Record £1.9 billion export deal ‘contributes to bolstered security on NATO’s eastern flank’, say Ministers.
In a recent round of written responses provided to parliamentary questions, the Ministry of Defence discussed the implications of the £1.9 billion missile export deal between the UK and Poland.
This major agreement was brought up following a query by Daniel Kawczynski, Conservative MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham.
Kawczynski questioned the Secretary of State for Defence about the Department’s assessment of the impact this deal might have on collective security. Responding to the query, James Cartlidge, the Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, described the substantial strategic benefits that the agreement brings to NATO allies.
Cartlidge stated, “MBDA’s export agreement announced on 28 April will see 22 Polish Air Defence batteries equipped with the UK’s Common Anti-air Module Missiles (CAMM) and launchers.” He also emphasised that this contract is “the largest ever UK defence export to Poland and one of the biggest deals of its kind in NATO.”
Importantly, Cartlidge outlined the implications of the deal on collective security, explaining that the agreement “provides a significant enhancement to the short-range air defence capability of a key Ally on NATO’s strategically important eastern flank, bolstering both Poland’s and the Alliance’s security.“
CAMM is great but we desperately need something bigger, land based aster 30 with an ABM capability. Is it still the case that we are developing a bigger version of CAMM with Poland?
Yes, even the Aster Samp/T, now deployed in the Ukraine, why the b****y hell doesn’t the UK get off its butt and order some of these? Said it before, “shared inventory” with the RN. Italy and France already doing it. And join in on hypersonics and interceptors with MBDA.
‘arse’. One is British.
The problem is Blighty is tightly packed and target rich. Where would the missiles (any type) be placed to cover all eventualities? Politically, an attack would be war, not a warning, so all in straight away.
Methinks better to be well prepared and well armed to defend well prior to be ever being attacked.
“we desperateley need”??
For England only big systems make sense due to distance from Russia:
So Arrow 3 or Standard 6.
What about Scotland and Northern Ireland, I guess we are all writing off wales 😀
Haha
I’m hurt that the Isle of Man didn’t get mentioned!
🖕
Hmmm…the boys from Wagner have evidently been busy shortening the odds for the UKR–evidently, they managed to shoot down a high value Ilyushin II-22M airborne command post a/c on their sojourn toward Moscow. Honestly, you couldn’t fabricate/replicate this sort of f**k up on a bet, on the part of the Orcs! 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😆😁
Questions for Mr Cartlidge, and how about some CAMM-MR for the UK Sky Sabre too? Any developments with quad pack CAMM, Containerised CAMM, or even MK41 CAMM?
And will 🍄 CAMM be able to take CAMM-ER/MR? Happy for 🇵🇱 and well done all involved, but don’t forget the 🇬🇧 and watch out for all the competition!
I suppose you could technically fit a CAMM-ER cannister into the standard CAMM hole on a T23. However it will stick up at a minimum of an additional metre, due to the ER’s extra length. Therefore, it would be sitting above the ship’s splash shield around the “mushroom farm”. Which is probably not a good idea. The question would be, is there enough space below the farm that could be used to house the additional metre or more of the cannister, so it doesn’t sit proud of the splash guard? These would also be similar questions for the T26, 31… Read more »
Thanks DB, I guess there’s classic CAMM for shorad and ER for medium range and then the later MR for longer, maybe faster and higher too? Also saw the other day a 4 x Marlett/LMM mount on a 20-30mm RWS mount on Navy News (I think). Shows that it can be done, looks a bit clunky though. MSI Seahawk could rework their 30mm RWS+LMM, maybe also reduce down to 4 and add in an efflux deflector?
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/06/video-knds-and-thales-add-missiles-to-rapidfire-gun-system/
What is interesting from that video, is that KNDS have also added a radar to the Rapidfire turret. This gives the turret a CIWS capability.
“efflux deflector” Any chance of me buying one of those for my staff toilets, might stop the cleaning moaning…..
That’s next level… Lol…😆
CAMM-MR is medium range at 60km.
