Warships from Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway are the latest visitors to Glasgow after a Polish frigate and Belgian minehunter visited last week.
The vessels are in Glasgow following the completion of this year’s Joint Warrior exercise, which ran from the 1st to 12th of October.
“Joint Warrior is a UK-led biannual multinational joint and combined exercise that includes 45 ships, 30 aircraft, submarines, land forces, and more than 11,000 troops from the UK, NATO, and Allies. It runs from Oct. 1-12 off the coast of the British Isles.”
Below is a video, hosted on Twitter, that I recorded of the arrival of Norwegian frigate HNoMS Roald Amundsen, Danish ocean patrol vessel Vaederren and Dutch frigate HNLMS Tromp today.
The exercise involved 45 ships, 30 aircraft, as well as submarines, sailors, soldiers and aircrew from Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
NATO say here that the aim of Joint Warrior 22-2 is “to provide a complex environment in which the participants can train together, honing tactics and skills in preparation for deployment as a Combined Joint Task Force”.
Participating nations include Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. You can read more about the exercise here.
I also photographed the arrival of Norwegian frigate HNoMS Roald Amundsen, Danish ocean patrol vessel Vaederren and Dutch frigate HNLMS Tromp.
Previously, as part of preparations ahead of the now concluded Exercise Joint Warrior, Belgian minehunter Bellis and Polish frigate ORP General Tadeusz Kościuszko visited the City of Glasgow.
You can see images of the Polish frigate and Belgian minesweeper at the link above.
What’s the chances that there will be more ballistic threats being used this year?
? On NATO forces/soil? Virtually zero, unless Mad Vlad truly has a death wish. Sleepy Joe just assured us Vlad is rational. Personally, wouldn’t wager the farm on that proposition…🤔😳
No, in the context as part of the exercise scenario. Normally the main incoming threats are aircraft or cruise missiles. Just thinking if the planners have factored in ballistic missile threats. As the Ukraine war has shown Russia likes using them against both strategic and civilian targets.
Understood. Wow, a complete swing and a miss on my part. 🤔🤯🙄
We kinda have to wager the farm. Not a whole lot of options, if we strike first because scared he is mad, then we risk the strike not fully working and nuclear armegedon happening.
Are we talking Russia or Westminster?
Maybe it’s the time to start rehearsing the seasonal tunes, something along the lines of:- “It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like – Italy?”
The De Zeven class frigates are still the most beautiful frigates ever designed.
Hopefully the Nansen frigates are more careful on their way home this year.
What a delightful looking berth that is, welcome to the UK!
something going on perhaps? or just a jolly gets to gether lol
Nice images.
Get them out of my city.Warmongers.
No.
Please explain how they are warmongers?
How is it your city? I was born there, is it mine as well?
They spend money to help your economy along so a plus for you.
With using the term “warmonger” Do you think with what Russia and China are currently doing western nations in NATO should not make port visits or show increased readiness?
I’m not even sure where to begin. I’m assuming you’re jesting. But if not, I would be interested in why you think that it’s warmongering. Here’s how I see it…
I see it like a fence protecting a farm.
A fence provides protection, security and establishes boundaries. Boundaries for which rules can be applied to.
Without a fence, the wolves get in.
For the UK, we have a multifaceted ‘fence’ in the form of our armed forces, political clout, NATO membership, heck even the fact that we’re an island creates a physical boundary.
So to me, these warships in one of our cities shows what a small part of our fence looks like today. The fact that other nations have their warships there too shows me that we aren’t the only farm out there. There are other like-minded farms with their own fences in place… and together we share advice and train together on what makes a good fence. How can we reinforce it? What happens when wolves are on the prowl… or they start looking for holes and vulnerabilities?
I like my fence. Could it be bigger? Could it be more modern? Could it learn from others? Are there wolves at the gates? Or hiding in the nearby woods?Yes.
When ships come to port, it’s a showcase, not just for potential adversaries, but also to instill hope in those within the fence, that there is something there to protect them. And this is a great opportunity for people to come and see it up close, ask questions and understand why people give their lives to serve the people and keep the fence posts strong.
A good fence costs money, but I’d rather spend money on a good fence than suffer the consequences of having it collapse. A collapsed fence costs more than its monetary value to replace.
But there is a balance. Don’t neglect the fence at the expense of what you’re trying to protect. And don’t neglect what you’re trying to protect at the expense of the fence.
