The United Kingdom is seeking a new battlefield ballistic missile, a class of weapon that it last fielded back in the Cold War. The Nightfall program reflects expanding interest in long-range precision strike systems, not just in the United Kingdom, but in Europe more broadly, spurred by Russian aggression and its own expanding missile arsenal.
The U.K. Ministry of Defense yesterday published a request for information (RFI) for the missile, providing details of what is required. At this stage, the Nightfall program is in the “open early engagement” phase, with the ministry judging interest from potential suppliers, ahead of a firm procurement decision.
The key performance parameter of having a range of greater than 600 kilometers (373 miles) puts it in the category of a short-range ballistic missile, a class of weapon that can reach out to between 300 and 1,000 kilometers (186 and 621 miles). There is a stated requirement for each launcher to deliver at least two “effectors,” each of which should weigh around 300 kilograms (661 pounds), based on a high-explosive payload. There is no mention of any other types of warheads being required. The wording makes it clear that the two or more effectors requirement relates to each launcher, rather than each missile. It should be noted that, while the RFI uses the broad term “effectors,” it also specifically refers to the requirement for a ballistic missile.
The range figure puts the missile well beyond the reach of the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), for example, a short-range ballistic missile which has a stated maximum range of 300 kilometers (186 miles). While ATACMS has been exported, the United Kingdom is not an operator.
For its new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), another short-range ballistic missile, the U.S. Army has outlined plans for incremental development that will increase its range from 500 kilometers (311 miles) to 1,000 kilometers (621 miles), with plans to extend this even further in the future.
As well as its basic ballistic trajectory, there is a demand for “some basic maneuverability,” suggesting that the United Kingdom might favor a weapon capable of being used on a depressed quasi-ballistic trajectory. This mode of launch renders a ballistic missile more capable of significant maneuvering in flight, presenting major challenges even for opponents with more robust missile defense capabilities.
As for the launcher, this is required to be a mobile platform, capable of operating in “a high threat tactical environment,” suggesting that a good degree of mobility and at least some armored protection are required. It also specifies that the launcher has a low multispectral signature, making it harder for enemy sensors to detect. All missiles are required to be fired from the launcher within 15 minutes of stopping at a launch location. After launch, the launcher must be able to rapidly leave the area, ideally within five minutes.
The U.K. Ministry of Defense wants the missile to be able to navigate in a GPS-denied environment and strike within five meters (16 feet) of a provided GPS coordinate 50 percent of the time. The missile is required to have a fast flight time, able to strike targets within 10 minutes of launch.
The ministry’s document provides relatively extensive information on resistance to jamming and other types of interference, likely reflecting lessons from the war in Ukraine. Here, Russian forces have reportedly been using electronic warfare systems to good effect against GPS-assisted guidance packages used on a variety of air and ground-launched munitions that Ukraine has received from the United States and other Western partners. Similarly, the ability of standoff precision-guided weapons to still operate effectively in the face of heavy electronic warfare jamming is also an area of considerable interest to the U.S. military.
In the Baltic region, Russia’s employment of jamming systems, likely to try to protect critical facilities and assets from long-range Ukrainian drone attacks, has become so pronounced that it is now having serious and potentially dangerous impacts on commercial aviation:
With this in mind, the U.K. Ministry of Defense states that it wants a missile that is “resilient in a complex electromagnetic environment (EME), including within a GNSS [Global Navigation Satellite System] denied and degraded environment, and resistant against targeted electronic warfare attack and spoofing.”
Another area of great interest right now, as regards precision standoff munitions, is the ability to procure effectors of this kind at relatively low cost and to scale up production, when required, to meet the demands of high-end contingencies.
These factors are also reflected in the U.K. requirement, which calls for a minimum production output of 10 missiles per month, if required, with the option to further scale this up. A remarkably low price of £500,000 ($675,000) for each missile is presented as the goal, although this excludes the warhead, launcher, and any development costs. This contrasts with a reported cost of between $1 million and $1.5 million for each ATACMS missile, depending on the variant (although this includes the warhead).