Hi Meirion, I hope they can do better than just 60km as that’s not much better than the existing ER! Please Sir, we want a bit more zip, altitude and distance! Is anyone listening to us here?
Quentin, the CAMM-MR is still under development, it’s range may go well beyond 60km. CAMM is still limited to about 10km altitude, so Aster 30+ BMD, is the way to go for very high altitude.
Yes, just waiting for “Aster-EX” (pun intended) to manifest. MBDA also has a high altitude interceptor in development but I don’t think the UK has signed up to this? Seems to be a further evolution of Aster but I could be wrong there. Good that the UK is updating its Aster.
If we were to consider CAMM-MR, then the Land Ceptor’s Giraffe radar will need replacing. Giraffe will still be ok with CAMM-ER, though there are better radars available.
It still hacks me off that Martlet is not soft launched like Starstreak. In that it doesn’t use a similar first stage short duration booster to kick the missile out of the tube, before the main engine kicks in. Thales could have easily included the soft launch or even an compressed air system, but they didn’t. Thereby limiting to how the missile can be installed.
CAMM-MR is more for somewhere between A30 and A15? And that is a pretty high performance missile. Almost as soon as Army got Sky Saber they wanted to stop that acquisition and get some thing better. Which was ridiculous as they would then have nothing in the inter regnum. Sky Sabre is pretty useful for defending HQ etc but it is not a sector or theatre control system. ER would be sector control and MR getting close to theatre…..depends of course on the size of the theatre……. There was mention of CAMM-EX….at one point….whether that is MR or something else… Read more »
It’s more “CAMM-EO” at the moment if nothing is happening for GBAD. It’s been mentioned before that the Army has only just purchased 11 new Giraffe radars. Would these be used with a future GBAD?
There were always 10 sets of Sky Sabre in the offing.
11 makes sense as one for a fixed training setup.
GIRAFFE is no use for GBAD it is a local radar for local battle airspace control.
Given that GIRAFFE is pretty good you could hook up more units that are just CAMM carriers to the GIRAFFE network and thereby increase covert and coverage density.
Morning SB, correct me if I wrong but don’t both Sky Sabre batteries in the Falklands and Poland have Giraffe? If they do it can’t be that useless and should be able to handle CAMM-ER even MR if made more powerful?
PT, tell you what needs to be a lot better right now and that’s the English batters! They can’t handle Aussie pace bowlers too well. Hopefully Stokes and Duckett can hold it together and pull through.
GIRAFFE is far from useless. It is an excellent and affordable system that works perfectly well.
It just doesn’t have the range, on its own, for theatre control which PT / MR combos would require.
However, there is no real need for the radar to be local other data sources can be used to create a radar-of-radars
Hi SB, I have heard that the requirement for the Polish MR version is 100km. In which case, it’s likely going to be a two stage rocket system. Haven’t heard if the forebody dimensions are changing, but I do expect it to be longer. There was also that RA Officer, who at the acceptance parade, said in an interview that they would be getting a longer ranged version of CAMM. Following the Lancet attack on the IRIS-T SLM’s radar. Which kind of shocked me, as Ukraine were given the latest Hensoldt TRML-4D radar. Which is a mechanical rotating C-band new… Read more »
Gepard is a tone dial telephone on a SystemX exchange in an iPhone era: amazingly it still works for making telephone calls! OK the analogy won’t work when POTS is withdrawn soon.
It all depends on the filtering used in the other units. Was there a minimum land speed for target recognition set? Could be a lot of reasons for apparent failure. Could be just a poor Ukrainian operator: they are not all superman. Maybe the operator got distracted or froze or misinterpreted the outputs?
