In the ‘News Snapshots’ podcast by The OSINT Bunker, hosts Jon, Austin, and George discussed the missile attacks in the Red Sea and the role played by HMS Diamond.

George said, “Speaking of HMS Diamond, I think I’d say the Red Sea has recently become a sort of proving ground for one of the world’s most advanced defence warships. It’s almost comical to think about targeting HMS Diamond, of all ships, with a missile. It’s like deciding to punch Muhammad Ali and expecting to land a decent hit.”

George further elaborated on the ship’s role and capabilities, “HMS Diamond is doing exactly what she was designed to do: detect and down missiles. She’s absolutely nailing her job.” However, he also pointed out a significant limitation, “Here’s the catch with that. I don’t think Diamond is carrying enough missiles to hang out in an extended fight. That could be a problem if the Houthis keep up a sustained attack.” This concern underscores the need for more extensive armaments to ensure HMS Diamond can maintain its defensive role over longer periods.

Addressing the planned upgrades, George mentioned, “In March 2021, the Integrated Review promised to beef up the missile count onboard. They’re adding a new 24-missile Sea Ceptor silo right in front of the existing 48-missile Sylver VLS silo. That boosts the total missile count from 48 to 72 – a 50% increase. But it’s not so much of a sprint to do this. It’s 2032 when all of the ships will have this done.”

Overall, the ‘News Snapshots’ podcast aims to provide a 15-20 minute perspective on current events; we hope you enjoy it! You can listen here.

You can listen to the podcast in full by clicking here.

Lisa West
Lisa West
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

192 COMMENTS

          • Calling it pathetic is bit much, given that its a serious technical and safety limitation and not just an issue of money.

            Attempting to crane several metres of sensors, explosives, and fuel into a tiny hole without damaging either the weapon or the launch tube is something no one has worked out how to do with an acceptable risk margin. Ultimately its preferable to withdraw and rearm instead of rendering the main armament inoperable.

          • So you need to get a long item into a tube on a rolling ship… it is done reasonably regularly with torpedoes and even shells, and I acknowledge shells are a lot shorter but in principle you make a guide and pretty much that is that. Obviously you still have the problem of getting the missile to the guide but if the guide itself can move from horizontal to vertical then loading a horizontal guide can be done with cranes and perhaps ‘flexible fingers’ to act to stop the swinging as it approaches the guide. Getting it onboard would likely require a case (hopefully reusable) that provides a degree of protection, personally I expect most missiles and their electronics are quite robust to survive the launch. Its a problem, its not an insurmountable problem

          • No the problem is trying to swing 7 meter long tube from 1 moving platform to a separate moving platform which is not an issue a sub has 200 feet down loading torpedo’s in to its tubes. The US did fit cranes to early AB & Tico’s to reloaded but it didn’t/couldn’t be made to work so they removed. If we had suitable RFA’s to carry hundreds of missiles you might be able to in a safe port when tied alongside which would be best option, as flying enough missiles to Bahrain for Diamond to go in to rearm (once Richmond is in station) would really stretch the transport fleet.

          • Yes, I do seem to recollect reading / seeing video of torpedoes being loaded onto subs in the ocean during ww2 but I guess I will check up on that I dont expect it to be ‘simple’ but I am quite sure it must be possible

        • Older systems could so a type 22s sea wolf system had 88 missiles ( 12 in launchers and 76 in magazines) you could also RAS over new missiles..the problem being that you had to do a slow manual reload after you had fired 12 missiles….the type T23 could fire all its 32 missiles one after the other…but that’s it.

          • It seems that whilst the missiles have got better, the logistics of reload and resupply have gone backwards.

          • Indeed, there are a number of issues.. longer range missiles have aways been an issue as a longe range missile has always been 4-4 meters long and around 500kgs in weight.

            With the shorter range missiles they have got a lot larger missile wise .which I think is one of the issues..as well as the vertical launch system’s essentially taking what was magazine space and the pure process of having to suspend a large missile in a vertical position above a cell and then lowering it in..with a moving deck.

            if you look at the short range options

            sea cat was a 1.4m long missile, that weighed 68kgs
            sea wolf was 1.8 meters and weighed 88kgs
            Camm is a 3.3m long missile that weighs 99kgs

            so sea Wolf and sea cat could be man handled…the 3.3 meter long CAMM less so.

          • Thanks Jonathan. Our country has got some clever engineers. I hope some are working on Gen 2 VLS to design systems with easier reloads.

          • Fair point. I couldn’t possibly know, so I should not have suggested a ‘design flaw’.
            Assuming it was not in the Staff Requirement to be able to replen at sea, then it was the Requirement document (that leads to the Tech Spec then to the Contract and then to the Design work) that was flawed.

