UK Defense Industry

Can anyone comment on this..  how true or bullshit is this?

BAE Systems claims they have an unmanned combat plane that neither RUssia or CHina low frequency+high resolution radars on development in the future will be able to counter..

BAE Systems' Taranis unmanned combat air system demonstrator is designed to defeat new counter-stealth radars, and may use thrust vectoring as a primary means of flight control and an innovative high-precision, passive navigation and guidance system, an AW&ST analysis indicates

Taranis is a blended wing-body shape with no tail surfaces, like most UCAS designs for wide-band, all-aspect stealth. It has a triangular top-mounted inlet and 2-D V-shaped exhaust nozzle. The underside is flat, with visible outlines representing weapon-bay doors. Panels under the leading edge point to provision for a dual-antenna radar like a smaller version of that fitted to the B-2 bomber. The demonstrator may be designed so that functional weapon bays and sensors can be installed for a follow-on program.

The Rolls-Royce Adour engine is mounted low in the center fuselage, behind a serpentine duct. Two small doors are visible on either side of the raised centerbody, and are likely to be auxiliary inlets used at low speeds. The weapon-bay outlines are on either side of the engine and the forward-retracting main landing gears are outboard of the weapon bays. The demonstrator's gear comes from the Saab Gripen.

The wing leading edges are highly swept to reduce head-on radar cross-section at all wavelengths. The double-V trailing edge is swept more acutely than on most blended wing-body UCAS designs. Unlike the Northrop Grumman X-47B or the Dassault-led Neuron, there are no short-chord wing sections or short edges: The shortest edge is more than 11 ft. long.

This most likely indicates Taranis is designed to avoid detection by very high frequency (VHF) early warning radars such as those being developed by Russia and China as counter-stealth systems (AW&ST Sept. 2, 2013, p. 28). VHF radars can detect some stealth shapes with wing and tail surfaces close in size to their meter-range wavelengths. When that happens, radar scattering is driven by “resonant” phenomena not affected by the target's shape.

Full report..

http://aviationweek.com/awin/broadband-stealth-may-drive-taranis-design


Also have anyone heard or read about the book of Robotics in the battlefield?
It appears US is working in low cost ,unmanned intelligent drones that can be used in the hundreds if not thousands
to overwhelm enemy defenses..and radars ,to keep them very busy and vulnerable to attacks..  The tactic americans
are researching is not only with mass attacks on Russian /chinesse defenses with very small intelligent drones.. but also taking into account the cost/performance ratio.. cost of S-400 missile vs a $1,000/$500 drone for example.. Here is the book cover.. shows a massive wave of intelligent drones formation that looks like birds.. that seems quite challenging saturation attack to counter with either missiles or gatling guns..of a pantsir..  



http://www.cnas.org/the-coming-swarm#.VMIfgodLOUk

For such kind of technology.. Thousands of intelligent Birds like drones , i do not see the S-400s or S-500
becoming effective against that.. Neither Pantsirs or BUk or TOrs..This goes to a question i had long time ago.. about how effective are Russian defenses against thousands of drones saturating their airspace at same time. That will be the only way NATO could consider to try if ever a conflict happens.


The only system i can see to counter such waves of drones is with counter electronic jamming..or emp attacks ,
but perhaps they are also exploring ways to make their drones anti jamming..  Looks interesting the research ..wonder if anyone read something about Russia ways to counter such massive attacks if in the near future NATO develops such technology.

So what, the radar range spectrum is very broad and they can not make it stealth against all bandwidths at the same time, if long waves don't work they will search for medium with longwaves and triangulate the planes.

Vann7 wrote:

Can anyone comment on this..

BAE Systems claims they have an unmanned combat plane that neither RUssia or CHina low frequency+high resolution radars on development in the future will be able to counter..

BAE Systems' Taranis unmanned combat air system demonstrator is designed to defeat new counter-stealth radars, and may use thrust vectoring as a primary means of flight control and an innovative high-precision, passive navigation and guidance system, an AW&ST analysis indicates

Taranis is a blended wing-body shape with no tail surfaces, like most UCAS designs for wide-band, all-aspect stealth. It has a triangular top-mounted inlet and 2-D V-shaped exhaust nozzle. The underside is flat, with visible outlines representing weapon-bay doors. Panels under the leading edge point to provision for a dual-antenna radar like a smaller version of that fitted to the B-2 bomber. The demonstrator may be designed so that functional weapon bays and sensors can be installed for a follow-on program.

