In a Norwegian fjord inside the Arctic Circle, the ‘Surveillance and Reconnaissance Squadron’ launched small teams from an Astute class submarine for ‘subsurface insertion’ missions.
Their aim say the Royal Navy? Reconnaissance missions on the rocky, icy shoreline in sub-zero temperatures while avoiding the multi-national ‘enemy’ force hunting them.
“The Surveillance and Reconnaissance Squadron – drawn from Plymouth-based 30 Commando Information Exploitation Group – is a specialist team of commandos who forge the way ahead for their fellow green berets to follow.
They are trained to gather valuable information on the terrain, the enemy and suitable beach landing places for larger amphibious forces to come ashore, arriving by ski, snowmobile, boat, all-terrain vehicles, helicopter or parachute, depending on the situation and environment.”
The SRS team leader explained:
“Being able to move sub-surface gives us a discreet means of moving our specialist teams to any coastline in the world. Not only can we conduct operations in isolation but by accessing and reconnoitring these complex coastlines by small craft we can set the conditions for larger, more lethal follow on forces.”
Commodore Jim Perks, the head of the RN Submarine Service, was quoted as saying:
“The ability to operate undetected for significant periods of time with top quality kit ensures that a submarine remains a formidable delivery mechanism, in this case enabling the covert deployment of the Surveillance and Reconnaissance team as showcased in the exercises off Norway. Our ability to work together highlights the remarkable attributes of the team and the platforms in which we operate.”
You can read more here.
Brrrr. That would be cold
During the 60s the US had the USS Seaview which had a flying sub which could be used to drop off troops on the QT, meanwhile 60 years later the Royal Navy uses rubber dingies.
Cue pinging sound
Ha ha – very, good.
Quality programme though.
Love Seaview, getting the model.
Was never convinced that the flying sub had the capacity to accomodate an adequate number of troops without upsetting its CoG. I agree a useful bit of kit in the recce role though. And a cool colour scheme.
Those two blokes in the rubber dinghy are sure going to scare the s*** out of those damn Ruskies!
Especially if they turn up outside Sevastopol on a dark night with limpet mines…
That’ll be the SBS mate.
That’s not their job though is it it’s what follows them that does that. And let’s hope the Ruskies are equally blind as you seem to be missing the 4 in the other dingy, plenty enough to do their prescribed job.
Ouch!
So its not sub surface delivery which would be really sneaky But conning and casing sticking out with a Gemini on the arse end infa red and night vision by the opponent would have seen and targeted them little dit we had infrared night shoulder sighting during Granby before anyone says differently wasn’t fun having on your sholder it was charged too 2000 psi
One $40,000 NLAW should do the trick.
Do you think the Ukrainians would sell us one back Rob 🚀
I think we would get it back in one way or another!
Give a Thing take a thing ,that’s a Devils plaything as my late mother would say Rob
In a real war would they have an SSN spare or risk one that close to shore to surface to do it? I understand they can use a chamber to get a team out whilst submerged , or use a small submersible that sits piggy back.
It is probably the sole area that an SSK has an advantage, smaller and far cheaper for that sort of mission.
Bet that chills the extremities
Good question. I’d assume not, however at the same time I think it important to have this capability and train in its use. Especially as it could easily be used outside of a hot war scenario or in a hot war scenario not directly involving the UK (such as Ukraine).
Cockleshell hero’s been there done that. 21st century, and we are putting ‘commando’s’ ashore in rubber dinghies… really?
In a real conflict I can’t see a billion pound 7,000 ton SSN surfacing to land Royal Marines!
Id think it was more to do with a slow time training ex carried out in a sheltered bay during daylight hours on a calm day in which to allow the participants to practice at leaving a sub. I suspect in real life, the sub wouldn’t enter a fjord during a time of tension, and neither would the sub surface to drop blokes off and then there is this which allows a number of men covered from head to toe in rubber to squeeze themselves into a small wet dark hole which craps them out at an ungodly hour in the middle of nowhere.
This is the Mi6 swimmer deliver vehicle
😆
Well James was a CDR C.D .Officer ,and this does beat congestion charges whilst in Londo if going up the Thames Davey
During the later years of The Second World War ,the RN used the Xcraft used against the Tirpitz, DDay beach reconasonce, and against the Japanese at Singapore Should have kept a branch in the silent service I know we have a rescue submersible but any cloack and dagger vessels or is that a need too know bases
I think we should have at least a couple of SSK’s and see how that works out. It would be the littoral where they would come into their own. Operate them in conjunction with other NATO navies for support. My Mum was on Admiral Ramsay’s staff at Southwick for D Day, just saying.