      • Burkes carry many more missiles than T45s especially if you count quad packed ESSMs. I could never work out why such a large destroyer with such expensive sensors, designed to simultaneously engage so many threats got such a small missile arnament.

    • The sheer irony in this comment is off the charts. The RFA can’t replenish Sea Viper missiles, perhaps it’s you that’s idiotic and uneducated? Maybe you’d be better off acting like an adult?

      • The rfa could bring then to a nearby friendly port, which there are plenty in the region. The bit im unsure on is what level of logistics are required to reload, does it need a military facility or could it be done on a civilian port? Practically how long would a reload take, if possible?

        Not ideal but they could set up a rotation system with ally ships to allow for the reloads or send another destroyer. Although I think they are holding back ships in case the decision to send a carrier is made politically which is being hinted it.

          • Guess it depends on length of deployment, if its just a photo op for the defence minister maybe resupply at sea isn’t needed or could be borrowed from the US.

        • Oman said it does Not agree with the strikes on the Houthis! I am not sure does Oman agree with the air defence aspect of the mission? If not that would rule out the nearest port in region.

          • They are in fact Aster missiles, Aster 15 & Aster 30. It’s a bit misleading as previous RN missiles were Sea Cat, Sea Slug, Sea Dart, Sea Wolf & the new Sea Ceptre. So misleading that the media call them Sea Viper. Sea Viper is the whole missile system including radar. As for reloading at Sea, the US Navy have tried it for many years, but it’s far too slow & dangerous, even in calm Sea conditions. The missile containers are too big & heavy. The receiving Arleigh Burke class destroyer is constantly moving up & down with the waves, slotting in the end if the container into the silo can easily damage it & the missile.

      • Hello George could you please tell me why you keep taking some of my posts off ? Not like arguing with any one or been rude language to anyone so what’s the problem .Have been on to Lisa and explained to her the problem over the last couple of months ,and the young lady has help out .But think it’s time we sort this problem out there’s a a good man. ?

        • Hi Andrew,

          We get hundreds of comments per day, no one is actively looking at what you’re posting to take it off again. More so, I have no involvement with comment moderation. The problem is that Lisa is off on maternity leave and caring for a newborn baby is time consuming. Your comments will be approved soon.

          Best,
          George

    • The Press on-board need a story too show the limits of our depleted armed forces just be grateful that Brian Hanrahan isn’t around anymore or the Houthies would now know how many missiles are on board and how much 30mm ammo is left as well

      • Hiding details like this just ends up compounding into the overall issue the armed forces have with supplies. If things were more transparent there is no way they would let ships go into hot zones not fully armed, which sooner or later will result in loss of life.

          • I’m not convinced, so many issues and deaths over the years can be linked back to the whole cloud of secrecy over the military. Yes it increases the risk of the enemy knowing something but generally I expect their spy network would have that info anyway and so it’s just the public that are kept in the blind and can’t push their MPs to fix the issues and that gives them zero accountantability when things go wrong because they can pretend they weren’t informed.

          • The BBC pressed for embedded Reporters to embark with the task force in 82 the Navy didn’t want them but had too put up with them .Apparently whilst we were down south there was updates via Whitehall on TV telling the public enough information good or bad being 8000 miles away we just got on with the job that we had trained and got paid for

          • If you don’t have that you have what is going on in Russia or isreal, media only being able to report on what they are told by official channels, which clearly aren’t aligned with the truth of what is going on.

          • With a media bias which seems to be left of center leaning at this present time I doubt if Any reports would cater too all viewers There’d always be a portion that agree and a portion shouting cover up .

          • Not sure where your getting left wing media, most of ours are very much right wing, being owned by media rich offshore individuals, super keen on removing worker rights under the guise of immigration. Combined with a bbc that is scared to challange the government, so covers for them which ever is in power.

            To be fair most of the war reporters belong to association press and just report facts, its then the media that publish them that adds the slant.

          • I Just don’t think that whatever side of the fence you sit there’s always going too be those who believe that there’s a cover up or pandering and you can never please everybody I’d rather have the adage of ” Keep mum ” rather than cause upset

          • I get that people have problem with what Brian Hanrahan said but at the end of the day the RN transmitted that report to admiralty as it was the BBCs only link back to the UK that didn’t rely on postal. Also part of the agreement to have press aboard was admiralties sole discretion on publication they allowed it.
            Sandy Woodward even admitted someone dropped the ball in Whitehall regarding the news reports on bomb fuses and the reporters didn’t deserve the stick they got, they were used as scapegoats. Brian Stood no advantage in getting himself blown up, at the end of the day he was aboard a target himself.