The Rolls-Royce Adour engine is mounted low in the center fuselage, behind a serpentine duct. Two small doors are visible on either side of the raised centerbody, and are likely to be auxiliary inlets used at low speeds. The weapon-bay outlines are on either side of the engine and the forward-retracting main landing gears are outboard of the weapon bays. The demonstrator's gear comes from the Saab Gripen.

The wing leading edges are highly swept to reduce head-on radar cross-section at all wavelengths. The double-V trailing edge is swept more acutely than on most blended wing-body UCAS designs. Unlike the Northrop Grumman X-47B or the Dassault-led Neuron, there are no short-chord wing sections or short edges: The shortest edge is more than 11 ft. long.

This most likely indicates Taranis is designed to avoid detection by very high frequency (VHF) early warning radars such as those being developed by Russia and China as counter-stealth systems (AW&ST Sept. 2, 2013, p. 28). VHF radars can detect some stealth shapes with wing and tail surfaces close in size to their meter-range wavelengths. When that happens, radar scattering is driven by “resonant” phenomena not affected by the target's shape.

Full report..

http://aviationweek.com/awin/broadband-stealth-may-drive-taranis-design

Might be just obfuscation for simple Low altitude maneuver. Thus utilizing the radar's horizon limitation to avoid detection.

I don't see any indication that Taranis will have B-2 size or "super sophisticated" material that can be thin enough to work at VHF.

Stealthflanker wrote:

I don't see any indication that Taranis will have B-2 size or "super sophisticated" material that can be thin enough to work at VHF.

Updated my post check again..

Werewolf wrote:So what, the radar range spectrum is very broad and they can not make it stealth against all bandwidths at the same time, if long waves don't work they will search for medium with longwaves and triangulate the planes.

apparently the claim is the Stealth will be against all wave length of radio spectrum and that the unmanned plane will not have any tail or mobile part ...

Vann7 wrote:

Werewolf wrote:So what, the radar range spectrum is very broad and they can not make it stealth against all bandwidths at the same time, if long waves don't work they will search for medium with longwaves and triangulate the planes.

apparently the claim is the Stealth will be against all wave length of radio spectrum and that the unmanned plane will not have any tail or mobile part ...

Sure if they want to make PR to counter any assertions that their stealth planes are not as stealth and completley "invisible" like they said for the past decades then let them mumble, reaiity is that is not the case and is already very hard to create a stealth object against long waves.

Vann7 wrote:

Updated my post check again..

That thousands of drones sounds to me like overglorified and clearly overexpensive version of chaff. Thousands of drones mean it would be small... Small drones means small payload.. small payload means small powerplant.. small powerplant means it cannot go as far, as fast or as high as real planes. Which would mean if those drones start appearing then the launcher must not be far.. Drop Iskander or even BM-30 there will solve the matter.

Buk, pantsyrs and S-400 may not even need to pay anything but some processing power at most to extract real planes or precision munitions from that flocks.

BAE Systems claims they have an unmanned combat plane that neither RUssia or CHina low frequency+high resolution radars on development in the future will be able to counter..

Yeah... and the SA80 is the best rifle in the world...

What access has BAE systems had to Russian and Chinese radars?

BAE Systems' Taranis unmanned combat air system demonstrator is designed to defeat new counter-stealth radars, and may use thrust vectoring as a primary means of flight control and an innovative high-precision, passive navigation and guidance system, an AW&ST analysis indicates.

Typhoon doesn't even have thrust control engines but they are going to develop an unmanned aircraft that has no flight control surfaces or tail to make it stealthy...

It appears US is working in low cost ,unmanned intelligent drones

Lots of mutually exclusive terms in that sentence already... I would say a 125mm grape shot round could be developed and fired at the clouds as they approach.

Also where will these thousands of drones be launched from? Destroy their transport before they are launched.

Here is the book cover.. shows a massive wave of intelligent drones formation that looks like birds.. that seems quite challenging saturation attack to counter with either missiles or gatling guns..of a pantsir..

Some trained hawks?

