Ukraine: a shadow of doubt

By Richard North - May 12, 2023

Not for the first time, I am confused by developments related to Ukraine, not least the widely reported announcement by UK defence secretary Ben Wallace that Britain is donating Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine.

This weapon is a sophisticated (and eye-wateringly expensive) air-launched cruise missile with a 1000lb warhead, notionally with a range of 350 miles. The versions to be sent to Ukraine, though, apparently have a restricted range of around 155 miles – sufficient to reach targets in Crimea when launched from unoccupied Ukrainian territory.

No timescale for delivery has been specified but The Times reminds us that prime minister Sunak promised the missiles during a visit by Zelensky to the UK in February. He reiterated his pledge at the Munich security conference later that month, saying that Kiev needed protection from “Russian bombs and Iranian drones”.

Where the confusion lies is in the timescale, as adapting a new launch platform for this missile is a costly and time-consuming business. In RAF use it came into service in 2002 with the Tornado GR4 but as these aircraft were edging towards retirement, the possibility of fitting them to the RAF’s Eurofighter fleet was considered.

Exploratory testing started in November 2013, assessing the ability of the aircraft to carry the load, using hardpoints usually occupied by external fuel tanks. The test was successful, clearing the way for further development.

The actual decision to fit the missiles to the Eurofighter, however, was not made until July 2014 when a budget of £120 million was allocated so that tranche 2 and 3 aircraft could enter service with the missile in 2018.

A successful drop test was carried out in December 2014 but the release programme for the weapon was not completed until November 2015, some two years after flight testing had first begun.

At this stage, only one experimental aircraft was fitted for the weapon and systems in the operational fleet then had to be adapted to bring the weapon fully into service.

If this gives some indication of the timing and complexity of fitting out a new platform, it possibly understates the problems of introducing the capability to the Ukrainian air force. Assuming that new Western aircraft are not going to be supplied, this means either the MiG-29s or the remaining Su-27s must be adapted.

The Times states that experts have previously suggested that they could be strapped to MiG-29s operated by the Ukrainian air force without much difficulty. But, given the adaptation programme for the Eurofighter, this does not seem to be a credible statement.

In any event, the Su-27s would seem to be the more appropriate launch platform, but the process of integrating Soviet era electronics and weapons systems with a sophisticated modern weapon must be formidable.

Since Sunak’s original promise in February, one assumes that some preparatory work will have been carried out, and it would not be unreasonable to suppose that some preliminary feasibility studies were carried out before the prime minister made his promise.

However, assuming that the existing Ukrainian platforms are capable of launching the weapon, it seems unlikely that the systems integration programme could take less than a year, with an additional period required to adapt the operational fleet.

Bloomberg addresses this issue in a superficial way, citing Douglas Barrie of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, who says that the decision to supply the missiles had probably been under consideration for some time, given the need to address “integration challenges”.

I suppose it is just conceivable that a top-secret programme has been underway for some time, but things don’t usually work that way. Most likely, the missile will not be combat-ready until early next year, if then.

Wallace, in parliament yesterday, though, was remarkably ebullient. Challenged on the integration issues, he conceded that “it is not easy to take a British-French missile and incorporate it with a former Soviet or Russian aircraft”. That, he said, is one of the reasons for the time taken: working out whether it was technically feasible.

He then went on to pay tribute to our scientists and technicians, “who have done an amazing job – and not just with this type of capability – as well as to other scientists across Europe who have managed to produce integration of western weapons into Russian equipment, and innovative capabilities, at speed”.

Careful textual analysis, though, does not confirm that the weapon is operational. All Wallace said was that the programme is “technically feasible”, whence he went on to emphasise that “putting a fifth or fourth-generation weapons system on what is sometimes a second or third-generation aircraft is not easy”.

“We will see”, he concluded. “I am not going to comment on when we expect these to be used. They have yet to be tested, and we will find out in the next few weeks or months the extent to which that has worked, but it takes time”.

“Weeks or months” in the context seems wildly optimistic. If the new platforms haven’t even been tested yet, even early next year might be a stretch, especially if fleet conversions and pilot training have to be taken into account.

In one respect, though, this makes sense, as Zelensky makes no secret of his intention to make long-range weapons an integral part of his much-heralded counter-offensive. Yet, while media and other pundits have been forecasting this as imminent for many months, he is now conceding that it could be delayed.

The president puts most emphasis on the need to wait for supplies of Western military aid, saying that combat brigades were “ready” but the army still needed “some things”, including armoured vehicles that were “arriving in batches”. But there can be no doubt that any offensive could benefit hugely from the Storm Shadow capability, so it would make sense to wait until it is available – if, indeed, it ever is.

Sir Alex Younger, the former head of MI6, said the counter-offensive was “extraordinarily complicated” and western countries needed “to back off” rather than pressurise Ukraine into launching the attack before it is ready. And he confirms that long-range munitions are critical to the success of the attack.

That said, there is most definitely no doubt that Putin – informed by his advisors – sees the arrival of Storm Shadow in theatre as a significant threat. His spokesman has characterised his reaction as extremely negative, declaring that its arrival “will demand an adequate response from our military, which will, naturally, from a military point of view, find corresponding solutions”.

Actually, although Storm Shadow is a mature weapons system, with combat use in Libya and Syria, it has never been deployed in heavily defended airspace. And while its performance is described as “stealthy”, there are some vulnerabilities in its flight profile, especially in the terminal phase, when it could be intercepted by a capable missile system such as the S-300.

Certainly, the Russian Kalibr cruise missiles have been proved vulnerable to Ukrainian air defences, so Russian bellicosity could be limited to upgrading their own defences.

However, Russian state TV presenters have previously called for London to be “turned to dust” if Storm Shadow missiles were used in the conflict. And, although such commentary is usually on the wild side and rarely represents official policy, some form of retaliation can never be completely ruled out.

If the result of Sunak’s generosity, therefore, is the transformation of London into a glass-coated car park, it would at least reduce the impact of Khan’s increasingly unpopular ULEZ extension and eliminate the need for LTNs. At about £2.2 million a pop for each missile, though, it seems an extraordinarily expensive way of solving domestic political problems.