MBDA Adapts Brimstone to Target Swarming Fast Attack Craft

PARIS — A missile used primarily to kill tanks could soon protect the U.S. Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship from swarming fast attack craft.

MBDA Missile Systems has adapted the well known Brimstone missile to specifically target fast attack craft while being fired from a naval vessel, officials said Wednesday at the Paris Air Show.

On May 29, the company completed a test in which it fired three Brimstone Sea Spears hitting two static vessels and one vessel moving 20 knots near Scotland. Encouraged by the demonstration, MBDA is looking to market the naval weapon to countries such as the U.S. and U.K.

The U.K. already fires the Dual Mode Brimstone from their Tornados. The missile has received notoriety for its performance in Afghanistan and Libya. U.S. officials have shown interest in potentially firing them from the Reaper.

The Sea Spear is the first variant of the Brimstone designed to be fired from a naval vessel. The missile tracks the target with a millimeter waver seeker eliminating the potential of losing the target behind the crests of the waves.

MBDA designed it as a fire-and-forget missile that can eliminate swarming targets autonomously. It is a canister-launched missile that can be mounted to a building or a naval vessel as small as 14 meters.

Douglas Denneny, a vice president for MBDA based in Washington D.C., said the Sea Spear could protect the Navy’s new LCS fleet from the fast attack boats driven by the Iranian navy.

Those interested in the Sea Spear won’t have to wait. MBDA officials Frank Morgan and Mark Sheehan said the naval missile system is available immediately.

About the Author

Michael Hoffman
Michael Hoffman is the executive editor at Tandem NSI and a contributor to Military.com. He can be reached at mhoffman@tandemnsi.com.
  • Big-Dean

    So image if you will, a swarm of 20 fast boats coming at your LCS. You start firing off your ($250K each) missile at them and you’ll probably achieve a 40% hit rate but your magazine is soon empty and now are within heavy machine gun range, rockets and rpgs

    You’re already doing Mach speed but that doens’t matter one bit, soon your taking machine gun fire on the bridge and in the engine room, the bullet easily shred the thin aluminum skin and fires break out, a rpg hit near the water line and takes out one of the gas turbines in a huge explosion, the entire bridge crew is dead as machine gun fire tears it apart, the fast boats are now circling and laughing like Hyenas, most of the crew is already dead, “help” is on the way but it’s too late, the fast boat swarm quickly leaves the area and the survivors to the sharks

    • change

      You’re forgetting the Mk 110 57mm main deck gun plus the 30mm auto gun likely to be mounted on any LCS doing inshore duty. With those two weapons plus missiles like the Brimstone, the LCS should be able to keep swarms far enough away to avoid much battle damage. Those swarming speed boats will be bouncing all over the water throwing aims high and low. The LCS with its stablized aiming systems plus fire and forget should be able to defeat the scenario you represent. If only the LCS could do more than defeat cigarette boats.

      • JoeSovereign

        In the anti-surface warfare (SUW) role the LCS would tear up swarming speed boats. 57mm main gun and the 30mm auto cannon are both auto-stabilized, independently targeted and fire over 200 rds per minute. The 57mm gun has a range of 9 miles. In addition it has the afor mentioned anti-ship missles and multiple auto stabilized .50 caliber machine guns.

        What it would have a hard time with is multiple sophisticated anti-ship missles or real war ships.

    • SJE

      Its nice to have something ready to go, but these are relatively large, expensive, and with HEAT warheads for destroying tanks. Seems like overkill for most boats, and could not handle the swarms as well. Can’t someone adapt a smaller missile for this purpose?

      • Guest

        I think the AGM-176 is exactly what you’re looking for, it’s been tested from ships also I believe.

        • Praetorian
          • SJE

            True. But its not too hard to upgrade the solid fuel rocket for a slightly longer range, especially since they are already trying these out for the LCS and other ships.

          • HGR

            There is a long range Griffin coming along that will be deployed on Cyclones and the LCS. It will have more than 4 mile range.

            Because of the environment the LCS operates the Navy is very interested in missiles that can hit fast moving targets and who’s warheads are not excessively destructive. The Army has these missiles that would work very nicely in those environments and the Griffin will be one of them.

            The main weapon against a swarm attack would be the helicopters. Helios are deadly against small boats. Then the deck gun but not at 9 mile. At less. At longer range than the deck gun is effective it will be missiles and these Army missiles can be adapted.