Thanks Jonno you must be really proud of your Mum , we never hear of the Backstage Actors who dreamt up such a massive operation , never in the limelight always in the shadows , one other thing had a draft to Dolphin when the P and Os were coming too the end of their adventures and Upholder class were about too come into service What a Whitehall cluster fxxx those Boats could have continued in a sneaky capacity But no the RN shall have an all Nuclear submarine service at a price compared too SSKs a fraction of a Nuke
@challenger said he could not imagine a submarine, surfacing to drop off Royal.
With the few we have, i can’t imagine RN embarking any Royal.
You are giving the Russians way too much credit.
Little kit and demotivated men.
The Royal Marines would mop them up. As usual there are lefty Brits on here enjoying knocking their own nation. They are the 5th column.
Seems to me to be a dangerous job for an SSN. I do like the Swedish concept for their A-26 submarine and its Multi Mission Portal, basically an extra large torp tube for divers. I do wonder if the UK could get some of these AIP subs together with Sweden, we could possibly get five for the price of two SSNs. With three 6 round VLS modules for Tomahawk, four torp tubes and a Multi Mission Portal with a possible SBS carrier submersible boat it would prove a useful addition to the fleet if operated in the waters of Northern Norway. That would leave the SSNs to do their job of hunting in the deep blue. Possibly if we could build six of these we could build them in the UK with help from Sweden. I know I know money, money money.
Let think about things realistically, is an SSN of 7,500 tons suitable for North Sea, Baltic, Norwegian waters or for that matter the Med a suitable platform. The next class will likely be about 9,000 tons. Is an Astute suitable for sneeky SBS operations, or to operate on a continental shelf. I would not use them in these roles an SSN needs space, depth, it needs to hunt. In shallow or confined waters it is hemed in, it is the diffrence of hunting a Jaguar in the jungle or hunting a jaguar in a safari park. Already in the safari park the Jaguar is at a disadvantage.
So my suggestion for the submarine fleet for the Royal Navy would be 4 SSBNs, 8 SSNs, 6 A-26 Oceanic with two 6 round VLS SBS carrier and MMP and 3 Oceanic Extended Range with three 6 round VLS SBS carrier and MMP, four would be better due to refit and repair needs.
What does this mean for operations, well one SSN could escort the SSBN, one SSN for a carrier group and three SSNs hunting in the deep blue, three undergoing work up, refit and the oldest of class Perisher training. The three/four A-26 ERs could be stationed of Northern Norway/Russia 10 days transit, 30 days on station ten days return. So one goes out and then the second follows 40 days later. The other 6 A-26s could operate in the GIUK gap, around Scotland/N. Ireland to protect the entrance to the SSBN base, North Sea or the Baltic. Or based in Gib for the Med or Oman for the Persian Gulf.
It is as far as I know only the US, UK and France that has a pure SSN fleet. The Franch subs are much smaller about half the weight of a Astute and the US has ten time the numbers of the RN.
So, yes this would be expensive, probably about £8 billion for the extra SSN and the A-26s but with that we will have the capability to operate on the continental shelf at will and hunt in the deep blue. It would also take some of the pressure off our limited surface fleet. Oh and remove Tomahawk missiles from the SSNs, they should have anti ship missiles and torpedos only.
So apart from who is going to pay for it or the comments on fantisy fleet what do you think of these numbers and ideas. Would it be better to have more Type 26 frigates, for an SSN a ship is nothing more than a target. A ship operatates in an area a sub in a cube or four times the area. Do we want or need or afford more SSNs that should not operate in confined waters. Or a mixed sub fleet, possibly sub heavy with hopefully 24 surface combat ships and 18 attack subs. By the way an AIP sub when it goes quite is much more quite than a SSN, they can be real sneeky sons of a …
I keep coming up with the result that the RN needs an extra £20 billion in new ship construction over and above what it currently has or planned. This would give the T26, T31 and planned T83; four 30,000 ton LHDs, eight T32s based on the Damen crossover, six MRSS, one extra SSN, nine A-26 type subs O and O-ER types, upgrades to T45 and upgrades to T31. If I had my way I would also include the replacement for the P2000 class with 10 Hamina type fast attack missile boats to operate with the T31s on a 1+2 squadron concept.
