesses the conventional capability to engage and defeat multiple near-peer/peer powers, simultaneously, w/in multiple theaters. Firmly convinced that, in extremis, POTUS (regardless of specific individual) would make the same sort of decisions Churchill made during the Fall of France, and w/hold some forces for defense of the homeland (in this case, US territory). The US must concentrate primary focus and preparations for probable conflict w/ a peer power in the I-P, and NATO commitment will be accorded residual forces and assets. Doubt that this assessment is a revelation to professionals or informed public. 🤔
The Peace Dividend delusion has allowed politicians to safeguard their electoral prospects by shifting Defence spending to social provision and even war in Europe hasn’t enabled them to pivot back to Defence, the first responsibility of the nation state.
It’s much too late, but hybrid war confirms for the most unaware voters that Defence spending is required at Cold War levels to keep the aggressors in check.
e NATO citizens must write to their representatives to make it clear that all the social provision depends on Defence of the nation and its values / Allies . Inactivity is not an option any longer.
Lonpfrb,
👍👍
I already have written to my MP. I even got a specific reply..! I was very surprised and there was even a promise that it would be taken forward as a question (probably a written question). I’ll have a dig around and see if I can find anything out. My specifc question pertained to the mess that the RFA is in…
Cheers CR
Hello Mate, hope you are well.
Agree with your comments they are, as usual, very prescient.
I too have wondered about the apparent apathy towards defence in Europe. My reading of the situation is that whilst your observations regarding memory and social welfare are definitely part of the issue I also think there is more at play. Life is very complicated for many these days with millions struggling to get by since the 2008 financial crash. Income growth has damn near flat lined in the UK and probably the rest of Europe as well which in the presence of even low levels of inflation means living standards are falling. Child poverty is a growing issue in the UK last figure I heard was that about 20% of children were living in poverty in the UK, growing numbers of children rely on breakfast clubs at school and food banks are everywhere these days. That is a huge proportion of the population struggling to just to survive, so I suspect they have little or no time to think about anything other than the next pay check and whether they can eat or heat the house. Believe it or not the government tops up the wages of low paid workers in the UK – my feeling is that if a business cannot or will not afford to pay its workers a living wage it is not a viable business… but that is another debate.
The above is just one example, I can think of others, but I think the main issue is that our children will be the first generation that will be worse off than their parents. That is not a sound foundation to run any country. Too much money in too few hands is a big issue IMO, and there have even been a number of billionaires arguing for a wealth tax at Davos for a few years now – says a lot, doesn’t it!
Your point about the idea that Uncle Sugar will come riding to the rescue being an unrealistic concept these days is, as you know, something I have been banging on about in the context of maritime security for a couple of years now. The USN has just 90 or so escorts to cover the globe… not possible. So something will have to give and Europe and the UK especially do not really understand that the US has a historic long term interest in the Far East. That is increasingly closer to home for Americans given the rise of the Chinese Navy. By the mid 2030’s, just 10 short years away, it will take most of the current USN to be able to deter the Chinese at sea. So unless the USN can solve its shortage of escorts and ships and subs in general in the next 10 years the Indo-Pacific region will need to be reinforced by withdrawing ships from the Atlantic and Mediterranean, i.e. NATO waters.
Given the perilous state of Europe’s navies, the RN in particular, the North Atlantic could well become a bloody battle ground for the third time as Russian SSN’s, potentially reinforced by Chinese boats, have another go at our Sea Lines of Communications (SLOC) in the absence of a significant USN presence. Given our island status, geographic position and history the UK should be in a position to lead European NATO in the effective defence of the SLOC’s – it isn’t. The thing is even if Uncle Sugar wanted to reinforce Europe a lack of sufficient NATO escort capability would mean that the US would be unable to support a long war in Europe. D-Day could only really go ahead with confidence after the U-boats were finally beaten and the Tirpitz sunk. Similarly a US Army could only be supported long term if those forces threatening or attacking the SLOC were effectively defeated and or contained so merchant shipping losses could be kept below the replacement rate. However, the reliable replacement of merchant ships might be an issue as most ships seem to be built in the Far East these days…
In short, 5% GDP defence spending the Europe is urgently needed. In the UK I would tie that spending into growth calculations to counter Treasury resistance and use it to help to raise living standards in deprived areas which would help to tie defence spending into the public conscious. This would be possible as we have not only neglected our armed forces but we have also trashed our industrial / manufacturing base, so we can decide where we put the new factories… In reality, the current economic system isn’t working anymore and treasure is a prerequisite for effective deterrence and warfighting.
