New UK missile programme by Thales

Hmmm. So the Europeans are running three new (V)SHORADS at the same time.
# Mica — existing and quite ok, but French, which obviously disqualifies it for everybody else
# CAMM/FLAADS(M) — the UK re-inventing Mica with even smaller wings (quad-pack)
# LFK NG — and of course the German poo on the pile
Am I the only one who misses a little focus?

And two of ’em are from the same firm . . . .

The CAMM launch system should be usable for the others, the seeker should be possible to fit to Mica, & it fits in existing VLS, so at least it’s not all duplicated (or triplicated) effort.

Hmmm. So the Europeans are running three new (V)SHORADS at the same time.
# Mica — existing and quite ok, but French, which obviously disqualifies it for everybody else
# CAMM/FLAADS(M) — the UK re-inventing Mica with even smaller wings (quad-pack)
# LFK NG — and of course the German poo on the pile
Am I the only one who misses a little focus?

This was stolen from Anthony58 on Warships1. I think he won’t mind it being posted here:

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/6957

According to Janes CAMM has greater range (20km) and an active radar seeker.

At the MBDA stand at Farnborough I was also told it is cheaper than Aster 15. So I take it for less range around six to eight miles, it can do everything Aster 15 can do but cheaper, doesn’t need trackers and can be quad packed in a Slyver launcher space, and you can also fit in the quad pack a surface to surface missile variant. I still think with only 6 Type 45, we also need Aster 30/45 on FSC.

More info that I have found.

Team CW set to proceed on UK’s Seawolf/Sea Skua replacement programme
Richard Scott

Plans to replace the UK Royal Navy’s Seawolf point-defence missile system and Sea Skua helicopter-launched anti-ship missile are being taken forward by MBDA-led Team Complex Weapons (CW) as part of a package of assessment phase contracts announced on 15 July.

Seawolf’s planned successor, the Future Local Area Air Defence System (Maritime) – FLAADS(M) – will leverage MBDA’s Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM) concept.

Meanwhile, Thales’ Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM) and MBDA’s Sea Skua IR (infrared) concept are being developed to meet the respective Light and Heavy elements of the Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon (FASGW) requirement.

Team CW – which includes Thales UK, QinetiQ and Roxel as well as MBDA UK – was established in response to the UK government’s Defence Industrial Strategy, which defined the need for the UK to retain operational sovereignty in the complex weapons sector.

Working with the Ministry of Defence, Team CW has been awarded two framework contracts worth an aggregate GBP74 million (USD148 million) to fund the startup of six new complex weapon programmes, including FLAADS(M) and FASGW, in its first year.

FLAADS(M) is intended to replace Seawolf aboard Type 23 frigates around the end of the next decade; it will also equip the projected C1/C2 variants of the Future Surface Combatant. The CAMM missile at the heart of the system will offer a range in excess of 20 km and use a combination of mid-course guidance updates and active radar homing.

The FASGW programme is required to deliver a solution to replace the Sea Skua missile from 2015. Current plans call for this capability to be delivered by two systems deployed from the Surface Combatant Maritime Rotorcraft variant of the Future Lynx helicopter: a FASGW (Light) to defeat small surface threats such as fast inshore attack craft or soft-skinned vehicles ashore; and a FASGW (Heavy) to engage larger targets up to corvette size.

LMM is a lightweight, laser-guided weapon drawing on technology previously used in the Starstreak surface-to-air missile. The 100 kg-class Sea Skua IR system would similarly build on the pedigree of the current Sea Skua but would offer extended range and introduce an imaging IR seeker and a two-way datalink.

http://www.marines-net.co.uk/cpgn2/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=15188 from nuts_mcauliff

and a further post from nuts_mcauliff

Common aim: CAMM missile seeks cost reduction without compromise
Richard Scott

MBDA UK, working as leader of the UK’s sector-wide industrial construct Team Complex Weapons (Team CW), is embarking on a second phase of technology demonstration activities intended to mature and de-risk critical subsystems proposed for a new and radically different anti-air guided weapon: the Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM).

