In the past few days, HMS Dauntless has completed a high-intensity live-fire training exercise off the Welsh coast, engaging a range of uncrewed air and surface threats in preparation for participation in the Carrier Strike Group (CSG25) deployment to the Indo-Pacific.
The ship’s company have spent the last two weeks operating from Devonport undergoing an Operational Training and Assurance Period (OATP) which is effectively top-up training for generated platforms that have already passed BOST. This is focused on the ship’s next tasking and is also used to assure ship’s internal training systems are working.
Exercise Sharpshooter, held off the MoD Aberporth range in Cardigan Bay, served as the final test in Dauntless’ training package and was designed to replicate the kind of complex, sustained attacks currently being faced by warships in contested regions such as the Red Sea.
The Type 45 destroyer engaged a mix of real and simulated threats, including jet-propelled Banshee UAS (200 knots), Hammerhead USV (40 knots) targets, and persistent virtual attacks to test her sensor suite, combat systems, and layered defences. This exercise marks the first time a Type 45 has faced and defeated a complex mix of drone threats at this scale. It follows a similar threat profile to that encountered by HMS Diamond in the Red Sea in 2023, when she successfully intercepted multiple Houthi-launched missiles and drones, including the first use of the Sea Viper system to destroy a ballistic missile in combat.
Dauntless responded to the attacks using her full defensive gunnery arsenal. The Phalanx CIWS, 30mm cannon and 4.5-inch guns were employed against fast-moving aerial and surface targets. The embarked Wildcat helicopter also launched laser-guided Martlet missiles which can destroy small targets at up to 6km range.
Additional instrumented static targets were placed at sea to provide data capture on weapon effectiveness and engagement performance. This information will feed into ongoing test and evaluation efforts, improving future iterations of RN tactics and systems development.
The scenario was structured to apply pressure on the crew over extended periods, with attacks taking place by day and night, mimicking the fatigue and operational strain of real deployments. The exercise confirmed that Dauntless is ready to operate as a fully capable air defence platform within the Carrier Strike Group.
There have long been complaints that FOST serials to prepare ships to defend against swarm attacks by USVs or UAVs were not realistic enough and conducted on too small a scale, too scripted or too reliant on synthetic simulations. This exercise demonstrates the threats are being taken more seriously and training has been increased in intensity.
The five-day exercise was coordinated by Fleet Operational Standards and Training (FOST) personnel, supported by QinetiQ staff. More than 350 people were involved with industry partners working closely with the RN and the Minister for the Armed Forces, Luke Pollard MP was on board to observe the exercise first hand.
Dauntless’ crew will now go on Easter leave before joining the Carrier Strike Group for its spring deployment which begins later in April.
Ah, HMS Dauntless—always a sight to see a Type 45 flexing her muscles! Sweaty work off Cardigan Bay, wrestling Banshees and Hammerheads—gets the Sea Viper throbbing nicely. The lads clearly know how to handle her—firm grip, steady aim, and not shy about going in hard.
Back on HMS Iron Duke—”Dukey” to her friends—we skipped the fancy OATP foreplay. Straight into a rough-and-tumble thrashing with a stiff upper lip. Keeping the 4.5-inch singing sweetly and coaxing the 992 radar to behave when things got a bit frisky was the name of the game. Credit where it’s due—Dauntless looks ready for CSG25, more than just a flash of her assets, I’d wager.
And a nod to HMS Diamond, the temptress of the Red Sea, batting away Houthi advances with a practiced hand—she’s always been good at keeping unwanted attention at bay. Seems the Type 45s are back to rising to the occasion with plenty of staying power.
Is this Leslie Phillips?
To coin a Royal Navy recruitment ad: raised on Carry On, matured in the Royal Navy
😆
Were you typing this with one hand?
Type 992 was never fitted on any T23s. Never heard of the Iron Duke being called ‘Dukey’ either. The whole fleet (flotilla now unfortunately) called her Iron Duck (aka West Indies Guardship).