That would give a combat fleet of 2 carriers, 4 LHDs, 6 DDGs, 8 T26, 5 T31, 8 T32, 8 SSN, 10 AIP, 6 MRSS, 4 Tides and 3 FSSS (+possibly 10 Hamina Type). Each LHD should be able to land an armoured battlegroup, the T32s would have the weapons of a frigate but able to land 100 Royal Marines (see Damen Crossover) and the MRSS could or should land 250 Royal Marines. The LHD should be designed to operate 6 F35s and 16-20 helicopters. A carrier group would have a SSN, 2 DDGs and 3 T26s, a LHD assault group would have 2 T32s. At full combat readyness that would give two carrier battlegroups, four amphibious assault groups or combining each carrier group with two LHD groups and you have a powerful assault force, combine two assault forces and you have a combined force of almost 100 F35s, 70 helicopters and 6,000 men, tanks, mobile artillery etc coming over the beach. Only superpowers would be able to deal with that type of flanking move. The T31s or T31s+Hamina Type would operate on policeing independent operations.
Question to think about, with that type of capability would Argintina tried to take the Falklands? No, many ships would have been saved, many lives would have been either not snuffed out or injured, and in monetry terms billions would have been saved to the treasury. That is the cost of defence, not the short term on saving but the long term on stopping nations think they can.
Yes again I know money money money, yet Germany is giving a 100 billion euro one of investment paid by credit plus an increase from 1.3% to 2%+ now. Thats a further 20 billion euro per year. Many other countries are increasing their expenditure by 0.5% GDP, Canada is planning 15 T26 variants plus 88 F35s. Think about Canada for a second, a nation with a population about half the size of the UK that does not need to survive on the sea lanes will have a surface combat fleet almost the same size. So what I am suggesting is that the UK government gives a one off investment over and above current investmant of £50 billion over a ten year period written into law, also the law should also include an increase of defence expenditure of 2.75%-3% GDP for defence, plus a year on year increase of inflation plus 0.2%. This one of investment would be broken done as follows £20 billion for the RN/RM, £17 billion for the RAF and £13 billion for the army. All new equipment must be either built in the UK or have a min of 30% British build. Over ten years thats £5 billion extra per year, when you think on how much we wasted on PPE. Possibly a new law could be made in that new MoD equipment such as tanks, planes ships do not pay VAT that would save the 20% paid on the equipment meaning an overall increase in buying power. Again I know trhe government has given a one of investment but really is that an investment or just to cover a black hole.
We are now in a situation where we are facing a new superpower China and a want to be superposer Russia. The peace dividand has gone. So we have to either invest or and I don’t want to say it leave the SSBN defence for convential forces.
There is off course another way the UK starts building again, we are a nation of engineers, techs, mechs, lets build things that people and nations want. That way our ballance of payments will be better. This area I know, I went to the Army Apprentice College Harrogate Royal Signals, when I left the Army I thought about going to BT well that did not work. So I worked for Telefunken, then became site manger, worked in Poland, USA, Saudi, Oman, Czechoslvakia, Russia, Ukraine and many others. Also been in situations where we are sending you there but if something happens we dont know you (the only thing missing was the tape recorder going on fire). Done pre investment studies for HMG. Worked my way up to senior project manger for national networks. Given presentations at international confrences, adviced governments on their next steps, adviced the international world on mobile billing, the international contact for MOU 21 (international roaming regulations). Yet when I returned to the Uk I again tried to fill out the BT online CV for the postion of a comms engineer however the box for University I could not fill so it kept rejected me. When I am seeing Ukratel and Vodaphone ( I know it as UMC) networks in Ukraine doing its job (in fact I think I am the only West European that ever worked inside the Ukrainian national bank, God did that cause some issues, security passport etc), I built the damned thing, not all of it but I fought for the design even if it cost more due to fall out capability, (everything and anything from 450-1800). I desisgned it with backup on the back up. Yet here back at home in the country I was trained I cannot fill out a cv because I went to an Army Apprentices College and not an Uni. SO it appears to me that the issue is what is expected or wanted, we have gone from a nation of building to service. A nation from experiance to a nation of paperwork. I remeber working in Poland as a senior project manger, we had a new director a Brit he was some CEO of the old BBC computer company, he asked me or said Oh your my project manager so you have a Prince 2, totally confussed with what the hell is a Prince 2 he then said I am not quilified. He was sacked about one week latter. I checked Prince 2 a weekend course and £1000, my course class 2 army, class 1 army fieled tech Germany, fieled Eng, Germany, Site eng, area eng, consultant, project manger, this does not include the periods of writing RFPs, contact negotiations in several diffrent langauges, or equipment training in the US, Germany, France Slovakia and god knows where else. Who the hell was this guy, what did he know of the countries law that he was coming into.
