The ‘Future Cruise/Anti–Ship Weapon’ will be fitted to Type 26 Frigates from 2028.
The vessel will also be armed with a five inch main gun as well as Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, click the below image to learn more.
The information came to light in response to a written Parliamentary question.
Kevan Jones, MP for North Durham, asked:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what is the planned service date for the Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon.”
Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:
“The Planning Assumption for Service Entry for Future Cruise /Anti-Ship Weapon on the T26 Frigate and Typhoon aircraft is 2028 and 2030 respectively.”
Quin also added:
“The Future Cruise/ Anti-Ship Weapon Programme is due to complete Concept Phase activity in July 2021. The Concept Phase has been focussed on conducting in depth operational analysis, technical studies and initial design activity to refine user requirements and better understand the options available to MOD to meet these. The Concept Phase findings forms part of the Programme’s Outline Business Case for Ministerial consideration.”
What is the Future Cruise /Anti–Ship Weapon?
The FC/ASW aims to replace Storm Shadow/SCALP air launched cruise missile in operational service in the UK and France as well as Exocet anti-ship missile in France and Harpoon anti-ship missile in the UK.
Last year we reported that two years into the FC/ASW (Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon) Concept Phase, MBDA announced the successful achievement of its ‘Key Review’, jointly conducted with Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) and the Direction Générale de l’Armement (DGA), the British and French armament procurement agencies.
“The conclusion of this Key Review makes it possible to select the most promising missile concepts in order to meet the requirements expressed by both nations’ armed forces. The conclusions of this study will also make it possible to establish the road maps for maturing the technologies required, and to launch any follow on assessment phase. This new phase will demonstrate the necessary maturity of the weapon system and its key components, to be followed by the development and production phase in the 2024 timeframe, so that current weapons systems can be replaced in accordance with required timescales.”
It was also stated recently by Quin that the total spend to date on Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon and associated activities by the Ministry of Defence is £95 million.
Does that mean HMS Glasgow will go 10 years without an anti-ship weapon, or is there an interim solution?
Think the headline is a typo? 2028 rather than 38, so one year after commission.
It is a bit strange that the article also talks about current aim being to select option at end of concept phase in ‘2020’ ! Other than propulsion system is this effectively existing technology (brimstone / sea venom / scalp) repacked in a new jumbo pack or is this effectively reliant on new technology. If primarily based on existing then timescales appear achievable. If heavily reliant on new technologies then timescales seam highly optimistic given history of Sea Venom etc. Nonetheless…fantastic news and a real game changer. Assume F35b will be external carriage? But great to see typhoon involved as… Read more »
See Farouk’s post. I think it will need a new motor. The concept is for a mach 5 800 kg missile. Propulsion will be a ramjet. I expect MBDA will turn to Bayern-Chemie who supply the ramjet for the Meteor missile which is a 190kg mach 4 missile.
Cheers
Yes my thoughts entirely, it’s capabilities on the face of it seem very advanced compared to what’s gone before yet the timescale seems to be more in keeping with exploitation of mostly proven or at least reasonably mature and developed technology for the most part. Either that or things are much further down the development trail than the the statements are revealing.
The title says 2038 but the piece says 2028. Hopefully this means from 2028. Until then for the Type 23 we will hopefully see the interim solution.
Considering the current level of development and how UK defence projects usually progress, I can’t be the only one to think that 2038 will probably turn out to be closer to the mark than the optimistic date of 2028?
The MoD have put out a RFI for an interim missile.
Do you know is it still asking for terrain following deep strike?
The MoD prior information notice (PIN) only stipulated a precision maritime land attack capability. It didn’t state any specific range requirements. Since the PIN was released in 2019, I’ve yet to see any requirement updates from the MoD. But this does mean dedicated anti-ship missiles are not in the running.
Thx
That was my initial thought, it says 2038 in the headline then says 2028 – 2030 in the main body text/story.
RN warships need a long range anti ship missile now.
