Two very
interesting written answers were given in Parliament yesterday, 10 July 2012,
regarding Apache and the Smart Defence initiative launched by NATO. Let’s seethem:
Alison Seabeck: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what multinational projects the UK will be leading under the Smart defence umbrella following the Chicago Summit. [114421]Mr Gerald Howarth: The UK will be leading two projects under the Smart defence umbrella. These are the Immersive Training Environments project, which seeks to enhance NATO's training and education capability through the development of synthetic systems, and the Theatre Opening Capability project which seeks to develop a multinational capability for expeditionary operations to establish a port of debarkation and conduct cargo handling and movement operations.
Mr Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) when he plans that the Apache helicopter will be upgraded to utilise the Brimstone missile system; [116028]
(2) what plans he has to marinise the Apache helicopter; [116029]
(3) what the total number of Apaches in use is; and how many are earmarked for upgrade. [116030]
Peter Luff: The Army Air Corps currently operates a fleet of 67 Apache helicopters. The number of aircraft to be upgraded through the Capability Sustainment Programme will be decided at the main investment decision, which is currently planned for 2014.
While not originally designed as a maritime helicopter, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has modified and cleared the Apache to support operations from the maritime environment as demonstrated from HMS Ocean on Operation Ellamy. The modifications included wet-sealing the aircraft to resist corrosion and modifying the windscreen wipers to include a solution to disperse sea spray. We are also currently in an assessment phase to fit flotation equipment to increase safety when operating over water.
The Apache is currently armed with variants of the Hellfire missile which are due to go out of service in 2021-22. The MOD will look at various options as a replacement to this capability. The successor to Brimstone, the 50kg class Spear Capability 2 Block 3 missile, will be one of the options considered as a replacement.
The two
Defence Initiatives that the UK will lead under the Smart Defence agreement are
both very interesting. Synthetic training and simulators are something that the
british armed forces have been adopting on a large and ever expanding scale.
Simulators of various nature and ambition level have been introduced into
service for training soldiers prior to deployment, to train Royal Marines how
to escape from a sinking Viking vehicles, to train personnel in how to evacuate
a vehicle overturned by a mine blast, to train in the use of parachutes and
firearms, to prepare crews for the AS90 self-propelled howitzer and so along.
The UK is particularly sensible to synthetic training systems, and it is a good
choice to have it leading the multinational effort in this direction.
But people
will pardon me for being particularly interested in the second Capability, that
of Theatre Opening. The scope of this initiative is potentially very ample,
depending on the level of ambition that will be set. We are looking, potentially, at a true re-edition, in
modern key, of the Mulberry Harbour pre-fabricated port of D-Day memory,
depending on the level of existing infrastructure envisaged as requisite for
“establishing a port of debarkation”.
For the UK,
this multinational capability investment might be a way to remedy to the pretty
certain loss of the 3 Joint Sea Based Logistic ships which were once planned as
part of the original, very ambitious Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability
(MARS) project. These three vessels were intended as deployable floating
support bases carrying supplies for land forces and the means to disembark and
distribute said supplies in absence of port facilities to support the
operations of 3rd Commando Brigade and/or of army forces deployed
abroad. The JSBL was also meant to have rather extensive workshop and support
facilities, where helicopters and vehicles could be maintained and serviced,
close to the frontline, even in absence of suitable equipment and installations
on land, limiting the number of vehicles and items of kit that have to be
returned all the way back to the UK for being serviced.
It is now
expected that the JSBL vessel will not be funded. Secured the 4 Fleet Tankers
with the recent contract announced with South Korean shipyards, the Royal
Navy’s new main target within MARS is the Fleet Stores Replenishment
requirement: 3 vessels are envisaged, to transport and distribute solid stores
to the ships of the fleet, including everything from food to gun shells to
replacement F35 engines and aviation weaponry for the aircraft carrier’s wing.
The FSS
vessels are meant to replace Fort Victoria, Fort Austin and Fort Rosalie in the
early 2020s, and the 10-years budget contains allocation of money for initial
activities connected to this requirement. The ships will almost certainly be
fitted with the new Rolls Royce replenishment at sea (RAS) equipment, which can
transfer pallets waiting 5 tons, against the current 2 tons, solving also an
emerging problem of weight connected to the F35 (an F135 engine in its
transport case is currently too heavy for the existing RAS rigs and is even
creating problems to the US Navy for aerial transport, as it is incompatible
with the Carrier On Board delivery plane, the Greyhound).
