Subscribe
Notify of
guest
19 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cky7
Cky7
May 14, 2016 12:17 am

TD, so glad you’ve got around to writing this series and am absolutely loving it so far! Is that a typo t third pararagrapg be,ow the picture of the 4 missile launcher though where it says sdb3 is able t get out of dodge quicker ha Chad a longer range? Surely spear would be superior in both these cases, your first sentence does seem to indicate that’s what you meant to say…..

HMArmedForcesReview
HMArmedForcesReview
May 14, 2016 5:08 am

Hope SPEAR 3 comes on time and target or the F-35B for the UK will be not much

The Other Nick
The Other Nick
May 14, 2016 10:04 am

The SPEAR Cap 3 is specifically designed for the F-35B. It is hoped to be deployed in the early to mid 2020s, but the UK after the F-35 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase no longer has the status of a Level 1 partner and as yet no agreement reached with the JSF Program Office for the integration of Meteor or SPEAR Cap 3, inclusion will become dependent on numbers of a/c ordered what priority it receives. A presentation by the JSF Program Office ‘Proposed Weapon Growth’ showed integration of SPEAR Cap 3 late in Block 4.3, so to achieve. 2025 IOC might be optimistic based on the software implementations history of the F-35,

The Block 4 weapons bay will have to be re-designed for all partner nations to accommodate new weapons including Meteor (with cropped fins) and SPEAR Cap 3, also the F-35B weapons bay is a harsh environment for weapons with temperatures over max. limit on landing, not sure if this has been fixed.

The SPEAR Cap 5 MBDA French/UK missile IOC 2030-35.

Some info. taken from Iain Barker, Defence Science and Technology Laboratory’s (Dstl’s) weapons integration team, Royal Aeronautical Society’s (RAeS’s) ‘Delivering Capability: A Balance Between Weapon and Platform’ November 2015,

HMArmedForcesReview
HMArmedForcesReview
May 14, 2016 10:18 am

Is it really 4 per internal bay? Makes it 16 SPEAR 3 possible to wipe out a whole tank squadron then?

crj
crj
May 14, 2016 1:15 pm

@HMAFR, only 8 I think (4 each in 2 bays). Still a pretty useful load though, surely?

crj
crj
May 14, 2016 1:33 pm

The vertical launch version is fascinating: at the risk of attracting mirth and derision, any chance this and a CAMM or two could be shoehorned into something River-sized…?

Don
Don
May 14, 2016 2:37 pm

It is claimed camm is able to fit on a opv over 50m . With the rivers at 90m it should be possible but they would have to be designed to accommodate it. With 2 new rivers on order it would be sensible to design the spaces for camm even if it is not fitted thus allowing for easier potential upgrade . If spear 3 and camm can share the same vls launch system this would give the rivers a good step up in capability.
Radars and weapons personnel would have to be accomadated also.

Brian Black
Brian Black
May 15, 2016 7:14 am

If you find yourself wanting missiles plonked all over the Rivers, you’d probably be better off building something other than the Rivers in the first place.

The UK doesn’t have a strategy requiring short-legged missile boats, and if it did, there is only a further two (unordered) Rivers planned.

The Other Nick
The Other Nick
May 15, 2016 10:44 am

Daily Mail reporting today that a £411 million MoD contract poised to be placed with MBDA for SPEAR Cap 3, will fund continuing development and be in production in four years. Will be in service with the F-35B in 2025.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-3590638/MoD-missile-deal-MBDA-worth-411m-secure-700-British-jobs.html

Rudeboy
Rudeboy
May 15, 2016 1:31 pm

crj
Don’t forget the 2 Meteor on the bay doors as well, all whilst retaining LO.

shark bait
May 16, 2016 6:51 pm

The exact same launcher as CAMM? Including cold launch?

That makes it sound much more exciting for a naval application

Don
Don
May 20, 2016 11:10 pm

Spear 3 being mooted with “antiship capability”.