I think that’s a fair analogy. The TRML is one of the very latest radar systems. It is also one of the first that incorporates a limited AI. From what I remember it’s a pattern learning system, that is supposed to help determine if a fleeting and intermittent object is a missile or aircraft that is radar stealthy. Before Germany gave Ukraine the IRIS-T SLM, Russia had been using Lancet for at least 6 months of the conflict. Hensoldt who make the TRML radar, would have known what the threats Ukraine were facing. I’m certain they would have tested the… Read more »
Sea Ceptor has an anti-surface capability that can take out small boats etc
When the news the T31 was to get MK41 vls I think it was a Navy Lookout article that said UK needs to ensure we develop missiles that can fit into the MK 41. Can CAMM-ER fit the MK41? I believe it can as MK VLS 5.6m long (tactical not strike) and Sea Ceptor which is being replaced by CAMM could be quad packed into a single MK41 canister. As an aside the downside of MK41 is its unlikely to be able to take a hypersonic strike weapon with any range. US has already acknowledged this and has developed an… Read more »
Are you aware that the missile used in Sea Ceptor is CAMM ? Sea ceptor is the Weapon System CAMM is the weapon. And as for quad packing CAMM in a MK41, that is a very big waste of resources. Its really designed for TLAM, VL ASM, Standard missiles etc.
The whole advantage of CAMM is it is a Soft Launch missile from its own launcher.
from what we know so far the 32 MK41 silos for the T31 are going where the CAMM soft launchers were going..so it seems the type 31 will get the 32 MK41 launchers but not cold launch silos for CAMM. So I think we will fine CAMM in MK41 silos in the T31.
Not necessarily. The Danish vessels have Mk 56 VLS next to the Mk 41 VLS.
Precisely
Yes but that space is taken up by a boat bay in the T31..so unless they start doing some redesign…the PowerPoint going around just showed the MK 41s…
CAMM are quite short and could be moved to the foredeck as in the T32 models.
Mk41 going as per the Danish version.
Why would we do that ? The original Iver Huitfeldt has 2 MK56 VLS right next to the MK41. The space and weight is reserved for another missile system and besides which MK41 are a very expensive VLS system. It will be used for the next generation FC/ASW missiles or TLAM.
CAMM is a soft launch system and is using a MK41 is just not needed.
No it’s a rubbish waste…but you have to remember the MOD are cheap…these ships will have 32 MK41 silos, they will not be filled with mainly standard missiles ( like the U.S. does) so what would the RN put in them….the MOD is never stumping up and having the 2 east of suez based T31s having 32 next generation strikes Missiles each…never happen…maybe 8 or 16 at best….so what will the RN do with all those other 16-24 empty MK41 silos…run them empty…or put Air defence missiles in them….the MOD was debating if it was putting more than 16 CAMM… Read more »
CAMM in MK41 is not saving cash.
You need another launcher inside the MK41.
I suppose we will need to wait and see, it would be good if they did fit both MK41 silos and CAMM soft launch silos……
The CAMM soft launchers will already have been ordered and be a in a warehouse by now as they would be on the long lead times items list.
It also means that there is commonality of systems across the 3 warship platforms.
So the question really is: physical space?
I hope they do…but I’m not sure about the space looking at the boat bays and mission bay lay out….they are big ships, but 32 MK41 and 16 individual CAMM launchers is a lot of space and the T31 has a lot of space taken up with mission/boat bays.
As for the ordered CAMM soft launchers they can easily be put over for the T45 upgrade program.
I’m pretty sure it will be 16 Mk41 given the T32 layout.
With the CAMM kept separate.
Yes I could see that, if you re read all the spin there is no promise of 32 MK41s…just to platting was in place for 32 of them and that they were getting MK41 and a study was underway…
so yes maybe we will see 16 MK41 and 16CAMM. But even that is a very strong fit for a GP frigate…
What I’m really not sure about is the lack of a hull sonar….that’s a saving to far.
Why 16 CAMM? 🍄 CAMM is in sixes, so if 4 lots likely to be 24.
There has been a lot of discussion around minimum fit. I don’t believe there specifically needs for CAMM to be fitted in any specific numbers, the soft launch silos are all bespoke..not like MK41 that come in modules. I specifically used the 16 number as this is equivalent to the AAW fit of the majority of the FREMMs and is a reasonable base line.
