Russian ‘spy ship’ in North Sea raises concerns about the vulnerability of key maritime infrastructure
A new documentary produced by a consortium of public broadcasters in Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway has revealed what appears to be a profound threat to maritime and undersea energy and data infrastructure in the North Sea and the Baltic region.
The Shadow War includes footage of a Russian research vessel called Admiral Vladimirsky allegedly collecting data on windfarms, gas pipelines, power and internet cables.
The film, which has been widely reported in the UK press this week, asserts that Russia is systematically mapping the vulnerabilities of maritime infrastructure in the North Sea. This would enable Russia to learn of any weak spots – for instance, the locations where underwater energy and data cables intersect, making it easier to mount a sabotage attack if the Kremlin deemed it necessary.
These reports don’t tell maritime security experts anything they don’t already know. We have known for a long time that Russian forces are mapping maritime infrastructures, including wind farms, communication cables and pipelines. Indeed, back in the 1990s and 2000s, when Nato and Russia were cooperating on some security issues, Russian spying activities in Nordic waters never stopped. In 2013, I was taken on a Royal Navy vessel to the North Sea where part of its mission was to look out for Russian spy ships.
But since the occupation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 these activities have intensified. Across European waters, including in Irish and Portuguese waters and the Mediterranean, Russian vessels have been spotted conducting intelligence operations.
Nord Stream sabotage
The sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in September 2022, in which a core energy pipeline was destroyed in the Baltic Sea, raised significant concerns in the west about the damage a hostile power could do by destroying or disrupting this important energy or information infrastructure.
The culprit behind the Nord Stream sabotage has not yet been identified. But the latest reports show that these worries are justified.
Nato and the EU have rolled out ambitious plans for improving the resilience of maritime infrastructure. Nato and the EU created new working groups and coordination bodies to develop better protection strategies and coordinate between civil and military agencies. In March of this year, the European Commission published an ambitious action plan as part of the updated EU maritime security strategy. It foresees studies to identify the most severe vulnerabilities and better surveillance. But do these plans go far enough?
Why the North Sea is so significant
The gas and oil supplies of the North Sea are an important resource for the entire European energy market. The increasing focus on the production of green energy makes this strategic importance even greater. More than 40 windfarms are based in the region, and with ideal conditions for wind energy, installations are continuously and rapidly expanding. The North Sea is hence vital to reduce dependency on fossil fuels and lower CO₂ emissions.
But given what we now suspect about Russian intelligence and possible sabotage activities, the North Sea now needs to be seen as a vulnerable and critical strategic security space. A concerted act of sabotage, damaging underwater electricity cables, for instance, can do significant harm to energy markets. Cutting underwater data cables can limit internet connectivity including across the Atlantic, since important data cable connect for instance Denmark and the US. Repair at sea is costly as it requires specialised ships, which can only operate if the weather conditions allow. After all the North Sea is a harsh environment.
Recent Nato and EU initiatives centre on improving surveillance. They aim at getting better at detecting suspicious activities, such as those reported by the Nordic documentary film. Satellites, radar and patrols – including by unmanned vehicles – CCTV on all infrastructure and contributions by maritime users, such as fishermen who report suspicious activity, can do much to improve the overall awareness.
This can assist in rapid responses and can also be a deterrent. Information sharing between states and with the industry is important. Nato, the EU, the UK and Norway need to work closely together, as none of them can handle this on their own. Putting different sources of information together to identify suspicious patterns is needed.
Importance of rapid repair
What often gets too little attention is the question of repair. If an attack occurs, it is vital to be able to fix any damage as quickly as possible in order to return to normal. Not only that, but if there is a demonstrable repair capacity in the region it reduces the strategic value – and hence the likelihood – of such an attack.
But as of now, these key repair capacities – such as specialised repair vessels and cable depots are severely limited in Europe.
New models of how security policy and the industry can work together to develop strategic repair capacities are required. These might be public-private partnerships that operate repair ships and provide contingency for crisis situations. This would have the dual benefit of enhancing repair capacity and, perhaps, at the same time will give an opportunity to enhance the efficiency of infrastructure by reducing repair times in the North Sea and elsewhere more generally.
Christian Bueger, Professor of International Relations, University of Copenhagen
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
It’s time we started adding these to Typhoons in the short term. Nothing quite like a valuable deterrent to make the Russians think twice.
“The aircraft version of the NSM is part of the advanced armament of F-35 Lightning II, Eurofighter Typhoon, Gripen and NH90 multipurpose fighters.
The multi-purpose JSM has an extended range up to 240 km, an advanced control system with a bidirectional data line, which allows to exchange information and act as part of a group of airborne attack vehicles.”
Nigel, I think your NSM/JSMs have gone misding here, but yes, agree with you. I bit more air to surface clout would be useful on the Typhoons, F-35s and P-8s
I don’t think the JSMs would help in this particular situation. The Russian spy ships are undoubtedly getting targeting coordinates (latitude, longitude) for underwater cables etc. Then in the event of war – or if they can pass it off with plausible deniability during peacetime – they will use unmanned underwater drones to approach and destroy these.
The drones might be deployed from the Belgorod or other similar vessels or if they have the duration, from Russian ports.
In any war I doubt any Russian surface vessel will make it past the GIUK Gap into the Atlantic or into the North Sea.
It isn’t so much as where – are they concreted in / buried or surface laid.
Are they old infrastructure, say from 1980’s, so sensors are unlikely.
I agree, it’s a mixture of having Intel on the inside of the kremlin, to know if they have a sneak attack planned and monitoring of under sea cables for a threat, all of which we are doing.
In addition it’s probably a role for drones like sea guardian to monitor them and some very aggressive patrolling by customs or fishery protection and OPV’s when they are in our EEZ.