This new weapon will be a long range anti ship missile, that will also have land attack capability.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/07/italy-and-uk-sign-contract-for-the-mid-life-update-of-their-aster-missiles/
In addition, it is important to highlight that the contracts will provide a key National capability in the field of ASTER missile maintenance, since the embodiment of the MLU kits will be undertaken in the premises selected by the three Nations: MBDA France (Selles-Saint-Denis) for France, CIMA Aulla for Italy and DMG for the United Kingdom. The activities performed in the Italian and United Kingdom facilities will be technically supported by MBDA and that includes the disposal of the replaced missile parts in line with the latest environmental standards.
Assuming this is going to be following the cruise missile subsonic trend , is the missile going to be stealthy?
I question its effectiveness against ships with layers of air defence if it isn’t. The same applies to its effectiveness in defence suppression.
A little more info:FC/ASW concept specifications Measuring 5m in length and weighing 800kg, the FC/ASW concept designed by MDBA consists of a central 200kg warhead with two additional 50kg warheads that can be deployed together to increase the firepower on a larger target, or separately to hit additional targets nearby. The FC/ASW will have a range of 300km and be powered by a ramjet engine capable of reaching speeds of Mach 5. It is intended to have two main modes of deployment. The first is from high altitudes for hitting targets on land, with the British expressing the need for… Read more »
A little more info: FC/ASW concept specifications Measuring 5m in length and weighing 800kg, the FC/ASW concept designed by MDBA consists of a central 200kg warhead with two additional 50kg warheads that can be deployed together to increase the firepower on a larger target, or separately to hit additional targets nearby. The FC/ASW will have a range of 300km and be powered by a ramjet engine capable of reaching speeds of Mach 5. It is intended to have two main modes of deployment. The first is from high altitudes for hitting targets on land, with the British expressing the need… Read more »
Farouk your a legend. Is your surname wikipedia ?
It is a cracking copy and paste. 😆
You sound like someone who knows how to copy and paste ! LOL
Never done that on this site. It’s all from experience 😀
That sounds impressive so effectively a hypersonic cruise missile. We traditionally think of cruise missiles as being subsonic but these days what with similar Russian weapons coming into service, they really just mean low level or sea skimming it seems.
My concern would be that 2028 date seems very optimistic if the weapon characteristics are only being set in stone around now. I think that interim solution might need to last a bit longer than planned in its initial deployment.
Extremely optimistic, the article quoted assessments being completed in 2020 and there has been no update in July 2021. Maybe Covid has delayed things.
It does doesn’t it, but as others have mentioned its years away. Plenty on the market for the MOD to choose from for the interim period, problem is will they pick a decent one or do as they do all the time and spend a load of money on a load of tosh?
Coming into service?
Russian/Soviet anti ship missiles with high mach speeds have been around since the early 1960s.
AS4 Kitchen is still in service 50 odd years later… and has just been updated with a new electronics and motor packs to become the KH32. Its a high Diver
Other supersonic sea skimming systems such as ssn 22 Sunburn, ssn 27 sizzler, ssn 19 shipwreck have been around since the late 1970s.
Yes but their latest ones if they are to be believed are far more advanced and in some cases not just supersonic but hypersonic and smart too. The Russians have always tended to favour speed over and above other aspects while the west have tended to favour other aspects of missile technology generally around smartness. Hypersonic sea skimming is something I had not realised was feasible presently certainly by the UK/France though some level of supersonic clearly is far more achievable and not necessarily a fundamental step up from the high subsonic sea skimming missiles we are more used to… Read more »
It is possible for a missile to travel at hypersonic speeds at sea level. However, its range will be incredibly short. This is due to the much thicker air density, therefore, to maintain this speed the missile will use up a huge amount of fuel. Furthermore, because of the denser air all the leading edges and probably a good portion of the body will be glowing due to thermal resistance. Depending on the Mach number and humidity, its likely the missile will be surrounded by a plasma corona, thus preventing any radar and optical sensors from working. The snippets of… Read more »
I thought “cruise” simply meant “not ballistic”…..
