I haven't done a good non-transit thread in a while. LUV kinda took me out with how much I put into it! Despite that, though, I feel like doing another because I'm bored today. So, it's time for me to actually talk about GBAD...
If you follow my posts enough, you'll know that the GBAD project is something that rattles me a bit. Is it the requirements? The qualified suppliers? The fact that the project has not turned out how I expected?
If you're curious about the history of GBAD in Canada, here are some very nice articles to catch you up to speed! I was going to do my own history bit like I did with LUV, but it wouldn't have come close to as nice:
The Ground-Based Air Defense (GBAD) project aims to provide the army with a new VSHORAD/SHORAD capability. The project will deliver two batteries, which will be integrated into the 4th Artillery Regiment.
We don't know exactly what will come of the project, and like other projects, one system might be used to cover both requirements, though, as it stands, we have two potential requirements here:
• A primary SHORAD system
• A secondary Man-Portable VSHORAD.
The primary SHORAD system is expected to have a range exceeding 5km and will be tasked with providing protection primarily against rockets, artillery, and mortars; air to surface missiles and bombs; and class 1 & 2 uncrewed aerial systems (UAS).
The secondary system will be tasked with supporting mobile battle groups against fixed and rotary wing aircraft, as well as some cruise missiles. Separately, a new GBAD facility is in the works for CFB Gagetown to provide operational support and training.
The new GBAD system will also include sensors, fire control software, an integrated networked C4ISR system, and training systems, among others. Guns, missiles, and directed energy weapons (DEW) are all on the table for this one.
An RFP for GBAD is supposed to be dropped in the fall with a contract award expected sometime next year. Funny enough, this is one of the projects that is actually ahead of the original schedule (slightly). So good job to GBAD. 👍
A list of qualified suppliers was released back in April, and it got people speculating hard about what in the world some of these proposals would be.
Just like LUV, I'm going to try and break down each competitor and what they could be offering. While LUV was more analytic, this time around, I will be more focused on my own speculations and vibes. So prepare for this to be more casual.
Saab
Saab makes this one really easy for me because they're the one who actively advertises what they plan to offer, more RBS-70. The RBS-70NG has already made its mark, taking home the AD UOR for Latvia earlier this year.
In the upper tier, we have Saab’s M-SHORAD. The system integrates the Giraffe 1X multi-mission 3D radar with the RBS-70NG MFU, coordinated by Saab’s ground-based air defense (GBAD) command and control (C2) system. This configuration allows it to detect and engage targets such as fighter jets, helicopters, missiles, rockets, and UAS within a detection range of 75km and an interception range of 9km.
The MSHORAD’s modularity enables installation on a variety of light and heavy vehicles. This was actually one of the proposals I expected to pop up, and I do quite like it. The RBS-70NG is already set for Latvia, and personally, I wouldn't argue about seeing more. Simple and to the point, Saab presents a well-rounded, highly modular option for GBAD.
SAABs MSHORAD is a highly modular system able to be mounted on multiple classes of vehicles
Raytheon
Raytheon is the next one. I don't think we'll be seeing NASAMS. NASAMS comes up a lot, and believe me, I would love to see it. But it is always best to remember the requirements.
This project has been in the works for seven years, at a much different time with a different mentality in mind for what to expect. Has it evolved? Absolutely. Is it still outdated? Maybe? Either way, the lower tier of the project is Stinger, or at least whatever comes out when production restarts.
The upper tier of the project has always been focused on C-RAM and CUAS, and with that in mind, Raytheon is probably the one company here with a proven system to fill that requirement. Skyhunter is the Americanized version of Israel's Iron Dome missile system.
Each launcher is outfitted to accommodate 20 SkyHunter missiles with a range of up to 70KM. The system comprises a launcher teamed up along with the AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar.
The system is nearly identical to the Israeli version with up to 90% commonality. Canada already uses the EL/M-2084 radar, and the system fits the requirements laid out almost perfectly. It's hard to ignore this as a highly likely option, even if it might not be the offering many would like to see.
Skyhunter, the US Marines solution to the Medium Range Intercept Capability (MRIC) program
Lockheed & Diehl
Lockheed & Diehl are the only team-up here, and one with quite a bit of history to it. The two have previously worked on a SHORAD concept together with Saab as part of Team Falcon.