            The Griffin will be more accurate and destructive at longer range and since it might be deployable by Helicopter that would simplify logistics. One missile for both the helicopter and the ship. My bet is for the Griffin deployed from the ship as well as from helicopter.

            What they would really would like to have is a small missile for beyond visual range.

          • blight_

            Surprised we don’t return to the blimps of the 30’s. We have the world’s helium market, might as well use it. Teleoperated blimps with racks of Viper Strike and Hellfires…hang out for days on the ocean, blowing up stuff dhow and again.

    • RedCell2

      Big Dean,

      The LCS won’t be there alone at the mercy of these “sea hyena” small boats, which will be tracked long before they get to the ship.

      Before the “swarm” arrives within range of an LCS they will already themselves be “swarmed” by Army attack helicopters, attack UAS, and Naval Air. What remains of these Boston Whalers and similar can then be decisively engaged by the LCS on-board weapons. You’ll see a lot more flotsam and jetsam from the small boat swarm than anything else.

      • Navbm7

        The Navy has always said that the LCS is not designed to operate alone, that doesn’t mean it will never happen. A TG Commander will use whatever assets are available to him and if that means an LCS operating alone is required that’s what he will order.
        A warship should be able to defend itself, this is still in question as regards the LCS.

      • Big-Dean

        I respecfully disagree Red

        A LCS is considered to be a warship and they WILL be detached to sail independantly by area commanders, they WILL go into harms way

        Secondly, we only have 11 carriers, with perhaps only 5 or so sailing at any given time, how in the heck do you provide air cover for every possible place the LCS might be, especially if we’re going to have 50 of them-it’s not possible

        Thiird, Army helos flying cover, I have a bridge you might be interested in

        Boston whaler, is that what you think fast attack boats are? Wow is all I can say in response

        Lastly, “decisively engage by the LCS on board systems” that’s is too dam funny. A single optically guided 57mm. So what happens when the 57mm cannot engage all of the attacking boats, what happens when it jams, what happens when you run out of ammo? You’re simply going to run away-not very likely especially if your in the littorials like they say it will be in.

    • Big Ellie

      If you have ever expierenced a swarm attack, you know that once you engage them, they will split, turn tail and depart the area. Not to mention if an LCS is part of an ARG or a BG, air assets are airborne constantly, crew served ships weapons will be on station, and as a last resort, you could have hose teams. Ships force will defend to the death unlike cowardly attackers.

    • Mastro

      What is the Sea Spear’s range? If its roughly the Griffin’s puny 4 mile range- yeah- this could happen

      If its 15-20 miles- I don’t think its as big a deal.

    • paperpushermj

      20 fast boats swarming are best attacked with fast movers dropping cluster bombs in my opinion.

  • The Old Bear

    This is Brimstone’s replacement: http://www.mbda-systems.com/products/air-dominanc…
    According to the latest Jane’s Rocket and Missiles magazine:
    “MBDA aims SPEAR towards Common Anti-surface Modular Missile
    MBDA has commenced privately-funded study activity to examine the potential for ground-launched and shipborne variants of its projected SPEAR air-launched extended range precision-guided weapon. Working under the internal programme title Common Anti-surface Modular Missile (CAsMM), the company is exploring how derivatives of SPEAR could be applicable to indirect fire precision attack requirements in the land and maritime domains.”
    This missile is supposed to have a range of 75nm according to the MOD specification.

    • Guest

      MBDA SPEAR & Brimstone SEA SPEAR are two different systems. SPEAR is a turbojet powered small diameter, sizer winged air-to-ground missile, & Brimstone SEA SPEAR is a solid fuel Hellfire missile derivative.

  • hibeam

    I have two words for you. Lasers! Lasers!

    • Jeff M

      Lasers inside of 2 or 3km risk blinding everyone on the flight deck, that’s the big downside.

      Consider the target surface to be a cylindrical lens, say 11cm in diameter for a 1cm spot on surface ) made of steel. At 100 kilowatts, reflected, the retinal eye damage threshold range will be exceeded out to several kilometers at 1um. Dropping system power at 10kW, but reducing beam spot on target by increasing sending aperture diameter, runs foul of the fact that target surface as cylindrical mirror inducing spread, becomes less significant - and reflected beam propagation behavior converges on native beam divergence. In that case 10kW will also blind you at several kilometers. So there’s no win.