If we can legally board these vessels for any reason we should and if that means killing any armed Russians then we should. They will quickly learn because of we legally board them there is nothing mad Vlad can do about it.
It’s not a reason for P8’s, frigates and anti ship missiles armed jets.
I would expect Russia’s naval captains to be marginally more competent than their army officers, so they will be making strenuous efforts to ensure they don’t give the RN a valid reason to board them legally. I imagine any captain who gave the RN legal reason would on return to Russia be given a WW2 rifle and sent to fight in Ukraine…
Certainly for the larger ships you would expect so, however the real threat would appear to be the smaller undeclared vessels pretending to be fishing vessels.
We have already seen incidents of Russian warships trying to ram US warships so I am guessing they are easily provoked.
Sight of so much as a fishing rod on a boat in our EEZ without a permit should be reason for search. If we can get the whole of Europe on the same page and constantly closely follow these boats at all time with Cutters or OPV’s it should make them A stop on B do something stupid that let’s us take away there toys.
Mad Vlad will probably threaten to level London again with his dooms day bomb or mega ultra hypersonic missiles but the reality is there is nothing he can do without giving NATO the excuse to take him out.
I’d completely missed reports of Russian trawlers trying to ram USN warships? 😳
Certainly with Brexit and us having more control over our waters I would expect us to be boarding trawlers in our EEZ more regularly, Russian or otherwise. Given Russian warships are always shadowed by NATO vessels when they transit the English Channel and the North Sea I would hope the Admiral Vladimirsky would have been similarly shadowed. Especially as it was a danger to navigation by turning its locator transmitter off – which is the reason why Russian aircraft are often intercepted and escorted due to no transponder.
To be honest I think anti ship missiles for both typhoon and f35 are actually a greater need than AShMs for our frigate fleet….I put aside the navel strike missile as that is an AShM and Stike missile and I considered stike as fundamentally important for the T31 role.
In the case of this particular issue though the threat is probably smaller boats pretending to be innocent so what is really needed is lots of lower end patrol resources…..this would be where autonomous underwater systems and things like boarder force cutters and rivers class vessels will make a difference in wartime…living under the UK air umbrella but patrolling and checking all those small boats.
Very good idea! and with the JACKAL drone rivers class vessels will have a bit more punch too.
“The trial – sponsored by the Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) of the Royal Air Force – involved teams from Flyby and the technology giant Thales which also manufactures the LMM.
Within a demanding six-week window, they were able to build two operational JACKAL aircraft and successfully fire two LMMs in an impressive demonstration of agile teamwork.
As a plug-and-play system, new equipment and technologies can be incorporated into JACKAL between missions as well as during continued development. The company says this novel streamlined procurement process ensures that future aircraft are not obsolete before they go into service and will remain relevant for longer. It also gives a pathway to future regulatory compliance and airworthiness standards.”
LINK
The video I saw had the Jackal firing in tethered flight, so further development is perhaps required. But platforms like this have the potential to rapidly increase both the search/surveillance and offensive capabilities of both OPVs and frigates (in tandem with helicopters).
Can we also add some diesel patrol subs into the mix here? Let the Astute’s do the
more of bigger fish and long range stuff.
Agreed, for a long long time!
I think the issue is that anti ship capability is a major priority for the navy. For the RAF however there are dozens of things they would prefer to sort out before investing in ASHM. Giving the FAA control of some F35Bs would solve the issue.
This is where a couple of extra River class OPV might be useful. Equipped with aerial and sub surface drones it would be able to harass and disrupt any hostile activity by these ships. Sending a T45 or T23 would be a waste of resources.
Yep, either that or buy a couple of already built ships and medium sized fast boats, preferably more sturdier and heavier displacement than these spy ships and disrupt their operations, either through ramming or by making UUVs unusable. Frees up the actual frontline ships and doesn’t take as much time compared to building a purpose built opv.
Pretty sure ramming them could be considered an act of war. And I think both NATO and Russia, while preparing in case of such an eventuality, are currently trying to avoid it.
You say that but there are lots of examples of navy’s getting frisky at a sub war level and Russia actually firmly believes in the whole idea of sub war conflict…..and would happy engage in it….without going to war…as examples ..look at what’s going on in the South China Sea…look at the cod wars.
Iceland isn’t a nuclear power and is a fellow NATO ally, hardly a comparable scenario.
I’ve not noticed the Chinese and the Americans ramming each others vessels in the South China Sea either 🤷🏻♂️
It’s a pity that HMS Clyde wasn’t retained along with the other B1 Rivers for this kind of role. Not advocating any kind of hostile, kinetic move against the Russian ship, just an option to ‘man mark ‘ it as it conducts its ‘research ‘.
Yes, I though the Clyde complemented the River B1s nicely. Flight deck would be useful for drones and small helicopters.
Unless they’re currently laying explosives to be detonated remotely later, they aren’t currently undertaking any hostile activity currently. Most likely they’re doing reconnaissance work getting the optimal coordinates for targeting cables and interconnectors.
I suspect any actual hostile activity against these targets will be done by unmanned underwater drones.
Or we could just use the existing ships on something more important for the UK than a tilt to the Pacific.
I don’t think the river ships deployed to the pacific would do better work being in the U.K.
There are a lot of allies in the pacific that need a friendly nation on the high seas.
It’s also a good advert for recruitment etc.
The batch 2 river have extra accommodation, long range and are good at patrol.
The U.K. is getting ships it thinks will be good for undersea protection just now. These ships probably wouldn’t be of great use in the pacific.
There’s still the 3 batch 1 river boats around the U.K. and the rest of the non deployed navy for U.K. water tasks.