Combining Lockheed's Skykeeper C2 system (LEAPP for the Britbros) and an IRIS-T launcher is definitely a wild combination for this competition. A similar project to GBAD is actually in the works over in Germany.
The LVS NNbS Project aims at filling the current capability gap for the protection of ground troops against air threats in short range and very short range. The LVS NNbS aims to create a multi-layered defense system, integrating seamlessly with existing Bundeswehr components.
As part of this, Rheinmetall, Diehl Defense, and Hensoldt have come together under the ARGE NNbS banner to participate. The big part here for us is Diehl, who has decided to integrate IRIS-T SLS onto the Boxer chassis. It presents an interesting look at the likely offering for the project.
I'd like to see that Skyranger 30 on a LAV though, just saying….
On the lower tier of things, Lockheed is working on a new VSHORAD system for the Stinger replacement, but the project is very much clear on wanting mature designs, which might make something like this a bit more complicated to come to a conclusion. Overall, though, I like the idea, and I'm interested to see what comes out of the team, especially on Lockheed's side of things.
Diehl proposal for SHORAD, Offering both a truck or boxer mounted IRIS-T launcher
MBDA
Our final competitor is MBDA. They produce many different systems, making it complicated to figure out what's going on.
Obviously, we have Mistral at the lower tier. While MBDA is working on a new VSHORAD missile, which they recently gave a peak at, I'm sticking with Mistral as a proven, mature design.
Really, you could pull off a Saab MSHORAD with Atlas/MCP as well. But if not, the next step up is CAMM. That's the one realistic option I see.
Sorry to Aspide and Mica, but I don't think either would make the cut. Does CAMM fit the requirements for the project? Sure. It might not be optimized for it, but it could.
While Mistral remains the likely option, CAMM presents another route for MBDAs SHORAD offering
I do think it goes to show how complicated this process has gotten and how much the environment has evolved since 2017. It certainly has not turned out how I was expecting it to, and by this point, I'm honestly quite excited to see what comes out of this over the next few months.
Personal prediction? I have no clue, although you are lying if you say you don't want to see an IRIS LAV. I don't care if it's just one that parades around. I just want to see it, just once.
Share this post
Breaking down the GBAD Project
Share this post
I haven't done a good non-transit thread in a while. LUV kinda took me out with how much I put into it! Despite that, though, I feel like doing another because I'm bored today. So, it's time for me to actually talk about GBAD...
If you follow my posts enough, you'll know that the GBAD project is something that rattles me a bit. Is it the requirements? The qualified suppliers? The fact that the project has not turned out how I expected?
If you're curious about the history of GBAD in Canada, here are some very nice articles to catch you up to speed! I was going to do my own history bit like I did with LUV, but it wouldn't have come close to as nice:
https://www.espritdecorps.ca/feature/ground-based-air-defence-back-on-the-agenda-for-canadian-army
https://rusi-ns.ca/air-defence/
Are you all caught up now? Good!
So what is the GBAD Project?
The Ground-Based Air Defense (GBAD) project aims to provide the army with a new VSHORAD/SHORAD capability. The project will deliver two batteries, which will be integrated into the 4th Artillery Regiment.
We don't know exactly what will come of the project, and like other projects, one system might be used to cover both requirements, though, as it stands, we have two potential requirements here:
• A primary SHORAD system
• A secondary Man-Portable VSHORAD.
The primary SHORAD system is expected to have a range exceeding 5km and will be tasked with providing protection primarily against rockets, artillery, and mortars; air to surface missiles and bombs; and class 1 & 2 uncrewed aerial systems (UAS).
The secondary system will be tasked with supporting mobile battle groups against fixed and rotary wing aircraft, as well as some cruise missiles. Separately, a new GBAD facility is in the works for CFB Gagetown to provide operational support and training.
The new GBAD system will also include sensors, fire control software, an integrated networked C4ISR system, and training systems, among others. Guns, missiles, and directed energy weapons (DEW) are all on the table for this one.
An RFP for GBAD is supposed to be dropped in the fall with a contract award expected sometime next year. Funny enough, this is one of the projects that is actually ahead of the original schedule (slightly). So good job to GBAD. 👍
A list of qualified suppliers was released back in April, and it got people speculating hard about what in the world some of these proposals would be.