Nah... I would say a mixture of airburst rounds like ANEIT and some grape shot rounds would suffice for most of them.

doesn't all have to be 125mm rounds either... 57mm shells both grape shot and time fused would deal with many of the numbers.

Besides for them to work together they would have to communicate, so jamming, decoys and tactical nukes over the airport from which they came.

And when they say cheap do they mean cheap like the F-16 or cheap like the F-35?

The day starts great already...

It appears US is working in low cost ,unmanned intelligent drones

Lots of mutually exclusive terms in that sentence already... I would say a 125mm grape shot round could be developed and fired at the clouds as they approach.

Also where will these thousands of drones be launched from? Destroy their transport before they are launched.

Thank you, GarryB.

GarryB wrote:

BAE Systems claims they have an unmanned combat plane that neither RUssia or CHina low frequency+high resolution radars on development in the future will be able to counter..

Yeah... and the SA80 is the best rifle in the world...

What access has BAE systems had to Russian and Chinese radars?

BAE Systems' Taranis unmanned combat air system demonstrator is designed to defeat new counter-stealth radars, and may use thrust vectoring as a primary means of flight control and an innovative high-precision, passive navigation and guidance system, an AW&ST analysis indicates.

Typhoon doesn't even have thrust control engines but they are going to develop an unmanned aircraft that has no flight control surfaces or tail to make it stealthy...

It appears US is working in low cost ,unmanned intelligent drones

Lots of mutually exclusive terms in that sentence already... I would say a 125mm grape shot round could be developed and fired at the clouds as they approach.

Also where will these thousands of drones be launched from? Destroy their transport before they are launched.

Here is the book cover.. shows a massive wave of intelligent drones formation that looks like birds.. that seems quite challenging saturation attack to counter with either missiles or gatling guns..of a pantsir..  

Some trained hawks?

Nah... I would say a mixture of airburst rounds like ANEIT and some grape shot rounds would suffice for most of them.

doesn't all have to be 125mm rounds either... 57mm shells both grape shot and time fused would deal with many of the numbers.

Besides for them to work together they would have to communicate, so jamming, decoys and tactical nukes over the airport from which they came.

And when they say cheap do they mean cheap like the F-16 or cheap like the F-35?

Garry why bother? Aerial drones are stupid and are susceptible to jamming/ECM, even the old Soviet legacy mobile jamming/ecm station such as Autobaza/Autobase (an export variant even) in Iran made a complete mockery of the RQ-170, one of the most advanced drones in the U.S. inventory. If a export-variant Soviet legacy system could do that to the RQ-170, imagine what the brand new domestic-variant of 'Nightshade' could do to a swarming fleet of drones? No shot would be necessary, 'Nightshade' is said to have an impressive standoff range of 400 km, and would cause hundreds, or potentially thousands of drones come crashing from the sky.

Actually we had aerial drone or UAV long ago, they are the things called "cruise missile" or "guided missile".

Can guided missiles fly ? Yes. Are they floating in the air ? Yes. They are unmanned ? Yes. They have a robotic pilot ? Yes.

Replace the explosive warhead with a camera then you have an UAV.

If AA defense can intercept guided missiles then it is able to find a way to stop aerial drones.

The British Brimstone missile seems to be a further development of the American Hellfire missile... so how in the world does it achieve its purported 60 km range when the hellfire is only capable of 8 km? The two missiles have the same weight and so it's not as though the Brimstone achieves its incredible range by being larger. As usual, I'm stumped.

Probably a lower thrust much longer burning engine and the fact that it is released from fixed wing high speed aircraft instead of low flying helos.

Cyrus the great wrote:

The British Brimstone missile seems to be a further development of the American Hellfire missile... so how in the world does it achieve its purported 60 km range when the hellfire is only capable of 8 km? The two missiles have the same weight and so it's not as though the Brimstone achieves its incredible range by being larger. As usual, I'm stumped.