I guess you are fundamentally right, though maybe only because that is what we have become used to for most of the term’s modern existence I envisage a low flying terrain following sub sonic weapon. Bias by familiarity I guess.
A cruise missile is a missile that travels at a constant speed for the majority of the flight
Bit of a relief that they are cracking on with FCASW to try and get it into service around the same time at the first T26 enters service – avoiding years of them sailing with empty missile silo’s! Will be a tall order to produce a heavyweight, long-range cruise missile that can be air launched and fit in differing VLS…..but if successful the flexibility of having a dual-mode missile, dual launched capability will offer massive benefits. Fingers cross the interim AShM will be moved across to T31. With that and at least 24 Sea Ceptor they will be useful general… Read more »
all good an all but whats the main anti-sub weapon gonna be. i mean it is a anti-sub warfare ship. on wiki it says its gonna have the vl-asroc but how many will it carry in the 24 mk41s?
The main anti sub weapon is the Merlin with dipping sonar, Sting-Ray torpedos and depth charges.
that seems a bit unreliable. and leaves little difference between the type 31 and type 26 except one is more expensive cuz of a quite hull.
A quiet hull mind is no doubt extremely expensive and pretty important for effective anti submarine work so quite a relevant difference.
There is a vast difference between the two types.
The main Asw weapon system in RN service is the ships Helo. So it will be a Merlin carrying 4 Sting Ray with a reload magazine on board capable of carrying at least 30 torpedoes. MATCH attack drones may take on the Pony role that Wildcat helos currently do in later years. Merlin can be off ship doing their own prosecution of a target for well over 4 hours at a couple of hundred miles away Of course you could use VLS Asroc with its vastly inferior Mk54 torpedo as the RAF is being forced to do with its P8… Read more »
the reason i say vl asroc because it seems to be a quicker method. i am not expert but reloading a merlin seems quite time consuming compared to pressing a button to launch a missile. one more thing can the asroc be quadpacked?
Fleet standard time to prep 2 Sting Ray without any notice from the magazine rack ready to load is 40 mins. A good prep team can do it in 20 mins. In wartime you prep before hand them and leave them prepped in the rack on a rolling maint period of 3, 15 and 30 day checks. Out of the rack and delivered to the flight in that condition takes less than 5 mins. Before that the Helo will have radioed ahead that it has dropped its load so you will know its coming back for a reload. The weapons… Read more »
Nimrod boys reckoned you needed 5/6 torpedoes in the water to guarantee a subkill. Helos can’t get near that so presumably working on the principle that any sensible sub captain will desist from his intent as soon as he hears a torpedo in the water, the objective being not to kill the submarine but to frustrate its mission. But what about if you come across a captain that won’t desist? ASROC and MILAS don’t possess great range but remember the sub is after the carrier, not the escort, an the escort will be 50 plus clicks ahead of the main… Read more »
And I’m not suggesting for a moment that this is instead of Merlin/FLASH/Stingray combination, but complementary.
I’m pessimistically with you SC. I tend to think of it like a Typhoon weapon fit. You go out hunting to kill the enemy jets at range using the best in class meteor (merlin) However, I don’t just carry the meteor. I carry ASRAAM to deal with the unlikely but close in dog fight encounter that can come out of left field and may require a very quick dynamic shot…if nothing else to gain time to reposition while enemy reacts to ASRAMM. Gunbuster is right. Merlin and Stingray are world class and helicopters are more reliable than they were 30… Read more »
I still like the idea of a few ASROC or MILAS on board. Many submarine detections, if they happen at all, will happen at short range, particularly with modern quiet submarines properly handled by well trained crews. I like your analogy of Meteor and ASRAAM. Also the escort will be positioned well ahead of the main force. Short range for the escort is still long range for the main body of ships
A Merlin can get a lot better fix as it’s going to be dipping and is not 100% reliant on buoys and MAD. A dipper can procecute and then drop right above a sub or close enough that the sub has little chance of getting out of the torpedo dog box. Add to that, the Merlin will be calling in Ponies to add their load to the mix. .. Probably in war time… no more than 2 or 3 Sting Ray per target to get a kill. I have been involved in trials over the years where we dropped single… Read more »
Glad to hear that Gunbuster. I hope you’re right. I’d still like to have a few MILAS on board. ASROC probably a second choice.