Russ, you old salt—appreciate the steer, but I’ll stand by the old girl’s pet name. Sure, not every hand got cosy enough to call her Dukey, but those who did were usually the sort who kept their fingers in more pies than just the one on the mess menu. All in good fun, mate—always a pleasure to cross swords over a tot of rum!
Fair enough shippers 🙂
Huehuehue! Nicely crafted. Makes me feel ‘pumped up’ and raring to go, somehow..
Is that a type Gopro camera stuck the glass in the main photo ?
Of course, Diamond has the whole suite of ‘socials’
No no no… That’s not a T45, That’s the new T31 !
As reported on various news sites earlier this week !
It’s a T45. It IS Dauntless!
No Jimmy was correct it is a T31, it was reported also on RAF Luton with a picture taken from a canberra
Good to see training adapting to emerging threats, wonder how much of Diamond’s experiences in the Red Sea made it into the syllabus in time for that, or if this had already been in the works for a while.
Wonder if Martlet was used in A2G or A2A mode, or both.
Looking forward to the point we have that extra layer in the form of CAMM.
And Dragonfire. Not sure what’s coming first. Last time I looked, Dragonfire was scheduled by 2027 (four ships) and CAMM was end of 2026 (first ship, Defender) to end of 2032. It could be a close run thing.
Good point, I’d forgotten that! You’d like to think that they’d schedule the refits for the same time, at least for 2026-27. So (in theory), Defender would be first to have both Dragonfire and CAMM.
Best laid plans and all though, doesn’t mean it’ll work out like that..!
Will it have enough missiles to handle all their 2 bob rockets?
Geo politics suggest that the CSG will be roughly handled.
Might be seen as an easier target / might be to put us in our place.
Local yahoos will be taking orders for the welcome that somebody else wants to give us.
The Red Sea will be a tough gig — there is also the Norse angle.
Land based torpedoes to mix things up — thinking caps on.
Static torpedoes — aka mines — plus real ones as well.
All
Before moving onto the really cutting-edge stuff – like debating the best type of new ray guns to order from Santa Claus next Xmas – the RN really needs to get its basics right!
According, my first comment must be
and so moving onto the even-more-advanced stuff,
Wildcat with Martlet makes a decent attack helicopter, especially against lighter armoured vehicles.
the CSG will have F35s if they want to do anything particularly agressive.
CSG — needs to be mob handed.
If we own it then it should be on it.
What else would they be doing — gathering dust in the UK?
The ability to walk and chew gum would be an advantage.
We need to fire the starting gun and see how we respond.
Two flights onto PoW — Ready for next week?
Surely it would not upset the AAC holiday rota for the half terms?
Try and do stuff at real world pace not MOD pace.
Donny John is struggling — could get messy.
And we would be stuck right in the middle of it.
Shame we dont use the gun POD on the F35 which could be a good anti drone AA weapon
Ian
Mixing up the various different componants of a muliti-layered and multi-ship naval air defence (AAD) systems is never ever a good idea….
It poses a very severe risk of a blue-on-blue…..
Second US Navy fighter jet narrowly avoided being shot down in ‘friendly fire’ incident: source | Fox News
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Sailorbouy
Wrong!
Wildcats
As RAF have been experiencing with their state-of-the-art targeting imaging system on their Typhoon’s recently over Yeman……the key issue is (always) actually spotting the real shooter in amoungst all of the civilans
Every recent operational report – USN. USAF and RAF has said that the Houthis are excellent at playing hide and seek….
And, remember remember…..you can only fire a Martlett (or Hellfire) when the ROE says you have positively identifed the target as hostile……which is often a easier said than done….
So the Wildcats sensor kit is nothing like as good as the Apache in that regards!
F35
Remind me, to launch F35’s
= which is not easy in a narrow seaway little wider than the grand union canal
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
PS and unless you know differently: according to their offical website – the Toyota landcruiser – favoured by the Houthis for its reliabilty and off-road mobility characteristics – is not ever fitted with a manufacturer’s option of light armour
2025 Toyota Land Cruiser Specifications | Toyota.com
Therefore, to evade in incoming missile = one simply parks ones Toyota sideways onto the incoming threat direction – then one winds both windows down – and the missile flies right through the vehicle – and out the other side…
Apache doesn’t have any sensors with an advantage over Wildcat’s for identifying targets, they both have FLIR, high powered TV and a good high resolution radar.
