Thread: 21st Century missiles

Today, it was announced that the new missile being developed to replace 'SeaWolf' on Royal Navy ships is to be called 'SeaCeptor'.
this missile is to become the UK's next generation SAM missile and anti-missile missile. The missile was previously known as 'CAMM', and will be fitted firstly to the RN Type 23 Frigates, then onto the new Type 26 Combat ship.

see attached link below for more details.

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...rRoyalNavy.htm

Incidently, i think the name SEA CEPTOR is a little unusual, presumably playing on the word interceptor.

Bearing in mind the UK military call its naval missiles 'SEA (something), some have had good names and others somewhat naff.

Dynamic named missiles such as:- SEA VIPER, SEA WOLF, SEA DART & SEA EAGLE.

Naff named missiles:- SEA SKUA, SEA CAT....but worst of all was SEA SLUG, which had performance to match its name.

Anyway, elsewhere, what missiles are currently under development?

Originally Posted by mepal1

Today, it was announced that the new missile being developed to replace 'SeaWolf' on Royal Navy ships is to be called 'SeaCeptor'.
this missile is to become the UK's next generation SAM missile and anti-missile missile. The missile was previously known as 'CAMM', and will be fitted firstly to the RN Type 23 Frigates, then onto the new Type 26 Combat ship.

It may be a very good anti-missile system, tests will tell how effective it is though. It vertainly seems to have the right characteristics to be able to shoot down incomming missiles.

However, it still lacks the thing that the Royal Navy needs most. And that is the ability to "reach out and touch someone". With it's range of 25 kilometers, it is still a purely defensive weapon. And it can only be used in a purely reactive manner, not in a way to prevent any aircraft from launching at it in the first place.

This is what I see as the largest flaw in the RN's attempt at air defense. They lack a single weapon that can launch at incoming planes armed with anti-ship missiles before it gets within shooting range.

"Wow, look at those fighters coming at us! There it is, 100 miles, 60 miles, 50 miles, it launched something! Now it is tearing away at MACH 2 and we have 9 missiles comming at us and 1 dud falling into the sea! Of wow, hope those defensive missiles all work, or we are up (*)(*)(*)(*)e creek!"

That is the problem I see with their entire Air Defense strategy. A US ship of the same class would have missiles that can reach from 50-90 miles (75-175 km). So they can launch before the aircraft even get within range. Even if they did not hit them, they might cause the fighters to abort the attack run, or burn more fuel then expected in evading the missiles.

Originally Posted by Mushroom

It may be a very good anti-missile system, tests will tell how effective it is though. It vertainly seems to have the right characteristics to be able to shoot down incomming missiles.

However, it still lacks the thing that the Royal Navy needs most. And that is the ability to "reach out and touch someone". With it's range of 25 kilometers, it is still a purely defensive weapon. And it can only be used in a purely reactive manner, not in a way to prevent any aircraft from launching at it in the first place.

This is what I see as the largest flaw in the RN's attempt at air defense. They lack a single weapon that can launch at incoming planes armed with anti-ship missiles before it gets within shooting range.

"Wow, look at those fighters coming at us! There it is, 100 miles, 60 miles, 50 miles, it launched something! Now it is tearing away at MACH 2 and we have 9 missiles comming at us and 1 dud falling into the sea! Of wow, hope those defensive missiles all work, or we are up (*)(*)(*)(*)e creek!"

That is the problem I see with their entire Air Defense strategy. A US ship of the same class would have missiles that can reach from 50-90 miles (75-175 km). So they can launch before the aircraft even get within range. Even if they did not hit them, they might cause the fighters to abort the attack run, or burn more fuel then expected in evading the missiles.

Blimey.....a reply to my post...thanks.

Yes, i generally agree, the RN is basically setup for defence rather than attack, when you look at its weapon suites, and i think more attacking systems should be developed.

The 'Sea Viper' on the 'Darings' does come in 2 versions, with the larger missile having a range of 75 miles.

From a anti-ship point of view there is also the American 'Harpoon' system fitted to the Type 23's.

....and some nuke killer subs have the 'Tomahawk' missile....but yes apart from these the other missile systems are generally short range defensive types.

Originally Posted by mepal1

Blimey.....a reply to my post...thanks.

Sorry, but I have been out in the field doing training for the last week, so needless to say I have no internet when I am out in the middle of the desert in a tent. *laugh*

Uncle Ferd says dat's why Putin wanted to be Russian President again - so's he could stick it to us when Obama not lookin'...

Russia tests new missile with previously unachievable performance
24.05.2012 - Russia's "asymmetric response" to the US missile defense system, the test flight of which took place on Wednesday from Plesetsk spaceport, was an analogue of the sea-based intercontinental ballistic missile Bulava. Sources from the Russian rocket industry told the Kommesant newspaper that the two missiles were identical in their construction. They weigh nearly 36 tons, and are 12 meters in length. The two rockets also have the same amount of stages.

The new missile needs to be developed further. However, if all goes well, then Russia may have the new state-of-the-art strategic complex of highest, previously unachievable performance. Colonel Vadim Koval, an official spokesman for Russia's Strategic Missile Forces, told reporters, without giving any details, that Russia conducted the first test flight of the prototype of the new ICBM. The launch was conducted from a mobile platform, the official said.

However, a source from the rocket industry told Interfax that it became the second launch for the missile. The first flight went unsuccessfully, although an official confirmation to that could not be found. Experts concluded that it goes about the little-known Avangard - a deeply modernized variant of the new Yars missile system. The new, yet still mysterious missile complex, can be a ground-based analogue of the Bulava system. The Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology started testing Bulava after a series of failed launches.