I just think that we should increase our naval presence nearer home. Any Russian ship, whether naval or quasi civilian ought to be shadowed constantly. The new infrastructure protection vessel(s) will have a different specialist role.
One would like to think that there are ‘systems’ in place, to detect and react to whatever threats are out there. It would seem common sense to me however, when bean counters get involved, ‘programs’ get starved of funds etc and so forth. I know assumption is the mother of all **** ups, but I assume there are measures in place’?
Yes. There are many measures in place. That can be coordinated across the full spectrum of capabilities. The Armed Force’s, the Police, Coast Guard, Energy companies and wind farm operators have comprehensive plan’s. Exercises take place, lessons learned. Special Force’s play a big role, along with the intelligence services. Anything that is classed as ‘critical national infrastructure’ have very high level plan’s in place.
Correct. 👍 Most of the responses to this stuff will not be of an open nature.
That is not to say more would not be welcome. And landside too, not just undersea. Certain CNI sites are wide open.
Russia mindset of targeting energy and internet telecom connectivity in the west even prior to Ukraine invasion. And with the idea of plausible deniability. It’s a rogue state. Hesitate to ask does nato do the same for Russia?
The US in particular must have the most comprehensive fleet of ships and submarines optimised for this type of work, certainly many more than the Russians. All nations with ‘hydrographic research’ ships have had then quietly plodding around the world examining areas of interest for decades. Our problem in a way is that there are few similar undersea assets owned by Russia or indeed China.
I would ask the question, is there anything actually new in this news? Maybe this was just the Russians doing a bit of updating. Surely those offshore windfarms are of much lower strategic significance to the UK than say the electric supply cable and gas pipes coming from Norway which don’t figure in the drawing. Or the cluster of fiber optic cables exiting Cornwall.
The difference is that the Russians have very recent history of attacking democracies and making the systematic committing of war crimes as a strategy of war.
You can drop the disingenuous nativity too, the Russians would undoubtedly target the electricity and gas feeds between the U.K. and Europe, the electricity feeds from wind farms and internet/communications cabling.
His posts on the previous none Russian/Ukraine stories are getting sickly! Desperate to appear impartial, commenting on the stories he has previously stated does not interest him! All the while still unable to condemn Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine.
Yeah his attempt to portray the USA and Russia as morally equivalent there was laughable. Daily we see Russia target civilian infrastructure such as electricity in the Ukraine, every act of which is a war crime.
And that’s before we get onto the more despicable and more difficult war crimes of executions, rapes, abductions, torture, looting, etc.
Executions, torture , rapes and abductions. That’s all just what the Russian army are doing to their conscripted soldiers. Using them as canon fodder. The biggest war crime Putin is guilty of is the crimes of humanity against his own people in this unholy, unjustified and frankly evil war.
Agreed, Russians are victims of Putin’s (and his cabal’s) crime too.
However he is their leader, and while some brave ones make a stand against him, too many unthinkingly believe his propaganda.
Believe the blokes down at the Admiralty have recently discerned the asymmetric threat presented by rhe Russians engaging in grey, sub-threshold warfare and other dastardly, nefarious, and ungentlemanly subsurface activities. Another activity to play catch-up in…😳
Hopefully, the rest of NATO receives the same message…🤔😳
Your attempts at soft-soaping the members here are glaringly obvious, we all read you like a book.
Why not rather tell us about the practice bomb runs your Su-34 is doing on the Russian civilian population of Belgorod?
I thought the own goal was rather fitting. The whole of the campaign has been an own goal for Putin?
Just hope nobody was killed by the RuAF usual total incompetence.
I still can’t believe that. Says it all really about the state of Russia’s air force. And NATO is supposed to be fearful of these nincoumpops.
You wouldn’t expect a WW2 bomber with zero modern avionics to be 45 miles off course and to hit the wrong city sized target.
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
That lost Su-34 is probably one of the ones using Russia’s GLONASS satellite system instead of a GPS receiver 🤣
No it does not, it Judy’s has the USS Jimmy Carter.
It does not employ a fleet of clapped out fishing boats designed to travel in international water using the laws and protection of the very same western Internation order it claims to despise.
I say claims to despise because when it comes to the location of their, children, women and money west seems to be best.
I would say what’s new about news is not much. What has happened though is society is perhaps a lot more reliant on the undersea pipelines, cables.
The data cables hopefully could be rerouted but it’s not certain that could happen.
The gas/oil pipelines are needed for energy and are harder to reroute, change supply.
Electric cables are important especially as we link Europe together and become more reliant on offshore supply.
Having the ability to fix the undersea assets is important.
I don’t think Russia is going for an all out war with the U.K. and apart from being annoying by attacking the undersea infrastructure I don’t see much point in such an attack. But common sense often flies out the window as often as oligarchs the past few years
I think ANY attack should be replied to in kind. Just as Putin’s Russia likes to undertake quazi hybrid warfare just below the threshold of open conflict, so should we.
An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth.
The best response is to give the Ukrainian military even more hardware, support and ammunition so they can continue to give Russia a bloody nose. Attrition will come to count eventuality as will stories of those few Russian soldiers who survive their tour of duty in Ukraine.
I think you have this right. it’s easy to get worked up about this but the reality is this threat is strategically useless, because any large scale attack on infrastructure would cross the threshold of plausible deniability and effectively become an open declaration of war with NATO.
More likely the intention is an attempt to divide and intimidate Europe into backing off from assisting countries that Russia considers in their sphere of influence.
As we have seen, this intimidation isn’t working – even reluctant Germany has doubled down on improving the diversity of their somewhat vulnerable energy supply.
Also in this context, Russia being responsible for Nord Stream attack seems entirely plausible. But in that case it was possible to point the finger at others, which would not be the case if multiple attacks happened elsewhere.
