Perseus? I can see a market for it - hypersonic dual role missile? Yes please.. Whether the RN will buy it or not, I can't say but I can see the rest of the Euro frigate owners taking an interest. It'd be a huge step up from Harpoon.
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
kev 99
Member
Maybe, it could well be the case that I'm forming a negative opinion because I can't really see the point in the cluster munitions, if it was a straight up dual role missile I'd probably be all for it, at the moment I feelt he cluster munitions would add a lot to the cost for a rather limited capability.
Hitting a modern warship in two or three places, spaced across the length of the ship will greatly complicate damage control though? And let's face it, the thing ships with an AESA radar with more modes than some front line aircraft used to have - the complexity of sub munitions isn't likely to be a major cost driver compared to that - and I dare say a unitary warhead wil be available, given the broad spectrum of targets it'll be aimed at.
Ian
kev 99
Member
Hitting a warship in 2 or 3 places with a big scary missile sounds great but the RN have never fired a heavyweight anti ship missile in anger and neither have most of the rest of our allies, as such I'm not convinced it's anywhere near the top of the RN's priority list (or even at all). It's not just the possibility of an unitary warhead being available, the sub munitions aren't just guided bombs they're missiles that are contained within the airframe of the main missile and when you add in the guidance systems for those submintions, well that doesn't sound like a cheap add on, to me it sounds expensive.
If I'm honest I can't see what the 2 sub munitions do that just firing another missile wouldn't, and I suspect it's just being floated as a concept right now with MBDA adding as many bells and whistles as they can to show what's possible.
I reckon the best chances of a mission kill are achieved either by a single warhead large enough to assure critical damage as long as it gets a good solid hit, or several small warheads striking upperworks. The latter should give a good chance of putting critical sensors & comms out of action, or might disable self defence systems.
The RAF hasn't made an air to air kill in combat with a missile in it's entire existence as far as I'm aware - I still think it's important they be able to do so.
Perseus has a land attack as well as anti shipping role - something that'll be come more and more compelling in the future.
Ian
kev 99
Member
I agree that the RN should still have anti ship missiles, I'm not convinced that they're as enthusiastic about it though.
I like the dual use role of it, in fact I think it's a something of a no brainer for any large anti ship missile, I just feel that the cluster munitions are gold plating it somewhat.
kev 99
Member
Yes, sorry I meant the heavier weight ones, it's fair to say that the RN are pretty keen on the smaller ones, incidently I saw this while searching for that Perseus video:
http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagallery/news-files/PR_2011-09-16_EN-1-467.pdf
Sounds like FASGW is progressing well.
FluffyThoughts
Member
Hmmm,
Not too sure about the complaints about sub-munitions.
The question is: Can we develop a participating warhead (or plural) to perform a collaborative execution-of-duty that is effective? By 2030!!!
Multi-role, multi-mission, multi-service makes sense: 'Seventies tech' is as relevant today as flairs...!
nfloorl:
Not too sure about the complaints about sub-munitions.
- BROACH : Uses sub-munition to penetrate,
- BRIMSTONE : Uses sub-munition to break defences, and
- STARSTREAK : Uses multi-munitions to ensure [sabot] kill.
The question is: Can we develop a participating warhead (or plural) to perform a collaborative execution-of-duty that is effective? By 2030!!!
Multi-role, multi-mission, multi-service makes sense: 'Seventies tech' is as relevant today as flairs...!
nfloorl:T45 & T26 can deploy with 2 x Wildcats, if they come equipped with FASGW capable of sinking a corvette or forcing a larger combatant to retire then the need for Harpoon is somewhat reduced. I can see the RN's current logic, they have never fired a Harpoon in anger from a T23 but they have had considerable success with Lynx/SeaSkua. A Wildcat/FASGW combo is better suited to the littoral environment particulalry if you have two airframes deployed allowing for near continuous coverage. When looking at the T26, Wildcat/FASGW needs to be included as part of the weapons fit, one will not deploy without the other in a hostile environment. Does anyone know the range of FASGW?
In a major fleet action the UK will have an SSN deployed, which should be able to provide the long range killing capabilities against an enemies capital ships. leave the Wildcats to deal with the fast attack boats.
What ever replaces Harpoon will need to be able to be fired from an ASTUTE Class, so I suspect the UK will mimic the US rather than opt for something like the RBS15 Mk3 heavy anti-ship missile, which is now fully operational.
A two-stage warhead is not the same as sub-munitions, in the generally accepted sense. Both stages attack the same point.
In that list, only Starstreak fits the normal sense of sub-munitions.
eh ???? double take, but right of course, as it was Fleet Air Arm Harriers. Hahaha you had me going there for a minute or so. :rotfl
Last edited:
A bit OT - but I believe a Lightning shot down a Harrier maybe late '60's / early '70's after the pilot ejected -- something I heard on a documentary about the Lightning. After a short segment about the Harrier being the only plane to beat the Lightning to 20 or 30000 feet ( The Harrier vetol'ing while Lightning was taxing).
Still not sure one can count this
It did indeed happen - a Harrier had an unstart near the-then East German border, pilot ejects, the shock of the ejection restarted the engine and the aircraft set off on a gentle climb towards the border, and had to be rather hastily intercepted and shot down.A bit OT - but I believe a Lightning shot down a Harrier maybe late '60's / early '70's after the pilot ejected -- something I heard on a documentary about the Lightning. After a short segment about the Harrier being the only plane to beat the Lightning to 20 or 30000 feet ( The Harrier vetol'ing while Lightning was taxing).
Still not sure one can count this
That plus a Jaguar getting accidentally splashed by an F4 I think...
As has been mentioned, RAF pilots flying FAA SHAR's did a perfectly splendid job in the Falklands, no issues there at all.
Ian
QE assembly has begun now the crane is up and running. The photo clearly shows how the physical constraints of the dry-dock have influenced the size and shape of the lower hull, fits like a bullet in a gun barrel.
Maritime Journal - First QE Class blocks joined at Rosyth
Maritime Journal - First QE Class blocks joined at Rosyth