Probably should not categorically state T-31 heavy strike load out will never occur; the two T-31s to be stationed East of Suez, may become precisely those which are loaded for bear. This could depend upon how malevolent the scum-sucking slimeball ChiComs appear to be at that time. 🤔
Honestly you have to remember that UK has never been big at carting around large war loads of missiles…you can really see the RNs view of how many strike missiles it needs from the Type 26 design…with 24 silos, so I think best count would be something south of 24…..to be honest I think one of the really interesting things could also be will when the RN takes forward its work on a more integrated air defence system…as you could have the T31 acting as a forward silo for sea viper with a load of Aster 30 missiles.
That’s not true. The Mk41 vls is in addition to CAMM/ Sea Ceptor mushroom farm
We don’t have any evidence of that mr Bell, the RN are undertaking exploration of the weapons fit…we don’t actually know if they will be the whole 32 MK41…if you look back at the announcements…it was announced that the plating would be put in place for up to 32 MK 41 (that was back in 22) then in 23 they confirmed that the T31 would be fitted with MK 41 launchers and they were going to work up what this would look like with the ship builder and manufacture…so we really have no idea…only our individual thoughts and hopes.
We will see as soon as George buzzes it on launch!
Other advantage of a build shed things are more secretive than our on the hard.
Yes, CAMM Cold launched from a canister.
Apologies, yes your correct, was smashing out a response to DB and got mixed up. Why is it a waste of resources to put the longer CAMM-ER missile in VLS? Or does CAMM ER fit the existing soft launch system? Or is it unnecessary to have the longer range of CAMM-ER?
Yes, CAMM-ER could fit in the tactical length (6.8m) Mk41 VLS. The missile is 4.2m long and the cannister that houses it is no longer than 4.5m, I believe. The CAMM-ER has a slightly wider diameter at 190mm compared to 166mm. But I have yet to read if the cannister is wider? From what I’ve seen they are the same widths. So in theory, yes it could still be quad packed if required. I have mentioned before in another post that the 7.7m depth of the strike length Mk41 VLS is too short, for a decent ranged (1000km+) hypersonic missile.… Read more »
Meanwhile from Naval News a MBDA PR from Formidable Shield 2023
with Aster successfully conducting single-shot kills against all targets.
On FCASW, I see that its stated it will be VLS and Sylver 70 compatible, Sylver 70 means its MK41 strike length for FCASW. So I would be very surprise if we go for tactical length on the T31 as it would limit the deployment one of our future weapons. With designs for the T26 and T31 frozen we’re going to have nothing capable of launching a hypersonic weapon with decent range until T32 or T83. I saw somewhere the new US system was based on a 87″ tube with 3 hypersonic missiles triple packed. That’s big. If we end… Read more »
Totally agree. I cannot see the point of the tactical length Mk41 on the T31. It severely limits current and future missile options. The 87″ tube is interesting, as that must be the tube’s dimension. Which is over 3 times larger in diameter than a standard Mk41. I know in the past the US have used Minuteman missiles as the launch vehicle for hypersonic test vehicles. Though at 16 to 18m long, depending on the variant, they are bit too long for a ship. Looking at the Angle-French blurb on the FC/ASW requirements. I believe the hypersonic version won’t be… Read more »
Hope the UK will be able to adopt both versions of the FC/ASW and not just be limited to one. If future vls missiles are going to be too big for MK41s shouldn’t there be some preparation for that by the UK ship designer’s or are these just going to be kept the SSNR subs?
Agree the tactical length MK41 is essentially there to carry standard missiles…as the type T31 would be using CAMM why would you bother. The strike length MK41 is there give flexibility…I’m not sure we will see 32 of them on the T31 as there is no way the RN is buying the strike missiles to fill them. I’m betting we see maybe a fit of 12-24 MK41 silos and. A fit of 12-24 CAMM soft launchers…if they went for 32 MK41 launchers we would see no Soft launchers and the MK 41 isles would end up having a lot of… Read more »
Cheers Jon, just to clarify. The Mk41 uses cell group sizes of 8, ie 8, 16, 24 etc. Though the Lockheed Martin EXLS uses a cell group of 3. So they batch up as 3, 6, 9 etc. For CAMM they can be quad packed as per Mk41. Once the T45 gets CAMM it should have the ability of giving interception updates to another ship’s launched CAMM. I would also expect the T45 to be able to give a launch command via datalink to a T23, 26, T31 and T32 as well. It will be interesting to see how the… Read more »
CAMM could theoretically still be put on the sides of the MK41s and if they split 2 MK41s forward in the B gun position and 2 aft, maybe a 24 CAMM farm is still possible in the back plus room for 2*4 NSM or even forward.
