First pics of Stormer in action, looking like a Martlet missile. Target was a Russian Orlan 10 which was successfully engaged and downed.

Suspect there might be some video soon...

View: https://twitter.com/Frknwar/status/1558386424138842113
The drone was a lot cheaper than the missile. Not a good rate of exchange for what is essentially a small unarmed drone of dubious value. I’m not even sure if the improved Orlan 10 with a laser designator was ever fielded?

The altitude of this drone can’t exceed 1500 meters so this sort of threat isn’t worth the missile. A good reason why the Indian army is still procuring 40mm L70 Bofors guns.
 
The drone was a lot cheaper than the missile. Not a good rate of exchange for what is essentially a small unarmed drone of dubious value.

Orlan 10 cost the Russian MoD c$120,000 per copy...and yes the Russian MoD got ripped off and probably paid for someones yacht...

Martlet is c$65,000 per copy....so Martlet is a lot cheaper...

Besides the Russian's are running low on Orlan's according to intercepted conversations. The cost is not a straight missle vs drone comparison...its what you just protected from being attacked...

Orlan 30 have been used in Ukraine, and shot down...

The altitude of this drone can’t exceed 1500 meters so this sort of threat isn’t worth the missile. A good reason why the Indian army is still procuring 40mm L70 Bofors guns.

Horses for courses. A Bofors L70 is a huge system to carry around in comparison to a Martlet and man portable launch kit. If its not got good sensors and airburst rounds available in quantity it will likely just be a target for more modern loitering munitions...
 
The drone was a lot cheaper than the missile. Not a good rate of exchange for what is essentially a small unarmed drone of dubious value.

Orlan 10 cost the Russian MoD c$120,000 per copy...and yes the Russian MoD got ripped off and probably paid for someones yacht...

Martlet is c$65,000 per copy....so Martlet is a lot cheaper...

Besides the Russian's are running low on Orlan's according to intercepted conversations. The cost is not a straight missle vs drone comparison...its what you just protected from being attacked...

Orlan 30 have been used in Ukraine, and shot down...

The altitude of this drone can’t exceed 1500 meters so this sort of threat isn’t worth the missile. A good reason why the Indian army is still procuring 40mm L70 Bofors guns.

Horses for courses. A Bofors L70 is a huge system to carry around in comparison to a Martlet and man portable launch kit. If its not got good sensors and airburst rounds available in quantity it will likely just be a target for more modern loitering munitions...
Your figure for the unit cost of Martlet is a little low. https://militarymatters.online/weapons/martlet-ukraines-latest-surface-to-air-missile/

To quote this source: “Best public estimates I have seen say that Martlets cost about £1.5 million each; Starstreak’s are about £3 million.” That seems quite high to me but $65,000 also was a bit low. Consider that Starstreak and Martlet are make work projects for job creation in Belfast (at least 500 jobs circa 2009) I don’t see either system as being especially low cost.

The Russians apparently quoted the price of Orlan-M as a package deal with a pair of drones, spares and the base station for $160,000 circa 2013. I assume that’s an export price and no doubt padded.
 
Last edited:
It’s not as simple as described in the article;-

U.K. gov will decide it’s in its strategic interest to develop the capability with a U.K. supplier. Hence after a selection process it’ll issue a development contract. The development phase contract is frequently a fixed price with agreed amendments, but it also contains an agreed cost per production round and export round profit margin/% refundable to U.K. gov. When the development process looks good, ie meeting performance etc, a production contract is placed at the agreed price per round.

An example using notional simple numbers;-
So if the development cost was say a billion and the agreed production price per round is one hundred thousand for a thousand rounds, at this point in time you could say each round costs 1.1 million, and when the second production contract is placed they’re 0.6 million each. And after the third contract they’re 0.43 million each.

Now this evolves further when export orders are achieved;- Say the agreed export price is 0.3 million per round, and the vendor is producing the round at a cost of less than 0.1million each the profit is 0.2 million is split, which you could say further reduces U.K. cost per round. With a reasonably successful development project generating good export sales it will drive the U.K. gov cost per round eventually to less than 0.1 million. In reality any profit for U.K. gov funds the next development project.
 
