Uneasy market position: lightweight very short range air defence (Shorad) missile systems have seen mixed market fortunes over the past decade, but the lightweight surface-to-air vehicle/missile combination has seen steady interest in recent years.

While lightweight Shorad systems were seen as an answer to a maiden's prayer when they first appeared--packing the punch of a heavyweight, but with a lighter price tag--they were seen as ideal and were put in a position to replace many existing, heavier air defence missile systems. However, although the market has seen some sales and growth, it has not been quite as spectacular as might have been imagined. Surface-to-air missile sales of all types have actually been hit by the military lessons of the 1990s: if one controls the air (Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq in 1990-91 and 2003 and in Afghanistan), why should one need much in the way of short-range air defence systems? In spite of the fact that this equation alone helped to stunt the very short-range missile system market sales growth (among others) in the 1990s, the lightweight vehicle-mounted missile appears to have remained relatively unscathed.

First up to Bat

The drive for this weapon system has been simple: the need to take the weight of weapons off the backs of hard-pressed air defence gunners, providing decent re-supply of missiles, with better targeting systems. While all of this could have been achieved with a few more 4 x 4s, the drive was to establish greater capabilities for light forces, but without the weight and cost penalties. Arguably, the US Army's Avenger system, based on the Hummer, was the first such weapon to define this market area. With a slightly-armoured, stabilised turret carrying a .50-calibre machine-gun as well as eight Stinger missiles, it provided weapon options for most line-of-sight engagement possibilities. The addition of thermal sights also allowed engagements in nearly every possible scenario. Continued upgrades with regards to the missile and the data transfer systems, and continued modernisation of sights is intended to keep the Avenger as the prime US Army Shorad system for the foreseeable future.

The Avenger went a great deal further than previous surface-to-air/vehicle combinations. These tended to see the welding of a firing post from a Manpads system to the bed of a 4 x 4 such as the AM General Hummer, the Land Rover and the Renault TRM-2000, whereby allowing a stable, less stressful platform for air defence gunners to operate from. A vehicle also allowed extra systems--more sophisticated communications, better, larger thermal sights and new data transfer systems--without driving a need for more men to physically carry the equipment. But unlike the Avenger, there is no stabilisation of the weapon post, so engagements are undertaken when stationary, after taking several minutes to set up. Such systems are in service with the French Army and a number of other MBDA Mistral users worldwide.

Others

The Russian arms industry has also followed this lead. The Djigit mount system designed by KBM and manufactured in Kovrov is offered for export--one Latin American country is believed to have bought it, and several Middle Eastern nations have also expressed interest. Mounting two SA-14/16s and with room for six to eight reloads, it resembles the Atlas system used by France and others. Only the deepest cynic would think that it was a reverse-engineered system. Korean industry has also been working on a very similar concept. But it is worthy of note that there seems to be little drive inside the Russian military for the deployment of such a system--the Djigit is designated quite clearly by design bureaux as an export system only.

It is, however, possible to find a midway stage between the simple carriage of very short range air defence missiles, as might be seen in many airborne and airmobile units, and the turreted, more sophisticated systems. A prime example of this would be the Swedish RBS 90. Here, the Bv206 articulated all-terrain tracked vehicle is more than just a means of transport and storage. Instead, it is also a command centre and firing post, which can be remote from the actual missile firing post and be rotated and directed from inside the Bv206. With the extra datalinks between firing posts, command centres and air defence cueing radars it is arguable that this system might be less capable than one such as the Avenger--it takes time to set up from vehicle halt and cannot be in a position to survey as it moves--but it is still a great leap forward from simply carrying Manpads missiles inside a jeep. The increased amount of electronics contained within the BV206, as well as the enhanced communications systems, also stand the RBS 90 apart from simpler Manpads.

To Protect or Not

One of the biggest concerns about many of the lighter very short range air defence missile carriers is that even when armour is added, it is often of a very low level. When planning such systems as the Avenger, there was a doctrinal split that divided the battlefield into a 'front line', or 'direct fire zone', and then there was what was euphemistically called the 'rear areas', where the threat level was lower. This allowed vehicles operating in the rear to get away with being either unarmoured or provided with very low levels of protection.

In the aftermath of the Iraqi campaign of early 2003 it is increasingly difficult to justify such a split. The losses suffered by the US Army to their rear area forces and support troops were of a level that ought to have been of great concern. As a result, it seems certain that many armed forces are studying protection levels that might need to be afforded to non-armoured formations, including air defence artillery units. Some studies already finished in Europe seem to suggest that outside of the lightest of rapid reaction operations, where speed is essential, support forces need to be heavily protected, taking the weight of vehicles such as Avenger from 3 to 3.5 tonnes up to over four tonnes--although this will depend on whether the carrier vehicle can take the weight of the extra armour. Some might see the creation of the Albi Mistral launch system, based on an armoured 4 x 4 VBL vehicle, as one such reaction to the rising protection requirements.

There is also a school of thought that says if one is adding air defence formations or armoured and armoured infantry units--as seen in the advance of the 3rd Mechanized Infantry Division in Iraq in early 2003--then to have these systems deployed primarily in under-armoured or unarmoured vehicles makes little sense: support and combat units should be matched in mobility and protection levels. If this school of thought holds true, then it would certainly militate against the lighter very short range air defence missile systems in such units in the future.

With a growing requirement for rapid reaction forces, as well as a need to tailor forces to work in areas of the world that might not be best suited to cope with heavier armoured vehicles, it is probable that there is still a role for the vehicle-mounted, lightweight, very-short-range air defence missile system. However, lessons from recent conflicts might see these changing shape, as it can no longer be acceptable to mount weapons on unarmoured vehicles. As such, it is more likely that air-portable, armoured, lightweight platforms, such as the Wiesel or the Bv210, will be the norm for such systems. They can provide self-protection against many threats, yet still retain both strategic and tactical mobility. Both are C-130 portable: a Wiesel can be carried internally in a CH-53, while a Bv210 can be underslung by a CH-47 Chinook. Significant interest in this type of vehicle/weapon combination can be seen by the fact Finland has ordered a variant of the LeFlaSys, with a Bofors beam-rider instead of a Stinger, and Greece has also adopted the same system, although it will be mounted on an armoured AM General Hummer. It is likely that as countries, in Europe especially, study their air defence needs, combined with rapid reaction, there will then be a steady growth in this very market segment that has been quite stagnant over the past decade. The early sales of LeFlaSys bodes well for future success in this arena, as the system seems to match capability, lightweight, growth and attention to cost.

If there is a concern for those marketing at the lighter end of the market area, it is that there will be more products appearing at the heavier end of the spectrum (but these somewhat exceed the boundaries of this article). Already the US Marine Corps operates the Lav Air Defence system, with a Blazer turret housing a .50-calibre Gatling Gun and eight Stingers. This is also C-130 portable, and can even be underslung by a CH-53. In the next few years, too, air defence vehicles in the 12 to 15-tonne weight class will appear as a result of two key land system programmes: the US Army's Future Combat System (FCS), and the British Army's Future Rapid Effects System (Fres). Both of these programmes offer a new paradigm; vehicles with protection levels normally associated with heavy MICVs but at a weight that can be carried in a C-130. If the trend is towards heavier light forces, then these programmes will probably be key drivers for future force modernisation, even in the less-than-fashionable air defence sector.