The Royal
Navy is aware that there won’t be money for a further three ships in MARS, and
they are also aware that, by the late 2020s, the new urgency will be delivering
a replacement for RFA Diligence and RFA Argus, effectively killing pretty much
any chance of financing the JSBL.
So they are
hoping to incorporate some JSBL solutions for the delivery of stores to the
shore within the FSS design. Among other capabilities that arguably FSS should
try to deliver I’ll add the possibility of resupplying an SSN at sea with
torpedoes and Tomahawk missiles, and the capability of replenishing at sea the
missile cells of Type 45 and Type 26.
Currently,
the RN has no capability to reload the missile cells at sea, and Tomahawk
missiles can only be embarked on a submarine within a protected bay and with
very calm sea. Expanding the capabilities in these two sectors would be a major
improvement, no doubt.
The RFA
Diligence’s replacement could take on some other characteristics of JSBL, if
economically and technically feasible, by providing some workshop space and
equipment compatible not just with the support to ships and submarine, but to
land vehicles and helicopters as well. The Forward Repair Ship would be
particularly useful if able to provide such comprehensive service. Of course,
providing maintenance on helicopters would be relatively simple, while
providing vehicle workshops and “fitter section” spaces would be more
challenging, as vehicles would need suitable arrangements in the design of the
ship for driving in and out, and in absence of a port, this means bringing the
vehicle to be serviced to the Repair ship either via helicopter or, more
feasible, via landing craft: a stern ramp allowing vehicles to board the
landing crafts would be a possible solution, but this adds cost and complexity
to the design, and the Royal Navy will be dealing with tight budgets and
competing demands. A RFA Diligence replacement must come cheap, first of all.
Even
assuming that workshops could be provided, and that the FSS vessels will have a
decent capability for sending ashore supplies even in absence of a port, there
would still not be that degree of independence from shore installations that is
desirable.
In this
optic, the outcome of the Theatre Opening Capability initiative will be very
important, and potentially game-changing, if the ambition is that of enabling a
large scale deployment in absence of suitable ports. The solution could be
somewhat similar to the US Marines Mobile Landing Platform, but with a greater
attention placed on the logistic aspect. The MLP itself is currently being
built in a very basic configuration, but the design can be significantly
enhanced by fitting ramps, already tested and validated, that allow vehicle
transfer between ship and platform even in Sea State 4. Such Self-Deploying Ramps were tested in prototype form (produced by Cargotec this was named Test Article Vehicle Transfer System’ (TAVTS)) to the FLO-FLO ship MV Mighty Servant 3 in February 2010, and demonstrated at sea by the USMC with the successful transfer of personnel and vehicles from a Large Medium-Speed Roll-on/Roll-off (LMSR) vessel to the Mighty Servant in high sea state 3 and low sea state 4
over multiple days of testing in the Gulf of Mexico. Vehicles
transferred included HMWVVs, HMWVVs with trailers, MTVR medium trucks,
LVS wreckers, amphibious assault vehicles, M88 tank recovery vehicles,
and M1A1 main battle tanks.
The capability is thus at a very high readiness level. Ideally, though, the design should be further refined, so to be able to work with different and unmodified Ro-Ro ships, without having to fit the vessels with their own part of the TAVTS ramp system.
 |
| The TAVTS being trialed in the Gulf of Mexico, with its launch tower assembly well visible on the huge open deck of the civilian FLO-FLO ship Mighty Servant 3. The Theatre Opening vessel could be a FLO-FLO vessel, or a large barge deployed from a FLO-FLO vessel, acting as a firm "port" for dembarkation. From the barge, vehicles and supplies could drive ashore on floating causeways, or be brought onto the beach via landing craft and/or mexeflote. |
A container crane can
also be added, making it possible to bring huge amounts of supplies forwards
using civilian or military container vessels.