Have a nice afternoon all
M@
Well put.
Yes, as Ian says. But I feel with these “Drive by Shootings” they post and clear off. Some people live in a parallel world but will be 1st in the queue wanting the military to protect their “way of life” if it comes to it.
Hi,this is nothing personal,but I assure you,I’m not joking.NATO has never been a force for good.They wrecked a perfectly functioning Libya from end to end,a country whose populace had a standard of living comparable and in alot of cases better than some western democracies,by using the Gaddafi bogeyman trick,to basically Rob the country of its oil.Belgrade in 1992 was r duced to rubble by NATO warplanes,even the extremely provocative action of bombing the Chinese embassy.USA led NATO has over 700 bases in 80 countries across the globe.Thats not defensive,it’s offensive.Also the invasions of sovereign nations such as Iraq,attacked on a lie about WMD.And the meddling in other countries domestic affairs ,usually carried out by the CIA.Chile and Nicaragua come to mind.Wlso the 60 years old Cuban blockade.The refusal to acknowledge the plight of the Palestinians and Yemenis.Doing arms deals with the utterly corrupt Saudi regime.I could go on all day.ive been around a while,and my eyes and ears aren’t painted on guys.Im not a confrontational person,but I don’t like being lied to either
Thanks Eamonn, no nothing personal taken at all! In fact I really appreciate that you’ve replied and kept it above board. Too many times on forums such as this people jump to aggressive and non-constructive comments. You point out some interesting topics of conversation.
I will say this, I agreed with going into Afghanistan post 9/11. But the whole WMD in Iraq… Based on a fictional report… never have I been so disappointed in my government and that of the US. I also don’t like being lied to.
Every nation on earth has skeletons in the closet and some cast longer shadows than others.
Circling back to warships doing a port visit after a joint exercise (while Russia violates Ukrainian territory) is not warmongering in my opinion.
You have your opinion and I have mine. Luckily we live in a country where we can post conflicting arguments and actually have a discussion about things without fear of authorities and regimes hunting us down. For me, joint exercises with allies is a good thing. There is a large world out there and not all of it good. Are we good? What defines good? As civilians it is our duty to stand up if we think our government is in the wrong. But what about when we think other governments are wrong? Step in? Igore it? Wait and see what happens? Live and let live? Unfortunately the power of hindsight is always out of grasp.
And I’ve waffled on for far too long for this topic.
You have your opinion, I have mine. I would rather be a part of NATO than on the outside… so long as it remains a collective defence organisation but ever mindful of what’s going on in the world.
Thank you
M@
Just for reference the Libyan campaign was actual a UN operation , un resolution 1973. NATO forces were asked by the UN to enforce this resolution, the resolution was put in place to prevent a potential genocide, No member of the UN Security Council voted against the resolution or request from the UN for NATO to enforce the resolution.
As for Iraq NATO had no involvement or decision making in the second Iraq war. It was a collation of individual nations, some of them were nato nations. Let’s review the context, this was to remove a regime that had actually used weapons of mass destruction on whole villages/towns. So actually the UN should have acted way before to remove this regime. The regime also refused to acknowledge or proved evidence that it had dismantled its Weapons of mass destruction programme…. hindsight is a lovely thing…but in really this regime had crossed a line well before the US lead coalition removed him. My issue was always about what happened after.
The only thing that happened in Belgrade in 1992 was the Olympics…I’m not sure that can be classed as a NATO action. If your are actually talking about the 1999 air interdiction that was to prevent an ongoing genocide in Europe..you may have forgotten all the mass graves.
so sorry you really need to be reading some actually evidenced based material and not just Repeat Conspiracy theories you have seen on some online Ecco chamber ( the irony of me posting this on an online eco chamber lol).
So glad I’m on the inside of the fence and not on the outside! I feel sorry for those on the outside.
14 NATO countries and Finland (Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, the United Kingdom) have agreed a joint procurement project for air defence dubbed European Sky Shield. The idea is that they would each procure a national air defence system from a short list of options but that they would all be compatible and hence form a wider integrated European air defense network.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_208103.htm
Poland, France, Italy and Spain notable exceptions this seems firmly on a Northern Europe to Central Europe axis. Germany is the lead and will provide the bulk of the financing for the initiative.
I wonder if this is the start of finally getting some much needed GBAD coverage for certain UK mainland sites?