The negative point with the Hellfire is that it has a fixed algorythm that after launch it will gain 400-600m altitude, even if it is launched from 4km altitude already, this burns extra fuel and with the combination that the rocket engine is a high burning engine it burns its fuel far faster then most missiles. In theory the Hellfire could reach easily 10km + maybe even 15km when launched at certain speeds and altitude of higher than 5km, but the problem is the flight trajectory (always trying to gain altitude) and high burning engine. The brimstone is based on Hellfire with two major things changed, the engine is a slow burning engine it burns the fuel much slower rate, because it is always launched from drones 10km+ altitude, meaning they cut out the algorythm and trajectory of the missile to gain extra altitude because it wouldn't make any sense at such hights. The other thing is the trajectory which is a direct trajectory which cuts the range from launch to target further giving it potential more range and of course that it is launched from fixed wing airplanes giving it the extra velocity, while most launches from Apaches are made with 0 velocity from hovering or at lower speeds than 180 km/h. It also has a multispectral sensor which gives it better target descrimination and lays down the basis at which ranges it can effectivley engage targets, bad SALH seeker on Hellfire 1 missile were the problem in Iraq war with relative short range of less than 4km, despite Iraq being mostly flat desert with good range of sight.

GarryB wrote:Probably a lower thrust much longer burning engine and the fact that it is released from fixed wing high speed aircraft instead of low flying helos.

That occurred to me but I didn't think that it would increase the range to that extent. Even when launched from a helicopter, the Brimstone can reach an astonishing 40 km. As always, thank you for explaining it to me.

Cyrus the great wrote:

GarryB wrote:Probably a lower thrust much longer burning engine and the fact that it is released from fixed wing high speed aircraft instead of low flying helos.

That occurred to me but I didn't think that it would increase the range to that extent. Even when launched from a helicopter, the Brimstone can reach an astonishing 40 km. As always, thank you for explaining it to me.

Brimstone can't reach 40km launched from a helicopter. It would reach 16 maybe 20km launched from 4-5km altitude from an Apache with speeds of 150-200 km/h.

UK Defense Firm Unveils High-Tech ‘Drone Killer’

The world's first fully integrated system designed to detect, track and disrupt small and large drones has been developed in Britain.

The Anti-UAV Defense System (AUDS) from Blighter Surveillance Systems uses radio beams to freeze drones in midair by interfering with their control channels.

These units consist of electronic scanning air security radar, a stabilized electro-optic director with infrared, thermal, and daylight cameras, and a directional radio frequency inhibitor.

The AUDS uses radar and optical trackers connected to proprietary software to detect, track, and identify the drone at distances of up to 8 km, Gizmag Emerging Technology Magazine reported on Saturday.

Once the suspect drone is locked onto, a radio inhibitor/jammer fires a 4-watt directional beam at the craft, which is much more powerful at reception than the signal from the drone's controller.

According to Blighter, the AUDS can briefly inhibit the drone to make the operator think it is malfunctioning or lock it until the drone's batteries drain and it crashes.

In addition to the radio disruptor, AUDS also has an optical disruptor that can disrupt the auto focus on the drone's camera, rendering it useless.

The AUDS made its public debut in May and has undergone testing in Europe and North America in different terrains ranging from open country to urban settings, Gizmag wrote.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20151011/1028337437/uk-drones-system.html#ixzz3oH01AzYA

Interesting feature about Brimstone is that its armed with a tandem high-explosive anti-tank warhead capable of penetrating explosive reactive armour



best looking AT at this moment

The Brimstone advanced anti-armour missile, developed by MBDA (formerly Alenia Marconi Systems) with Boeing as the primary subcontractor, entered a pre-production development programme in 1996. It began quantity production in late 2004.

Brimstone entered service with initial operational capability (IOC) on the UK Royal Air Force (RAF) Tornado GR.Mk4 aircraft in March 2005. Following a series of highly successful batch and service evaluation trials, full operational capability (FOC) was achieved in December 2005.

The system has been operationally deployed on Tornado GR4 aircraft in Iraq and in Afghanistan in 2009.

Dual-mode seeker

In May 2008, the UK RAF issued an urgent operational requirement for an upgrade to the dual-mode seeker, in order to give the missile system a man-in-the-loop capability to reduce the possibility of collateral damage.

The RAF placed an order with MBDA for additional Brimstone missiles in December 2010 and a further order in August 2011. MBDA delivered the 500th missile in February 2012.

MBDA received a £35m contract from the UK Ministry of Defence in November 2013 to supply Brimstone missiles for five years.


Missile demonstration

The Brimstone missile made its first firing against a fast in-shore attack craft in June 2012.

