The BAE/ROKE ARTISAN (Advanced Radar Target Indication Situational Awareness and Navigation) Radar is now in service with the Royal Navy, designated the Type 997.
It is an advanced medium range 3D radar with a high level of resistance to jamming, providing air surveillance, target identification and air traffic management services.
The Saab GIRAFFE Agile Multi Beam Radar is now in service with the British Army as part of the Land Environment Air Picture Provision (LEAPP) system being developed by Lockheed Martin in a £100m contract awarded in 2008.
]
It is an advanced medium range 3D radar with a high level of resistance to jamming, providing air surveillance, target identification and air traffic management services.
Both will be used to provide target information for the Common Anti Air Missile (Sea and Land Ceptor) as part of the Future Local Area Air Defence System (FLAADS) land and naval flavours.
The ARTISAN antenna weighs in at about 700kg and was developed at a cost of over £100m, the UK has a lot invested in ARTISAN and just looking at the headline brochure stats looks much more capable.
Saab has a naval version of the lower Giraffe AMB but BAE do not seem to be marketing a land version of ARTISAN.
We have a common missile, gone will be Sea Wolf and Rapier to be replaced with CAMM but different primary search and target sensors.
My question, why no commonality between the land and maritime environments to eliminate duplication and drive down support costs?
If we really want to drive down defence costs, commonality and the elimination of duplication is one of the most fruitful avenues. If there is no good reason for maintaining two systems that do the same thing is there an ‘invest to save’ argument to withdraw the handful of Giraffe radars in service and replace them with the much more numerous and higher performance ARTISAN?
Maximising our considerable investment in ARTISAN and lowering overall support costs, best pack that kind of radical nonsense in right now.