CAMM is intended to enter service in the latter half of the next decade, meeting multiple user requirements across land, sea and air environments.

Hardware development, integration and demonstration efforts already undertaken have given confidence that novel engineering approaches and a series of ‘breakthrough’ technologies can realise a future air target engagement weapon offering high-end capability while concurrently delivering significantly reduced unit production costs and lower through-life overheads. Additionally, there is a growing belief within MBDA that the CAMM missile round itself could be fully interchangeable and interoperable across the land and maritime domains.

CAMM is also highly relevant to the future sustainment of the UK’s complex weapons sector, and very firmly aligned to the principles outlined in the complex weapons chapter of the Defence Industrial Strategy. The advent of Team CW – comprising MBDA UK, QinetiQ, Roxel and Thales UK – marks a shift in weapons procurement from a 20-year policy of competition towards one based on securing the most effective mix of military capability, value for money and operational sovereignty. Accordingly, CAMM was identified by name as the basis for the projected Future Local Area Air Defence System (Maritime) – FLAADS(M) – requirement when Team CW signed its landmark teaming agreement with the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) in July 2008.

“The CAMM programme offers a good fit within the wider complex weapons package because it intrinsically addresses many of the ideals we have set out to achieve in the UK’s complex weapons sector,” explains Dr Phil Miller, business development manager, air defence and naval, for MBDA UK. “These include rationalising the inventory through cross-service missile commonality, a reduction in total weapon stocks, a more aggressive re-use of technology and the maintenance of top-end skills.”

Dr Miller continues: “Another objective is to better exploit technologies pulled through from research funded by the UK MoD. We also see an excellent alignment between the MoD’s requirement and future export opportunities.”

Common vision
The CAMM vision emerged from studies undertaken by MBDA five years ago to examine future ground-based air-defence (GBAD) requirements for the replacement of the UK’s current Rapier and Starstreak short-range air-defence (SHORAD) systems. “It was realised that this would entail reasonably substantial costs but only deliver benefits in one area,” says Dr Miller. “So we began to look across domains to assess whether other air-to-air and naval point-defence requirements could be ‘collectivised’ in a largely common missile.”

Out of this came CAMM, a concept for a tri-service air-defence missile and associated weapon system that could replace the ground-based Rapier SHORAD system and the Royal Navy’s Seawolf point-defence missile system, and additionally provide technology insertion opportunities for an evolution of the Royal Air Force’s Advanced Short-Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM).

The naval and land-based threat sets, while not identical, have significant overlap. In the naval domain there is a requirement to defeat increasingly stealthy, low-flying anti-ship missiles approaching at both subsonic and supersonic speeds. There is also a need to counter high-performance combat aircraft, helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and small surface craft.

On land the threat is characterised by attack helicopters, UAVs, standoff weapons and manned strike and close-support aircraft. A capability to interdict land-based targets of opportunity has also been studied, although it is acknowledged that this should come at no cost to the core air-defence capability.

The solution, as it exists today, is an all-weather, local-area defence missile system that embodies selected new technologies and techniques in the missile round and its launch sequence, while maximising use of, and integration with, legacy components as appropriate. What is more, the missile itself would be common for both shipborne and land-based applications.

“As well as addressing the UK’s capability requirements for future land-based and naval anti-air weapons, the MoD was attracted by a common approach that could offer significant benefits in terms of cost of ownership,” says Dr Miller.

The MoD committed approximately GBP10 million (USD20 million), through the Joint Sensor and Engagement Networks Integrated Project Team, to seed the CAMM programme under a three-year technology demonstration programme (TDP01) that began in late 2004. MBDA UK has in turn contributed about GBP4 million to this first phase.

The need to drive out cost has underpinned the CAMM engineering approach and system architecture. “We needed to understand the legacy cost drivers in terms of procurement, use and support,” says Dr Miller, “and then look hard at how we attack these big cost areas.”

These costs are not just associated with the production of the missile in isolation. “We took cognisance of the wider weapon system architecture,” explains Dr Miller. “On board a frigate, for instance, that includes the integration of the weapon system with existing radars and combat management system infrastructures. So we identified early on the need for CAMM to be able to integrate with these legacy combat system components.