MBDA then demonstrated its precision low collateral capability from a MQ-9 Reaper remotely-piloted aircraft in January 2014, while the maritime capability was demonstrated against a fast in-shore attack craft was in March and April of the same year.

Ground and air launched anti-armour missile system

Brimstone can be ground or air launched. Ground-launched missile firings have been successfully carried out at the Yuma Proving Grounds in Arizona, US.

The system can be fired from fixed or mobile ground launchers and was proposed for installation on the cancelled UK Tracer armoured scout and reconnaissance vehicle project.

When air launched, the missile meets and exceeds RAF requirements for a long-range anti-armour weapon, giving fighter aircraft the stand-off capability of destroying tanks and armoured assets deep behind enemy lines.

Brimstone is being integrated into the RAF fleet of Harrier GR7, GR9, Tornado GR4, GR4A and Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft, and will replace RBL 755 cluster bombs.

The small size and weight of the missile allows it to be integrated onto a wide range of helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft, including the L-159, Hawk and F/A-18.


Brimstone fire and forget missile system

Brimstone is a fully fire-and-forget system, requiring no further interaction from the launch platform or a post-launch target designator.

After leaving the launcher, the solid propellant rocket motor accelerates the missile to supersonic speed.

This motor has a short burn time and very low smoke emission, providing a very low visual and infrared signature, minimising the probability of detection by hostile sensors.


Radar seeker to operate in all weather conditions


Brimstone is equipped with a small, robust millimetric wave radar seeker operating at 94GHz, providing the capability to operate in all weather conditions. day and night. The seeker operates in low visibility and contaminated battlefield conditions, and is not susceptible to battlefield obscurants such as smoke, dust, flares and chaff.

The high-millimetric band seeker provides a high-resolution radar return image of the target, while the frequency gives a small beamwidth and therefore very high angular resolution and reduces unwanted clutter for the given antenna size, which is limited by the diameter of the missile.

The millimetre wave radar enables wideband operation, facilitating the use of very sophisticated electronic countermeasures. Millimetric radar attenuates more rapidly than conventional centemetric radar in rain, sleet and fog, but its advantage is high penetration, in comparison to infrared sensor systems when countermeasures are employed.

Brimstone's seeker incorporates a terrain avoidance capability, allowing it to cruise at a fixed height above ground.

A digital autopilot provides mid-course guidance and uses a high-accuracy digital inertial measurement system for high-precision navigation to locate targets at long range and in off-boresight operations.

The highly advanced guidance system on the launcher's fire control unit and missile uses the target coordinates, course, speed, distance to target, missile trajectory data and data from other sensors to direct the controls and produce the optimum flight path to the target.

Multiple launch firing

In the event of a group of hostile armoured vehicles being identified on the battlefield, multiple Brimstone missiles can be fired in salvo. The missiles can fly out from a single platform and spread out to cover a large area.

Where hostile forces have in-line formations of armoured vehicles, Brimstone can be flown down the same corridor to attack the formation.

Engagement algorithms in the onboard computer reduce the probability of more than one missile hitting the same target. In addition, the fire command and control system can allocate individual missiles to engage sequentially numbered valid targets.

Damage control

During the search phase of the missile flight, the millimetre wave seeker carries out a sweep search for targets on the ground directly ahead and to each side of its path.

For low collateral damage control, the missile can be programmed not to initiate target search until it has passed a given point. This allows Brimstone to safely overfly friendly forces.

Brimstone can also be programmed to cease target search beyond a determined engagement area or to accept a target only within a specified area.

Embedded algorithms can be told to attack only valid targets within a specified area. The high selectivity allows Brimstone to target armoured vehicles and ignore other fixed or moving assets, such as houses or cars. It is also possible to programme the missile to engage targets with a specific radar signature, for example patrol boats.

The missile is fitted with a programmable self-destruct mechanism.


Anti-tank warhead

Brimstone is armed with a tandem high-explosive anti-tank warhead capable of penetrating explosive reactive armour.

The front charge initiates the explosion of the armour and clears the path for the main charge to penetrate it with the anti-tank jet dart.


Brimstone 2 missile upgrade


Brimstone 2, an improved version of the Brimstone missile, features new airframe, millimetre-wave (mmW) radar with semi-active laser dual mode seeker capability, and an insensitive munition (IM) rocket motor and warhead.