      You find that no matter how you slice and dice the laser equations, something’s always going to suffer, range, laser intensity, blinding people on the flight deck… not to mention cost.

      The Navy’s FEL (free electron laser) project is the only real serious contender, being able to deliver x-rays which are perfect and will disable electronics, and it will be huge and expensive with cryogenics, superconductors, etc.

      There are already microwave beam weapons that can disable most non-hardened electronics which might be another “good to have” weapon, like the laser, but a good old fashioned missile is still what I’d load up the ships with. There are projects to drop the cost of a missile to ~$5,000 using cmos camera sensors and such, that’s the approach I would pursue. Put an LCS with a few dozen smaller missile canisters in the water.

    • elizzar

      Hi. Whilst laser systems are now being used / developed for anti-swarm (and anti-missile) use, this is a) generally in the dazzle / blind crew role b) requires a big old power supply, which a smaller vessel might not have. Also not sure of laser range in choppy sea versus guns or missiles at the moment.

  • PolicyWonk

    Defense contractors love missiles because they’re expensive. And they hate guns because they’re cheap. The LCS needs to be up-gunned.

    If the LCS is going to get missiles, they should get something that it can use against a serious adversary.

    • blight_

      Stabilization in a moving tank to fire a gun round several kilometers…check.

      Ditch stabilized direct-fire guns >50mm, use missiles instead…check.

  • Stan

    Shouldn’t need an expensive missile to take out speedboats. Automated cannons should be more the enough to do the trick. The ideal system literally should require a targeting officer to plant his finger on a touchscreen to direct the system’s attention to a target and have it take care of the rest with a few smart round airbursts.

  • Taylor

    One flaw in the thinking with the missiles is that unless we are already at war with Iran their boats can get pretty close without us shooting at them I would guess. They would get the first shots off from close range. After that I guess we could start using the missiles at long range to keep them away, but what would be our losses from the first attacks? Wonder what the shortest range is and how many boats can be taken out in a hurry at short range?

    • Brass

      Not sure what the minimum range is, but the air launched version of brimstone was used in a 24 missile salvo against a concentration of armoured vehicles in Libya a couple of years back.

    • Guest

      Declared war or not, let an Iranian boat get anywhere near a US vessel without prior authorization and watch how fast they get blown out of the water. Unless I miss my guess, the ROE state that no Iranian boat is considered a friendly; all are considered hostile.

      • blight_

        More like

        “If Iranian boat detected, fire when fired upon, do not wait for direct hit to return fire”


        “If fired upon and hit, destroy the attacker”

        Of course, with suicide craft it’ll be dicey, but after USS Cole I think they will shoot anything small, incoming and failing to turn away.

        • tiger

          Sounds like the Gulf of Tonkin all over again…….

        • tmb2

          After the Cole bombing they revamped the policies on signals, warning shots, and lines being crossed.

    • tiger

      Good point. Rules of Engagement would require we ID & hail the vessel. We can’t just shoot up every Fishing boat, Dhow, or Canoe that happens to be close by..

      • SJE

        Which kinda defeats the purpose of this missile in most contexts.

  • hibeam

    These missiles will only be used after we have carefully ascertained that no fish will be annoyed. –Your Commander in Golf.

  • Nicky

    Which is why we need to bring back a ship that is more heavily armed like a World War II Fletcher/Sumner/gearing class Destroyer. Let’s see what would happen if those swarm boats try to get past them

    • IronV

      Said boats would be obliterated… similarly, if Somali pirates attempted to hijack a WWII Attack Troop or Cargo Transport, they wouldn’t have a chance.

    • tiger

      Interesting comparison. The LCS 2 is about the same displacement, longer hull, more beam as a Fletcher class. Yet the Fletcher out guns it, has more range, And can do all warfare missions.

    • PolicyWonk

      What I find very ironic, is that what is called the LCS (in either variant) fails to take into account the hard-learned lessons of fighting in the littorals in WW2. What those battles lacked w/r/t size, they more than made up for in sheer intensity.