“Another driver was to avoid having to have regular inspections of the missile. Our aim is to have an all-up-round that has a shelf life of 10 years or more inside its storage and firing canister,” says Dr Miller.

The tail-guided missile round itself, a little over 3 m in length and 166 mm in diameter, shows a clear lineage from ASRAAM and incorporates a number of subsystems pulled through with relatively minor changes from that weapon. These include the low-signature solid rocket motor (Roxel); the laser impact/proximity fuze (Thales); and the blast fragmentation warhead (MBDA TDW).

Key technologies
TDP01 has seen focused investment in critical technology areas: notably a low-cost active radar seeker, a dual-band two-way datalink and an open-architecture internal communications bus. In addition, a programme of hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) integration has been conducted at the CAMM integration facility set up at MBDA’s Stevenage site. Dr Miller says these critical ‘breakthrough’ technologies have now been matured to Technology Readiness Level 5-6.

He identifies the new active radar seeker as key to achieving both the cost and performance targets demanded of CAMM. “Present-generation active radar seekers are very complex electromechanical devices. The CAMM seeker reduces the level of electromechanical complexity – the moving part on the gimbal is very simple.

“Instead, the high-end performance required is achieved through complex algorithms and waveforms. It is essentially a software-driven seeker that has the additional advantage that new software-based functionality can be easily introduced through life.”

MBDA’s seeker group has in fact been working on this technology for more than a decade and believes it represents a significant leap forward in seeker architecture with applications extending far beyond CAMM. The same is true of the datalink, characterised as a low-cost, dual-band low-probability-of-intercept system, which will provide for two-way communications between the missile and the firing control unit (uplinked messages being sent via a dedicated transmitter group).

The other ‘breakthrough’ technology refined and matured through TDP01 is an open system architecture that enables the various electronic subsystems within the missile to interface and communicate via a standard bus. Known as PrOTeUS (Programmable Open Technology for Upgradable Systems), this is another generic technology that has been the subject of joint MoD and MBDA research for some time, but its maturation has dovetailed neatly with the CAMM programme.

“PrOTeUS essentially gives the missile designer far more freedom than before by using a standard commercial bus to exchange message traffic between the electronics units,” Dr Miller says. “It means we can build up the prototype missile in the lab using available COTS [commercial off-the-shelf] technology, and then use exactly the same technology in the real missile rather than have to totally redesign the architecture as before.

“Currently we have baselined on IEEE 1394 Firewire technology,” he adds, “but the approach is inherently adaptable to enable change as bus technology evolves.”

Another innovative concept embodied in CAMM is that of ‘soft vertical launch’ (SVL), whereby the missile is ejected ‘cold’ from its launch canister prior to main motor ignition. The base of the launch canister, containing a gas charge and piston, is effectively a low-pressure gun barrel that ejects the missile upwards to an altitude of 80-100 ft. As it ascends, the missile orientates itself by means of firing small tail-mounted thrusters mounted just aft of the fin surfaces, to steer the round through its turnover manoeuvre before the main motor is fired to begin powered flight.

SVL is seen to offer a multiplicity of benefits: safety is improved because there is no efflux to manage; there is no risk of a hang-fire; the shipboard footprint is much reduced; and there is a significant performance benefit from having all of the rocket motor’s energy expended efficiently in the direction of intended travel.

A series of hardware demonstration trials, performed by MBDA in 2002 under an earlier TDP jointly funded with the MoD, have proved the underpinning technology. These culminated in a proof-of-principle test conducted using ASRAAM-based missile hardware (using a cut-down motor to meet range safety limitations) and a representative box canister.

“CAMM canisters could be quad-packed to fit in an existing Sylver or Mk 41 vertical-launch cell,” says Dr Miller. “Alternatively we can offer the option of fitting the SVL launch canister in small standalone clusters or patterns that best suit the deck area and topside characteristics of the host ship.