The performance of the missiles hold perfect prospects for the new weapons in the struggle with the US missile defense system, the elements of which are going to be deployed in Europe. NATO officials stated during the recent summit in Chicago (which Russia ignored) that the first stage of the European missile defense system was practically ready. It is worthy of note that in May, Nikolai Makarov, the chief of Russia's General Staff, announced a possibility of pre-emptive blow against European military objects in case of deployment of the European missile defense system.

Sources from the rocket industry of Russia said in connection with the above-mentioned launch that there was new fuel used for the new missile. The fuel reduces the time required for the work of the engines during the boost phase of the flight. This is the phase, when the missile is most vulnerable to air defense systems. "As a result, the most complicated boost phase of the flight goes so quickly that the enemy does not have time to calculate its trajectory. The enemy will thus be unable to destroy it. In other words, we can say that our opportunities in overcoming missile defense will increase considerably," an official with the rocket industry told the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper.

Owing to the new fuel, the missile will be able to carry more warheads - up to ten. Nowadays, this can only be carried by super heavy (weighing more than 200 tons) silo-based liquid-fuel ICBMs RS-20 (SS-1. The missiles were developed in Ukraine. Russia still has them, but their resource is about to reach the limit after many prolongations. The term - "asymmetric response" to the US missile defense system - was coined by Vladimir Putin during his second term as president in 2007. He referred to the lexicon of the Soviet times at an annual press conference and said that all responses to the deployment of the US missile defense system in Europe would be "asymmetrical, and yet highly effective."

Source

See also:

Russia works on 100-ton monster ballistic missile
19.12.2011 - In connection with the plans of the United States to develop the air defense system in Europe, in close vicinity to Russia's borders, and because of the unwillingness of the US side to provide any guarantees, the Russian Federation continues to take measures to preserve parity in the field. In particular, Russia's Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) will be renovated with the help of state-of-the-art Topol-M and Yars complexes during the upcoming ten years. In addition, Russia will pass into service a new intercontinental missile of enormous power.

"The decision about the creation of the new silo-based missile system with a liquid-fuel heavy missile has been made. The complex will have increased possibilities in overcoming the prospective missile defense system of the United States," Sergei Karakaev, the commander of the missile troops said. The new missile, the mass of which is going to make up 100 tons, is said to replace the world-known "Voevoda" ICBM. In the West, this missile is known as "Satan." In the meantime, Russia has already started working to create the middle-class newly equipped missile. The new missile is to be passed into service in 2015, RIA Novosti reports. "Russia does not stand against the US missile defense system. Russia stands against the creation of the missile defense system, which would be directly aimed against Russia to potentially reduce the possibilities of the Russian nuclear containment forces," the official stated.

According to Karakaev, as long as there is a stable mechanism of nuclear containment in the world, one should not undermine this mechanism to provoke an arms race. In November, President Dmitry Medvedev announced a complex of measures, which Russia would use to respond to the deployment of the missile defense system in Europe. In particular, Medvedev did not rule out a possibility to refuse from the policy of disarmament. Russia could also revise the previous agreements about arms control, he added. For the time being, there is no direct threat to Russia, the head of the missile troops stated. However, the Strategic Missile Forces will be prepared to respond fast, if necessary, the general added. "Technically, there are no restrictions in the opportunity to apply the SMF missiles. It takes little time to pick an object of destruction and put this object into the flight assignment of an ICBM. For the time being, the combat groups of the SMF are on duty with a zero flight assignment, which means that the missiles are not targeted against anything," Interfax quoted the official as saying.

Russia's new Yars, Topol-M and Bulava ICBMs are unvulnerable to the US missile defense system. The commander of the Russian SFM said that it was best for the enemy to destroy the missile during the initial part of its flight, when it gathers speed. The missile separates later, which makes it harder for interceptors to detect the missile in a whole cloud of fake targets.

Russia's state-of-the-art ballistic missiles have the shortest boost phase of the flight - this phase is much shorter than it was with older missiles. "At this short part of the flight the missiles perform active maneuvers, which makes it impossible for interceptors to plan the attack. "We conducted the tests to evaluate and confirm the nuclear safety of Topol warheads. The results of the tests showed that even in case of most complicated breakdowns, fires or explosions, the nuclear explosion of the warhead is excluded," Karakaev said. Russia's present-day SMF consist of more than 350 missile complexes of six types. Three of them are silo-based and three others are mobile ground-based complexes. It is worthy of note that the Russian system of nuclear containment forces consists of the Strategic Missile Forces, strategic nuclear submarines and strategic bombers.

MORE

Originally Posted by waltky

Uncle Ferd says dat's why Putin wanted to be Russian President again - so's he could stick it to us when Obama not lookin'...

Russia tests new missile with previously unachievable performance

Russia and the world need new ICBMs about as much as it needs a return to the concept of World Socialism. And people love to say it is the US that is creating this arms race. However, the land based missile system we use now has been around for over 40 years now (Minuteman III) and the sea based system for over 20 years (Trident II).

And this is one of the things that bankrupted the Soviet Union in the first place. This inferiority complex they have culturally, that insists that they constantly have to develop something new to evade or eliminate anything their perceived "adversary" has. So they wase huge amounts of money into essentially black hole projects, while the rest of the world sits back and laughs.

But ya gotta love that language. "stands against the creation of the missile defense system, which would be directly aimed against Russia". Funny, how do you aim a defensive system at somebody, and how is that a threat? Does wearing a bulletproof vest make it a threat to somebody? Is putting locks on your dorrs a threat to your neighbor? Is buying a gun for home defense a threat to everybody?

Well, maybe, if they planned on attacking you. Otherwise, none of these things would matter a single bit. Of course, I still believe the absolute best missile deterent would be to reduce global stocks to say 15 per country. Still enough to devistate a large portion of their adversaries, but not enough to worry about global armageddon if an accident happens.