Hmmm… therefore, no matter the choice, tactical or strike length Mk41s, the entire issue will need to be revisited in the 2030s, when hypersonic weapons are matured?!? You know that will occur as a result of AUKUS Pillar 2 R&D, paced by scum-sucking, slimeball ChiCom R&D. 🤔😳😱
Yes, in all probability. It looks like the Zumwelts will be the first ships modified with the new bigger VLS. As I’ve heard that the USN want to seriously up the offensive capability as a possible supplement/replacement for the TLAM carrying Ohios. I can’t see them going on the Arliegh Burkes. If there were to be fitted they’d have to give up some Mk41s. Perhaps this is an option for the future DDGX program that replaces the ABs?
Makes apparent sense, hadn’t read about the proposed change for the Zumwalts. The ABs may be nearing the end of the evolutionary change line, but believe DDG(X) design is a relatively clean sheet.
The canister of the CAMM stays put so will not need the launch tolerances needed for a missile.
Type 45 plenty of space, they havent fit strike length canisters so even though they are adding more missiles into the reserved space the gym that occupies that void space will remain.
Good thing the gym space is still there. those sailors need to keep their displacement under control
Navy Lookout Twitter post stated that HMS Defender’s upcoming maintenance/overhaul period (3-4 yrs.) will include CAMM insertion. No details provided.
And Portsmouth news says she returned to Portsmouth yesterday to start her refit including PIP, Radar, CMS and adding CAMM.
👍 Hence, the extended project timeline. Presume this will be the first DDG overhaul which includes all major projected upgrades/updates.
I did have a chuckle when people started saying the overhaul would take 3-4 years. All it means is that this type of ship is due and overhaul between every 3-4 years. And this is that type of overhaul. The idea that the overhaul would take 3-4 years was TBH hysterical – even MOD couldn’t manage that….. Now that PiP is properly debugged it will be much faster from having done the first three T45 and so the risk(s) of adding the Sea Ceptor project on top of it is/are much less. The radar upgrade has already been done and… Read more »
Hope your interpretation is correct, from text envisioned all subprojects accomplished serially, rather than largely in parallel. 🤞🤞
Think that could be around 2026..
A gym next to a magazine, with missiles on top and behind you, what more exercise motivation could one want? Lol 😁.
Wonder if they’ll give the 🍄 CAMM silos a wee stretch and make it 8*4 for 32+48 Asters. 80 is more useful than 72!
Pizza hut and play grounds priority targets for Russia
Awful when civilians get caught in warfare. Those responsible need to be held accountable and not escape justice. In Iraq many civilians were killed by “Allied” missiles. Will Bush/Blair ever face justice?
Did bush or Blair approve the targets to be hit? Can they be held responsible for a target approved by someone else?
Nato forces have come along way in minimising civilian casualties over the past 20 years.
Still things that go bang in a war is a risky business for anyone near by.
It will be unlikely any Russian will be held responsible for hitting a target.
War is awful, Russia could end it today by going home.
NATO don’t deliberately target civilians Russia do unfortunately . It’s a shock horror game that’s backfiring on Russia all its achieving is harder fighting & motivated Ukraine troops and probably Uk & USA long range weapons systems will be approved . Russian need to home they don’t have the troops or modern weapons to win this war .
I not defending Russia at all for the awful war crimes they are commiting on a daily basis. They need to be tried and punsihed after the war. But WMD, come on.
Err who mentioned WMD ? He just said long range U.K./USA weapons. Which means giving the Ukraine ATACMS and the full bore Storm Shadow.
WMD were found. The failure is that there were no working WMD program going on.