      Originally, the LCS was supposed to wipe out swarming speedboats. If thats the problem they were looking to solve, then a ship that costs $400M is effin’ nuts. If they wanted to replace frigates, then its still effin’ nuts, because the LCS is woefully underarmed and unprotected. Many in the navy feel it isn’t likely even to be able to survive a real sea-frame level-1 test (and FFG’s were designed to the navy level 2 standard).
      Adm. Samuel Perez made these comments (from Defense INdustry Daily):
      “Armament: Perez shares Copeman’s reservations about the LCS’ armament, and points out that Iran alone has 67 Fast Attack Craft that carry anti-ship missiles with a range of over 5 miles. Any one of them can strike LCS ships without direct retaliation, and deliver disabling hits.”

      Not exactly confidence inspiring.

      Here the link to the entire article.

      • d. kellogg

        Back in the early days of LCS, I remember cost discussions, and where the LCS plus mission modules costs now, we could’ve bought for the same price range a Spanish F100 Aegis/SPY/MK41 VLS equipped frigate that actually has the ability to fight it out in the littorals.
        Granted, an F100 won’t sail in 15 feet of water, but I doubt any LCS ever will, either.

        • Big-Dean

          that’s one of the dirty little secrets of the LCS, it CANNOT sail in shallow waters or it will suck up gunk into the intakes and quickly clog the jet impellers

      • Big-Dean

        hahaha, great reference

        I love how the alternative Lockhead versions actually have weapons on them!

  • EW3

    I’d like to be packing Hydra 70s (aka APKWS) if I were on an LCS dealing with swarm attacks. Prefer to put four 19 round launcers together with a laser designator as a package. Put two of these packages on an LCS and you’re going to add a lot of firepower at reasonable cost.

    • d. kellogg

      There are various seekerhead systems out there other than just laser guidance that are perfectly suited to 70mm rockets.
      IR and EO/TV guidance would be just as usefulin many situations.
      And there are several rocket motor types that vary range according to warhead weight, carrying considerably farther than any Javelin or Griffin.

      Query CVR7, Skyfire 70, etc.

  • Big-Dean

    Nicky, you just don’t get it do you, The LCS is so powerful it could take out a WWII destroyer or even a battleship, so swarms of small fast boats are just mere flies to the mighty LCS and it’s all powerful 57mm. So to suggest that the LCS isn’t all powerful will get you lot of thumbs down here by the LCS mafia

    You’ve got to get on the LCS bandwagon and cheer for the mighty LCS ;-P

    Let’s see how many thumbs down I get here

    • tiger

      The LCS would not last 10 mins at the Battle of Samar.

      • Mastro

        Well- it could have hauled a$$ out of there-

        different times/mission- no reason you couldn’t put a few torpedo tubes on the LCS

        Our entire fleet barely has the armor of a WWII tin can- different time.

  • Belesari

    Um the brimstone has a range of 7.5 miles………so if something were to get within range of the LCS to where it can fire them the LCS would then be in range of most of their weapons.

    Sorry with a k:D ratio of 4/1 they still can cripple the navy.

    • Joe_Sovereign
      • blight_

        Looking at the shaping of LCS, I doubt it’s fully low RCS. Granted naval radars from WW2 weren’t great, but they could probably pick it up.

        A CIWS would probably rip up dive bombers and torpedo bombers like nobody’s business, ruling out attack from the air. It might be catchable by later WW2 destroyers and later cruisers, especially if sticking to diesels.

        • Belesari

          Yes but ww2 ships had hundreds of them and each ship had more guns that it could shake a stick at (that saying makes no sense).

          • blight_

            And we learned from WW2 that guns suck at killing aerial targets, hence the move towards radar guided missiles.

            Presumably a Phalanx CIWS would rip up WW2-era dive bombers from afar, same with torpedo bombers. They’re subsonic, have a high radar cross-section and aren’t very agile…especially for a weapons system designed to target missiles or jets.

    • Joe_Sovereign
      • d. kellogg

        Anything larger than a destroyer, the 57mm gun on the LCS isn’t gonna do anything to. Ships in those days had armor, and even some destroyer classes aren’t going to be bothered much by 57mm cannon fire.
        Let’s see how well an LCS even shrugs off 4- and 5″ naval gunfire, let alone slugging it out with corvettes and destroyer escorts armed with multiple 3inch guns and rapid-fire AA weapons that can be aimed at surface ships.