Cranes of various design and capacity can
of course be added, and connection to the shore can be achieved via landing
crafts or via floating causeways of various design, effectively creating a port
of entry: Ro-Ro ships loaded with vehicles and troops can connect to the MLP
and transfer vehicles and men onto it, and from the MLP the vehicles can be
driven ashore down the causeways or shipped with landing crafts.
Container ships can berth alongside the platform and be unloaded by the crane,
which might put the container directly down on the back of a truck ready to
drive towards the shore or onto a winched sled connecting the platform to the
beach and specifically thought to move containers back and forth.
Thanks to
US Marines studies and trials, many of the most complex problems have alreadybeen overcome, leaving the money aspect as perhaps the worst of all issues to
be tackled. A multinational, collaborative approach might be the solution to
the problem.
I put together a proposal for such a "Theatre Opening" capability already long time ago, as my personal take on the JSBL ship, and i'm gonna put it forwards again as an example of what can realistically be achieved with the right effort.
I am wary of such multinational plans, since results could never arrive for lack of funding and committment from this or that nation, delays could be caused by countless reasons and we might not see results for years, but at the same time i welcome the news of this Smart Defense plan, and i keep some hopes alive: i've just read the Army's Agile Warrior 2012 report (i'll write about it in the coming weeks) and they are saying that they "won't be able to avoid being dragged in battle in two particular environments being the Urban Areas and the Littoral, where most of the world's population and wealth is and will be concentrated.
When even the Army start to admit that operations in the Littoral and amphibiosity are going to be more frequently needed, it is time for your hopes to grow at least a little.
 |
| Theatre Entry from the sea: my take on the JSBL/Mobile Landing Platform at full capability, including extensive workshops for maintenance of helicopters and land vehicles. |
Regarding
the Apache, it is interesting to hear that an emergency flotation device is
being assessed for possible fitting onto the helicopter. The Army Air Corps had
evidenced a list of improvements that the Apache needed to operate effectively
and safely at sea in the future, right after the somewhat pioneer operations in
Libya concluded. A flotation device was among the requirements deemed more
urgent, since the crew of a current Apache which was to crash at sea during
operations from a ship would have very little chances to get out in time to
survive. It is good to see that some proper reflection and action is going into
completing the “navalization” of the mighty Apache. Personally, I’ve long been
saying that the cost of the folding blades and other “naval” features included
in the UK Apaches is little thing when compared to the flexibility it offers.
Purchasing “naval” Apaches was as smart a decision as it was stupid to buy
Merlin helicopters deprived of their naval traits for the utility role.
The
unpleasant note is the unwillingness to promise that all Apaches will be
upgraded and life-extended out to 2040, but we can hope that, when the Main
Gate point is reached, the right decision is taken. For sure, after all, Apache is, at the moment, a "must-stay" capability, which has been ringfenced from any hypothesis of cut. This is at least promising.
It is
interesting to hear that the MOD plans to retire Hellfire by 2022. Currently,
the Hellfire missile is employed by the Army on the attack helicopter and by
the RAF on the Reaper drones, despite the current Brimstone missile having the
capability to be employed from drones and helicopters without any issue.
The Reaper,
of course, was procured for an Urgent Operational Requirement, so integration
and validation of new, national and sovereign weaponry was a no-no as it would
have required more money and, critically, more time, delaying the fielding of
the drone in theatre.
The Apache
was purchased along with its typical weapon, the Hellfire, and Brimstone,
anyway, was not yet mature back then, and only entered service on Tornado in 2005, meaning that Hellfire was, if not the
only choice for the Apache, surely a sensible one, in the optic of achieving IOC in 2000, even if the Apache Full Operating Capability was only declared in 2007.
Hellfire also has the advantage of having been
acquired in tens of thousands of rounds by the US, and by many export
customers, so that its cost is also remarkably competitive. The US backing has
also meant the timely development of upgrades, alternative warheads and other
improvements that have kept Hellfire up to date and made it suitable for new
roles and employment methods as time and events moved onwards.
At the same
time, Apache started deploying on operations with the British Army as soon as
it entered service, and is still going full strength to this day, so the
appetite for devoting money, time and airframes to the integration effort
required by a passage to Brimstone never developed.