Martlet is also almost certainly better than Hellfire for avoiding civilian casualties; it has a much smaller warhead and more manual guidance, so you can make sure it only damages the correct target.
F35s don’t need the carrier to turn into the wind as much as you do for CATOBAR, they’ve even landed facing backwards so I doubt forwards airspeed is as important. The ski ramp helps there.
(Ackshually, I have passed my GCSEs, so there.)
Sailorbouy
Fair point about the smaller warhead.
However that simply means the Martlet missile (note 4) has to be very accurately manually aimed – during its entire flight time – so as to actually kill the intended target with a direct hit (or be very close).
————————-
Manual guidance – aiming the missile whilst the nintendo playstation is being balanced on his or her lap is key skillset which all new Biggle’s must perfect during the very long period when their helicoptor has its “L” plates fitted….
… so that technique is all well and good = until somebody on the ground starts shooting back at the Biggles flying the helicoptor
Which, due to our very onerous health and safety rules, is not a technique ever practiced here in the UK during that aforementioned pilot training!
Shooting at a whirrybird is known as AAD or AAA in the trade (note 2)
So – at that point in time – when lots of Mr Shrapnels stuff is flying through the air, usually with some tracers following it …….Biggles changes the previously-briefed mission objectives….
…….and so, at that point in time….Biggles quickly decides that self-preservation is far more importaant than hitting the intended target….
……hence playing with the Nintendo gets forgotten
….thus the missile looses lock – and so it goes walkabouts…..
……a bit like a blind person who’s guide dogs leash has just broken….
……and thus misses (note 4) the target
= so it then often kills what most US pilots call “collateral damage”
——————
.
so, the USA lost over five thousand of their whirrybirds to AAD/AAA during in Vietnam War
= which is why General Norman Schwarzkopf (note 3) was then put in charge of developing the Apache ground attack helicoptor
……..which has the “fire and forget” hellfire missle
Indeed so important is that “fire and forget function” – it is key part of the Hellfire’s unique eight letter acronym!
Ultimate Guide on AGM-114 Hellfire Missiles: Capabilities and Cost
Remind me – was’nt the lynx the predessor to the wildcat?
BBC NEWS .| UK | British helicopter was shot down
Funnily enough, the same thing quite-often happens to fixed wing aircraft flying in war zones when there is AAD and AAA flying about…
2005 Royal Air Force Hercules shootdown – Wikipedia
So should the Army Dress Committee now consider reintroducing live firing at Biggles – whilst they are still in training – at Middle Wallop?
—————-
I have to agree to disagree with your comment about the F35 take off
Yes, it can land in most places most of the time (that skill set probably has something to do with Sir Issac’s Newton’s invention of gravity (note 1 – part 4)
However, for the F35 to be able to take off with a good payload of air to ground munitions – which is the role I was specifically discussing yesterday = the F35 will have to be quite-heavily loaded.
= and thus the carrier will need to turn into the wind…..(also note 1).
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Houthis are a political group who took over the capital and government of ( northern) Yemen along with the regular armed forces.
The Saudis tried bombing the hell out of the North when they launched an attack/war ( Putin Style) and that didnt defeat them either
Its effectively the former North Yemen where most of the people live and follow the same brand of Islam. The Southern Yemen was the former British protectorate around Aden.
Do let me know how you’d buy and integrate a new weapon system within the next month or so into Dauntless and how amazing your training scenario would be.
Hugo
There should be nothing at all amazing about what I have just suggested!
Because….
According to the RN’s own offical website, all of the 40mm mounts were ordered five years ago.
Thus all of the UK / RN guns were supposed to be manufactured in 2023/2024
Thus the RN should already have been training; it should also have been procuring the 40mm diameter pointy bits (wot shoot out of the business end) etc
Furthermoe, the urgent need for the 40mm out in the Red Sea was identified fully 12 months ago = when the T45 ran out of warshot missiles
Accordingly, if the RN is not 100% ready to introduce the 40mm into active service ASAP – heads should roll at Whale Island and MOD whitehall (note 1)
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
NOTE 1
To replace the 30mm on just our escort fleet would require 2 dozen or more mounts, at a time when we don’t even have enough 30mm or phalanx for the entire fleet. Until the 40mm enters service on the Type 31 I don’t think we’ll see it on any other design, and even then it will probably only be on new builds.