Last edited:
To quote this source: “Best public estimates I have seen say that Martlets cost about £1.5 million each; Starstreak’s are about £3 million.” That seems quite high to me but $65,000 also was a bit low.

That figure is comically wrong. Thats more expensive than a Tomahawk missile or Meteor....

The design and manufacture contract for 1,000 missiles in 2014 with Thales was £48m. Development was incredibly cheap as Thales used the existing aerodynamic work from the Starburst missile and the same launch equipment and guidance as the already existing Starstreak. In essense pretty much everything was off the shelf in the manufacturers stores...

You can see the family resemblance in this picture from Thales UK's Belfast factory reception...(who need to sort out their wallpaper..)

From top to bottom:

Martlet (LMM) - Mash up of Starburst and Starstreak
Starstreak - Wholly new concept, but took the guidance method from Starburst
Starburst - Essentially Laser Guided Javelin (also known as Javelin S15 in UK service). Not SAL.
Javelin - Blowpipe but guided via SACLOS via RF
Blowpipe - The original MCLOS guided via RF missile


us76xh6.jpg
 
Last edited:
First pics of Stormer in action, looking like a Martlet missile. Target was a Russian Orlan 10 which was successfully engaged and downed.

Suspect there might be some video soon...

View: https://twitter.com/Frknwar/status/1558386424138842113
The drone was a lot cheaper than the missile. Not a good rate of exchange for what is essentially a small unarmed drone of dubious value. I’m not even sure if the improved Orlan 10 with a laser designator was ever fielded?

The altitude of this drone can’t exceed 1500 meters so this sort of threat isn’t worth the missile. A good reason why the Indian army is still procuring 40mm L70 Bofors guns.
If you're just looking at unit cost vs. unit cost, you're doing it wrong.

You don't expend a Martlet to kill a drone, you expend a Martlet to stop the drone from spotting important stuff.

You know, like PzH 2000 units, or HIMARS launchers, or ammo depots. Or just plain people.

Simply saying that it cost you more than the other guy just to stop his stuff is forgetting that that drone was spotting for stuff that could do a lot of damage to YOUR stuff.

And not having your stuff buried under a 152 mm barrage is worth a lot more than one Martlet.
 
If you're just looking at unit cost vs. unit cost, you're doing it wrong.

You don't expend a Martlet to kill a drone, you expend a Martlet to stop the drone from spotting important stuff.

You're also stopping that drone from doing its job many times in the future..
 
Something I wasn't aware of....Indonesia purchased Martlet. There were some deliveries starting at least 6 months ago...

Indonesia use lots of different types of MANPADS, but already use the Starstreak on the LML and RapidRanger mounts.
EDIT - Sorry should have added this was on their Instagram page about 6 months ago and depicts a Learning on the Job training session.

cyUozL4.jpg
 
Last edited:
The drone was a lot cheaper than the missile. Not a good rate of exchange for what is essentially a small unarmed drone of dubious value.

Orlan 10 cost the Russian MoD c$120,000 per copy...and yes the Russian MoD got ripped off and probably paid for someones yacht...

Martlet is c$65,000 per copy....so Martlet is a lot cheaper...

Besides the Russian's are running low on Orlan's according to intercepted conversations. The cost is not a straight missle vs drone comparison...its what you just protected from being attacked...

Orlan 30 have been used in Ukraine, and shot down...

The altitude of this drone can’t exceed 1500 meters so this sort of threat isn’t worth the missile. A good reason why the Indian army is still procuring 40mm L70 Bofors guns.

Horses for courses. A Bofors L70 is a huge system to carry around in comparison to a Martlet and man portable launch kit. If its not got good sensors and airburst rounds available in quantity it will likely just be a target for more modern loitering munitions...
Your figure for the unit cost of Martlet is a little low. https://militarymatters.online/weapons/martlet-ukraines-latest-surface-to-air-missile/

To quote this source: “Best public estimates I have seen say that Martlets cost about £1.5 million each; Starstreak’s are about £3 million.” That seems quite high to me but $65,000 also was a bit low. Consider that Starstreak and Martlet are make work projects for job creation in Belfast (at least 500 jobs circa 2009) I don’t see either system as being especially low cost.