Russian spy ship raises concerns on Russian navy policy of smoking on duty!
This is what befalls us when we do not have much of a navy! Shameful. Labour/Tory what is the difference!?
Nonsense, the RN is the most powerful navy in Europe.
Are you seriously suggesting starting a war with Russia by deliberating attacking these vessels? Nutter.
So what are you proposing the RN would do? Sail up to Russian intelligence ships and ask them politely to buzz off? They’re not doing anything illegal.
So now you dismiss the naval forces of our European NATO allies… you’re just making yourself sound even more ignorant.
• 2 x QE Class Carriers
• 6 x Type 45 Destroyers
• 11 x Type 23 Frigates
• 2 x LPDs
• 4 x SSBNs
• 6 x SSNs
You do realise ships need to be actually built before they can be deployed, they can’t be magic’d up with a click of the fingers. And difficult to build T32s when the requirements are still being defined, let alone them designed.
Yeah , swearing is probably the only thing you’re capable of. Certainly not reasonable adult debate.
(“LOL” – really? Are you still wearing shoulder pads and sporting a mullet? 😆)
Delusional c**t? Nice….I presume you have an issue with human interaction and grown up communication?
Sounds like that happy crack that popped up last week mouthing off at everyone. Forgot his name now.
He obviously reads the Daily Mail lol. I do not comment much on here but notice he seems to pop up all over the place offering “expert” opinions. Must have loved it when we sent two little gunboats to re-invade the Pacrim 😅
True, but a shadow of its former self…..numerically. Capability wise it will be top table when T26 enters service.
And with T31 numbers will be back to the bottom of the barrel level.
I just hope the contractual ding dong over T31 doesn’t queer the pitch for T32.
Even the current US Navy doesn’t compare with the size of fleet the RN fielded to escort the German High Seas fleet to Scala Flow. But times change…
Yes the RN is a fraction of its Falkland era days, but if it’s a shadow now, then the Russia fleet is a ghost. The decline in our opponent’s is proportionately far greater.
It will be good to see the T26s and T31s replacing the T23s and all the Astute’s in service. It would be interesting to know what requirements had pushed the projected T32’s costs to (reportedly) double those of the T31s.
I doubt in the present adversarial scene we will ever know.
But I guess
– inflation
– profit – want one
– quietening
– 5” gun
– Mk41 VLS
– tail
– upgraded radar
Swiss Army knife stuff. It would be a fully rounded GP++ frigate.
Maybe for that price they wanted a rail-gun instead 😉
All T32’s will have gold hull plating and Gucci seats. Sailors will be dressed in Fur Coats but will not have any underwear 😀
T32 is a daft idea, just keep the T31 production line rolling and buy some off the shelf Offshore Support Vesells for MCM work in a moderate risk environment or deploy USV from a T31 or T26 in a high one.
Building a third fleet of frigates in a batch of just 5 is asking for disaster. What could T32 possibly have that can be put on an USV or added to a base line T31.
I have to agree, a second batch of T31s would seem to make more sense. I’m intrigued as to what the requirements for T32 are that can’t be achieved by tweaking the T31 given that the T31 design was chosen so as to provide lots of opportunities for improvements in armaments etc.
I wonder if they wanted a hybrid design like an Absalon or a Damen Crossover. Keeping the front frigate-like and making the majority of the rear more like an LPD might make sense if they are slated for the Litoral Response Groups. The BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate isn’t totally different in concept with a rear ramp and mission bay launch and would cost about £250m-£300m before fit out, so £500m afterward seems about right.
While ASF looked great on the screen, I’m a little cautious of new BAE designs given how many years it took them to iron out enough kinks in the T26 design to start the build.
The delay in starting Type 26 construction was down to the government rather than any issues with BAE, usual adjustment of goalposts to suit the budget.
You’ve only done 12 posts and already you’re showing broad ineptitude and zero understanding of the world around you.
Everyone should be given a chance to learn and change their opinion. Maybe better to explain what the poster has wrong and educate rather than berate.
With that though u can lead a horse to water but can’t make it drink.
Yes. There was a time when we could listen to sound and competent posters like ….Harold 😂.
God, I’d forgotten about him.
Then there was TH, and Peder, and “Mike”
Well observed, I think that might be a new world record…
There’s nothing new there. we’ve known about these ships for a very long time, and we’ve known what the Russians were capable of. It seems odd that we’re talking about this now as if it’s a new development..
Propaganda purposes I guess, “trawlers” from Russia have been a reality for decades the world over. Every time polls show interest in the proxy war is waning? Wheel out a new “threat”.
Maybe the SBS can put an e-tag on this ship so we can see exactly where it going too…? Lol 😁
I seem to recall at the height of the Cold War, that the USA tapped into an undersea phone cable running out of Vladivostok or so similar place in Russia’s Far East. It has been going on for years, it only just getting raised by MSM.
like a lot of thinks, just reading about the renaming of the Brecon Beacons, I hadn’t realised that Snowdonia was renamed last November 😎
Big difference about tapping someone cable like the USA and cutting it like Russia.
Yes, Project Ivy Bells.
As J in MK above observed though, with such a vast landmass in Russia and China undersea access is not so readily available.
It has been in the MSM periodically since the mid 2000s when the traitor Snowden revealed openly some of the details of what goes on, though to those of us who follow that stuff it was already well known.
GCHQ alone has over 200 access points now in place to the undersea infrastructure, let alone UK mainland SIGADS.
It is only to be expected that a potential and actual enemies will be trying to do the same, though I’d assume without our levels of sophistication.
Difference is, that is our side and perfectly acceptable if it helps the west defend itself.
Spying is a very old game.
