UK SAM defence

[deltergo]

I am curious as to why the UK has (or appears to have) relatively weak surface-to-air missile defence systems. Perhaps those with more knowledge than me on this subject can help?

To be more specific, I'm referring to the lack of a medium/long range SAM system. Rapier being very short range / low-altitude.

Is it that there is deemed to be no credible threat? Is that true now and will it be true in the near future with the increasingly longer range ballistic missile threats popping up around the world.

I know CAMM-L will have more range/altitude than Rapier but it still isn't much more than a point defence system (as far as I can tell) and therefore pretty much a straight replacement.

Are there US assets (Patriot, etc.) based in the UK that I'm overlooking? Almost all other major countries seem to have a medium/long-range SAM system of some description, so the UK setup is a mystery to me...

 

[the road runner]

I am curious as to why the UK has (or appears to have) relatively weak surface-to-air missile defence systems. Perhaps those with more knowledge than me on this subject can help?

The best form of Air defence is usually a jet fighter.The UK has a strong Air Force that covers most of its Air defence needs.

 

[deltergo]

The best form of Air defence is usually a jet fighter.The UK has a strong Air Force that covers most of its Air defence needs.

I understand that's a part of the equation, but why do so many other countries with comparable airforces seem to feel differently (France being an obvious local example with SAMP/T)?

Also, that doesn't cover any ballistic missile threat, although as I said, I'm not sure if that's a credible threat.

 

[StobieWan]

We're an island nation with a deep buffer of friendly nations along much of the land facing our coastline. Historically, for the last thirty or forty years, the air threat would have come from the North Sea and overfly a large chunk of Scotland to get to striking distance - better to use that depth to intercept in the air than spend money on air defence SAM's that may not be in place to hit the threat.

It's possible we may go down the ABM route at some point in the future however.

 

[STURM]

I am curious as to why the UK has (or appears to have) relatively weak surface-to-air missile defence systems

Its got an excellent low level short range capability, in the form of the Starstreak. One plus point of using laser guided missiles like Starsteak, Starburst and RBS-70 is that the bulk of military aircraft operated worldwide are not fitted with means to defend themselves or to provide warning against beam riders. And for some strange reason, beam riders have not caught on in the way IR MANPADS have - it could be due to the cost and the need for the gunner to keep his sighton targets until missile impact.

 

[Cailet]

With the end of the Cold War, the only short-medium term threat to the British Isles vanished. In the long term even, there are no major threats likely to overfly the mainland UK, any operations are expected to be of an expeditionary nature intruding into enemy airspace or defending outposts (i.e the Falklands) with naval forces which do carry SAM systems.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Britain invest in a ground-launched Meteor at some stage but for now the combination of limited budgets and low priority means that the only SAMs the UK is likely to purchase will be MANPADS and other tactical units. Unlike the US, we can't afford to pile backup upon failsafe so we pick the best options for the scenario and stick with them and on current going, the SAM comes a very distant second to the missile-carrying fighter for defending airspace.

 

[Ricey]

I am curious as to why the UK has (or appears to have) relatively weak surface-to-air missile defence systems. Perhaps those with more knowledge than me on this subject can help?

To be more specific, I'm referring to the lack of a medium/long range SAM system. Rapier being very short range / low-altitude.

Is it that there is deemed to be no credible threat? Is that true now and will it be true in the near future with the increasingly longer range ballistic missile threats popping up around the world.

I know CAMM-L will have more range/altitude than Rapier but it still isn't much more than a point defence system (as far as I can tell) and therefore pretty much a straight replacement.

Are there US assets (Patriot, etc.) based in the UK that I'm overlooking? Almost all other major countries seem to have a medium/long-range SAM system of some description, so the UK setup is a mystery to me...

It's also worth remembering that the new Type 45 has Aster 30 & 15 missiles, and if im not mistaken the Aster 30 has the longer range and is also capable of shooting down Ballistic missiles. This will pose a very credible air defense if used in conjunction with the Queen Elizabeth carrier, or land based Eurofighters.

But at the moment i fail to see why we would need such a system when we are surrounded by allies

 

[Beatmaster]

Personally i venture to say that the UK has a rather good air defense grid.
Obviously most nations have the defense grid working together with other branches of their system, but i think that the UK has done it properly.
Instead of having gazillions of land based systems they have put their air defense focus on the navy and their air force backuped by some serious radar coverage, provided by their own extensive radar network and that of their allies.
Which will give them enough warning to have a substantial amount of birds up in the air to deal with it.
Its commonly known that the UK's naval forces are in decline but they still got a good amount of air defense type 45 floating around, combined with their land based air fields its going to be a nasty job to penetrate their mainland.
Obviously land based systems could not hurt as they got their use, but the time that the UK has to be offensive organized as a world power are sort of over, the only thing they need to do is to hold out for a few days till help comes from the EU or US.
And for that they have one hell of a defense going.
Granted their naval and air forces cannot be everywhere at the same time and their 30 rapiers are not going to make much of a difference when it comes down to it, however its save to say that the systems they got running are adequate to ward of any successful air campaign.

 

[Supermoves]

The issue here, IMO, is the population density of London. They prefer to have missile sites set up on the coast and in other places, because if you shoot down a plane over london, you may end up killing as many people as are on the plane in the first place.

Of course, this all changes with the 2012 Olympics and the state-of-the-art SAM sites they are setting up to protect the games. Any lack of SAM defense England has had in the past is being overcompensated for during the olympics. In fact, I believe they have just released a bunch of SAM sites to the public.

 

[Dodger67]

A fixed SAM installation is just another target that needs to be defended against "Wild Weasel" attacks.

 

[the concerned]

a modern mobile sam system would be a good asset to deploy (like if we had the capability to place a sam battery like patriot or samp/l on to places like the falklands or say cyprus).why weren't the Raf base in Cyprus offered for the deployment of the Nato ABM missile defence it would help against Iranian ambitions to europe aswell as offering a solution to Israel's worry's aswell

 

[Cailet]

a modern mobile sam system would be a good asset to deploy (like if we had the capability to place a sam battery like patriot or samp/l on to places like the falklands or say cyprus).why weren't the Raf base in Cyprus offered for the deployment of the Nato ABM missile defence it would help against Iranian ambitions to europe aswell as offering a solution to Israel's worry's aswell

What Iranian ambitions in europe? And how would a base in Cyprus provide ABM defence for Israel? While we're at it let's install a system on Gibraltar to protect Libya from possible trouble from Egypt, it'd make as much sense.

If you're worried about 'containing' Iran, just look at a map of US bases in the ME, Iran is quite comprehensively surrounded. I'd call that pretty effective containment.