Exocet | |
---|---|
An AM39 aircraft-launched Exocet |
|
Type | Medium-range anti-ship missile |
Place of origin | France |
Service history | |
In service | 1979 |
Production history | |
Manufacturer | Aérospatiale's division MBDA |
Specifications | |
Weight | 670 kilograms (1,500 lb) |
Length | 4.7 metres (15 ft 5 in) |
Diameter | 34.8 centimetres (1 ft 1.7 in) |
|
|
Warhead | 165 kilograms (360 lb) |
|
|
Engine | solid propellant engine
turbojet (MM40 Block 3 version) |
Wingspan | 1.1 metres (3 ft 7 in) |
Operational range |
70–180 kilometres (43–110 mi; 38–97 nmi) |
Flight altitude | Sea-skimming |
Speed | 315 metres per second (1,030 ft/s) |
Guidance system |
Inertial and active radar |
Launch platform |
multi-platform:
|
The Exocet is a French-built anti-ship missile whose various versions can be launched from surface vessels, submarines, helicopters and fixed wing aircraft. Hundreds were fired in combat during the 1980s.
Contents |
The missile's name was given by M. Guillot, then the technical director at Nord Aviation, after a French word for flying fish (Exocoetidae).[1]
The Exocet is built by MBDA, a European missile company. Development began in 1967 by Nord as a ship-launched missile named MM 38. A few years later Aerospatiale and Nord merged. The basic missile body design was based on the Nord AS30 air to ground tactical missile. The air-launched Exocet was developed in 1974 and entered service with the French Navy five years later.[2]
The relatively compact missile is designed for attacking small- to medium-size warships (e.g. frigates, corvettes, and destroyers), although multiple hits are effective against larger vessels, such as aircraft carriers.[3][4] It is guided inertially in mid-flight and turns on active radar late in its flight to find and hit its target. Its solid propellant engine gives the Exocet a maximum range of 70 kilometres (43 mi; 38 nmi). The solid-propellant engine was replaced on the Block 3 MM40 ship-launched version of the missile with a solid-propellant booster and a turbojet sustainer engine which extends the range to 180 kilometres (110 mi; 97 nmi). The submarine-launched version places the missile and a naval booster inside a launch capsule.
The Exocet has been manufactured in a number of versions, including:
The chief competitors to the Exocet are the U.S.-made Harpoon, and the Chinese Yingji series.
The newest MM40 version (MM40 block 3) has an improved range of 180 kilometres (110 mi; 97 nmi) through the use of a turbofan engine, and includes four air intakes to provide continuous airflow to the engine during high-G maneuvers.
The Block 3 missiles accepts GPS guidance system waypoint commands, which allow them to attack naval targets from different angles and to strike land targets, giving them a marginal role as a cruise missile. The Block 3 Exocet is lighter than the previous MM40 Block 2 Exocets.[6][7][8]
The 45 Block 3 Exocets were ordered by the French Navy in December 2008. These are not to be new productions but the conversion of older Block 2 missiles to the Block 3 standard. The first firing of the Block 3 from a warship took place on March 18, 2010, from the French Navy air defense frigate Chevalier Paul. Besides the French Navy, the Block 3 has been ordered by the navies of the UAE, Qatar, Oman and Morocco.[9]
In 1982, during the Falklands War, Exocet became noted worldwide when an Argentine Navy Super Etendard warplanes carrying the AM39 Air Launched version of Exocet caused irreparable damage to the Royal Navy destroyer HMS Sheffield on 4 May 1982; and when the 15,000 ton merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor was struck by two Exocet anti-ship missiles on 25 May. Two MM38 ship-to-ship Exocet missiles that were removed and transferred from the old destroyer ARA Seguí, a retired US Sumner class, to an improvised launcher for land use [10] caused damage to the Destroyer HMS Glamorgan on 12 June.
While the Argentineans claimed that an Exocet-armed Super Etendard attack on 30 May damaged the aircraft carrier HMS Invincible, this claim is unfounded, due to the continued air operations of Invincible with no signs of damage. During the conflict the Argentinian Government several times claimed incorrectly that it had damaged several ships, with multiple previous claims to have damaged or sunk the aircraft carriers HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes, the two most important British warships there, and shot down Sea Harriers, due to some combination of the natural confusion of battle and propaganda purposes.
The Exocet that struck HMS Sheffield impacted on the second deck, 2.4 metres (7 ft 10 in) above the waterline and penetrated deeply into Sheffield's control room,[11] near to the forward engine room, cracking the hull open roughly 1.2 by 3 metres (3.9 by 9.8 ft). It appears that the warhead did not explode.[12] Accounts suggest that the initial impact of the missile destroyed the ship's on-board electricity generating systems and fractured the water main, preventing the anti-fire mechanisms from operating and dooming the ship to be consumed by the fire. The loss of Sheffield was a shock to the British.
The crew of Sheffield believed that the missile exploded. The official Royal Navy Board of Enquiry Report, however, stated that evidence indicates that the warhead did not detonate. During the 4.5 days that the ship remained afloat, five salvage inspections were made and a number of photographs were taken. Members of the crew were interviewed, and testimony was given by Exocet specialists (note that the Royal Navy had 15 surface combat ships that were Exocet-armed in the Falklands War). There was no evidence of explosion although burning propellant from the rocket motor caused a number of fires, which continued unchecked as a result of a punctured firemain.
The Exocet that struck Glamorgan detonated (indeed a number of crew witnessed this) on the port side of the hangar deck, punching a hole in the deck and galley below, causing fires. The missile body traveled into the hangar causing the fully fueled and armed Wessex helicopter to explode. Prompt action of the officers and men at the helm saved the ship. With less than a minute's warning the incoming missile was being tracked on radar in the operations room and bridge, as the ship was traveling at speed, a turn was ordered to present her stern to the missile.[13] The ship was heeled far over to starboard when the missile struck. The missile hit the coaming and was deflected upwards. The dent caused by the impact was clearly visible when Glamorgan was refitted in late 1982.
In the years after the Falklands War it was revealed that the British government and the Secret Intelligence Service were extremely concerned by the perceived inadequacy of the Royal Navy's anti-missile defences against Exocet missiles and its potential to tip the naval war decisively in favour of Argentine forces. A scenario was envisioned in which one or both of the force’s two aircraft carriers (HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes) would be destroyed or incapacitated by Exocet attacks, which would make recapturing the Falklands much more difficult. To contain the Exocet threat a major intelligence operation was initiated to prevent the Argentine Navy from acquiring more. The operation included British intelligence agents claiming to be arms dealers able to supply large numbers of Exocet to Argentina, diverting Argentina from pursuing sources which could genuinely supply a few missiles. France denied deliveries of Exocet AM39s purchased by Peru to avoid the possibility of them getting to Argentina [14].
Iraq fired an estimated 200 air-launched Exocet against Iranian shipping during the Iran–Iraq War with varying levels of success. Tankers and other civilian shipping were often hit.
On May 17, 1987, the pilot of an Iraqi Mirage F-1 allegedly mistook the U.S. Navy Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate USS Stark for an Iranian tanker and fired two Exocet at the warship. The first penetrated the port-side hull. The second entered at almost the same point, and left a 3-by-4-metre (9.8 by 13 ft) gash, exploding in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and 21 were injured. The Stark was heavily damaged, but saved by the crew and sent back for repairs. The errant pilot was reportedly executed for his error, and his explanations for the attack are not available. Later, Iraqi officials denied that the pilot had been executed and stated that he was still alive.[15]