Clearly, this is tantamount to a decaration of war by Russia on NATO countries that border the N Sea, and particularly us.
Medvedev posted to his Telegrasm channel last week “Who gives a damn about their decisions? Britain has been and always will be our eternal enemy, at least until their arrogant and miserably damp island is swept into the murky depths of the sea by a wave created by a state-of-the-art Russian arms system.”
We should demonstrate courage and resolve and board this ship, seize the data and scuttle her. Fcuk the Russians
What crap comments from Medvedev. Like to see his and his mates facea when Russian forces get shovelled back onto their side of the fence. Long live and much success for the 🇺🇦 offensive!! No need to knock… just go straight in!
Sailing in a countries EEZ is not an act of war. Had this vessel actually done anything illegal then the RN would have acted.
Boarding it and scuttling it would be an act of piracy, an act of war, and an act of pompous stupidity.
What sort of arsehole comment it that? Looks like cowardice in the face of the enemy to me
Everyone just needs to get a grip … nobody is boarding anything …
Thank god for another sane voice.
It’s a comment that is factually accurate with regards to the law. Observation of the law being one of the primary differences between the West and Russia.
You appear to want to lower us to Russia’s level.
As for cowardice, it’s usually those that bluster for military action at the slightest provocation that tend to be the cowards.
David, let me remind you of when you wished the RN to sink the Russian ships that were sailing down the Channel before February last year and I almost spat my tea out.
We respectfully agreed to disagree then, and I’ve not changed my view! These things need tact and level heads mate we cannot go off like that without a clear reason to.
Hi Daniele I havent forgotten your views, however everybody should take note of Medvedev’s comments. This ship, operated by an unfriendly nation, is mapping our undersea energy and other infrastructure which is a clear provocation. Russia may well have been responsible for the Nord Stream 2 sabotage and indeed, may have been testing their capabilities. If we dont stand up to them now, you know what will happen next winter
No need to scuttle it. If it didn’t have its transponder going it was breaking SOLAS rules, which we and Russia have signed up to.
Of course the law isn’t everything and letting it pass may be wisest.
Yep, we sent an enourmous amount of military hardware to Russia to enable them to withstand & survive the Nazi invasion, at great cost to our own beleagured forces across the world, plus a heavy toll on our strained merchnt & RN forces. Then we gave them our jet engine technology which likck started their MIG 15 program. Despite Mevdevs properganda we’ve tried to be nice, maybe too naively.
I think we need to get a bit more muscular to disabuse tem of their perception of us & the West’s weakness; before it’s too late. But do we have the leadership, considering the courting of Russian & Chinese money by our leaders over the last 20 years & intermable defence cuts?
I think we should just pay less attention to the b@llshit propaganda that Putin, Medvedev, et al, spew out.
Reacting to their comically bad insults is exactly what they’re trying to provoke.
We’re better than that.
Yes, he’s either as lunatic as Putin, or, more likely, as much playing to his own audience as a hardliner.
Making those threats shows his stupidity, as he knows full well what would be coming straight back at him. The beauty of MAD.
Medvedev is hoping that Putin will anoint him as his eventual successor. When Putin his the old constitutional limit of presidential terms, he and Medvedev swapped jobs for a term, before Putin returned as president.
Of course, Prigozhin, Gerasimov and other members of Putin’s cabal are all competing to gain Putin’s favour in the hope of being his successor. The similarities to the Nazi hierarchy around Hitler is astonishing.
Yes, an interesting parallel I had not considered.
I would have thought that the threat to rigs and turbines has been obvious right from the start. The question as always is are we doing anything about it. The answer at the moment appears to be no.
There were always plans in place to protect the rigs from terrorist activity.
Thatcher had a bee in her bonnet about that and there were lots of very interesting exercises.
Indeed!
SBS Recapture Oil Rig
LINK
Hi Nigel – far better to prevent the rig from being captured in the first place! Thanks for the link 🙂
It pretty much seems like GCHQ knows more about Kremlin operations than Putin these days. Just because the MOD is not broadcasting actions does not mean they don’t take them.
Glad they’re NOT broadcasting this! No need to broadcast about the 🇺🇦 spring offensive either… unless it’s truthful misinformation… Lol 😁
100% 👍🏻
S.B. and Jim… I was thinking more about the physical threat from the Russian navy and air force should a conflict arise. The rigs would need to be armed and the turbines protected by some sort of missile defence as well. It would take half the RAF to fly top guard patrols day to day.
In a shooting war with Russia I don’t see the Russian “fleet” leaving the baring sea and I think NATO captures most of it in Murmansk on the first day.
I don’t see the Russian Air Force being able to survive this side of the Urals for more than a few hours.
Would take a lot of cruise missiles to cause meaningful damage to a wind farm and most of the oil platforms are being decommissioned.
So it’s a bit like the Germans not going through the Ardennes and knocking France out of the war. Nothing to worry about then.
😆 True. I rate the Werhmact and Waffen SS a bit more than the Russians mate.
No argument with that but I do hate this lack of gumption, as my grandad would say, shown by so many and the politicians in particular. Can they not see what is building up around the world?
Well their ships wouldn’t, they already have a bastion policy in the Kara and Barents seas.
Geography is against them too. Baltic, Black, Korean seas, all choke points that can be bottled up.
Petropavlovsk, from memory, is their sole home port for access to the wider oceans.
Having a thought about your last paragraph. Is there any sense in arming two or three redundant rigs or am I going a bit James Bond?🕵
Exactly.
You need to look a lot lot deeper Geoff.
Most of the responses to this stuff will be covert, highly advanced security systems and surveillance, especially in the domain of the UKUSA agreement, and not for this forum.
Openly, beyond sailing RN vessels regularly as presence and more MPA/UAV flights what more can you do.