Morning Danielle – back in the day when Britain had a well organised military industrial complex, the Bristol Bloodhound missile was intended to protect the RAF’s V bomber bases to preserve the deterrent force, attacking Russian bombers that made it past RAF Lightning jets.
Developed in the 50’s and deployed in the 90’s this ADS ran to several Mk’s, was widely exported and was considered an excellent system until the Russians developed countermeasures to radar painting guidance systems.
I am appalled that the MoD has allowed GBAD to wither, whatever happened to the excellent UKADGE we had during the cold war
Morning David. GBAD withered as with all the endless cuts since the Cold Wars end and a move to an expeditionary posture the MoD experts ( they do exist! They are the Threat Assessement folk at DI ) decided the risk was low to the UK ( it was, for decades ) and so those assets were let go.
“whatever happened to the excellent UKADGE we had during the cold war”
The answer is, its infrastructure is mostly still there! The UKADGE is now the ASCS “Air Surveillance and Control System” and it is in the process of being upgraded.
I can list you what is missing from late 80s, early 90s as comparison. Missing is in Bold.
Radar Sites – Known as RPs “Reporting Posts. All still in place except for Bishops Court in N Ireland. Portreath, Trimmingham, Staxton Wold, Brizlee Wood, Benbecula, Buchan, Saxa Vord all remain.
The ASCS communications infrastructure with varied LINK and UHF VHF systems connecting it all are still all at various sites I won’t bother to list, but Anthony and Weyborne are two.
CRCs “Control Reporting Centres” in R3 bunkers at Buchan, Boulmer and Neatishead with as “Standby” at Ash were reduced in 2004 to 2 2 sites, Boulmer, and a facility at Scampton. RAF Neatishead remains with some MoD infrastructure but is no longer a CRC.
HQs – RAF 11 Group, UKADOC – The UK Air Defence Operations Centre at High Wycombe is still in place at Naphill, at the “Ops Site” of the station, and now the NADOC. The “Standby” at Bentley Priory was bulldozed.
Fighter Squadrons – We know what has happened to the RAFs Fast Jet fleet. But at that time No 11 Group RAF had 7 Tornado F3 Sqns and 2 Phantom Sqns.
2 Sqns at Leuchars, 3 at Leeming, 2 at Coningsby, 2 at Wattisham. The Lightning was being phased out by the mid 80s and only 1 Sqn at Binbrook survived, and Binbrook was a dated station without the others enhancements, like HAS.
All the other 4 stations are still MoD, all still have the infrastructure in place. Those not used for flying could be reused, such as dispersal.
GBAD. All gone as we are lamenting. but at that time RAF Leuchars and RAF Lossimouth had a Rapier Squadron. The RAF stations used by USAFE had 4 Rapier Squadrons, and as you say the Bloodhound Squadrons were arrayed on the east coast from the Humber to Bawdsey Manor.
Linked to 11 Group UKADGE was the UKWMO and the RAF ROC, Cold War entities that disbanded, though the UKWMO role obviously still exists but in smaller scope. For example, there is a Home Office Warning Liaison Officer at the NADOC which is the National Warning Centre linked to Fylingdales and BMEWS, but I’m going off on a tangent there.
We still have an effective AD System David. What is missing is a GBAD element and hopefully that will now be addressed.
Many thanks Daniele – I thought you would have the historical info at your fingetips – maybe you could write a book about the decline and fall of the British military post cold war
I could, but I would not as the cuts have been far too extensive and I have been pissed off at every defence review 91, 95, 97, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2019.
Still, I try to see the positives, which are many.
What would be interesting to know is how much the defence budget would have to be had the U.K. tried to keep what it had numbers wise? The repeated cuts to bring savings never really seemed to save that much.
The U.K. tried to keep everything high end with no low end.
The cuts post Cold War, that is the 91 Options for Change, were justified.
The cuts after, from Front Line First in 95 to Labours 1st effort, the 1997 SDSR, were not. SDSR 97 was at least well thought out and IF IMPLEMENTED was a good baseline.
Issue was Blair and Brown talked lots but did not resource it and the wars in the Middle East added to the problem.
So post 91 numbers I’d think are unaffordable, but 97 numbers were more realistic. 35 Escorts, 10 SSN, 23 Fast Jet Sqns. That number of fast jets squadrons would surely mean a high low mix now with the cost of these modern jets.
