Implying that Aster missiles have rather long minimum range of engagement, and that Aster ought to be supplemented with a closer-in air defense missile.
Wikipedia claims minimum engagement for the Aster 15 as 1.7 miles which I make to be about 2.86 seconds from impact assuming Mach 3 @ SLS. It would appear that the Aster 15 is for closer in engagement while the 30 is for longer range. Presumably the two versions are optimised for their respective roles. I doubt there's much you could do with another system in that last window of opportunity.
Also just consider for a moment that these are not little fireworks, 4.2m tall is one hell of a lump to be throwing out with 3 seconds left on the clock!
Please explain the advantage of midcourse updates via data link over semiactive, provided that one’s system has multiple electronically steered antennae which can keep many targets “painted” simultaneously around 360 degrees az. and 180 degrees el. with mucho more kilowatts than transmitters in Aster missiles can emit. In addition, missiles used by brand AB can also get data link updates.
At last the much vaunted network enabled capability being used for something properly! I should imagine that the exact advantages of such updates would be liberally coated with a warm 'official secrets act' goo, were you even able to find someone to ask about it.
It seems to me that PAAMS/Aster's principal advantage is that it can be fitted to a smaller ship than Aegis/SPY.
Considering the UK MoD love of insisting everything is gold plated I should imagine that it's got some serious clout, but then who knows until it gets used in anger.
Assuming that the system doesn't have to be mounted in a floaty, boaty thing, it seems to me that we have a pretty useful close air defence system there. Why not deploy it at all important military bases (i.e. targets)? Oh, I forgot, defence spending cuts. The money is to be spent on a rapid reaction force (read carrier groups) that can poke its nose into any other country's business anywhere in the world. Why would we ever need to defend the United Kingdom?
Yes.. because we've spent no money at all on UK air defence, those Typhoons (of which will may well end up with more of than pilots!) are just there to look pretty..
Last edited by WillDAQ; 20th Aug 2007 at 21:15.