It was fired at fast targets with a telemetry system in October 2013 and fitted to a Typhoon aircraft for the first time in December 2014.

Production of Brimstone 2 began in July 2014 and the missile is expected to enter service with the UK RAF in 2018.





The Brimstone millimetre wave seeker.






A Brimstone missile hits a T-72 tank during ground firing trials at the Yuma Proving Site, Arizona, US, in May 2000.

Tandem warheads? Welcome to 1980's.

Heehehe... Tandem warheads... wont do much against ARENA... Nakidka might be a problem too.

Plus at the end of the day TOR can deal with Hellfire sized missiles...

General Dynamics Opens New Armored Combat Vehicle Plant in Britain

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160307/1035931063/general-dynamics-plant-gb.html#ixzz42GOMLtCH

UK Backs MBDA on Mini-Cruise Missile Requirement




Britain's Defence Ministry is expected to extend MBDA’s assessment phase contract on the SPEAR Capability 3 missile program, leaving no room for the moment for Raytheon Systems to secure a foothold in the requirement for it’s Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II), according to a source familiar with the program.

No formal decision has been announced to continue solely with development of MBDA’s Selective Precision Effects at Range (SPEAR) missile development, but the MoD’s Investment Approvals Committee (IAC) has considered the business case in the last few weeks and opted to recommend to higher officials that they continue with work being undertaken by the European complex weapons maker, said the source.

“The IAC met a couple of weeks ago and they have recommended to progress the MBDA option. At this stage their considerations don’t appear to include the SDB II,” the source said.

A Defence Ministry spokesman confirmed the IAC had received a business case for the next stage of the weapon’s development but declined to give details.

“The business case for the next phase of the SPEAR Cap 3 program has been submitted, and formal approval is awaited. No announcements will be made until approval has been granted,” the spokesman said.

Selective Precision Effects at Range Capability 3, better known as SPEAR Cap 3, is one of several weapons being developed for the British military under the SPEAR umbrella.

Responding to reporters' questions during a MBDA briefing on its 2015 results on Thursday the company's UK managing director, Dave Armstrong, said he didn't know the outcome of the IAC deliberations.

He did say though that if things went the way he hoped it was possible there could be a contract agreed in the second quarter of the year.

Although the MoD term the next stage of work on the weapon as a continuance of the assessment phase, Armstrong said it was in effect a development contract.He said the value of the deal could be significant.

MBDA has been carrying out assessment phase work on the SPEAR Cap 3 missile for several years. First mention of the assessment phase was made by the company in March, 2010.The new deal will likely take the program through to a final approval on a demonstration and production phase in 2018.

Raytheon has been looking to break the near stranglehold MBDA and other local companies have on new complex weapons developments here as a result of a government/industry arrangement, and SPEAR Cap 3 was a way of getting a foot back in the door.

The UK arm of Raytheon has been supplying the Defence Equipment & Support procurement organization and the military with data and other SDB II information for a number of years.

Analysts here said they weren’t surprised at a MoD decision to maintain the status quo but said it was just possible the door could open for the US weapon to compete when the demonstration and production phase comes up for a decision in 2018; particularly if Britain’s defense budget is strapped for cash.

A Raytheon spokesman said he would not be drawn on the subject of SPEAR Cap 3.SPEAR Cap 3 is set to be part of the offensive armament of British F-35s to be operated by the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy.

The standoff weapon is being designed to allow the F-35, and eventually maybe the RAF Typhoon, to attack a wide range of moving and stationary targets, day or night with a selective-effect warhead.

SPEAR Cap 3 is one of several weapons being developed for the British military under the SPEAR umbrella. SPEAR Cap 1 is a development of Raytheon’s Paveway IV precision-guided bomb, while Spear Cap 2 is an advanced version of MBDA’s Brimstone missile.

MBDA’s 2-meter long Spear Cap 3 weapon is a turbojet powered mini-cruise missile with a range beyond 100 km – beyond the range of many potentially hostile air defense systems .It’s would be rival, the SDB II, is a winged unpowered bomb with a range in excess of 40 miles.

The weapon has been purchased by the US military and is scheduled to be operational starting with the F-15 with other combat jets, including the F-35, to follow. Integration activities are already underway.