Oh dear your desperate efforts at misdirection are poor! In Iraq many civilians were killed, yes, but not intentionally! You have a command chain which made multiple efforts at preventing mis-strikes (collateral is a term I never liked) but on occasion due to targeting errors, technical errors or EF tactics, it did happen! However it wasn’t an SOP, or an effort at terror warfare like our Nazi criminals in Russia headed by Putler are doing. If you even make an effort to justify a similarity then it does go a long way to show your real agenda!
Like Putin, Blair “believed” that the nation he represented was under threat and invaded a foreign land to neutralise that threat. The truth is Blair like Putin had a hidden agenda. The RAF/USAF/RuAF etc know that there will always be civilian deaths when they unleash weapons from the sky.
Ha ha ha lol cheers for that.
False equivalence is your friend. Iraq under Saddam in 2003 is the same as Ukraine in 2022. Aiming, deliberately, missiles at non military built up areas as the Russians do nearly daily is the same as attacking military infrastructure; apartment blocks (hundreds) hit by Russian missiles is the same as Iraqi bunkers and airfields, chemical weapon facilities notified as targets beforehand. Civilian women and children raped by Russian infantry or freeing same fleeing from Basra under fire in 2003 by British infantry are equivalent. Several around here with experience regret all loss of life and have acknowledged that as a… Read more »
False, most of civilians were murdered in terrorist attacks by Alqaeda-Tikrit Saddam tribe alliance. And also Iran alliance with the cleric i am not reminding his name.
On a side note liberating France in WW2 costed only in aerial bombing about 70000 French civilians.
I had a spare moment. Happy to assist. Frost002 will be better informed if none the wiser.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqtada_al-Sadr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-Zarqawi
Zarqawi founded al-Qaeda in Iraq. This organisation he used to slaughter Shia Moslems in order to promote civil war, the rise of an Islamic Caliphate and ever onwards.
Poland are really not taking any chances. Sky Sabre and CAMMMR development as well as now buying Patriot and PAC 3 missiles from the states.
https://www.army-technology.com/news/us-approves-sale-of-48-patriot-batteries-to-poland-in-15bn-deal/
PATRIOT and PAC3 for now in smaller number but then CAMM and CAMMMR for the bulk of the defences.
Presumably the front end of the CAMM can be added to the back end (motors) of ER and MR variants?
And what’s being done for the UK’s GBAD? Are the decision makers down at the pub or at the cricket?
Canada getting 16 P-8s too. Wonder if the UK will ever get a few more if it can afford it?
Will Canada actually buy all 16 – they have a habit of anointing and not doing too much?
I agree UK could do with 3-5 more P8.
I see France has conducted a Hypersonic missile test 2 days back!!
Just to put this into CAMM purchase into some perspective, the US has just done a US$15bn Patriot sale to Poland! Not sure what that is in pounds but it’s an awful lot. Making Poland to be the best protected country in Europe in terms of GBAD. Surely now the UK (and others) also needs a tad more in their GBAD department? Would the UK ever consider Patriot and its been made MK41 compatible too? Wonder if MBDA’s Aster-Samp/T would even get a sniff at this?
PATRIOT is an exorbitantly expensive system.
It isn’t the way you would approach things with a clean sheet of paper.
It makes you wonder how Poland can afford it unless it’s part paid by the US. It’s all good for Poland European security. The USD are quite staggering. Shows you potentially how much others are missing out on these sales. Pity the Aster Samp/T didn’t get gig.
Maybe they don’t want to have too much to do with anything the French can stuff up?
Micron’s antics didn’t go down well anywhere even in the EU.
However, when A-NT is real it will probably be the medium range pan-European ABM solution as UK is on the project too.
Because Polands economy is going like a freight train at the moment 2.7% growth which double France or Germany.
While CAMM has its place in UK defence, we’re missing proper GBAD anti missile systems, Israel is the world leader in this technology. Now that Israel has been allowed to sell Arrow 3 to Germany it’s time for UK to partner with Israel on Arrow 4 development/purchase or purchase Arrow 3. Having both the ability to respond to a nuclear attack with a counter strike is not enough of a deterrence to use of or blackmail by a nuclear power. The ability to defend as well as retaliate is a necessary requirement to focus the minds of those that would… Read more »