“As for land-based applications, we have already conceptualised a mobile configuration based on a 4-tonne flatbed truck. This would have 12 rounds [in two sets of six] stowed flat for transport and then erected for launch.”

One area where the CAMM weapon system seeks to maximise the re-use of existing technology is in its command-and-control segment. “As far as possible we will re-use threat evaluation and engagement control functionality previously developed by MBDA for the UK variant of the Principal Anti-Air Missile System [PAAMS],” says Dr Miller, “modifying or ‘re-tuning’ the PAAMS algorithms as necessary to match the CAMM missile performance envelope.”

TDP02 plan
TDP01 achievements included seeker radio-frequency (RF) chamber and outdoor trials, outdoor testing of the datalink and laboratory proving of the PrOTeUS open architecture. These hardware demonstration and proving activities culminated in a programme of HWIL testing at the CAMM integration facility. Here, critical subsystems – the inertial measurement unit, electronics processing unit, control fin actuator, seeker and datalink communications – were progressively integrated on the bench and ‘flown’ in both naval and ground-based air defence ‘environments’ within a high-fidelity synthetic environment.

The MoD is now committing almost GBP15 million to a second phase of technology demonstrations (TDP02), intended to further mature and validate critical CAMM technologies. This programme, extending through to early 2011, will include captive airborne seeker trials (due to commence aboard an Andover testbed aircraft at the end of 2008), the manufacture of flightworthy subsystems, a mid-course guidance firing and further soft-launch trials.

“We have reached a very high state of maturity in the pre-demonstration and manufacture phase, performed successful early HWIL trials and pulled through customer-funded research efforts,” points out Dr Miller, adding: “Many of the technologies embodied are ones that the MoD had picked out some years ago, showing the relevance of this long-term research. What we are now doing is leaving the research phase and transitioning into what I would call system definition as a precursor to full-scale engineering development.

He adds: “The CAMM vision for a single common missile for both the naval and land customer remains intact. Indeed, our evidence suggests that a single missile/single warstock is entirely feasible.”

Some excellent stuff in there. I’ve highlighted one particularly significant point. Sounds like a real beauty: fits in VL Seawolf VLS, quad packs in Sylver launchers, >20 km range, more robust active radar seeker . . .

A couple of pictures I took at Farnborough.

[ATTACH]164164[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]164165[/ATTACH]

And yet more missiles . . .

Team complex weapons

The interesting thing about this, is that it’s approaching an integrated PGM/missile strategy, covering options from LMM up to Storm Shadow.

“Indirect Fire Precision Attack Loitering Munition (MBDA-led with Team Loitering Munition);
100kg weapon family to meet first the Future Air-to-Surface Guided Weapon (heavyweight) requirement for Royal Navy helicopters (MBDA);
Light weapon family to meet first the Future Air-to-Surface Guided Weapon (lightweight) requirement (Thales UK);
50kg weapon family to meet the Selected Precision Effects At Range (SPEAR) requirement for fast jets and helicopters (MBDA);
The Common Anti-Air Modular Missile family to meet first the requirement for a Future Local Area Air Defence System (FLAADS) for the Type 23 frigate and the Future Surface Combatant (MBDA); and
An upgrade programme for Storm Shadow, currently used on the Tornado GR4 (MBDA).”

Is it reasonable to assume that SPEAR is likely to be a Brimstone derivative?

And a Thales LMM press release

So presumably these Starburst firings are what is referred to by the Thales Air Systems MD?

“Test firings have already been performed from a suspended Camcopter without disrupting the handling characteristics of the 200kg (440lb) vehicle, says Steve Hill, managing director of Belfast-based Thales Air Systems.”

That’s what I would assume. My informant (who is involved in the programme) specifically told me that the Camcopter firings had been made using Starburst. His remark that the blast from the booster had had little effect on the UAV led me to assume that these findings were conducted in free flight.

…

To the best of my knowledge, there have been no firings from the Camcopter. Trials with this platform have used Starburst rounds and have confirmed that the firing of the booster stage has minimal effect on the Camcopter.