But with
combat operations in Afghanistan to end in 2014, with a mid-life upgrade to
Apache to follow and with a new MALE drone to come into service in 2020 in place of Reaper, times
are more than mature for nationalization and standardization of this particular
area. By the early 2020s, it make a lot of sense to envisage the gradual
retirement of Hellfire and the passage to Brimstone 2, also known as SPEAR
Capability 2 (block 3?).
For some clarity, it should be noted that SPEAR is a multi-capability programme, and each capability is divided in blocks. It does not make it very easy to keep track from the outside of exactly what is going on. Anyway, the Selective Precision Effects At Range (SPEAR) programme includes:
SPEAR Capability 1 - Improvements to the Paveway IV bomb, new warhead options, potentially new seekers and guidance methods.
Paveway
IV is the british answer to the USAF’s JDAM, and it undoubtedly built
on American experience with the Joint Direct Attack Munition: while the
USAF first focused on a bomb guided on its targets by the GPS and then
found out that a secondary laser-targeting mode was desirable, the
Paveway IV was immediately conceived as a combined guidance weapon,
using GPS and Laser, depending on the situation. The weapon is a
guidance kit based on the existing Enhanced Paveway II Enhanced Computer
Control Group (ECCG) added to a modified Mk 82 general-purpose bomb
with increased penetration performance. The new ECCG contains a Height
of Burst (HOB) sensor enabling air burst fusing options, and a SAASM
(Selective Availability Anti Spoofing Module) compliant GPS receiver. It
can be launched either IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) only, given
sufficiently good Transfer Alignment, or using GPS guidance. Terminal
laser guidance is available in either navigation mode. The bomb
displayed amazing accuracy, and can be detonated at impact, with delay
to exploit penetration against protected, buried targets, or it can
detonate in the air for air-burst effect. The Paveway IV guidance kits
can also be modified to fit other sized warheads, but for now it is
being used only for 227 kg warheads. Its stand-off range is
significantly greater than any other precision guided bomb. Paveway IV's
unique manoeuvrability means that, if necessary, following launch it
can turn and attack a target behind the delivery aircraft. The
availability of dual-mode laser/GPS guidance within a single weapon also
means that air forces do not have to incur the expense of maintaining
two separate (laser and GPS) weapon stockpiles.
As part of SPEAR Capability 1, a series of enhancements to the Paveway IV are to be pursued:
- Low Yeld Warhead for reduced collateral damage in urban environment
- Enhanced Penetrating Warhead for engagement of deeply-buried reinforced targets
- Extended Range with wing-kit
- Improvements to the GPS signals security
In
particular, point 4 is already being undertaken by Raytheon, while
point 3 should be the easier of all to fulfill, because the Paveway IV
system is already compatible with the addition of wing-kits, and many
such systems are already available, with an obvious leading contender in
the form of the MBDA’s Diamond Back wing-kit, which would allow the
bomb to glide for tens of miles to strike targets while keeping the
launcher aircraft as far away as possible for enemy air defence
weaponry.
Point
two, perhaps the most interesting, would fill in a gap of capability of
the RAF, which is currently not well equipped for the destruction of
deeply-buried targets, which can range from caves where talibans hide to
modern bunkers and underground facilities which have never passed out
of fashion and remain common throughout the world. Most likely aimed to
an upgrade of the Paveway IV and AASM respectively, the joint UK-France
development programme through MBDA of the bunker-buster Hardbut warhead
is the most probable answer to this requirement.
The
second test firing of the Hard and Deeply Buried Target (HARDBUT) Next
Generation Multiple Warhead System (NGMWS) was carried out successfully
at the Biscarrosse test range of DGA Essais de Missiles on 14th
September 2010. The HARDBUT Technology Demonstration Programme (TDP) is a
successful warhead research programme jointly funded by the UK MoD and
French Direction Générale de l’Armement (DGA) with MBDA UK as the Prime
Contractor. The NGMWS is designed to defeat a wide range of targets such
as command and control facilities, infrastructure and underground
facilities including caves, reflecting current and potential future
operations.
The recent orders for new Paveway IV (one worth 60 million pounds, and another one for less than 20 millions announced even more recently) reportedly included money to continue development of incremental improvements for the bomb under SPEAR arrangements.