ASROC cannot be quadpacked in Mk. 41.
It is 15ft long, and over 16 inch(420mm) diameter.
The ASTER family of missiles have different lengths. So no I do t think this is such a tall order. The length being mainly related to the maximum altitude and then range. The longest being the NT version for ABM use. So I can see air launches versions being a lot shorter as they are pre accelerated to Mach1 and at altitude at point of launch. I can easily see a medium range option that will fit in the A50 silos of the T45. As I said on Navy Lookout earlier this may be why T45 went A15 -> CAMM… Read more »
The Aster Block 1NT fits in the Sylver A50 cell, whereas the Block2 BMD has to use the longer A70 cell. Hence why the T45 is getting the 1NT version not the BMD version. As soon as the RN announce the T45 is getting A70 or strike length Mk41 cells, you can pretty much guarantee the ship is getting SM3 or the BMD Aster.
I agree. Thanks for the correction.
Sorry I had my brain in neutral and transposed the relative lengths.
Personally I see F45 going OoS with S50.
Anything else is going into the 8 x deck mounts where harpoon goes.
48 x S50 + 26(?) x CAMM + 8 x ? Heavy-AShM/Heavy-LAM ? is a very good load out by any standards.
Whilst this may be an AShM the primary use will be LAM.
I would like the T45 to have a fast firing gun fitted on top of the hangar. Preferably the non-deck penetrating version of the BAe 57mm. Much like the previous T42s I see the stern area as a weak spot. Even though SeaCeptor is PDMS it still has to loop over the ship. The two Phalanx can only slew so much towards the hangar. Fitting the 57 above the hangar would give the ship more capability in dealing with close in threats, especially if it had access to both the 3P and ORKA shells. I would also consider replacing the… Read more »
What about a Phalanx?
I totally agree that the 4.5” is redundant (T45 will never do NGS) and should be replaced with either the 5” (expensive) or the 57mm with the extended magazine forward and, as you say, the non penetrating version astern.
I have to say this has cheered me up on the Royal Navy front. An article on Navy Lookout marked the RN’s firepower below that of the US (obviously), French, Australian, Canadian, Dutch, Chinese and Russian. This news changes that completely, Build quality, sensor quality and training was never going to be enough without something to throw at targets.
yes but what about the anti-sub weapons? how many vl-asrocs or something similar can we fit into 24 mk41.
It does appear to be a huge blindspot, and a lot of weight placed on helicopters carrying lightweight torpedoes.
again seems pretty unreliable.
None of the RN types here say the helicopter is unreliable. Good enough for me.
Merlin, sonar, T26 a deadly combination.
Correct mate GB seems to have no issues with the current ASW thought process and assets.
Maybe they can look at a lightweight dipping sonar for the Wildcat as I think the Korean helos have. This extra ability could be very useful and complement the Merlin’s.
I think that will go instead to one of the planned new UAV with the “find” role?
But yes, dipping sonar for the Wildcat seems a bad omission.
No I ment unreliable method. As it may not be the right weather to get the marlins up in air. And seeing the rns focus is gonna be south China sea, they surely need a ship launched method.
I’ve watched a Lynx take off from a heaving and pitching deck in the North Sea, that is more akin to a roller coaster ride. If the ship has a hint of an enemy sub nearby, health and safety will be their last concern.
and not to mention a pretty low hardpoint.