I was always taught that service is a nice to have but the building is the bread and butter. Maybe we should go back to bread and butter, service is not paying the nations bills.
SO after what might seem like a rant and if so I am sorry, but my overall thinking is this, is it a good idea for an Astute to come to the surface hell no. Should we build some AIP subs possibly with the Swedes yes. Should we increase in real terms the MoD budget yes. Should the RN have AIP subs yes and should the UK government give a one of extra budget of £50 billion for equipment with a increase to 2.75%-3%GDP + rate of inflation to cover manpower cost operational cost etc yes. Does the government need to invest into building things again for overseas sales yes. Germany builds and has a possitive ballace, we invented the industrial age. Put it a diffrent way, name me one British car company, train engine company, aircraft company, washing machine company. To have a good defence we must make money for the government to invest.
In ideal world there could be a few subs for these roles, Dropping in marines, real sneaky stuff. If we are taking up our role in nato which looks like we do Norway and the Baltic’s some subs for these areas would be welcomed. Has to be able to carry the dry deck and the underwater kit. The diesel boats are quite expensive these days. Much smaller crew tho. Up until Ukraine I was never a fan and would of said nuclear boats were needed. The Royal Navy really needs both and as nuclear boats aren’t going to happen anytime soon so that only leaves conventional subs. 4 diesel boats could be a good addition. Partner with Sweden or Germany/Norway hopefully dropping the price across the board. Free the nuclear boats up for other roles.
Then if we don’t want them after some time maybe Canada will take them or someone else.
I’m not saying replace nuclear boats this would be in addition to.
Never going to happen. Can’t even get cheaper ships for the RFA to replace the ever shrinking fleet
Monkey Spanker, Hi. This is my point, would I like to see an RN with 12-15 SSNs yeep but I also must think on cost, areas of operation and types of operation. I keep coming up with a minimum of 8 SSNs and 9-10 AIPs. As we have not built any AIPs or SSKs basicaly non nucs for many years then I looked at what is suitable in needs requirements and nations that we oprate with. Sweden seems to be the best of these nations in the AIP designs. As for our limited SSNs if we could get some AIP subs it would leave them to do the job they are designed for hunt and kill.
12 nuclear boats shouldn’t be a massive stretch as this is what was used before. Only way I can see it happening is for the 12 to be ordered after dreadnoughts are out the way. I would try and speed the dreadnoughts up if possible and get started on attack subs ASAP. Australia needs them ASAP also. Really depends if they are going for Virginia or not. If a joint program with the Aussies could be agreed that would be 20 boats.
On the subject of our British Commandos, for those who have not seen it,Google 1899-1902 The Legend of the Boer Fighter showing amazing colourised photos of Boer combatants who were the original Kommandos. Turn up the volume and watch this stunning piece of history
Thank you Geoff for sharing that link. Great footage.
Pleasure Emjay. They were hardy men and an adversary to be admired. It was a tragic and unnecessary conflict that created strong feelings of bitterness that linger in some quarters to this day
I realise this was only an excercise but in real terms surely such a scarce and highly precious asset like an Astute would never be put at risk in such a low end venture. In the days of mini subs and plentiful diesel units it would be a different story
Give a thing , take a thing .That’s a Devils plaything so my Late mother would say
All these little specialist groups confuse me. Isnt this a primary role of the SBS? Scouting ahead of landings?
There are non SF units in the military that can do this, by land, sea, or air.
148 and 4/73 are examples.
Why use Tier 1 SF for when they can be used on other strategic tasks.
Hello Daniele!
Afternoon!
She’s trimmed down aft! Wow. I guess that acts like a kind of ‘beach’ for the dinghies?
The weight of those four hefty matelots?😂
Would it be possible for the UK to licence-build an existing diesel/AIP/SSK design? Similiar to the Type 31. A26? 216? The 216 design has vertical tubes, could be used for commando delivery.
Might they be covertly deployed in certain waters of the Black Sea? Crimea, etc….