    • Joe_Sovereign
      • Belesari

        Well hate to tell you this but i think you are responding to the wrong post?

      • tiger

        The average Japanese Destroyer had a 5″/50 dp gun with a range of 11.4 miles. That’s not counting The Long Lances. The lookouts will spot you, radar or not.

        • blight_

          CIWS will give LCS a fighting chance against dive and torpedo bombers.

          Until you run out of ammo.

        • JoeSovereign

          They aren’t going to see the LCS at night but the LCS can fight as well at night as during the day.

          • Belesari

            And the LCS can’t do enough damage to the DD’s and everything else would kick its ass. Seriously have you seen the damage a ww2 DD could take?

            LCS-glass jaw.

    • guest

      Brimstone 2 has range of 25 miles.

  • Tony C.

    Seems to me that an updated CIWS would be more cost effective? The US Navy is retiring the CIWS as an indiscriminite killer, but in a boat swarm that is what you want.

    • elizzar

      Isn’t CIWS like Phalanx being replaced by Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) systems for last-ditch defence? I would guess intended for anti-missile work, don’t know if anti-ship capable. The problem with the RAM is the low-ish magazine size, so you might have RAM for missile defence, and this Brimstone launcher for anti-ship-swarm work perhaps.

      • blight_

        If you want to kill swarms, you don’t “waste” CIWS on it. They’re putting it in as a secondary capability to give the Phalanx some additional utility for the 20mm’s, but in the big picture, the Navy still thinks anti-ship missiles are the bigger threat (which is why CIWS was installed in first place). Thus, more RAM instead of just CIWS.

        I wonder if putting TOW launchers onto ships would give passable anti-ship defense…

      • The Old Bear

        Or shooting tanks, afv’s or bunkers, think laterally guys.
        Scenario for you to consider:
        An LCS is escorting a Red Cross ship to evacuate women, children and injured civilians from the Rebel Blueland port city of Al-Recked, said city is being besieged by forces loyal to Col Whatusname, current dictator of the Country, when a loyalist tank crew high on psychotic drugs start shooting DP rounds at Red Cross Ship. You have 30 seconds to stop a massacre occurring so how do you take out that blasted tank with levelling most of a tower block full of civilians next to the tank?

  • d. kellogg

    one note:
    “Those interested in the Sea Spear won’t have to wait. MBDA officials Frank Morgan and Mark Sheehan said the naval missile system is available immediately.”

    That simply won’t do, not for the USN.
    If it doesn’t have provision for otherwise useless Brass to occupy PEO/project manager and team leader seats and stuff up the program for several months or more, and unnecessarily waste money, and has no corporate career opportunities for said Brass upon leaving the USN, then it isn’t suitable for the Navy.

    This isn’t about an actual weapon system with the kind of performance this ship is sorely lacking; it’s about post-service job security for outbound officers for the length of time these ships will be in service.

  • blight_

    LCS will need to deploy a cloud of unmanned speedboats with machineguns and anti-ship missiles (or anti-tank missiles, I suppose) to defeat the Iranian threat as far away from the LCS as possible; and in turn, as far away from the bigger ships as possible.

    • Mastro

      Not a bad idea- a couple small USB (??) with a minigun and maybe a rocket launcher.

      they could sit out a couple miles with their cameras providing better eyes- might help in foggy situations as well.

  • elizzar

    another obvious thought - wouldn’t you also use ship-launched, air-to-surface armed helicopters in such a role, far ahead of any ships to intercept and destroy said swarm? in which case ciws / ram / brimstone / frikkin’ sharks with frikkin’ lasers remain the last-ditch defence for anything that sneaks through? and you’d hope this wasn’t much! i think this is how they are dealing with some of the pirate attacks ~somalia, RoE slightly different i guess cos they need to confirm small ship is a pirate and not a poor old fisherman!

    • Mastro

      Well- the navy has always used them to monitor Iranian speedboats- but they break/have down time/etc.

      The Iranians might also send some suicide boats out in nasty weather that the navy grounds it helos for-

    • tiger

      1. How many shot does your helicopter have. 2. Can your Helicopter dodge a SAM?

  • SPL

    The weapon of choice to deal with the “swarm threat” is an APKWS-armed gunship… the LCS only will have to deal with the leakers (if any).