Indeed – if the helicopters are unserviceable, or simply on another tasking then one really wants an onboard anti-sub weapon with decent range that can be fired at the push of a button. RUM-139 ASROC would be the obvious choice as it’s compatible with the Mk 41 VLS.
The helicopters are always available. ASW tasking on T23’s have never been missed due to the helicopters out of action, and are by far the most affective ASW capability.
RUM-139 ASROC is Not the obvious choice, it is based on a dated torpedo and lacking range. This weapon’s issues has been highlighted here before. Stingray torpedo is much better.
Can Stingray not be fitted to ASROC? I thought ASROC was only really the booster.
Yes it can if the UK is willing to pay a shed load of cash to do it for its torpedo. Looking at the interface attachments on the Asroc booster it would take a major rework to get it to fit on Sting Ray. Then you can add in the command system software mods, Ammo Depot retooling new training, safety cases…
Not worth the hassle or the cash
ASROC… What is this fixation with Asroc? The RN uses Helos with Sting Ray. ALL of my time as a maintainer on ships from the very early 80s to early 00s was spent as a back endy doing Air Weapons and towed array or as a Gun Maintainer backing up air weapons . After that from 00s to mid 10s I was promoted to do System Engineering and Middle Management at the now Warrant Officer Level but I still backed up Air Weapons from my previous experience. NEVER in all that time of 34 years did a Helo miss a… Read more »
How long before you have to post something similar ???? 😂
Its becoming the new ‘guns on a River’ debate on here. 😞
Putting ASROC on a ship with Merlin is the equivalent of the bottle opener on the old SA80A1.
BOOM… Got it in one!
The problem may be when subs can fire a missile at the helicopter hunting it – https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/6894/have-submarine-launched-anti-aircraft-missiles-finally-come-of-age. Then what?
RN Helos have ESM, chaff and Flare launchers and IR jammers.
If a sub decides to come up towards the surface to launch it would be dead before it knew anything about it.
GB, how does the old “IKARA” compare to ASROC?
Ikara had a longer range. It was basically a winged drone that dropped a 1960s era Mk44 or Mk46 Torpedo ( Thats the warhead and back end bit of the current Mk 54 so that shows you the Mk54 pedigree or lack of it!). It was a pig of a system to work on and had a massive footprint. At the time Sonar was nowhere near what it is now, the most numerous sonar the RN had was S174/77, S184 with S2016 coming on stream in T22. Towed arrays where not a thing until the early 80s The effectivness or… Read more »
Thank you.
From the horses mouth then.
Hope the ASROCers are taking note.
Yes, but if you used the Aster 30 Block 1NT booster and strapped it to a Stingray. You’d have the potential of sending it over 100km at near hypersonic speeds. Not even a Merlin can match that….. 😉
It won’t fit even an A70 cell with Stringray(2.6m). The combination should come to 7.5m in length. You would need to extend the A70 cell by a few cm, and by building a raised silo. Not sure is that possible with Aster?
It was supposed to be a tongue in cheek response, not something that is plausible.
Could you imagine a hypersonic version of ASROC and the practicalities of trying to protect the torpedo when hitting the water?
Ok, I do get you now!
It would have to slow down a lot before the torpedo part hits the water, a big task.
As an example when Nimrod dropped the first version of Stingray. It was cleared up to 300kts and up to 2500ft A high speed drogue parachute would stabilize it and slow it down, before a larger one deployed. So it hit the water about 70ish kts. Any faster and it would smash the nose radome. Hitting the water at say 100kts is like hitting a solid wall.
Ohhh hypersonic Le ASROC!
If a large scale, peer, naval confict occurs, and as time goes on the likelyhood of that becomes higher. Assuming it doesn’t go nuclear, a big assumption, its likely to be a very fast very hot war. Ships will expend their missile stocks very quickly. What will be left is quite a few ships with empty silos and quite a few submarines lurking here and there with full magazines. At this point the ‘unsexy’ helicopter with lightweight torpedoes will be an absolute godsend, otherwise surface fleets will be wiped out completely.