The National Audit Office, the Governments spending watchdog, effectively endorsed the MBDA program in its major projects report released late last year, saying that the SDB II fell short on a number of the key user requirements.There was a “clear operational analysis that supports the UK procurement of SPEAR Cap 3,” said the NAO.

Raytheon executives though have previously emphasized the cost-benefits of their weapon as well as it’s local production possibilities as reasons why the British should allow the weapon to compete.

Company executives have said components built in the UK could be part of the global supply chain for all SDB II’s. A purchase could save the British over £500 million compared with the rival MBDA weapon, they have previously said.

Last year Taylor Lawrence, the president of Raytheon Missile Systems, told Defense News in an interview at the Paris Air Show that the company was open to developing a powered version of the SDB II to meet the requirement if the British showed interest in it.

Under a UK government arrangement with MBDA and other local complex weapons suppliers crafted in 2006 competition was normally excluded for companies outside the arrangement .The complex weapons policy is aimed at helping preserve local skills and technologies while also retaining operational sovereignty.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


MBDA and Boeing studying Apache Brimstone integration

MBDA is carrying out a feasibility study for the UK Ministry of Defence into the possibility of integrating its dual-mode Brimstone air-to-surface missile onto the Boeing AH-64E Guardian attack rotorcraft.

Brimstone Reaper integration still in the pipeline

MBDA is still hopeful its dual-mode Brimstone air-to-surface missile will be carried on General Atomics Aeronautical Systems MQ-9 Reaper unmanned air vehicles, as it awaits requirements that will lead to the next round of testing.

U.S. orders Archerfish counter-mine system




BAE Systems in Britain is to build and deliver Archerfish mine neutralizers to the U.S. Navy as well as fiber-optic communication spools for them.

The Archerfish, an air-dropped remotely-controlled underwater vehicle equipped with an explosive warhead, has been a key part of the U.S. Navy's Airborne Mine Neutralization System program since 2007.

"We are delighted to provide the Department of Defense with Archerfish neutralizers, and to continue supporting the U.S. Navy's work in clearing sea mines," said Les Gregory, Product & Training Services director at BAE Systems.

"This important contract demonstrates BAE Systems' ability to deliver equipment that provides greater security and resilience to modern threats around the world, and we look forward to meeting the U.S. Navy's demand for a first-class underwater defense capability for many years to come."

The Department of Defense contract is worth about $22 million. If the contract's options are exercised, the overall value of the deal would be about $55.5 million.

Deliveries of the Archerfish system, which is made in Britain, will begin in September of 2017. They will be used by U.S. Navy MH-60S helicopters operating from littoral combat ships.

The fiber-optic spools for the system allow for communications between the systems and the aircraft that dropped them.

"BAE Systems will introduce new BVS10 Beowulf all-terrain vehicle at Eurosatory 2016 (13-17 June, Paris, France).

The new vehicle, called “Beowulf,” is based on the Company’s revered Viking BvS10 fighting, troop-carrying and logistics vehicle that was initially designed in Sweden for the UK Royal Marines.

Beowulf has a payload capacity of eight tonnes and built-in flexibility with special role cabins in the rear car to carry a combination of personnel and cargo. The vehicle can traverse through water, swamps, snow and soft sand; and climb 45-degree slopes. Beowulf features increased crew comfort and visibility, and is easy to maintain and support, resulting in reduced operational costs.

“We know from more than 40 years of all-terrain vehicle experience that there is a need for an unarmoured vehicle that can reach places other systems cannot, carry a high payload and do it around the clock regardless of weather conditions,” said Tore Akser, platform manager at BAE Systems Hägglunds, a subsidiary of BAE Systems, Inc. in the United States.



BAE Systems sees Beowulf as a successor to its Bv206. More than 12,000 of the glass-fibre bodied vehicles were built and the majority are still in service with military and emergency services in more than 40 countries around the world. Beowulf is well placed to meet a recently declared requirement from the UK Royal Marines for approximately 230 vehicles, in a range of variants to replace the Marines’ 350 Bv206s.

Though aimed primarily at the military market, Beowulf is also expected to attract interest for carrying out civilian missions in areas difficult to access"

Source: http://defence-blog.com/army/bae-systems-will-introduce-new-bvs10-beowulf-all-terrain-vehicle-at-eurosatory-2016.html