It’s one thing to have a Don Quixote type tilt with a windmill, it’s still another to have that same windmill come back and smear excrement (I’m sorry egg, to be politely P.C.) in your face.
Just this month, having been long retired, this author celebrated his 85th birthday. In a previous blog post, published several years ago (2013), a parallel to this very same subject was addressed in some detail; https://arnhemjim.blogspot.com/search?q=VLS .
Not having quite as fast a draw as I once had, it was not until today that I discovered a Royal Navy missile defense system that had an I.O.C.(2018), three years ago. Shame! The Sea Ceptor missile is truly generations of technology more capable than anything available to the early U.S. Navy Aegis system. It’s the SVL (Soft Vertical Launch), an integral element of Sea Ceptor, that I found "intriguing". For those who may have taken the time to scan the afore-mentioned blog post, striking design similarities should be obvious (see following images).
It suffices to say I have no one else to blame but myself, at the time just lacked the assertive personality to have pushed back a lot harder. "No guts, No glory!" However, I’m certainly going to go on written record at this time.
To better accommodate the reader, in addition to its silo’s circular configuration, I’ve taken the liberty of bolding the text on certain other specific design features and capabilities.
A new missile for evolving threats – Sea Ceptor
CAMM incorporates the tail fin control technology and rocket motor from ASRAMM. The blast-fragmentation warhead is derived from the Meteor Beyond Visual Range Air-Air Missile that entered service with the RAF last year. Some internal electronics from the Sea Wolf Block 2 missiles are also incorporated. Otherwise, Sea Ceptor has little in common with Sea Wolf, Weighing 99kg and 3.3m in length, it is considerably bigger and capable of Mach 3. Most significantly it has far greater range, officially capable of interceptions between 1 and 25km, although the missile reportedly travelled up to 60 km during trials. This has important tactical implications. Sea Wolf provided point-defence for the ship itself and a few others in close company, Sea Ceptor can now defend more than 1,000 km² around the ship, offering an area air defence capability. This will allow the frigates to operate in more loose formation with the aircraft carrier or high-value Unit, important for anti-submarine operations, while still contributing to the air defence.
As the air threat to surface ships has evolved with increasing speed and sophistication, being able to intercept faster and at a greater distance becomes imperative. The ability to make high-G manoeuvres in the terminal phase and better resistance against jamming are all important improvements over Sea Wolf but it is the guidance system that is greatest step-change. CAMM / Sea Ceptor utilises the powerful track-while-scan ability of the multi-function Artisan 3D radar. Artisan has a maximum range of about 200km and can detect small object travelling at Mach 3 more than 25km away. It can track up to 800 objects simultaneously and is highly resistant to ECM and interference. Artisan provides initial target data to Sea Ceptor and updates the missile in flight via the two-way Platform Data Link Terminal (PDLT). Most importantly, the missile itself has an advanced active radar seeker head for use in the terminal phase which removes the need for dedicated fire control radars. Numbers are classified but it is clear that a salvo of missiles could be launched simultaneously against multiple targets.
Sea Ceptor is clearly optimised for defending against saturation anti-ship missile attacks, which could overwhelm the limitations of legacy systems based on target illumination fire-control radars.
CAMM features another major innovation, soft vertical launch (SVL). A very rapid chemical reaction in a gas generator in the base of the missile canister ejects the missile out of the tube via a piston with enough momentum to get about 30m above the ship. Small lateral thrusters then fire in sequence to turn the missile horizontal before the main rocket motor ignites. This ‘cold-launch’ method reduces the heat signature and has a better minimum intercept range, compared to conventional VLS which have a greater turnover arc. It also reduces stress on the vessel’s structure and avoids the risks of a missile with a burning rocket motor jammed in its cell. SVL also saves smoke and exhaust gas efflux enveloping the ship which can lower visibility for several minutes in light winds.
The 'mushroom' farm. The 32-cell silo on HMS Argyll. Note how each cell is offset from the vertical. If the rocket motor should fail to ignite after soft-launch, the missile will not fall on the ship. Sea Ceptor is longer than the Sea Wolf the silo was designed for, so each cell protrudes above the silo top slightly.
The cost of upgrading the Type 23 frigates missiles has been kept down by using the existing ship footprint and infrastructure as far as possible. The existing Silo has been used, although modified to take the longer missile. The main weight of the cells is carried on shock-proof mountings by the deck below, instead of the silo top in the case of Sea Wolf. The deck has been strengthened to cope with the shock loadings generated at launch. The removal of the Fire Control Radars and replacement by the small PDLT is a considerable saving in top-weight. This reduces the stress on the ship or could be used as a growth margin to fit additional equipment on the superstructure. There are four launch management system cabinets, one for every eight missiles and other below-decks control equipment in the operations room and in the old Sea Wolf radar offices. Overall the amount of equipment is reduced and some of the existing cabling has been re-used.
