Feature 3
limitations) and a representative box platforms as the footprint is so small and
canister. its requirements relatively undemanding.
In operation, the missile is ejected Essentially, all an SVL-based launcher
upwards, its fins unfolding following egress needs to be is a stowage canister. Its
from the launch tube. A series of small reduced size and weight permit it to be
thrusters mounted just aft of the fins are located within the superstructure as well
then fired to steer the round through its as distributed around the hull, in addition
turnover manoeuvre before the main motor to more conventional locations. Because
is fired to begin powered flight. Side-by- there is no efflux, SVL launchers can be
side realtime comparison of Seawolf and located closer to manned positions than
Aster hard vertical launch sequences would otherwise be the case.
shows the SVL to have an appreciably The ability to more freely disperse
faster reaction time from launch initiation SVL launch canisters would also offer
to commencement of powered flight. benefits to the general design and topside
A soft launch is seen to offer a number arrangement of new-build warships. SVL
of benefits. In terms of safety, there is no removes the efflux problem and permits
efflux to manage because the main motor a distributed launch approach with small
does not ignite until well clear of the ship. clusters of missiles where they can be most
Also, there is no risk of a hang-fire, a fault easily integrated.
condition where the missile motor burns
while retained in the canister. Flexible positioning Time lapse image
There is also an appreciable performance Relaxed from the demands of the showing the soft
benefit. Whereas a hard vertical launch conventional vertical launch silo, platform launch and turnover
requires the missile to expend significant designers have much more freedom to of the CaMM missile.
energy in performing what is in effect a place the missile launchers where it best (photo: MBda)
‘handbrake turn’, in a soft launch all of the suits the overall demands of the platform.
motor’s energy is expended efficiently in Such an arrangement is ideal for air defence
the direction of intended travel. missiles: this role benefits from additional
Another key advantage cited by MBDA resilience and it permits simultaneous, or vertical launch systems is complex,
is the far smaller shipborne footprint. The nearer simultaneous, launch than a single problematic and expensive because of the
canisters are of significantly reduced size [vertical launch] silo arrangement does. size and weight of the installation, and
and weight because there is no longer Bolt-on and containerised options are its invasive nature regarding platform
a requirement for efflux ducting. The also feasible. integration (it will typically penetrate
company adds that this would enable Retrofit potential is another argument through several decks and numerous
the retrofit of the system to existing in favour of SVL. Retrofit of hot launch compartment spaces).
However, SVL launch canisters can be
more easily retrofitted due to their overall
low size and weight, and the fact that the
smallest launch module could be just a
single canister. It will still be most practical
to locate canisters in groups or clusters,
but this could be short rows distributed
around the ship topside rather than in
the large blocks required for conventional
vertical launch modules.
MBDA has already worked with naval
design and systems engineering house
BMT Defence Services to examine the
integration of CAMM SVL technology
in BMT’s Venator ocean-capable patrol
vessel design concept. Venator is a minor
warship platform, sized and powered
for global deployment, which could be
reconfigured to execute alternative mine
countermeasures (MCM), MCM support,
Flaads(M) will replace the seawolf shipborne point defence missile system and will be hydrographic survey, maritime security
retrofitted on Type 23 frigates and the Future Surface Combatant. operations or offshore patrol missions. WT
Warship Technology May 2009 35
p31-32-33-34-35_WT_May09.indd 35 17/04/2009 15:21:15
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52