How many spear 3 would it take to score one hit on a type 45?

How many spear 3 to disable a type 45?

How effective as an antiship missile would it be ?

shark bait
May 21, 2016 8:42 am

The jet engine and wings should allow it to fly a low path, couple that with speed and slow profile it should be reasonably survivable.

It’s biggest survivability features would be a salvo launch, using the same tactics brimstone uses to communicate between missiles and coordinate a saturation attack. 8 from a single F35 could stress defensive systems.

The warhead it small, so to have a real effect it would need to be smart with its terminal guidance and pick out the important bits. Think of a brimstone exploding inside the mast of a T45, it certainly wouldn’t sink the ship, but it would seriously reduce its ability to fight, and would leave the door wide open for further attacks if necessary.

Those tactics should be possible if it build upon the advanced systems inside the brimstone.

Against smaller craft it would certainly be effective, but with those targets it wouldn’t be making best use of the large range.

Ship launch for land and surface capability definitely need to be explored, especially if it can be launched from a CAMM cell.

Julian
Julian
May 21, 2016 10:35 am

I don’t see much about the warhead size. It’s described as bigger than Brimstone 2 and smaller than SDB-II but I couldn’t see any actual numbers (maybe I missed them?). In all the Brimstone / Spear cap 3 stuff the only number I saw was 6.2kg for the main warhead on legacy Brimstone.

I’d really like to understand how Spear cap 3 warhead is likely to compare with Brimstone 2. Can anyone give any pointers (even if it’s to stuff I missed in TD’s articles in which case apologies)?

shark bait
May 21, 2016 1:18 pm

Brimstone is 50kg with a 6kg warhead, spear is in the 80-100kg so can we expect the warhead to be 15kg?

Certainly not enough to sink a ship, but enough to disable it if placed correctly.

Donald_of_Tokyo
Donald_of_Tokyo
May 21, 2016 1:37 pm

@SB

> The warhead it small, so to have a real effect it would need to be smart with its terminal guidance and pick out the important bits. Think of a brimstone exploding inside the mast of a T45, it certainly wouldn’t sink the ship, but it would seriously reduce its ability to fight, and would leave the door wide open for further attacks if necessary.

Totally agree. If can hit the radar on escort such as T45/T26, the F36B parking on the deck of CV, or the bridge of LSD, it will be “critical”. The ship may survive, but will be “out of war” for at least days, and probably months. Since there will be only 2 T45s escorting CVTF (another one on Amphib TF), if a saturation attack by SPEAR3 was effective against 1 T45’s radar, all the CVTF shall be forced to retreat.

Another point. Because of this “criticality”, if not “lethality”, escort fleet need to shoot down “every” SPEAR3. A Typhoon can carry 12 of them. So, T45’s ASTER missile will be totally consumed with only 4 Typhoon attack.

Actually, you do not need ASTER to shoot down SPEAR3, it is very very expensive, highly agile, capable SAM. Here, I think CAMM is the right choice.

Then, I think adding 48 CAMM on T45 (24 at the wall of Sylver launcher, and 24 around the hangar), and make her missile 48 ASTER30 + 48 CAMM will be very nice…

Chris Werb
Chris Werb
May 22, 2016 3:17 am

Add a booster, daylight CCD camera and IIR (if possible – IIR, SALH and MMW all fit together into GBU-53) and you have an Exactor with >3x the range. The problem is it would presumably have to fly quite a high trajectory to maintain line of sight for its datalink (unless via a UAV, plane or satellite) and you would probably lose signal as it dived in to hit its target. That’s unless it went in on GPS/INS and a third party lased for it. Assuming what it was targeting was not in the missile’s threat library, DGPS alone is pretty accurate, but given it’s relatively tiny warhead, I’m not sure circa 3m CEP would be good enough in many instances.

JohnHartley
JohnHartley
September 28, 2016 8:11 pm

Helicopter launch from a Merlin perhaps?

19
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x