Paveway IV is on Saudi Arabia's shopping list since 2010, but the UK has been unable so far to ink the deal due to US opposition under ITAR regulations. Quite a low blow of the USA, considering that they do sell everything and more to Saudi Arabia themselves.
SPEAR Capability 2
Capability 2 is about developing improvements / new variants of weapons in the 50 Kg class, mainly Brimstone. In fact, the "Brimstone 2"
was recently unveiled by MBDA, and should enter service next year with the RAF,
replacing the earlier Brimstone and the Brimstone Dual Mode which was,
effectively, a UOR upgrade to the original missile. Brimstone 2 includes
several improvements, including Insensitive Munition compliance for improved
safety of handling and storage. It will have a multi-mission warhead and
multi-mode seeker and will be launched from the typical triple rail (for fast
jets and UAVs), from a readily available twin rail (UAVs) and in future from
the quadruple rack currently used for Hellfire. Launch of Brimstone from the
ground was tested and validated already in the late 90s, and launch from boats
as small as 15 meters long has been validated literally in the last few days.
SPEAR Capability 3
Development of a new 100 kg-class weapon, specifically for use on the F35 first of all, and on other platforms later. This new weapon system has been presented in these days. It is a multi-mission stand-off missile with a range of over 100 km, network-enabled, subsonic in speed and fitted with multi-role warhead. Its multi-mode seeker makes it suitable for engagement of mobile targets, even if they are maneuvering at high speed.
The missile is effective as anti-ship weapon as well, and will be carried on a quadruple rack that will fit into the F35's weapon bays, alongside with a Meteor air-air missile.
 |
| SPEAR 3 as shown by MBDA: the Typhoon is carrying 16 such missiles, a formidable firepower. The F35 can carry 8 internally, and could carry at least as many externally if integration went ahead. |
SPEAR Capability 4
MBDA-Led,
joint anglo-french upgrade and sustainment programme for the Storm
Shadow missile. Italy, being the third major user of the missile, could
likely participate to the upgrade programme, while Saudi Arabia is
unlikely to collaborate, save probably having its missiles later updated
by BAE.
Not
much is really known and firm about these future upgrades, but a
two-way datalink is almost certainly going to figure, to allow
re-targeting and increasing the control over the missile post-launch,
just as with the latest Tomahawk IV. Other improvements are likely to
include an increase of the range of the missile, particularly since the
upgrade will build upon experience matured with the SCALP Navale with
its 1000+ km range.
It
is to be noted that the 250 km range figure for Storm Shadow is the
range for a low-flight profile engagement from launch to hit. If the
missile could do at least part of the cruise at altitude, efficiency of
the propulsion would be much higher, allowing for a much longer range.
The Lancaster House agreements signed in 2010 for collaboration between France and UK include a committment to joint Storm Shadow upgrades for the 2020s.
Indeed, joint work is ongoing from long time in this area: an upgrade considered for Storm Shadow was the DUMAS, for which
development started in 2006 in a collaborative programme with France.
DUMAS technology combines an active infrared scanning laser and a
passive infrared detector which, used in conjunction with sophisticated
algorithms, detects, images and identifies targets.
DUMAS
improves existing and new missile systems by increasing target
search areas and by providing powerful automated target identification
capabilities. It was meant to demonstrate a new seeker capable to guide
the missile on moving, difficult targets, while also providing
before-strike enhanced imagery, valid also to conduct a first
mission-effect estimate.
The
DUMAS is believed to have informed subsequent developments and
researches tied not just to the Storm Shadow but also other elements of
SPEAR.
SPEAR Capability Block 5
Blocks internal to the various Capabilities probably denote the various stages of improvement. The Capability 2 Block 3 might be a further enhancement of the Brimstone 2 entering service next year, since anyway the answer is relative to the 2020s period.
By then, with some determination and investment, the Brimstone might
finally fully mature, and meet its intended mission: become the common,
multi-platform weapon of choice of the british Armed Forces, used on drones, attack helicopters, fast jets and, perhaps one day, on ships and land platforms as well.
Already years ago, Brimstone was envisaged as Swingfire AT missile replacement in the missile Overwatch vehicle variant of the Tracer reconnaissance vehicle, which was then cancelled as we know.
The army would still like to have an overwatch capability back in the future as part of FRES, though... who knows what might happen.