  • Joe Nukem

    The Phalanx Missile Defense System should be adequate enough to retask for a swarm of small craft. At 6,000 Rounds Per Minute (100 per sec) the time on each target need not be more that 3.0 secs or less with mildly accurate aiming. Range can be “at horizon” almost. at 6 -10 Miles range what can the little Iranian boats do? Does not 30 mm have proximity fuse capability?

    Want a “Swarm” to defend against a Swarm? What about Metal Storm? (check it out)

    • Big-Dean

      Joe, in case you didn’t know, the CIWS is a great “last ditch” weapon, but it only carries1,550 rounds, then sailors have to go out on deck to reload it, the process is not fast by any means

      So basically you have a few seconds of firing before it runs dry

      Lastly, the CIWS isn’t really designed to shoot at targets on the water, it was designed to take out anti-ship missiles

  • d. kellogg

    Two models of the Phalanx exist: both using the 6-barrel M61 series 20mm gun,
    the early models fire at 3000rpm, the newer Block 1B has longer barrels, is identifiable by its barrel brace (and a slightly longer ammo drum underneath), and fires no more than 4500rpm.
    None of the Phalanx fire at 6000rpm, and both models only fire in bursts, not sustained, as they would empty out too quickly.
    Even service with the Centurion, the name for the ground-based C-RAM variant of Phalanx, doesn’t fire at 6000rpm.

    The 30mm system is Goalkeeper, using the 7-barrel GAU-7 famous in the A-10.
    It fires at a maximum of 4200rpm, but again, also only in bursts, not a sustained rate.
    And while yes, there are programmable airburst munitions developed for the same 30x173mm ammunition class the GAU-8 uses, none of the barrels in any GAU-8 mount ANYWHERE are fitted with the muzzle-mounted induction programmers to program the shells before exiting the barrels (the complexities to incorporate the coils and wiring to the muzzles would be just too difficult in a rotary cannon).

  • paperpushermj

    In my opinion the best way to handle swarming fast boats is to have your fast movers drop cluster bombs on them. You don’t really need to be accurate like with a missile

  • STemplar

    I’m just curious how much DoD will spend to fight, what in reality is one fight, that might occur in one waterway on this planet, and will last one day, before US airpower swoops in and destroys that nation’s military, regardless of the outcome of the initial fight.

    I’m not opposed to being prepared and all but frankly the US military already possesses more than enough firepower to annihilate the Revolutionary Guard naval forces to the microscopic level.

    • Big-Dean

      When I was in the Navy, I served on a Frigate (a real warship with real weapons by the way) but the joke in the Frigate Navy is that we all are “Torpedo sponges” for the fleet. Our job was to “take one” for the CNV and others we are protecting..

      Makes me wonder what the LCS Navy’s motto is, “bend over and take one” “We are expendable,” “the Real Navy is right around the corner” “Run away, run away” or the best yet
      “I joined the Navy and all I got was this crappy little ship”

    • tiger

      Hmmmm……… your over looking other areas of interest. Notice the first deployment is to Singapore, not the Gulf region. Airpower??? Ask the guys in Bengahzi about airpower swooping in to save the day.

      • blight_

        Perhaps they know that Boghammars will hand it to them.

        That said, the Royal Saudi Navy is La Fayettes and a number of smaller corvettes and patrol boats for the littorals. The Qataris use Vosper FAC’s and Combattantes

  • http://wiki.shes.tc.edu.tw/index.php/%E4%BD%BF%E7%94%A8%E8%80%85:Dlondon london escorts
  • http://www.omtecexpo.com/site/omtecblog/entry/omtec/2012/01/11/omtec-2012-device-company-attendee-promo-codes omtecexpo.com
  • http://www.madamasr.com/content/cost-electricity-increase-10-percent-or-more www.madamasr.com

    In this example, you will need to look to the company that
    has probably the most reasonable fees. When you happen to
    be going to generate decision to ship your vehicle in California then you must have
    a idea concerning the routes of California. You should also
    be acutely aware in regards towards the web site which includes grammatical
    mistakes, typos as well as numerous other mistakes because there’s a possibility of accessing a bogus web
    site somewhat than true one.

  • https://www.facebook.com/beautymenow ครีมหน้าใส

    Awesome! Its genuinely awesome paragraph, I have got
    much clear idea regarding from this paragraph.