The SBS MCT teams have been exercising on oil rigs for decades. From every type of Cruise ship, Merchant ship, type of train, tube train, commercial aircraft types, rigs, and CNI sites they are surveyed, contingencies arranged, and exercises carried out.
The IUSS is widespread and monitors Russian movements.
And there are plans and contingencies in place for UK CNI sites and “Key Points” especially.
Sure one can always want to do more but to assume the UK is doing nothing is simply not correct.
Regards.
All of which may be true but I repeat I was talking about in a time when a conflict exists. It seems to be common for people to say there’s plenty of time or there’s no rush or we don’t need full capability yet. Most were saying the same in January 2022 when it was ridiculous for Russia to invade the Ukraine. We are for all practical purposes re-running the 1930’s now, the only difference being that the world is even more dangerous.
Good morning Geoffrey.
Yes, apologies, I read your follow up post further down after I posted mine.
Worry not my friend. No apology needed but thank you.😀
Russia and NATO nations have carried out information gathering off each others coast for decades so in many ways this is nothing new. What is new is the unpredictability of Russia. NATO and the old Warsaw Pack used to play the game by rules, Russia has ripped up the rule book.
So what can the UK and NATO coastal nations do about it without sending out gunboats to nudge them out of the way. Use the LAW better yet a law that both Russia and NATO nations have signed up to the UN Convention and Law of the Seas and the Right of Innocent Passage. Article 19 Section 1, 2, 2a, 2c, 2j, 2k, Article 20, these state that innocent passage is granted unless it is prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if the coastal State has had any threat or use of force against its sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence carried out against it. If any act of collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State. Any act of propaganda against the coastal State. The carrying out of research or surveys in the waters of the coastal State. Any act aimed at the interferance with any systems of communication or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State.
As Russia is in breach of every one of these from either Russian politiians and its State run madia threatening the UK and other NATO nations to unleash their wonder weapons to cause a Tsunami and sink the UK, or to launch missiles and put NATO nations back into the stone age. Carried out information gathering and surveying coastal infrastucture, e.g. wind farms, underwater power supplys, communication networks etc and possibly carried out acts of sabotage against said infrastructure.
We the UK could as could all NATO nations ban any and every Russian flagged ship. As we the UK or for that matter any NATO/EU nation cannot garantee that a vessel of a Russian friendly nation has not been altered or converted into an armed merchant cruiser we could then ban any ship with a third party flag coming from a Russian port sailing through territorial waters of NATO nations. We could also implement stop and search on Russia bound vessels sailing through NATO/EU territorial waters for contraband.
This would close the English Chanel, Kattagate, Straits of Gib and the Dardanelles if all NATO nations implement such a ban based on the rule of law. This will not mean a blockade of Russian ports as they will still have the ports in the Kola Peninsula and on the Pacific. It will however cause a massive logistics nightmare as the English Chanel, Baltic and Med become effectivly closed for Russian flagged or Russia inbound/outward bound vessels.
Using the Rule of Law no one can say that NATO/EU is escalating at a military level.
“Use the LAW better yet a law that both Russia and NATO nations have signed up to the UN Convention and Law of the Seas”
That is not strictly correct, whilst the Convention has been ratified by 168 parties, with an additional 14 UN member states having signed, but not ratified it, there is a standout country that is not a party, the USA. Just like the ICC, this is another international agreement that the US believes it should not be bound by.
Will stick to the NLAW so much better for dealing with Russian Nazis. Any condemnation yet if Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine yet?
Les be honest, protecting these cables and pipes in peace time is a massive challenge in itself. There is effectively no situation in which they are going to be secure in wartime what western nations need to do is ensure security in peace time and simple have a robust plan in place for their loss in wartime, any plan other that managing the loss of undersea infrastructure is likely to fragile so survive.
Is there any truth in this story?
“Britain’s £3.2 billion aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales has been reduced to acting as a scrap-yard. Essential pieces of equipment are being ripped out of the stricken warship, a move that raises questions over its long-term future.
The UK’s second carrier has been in dry dock since breaking down off Portsmouth in August 2022.
Now Navy top brass have begun stripping the carrier – a process known as ‘cannibalisation’ – which will render HMS Prince of Wales inoperable for much longer. Lift chains, which allow fighter jets to be raised from below deck, electrical systems and sections of the ship’s gas turbines have been taken out.
These parts, without which it cannot function fully, are being fitted to her sister ship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, as replacements for parts that have aged or malfunctioned. HMS Prince of Wales broke down due to issues with her starboard propeller, which is being replaced as part of a £25million refit – the cost has risen by £5million in the past month.
The Mail on Sunday can report for the first time today that the warship’s port propeller also needs to be replaced as it is suffering from the same issues. HMS Prince of Wales – launched in 2017 – is expected to spend at least a year in dock due to the additional workload.
According to insiders, the Navy is also spending millions on replacement fuel pumps for both carriers.
Last night, a Navy source said: ‘It is one disaster after another. To lose both propellers so soon into her lifespan is ridiculous. As she’s out of action, inevitably her good parts are being stripped off to support HMS Queen Elizabeth.”
“The Mail on Sunday” enough said 🤣
Morning Nigel,
The RN routinely take parts from vessels undergoing maintenance to supply those ready for sea. These items are then replaced via the stores systems we use. It happens all the time, the MoS article is very inaccurate in what it portrays.
The MOD have taken the PoW unexpected docking to bring forward her Lloyds safety inspection, to save both time and money by not having to dock her twice in the same year.
No idea how any repairs are progressing, but the RN will use this period to sort out what’s needed even if it means staying in dock slightly longer then planned.
Many thanks, the article did appear to be blown out of proportion somewhat which is to be expected when reading stories from the press!