The delivery of Sea Ceptor into service has been relatively quick. MBDA invested around £2 Billion in its development and were rewarded with a £483M demonstration contract for Sea Ceptor in January 2012. To reduce costs, development and de-risking work was carried out entirely on land and benefited from the Type 997 (Artisan) radar already proven in service. Missile test firings were conducted at the Vidsel range in Sweden while Integration and development was done in Bristol, Stevenage and at the Type 23 Land Based Test Site (LBTS) at Portsdown Technology Park. A further £250M contract to supply the equipment for the frigates was signed in September 2013. The number of missiles purchased, their individual cost and their delivery schedule are not in the public domain.
Sea Ceptor will be fitted to the Type 26 frigates which will carry up to 48 missiles in two separated 24-cell silos. It is also very likely that the Type 31e frigates will carry the system, although with a smaller number of cells. It is expected that Artisan radars and the control equipment will be transferred to the new frigates from the Type 23s as they decommission. While the system has been fully proven and de-risked, there are integration and timing challenges that will be involved with this migration process.
A flexible friend
It is possible the Type 45 destroyers could be fitted with Sea Ceptor. Their Sylver VLS cells that hold Aster 15/30 (Sea Viper) missiles could be adapted with quad packs that allow 4 CAMM to fit inside each cell. Theoretically, a Type 45 could, for example, be outfitted with 30 x long-range Aster30 and 72 x quad-packed Sea Ceptor. Trading 18 x Aster15 for 72 x Sea Ceptor would make sense and add significantly to each ship’s firepower. Sea Ceptor uses around 70% of the same technology as the PAAMS carried by the Type 45, so integration should be fairly straight forward. The Sampson radar offers even better performance than Artisan, potentially offsetting the reduced range and performance of Sea Ceptor compared with Aster15. Quad-packed Sylver is a theoretical niche capability for the UK and France but Lockheed Martin has already tested and proven the quad-pack concept for their Mk 41 VLS Extensible Launching System (EXLS). Mk 41 is utilised by many navies across the world and Sea Ceptor is an attractive proposition for cost-effective medium-range naval air defence. (It’s an unlikely scenario but a single Type 26 frigate could potentially carry a total of 144 Sea Ceptor missiles if also quad-packed into its 24 x Mk 41 cells!)
CAMM are assembled in Bolton, Lancashire, although the component supply chain is global. MBDA is a European company but CAMM is primarily a British product and already something of an export success. Lockheed Martin Canada is fitting Sea Ceptor to the New Zealand Navy’s ANZAC Frigates as part of a major Systems Upgrade (FSU) project. Chile has also contracted LM Canada to upgrade their ex-RN Type 23 frigates and they will receive the system. Brazil has selected Artisan and a 12-cell Sea Ceptor installation for its Tamandaré class corvettes being constructed by TKMS in Germany. The Royal Navy, New Zealand and Chilean navies have now established a ‘Sea Ceptor users group’ to share experience and best practice with the system.
CAMM/Sea Ceptor appears to be a rare example of a highly successful UK procurement project, affordable, delivered on time and meeting all requirements. Through its acquisition, the RN has quietly gained a step-change in defensive capability, which is very much needed in the face of ever more demanding air and missile threats. Operating inside the Sea Viper umbrella of the Type 45 destroyers, the frigates can provide the next line of defence for the carrier battle group with an equally credible weapon system.
In conclusion, both the launch system proposed by the author while at General Dynamics/Pomona in 1963, and the Sea Ceptor launch system, circa 2018, incorporate the following same attributes:
• Vertical launch with angled launch tube to avoid “dead launch” hitting ship
• Cylindrical missile storage container and launch tube
• “Cold launch” with gas generator and sabot piston
• Avoids potential burning rocket motor jammed in cell
• In event of missile malfunction, instantaneous ability to switch targeting/launch data to another missile
• Capable of simultaneous engagement/multiple launch against multiple targets, and/or types (AAW/ASW/SSW)
• Lower center of gravity and physical profile of entire launch complex
• No heavy, complex, electro/mechanical amplidyne launcher drive vulnerable to damage and/or malfunction (operability/maintainability/survivability/)
• Entire missile inventory in magazine not rendered useless because of launcher malfunction and/or combat damage
The only difference being, that the one launching system could have been operational in the fleet at the very least over 55 years ago, albeit without as sophisticated a missile.