The U.K. Ministry of Defense wants these capabilities to be packaged and ready for at least five all-up units to be delivered for trials within nine to 12 months.
At this stage, it appears that a sovereign solution is also preferred, with the system required to be “ideally […] free from foreign government trade and usage restrictions, such as export control.” There is also a requirement for further growth potential to be available from the start, including the option to increase the range, accuracy, in-flight maneuverability, and more. The combination of a sovereign weapon and a notably low cost point, per unit, would also point to the potential to export this weapon.
It is significant that the U.K. Armed Forces are looking for a new ballistic missile at this stage, having last fielded the U.S.-made Lance, a mobile field artillery tactical missile during the Cold War. With a range of less than 100 miles, this was primarily a nuclear-delivery system for the Central Front battlefield.
Now, driven primarily by concerns about the Russian threat, the United Kingdom is looking at the potential of various new missile systems and has even decided to reinstate an air-launched nuclear capability, albeit using U.S.-owned weapons.
Earlier this year, the United Kingdom and Germany announced they would jointly produce a “deep precision strike” weapon with a range of over 2,000 kilometers (1,243 miles, considerably more than specified in the Nightfall program. At this point, it’s unclear whether a ballistic or cruise missile — or perhaps both types — will be the preferred solution for the longer-range requirement.
However, the project reflects growing ambitions among European NATO members to field long-range strike capabilities, faced by a growing Russian threat on the alliance’s eastern flank.
With Russia continuing to make extensive use of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles against Ukraine, the United Kingdom and other European NATO members are increasingly concerned about a major gap in their inventories when it comes to standoff precision-guided munitions.
As TWZ has pointed out before, among European NATO members, only Turkey possesses a conventional ground-launched missile with a range of more than 300 kilometers (186 miles). This is the locally developed Bora short-range ballistic missile.
In contrast, Russia has fielded or is developing multiple ground-launched ballistic and cruise missile systems that match this kind of performance, and which are able to carry conventional or nuclear warheads. This is before taking into account Russia’s air-launched and maritime long-range strike capabilities, which also vastly outmatch their NATO counterparts in Europe.
As there was in the Cold War, there is a growing demand among NATO members in Europe to develop a deterrent to Russian tactical nuclear missiles, which are being fielded in increasingly advanced and long-reaching forms, including in Kaliningrad, the Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea. However, at this stage, there is no indication that either of the aforementioned British missile programs envisages using a nuclear warhead, although this could conceivably be introduced, including on Nightfall, at a later stage.
Meanwhile, the United States has announced that it will deploy to Germany, on a rotational basis, starting next year, a range of advanced ground-launched weapons. These include the SM-6 multi-purpose missile and Tomahawk cruise missile, as well as “developmental hypersonic weapons.” The latter is a reference to the Dark Eagle and potentially others, like the Operational Fires (OpFires) ground-launched hypersonic missile system and the aforementioned PrSM short-range ballistic missile.
Developing a new ballistic missile that fulfills the outlined requirements within the United Kingdom, and without recourse to licensed production, may be a challenge. After all, it’s been many decades since the country was developing and producing these kinds of weapons.
It is also worth noting that the U.K. Royal Navy has outlined plans to adapt its two Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers to fire undisclosed long-range missiles from their decks.
In the past, we suggested that the most likely option for the Royal Navy would involve launching a cruise missile from the carrier, perhaps even a hypersonic weapon. Nevertheless, a ballistic missile is also a possibility, albeit less likely.
It’s unclear at this point what sort of range requirement the Royal Navy is seeking, and what kinds of targets the missiles should prosecute.
As for the British Nightfall effort to develop a new ballistic missile, this points once more to a growing focus on long-range fire capabilities in Europe and, depending on its ultimate range and potential warhead options, it might ultimately have a significant effect on the military balance on the continent.
Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com