Don’t read the media Nigel!! Very bad for your health.
I didn’t initially, the story was posted on MSN, I should have checked the source of their post first!
Part replacement for QE and a further increase in cost seem plausible, just blown out of proportion.
LINK
A more accurate appraisal than the Daily Fail
https://www.navylookout.com/repairs-to-hms-prince-of-wales-will-not-prevent-return-to-operations-this-summer/
😴
That you dismiss the excellent Navy Lookout and prefer the hysteria of The Daily Mail says a great deal about you.
WTF has Navy Lookout got to do with anything?????
As for Navy lookout, I often post links from their website 1, and 2, the origional Article I read came from MSNews. Plus, my reply to Daneille above came from Forces Net and not Navy Lookout 😂
Being a complete twat says everything about you. 😂😂
Stick to selling Insurance policies!
Guess you didn’t both to look at my post – which linked to the Navy Lookout – before you felt the irresistible urge to post a reply.
Bit of advice, try reading before replying, than way you won’t make yourself look a complete and utter idiot again 😆
“selling insurance policies”? – you must be thinking of your dream job, would be a step up from road sweeper I guess 🤷🏻♂️
No, It’s what you posted in a link a while ago or have I got that wrong in you being an insurance broker who has never served?
Please, feel free to correct me and keep taking your meds.
The one word you’ll absolutely hate if you’re a narcissist
NO
Leadership and authority: I am a good leader.
Anticipation of recognition: I know that I am a good manager because everyone says so.
Grandiosity: I very much want to be powerful.
Self-admiration and vanity: If I ran the world, it would be a much better place.
Exhibitionism: Everyone likes hearing my stories.
As for your comment on road sweepers, it just sums you up nicely.
Yes like everything else, you got it wrong.
I worked at Lloyd’s of London in the 90’s, then was head-hunted by a telco/ISP, then did contracting to advertising/ pharmaceuticals/ etc.
The advantage of being a Computer Scientist is you get to work in many industry sectors.
Correct, I’ve never been a waiter.
I’ll keep on correcting you, seems to be required with just about every post you make.
No idea what the remainder of your random post is rambling about…
did you accidentally paste your psychological evaluation?
Self-admiration and vanity: If I ran the world, it would be a much better place.
“then was head-hunted by a telco/ISP”
“The advantage of being a Computer Scientist”
Correct, I’ve never been a waiter???? I thought you had me down as a road sweeper.
Keep taking the meds!
https://idisciple.blob.core.windows.net/idm/Just-Say-NO-1-OriginalWithCut-774×1376-90-CardBanner.Jpeg
I knew that joke would go completely over your ignorant head…
because Lloyds of London started out as a coffee house, the red and blue coated staff that work there are still called ‘waiters’.
Ah I detect envy you never got to university, but you’re clearly not bright enough too.
My mistake, I suspect you’d fail in any job application to be a road sweeper. How’s life on the dole going for you?
Oxford Dictionary
Waiter: a man whose job is to serve customers at their tables in a restaurant.
I’ve never worked at Lloyds of London, so the joke was lost on me clearly.
BA (Hons) in Post Production for Film and Television and still going strong after 27 years.
Still attempting to belittle others I see, all classic signs of a narcissist and one or lives underachievers.
Keep knocking on doors,
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2b/57/49/2b57493d4e050c6de9dc277fca7a9ffe.png
Clearly no general knowledge about the UK then, I knew that even before I worked there 🤷🏻♂️
“BA (Hons) in Post Production for Film and Television” 😂🤣😂
So not a proper degree then, and probably from a poly too. I meant a real degree not some technical apprenticeship.
I very much doubt you have a Degree anyway Mr. Insurance Broker.
Ring any bells? It’s all there if you read it!
Narcissists seek out an endless supply of validation, attention, and praise to compensate for low self-esteem, confidence, and a perceived lack of acceptance that’s often a result of early childhood trauma and attachment issues.
Recognition or affirmation that a person or their feelings or opinions are valid or worthwhile.
“They have exaggerated needs for acceptance and validation
Affirmation
I expect to win. I deserve to win.
I will not care what other people think
Validation
What is validation syndrome?
“Known as approval addiction, this behavioural health condition is defined as an intense desire to win the approval of those around you and avoid feelings of rejection at all costs.”
And try to remember to take your meds.
Have a good day at the Coffee House 😂😂😂
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0899/9232/products/KEEP_CALM_AND_LET_THE_INSURANCE_BROKER_HANDLE_IT.jpeg
You really are ignorant aren’t you? Average broker salary in the Lloyds market is north of £100k, you think that’s an insult? 😆
Personally though I prefer working in the product design industry, much more interesting from a technology perspective, far fewer snobs and hooray Henry’s too.
It’s hilarious watching you fail at playing amateur psychologist. Because my degree in computer science majored on artificial intelligence, one of the subsidiary subjects was psychology. And your posts are simply broadcasting your deepest deficiencies and failings.
Keep up filming your dirty videos, in which I assume your wife plays a leading part.
There were two (possibly three) Russian ‘science’ ships that were off the coast of Ireland for a week in the end of March early April . They left the area and then turned around and came back. They were off the coast of the Dingle peninsula and were fully over Internet cables most of the time.
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/03/31/russian-ships-return-to-west-coast-despite-appearing-to-depart-for-africa/
Whatever. Vlad is planning something and he’s not know for his aversion to being spiteful as well of course of not being deadly !
Hi everyone, to be honest Russia doesn’t worry me fighting wise but I do worry that they could at some point in time get china and India to work together to tell the west to f##k off, the Indians have no interest in us as a people the amount of times I’ve seen them rip in to us on feeds I get is crazy so if I was Russia I’d be looking at getting brics to be military aswell, we do need to get more money in to defence somehow or I think at some point we will be struggling against much larger populations.