With getting on for 70million people and an economy in the top 6 largest in the world the UK should be able to do better by it’s people and it’s defence.
We live in dangerous times and the message needs to be pushed by our leadership – oh hang on a minute, we ain’t got leaders, we got politicians…
Politics is broken in the West and people are angry, that is not a good basis for defence of democracy.
Happy New Year 🙂
Cheers CR
CR,
.
You are indeed a kindred spirit across the Pond! Not certain our army of two will prove very effective in disturbing the inertia of respective bureaucracies, but perhaps an effort should be attempted regardless, because the consequences of being ill-prepared for the coming storm are quite distressing to contemplate.
It is somewhat disconcerting that the nation that figuratively birthed the Industrial Revolution is foundering in terms of GDP growth, due to multiple factors, but am convinced that AUKUS, especially various Pillar Ii initiatives (AI, Quantum computing, etc.) will ultimately produce consequential civil and military benefits. Simply need to keep the faith as the storm clouds gather in the East.
That was just a comment and not part of the article, wasn’t it?
And a pretty dodgy commenter as well, no sources and pretty stingy when criticised.
Not sure, will go back and have a look.
?? Sorry Sailorboy, w/ the revised system of presenting texts, not always able to discern who is responding to whom. My post was essentially a response to CR listing personal reflections re possible factors which constrain HMG’s guidance for current SDR. Hope that answers your question.
Oh, I’d thought I was replying to CR. My bad.
I agree with what you are saying, with the added caveat that, at least amongst my generation, the military and defence has now become a dirty word.
The idea of spending money on “killing people” is no longer palatable to young people, mostly because social media allows them to witness the horror of war first hand. Having a balanced conversation about deterrence and just wars is nearly impossible.
I wouldn’t be too hard on your generation mate.
Back in the dark ages (when were a lad) pictures were on the front pages of magazines like Time magazine – and they hit home. Also I was trained as an apprentice by men who had fought in WW2, and some of then were quite willing to tell stories about the desert, jungles and D-day – nothing bloody but little insights that put the human experience on the historical stories. Also, I remember wondering if there was a ICBM flying towards me – I lived close to two targets…
My generation also had vocal anti war people, CND was very big in the early 80’s as it was going through something of a resurgence. On the flip side my generation were the ones that fought in the Falklands and around which the country rallied in ’82. I don’t think much has really changed as far as people are concerned, they come with all sorts of world views, but the circumstances have changed and they are still changing and at the moment those changes do not look to be for the better.
It was never easy to have a balanced conversation about deterrence and it never will be, but people have always rallied when the need has arisen. The problem is that they need something to rally to – and that means our politicians need to wake up and smell the coffee and ensure we have the capacity to train and equip people when the need arises and at the moment to have neither.
The UKDJ and others on the internet are doing their bit and they do get noticed – our posts matter even if it is only in a very very small way.
Cheers CR
Ahhh, you are wise beyond your years. Crux of the problem is convincing the majority of the population that the investment of relatively modest amounts of treasure in a well equipped (and trained) military is the best available insurance policy to prevent the expenditure of much greater amounts of national blood and treasure in conflict. Unfortunately, very few in Western Europe appear to be able to comprehend that. Whereas in Eastern Europe (Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Sweden, etc.), populations understand the issue, probably as a byproduct of geography. Imminent jeopardy tends to focus attention. Rant over.
