Fire Shadow Loitering Missile

The so-called lurker bomb will also be able to shadow British troops for up to ten hours or 100 miles, ready to take out enemy targets with surgical precision at a minute’s notice.

GMLRS missile cost £60,000

‘We need to get Fire Shadow’s price to around that, which is a big challenge,’ said an industry source.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

I wouldn't normally link to dailymail but they seemed to have the most information in one place and fairly accurte apart from the "Hover" in the title and I don't think they should of put the "or" in the "up to ten hours or 100 miles" I think it should be 100 miles to target area and then loiter.

If they can get it to that price sounds interesting. Although sounds expensive but when a F16 cost $15,000 an hour to fly + the cost of the aircraft (defenseindustrydaily) + cost of precision weapon to drop.
A UAV instead of F16 may be cheaper to fly but since the UK got quoted $1 Billion for 10 MQ-9 Reapers and ground stations that's a big investment (The US seems to get them at a much cheaper price) and you still need the precision weapon to drop

reply to post by deckard83


A UCAV can hover for a far longer duration, travel a greater distance, offer you more flexibility, better ISR and most importantly it can return with its payload. There have been several concepts for such a system floated around, even supersonic versions. They might have a very small niche to occupy but it's overall not really a pressing need when you have other things which can fulfill the CAS role more effectively.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by WestPoint23]

The most interesting part of the story was the price tag, in my opinion. Not alot of things can offer you that capability for that cost. You'd sell alot of them if you can deliver.

Once airborne, however, Fire Shadow is unable to return to base. If it is not used in action, it is brought down in a controlled crash after it runs out of fuel.

Personally I would not WANT this thing to return to base after launched.

I wouldn't want to do without the UAVs with all there plus points and the UK do use them.

The issue with CAS is response time which is why artillery is always first choice when it's in range. This system is trying to address that response time issue.

reply to post by deckard83


On 'Futureweapons' they were showing an artillery system that could fire a bunch of shells in a row at different angles so they all arrived on target simultaneously. Did anything like that ever go in service or is it just testing?

reply to post by emsed1


It is called MRSI (Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact) capability. Currently one of the finest self 155MM self propelled Howitzers is the German PzH 2000. It entered service in 1998 and has been ordered by several nations.

Another weapon system shown on Future Weapons was the US Army XM1203 (NLOS Cannon). This system is a next generation 155MM Howitzer and it is part of the FCS program. It is currently undergoing testing, the projected service date is set for sometime around 2014.


[edit on 17-10-2008 by WestPoint23]

reply to post by emsed1


Its refered to as a TOT or time on target attack. The canceled Crusader modile gun was also to have this ability. Uusally it takes several disbursed vehicles to do so.

I think you're talking about the MRSI technique and various pieces have been doing this for decades. It's a nice trick. I think the Crusader was supposed to have an impressive MRSI ability, but I don't remember the details.

I wonder how long it will be until our combat aircraft are totally unmanned.

Will there be a need for pilots in air combat in a few years? I realize we are the only country that could pull it off, but have we developed systems sophisticated enough for Air Superiority?

I think unmanned bombers are only a few years away as well. Will we still need systems like the B-52, which has been extended to 2030 and beyond?

When retired, the Buff will be older than any person who has ever flown it, with a service life of greater than 80 years.