Because the US uses it presumably. I’ve experienced the same in regards to ship torpedo tubes or the lack thereof on the T26.
T26 could get something with regards to tubes…but where would they go?
Not on the flight deck and there is nowhere on the upper deck that gives you access to the Air Weapn mag.
An internal to the Hull system may be required. If its not fitted as the current T23 MTLS system is in the magazine then you will need access routes for Torpedo trolleys between the mag and the tubes and hand winches and lifting frames to load/reload.
I knew it was somewhere so I’ve hunted the comment down. Could only attach one image though so hopefully it works.
If onlt sticking tubes internally was that easy.
MTLS has a huge system footprint in the mag and that’s just” fitted into the structure”
I really despair at times with people who have no idea about what is involved with fitting operating or maintaining systems
Also if the weather is so bad you can’t have a helo launching to do ASW… how effective is a submrine going to be at attacking surface tagets? Seems to my land lubber mind that anyone with half a brain will have decided to go deep and wait out the storm.
French, Aussie, Dutch and Canadian? That is beyond ridiculous
Have a look at the table. It doesn’t make happy reading.
https://www.navylookout.com/under-gunned-royal-navy-warships/
In a ti ship I can believe it actually.
The Navy lookout article did have some rather major issues though.
For example: Simply listing “Does this ship have this and ASW weapon Y/N” isn’t actually a good way to compare navies.
All very promising, something that I think pretty much everyone on here has been looking for. Surface launched cruise missiles has been a big gap in our capability for a long time.
Excellent news. Its been a hopeful week for the RN. Am looking forward to learning what is selected as the interim AShM.
With this announcement and the one the other day in up arming the T45s is great news. Perhaps the MOD & RN have realised that ‘fitted for but not with’ isn’t a realistic deterrent in today’s world. Let’s hope so.
I’d still like to see more sets purchased of the interim AS missile, maybe another 5-10 so all the T45/T23s can be fitted out too (pending how many Harpoon are still left in RN inventory) and sooner than later. Ships will need to able to deal with other ships and land and subs and not just shoot stuff out of the sky. Then like Canadian T26s you have canister launched ASMs as well. It’s good that this future ASM is progressing. Mach 5, jeers, that’s some zip…
Nice positive trend of late regards RN vessel armament improvements.
I’d prefer more helicopters myself. That surely is the most flexible weapon.
Hope some more of the extra spend finds its way to RAF and Army programmes in due course.
Comrade Borisovic did say that Da RN would be the most powerful navy in Europe?
IRL it is the cheapest promise to fulfill rather than Amy or RAF…as the platforms are there and most of these upgrades are pretty obvious integrations…..try doing that for the army and weep at the time and wastage….ironic really that the service with the most complex, biggest, heaviest bits of kit actually has sorted it most.
Tongue firmly in cheek, sort of…
Excellent point Daniele, as the RN has lost 50% of it rotary fleet in the last 20 years. I think all 34 Wildcats should move to the navy and be replaced with another 50 Apaches (which are the bargain of the century in my opinion), as well as trying to get the mothballed Merlins operational if at all possible and keep the pumas going until the next Gen rotary is available from the USA. once the valour and defiant helicopters are available I think we take a decision to replace the whole fleet (excepting chinook and Apache) with this class… Read more »
I believe the mothballed Merlin are goners mate.
This is unexpected news ,T45 to be up Armed and now T26 getting a bit of punch is the Government waking up.😀🇬🇧⚓🚀
Is the picture of the joint anglo-french Perseus project?
Yes but Perseus was just a concept for FCASW, the actual missile may not look like that.
Just hope this missile doesn’t get nicknamed “Percy”…lol….and apologies to all the Percy’s out there…. Mind you it might be all black and look like a penguin…
How about “Pursuit”…as that’s what it’ll do..?
No, No, not Pingu..