The Russians apparently quoted the price of Orlan-M as a package deal with a pair of drones, spares and the base station for $160,000 circa 2013. I assume that’s an export price and no doubt padded.

Don't compare the cost of a dead drone to a missile. Compare the cost of a live drone to a dead company or battalion instead.

Because that's the actual economic exchange occurring. If the drone doesn't die it will be able to direct accurate artillery fire onto a defended ground unit and cause far more material damage and costs than a single MANPADS.

Ditto the attack helicopter team/platoon with Vikhrs or something that Martlet has occasionally bullied.

40mm probably doesn't have much a future as a CUAS system though. It has too few stowed kills to handle the actually large numbers of targets of Group 1/2 UAS that make up observer team or swarming attacks, and against something like a Orlan-10 or similar Group 3 UAS it's typically better to use a missile. The stowed kills of a Bofors gun on a large tracked chassis is something puny like 20-25 after all, if we assume a 8-12 round engagement cycle with airburst 3P rounds.

The unironic best gun caliber for a dumb round SHORAD these days is somewhere between 20-30mm with the latter leaning towards PABM and the former leading towards APDS. This gives you a large magazine and the additional rounds needed don't encroach on stowed kills.

Somewhere between 30-50mm is where you see this bizarre dip in stowed kills against swarming drones but retaining similar lethality against higher altitude threats. This only makse sense if you intend to use the cannon as an all-threat engagement system like Lvkv 9040. Beyond 50mm you can get terminally guided, radar beamriding projectiles that cut the engagement cycle from "a dozen or two" shells to literally 1-3 rounds against all threats, and you start to see an improvement in stowed kills over smaller calibers. The downside is that you need a radar guided projectile with an airburst warhead and you still don't carry many rounds.


The most realistic options going forward are 20x102mm, 30x113mm, and various 57-76mm calibers that have only really seen use in naval guns and the occasional crazy clown car that no one buys. Since we know it is possible to make PABM 20-25mm rounds, that's a possible solution, using MEMS fuses derived from the 20mm rounds used in the OICW. They wouldn't be particularly dangerous to a helicopter but they would absolutely shred most lightweight forward observation team UAS.

For helicopters, you will have a missile for BLOS autonomous guided shots (Brimstone or Longbow Hellfire), and short-range LOS interceptions of battalion or regimental observation UAS using something like RBS 70, Martlet, or Stinger. The gun would exist solely to kill Group 1/2 UAS that are too small for reliable IR missile engagements and too numerous for any stowed quantities of guided rockets regardless.

You can expand out the engagement capabilities by addition of extremely small missiles like MHTK or something, or APDS ammunition for the 20-30mm gun, to shoot down mortar bombs and terminally guided artillery rounds that might harm accompanied main battle tanks or something, too.

Anyway my point is Martlet is fine for swatting Orlan-10s. It could be cheaper I guess, but a LAADS team isn't exactly the most common type of munition or biggest equipment user of a battalion task force, nor are the targets they engage (attack helicopters and Group 3 UAS) particularly common in of themselves.

The real problem is that terminally guided projectiles can murder a battalion to a track fairly swiftly and that Group 1 UAS can direct TGP/TGSM artillery pieces as effectively as an Orlan-10 while being about a dozen times more numerous a target. Which is why a future SHORAD will need to be very low level (sub-sub-unit possibly), have the capability to destroy or disrupt incoming terminal guided projectiles, and have a lot of stowed kills because you might be fending off artillery and their eyeballs for a while before getting more ammo.

All of that points to small calibers as being ideal. Preferably the same caliber as the platoon/company carrier.

The really big guns can be used by the battalions for protection against the same threats, but at longer ranges, letting them disperse a battery of half a dozen heckin' chonker trucks, instead of a company of a dozen SHORAD LAVs, throughout the battalion's COMMZ.

...or if you're Rheinmetall the field artillery battery fires a shot of 155mm PABM rounds to obliterate anything that flies.
 
Last edited:
Its going to be really interesting to see all these various systems and how they held up. Because honestly I don't much get the darts for Starstreak, unless your kill shot is going though the titanium tub of an a-10 then there's not much point? An explosive will have a much higher probability to hit and probability to kill with the only things the darts give is huge speed, wich means little if it gose though the target instead of killing it. Pulse you should be able to get the same speed even from a unitary warhead.
 