Hugo
With respect – you have not, answered my one key point
If the RN brought the 40mm in 2020, and they were supposed to have been manufacturered by now = where are they?
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Waiting to be fitted onto the Type 31 class, fairly sure I saw that we had received all the weapons
We have loads of 30mm mounts and Phalanx.
The numbers were gone into by NL a while back.
With Albions and T23 draw down as well as other platforms the could mount them I’m not seeing a shortage. There may well be other reasons for not fitting them – lack of WEs?
That is another good reason for the 30 -> 40mm switch they use a lot less manpower.
30mm stocks are unclear, but they may not be fitting older versions.
We do not have enough Phalanx in stock for the upcoming T26 fleet and none have been ordered.
40mm switch, if it happens will only be as ships are replaced
Hms Diamond didnt run out of missiles. It didnt even use a quarter of them.
Stoney
This article was here on Navy Lookout almost a year ago
Royal Navy reveals more details of HMS Diamond’s epic deployment in the Red Sea | Navy Lookout
So – the b****ing obvious question is coming next:
“So why did the ship have to return to Gibraltar to reload?”
Peter (Irate Taxapayer)
The ship was diverted to the red sea and leave cancelled. The stop at Gibralter was to give leave to the crew. While it was there, they took the oppurtunity to refill the 10 or so missiles that had been used.
By the way l am a non irate tax payer. Taxes fund our armed forces, my kids education and also your blood pressure pills!
Stoney
Thank you for update on the number of missle used during Round 1.
Point taken .
However if that was the one and only reason for going to Gib (i.e. crew leave) then one has to ask (note 1) why was the ship simply not docked in HMS Cyprus – which is far far closer to the Red Sea than HMS Gib?
It also says a lot that the RN was totally relying on just one T45 to fight a hot war!
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Note 1
If I was nasty suspicious old git = I might also suspect a software update (for ABM?) was being written and tested by Q branch (i.e. here in Blighly) during that Med cruise!
PS
Irate Taxpayer,
The blood pressure comment was my (poor ) attempt at humour.
Couple of points, l am sure you are correct about revised softwarein the light of the missile shoot down. You would expect this in the light of real world expdrience. I imagine the US navy has done the same with aegis as a missile fired at the uss Gravely evaded all defences exept the last one…….the much derided phalanx gun system!
And what is the effective armed combat range of an Apache gunship?
It seems to me the Type 45 did what was designed to do, defeat an air attack, and by the sounds a simultaneous surface attack by drone craft.
Martin
What happened last year in the Red Sea was different – very different – from what is now being planned for the RN’s CSG 25 later this year.
In 2024 the USN was on hand, with their excellent and very battle-hardened Eisenhower carrier strike group. ..The T45 were under the very effectively coordinated command system of the USN
Thus in 2024:
I do not deny, for one minute, that the RN crew (singular) out on the RN T45 (singular) in the Red Sea did a good job.
However those were all short single ship actions.
The T45 was only acting defensively to protect itself and a relatively small sea area around the ship.
Then, after not very long at all……. it expended all of its munitions.
In 2024 the RN carried out no offensive actions whatsoever: i.e. to try to “shoot the shooters operating on land”
It will be, this time around…only the RN…..no USN
Defending a complete carrier group, in the very confined and very narrow waters of the Red Sea (at its narrowest ten miles across) will be a completely different kettle of fish from 2024 (very small and very shallow kettle – and lots of fish)
.
The last time the RN went into anything like a similar situation was back in Libya, (before that Iraq 1991 and Falklands 1982).
