Talk:Storm Shadow

message: The "Anglo" in "Anglo-French" as used in this article refers to the UK not England, so I'm changing it accordingly -- Cabalamat 02:15, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: My little contribution to the naming debate, the term "Franco-British" is used in MBDA documentation (although it refers to a procurement summit). I have trouble understanding why products designed by multinational companies should have a nationality, it's not like they needed a passport to cross a border...Corentinoger (talk) 10:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

text: What rot. MBDA in Stevenage (which is in the UK, not France) had a large office building full of engineers working full time for several years on it. Then of course there's the export derivative. You are correct that SS/EG is a DERIVATIVE of a French weapon (APACHE), however the link between Apache and SS/EG is visual only. Every subsystem inside is redesigned. SS has BROACH, APACHE has KRISS. Totally different sort of lethal package. Different mission set altogether.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.86.138.193 (talk) 01:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Except that the seeker, warhead, G&C computer, navigation system, engine, actuators and airframe are different.  Only the external shape of the airframe is in fact common.  It was sold as an evolution of an existing design but is in fact completely different.  And it was developed by MBDA not BAE Systems.  Justin talk 21:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Given what the sources says, it seems Scalp/Storm Shadow are two missile-systems (Mirage/Rafaele and Tornado/Eurofighter) with a lot of shared main components rather than one issile with two names. BP OMowe (talk) 10:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming and nationality

message: The MdCN should have it's own Wikipedia entry.  
There are some significant alterations which differentiate it from the Storm Shadow/Scalp EG cruise missile. 
Based on a French Naval requirement, the MdCN is rocket boosted to cruise speed, it uses a different variant of the powerplant (Microturbo TR50 vs TR40),  MdCN air intake is retractable (as opposed to fixed for Storm Shadow/Scalp EG), it features a different guidance system, and a completely different warhead.
To allow for vertical shipboard launch or underwater launch by submarine (Storm Shadow/Scalp EG is air launched only), the fuselage dimensions were significantly altered.
The end result is a missile with a substantially longer range (1000 KM for submarine launch, 1400 KM for shipboard launch).
https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/apache-ap/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.144.134.26 (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Missile de Croisière Naval

message: The article claims that the final manouver before target acquisition is called a "bunt". But a bunt - as far as I can find - is a negative G manouver... that is to say a pitch downwards and not upwards. Can this please be reworded or shown a source that the manouver is indeed called a "bunt". --J-Star 20:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I didn't add it but I remember reading this term in the RAF Magazine. I would welcome more expert opinion but let me hazard a guess - The missile flies low and then for its attack it climbs rapidly for a final dive onto its target, perhaps the negative G refers to the transition from rapid climb to rapid dive. Mark83 21:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the terminal phase, Storm Shadow pulls up, climbs to altitude and then performs a bunt to dive onto the target.  So the article is in fact correct.  Justin A Kuntz 12:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bunt? 

message: I'm certian that the Harrier GR7/9 is not cleared to use the Storm Shadow, so will remove the reference to this, if no one has any objection.
Ttdjp 20:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're correct MBDA's own page lists the aircraft types and Harrier isn't there. Justin A Kuntz 12:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harrier 

message: Note sure this section is completely correct
This semi-autonomous flight and dual-stage warhead make the missile unique among cruise missiles. ... but lacks the target-acquisition ....
Depending on the version Tomahawk has DSMAC which confers an ATR capability in the terminal phase.  Also JASSM has a terminal seeker capability.  Justin A Kuntz 19:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you'll find JASSM does have a bunt capability for certain targets.  Justin talk 00:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomahawk 

message: I 've heard that the French missiles are only carried by Rafale/Mirage 2000-5 Mk 2. Is this true?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.251.240.62 (talk) 14:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SCALP-EG/Storm Shadow: A different weapon?

message: Why does 'Storm Shadow' come to this article instead of the more popular GI Joe character who was an established character decades before this missle?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by IrwinRShyster (talk • contribs) 08:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please define more popular, anyway rather than remove the artical (which is what your edits did). You could have moved the page, and the talk page, to Storm Shadow (missile)  and then created a Disambiguation page for both Bihco (talk) 08:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storm Shadow (GI Joe) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Storm Shadow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/stormshadow.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:11, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "has a maximum body diameter of 48 centimetres (19 in) and a wingspan of 3 metres (120 in)."
Does it not have a length?
Or is this a glaring omission indicative of the editorial quality of an anyone's-an-editor encyclopaedia substitute? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.56.45 (talk) 
:No, it was intentionally left out to draw sarcastic drive-by comments. Glad we succeeded. - BilCat (talk) 07:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length? 

message: A source from defense-newshttps://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/08/01/a-jet-sale-to-egypt-is-being-blocked-by-a-us-regulation-and-france-is-over-it/ date August 1, 2018 states that the Scalp sale to Egypt was blocked by the US through ITAR, and another source from defense-worldhttps://www.defenseworld.net/news/22882/France_Receives_US_OK_for_Export_of_Scalp_Missiles_to_Egypt#.YBMlvOgzaUk date July 9, 2018 states that France received the OK from the US to export the missile to Egypt... but the source from defense-news (posted 1 month after the defense-world article) states "we cannot get the U.S. to lift its opposition to the sale of Scalp missiles" .... so, what's going on? did the US agree to the sale or not?Wasteland1 (talk) 21:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Egypt's Scalp sale 

message: Just as a note, although I found substantiation of this report on BulgarianMilitary.com, a generally trustworthy source, I am growing more skeptical about it.  The information may be a lift from a rumor posted a few days earlier on a well known Telegram Russian milblogger channel. There are further repetitions from non citable sources eg twitter and other blog sites, as well as untrustworthy sites known to publish Russian disinformation (avia-pro.net).  A ukraine friendly blogger on reddit cited a report on what appears to be a fake site here, and the post was taken down as citing a non reliable source.  It was elsewhere claimed that the report is only a rumor, (for example on on this blog).  As of this time, there is no official statement (either denying or affirming) or other reliable sources on this item so if there is nothing corroborating from a reliable source in the next week, I will remove what I added on the Ukraine report.J JMesserly (talk) 19:33, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think technically it is possible provided the SCALP is programmed on the ground and the carrier is just ferrying it to the launch point. There may be some additional spoofing to make the carrier think it is a different weapon. I doubt it would be more difficult than HARM integration, no signal lock needs to be confirmed as in HARM. If it requires any sort of translation hardware it is likely well within the capabilities of a lot of FPGAs.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Talk pages aren't for theories and general discussion. Mark83 (talk) 08:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish integration work on Ukrainian SU-24 

message: reference/source for Mikoyan MiG 29 as launch platform?
Or anyone can add anything without reference? 83.99.198.116 (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's too heavy for the max pylon weight of Ukraines early MiG-29s. It's most likely either Su-27 or more likely Su-24. Not sure who added MiG-29 or where they got that info from. 159.196.12.87 (talk) 22:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  reference/source for Mikoyan MiG 29 as launch platform? 

message: "Wreckage of a Storm Shadow shot by Russian forces over Ukraine" should probably be "shot *down* by" 94.207.79.254 (talk) 15:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It should probably be "crash landed over Ukraine", as there are no independent reports that this has been shot down. --11:47, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image caption