So presumably these Starburst firings are what is referred to by the Thales Air Systems MD? Quoted by Janes –

“Test firings have already been performed from a suspended Camcopter without disrupting the handling characteristics of the 200kg (440lb) vehicle, says Steve Hill, managing director of Belfast-based Thales Air Systems.”

Quite a bit has emerged over the last week about the new Thales LMM missile.

The first fully guided firing was successfully carried out on the afternoon of Tuesday June against a target 6 km from the launch point.

There is more to this missile than a simple revision of Starburst. It uses some Starburst technology, and the guidance system from the Starstreak, but contains a number of new developments.

Traditionally, Thales (formerly Shorts) short range SAMs were expelled from the launch tube by a brief-burning boost motor, which was then jettisoned. The main motor did not ignite until the missile was a safe distance from the launch point. In the case of LMM, the booster it is not dropped, but remains attached to the missile throughout its flight. Although prototype missiles used a Starburst rocket motor, the definitive design is intended to use a new motor developed by Roxel.

The warhead is a new design that combines a shaped charge with a fragmentation charge.

LMM is expected to deal with light combat vehicles (whether wheeled or tracked), including the ‘technicals’ seen in recent third-world conflicts. It is not intended to counter fast jet aircraft or main battle tanks, but would be able to down light aircraft, helicopters and UAVs. The need to counter the smallest sizes of UAV led to the choice of a laser proximity fuze, since this will be able to trigger from Northern-metallic surfaces.

A three stage development programme is planned. At present the missile uses laser beam riding guidance, but a semi-active laser seeker will be developed in the next phase of the programme. This is not intended for a second variant of the missile – the beam riding guidance system is sufficiently inexpensive (by missile standards) to allow all missiles to be equipped with both guidance methods. For the longer term, the company is also exploring imaging infrared guidance and combined INS/GPS guidance, believing that such multimode solutions will make the weapon more flexible.

To the best of my knowledge, there have been no firings from the Camcopter. Trials with this platform have used Starburst rounds and have confirmed that the firing of the booster stage has minimal effect on the Camcopter.

The Starburst SAM does up to 7km, going upwards, & weighs 15kg. 4 km ceiling. LMM is based on Starburst, & will have the advantage of air launch. More aerodynamic than ATGMs, because it isn’t trying to punch through armour with a large calibre shaped charge. Light warhead, as well. Meant for soft targets. To be fair, that range could assume the launcher is flying towards the target, adding some speed.

True, there’s not much in that class available now. As you say, out of production – and yes, Marte is bigger. But still a step down from Penguin or NSM.

Have to say I’m pretty surprised by a 13kg weapon with an 8km range claim.
A 70mm unguided of 11kg has a hard time getting beyond 4km, the APKWS does just 5km. But who am I to doubt?

Talking about Hermes because of the concept, not to sell. 😀

There is not too much produced between the supersized “ATGM class” of 50kg and the Penguin. Sea Skua, AS.15TT are out of production, Marte 2 is 300kg+. Nimrod could be interesting, but with just a laser seeker not really all-weather. That’s why I said Sea Skua II would be a useful missile with in-between size.

The LMM has a range of around 8km, weighs about 13 kg, & an S100 can carry two, with some margin left for a camera, & still have a useful range – though reduced a bit by the weight (max payload 50 kg, 25 kg allows maximum endurance). I don’t see the occupants of small boats being able to hit an object as small as a Camcopter at even half that range, stopped dead in the water in a flat calm (platform stability is an obvious problem), except with a MANPADS, & even that’ll be difficult.

KBP products are non-starters for the UK, for fairly obvious reasons. And why do you call Penguin & NSM “the lightest anti-surface-vessel missiles”? Sea Skua has been in service for many years, as has AS.15TT, & Marte Mk 2 & TL-10 are also smaller than Penguin or NSM. All are designed for use against (light) surface vessels, & Sea Skua (AFAIK the only one used in anger) performed very well in a real war.