This time the RN CSG has nothing like enough escorts; and many of what is deployng are our allies: and we have (noticeably) not been working up with those allies (hence my comment about all training needing to be very realistic)
It seems that the RN has forgotten, over the past fifteen years, just how vulnerable their warships are when they operating close inshore in the litterol near a hostile shore
For example, off Libya, HMS Nottingham was heavily shelled by artillary; and to use the techical term “it then had to do a runner“.
Thus the Apaches “did the buiness” operating off HMS Ocean.
For the record, the Apache has an effective combat radius of about 150/250 miles (depends on loiter time). That is more than adequete to cover much of Yeman.
Therefore in 2025, the Houthis will be using all three types of threats – air, surface and underwater – simulataeously. That is in a very narrow and very confined waterway.
Unforyautely Carrier Groups are never very good in such constrained cirmstanaces: there is simply not the sea room to manouvere and evade – definitely not at high speeds (think Malta in WW2)
The RN has never done it before…….,
and even the the USN has only once (2024) and even the USN had to withdraw!
CONCLUSION
Only a very naive fool woud deny that….
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
PS.
And I am not the first one to point out here on Navy Lookout that the RN has nothing like enough of its own escorts out at sea at any one time
…..- hence my earlier remark, made first thing this morning, about the T45’s being “Drydock Queens”
Finally: get it wrong just once = the coffins will be in the black hearses driving out slowly from the RAF’s main gate – and then even more slowly through Carterton High Street…
Note 1
And, just for the record technically you are wrong on all counts
…..- back in 2024…… the T45 (Adml Parry’s Folly) dd not do what it was orginally designed to do.
The T45 was really only ever designed for deep ocean work: and thus to defend against airplanes and cruise missles. That is why the T45’s puny computer brain cell struggled to cope with the Houthi ballistic missile threat last year! (Note.The crew had to improvise = BZ boys and girls)
The USA sending a second carrier into the red sea, so they are not worried by these brilliant tacticians in Yemen, nor were the French who sent the Charles de Gaulle past Yemen and Iran with no thought of seeing her sunk.
Just do not exaggerate the threat and even the ability of the new technology.
Just look at what Russia has had to do to fly observation drones in Ukraine, stick on the end of a 5 or 6 Km thin fiber optic wire because of the jamming of radio signals , some thing as straight forward as that nullifies there ability.
Martin
Firstly the French have not been attacking Yeman
Secondly, the Donald has recently made it very clear that if the Houthis attack any USN ship, or indeed any other commercial ships, then US will directly attack Iran
That is why B2’s from Whiteman are now at Diego Garcia as we speak (its called detterence)
I am not exaggerating the threat – and I did not ever call them brilliant tacticians
However IF the Houthis want to attack a western target – so in direct retaliation for our own RAF recently attacking their country – then the RN carier group is the next very obvious target
And for jamming to work: we have to know their frequencies…
(so, do we?)
It does not have to be an attack with new technology: any old explosive device will do….
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
‘ Donald has recently made it very clear that if the Houthis attack any USN ship, or indeed any other commercial ships, then US will directly attack Iran”
There would be zero US flagged commercial ships passing through the Red sea straits
US attacking Iran directly would probably result in immediate closure of the Oman-Iran straits by military action and insurers cancelling coverage. Thats the end of tanker shipments from Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and importantly the main Saudi and Emirati oil/gas fields….for months ?
Such a waste of resources. Humanity needs to be wiped
T45 — look what you could have won …
Day late and a dollar short — well 18M short and a dysfunctional layout.
This is not the 1880’s — the CIWS should be positioned fore and aft.
An extra 18M at the pointy end would allow this arrangement and space for more VLS.
All dumb steel so would not have been that expensive.
Indeed it might have improved her hydrodynamics.
Shape factor vs skin friction — now where did I leave my notes?
Hopefully the T83’s break the 180M barrier.
25M beam would be good for durability / stability.
Go large or stay home.
Crewing at 90 /100.
T45 — percentage time on patrol?
Are we looking at 20% over 15 years?
Or is it worse than that?
Hardly gonna take your advice on ship design. Come up with some actual criticisms like the choice of engines or sonar capabilities rather than the excellent Radar systems, decent amount of VLS, which is being increased or the perfectly adequate CIWS placement
You go on about multiple guns converging yet most US ships only mount 1 Phalanx
I,m a LEANDER guy myself, 1 Assault ship and 2 T23 so all of this is far ahead of me
T45 vs future — interesting debate.