Army was fine at just over 100,000.
My feeling is also the 97 was right. Even now it still seems roughly right for what is needed to play our part in the world.
I’m not sure why the governments have repeatedly failed to understand that if you want to have overseas locations, be an enforcer of the rule of the seas, be 1 of 5 members of the UN Security Council ( which is basically to cover the whole world), large role in nato etc etc that requires a larger than average defence force.
They shrink the defence assets while increasing the responsibility.
Blair/brown were guilty of not proceeding with what was needed and then got very distracted with conflicts which took a lot out of the defence spending.
Yes I can accept that. The review made all the right noises, but so did the last one. It’s why I pull up posters on here going on about Tory cuts like they’re the only game in town. They’re ALL guilty, repeatedly,and collectively responsible for the lack of assets across the board.
However, “defence” means different things. You might have noticed I’m a big fan of the intelligence community/arena as an equally vital part of defence. I was studying the 2019 to 2021 ISC Intelligence Security Commitee report the other day, and looking all told at numbers, there are now around 15,000 people in it, non military. Compare that to the size of the infantry, which I recall here we were trying to gauge it’s size. Not too dissimilar. Intelligence IS a growth area, but it gets little comment or interest here.
I study that area as much as the military.
I think it’s best the intelligence services stay under the radar. Seems to keep them safer from cuts etc.
It’s a bit of a “we do an important job but you wouldn’t understand role”.
With that though it has to be backed up with hard power when needed.
Knowing what the enemy is up to is vital to use your forces properly.
Poland are already well on the way to having a national air defence system. France will do their usual patriotic locally designed/manufactured purchase.
Understand situation w/ Poland and France. So do Spain and Italy think they are immune to ballistic missiles, or just feel like rolling the dice? 🤔
I think Spain has USN AB DDGs with ABM standard missles stationed permanently there as USAs contribution to European NATO defences. Also operates standard/Aegis on its warships, not sure if they are ABM versions.
Hmmm…ok, will stipulate USN 6th Fl. has standing tasking to provide ABM coverage to as large a proportion of NATO territory as feasible 24/7, 365. Keyword–feasible. Could easily envision scenarios wherein DDGs, movable assets, are stripped out of the 6th to reinforce the 7th in the SCS. Believe it is a corollary of one of Murphy’s Laws of War that any asset one is absolutely counting on is unavailable at precisely that moment. NATO governments may be more comforted by land-based, fixed site coverage, as opposed to the mobile, migratory variety. Just musing…🤔
BMD on a AB is limited. The vessel is constrained to a very small area of the sea when doing it and it can only cover a relatively small area .
The UK could opt for a sea based BMD but we only have 6 type 45s and the RN rightly states the ships mission is providing air defence over a task force.
So unless we are building type 83 imminently that leaves only ground based. A land version of Aster 30NT based on Sampson radar technology is the obvious solution. But to cover most of the uk we would need probably 10-12 batteries. Thats quite a lot of radars and missile systems to purchase, operate, update and service….crucially manpower for those 10-12 batteries. You’re looking at 1500+ personnel.
The UK has been recklessly negligent regarding ABM defence. I’d hope Ukraine would be a wake up call but the ability of HMG to ignore the threat to avoid spending what’s necesary seems far far greater than doing the responsible thing.
Absolutely, basing it on our 6 T45s is high risk regarding their necessary deployments elsewhere, maintainance & of course battle damage or losses. But we need to move on from having nothing at all.
They already have, years ago- they adapted Aster for ground launch. In this instance, they went ahead with something when no one else was interested, and have a capability now that everyone else in Europe is scratching around for.
SAMP/T
Hope the UK doesn’t lose out with any CAMM/EX type land/sea projects with Poland or even Aster NG upgrades with this program. Understand the need for systems integration-interoperability and a AD/ABM shield. Sweden is missing here and even Iceland anyone?
Iceland doesnt spend any money on defence, it has no army or navy instead relying on its coast guard for maritime protection and the US for air defence. It does fund four radar stations for the benefit of the US though I believe, these come out of the coast guard budget.
To be fair to them, France and Italy (I think) already have Aster 15/30 ground launched systems to provide national air defence, and they’re intending to upgrade them to have further ABM capability via the Block1/NT if I recall.