          • Nearly 42yrs but should the BBC worldservice of aired that comment about fuse timing of British made munitions that the Argentines were using or kept mum and not said a word it’s history I know but now everyone is a frontline reporter and Social media is the new world service its no longer loose Lips its now A Loose Finger

      • Yes, I’d like to think the “I counted them all out and I counted them all back” headline grabber didn’t apply in this case!!!😆

    • What RFA ship would you use to ship more missiles? A tanker? The RFA has no ammunition ship ready to sail to a friendly port to meet diamond there.
      Most likely option would be flying the missiles to a port as reload has to be done there.

      • Has no thought been given to the needs of any sustained campaign? This is relatively a mere skirmish compared to what we could face after all.

        • The RFA has been reduced greatly over the past years. Sustained naval operations are difficult especially if no friendly ports are near by.
          The U.K. has the ability to fight with what it has on hand. Resupply and rotation on a large scale/multiple missions have been lost.

          • Look at the PAY! Why would you dedicate years of your life to the RFA for less than the wage of a corner shop!?

          • You begin to understand the usefulness of drones to deplete a warship’s missile defences at a relatively low cost compared to the missiles themselves.

          • djibouti is close ties with usa and i would expect the saudis would allow use of a dock now they allwoed to buy some typhoons

          • Oman on the peninsula the UAE, and Bahrain ,as France didn’t want too partake in the strike against the Houthis will they allow us too use Djibouti?

        • Is that a serious question for Scrapps and Sunak? Election year and they have a war, smell the coffee man

          A QEC will sail amidst great fanfare and a GE will be called. Cue much waving of flags.

        • I read an old OpEd from the US Army War College a while back. It estimated that all European stocks of “modern” reloads, ie ASM, SSM etc, would be exhausted in less than two weeks of high intensity fighting. Same for air, land and sea. Thats the trouble with high tech expensive stuff I guess. And lack of mass. The Russians are proving mass, as a theory and in practice, still matters.

          • What is needed is the ability to manufacture at the rate of a high intensity conflict, along with stockpiles that will tide you over while you ramp up manufacturing. How far we are away from this capacity, I have no idea. Let’s hope someone in MOD does.

          • Problems in “shelf life”. And keeping the MIC busy in times of peace is another factor. I remember well the jamboree of firing off nearly out of date ordnance. I really believe the arguments for more mass in more basic forms holds true now. Recently saw wartime German 7.92 fired off at my club, not a dud. Ike warned us in 1950. We ignored it. Where shiny toys for boys are concerned? Industry will always have its way.

      • I would suppose the nearest ‘safe and secure’ port, a C17 and whatever dedicated equipment is needed to reload the tubes.

          • And security when I was in Oman you weren’t allowed ashore after 6pm at the Navy port but when we alongside in Muscat the curfew was 10pm very security conscious having a neighbour like Yemen GB

          • They just allowed everyone out here before Christmas. Prior to that US and UK were locked down for security. Its still very tight but with some relief they are not going stir crazy.

            Its actually been nice downtown…no drunken servicemen…just drunken ex servicemen like me!

          • If my memory serves me ish Winston Churchill bar as it had gone 22.oo hr we all booked into the hilton our 1st LT didn’t and got a night in the Cells for breaking Curfew

      • Exactly.

        I’d be very surprised if we hadn’t foward positioned some reloads already via A400M or C17.

        Diamond is part of a coalition so the other ships will cover while she peels off reloads and restocks. She must be getting fresh food from somewhere? And fuel too?

        It is a day / half day alongside to reload.

        Then Diamond will rejoin and another will peel off.

        • Apparently a stock of Aster Missiles has been forwarded/pre-positioned,but it has not been disclosed where exactly that is yet.

          • In a hot conflict disclosing your munition dumps is asking for trouble.

            So we will learn the answer to that far in the future.

            I’d encourage other posters not to speculate on things like this.

          • I’m more think of USS Cole Mk2 which is the way these characters would be thinking.

            A warship is very vulnerable tied up alongside.

            Its GP coordinates are observable and plot-able on a map by any randoms.

            So I do think we owe it to the crew not to speculate where she will resupply. Even manoeuvring in and out of harbour a ‘fishing vessel’ loaded with explosives can ram her.

            If we make it easy all they need are eyeballs booked into a hotel in the likely locations and they will know.