Will the AAW missiles make it to the next gen?
Will the ASurW missiles make it to the next gen — No.
Will the sonar suite make it to the next gen?
Will the VLS tech make it to the next gen?
Will the various radar systems / architectures makes it to the next gen?
Will the powertrain architecture make it to the next gen — No / No / Thrice No.
Will the CMS architecture make it to the next gen?
Will the vessel architecture make it to the next gen?
Will the crew be significantly reduced for the next gen?
Will they find a life elsewhere after the RN?
Three out of ten is we are lucky.
They were building AB’s when we were designing it.
They will be building AB’s when they are being replaced.
Quite a few lessons to be learned.
AAW missiles are continuous improvement within the same ‘airframe’ Thats how it works
VLS ‘tech’ to next gen is laughable claim
and for CMS , just a few months back
Will the ‘tourists’ ever understand the claims they make ?
Mk41 VLS from Lockheed was introduced from 1982.
The claims seem to be a litany of outright fabrications
“ The Phalanx CIWS, 30mm cannon and 4.5-inch guns were employed against fast-moving aerial and surface targets.”
Is interesting – as it implies that the 4.5” mount is AAW capable again with a software module added?
4.5″ — all the way back to 1936 …
Wasn’t it sold as a GP weapon with good AAW capabilities?
To me the 4.5″ gun family was always good for AAW.
Just a case that 1982 changed the focus / public perception of its use.
Plus AAW had been forgotten about as it had diminished credibility in the age of fast jets.
4.5″ / ZX Spectrum computing / large scale radar vs Yahoo drone off Amazon = fair fight.
More shells than missiles so it is now in the mix — do we have an AAW round in use?
Thrifting the threat.
ZX Spectrum computing — that is all it would need.
“To me the 4.5″ gun family was always good for AAW.
Just a case that 1982 changed the focus / public perception of its use.”
In ‘82 it did pretty well as it was a radar controlled gun with compensation.
There isn’t a lot in common with the Mk8 as all of the hydraulics are replaced with servo motors so much more precise.
“More shells than missiles so it is now in the mix — do we have an AAW round in use?”
All the later shells were tri fuzed. So the shells can do AAW proximity fuzed.
The computing isn’t hard but the software module needs to exist. And somebody has to pay to develop it.
Maybe it is a hint that the 4.5” Mk8 will live on with T45? Certainly enough spares with all the ones of T23 going spare early.
Sensibly it probably isn’t worth cutting up T45 to change the main gun but rather focus on other measures?
T45 — the B727 of AAW / unloved when the time comes.
T26.5 — maybe we should save some money with 2nd hand 4.5″.
UK PLC / MOD — Doesn’t do development very well.
UK is too much into lab coats and not into boiler suits.
Discover stuff rather than develop stuff.
I blame the public schools.
Need to be first not the best.
Across the Andes by frog vibe looms large.
Commercialisation requires patience from investors who want to build value not short term dividends.
Unfortunately the City isn’t very focussed on the former.
T45 development angle — we have had 20 years to work on it but when it comes to ABM capability we would appear to be behind both the French and the Italians.
Somebody somewhere is needs a boot up the erse.
Our Harrods level build economics and glacial engineering capabilities means that we are getting less and less from whatever level of spend we can crowbar out of the Treasury.
Which means that we are at the back if the queue for new tech and performance improvements.
Whatever happened to the 90’s vibe that kept the Jaguar fleet in the air on low levels of resources? Was it one guy working his own angle as the rest of the MOD tutted and said that will never do?
Or was it something bigger that ran out of steam?
Low cost delivery is the future if we could find it.
However I do get the City and their stag it business vibe.
Points to a whole industry of monkey managers that realise any surplus they can find on a daily basis.
“T45 development angle — we have had 20 years to work on it but when it comes to ABM capability we would appear to be behind both the French and the Italians”
As far as ABM radar we are in front of them and the tracking was tested on a US range a lot of years ago.