Nice trials, I’m sure. Didn’t follow that story, sorry. But:
A long-legged Spike is over 30kg, plus the targeting equipment.
A Camcopter S-100 has a realistic payload of around 25kg.
If you still want the camera on your pretty noisy S-100, you’re down to a single short Spike (or any other missile <12kg), which range-wise sure puts you into danger from anti-materiel snipers, MANPADS, ZPU-2, &c.
Not really desireable in my mind.

Sea Skua II – if built – will be a useful missile between large ATGM’s and the lightest anti-surface-vessel missiles, like Kongsberg Penguin and NSM. But will it be better than, say, a concept like the KBP Hermes as FASGW (heavy)? Also doubt it.

Camcorder is way too small. Even a Fire Scout would have a hard time lifting two Brimstones, let alone a Sea Skua. Can’t see FASGW (light) coming under 50kg.

We’re discussing a missile which has been fired from Camcopter. There are pictures out there of a Camcopter flying with two of them. It’s a lot smaller than Brimstone.

Whether it’s bought is another matter – and if it is bought, whether it is bought to fill the FASGW (light) requirement, or even part of it, is another thing. But consider – FASGW (heavy) is meant to replace Sea Skua, & be longer range. FASGW (L) is meant to fit in below that, for smaller, lower-value targets, such as small boats & soft land targets, & is defined by the MoD as ‘a lightweight precision-guided weapon’. What’s lightweight? 50 kg? Or 15 kg? The latter would be plenty for that target set.

MBDA is offering Sea Skua Mk 2 for FASGW(H) – 150 kg, 40 km range. Do you need both that and a >50 kg missile?

Camcorder is way too small. Even a Fire Scout would have a hard time lifting two Brimstones, let alone a Sea Skua. Can’t see FASGW (light) coming under 50kg.

Another new missile, from Thales UK (ex-Shorts). LMM – proposed for FASGW (light). Small enough for UAVs, & has been test fired from the Schiebel Camcopter, which looks a handy capability to have –

Link

Now the Camcopter integration is potentially very interesting. If the logistical footprint can be kept low enough and the system robust enough (2 very big IF’s) this could be a very effective way of providing long range (in artillery terms) precision strike and CAS to ground units, that is to say deployed with the front line units.

Another new missile, from Thales UK (ex-Shorts). LMM – proposed for FASGW (light). Small enough for UAVs, & has been test fired from the Schiebel Camcopter, which looks a handy capability to have –

Link

[Edit]
Dohhh! This is the missile the thread is about. Please excuse brain fart. Illness & pain are distracting me at the moment.

Sealordlawrence: and it’d be handy for deployment on ships, as a stand-alone facility for smallish vessels, & as a supplement for the main helicopter on larger ones, for pirate plinking, etc.

Well they have been marketing such a system:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dQgSxpy5Wyw

Could be a variation on this set up.

That video shows the Thor (later renamed the Multimission Missile System), a private-venture missile launcher that’s been around since mid-2005. Although it’s been demonstrated to a number of potential customers, there have been no takers. However some of its concepts, such as target autotracking, were recently demonstrated to the UK MoD as a potential retrofit for its mobile version of Starstreak.

Rather off topic, but it is a new UK missile –

Fire Shadow loitering munition flies

Note that some prat of a Flight sub-editor doesn’t know the difference between kilometres & nautical miles.

The lack of detail in that story also shows how much the missile reporting in Flight has deteriorated since the 1960s and 1970s when the missile scene was being covered by Bill Gunston and Mark Hewish. I still have copies of some early editions of Flight’s annual ‘Missile Survey’. That kept going until the late 1980s with Doug Richardson as compiler, then seems to have died. Pity – it was a useful source of info that at least once US aerospace company used to unofficially reprint as an internal document for its engineering and marketing staff.

Rather off topic, but it is a new UK missile –

Fire Shadow loitering munition flies

Note that some prat of a Flight sub-editor doesn’t know the difference between kilometres & nautical miles.

Well they have been marketing such a system:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dQgSxpy5Wyw

Could be a variation on this set up.

A formal trial of Starstreak in the anti-armour role was conducted at Shoeburyness in Essex in 1999, using an FV432 armoured personnel carrier as the target vehicle.