India and China have an unresolved border dispute which every few months or so sees their troops fighting with clubs etc – they usually refrain from firearms.
In the wake of China’s Corvid response and it’s increasing authoritarianism western manufacturers are beginning to relocate manufacturing operations out of China and into other low wage economies like India. Not something that will improve Indo-Sino relations further.
But a China Russian team-up against a common enemy is a possibility: no more improbable that the Nazi Japanese cooperation in WW2.
However while China still trades fully with Russia, it has yet to supply weapons to Russia. To do so would make it liable for reparations to Ukraine as it would become a co-belligerent. It would also see Western sanctions which would seriously damage its economy.
Given Chinese debt to GDP has increased dramatically in recent years, and has passed the UK’s, damage to its economy could seriously undermine its ability to finance its debts.
In short, while China might find teaming up with Russia beneficial, the timing isn’t right. And it’s China that will choose the timing, not Russia.
Hi Sean, thanks for that I get a bit high now and again thinking about things that could happen so appreciate yourself and others on here that explain things a bit better. 👍
So this is UKs plan to have secure energy! Who actually thinks distributing 1000s of turbines offshore is going to be easy to protect! It will be incredibly easy to reduce UK power generation capacity with some very basic tech and weapons. The only way to have secure energy is to have dense onshore power generation which can be easily protected and if you want that to be carbon free then there’s very limited options.
There is no real need to protect either rigs or wind turbines out at sea, apart perhaps from terrorists. Both have single or a very limited number of points of failure, that is where their usually combined output comes ashore. Those are the places that need protection. Similarly with telecomms, there are very few cable/sea or strategically important satellite up/down locations. Lots of fiber routes inland as well, I even have a major north/south cable at the end of my garden. Few if any are not public information.
I disagree the wind turbines themselves are vulnerable. Have you see what a small civilian drone does to the wing of an aircraft. Imagine a drone design to maximise damage, it wouldn’t even need an explosive. The blades of wind turbines hit 180 mph, flying a drone or dropping anything onto a blade would shut the turbine down as unchecked damage could cause catastrophic failure. Unlike oil which is portable energy which can be imported, electricity is far more vulnerable and we changing our entire economy to be 100% dependent on it.
It’s not hard to come up with other ways to take out dispersed wind turbines.
Of course wind turbines are vulnerable, I didn’t write otherwise. But why go to all the effort of trying to damage possibly hundreds of them when you can hit the the composite cables where they come ashore and shut them all down?
We may be increasing our dependence on electricity but at least we are not bonkers like the German,s who have just shut their last 3 nuclear power stations, causing EON to apparently crank prices up by 45%.
Single point of failure means single fix to bring it back up. Easier to defend a single point. Much harder to fix several hundred turbines.
Yaaawn more generic guff from you! How about a generic condemnation of Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine or some condemnation of the illegal actions of Russian murderers in uniform? Another cowardly no then….
You don’t retain fixed assets by trying to defend them. You retain them by destroying the enemies offensive capabilities. The chances of Russian vessels entering or surviving in the North Sea in a time of conflict are zero.
Aircraft, drones, subs, special forces, malicious vessels posing as civilian.
Special forces need vessels to deploy from either surface ships or submarines. In both cases neither will reach the North Sea. As it is, a large part of Russia’s special forces are littering the fields of Ukraine.
Russian aircraft won’t reach the North Sea either, they have far too much NATO airspace to cross just to reach it.
Any Russian vessels posing as trawlers or freighters will be known to NATO intelligence.
The only real danger is long-range UUV, deployed from submarines such as the Belgorod or surface vessels away from the North Sea. Even then they would have to preemptively deploy the UUVs as their motherships won’t last long.
Your far more optimistic than me. Ukraine has struggled to pick up Iranian drones even with layered air defence something not present in the North Sea, Shahed 136 has an estimated range of 1500 miles. The west still can’t track all boats dodging Iranian or North Korea sanctions or delivering arms to Yemen. There’s countries experimenting with launching drones from high altitude balloons!
The bottom line is onshore dense power generation, ie power plants are is still far easier to defend.
No, I’m just a realist.
Ukraine is regularly swatting Iranian drones as is Russia swatting Turkish drones. They aren’t enjoying the successes they did early in the war.
Any drone launched from Kaliningrad – before it falls to NATO forces – would have to fly through Polish and then German airspace to reach the North Sea.
Not comparable situations. NATO is not at war with Yemen, North Korea, or Iran so only small forces are assigned to these.
Also geography counts against Russian. Any Russian vessels from the Baltic are never going to get through the choke point of the through the Kattegat.
That only leaves vessels coming from the North, and they are going to have traverse the whole length of the Norwegian Sea to reach the North Sea. And this is where NATO’s maritime assets will be focussed.
Hit a power station with a single cruise missile and potentially its output drops to zero. To do the same with an offshore wind-farm you have to destroy EVERY single wind-turbine. By their very nature wind farms offer greater resilience to attack than say a gas-fired or nuclear power-plant.
There’s over 10,000 separate wind turbines in the North Sea. Does Russian have that many cruise missiles?
Bottom line is wind farms are more resilient to any attacks that penetrates our air defences.
Needless to say I disagree onshore power plants would far easier to protect. You provided reasons why also, as they further into protected territory. Very simple logic dictates its easier to protect a few hundred sq km which our power plants occupy against 10s of thousands of sq km of wind farms.
An onshore plant is easier to destroy, a single missile hit could take it out.
A wind farm can take multiple hits and continue at high capacity. Every single turbine would need to be destroyed.
Yes it’s simple logic, it’s called numbers.