I am told it was very good which reinforced the USN’s very positive view of the work that had been done fusing the 1850 and SAMPSON together.
“Our Harrods level build economics and glacial engineering capabilities means that we are getting less and less from whatever level of spend we can crowbar out of the Treasury.”
The main problem across a huge number of sectors is stop start economics. Same for digging tunnels or building tube lines you need to have one of those kind of projects on the roll at any one time as the skills re perishable and internationally in demand. Both the Queen Elizabeth line and Thames Tideway Tunnels came in structurally close to budget and timeline. That was because essentially the same people slid over from one project to another. If HS2 had not been built into Euston [I don’t get how bloated these costs are either and I PM this stuff] then those people would have dispersed. The problem is what do they do next….if there is no next and there doesn’t seem to be those people are dispersed and the next learning curve is expensive. That is why things like Cross Rail 2 are actually quite important or one of the many tube line extensions that London is crying out for.
Bloated costs — Brewer style price gouging.
Every excuse under the sun brought out to explain price jumps.
Plus project engineering instead of product engineering.
Everything back to square one and no carryover.
Some of which you mention.
Then you have the HS2 angle of a gold plated spec / ignorant politicians with huge egos / no effective cost control / well oiled cheque signing routine with a contactor owned barrel involved — it all adds up.
However all of this does not excuse the MOD and their shockingly bad management of their defence assets / their workforce / the delivery of new assets.
Not sure if we are beyond redemption — second nature now to screw up / we don’t know any better.
RN fleet — how many ships are on the water tonight?
RN fleet — how many ships can we fully crew at the moment?
Still think we are behind the curve with naval ABM.
Some of the building blocks might be OK but we are just now taking baby steps — somebody needs to put the feet to the fire.
“Previously, in December 2022, the MoD signed a contract with MBDA to acquire the Aster 30 Block 1, which will deliver an improved maritime anti-ballistic missile capability. This involves converting the RN’s existing stocks of Aster 15 and 30s to Aster 30 Block 1 standard at MBDA’s facility in Bolton and at DM Gosport.” …it was in NL
The facts contradict your claims
Muddled stories confuse my facts / my claims.
The Aquila programme would appear to be the full fat Euro ABM programme that came up a couple of weeks ago. The bus has left the station and we are not on it.
Full spectrum capability claimed against various Yahoo and non Yahoo attack vehicles — as rockets / fast missiles / super fast space missiles.
As in where we need to be or at least have a map to get there.
A30 Block 1 would appear to be a much more limited upgrade based on what we have to deliver a form of ABM capabilities but pretty limited compared to what other have or are planning.
Block 1 — goes up to XXXK feet.
Aquila — has plans to do XX Km.
Interesting to see what launcher Aquila will use and do we have the metal to use it?
Army capabilities vs Navy capabilities — need to read more.
Main point — we would appear not to be on the Euro NG ABM bus.
Politics suggests that we need to buy a ticket.
Donny John will be about for 4 years at least.
.
Aquila is some future hypersonic study. It doesnt exist in any meaningful sense
But its a project by MBDA and seems to just be extended range 3 stage Aster 30
As Britain doesnt have a land based BMD systems at all the Aster 30 Block 3 would fill any gaps. thats against 3000km class BM.
Update: . Aquila wasnt even selected by the EU defense fund for the HYDEF ‘ study’
2023 news
“Currently, AQUILA fits within an €80 million, three-year concept phase funded by the European Defence Fund (EDF). At a more fundamental level, the weapon is aligned with the European Union’s Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO)-sponsored Timely Warning and Interception with Space-based TheatER Surveillance (TWISTER) program that aims to have an endo-atmospheric hypersonic interceptor entering service in 2030.”
So it has funding through to 2026 at which point a decision is required.
I’d be suprised if it doesn’t get funded even by the UK arm of MBDA – we seem to forget that UK owns a chunk of it as well as the UK bit being sovereign IP.
Seem to have lost a post yesterday with more detail on where we are.
Gist of it — current RN ABM plans will keep us safe if Switzerland were ever to go rogue.