Yes
Good news but there is a few issues. It looks like we could get a 200-300 mile range supersonic/hypersonic missile by 2030. So it looks like the original plan for the FC/ASW is still on track. However, there is a few points that need to be looked into. The FC/ASW will be a good weapon I hope with good range able to deal with high end targets, but what about smaller targets or targets that are say 40 miles away, do we really want to expend a hard hitting or long range missile for that. Would it not be an… Read more »
Ron, from reading the latest articles around, it appears the speed and range of the missile could be either 300km mach 5 which is what the French want, or 1000km subsonic which is what we want as we wish to fight from distance where possible. The French already have the MDCN for this role. If we go for the mach 5 version then we get a much smaller 150kg warhead which will not be suitable for bunker busting for us. The 500kg warhead version is not fast enough to engage or the French. The other role the French need is… Read more »
T.S, I agree that is why I was thinking of using the NCM for long range and land attack whilst having the FC/ASW for high end targets, such as FFG/DDG/ Carriers and coastal radar defence sites. The MdCM-NCM is available and as I also said there could be a possibility of converting Storm Shadow to the NCM. The NCM is based on Storm Shadow/SCALP so it might be possible and cost effective. The only issue that I have is that these missiles are expensive and limited in numbers on a ship. So possibly a third smaller anti ship missile that… Read more »
is CAMM not suitable for this purpose, if we standardise on the ER sizing and then decide on more boost or larger warhead (extended range or greater punch), perhaps it would take more than one missile, but surely cost effective, especially if we quad pack into a std sized VLS cell.
I think we are better opting for the 300km mach 5 version. Tomahawk can be continuously improved for long range strike and produced in significant numbers to keep the cost down. We need gucci missiles to take out high value strategic targets but also thousands of cheaper long range missiles to target infrastructure bunkers and other strategic targets.
Sea Venom, which is carried by the wildcat, and just entering service has a big enough warhead to knock out enemy vessels up to the size of corvette’s at a range of 20km,
Remember when everyone got a flap on because the City class was going to be equipped with a Mk41 VLS system with “nothing in it?”
Oh yes.
It’s almost like people are really keen for the MoD to fuck up.
I was commenting about it on twitter the other day, people don’t want good news stories they want to tear their clothes and wail in dispair.
The old British put ourselves down and find something, anything, wrong.
I got a bit dissolusioned with Miltwitter the other day when the Ajax news broked. People seemed positively gleeful, like they’d been wanting the program to go tits up and now, that it had problems, where effecitvely out in the streets partying.
Pretty much haven’t posted much on there since.
Surely the big issue with all of these types of anti-ship missiles is the transformation in soft and hard kill defensive systems on warships . If the JSF can manipulate its radar to jam missiles imagine what the t45 radar can do…
More good news…..
Can I ask those in the know; why are people panicking re the anti ship missile and asking for it now? Who has the sea power to take on NATO? My amateur view was that Russia has no chance against NATO in a hot war. I suspect China will have a credible force in around ten years.
China has a credible force now to project power in the South China Sea and over Taiwan. I don’t think it could match the US and Japan further north or in the Pacific. Either way the Royal Navy would really just be a token force.
Thing is Dave if you take the likes of US UK FRA GER away how many NATO members would actually fight.The GERs look like they may think twice at the moment.🤔 And for seapower other nations couldn’t bring much to the board game.
Poland and the Baltic states would def fight add Norway and Denmark and after that your struggling. With one or two you might even ask on who’s side ?
Sounds about right .
Reading off the wiki page, it claims that FC/ASW will be an air launched/sub launched cruise missile, anti-ship missile, land attack missile and be hypersonic to boot. Having it on Typhoon covers the ALCM/AShM and probably land attack roles, integrating it into Mk41 on the Type 26 gives it an SSM/land attack capability. It would be nice for the P8s to get it too, though odds are those will get JSM/LRASM, whichever also fits the Lightnings if they do at all. All that rambling aside (apologies for that), it’s the sub launched bit that got my attention as that, along… Read more »