Description
The missile is shipped as a single round in a storage cylinder/firing tube. The controller unit is clipped to the launch tube and fired from the operator's shoulder. To reduce the overall size of the container, the rear fins of the missile are stored in the larger diameter area at the front of the tube; during firing the fins clip onto the rear of the missile as it moves past. This gives the launch container a unique shape, seemingly oversized at the front and extremely thin at the rear. The missile is powered by a short duration solid rocket for launch, then by a main sustainer rocket once it is well clear of the launch tube.
Guidance of the Blowpipe is completely manual, or MCLOS, requiring the operator to steer the missile all the way to its target manually via a small thumb joystick. A flare in the tail of the missile makes it more easily visible in flight. Detonation is either by proximity or contact fuse. The controller can then be removed from the empty missile container and fitted to a new round.
Blowpipe was developed as a SAM for submarines, fitted into a mast that could be raised from the submarine's conning tower under the name Submarine Launched Airflight Missile (SLAM) trialled on HMS Aeneas (P427) in the 1970s.
Jemiba said:Found a drawing of SLAM in Bill Gunstons "Enzyklopadie der
Raketen & Lenkwaffen". It even seems to carry six Blowpipes.
rickshaw said:Using SLAM would have sort of destroyed the best defence the submarine had - stealth. Which is why the weapon wasn't adopted by anybody except (supposedly) the Israelis.
TinWing said:Even today, the issue of submarine air defence isn't entirely dead. MBDA promoted an encapsulated, torpedo tube fired MICA VL missile. Would it be practical or even desirable?
All I can state for certain is that it seems that the P-8 MPA might very well deliver its lightweight anti-submarine torpedos from relatively high altitude, well outside of the range of potential air defense missiles. This obviously saves the 737-based airframe from the fatigue of sustained low altitude flight, but it also nullifies a very indefinite future threat.
starviking said:But if you can't detect 'em...useless.
Firefly 2 said:I just remember reading something in the excellent " La Marine Soviétique" by Claude Huan.
Apparently, the Project 949 A ( nato code Oscar II) subs Omsk and Kursk( we all know that one) were fitted with a SLAM system called Igla, with 12 missiles. The author susjests that the Borei class SSBN would also receive this system. He mentions no further info on the system, and these facts are not confirmed by the excellent " Illustrated Directory of Submarined of The World" by David Miller.
Would this be a navalised version of the Igla MANPAD?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K38_Igla
that's correctSea Skimmer said:My understanding is they simply have MANPADS launchers as used on land stored in a locker
Nik said:If you're a diesel sub in littoral zone, and your threat is a helicopter or two, being able to force the helo to dump its dunker and evade might, IMHO, prove useful...
'Honour the threat...'
How many sub-hunter helos would you face ? And how long for them to return to ship and re-equip ??
Still, it would be poor odds to fight on surface-- The WW1 Q-ships proved what a juicy target a surfaced sub could be...
Hey there,that's correctSea Skimmer said:My understanding is they simply have MANPADS launchers as used on land stored in a locker
I'm assuming that this system was usable while submerged.If you're a diesel sub in littoral zone, and your threat is a helicopter or two, being able to force the helo to dump its dunker and evade might, IMHO, prove useful...
'Honour the threat...'
How many sub-hunter helos would you face ? And how long for them to return to ship and re-equip ??
Still, it would be poor odds to fight on surface-- The WW1 Q-ships proved what a juicy target a surfaced sub could be...