Its going to be really interesting to see all these various systems and how they held up. Because honestly I don't much get the darts for Starstreak, unless your kill shot is going though the titanium tub of an a-10 then there's not much point? An explosive will have a much higher probability to hit and probability to kill with the only things the darts give is huge speed, wich means little if it gose though the target instead of killing it. Pulse you should be able to get the same speed even from a unitary warhead.
I just take it from Wikipedia:
The dart housing is made from a tungsten alloy. The darts are each 396 millimetres (15.6 in) long, 22 millimetres (0.87 in) in diameter, and about 900 grams (32 oz) in mass. Around half the weight of each dart - approximately 450 g (16 oz) - is its explosive charge, detonated by a delayed-action, impact-activated fuse.
 
Its going to be really interesting to see all these various systems and how they held up. Because honestly I don't much get the darts for Starstreak, unless your kill shot is going though the titanium tub of an a-10 then there's not much point? An explosive will have a much higher probability to hit and probability to kill with the only things the darts give is huge speed, wich means little if it gose though the target instead of killing it. Pulse you should be able to get the same speed even from a unitary warhead.
Each dart has a bursting charge. They're fused to detonate after penetrating the aircrafts skin. The warhead size of each dart is equivalent to a 40mm Bofors round.
 
Whit is hilariously small consdering how big airplanes actually are.pluse it still requires the missile to directly hit and one would think the uk learned that lesson from the falklands. But will see if it was en effective traid off (consdering this is really the first time this system has had to test itself).
 
Its going to be really interesting to see all these various systems and how they held up. Because honestly I don't much get the darts for Starstreak, unless your kill shot is going though the titanium tub of an a-10 then there's not much point?

You're more likely to hit something important if you detonate inside the plane rather than on or near its skin. Proximity fuses are only used if your missile's lame, but most missiles (i.e. Strela/Igla and Redeye/Stinger) are lame, and proximity fuses let you live with lameness. Impact fuses are better for killing stuff. British missiles aren't lame so they use impact fuses.
 
You're more likely to hit something important if you detonate inside the plane rather than on or near its skin. Proximity fuses are only used if your missile's lame, but most missiles (i.e. Strela/Igla and Redeye/Stinger) are lame, and proximity fuses let you live with lameness.

Stinger was impact fuzed until the latest update, which added proximity fuzing specifically for C-UAS.

Same for Strela/Igla -- impact/graze fuzing, not proximity.

I'd have to go hunting to see which, if any, MANPADS used prox fuzing before 2000 or so. Maybe RBS-70?
 
In the translation of the video, he describes the StarstreakMartlet system as the most lethal MANPAD in the Ukrainian armed forces and it took him a week to learn to use it. The problem is there are too few systems deployed. It’s a really big country, so 10km circles are minimum coverage with relatively low density air activity so little gets into a kill zone.

I think most take downs that go viral are a Stinger irrespective of what it really was. Considering Opsec it’s well worth keeping it this way to boot….By all means come in and pop those flares but cross your fingers it’s a Stinger… which if it’s a not…
 

Attachments

  • 02AB2A20-4BFD-4D42-8185-6B21B256ADA9.jpeg
    02AB2A20-4BFD-4D42-8185-6B21B256ADA9.jpeg
    542.4 KB · Views: 40
Last edited:
In the translation of the video, he describes the StarstreakMartlet system as the most lethal MANPAD in the Ukrainian armed forces and it took him a week to learn to use it. The problem is there are too few systems deployed. It’s a really big country, so 10km circles are minimum coverage with relatively little air activity that gets into a kill zone.

I think most take downs that go viral are a Stinger irrespective of what it really was.
Link to video?
 
First sight of Stormer with HVM (Starstreak) in Ukraine. Apparently they've been there for a while.
Wonder what the spares situation is like.

If it's anything like the M777, they're probably cobbling together spares from scrap metal using lathes and cutting torches.

Neither of those weapons are still in production.

I wanna know where the PIVADS are at though. MONG sent at least four PIVADS carriers to Ukraine and those engines are from the 1930's, so the "scrap metal and lathe" supply chain might unironically be completely doable.
 