As in limited ABMs out to 600 / 900Km.
Consequently a lot of work to do.
Aster tech path …
Aster 1 / Short range ABM — Signed up.
Aster 2 / Medium range ABM — Not involved.
Aster 3 / Medium range plus manoeuvring — Not involved.
Consequently to me it is baby steps with a lot of work needed ASAP.
I suppose the big question is the ability to use BM’s as anti ship missiles?
US security gum bumpers — journalists / ex military / amateur — are always bigging up the PLAN capability to do a number on USN carriers using some sort of specially developed BM / hyper sonic missile which can manoeuvre as it re-enters.
Base point is how accurate are they?
CoP performance credible against a CVN but not a destroyer?
Does the manoeuvre dimension increase its accuracy or its survivability?
ABM capability / where is the current RN focus — Strategic as in national survival or tactical as in fleet defence?
Finally what is our medium / long term focus?
Aster or Mk41 pathway?
Do you put Aster into Mk41?
National survival ?? Thats the Armys mission for defence of cities
etc.
MK41 is a 1980s era VL hardware thats all. Doesnt add to the capability.
Sylver is the MBDA VL hardware, you confused the missile with the box its fired from.
this is Sylver
National Survival angle — OK then …
When are we going to hand back the task of running the nuclear deterrent?
The Argyles could take over the running at Faslane.
Next door so not much of a jump / challenge.
Aster pathway includes the Sylver launcher.
Next time I might add in a few intermediate steps.
Sylver vs Mk41 — no confusion / well to me anyway.
All very apparent to me — where next for RN AAW?
T45 — Sylver / Aster.
T45 plus — Aster upgrades.
T83 — Will it still use the Aster missile family for med / long range?
If it is going to use the Aster missile — where will it fire it from?
Sylver or Mk41?
Indeed can an Aster be fired from a Mk41?
Or if not what laws of physics are involved?
Plus who would pay for any engineering?
RN vs Missile maker?
Follow the money — profits in missiles vs profits in launchers?
All of this seems to be coming to the boil because of the T31
Seemingly the RN is starting to get involved with Mk41.
And not Sylver — based on what you can put inside.
However …
… it is all cassettes and you can swap between the two systems if you manage the pareto frontier of the hull structure / compartmentalisation.
As in don’t paint yourself into a corner.
Optimisation is good but not at the expense of flexibility.
So future RN / medium VLS — Mixed fleet or just the one?
I would probably go for a mixed fleet and generate price competition.
Extra 20M in the hull and you will be laughing.
Parametric design / variational geometry — the future.
Or swap them in and out as required.
VLS — commodity.
Missiles — near commodity.
Radar — not the secret sauce it once was.
Seekers — tech differentiator.
CMS — Real brains / should be able to handle the complexity.
Integration — big management effort required / not MOD spec 2 year Excel engineers.
Post gone AWOL
For the record I do know the difference.
Just a case for med VLS we started with Sylver and have moved on to Mk41.
Is it mix and match or a change in direction?
RN is receiving the same Aster upgrades as the French and Italians- it was a multi nation project through Thales and MBDA.
However the British Army doesnt operate the Aster as a land based long range air defence and ABM system like they do thats all ( Should be a reasonably urgent buy)
Aster Block 1 upgrades to existing missiles and new buys still happening for RN
Not so . ABM capable Aster 30 missiles are upgraded like their French and Italian Cousins. Including existing RN stock as well as new builds.
Details shown below which refute your claims totally
Fair point but not the full story.
We are not in the long range / fancy hyper missile ABM game at the moment — as noted above.
Next question — should we be in it?
Or does GCHQ have a cunning plan?
MOD capability gaps — I fear they put quite a few eggs into the GCHQ basket.
1980/90’s and the lack of customs guys at airports — seemed strange to me at the time as I sweated over an extra bottle of vodka in my case — who needs it when you can monitor phones for phrases / patterns and catch Mr Big’ish.
Then the Aster 30 — ABM defence / three ring circus.
We have a ticket to the first ring / stage but not sure about the other 2.
So I stand by my comments that we are late to the party and we are taking baby steps.