express.co.uk
>The British Army has completed its first successful firing trial of the Land Ceptor missile
Isn't this something other militaries have had for years?
The British Army has completed its first successful firing trial of the Land Ceptor missile
Zachary Hughes
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
ft.com
twitter.com
Ian Sanders
The BAF suck ass
Nathan Barnes
neat, maybe they'll even meet their NATO contribution target this year
I'm just assuming they don't.
Lucas Ortiz
>Isn't this something other militaries have had for years?
Including the British Army? Yeah.
Shocker: CAMM is an upgrade
Asher Walker
They are one of the five nations which do.
Jaxon Anderson
You're right that this isn't something *new* in it self, but for western armies the focus on land-based AA is somthing that's only now beginning to show after a long time without.
Until recently there has never been any question regarding NATO's total air dominance in any scenario and thus there was no need for land based AA. Jets would fill that role while also flinging bombs at whatever they pleased (that also explains the little focus on artillery in western armies compared to say Russia). The only enemies we would realisticly fight was militarily and technologically vastly inferior to us.
But with the recent geopolitical shifts we are now reforming our militaries back in the direction of actual warfare against peer or near-peer forces (Russia and China). That means that air dominance is no longer total: There would be times where fighters are not available and areas where they are denied because of heavy presence of enemy AA. This means that western armies now have no build up their ground-based AA that has been neglected for a long time.
Nathaniel Robinson
The UK has never not met the NATO target, dumbass.
Parker Bailey
What kind of altitude can it engage at?
Thomas King
It's replacing an existing weapons system. Fun fact, the US Army doesn't have a weapon in this class unfortunately. Hopefully with MML that'll change.
Adrian Myers
How are the land based IRIS-T and VICA missile SAMs going? Any countries using either one?
Sebastian Ramirez
>the US Army doesn't have a weapon in this class
Wut
Why?
Daniel Ross
Because the US has shittons of operational fighter aircraft in four of its armed service branches, and the fifth is literally forbidden from using fixed wing aircraft.
John Williams
Correction, three of the five operate fighters. The Coast Guard operates fixed wing aircraft, but does not have any fighters, and the Army isn't allowed to use fixed wing aircraft.
Nathan Roberts
Some countries use the Mica vl. It can be both land and sea based.
Also, you can use both radar and ir with the Mica
Zachary Brown
> t. salty Argie
Nathaniel Parker
>Coast Guard ... does not have any fighters
who needs fighter when of having glorious mi-24 Hind, user? is sufficient for most task
Andrew Rogers
>who needs fighter when of having glorious mi-24 Hind, user? is sufficient for most task
Well they're probably not about to go shooting down fixed wing aircraft on a regular basis, for starters.
Daniel Murphy
simply fire handheld anti-aircraft missile from troop compartment open door
it's very versatile
Julian Bailey
With the range of a stinger? You ain't gonna shoot lots of stuff with it, I tell you that!
Brody Ramirez
I'd like to see the size of the balls on the guy that goes into battle against enemy fighters, hanging out of the side of a helicopter with a stinger over his shoulder
Landon Adams
Someone suggest it to Michael Bay
Thomas Cruz
you drive helicopter closer
is purpose of the rest of troop compartment, to carry them
Asher Allen
>the Army isn't allowed to use fixed wing aircraft
RQ-12/MC-12, EO-5, RO-6 are all operated by the army
They just don't have CAS/Fighter aircraft
Evan Cruz
The interesting part of CAMM is the first M. The land, maritime and air launched versions will all be based on the same missile, so the Royal Navy, British Army, Royal Air Force and Fleet Air Arm will all be using the same basic missile. This means that manufacturing, research and upgrade costs can be reduced through scale, and production more easily shifted from one variant to another as priorities change or export orders are secured.
Connor Phillips
All hail Team Complex Weapon.
Leo Taylor
Doesn't that mean none of them are catered to properly because a jack of all trades is master of none?
Christian Jenkins
en.wikipedia.org
its actually fairly simple, the missile itself is derived from the ASRAAM, which is a pretty decent missile to begin with, and the air launched version is essentially ASRAAM with a upgraded active radar seeker, the land and maritime versions use a vls launcher to launch what is essentially the same missile.
so far its passed all its firing test and is a significant improvement on the systems it replaced.
erroneously, the UK has always met its NATO targets.
Not really in NATO forces, the russians and chinese have plenty of ground based AA but in western forces its generally assumed that AA will be provided by fighter cover so most NATO forces including the US have neglected ground based AA systems, most of the ones in service with NATO are -like the Rapier missile that land ceptor is to replace - fairly old and long in the tooth.
Logan Perry
>ASRAAM
Still my favourite missile name.
Austin Ortiz
>ASRAAM
Someone was having a giggle when they named this
Evan Gonzalez
The new Russian LUBE countermeasure system will render it useless.
Nolan Baker
Advanced Short Range Air to Air Missile.
whats so funny?
jokes aside it is a damn good weapon, and CAMM looks like a pretty good system, combine that with Brimstone/SPEAR and Meteor and the UK missile industry lloks in a pretty good place right now.
Jose Ross
Wouldn't that be neat?
Solely because they attach their pension and intelligence budgets to their overall defense spending.
Other than the last 2 years lol
Kayden Lopez
>whats so funny?
are you autistic?
ASRAAM
ASS RAM
It would only be better if they made an ER variant
ASRAAMER
Xavier Reyes
Did Sweden actually adopt this?
Josiah Wilson
>Solely because they attach their pension and intelligence budgets to their overall defense spending.
Yeah, it's defence related spending. Caring for vets matters.
Also
>According to Nato, the UK spent 2.14 per cent of GDP on defence
I'll take their word over some generic "think tank" that has nothing of substance to say.
Mason Smith
Buy me.
James Hughes
yes
William Evans
Any info on what I am looking at?
Jason Jones
It's as the file name says, a BvS 10 vehicle with a SAM system fitted to it using a ground launched variant of the IRIS-T air-to-air IR missile.
David Allen
i come from the most prestigeous think tank listen to me master yi is the best toon
Blake Ramirez
the S-400 is superior.
Caleb Howard
Yes, and its a horrible mistake
/Swedish Army corpral
Oliver Taylor
The S-400 was designed for a totally different doctrine, purpose and organisation. Its not even comparing apples to oranges at this point, its comparing apples to a fucking coconut.
Jack Carter
tell me more, I've heard several nations have them and they're good.
Brody Lewis
The IRIS-T is an awsome short range missile for an air-to-air platform like our Gripen. Qite possibly the worlds best infact.
But adopting it for a heavy tracked vehicle is just wrong. It hardly does anything better in the AA-role then our current RBS-70s, and it extremly expensive and impractical and cant be air-transported, not to mention that it cant be taken apart and mounted on for example a roof-top like the RBS-70.
If they had gone for the IRIS-T SL variant or CAMM system It would have been perfectly fine, as that would work as brigade AA, but this pice of shit? Its next to useless for everything...
Dominic Wilson
The air defence variant, the BvS 10, or the entire line of Hägglunds articulated ATVs? As far as I know the Royal Marines are fairly satisfied with their BvS 10 (at least for the amphibious role).
Luis Morgan
The BvS 10 is a miracle of a machine, but the missiles they fitted to it is a disaster. An expensive disaster.
Logan Harris
Meh, it possibly (probably) is, but with the Russians selling S-400 to everyone we're likely to ever need AA missiles against, I'd rather have something they can't practice against.
Also as other user said, S-400 is a different beast for a different deployment