If it's anything like the M777, they're probably cobbling together spares from scrap metal using lathes and cutting torches.

Neither of those weapons are still in production.

M777 is just finishing production for India and BAE is considering reopening the line for new orders. I'm sure that factory spares are still available.

 
If it's anything like the M777, they're probably cobbling together spares from scrap metal using lathes and cutting torches.

Neither of those weapons are still in production.

M777 is just finishing production for India and BAE is considering reopening the line for new orders. I'm sure that factory spares are still available.


Perhaps, but not enough for consumption at any significant wartime usage rates, even if the factory were open.

The ammunition consumption for the Russians, at least if we can believe Ukraine to any extent, is roughly comparable to the US Army in Korea on a per-gun basis. I can't imagine Ukraine needing to fire much less. Those guns are going to likely going to need more spare parts at greater rates than they've ever seen manufactured, so the scrap spares and battlefield fabrication will be pretty much their only significant lifeline once they arrive in theater.

Provided Ukraine can cobble together enough fabricators and artificer shops this isn't a huge deal though, and it seems they're managing for the most part, along with foraging for mobility. If anything, Western armies should probably be preparing their troops to manufacture spare components in situ as well.
 
It seems to me that the Starstreak would be a good choice to shoot down these Iranian Shaheed suicide drones.
 
If it's anything like the M777, they're probably cobbling together spares from scrap metal using lathes and cutting torches.

Neither of those weapons are still in production.

M777 is just finishing production for India and BAE is considering reopening the line for new orders. I'm sure that factory spares are still available.


Perhaps, but not enough for consumption at any significant wartime usage rates, even if the factory were open.

The ammunition consumption for the Russians, at least if we can believe Ukraine to any extent, is roughly comparable to the US Army in Korea on a per-gun basis. I can't imagine Ukraine needing to fire much less. Those guns are going to likely going to need more spare parts at greater rates than they've ever seen manufactured, so the scrap spares and battlefield fabrication will be pretty much their only significant lifeline once they arrive in theater.

Provided Ukraine can cobble together enough fabricators and artificer shops this isn't a huge deal though, and it seems they're managing for the most part, along with foraging for mobility. If anything, Western armies should probably be preparing their troops to manufacture spare components in situ as well.
I’d argue that an expensive titanium gun carriage and recoil mechanism is unwarranted for the current scenario and that restarting M777 production in the UK is equally frivolous. For the current conflict, you don’t see M777s slung beneath helicopters and there’s no real need for such an expensive weight critical design.

If memory serves correct, doesn’t India have a domestic production capacity for the M777? Why restart UK production?
 

India makes some parts of the M777, including that titanium cradle and a final assembly line, but not the whole gun.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems to me that the Starstreak would be a good choice to shoot down these Iranian Shaheed suicide drones.
It’s worth noting that these drones only cost about $20,000USD each - not worth expending an expensive Starstreak. The Tamir interceptors of the Iron Dome system are probably cheaper and that system is designed to avoid expending valuable missiles protecting non-critical targets from cheap munitions. There’s no way of exercising similar discipline over the operator of a shoulder fired Starstreak. A poorly trained, conscripted enlisted man making $300/month isn’t a good judge of what a worthwhile target is for an expensive missile like Starstreak. If this conflict has taught us anything, too much expensive Western ordinance is being expended for lack of proper command and control. That’s even true for simple dumb artillery shells.
 

India makes some parts of the M777, including that titanium cradle and a final assembly line, but not the whole gun.
So the suggestion here is that the parts India doesn’t make are stockpiled from past British production and are definitely no longer produced in the UK?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s worth noting that these drones only cost about $20,000USD each - not worth expending an expensive Starstreak.

They may only be $20,000 each but they have been inflicting millions of dollars worth of damage on civilian infrastructure such as power-stations and sub-stations. How much do you think it costs to repair and restore to operation a damaged power-station? No doubt it is a LOT more than $20,000.
 
Last edited:
Stumbled on this whilst looking for something else....as you do.

It appears that Saudi Arabia is a user of LMM...

That means the confirmed users are UK, Ukraine, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. Wouldn't be surprised if more are added to the list in the near future.

 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom