BAC PT 428

[uk 75]

Have just been reading through the excellent Monograph online about the US Mauler missile at the Missile Site in the US. Apparently the UK gave up its own equivalent of Mauler, a system called BAC PT 428, and then had to adopt the simpler Rapier when Mauler was cancelled. As far as I can gather from piecing together sources PT 428 looked like the later Roland system, but with four instead of two tube launchers on a mobile vehicle with a fire control radar. Any old BAC hands know any more?

UK 75

 

[CJGibson]

PT.428 is covered in BSP4.

KB

 

[Thorvic]

PT.428 is covered in BSP4.

KB

Any details on when its now scheduled to be published ?

Ralph

There is a small mention in either John Forbats Vickers Secret Missile projects or his TSR2 Navigation & Attack system.

Cheers

Geoff

 

[uk 75]

Geoff
Thanks for the steers. I saw the book you mention and it has come interesting missile stuff. TB@s book should be worth the wait.
Ralph

 

[PMN1]

Would the system have had anti missile capability?

 

[PMN1]

Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?

 

[RP1]

Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?

Since PT428 wasn't mounted on multiple trucks, "less". Full-on GWS-25 occupies a lot of space, but I suspect PT428 would not have the computers for fully-automatic engagements (not many "pop-up" anti-ship missiles on land).


RP1

 

[PMN1]

Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?

but I suspect PT428 would not have the computers for fully-automatic engagements (not many "pop-up" anti-ship missiles on land).


RP1

Sneaky devils those Soviets...tunnelling in....

I was wondering if there was the chance of a joint service missile....I don't think the timing is right but.....

 

[zen]

Considering one of the criticisms of PT.428 was in computing capacity, met BTW by the time of cancellation, I'd say handling 'pop up' threats out to something like 20nm or less was very much part of the system.

 

[zen]

Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?

If it fits on the back of a Bedford RL truck, then it's no more than 3 tons.

 

[JFC Fuller]

A naval PT428 proposal. This would be the boosted version that was considered for the SIGS requirement. Note that the surveillance/search radar is moved to a seperate mast but the guidance equipment/director appears to be mounted on the same platform as the missiles and their launch canisters, that said the idea doesn't appear to have been worked out in any great detail.

The ship silhouette is probably meant to be a generic Type 12/41/61 but it does look more Type 41/61 than Type 12. Given the size of the boosted missile it would have required a lot of deck space and weight allowance, though the suggested solution does not have a below deck magazine.

 

[Scott Kenny]

A naval PT428 proposal. This would be the boosted version that was considered for the SIGS requirement. Note that the surveillance/search radar is moved to a seperate mast but the guidance equipment/director appears to be mounted on the same platform as the missiles and their launch canisters, that said the idea doesn't appear to have been worked out in any great detail.

The ship silhouette is probably meant to be a generic Type 12/41/61 but it does look more Type 41/61 than Type 12. Given the size of the boosted missile it would have required a lot of deck space and weight allowance, though the suggested solution does not have a below deck magazine.

Only 12ft long and 225lbs, that's a light missile! Half the weight of early Sea Sparrow, only a 35lbs heavier than a Sidewinder. And the dart proper is only 98lbs, so an aircraft missile might be 1/5 the weight of a Sparrow!

Was this SARH or a Beam Rider?

 

[zen]

Beam riding from my information, the clever bit is the search/tracking radar and the computer system.

 

[zen]

Given the size of the boosted missile it would have required a lot of deck space and weight allowance, though the suggested solution does not have a below deck magazine.

It seems no different to Sea Mauler in this regard.
Interesting to finally get a range figure for the boosted missile.
10nm
And presumably the unboosted is Rapier like 5nm?

Presumably greater effective range would hit thermal issues with missile?