Hi SailorBoy,
It was in the article – I didn’t read the comments 🙂
Depressing.
Cheers CR
Lord Robertson told the Defence Select Committee that the SDR scope was for 2.75% GDP by 2030-40 period. So that was clearly set by HM Treasury as no Defence literate person would believe that 20 years neglect could even make good the gaps, never mind meet current threats, with so little.
Cold War spending 5% GDP suggests the same.
Pay up now, or pay more blood and treasure quite soon…
Hi Lonpfrb
As I have pointed out a few times recently defence spending in WW1 peaked at about 48% of GDP and 52% during WW2… Makes 5% look like a very good deal don’t it..!
As for HM Treasury, I would set up a Cabinet level War Preparedness Committee that did not include the Chancellor. Any decisions on spending would contribute to a national re-industrialisation strategy as well as we can’t even support Ukraine’s needs for ammunition and the next war could easily turn into another long slog. Excluding the Chancellor would mean the Treasury would have to do as it was told, or else I would simply convert decisions into Acts of Parliament… desperate times, desperate measures.
Cheers CR
And as we sit here commenting.. Air raid alarms have been going off over CRIMEA (fact)
>>>
A large-scale assault targeted Crimea and Sevastopol, utilizing Storm Shadow cruise missiles and kamikaze drones.
Additionally, reports claim Ukraine employed Neptune missiles during the attack.
Stormshadow is a success story and we need to increase production and make sure we have plenty for ourselves and allies
I was not aware that the Russians had already recovered an example.
Not great?
It’s a 30 year old missile. I wonder what the Russians could learn that they don’t aready know.
Hi Daniele,
Happy New Year.
As we all know any weapon that gets used on the battlefield will eventually have their security compromised. The Russians have captured quite a few intact examples of NLAW, for example, so I guess it was only a matter of time before bits of Storm Shadow fell into their hands (pictures on the TV showed fragments of a missile). Hopefully, the clever computery bits were sufficiently fried to ensure that none of the software was recoverable.
However, such is the situation we find ourselves in, the impact of Storm Shadow on the battlefield easily out ways the risks to weapon security, as Jon says it is a 30 year old design and we can always upgrade the software to a greater or lesser extent.
Cheers CR
Happy New Year too. mate.
Challenger and its armour is my biggest fear.
Failing to destroy the shadow fleet Tankers and sanction the sanction evasion enablers in India and CCP is the main issue because it allows RF to continue funding their illegal invasion from hydrocarbon revenue. That funding includes making serviceable their stock of obsolete armour and making new aircraft and missiles. Maybe even some reverse engineering of captured weapons, but that’s unlikely to be for making copies, given the dire state of manufacturing and the effect of technology sanctions, IMHO.
I take your point, Leopards and Abrams could be added to the list…
If we are going to put our technological lead on the line for Ukraine we should damn well make sure we win and ram the point home hard…
Our politicians are being very foolish indeed, we need to win in Ukraine or face another even bigger war in the not too distant future.
Cheers CR
As others have said in War some Capabilities will be compromised, but early on in the use of Storm Shadow one was downed pretty much intact, there are pictures to prove this.
I very much doubt that UKR needed or were given the full fat version. They won’t care provided it does the job – which by all accounts it does just fine.
At best they will have the export version and I suspect there will be more than a few clever bits removed from it which they simply don’t need.
What are the Russians going to learn from a 30 year old design that can follow a pre programmed course by GPS and also control its altitude by GPS or inertial guidance? OK it has a terrain following radar and can likely use that to reference the loaded map to cross check its location. Big deal – we can all imagine how to make that work and with current GPU’s a home coder could make a very good job of that.
To be perfectly honest an iPhone will have better inertial sensors that the original Storm Shadow – that is the nature of the fast march of technology.
I’m far from worried about it TBH.
