According to Raytheon, Stinger will need to be redesigned a bit to have new components in order to restart production, and will take till 2023-24 before production begins to really hit its stride.

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/04/facing-obsolete-parts-raytheon-struggling-to-replace-stingers-sent-to-ukraine/

Whether this will result in a basically identical stinger with new little parts, or an improved stinger, remains to be seen. Also it calls into question whether we will see a new and improved manpad.

Msg 24 of 34 to gatnerdgatnerd

In reply toRe: msg 23

I too would like to see the next step in western MANPAD development, I wonder what technologies could be applied to future MANPADs to make them better, other than just replacing 1980s electronics with 2020s electronics

Msg 25 of 34 to Gr1ff1thGr1ff1th

In reply toRe: msg 24

From: Farmplinker

27/4/22

Honestly, 2020s electronics and production techniques are all Stingers really need. Less manual labor, more automated production.

Msg 26 of 34 to Gr1ff1thGr1ff1th

In reply toRe: msg 24

From: RovingPedant

27/4/22

Imaging seekers and uncooled seekers would be the first two I’d look at. Granted that’s really only applying 4 decades of electronics development, but it would be a fairly big uplift in capability.

Other than that, there are incremental improvements in warheads, propellants and structure that might squeeze some more capability out of it.

Common launchers is an idea that’s been mooted for Stinger/Javelin and arguably implemented with Starstreak/Martlet. I don’t know if common missile would work without being a horrible compromise in either case.

Or you could keep the same capability but make the missile smaller and/or cheaper so they could be used against UAVs without breaking the bank or the infantry’s backs, or make it possible to integrate onto more platforms as a defensive system. Lockheed’s Miniature Hit to Kill system was an idea in that direction.

Going more off-the-the wall could see anti-drone-drones, a swarm of small systems that hang around the item to be defended and can be sent to physically intercept other flying objects, maybe going for nets or impact to avoid UXO issues.

Msg 27 of 34 to RovingPedantRovingPedant

In reply toRe: msg 26

From: roguetechie

27/4/22

The Navy's spike is also an interesting one.

Msg 28 of 34 to roguetechieroguetechie

In reply toRe: msg 27

From: RovingPedant

28/4/22

Yes! That spike is odd as I don’t think it has been accepted to service but keeps being involved in small and interesting tests. I wasn’t aware that it had been tested vs UAVs but if a missile has the kinematics to get to a UAV* then there’s no reason why not. There has been footage of Ukraine using ATGW, their Stugna, against incautious Russian Helicopters hovering.

*Let’s face it, most UAVs are hardly challenging in that regard

Msg 29 of 34 to RovingPedantRovingPedant

In reply toRe: msg 26

From: taschoene

28/4/22

A lot of good points there.

MHTK is really interesting, given the small size and active radar seeker. It's even been proposed in a multi-shot pod suitable for man-portable use.

It might be interesting to see a family of systems approach -- a small interceptor like MHTK for killing Class 1-2 UAS loaded into a multi-round canister that would be interchangeable with a larger single-shot MANPADS that is more of a Stinger replacement for engaging helicopters, low-flying fixed-wing aircraft, and low-flying Class 3 UAS. If it is interchangeable with Javelin, so much the better. Your dedicated air defense launchers can be useful even in a lower air threat environment and your ATGM teams can become a supplemental air defense threat if need be.

In terms of the direct Stinger replacement, adopting some sort of dual-mode seeker (IR/UV plus MHTK-style radar) seems like it would improve countermeasures resistance. And then yes, anything you can to to improve kinematics out of the tube would be good.