In all the Eurosatory news this week another story has emerged that is interesting for the UK. Kongsberg make the US CROWS II Remote Weapon System and as a follow up to a previous test firing from a Stryker they done the same from their PROTECTOR RWS mounted on a Piranha V vehicle on a winter firing range in Norway.
The Norwegian MoD sponsored the tests in Rena, two missiles hit targets at 800m and 1,650m respectively.
The Javelin Vehicle Launcher (JVL) allows Javelin to be fired from a modified PROTECTOR mount from under armour.
Since the MoD withdrew the CVR(T) Striker vehicle equipped with the Swingfire missile the Army has not had the ability to fire anto tank missiles from under armour.
We dabbled with the recce overwatch concept with the TRACER vehicle and FRES has also skirted with the idea but the latest information indicates this is longer part of the FRES vision.
So why does any of this matter?
Although the Army uses the Selex Enforcer Remote Weapon System, it also being a licence build, this time the Rafael Mini Sampson, on Ridgeback, Challenger, Bulldog and Panther it has also fielded the Kongsberg Protector in a licence build from Thales in Glasgow.
The Talisman route clearance and proving capability uses the Thales manufactured Protector and it (in the lite version) has also been demonstrated on the Jackal ISTAR.
As usual it would seem, the MoD has managed to duplicate on a relatively simple off the shelf capability but the benefit of the Protector is that it leverages its large installed base, especially with US forces.
Although there is no stated requirement, it would seem that for a modest investment the UK could integrate a single Javelin launcher with its Protector RWS.
Protector also goes to sea (for a long time, by now)
– so commonality there, regardless of platform
Any old FV102 Striker’s around that we could update?
Dave
What I don’t like is the ad hoc nature, sure it could give an APC FRES UV variant an ATGW capability while buttoned up and on the move, but it’s the basic infantry Javelin fibre glass container/launcher by the look of it – this does not compare well with twin armoured box launchers for Spike that have been added to RWS and turrets of many Euro nations AFV’s.
Dave, I’m with you on that one, FV102 updated to Bulldog standard to boot! Waiting for FRES or something like it will take forever, we could have an updated FV102 in service in a fraction of the time.
Ace,
FV102 is CVR(T) based, Bulldog is an upgrade for the FV430 series.
Mr Fred, doh! Apologies, Bulldog is FV430, meant swingfire FV438
Check out these for how forward thinking we were
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7IIOWOprY0
bring back swingfire? shit off, you couldn’t swing a mouse in there and the rear door was the smallest on any NATO vehicle!!!
@ TD – awesome vids – I like the rifle-like controls.
I like the idea of batteries of containers/launchers linked together; upgraded with video cameras/fibre-optic control could be interesting…
A question for those who have user experience.
In a big contact with helicopters and infantry firing off wire-guided anti-tank missiles all over the place….I have always wondered what happens to all the wires? How strong are they? Are they a risk when they are draped all over the trees etc?
How hard would it be to put a multiple launcher for Hellfire onto a SV base chassis?
It has a lock-on after launch mode so it can be fired from defilade, it has a variety of different warheads and attack profiles and the launcher can be used to fire 2.75″ guided rockets.
Mr Fred, I think a vehicular Hellfire launcher has been implemented on a few vehicles
http://www.heartlandmuseum.com/db_launcher3.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fP7ZHF3g3yg/Shtx0UzpSEI/AAAAAAAAAGI/8422PnKmIWQ/s400/hellfire_2_air_to_ground.jpg
http://www.armedforces-int.com/upload/image_files/news/568_first-ever-avenger-hellfire-missile-launch_content_Avenger_Hellfire_Missile_Launch.jpg/
The Canadian MMEV and Thor mounting are also interesting
http://www.army-technology.com/contractor_images/thales/3-vehicle-missiile-launcher.jpg
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/512/mmevconcept25or.jpg/
The Thor concept is a good one for light vehicles – LMM carries a fair amount of bang and each Starstreak dart is roughly the same as a medium autocannon APFSDS shot.
For heavier vehicles something more like the MMEV would seem sensible – The MMEV itself seems to have been cancelled. I’m not sure that a turreted systems is necessarily the answer. Brimstone has demonstrated high off-boresight capability so a swingfire-esque launcher might be possible. Or perhaps a more MLRS-style launcher on a flatbed. The projected P44 missile used a hellfire-class warhead, IIRC, so maybe you could have a launcher good for both.
Hi, ChrisM. I’ve seen TOW wires tightly wound around the main rotor heads of a couple of Lynx AH7, no damage done though.
It was apparently quite a common occurrance. The TOW wires were just a single thin copper wire that could easily drift on the wind and stay aloft for a while once it had played out.
something similiar to the MMEV, but actually made, 8 stingers and 25mm gatling gun. If UK were to do something on the same lines, then use the new 4 barrel 20mm going into the F-35 for commonality (it’s very light as well) and for the missiles either starstreak or LMM