What I would be a tiny bit more concerned about is them getting their hand on the casings so they understood better how to detect them inbound. As I said before, I have a sneaky suspicion that the UK issue casings will have been swapped out for more basic ones that could be made by any aero composites company with an autoclave it would have been using the same moulds so there would be no externally detectable difference but it would keep the RAM coating and the materials blend secret.
That iPhone comment got me thinking.
Using a general purpose CPU and the requisite sensors, actuators etc, how complicated actually is a modern missile software-ly speaking?
Could someone with a reasonable grasp of Python or Micro:bit code one?
Or are they SAMPSON style software monsters?
It all depends on what you are trying to do and the stability of the platform.
If you are trying to auto pilot a small civilian prop aircraft that flies at 150mph then that is pretty easy as it is inherently stable.
If you are trying to auto pilot something approaching the speed of sound it gets a lot harder as when you hard turn bits of the wing tips go super sonic.
If you are trying to auto pilot a missile that is inherently unstable in flight with tiny surfaces then you have quite a big issue.
The thing is the Russians have similar missiles, albeit with terrible guidance, so you know they can figure of the control laws for themselves.
Wbatever code they use it won’t be Python because its too slow for realtime systems.
mil standard semiconductor/components are used, which are expensive
I saw an interesting science program about a project that involved dropping an object from stratosphere to a prepared ground target.
The mentor for the project in a US government funded agency explained that the algorithm to do that was known to less than 1000 people and an official secret so a different experiment must be designed. So despite hardware potential, the software is literally rocket science and not freely available.
Thanks for that explanation, SB.
Makes sense.
UK/France supplied the missiles relatively early in the war, so it might be a non-ITAR version that avoids using US terrain mapping.
Not fantastic but it’s the nature and reverse engineering isn’t that easy. The biggest problem is the Russians probably know (or have a fair idea) of ours and French inventory so know how long we can stay in game for. As far as I know, the UK aren’t procuring more so it’s a fixed number.
Nobody talks about wartime production as a rule. Just a reminder: in Irak/Iran war, France never sold a canon to Irak. We sold them heating tubes, which were as one could imagine very important in such a situation…
Luhansk region of Russia? Only according to Russia.
Putin effectively declared war on Britain when his operatives killed a British citizen on British soil using Novichok.
The insouciance of successive British governments in the face of Russian aggression is a major concern.
This country should get serious about defending it’s borders.
That will require 5% of GDP, an Army Corps on continental Europe to restore conventional deterrence.
We already see the consequences of failed deterrence in our supine foreign policy towards powers that overwatch us, Russia and China particularly but not exclusively.
Having surrendered much of our independence in foreign policy, it is but a short step to surrender on domestic policy. Many would argue that has already happened, will deteriorate, particularly regarding our home waters fisheries.
Yes Russia did declare war on Britain and continues to do so.
I think the tactical (small warhead) nuke threat from Russia is now moot since Russia could not find much profit in it.
Strategic nukes though would surely be different. Russia could obliterate the UK and/ or France with nukes and the USA could sensibly and rationally sit back and watch it happen without launching it’s own nukes at Russia.
On the subject of missiles: MSM has severely played down the threat to Ukraine posed by Oreshnic:- it’s necessary to search quite deep news to realise that the target was subterranean bunkers which is why the warheads were non explosive (to penetrate earth and not explode on contact or with delay)
Storm Shadow/ Scalp are useful adjuncts but exlensive and inly available in tiny quantities. They won’t alter the course of the war a great deal ( any more really than Tiger tanks in WW2. What is needed is quantity and cheapness. I’d prefer to see Ukraine get a lot of cheaper glide bomb kits and drones/rocket artilly to take out Russian AA defences and lots of cinventional artillery/mortars ammo to kill orcs.
Btw does the RAF use any glide bomb kits?
We can use all the conventional kit we like, it’ll only take one nuke to change the world forever, he’s only sabre rattling though.
Make peace you imbeciles. 🫶☮️