Just like LUV, I'm going to try and break down each competitor and what they could be offering. While LUV was more analytic, this time around, I will be more focused on my own speculations and vibes. So prepare for this to be more casual.
Saab
Saab makes this one really easy for me because they're the one who actively advertises what they plan to offer, more RBS-70. The RBS-70NG has already made its mark, taking home the AD UOR for Latvia earlier this year.
In the upper tier, we have Saab’s M-SHORAD. The system integrates the Giraffe 1X multi-mission 3D radar with the RBS-70NG MFU, coordinated by Saab’s ground-based air defense (GBAD) command and control (C2) system. This configuration allows it to detect and engage targets such as fighter jets, helicopters, missiles, rockets, and UAS within a detection range of 75km and an interception range of 9km.
The MSHORAD’s modularity enables installation on a variety of light and heavy vehicles. This was actually one of the proposals I expected to pop up, and I do quite like it. The RBS-70NG is already set for Latvia, and personally, I wouldn't argue about seeing more. Simple and to the point, Saab presents a well-rounded, highly modular option for GBAD.
Raytheon
Raytheon is the next one. I don't think we'll be seeing NASAMS. NASAMS comes up a lot, and believe me, I would love to see it. But it is always best to remember the requirements.
This project has been in the works for seven years, at a much different time with a different mentality in mind for what to expect. Has it evolved? Absolutely. Is it still outdated? Maybe? Either way, the lower tier of the project is Stinger, or at least whatever comes out when production restarts.
The upper tier of the project has always been focused on C-RAM and CUAS, and with that in mind, Raytheon is probably the one company here with a proven system to fill that requirement. Skyhunter is the Americanized version of Israel's Iron Dome missile system.
Each launcher is outfitted to accommodate 20 SkyHunter missiles with a range of up to 70KM. The system comprises a launcher teamed up along with the AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar.
The system is nearly identical to the Israeli version with up to 90% commonality. Canada already uses the EL/M-2084 radar, and the system fits the requirements laid out almost perfectly. It's hard to ignore this as a highly likely option, even if it might not be the offering many would like to see.
Lockheed & Diehl
Lockheed & Diehl are the only team-up here, and one with quite a bit of history to it. The two have previously worked on a SHORAD concept together with Saab as part of Team Falcon.
Combining Lockheed's Skykeeper C2 system (LEAPP for the Britbros) and an IRIS-T launcher is definitely a wild combination for this competition. A similar project to GBAD is actually in the works over in Germany.
The LVS NNbS Project aims at filling the current capability gap for the protection of ground troops against air threats in short range and very short range. The LVS NNbS aims to create a multi-layered defense system, integrating seamlessly with existing Bundeswehr components.
As part of this, Rheinmetall, Diehl Defense, and Hensoldt have come together under the ARGE NNbS banner to participate. The big part here for us is Diehl, who has decided to integrate IRIS-T SLS onto the Boxer chassis. It presents an interesting look at the likely offering for the project.
I'd like to see that Skyranger 30 on a LAV though, just saying….
On the lower tier of things, Lockheed is working on a new VSHORAD system for the Stinger replacement, but the project is very much clear on wanting mature designs, which might make something like this a bit more complicated to come to a conclusion. Overall, though, I like the idea, and I'm interested to see what comes out of the team, especially on Lockheed's side of things.
MBDA
Our final competitor is MBDA. They produce many different systems, making it complicated to figure out what's going on.
Obviously, we have Mistral at the lower tier. While MBDA is working on a new VSHORAD missile, which they recently gave a peak at, I'm sticking with Mistral as a proven, mature design.
Really, you could pull off a Saab MSHORAD with Atlas/MCP as well. But if not, the next step up is CAMM. That's the one realistic option I see.
Sorry to Aspide and Mica, but I don't think either would make the cut. Does CAMM fit the requirements for the project? Sure. It might not be optimized for it, but it could.
I do think it goes to show how complicated this process has gotten and how much the environment has evolved since 2017. It certainly has not turned out how I was expecting it to, and by this point, I'm honestly quite excited to see what comes out of this over the next few months.
Personal prediction? I have no clue, although you are lying if you say you don't want to see an IRIS LAV. I don't care if it's just one that parades around. I just want to see it, just once.