They don’t necessarily need to be directly involved in new purchases if they already have a system- probably just peripherally to make sure their stuff integrates.
Just what is needed for the UK. Tactical systems for the Army but the RN already has the expertise using them and as long as they are kept up to date (MOD has a poor record of that of late as we see) then they will last a long time. Shared system cross over with those in Europe a must to share the cost etc etc. But since that is using common sense we know it will not happen. 🙁
Sampson’s upgrade is going ahead?
Sea Ceptor had an upgrade recently?
Aster is due an upgrade from mixed 15/30 to all 30 which would include some other upgrades. When Sea Ceptor is fitted to T45.
The point of RN having a few really good systems is that there is budget to keep them current?
I see HMS Queen Elizabeth returned to Portsmouth Thursday afternoon.
As much as I approve the European missile defence scheme I can see troubles ahead. Germany who seem to be pushing the concept as does several other European nations have their missle systems based on US designs(Patriot) where as the UK, France and Italy are based on Aster designs. So the question would be could we get Patriot to take information from SAMP/T, or the AN/MPQ to work with Aster as examples but not limited to trhese two systems.
What I do agree with is that finally the UK might get an Air Defence system for some of our strategic locations such as RAF Lossiemouth and HMNB Clyde, East Anglia (area defence) for the airbases and S-SW England protecting the RN bases.
Where there is a will there is a way. Both systems would only need to share radar data and since both are already designed around that concept, it’s just a matter of finding a way to translate the data feeds.
I don’t think it is that hard TBH.
Not these days with modular software. It isn’t that easy either.
For instance BAE CMS will already talk to Aster on T45 and will need to talk to Mk41 VLS on T26 and to Sea Ceptor on both. So the gap has been bridged.
Yes, I think it’s probably doable, The US Aegis can take search and targeting data over Link-16 from other NATO ships. I would expect the UK’s T45 with its BAe combat management system to be able do the same from US ships and other NATI ships. I do know the Thales Tacticos can talk to both Aegis and the T45s.
For land based systems THAAD, Patriot PAC 3 and NASAMS can talk to each to build a layered and networked system.
The UK’s Sky Sabre has been designed to make it networkable with other radars and combat management systems. I’d expect lots of simulations have been conducted to test its interoperability. But as it’s only been field since the summer, it probably has not been fully tested yet. However, having the first unit deployed to Poland, will I’m sure be testing its interoperability on the fly.
Tromp is a nice-looking ship. And better armed than anything we’ve got.
Until the type 26 comes along i agree the Tromp is a better multi purpose warship then the RN has. The type 45 could become a multi purpose warship. It just needs mk41 vls strike cells fitted. Even just 16 cells would provide a huge uptick in offensive firepower.
As an aside, I wonder what’s going through the minds of the Ukrainian refugees who live on that cruise ship as they see these warships coming and going?
Whats depressing is the housing of refugees on cruise ships. There is a massive crises of unaffordable social housing. Refugees on cruise ships is one example. The other are the numbers of people who cannot afford their own home or are homeless (i know seperate issues but symptomatic of a societal-wide problem)
It’s unbelievable the housing issues. I know a 32 year old lady who lives in a 3 bed house with her parents and 3 siblings. She also has her own 2 children.
9 years she has been on the council waiting list. Last year she was 44th on the list. This year she’s 118th! That’s due to people going on the list with a higher priority.
She works 32 hours a week and the older kid is at a local school. She’s never going to be able to afford to buy a house and private rent would cost way to much. Also if she moves out she’s a lower priority.
Build more council houses. The lack of doing this since the 1970s and then the sell off of stock has caused the crisis.
This is kind of related have you seen the article in naval news a couple of days ago about Martlett missile trials on wildcat?
The wildcat carried 20 missiles. Thats a pretty decent saturation attack capability against fast attack craft/ corvette sized warships. Probably would overwhelm a targets ciws and/ or point defence missile system.
I am not sure the missiles can be used in saturation attacks, as they are not fire-and-forget and therefore have to be individually guided by the launch platform.
Maybe you can launch them all at the same target? I don’t know how the targeting works for the wildcat/martlet.
Is the martlet the same missile that’s the LMM being used in Ukraine alongside starstreak?
Yes, it uses the same targeting method as Starstreak.
Any guesses what class this is. Maybe a Trafalgar? Bow looks too long for astute. Spotted off coast of Scotland last week.