Scenario to develop NIGS instead of cancellation.
Option 1. continue as is.
Option 1a. Separation of Tracking and Search sets, as per SCANFAR.
1-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
1-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".
Option 2. continue at reduced specifications.
2-a. Reduce NSR to rotating C-band FSR type.
2-b. Reduce NSR to ASWE C-band FMICW or S-band FMICW
2-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
2-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
2-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster.
2-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".
Same options for missile in 2-b as 2-a and 1-a sequence.
The Lightest Option is likely 2-a-2, also the cheapest and variants for higher speed seem easiest to develop.
The most potent and applicable for ABM is 1-a-2.
Option 1 radar is the most potent management system applicable to scale for UK defence. But the most expensive.
The strongest case for anti-ship alternative weapon, is any with the -1 missile
While for land attack any with the -4 missile
Easiest internal handling case is the -3 missile
Easiest fit for nuclear warhead is the -4 missile
Ergo the RAF would prefer to continue Option 1.
While the RN would rapidly prefer Option 2.
And the Army anything with a Blue Water scale missile. Even if they'd also like the -2 missile for mobile defence
Jones Report might suggest -2 and -3 missiles as the most applicable for mobile landbased defence against Mach 2.8 threats upto 80,000ft.
Bristol will lobby hard for the -1 missile.
502 Group would recommend the -3 missile as the best compromise.
ASWE would recommend the Option 2 radars.
Platform Options:-
County type COSAG
NG COSAG a.k.a. Bristol type
COGAG as per Invincible type
Steam options
Frigate plant and boilers increased in number. As per HMS Fearless.
Scaled NG plant and boilers from CVA-01.
COSAD single CVA-01 set with diesel.
Nuclear using new submarine core and steam plant. Possibly scaled up.
CONAD.
Cheapest is continued production of Frigate plant or County type COSAG.
Most logical is use of new CVA-01 plant.
Ambitious is dedicated nuclear.
Radar requirement for Option 1 series is strongest for nuclear and CONAD.
Option 1. continue as is.
Option 1a. Separation of Tracking and Search sets, as per SCANFAR.
1-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
1-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".
Option 2. continue at reduced specifications.
2-a. Reduce NSR to rotating C-band FSR type.
2-b. Reduce NSR to ASWE C-band FMICW or S-band FMICW
2-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
2-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
2-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster.
2-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".
Same options for missile in 2-b as 2-a and 1-a sequence.
The Lightest Option is likely 2-a-2, also the cheapest and variants for higher speed seem easiest to develop.
The most potent and applicable for ABM is 1-a-2.
Option 1 radar is the most potent management system applicable to scale for UK defence. But the most expensive.
The strongest case for anti-ship alternative weapon, is any with the -1 missile
While for land attack any with the -4 missile
Easiest internal handling case is the -3 missile
Easiest fit for nuclear warhead is the -4 missile
Ergo the RAF would prefer to continue Option 1.
While the RN would rapidly prefer Option 2.
And the Army anything with a Blue Water scale missile. Even if they'd also like the -2 missile for mobile defence
Jones Report might suggest -2 and -3 missiles as the most applicable for mobile landbased defence against Mach 2.8 threats upto 80,000ft.
Bristol will lobby hard for the -1 missile.
502 Group would recommend the -3 missile as the best compromise.
ASWE would recommend the Option 2 radars.
Platform Options:-
County type COSAG
NG COSAG a.k.a. Bristol type
COGAG as per Invincible type
Steam options
Frigate plant and boilers increased in number. As per HMS Fearless.
Scaled NG plant and boilers from CVA-01.
COSAD single CVA-01 set with diesel.
Nuclear using new submarine core and steam plant. Possibly scaled up.
CONAD.
Cheapest is continued production of Frigate plant or County type COSAG.
Most logical is use of new CVA-01 plant.
Ambitious is dedicated nuclear.
Radar requirement for Option 1 series is strongest for nuclear and CONAD.
Last edited: