Ok - but with 9nm how does the RN provide the area coverage if it has Orange Nell ? - the RN still needs S.Dart equivalent, and in reality was struggling to get that done, plus bring S.Slug fully into service (i.e. make it work...) and had what became S.Wolf as a development activity. Is there really capacity for a 3rd system? If it replaces S.Wolf, are we really able to bring an equivalent into service a decade and a half earlier, and wont it lack in capability vs. S.Wolf (which was good, but not always) by the 1980s?
Let's pull this out and focus back on SIGS and Orange Nell....
What this system is aimed at is Local Area Defence. Not Area Defence out to say 30nm (Sea Slug mkII) or 60nm (these figures emerge from 1950's fighter interception studies and seem quite relevent to later defence of the Fleet).
And what needs to be born in mind is by 1965 the Tripartate group was meeting to discuss a Self Defence and Local Area Defence SAM system. The French are the ones insisting this is a high performance system for true Local Area Defence against crossing targets.
This ends up defined as System C.
Which I raised as a Alternative History thread.
This would be able to intercept any target at 7km that would be passing within 4km of the ship, such as crossing targets
What this brings home is the failure of SIGS to deliver local area defence to achieve much longer ranged interceptions that make it much more a Sea Slug successor, and as we've discussed possibly bluring the boundry between SIGS and NIGS.
It's certainly one of the original options for local area defence and ruled out by the group as too large, too heavy and too expensive.....
Think about that date 1965, Type 82 is becoming a fixed design and being ordered in this year.....by '66 the RN will be in chaos as it tries to rethink what it needs, concluding a expensive Type 82 is just not worth it bar proving the onboard systems....but what if it had been cheaper?
What the UK chose was System B, a.k.a PX430 which became Sea Wolf and really built on the earlier PT.428 as it did to fill in the void being created by the cancellation of Sea Mauler. For all it's flaws it's a system that won exports and is considering a success despite it's poor performance in the Falklands War.
What the Dutch wanted was System A, a Sea Rapier or more accurately Sea Cat mkII and probably they too had planed on Sea Mauler.
What the Italians actually developed was Indigo......and offer a Sea Indigo system compatible with Sea Killer.
What is implied by a statement in Friedman's book is that SIGS guidance system began as a 14" diamter polyrod +7" dish system and was claimed to be as good as a 20" conventional dish......or to put it another way as good as Bloodhound or Thunderbird, but in a smaller package.
I'll go further on that and suggest 14" diameter is close to Sea Slug, meaning this guidance system might well have started life as a next generation Sea Slug development. As 11" is the diameter of the smallest nuclear warhead.....
Jones Report suggested a Lightweight SAM system for dealing with a Mach 2.3 bomber or "supersonic U2", could be a battery of 24 missiles as a system weighing in at 200,000lb (compared to Thunderbird II's 12 missiles as a system at 1,600,000lb) or HAWK's 36 missiles as a system at 630,000lb). They are thinking PT.428 or Mauler....and despite Sea Dart being 'it' for current UK SAGW, and the only game in town, objections are being thrown up.....
What the Head of GW wrote on Cf.299 in '64 was "if targets above 50 to 60,000ft are to be take seriously, then the present CF.299 is not really applicable and would require a number of modifications to the missile". HSD advised this would really be a new missile. They were not impressed with Land Dart's ECCM capability either.
As was CF.299 was marginally better than Stage 1 and a half missiles, a.k.a the mighty Thunderbird mkII.
What the process of Land Dart reveals is that really a smaller missile is needed and was discussed as an alternative to Mauler (which was cancelled). Army wanted HAWK as it's alternative, not Land Dart using the Sea Dart missile.
In the end they got Rapier, but what they wanted is much more like the earlier PT.428 system. For enagements unboosted to 5nm and boosted to 'probably' 10nm.....and a outer range of 20nm......
But back to the RN, there's a reason why SAM.72 emerges by 1972, and it's that a unified missile without separate boosters and with a much shorter minimum range is desired. XPX430, a scaled up Sea Wolf missile seems the basis for achieving this. I suspect with the original VLS concept.....They look at liquid motors to achieve this.
so I've also set up a Sea Dart Success Alternative History thread to both explore that, and show how little it has had.
So back to Orange Nell.....
If we field ON as a missile of under 650lb, and able to deliver Local Area Defence out to say 10nm or so by 1964 then the RN is much better placed to evolve this to meed the 1965 Tripartate requirements as emphasised by the MN.
This means keeping that group together and because it's already paid for, the costs of export or license to the French and Dutch along with collaborative evolution of the system, makes it highly attractive.
Essentialy the French opt for it instead of Tartar, and the Dutch instead of Sea Sparrow BPDMS.
And with that the Germans will follow......possibly the Italians too....
Because the French will walk out if it's not meeting their requirements.
Because the Dutch want it to be cheap as Tartar.......which is why they ditched Sea Dart.
Because it's already entering service by this time, despite it's size and weight, it's much more in the Arny's consideration of a lighter and more acceptable successor to Thunderbird mkI and frankly achievable in reasonable timescale with a future to reach the higher performance increasingly desired. Essentially increasingly faster and more sophisticated versions would extend out the envelope until it meets the later requirements.
What might start out using valves is certainly going to be transistorised, and the seeker gain increasing fidelity through the 60's and 70's. By which time a successor......SAM.72 potential winner is likely to use the missile's envelop (size and weight etc...) to achieve a Standard-like upgrade over the earlier missile system.
Not competing with Standard as such though.....rather complimenting it and being a sort of earlier SEa Wolf, cum Sea Sparrow......of the two it's potential is closer to Sea Sparrow.
What is clear is improvements in rocket motors will extend speed and energy of the missile. From supersonic targets to mach 2+ targets, and from targets upto 10,000ft, to 60,000ft.....
What is clear is such improvements would drive a materials update of the fuselage to cope with the heating aspects and the potential need to exploit manoeuvring at higher speeds.
What this means for Type 82 is, it's much more a natural successor to Type 81, a local area defence frigate/destroyer, not a psuedo-cruiser like the County's.
And ON is the best basis to both sustain UK GW SAMs and yet bring in other European members, along with winning exports.
Sea Dart failed bar Argentina, Sea Wolf gained more success, and this could take some Sea Sparrow orders.