          • And Iran loved using fast small boats (Boghammers) during the ” tanker war” of the Eighties doubt if they’ve forgotten how effective that was and Al queddas attack on the Cole went .But now if the Captain informs the crew that they’ll be going to X by the time he’s finished his speech the World knows through Social media unfortunately its no longer ” loose Lips ” it could be “loose Fingers”

    • The RFA cannot resupply shots from vertical launch silos…the strength of vertical launch silos is their ability to respond to immediate saturation attacks, weakness of vertical launch silos is there ability to respond to attacks over a long period of time.

      As an example I believe a type 22 batch 3 carriers 88 sea wolf missiles in its magazines for its 2 sextuplet launchers..but could only ever have 12 ready to fire. The type 23 could fire every sea wolf it had in a continuous engagement but only had 32 missiles total also the type 22 could have new sea wolf missiles RASed and placed in its magazines ready for reloading, you cannot reloading a vertical cell even if you did RAS over the missiles…

      so the type 22 would be overwhelmed by a large number of attacks over a short time but could keep going fending off small attacks for a long period of time..the type 23 could respond to a large scale attack but once it’s used its 32 missiles that was it.

      pick your poison…it’s why medium calibre guns with good air defence capabilities(modern 40mm to 5inch) are profoundly important and why guided rounds from guns could be a game changer in combatting swarm attackers.

      it’s also why your options to attack need to be around swarms of clever weapon systems over a small number of larger systems…as the way to overcome a modern air defence system is to throw huge numbers at it..it’s the major weakness…that’s why spear 3 will be a game changers.

  2. Good morning 🇬🇧, this has been said before and screams the bleedin’ obvious! There’s room for 1-2 MK41s, slots are there already, and even 2*3*6 CAMM down the sides and for a bonus maybe for an extra 2*4 NSMs. Seriously, what’s this fixation with 24 CAMM ? If it’s not enough, well find a way to increase it! Rant over, back to my ☕.. 😆

    • NSM will also be fitted to T45 in addition to the 24 CAMM. The 48 Sea Vipers will also all be the Aster 30 varient. Instead of a mix of Aster 15’s and 30s. A Wildcat with Martlet and Sea Venom missiles also offers even more firepower.

      • Good morning Robert, yes I am aware of this, it just the issue of the quantity of CAMM that particularly gets up my 🐐…for some reason. It’s adjustable upwards if they want to do it as are adding MK41s. If the T45s have another 10-15 years of life to go it might be well worth it and pending the T26/T31s coming into service. We watch and hope from the sidelines.

    • 24 Cam + 48 Aster 30 would put a T45 ahead of a SM2 equipped AB with 96 tubes (assuming all with AAW missile, on targets that could be engaged. RN practise because of the type of missile is one per target. USN practise for the older and plentiful semi active SM2 variants is 2 per target.

      The issue I have with Mk41 for CAM is its cost and utility. If you intend to use the Mk41 for other missiles fine but then you lose out on CAM slots . If you want it for just CAM you will spend north of 15 mil for 8 tubes that are optimised for hot launch, are 7-8 m long, to fill with a cold launch 3 m long missile. A missile that comes in its own dedicated launch container anyway and can be slid into a hole in the deck with a simple securing arrangement at its base in the ship and at the top in the deck.

        • No…the majority of SM2 is a semi active radar homer. To keep the K% up you shoot 2. The RN did the same with Sea Dart (semi active) and Wolf (CLOS) . With Viper and SC being active homers you just need to get them in the basket close enough to the target before they go active.They dont go active until really close so reducing the escape chance of the target to almost zero.

      • Hi GB, my basic thing is whatever they’re doing with CAMM/CAMM-ER/MR particularly on the T31 and even T26 they could also do on the T45s. If not into Mk41s, which can be used for other things, if the six siloed CAMM were made into 8s that would also be an improvement. Hope they do not waste the space available for adding to the T45s.

      • Hi GB, some of us were discussing this in the thread dealing with the Polish putting CAMM in their Mark-41s on their Type-31 Variant. What LM and MBDA are both pushing as part of that deal is that they can quad pack CAMM and CAMM-ER using LM’s ExLS.
        The sixteen Mark-41 slots which would fit on the Type-45 would allow for 64 CAMM or CAMM-ER missiles to be carried freeing up the Sylver to carry their 48 Aster 30 Block1s and still have the 8/12/16 block of containerised NSMs where the Harpoons were mounted.
        By my calculations that is more than a 100% increase let alone a 50%. Suddenly those costs might just be worth it. Especially with even small regional rebel forces being able to mount saturation attacks. If I am allowed to be slightly cheeky and borrow your analogy that would be 12m of missile in a 7m slot.
        It also means that our Type-31s which are now getting their Mark-41s could in theory carry 128 CAMM. That doesn’t sound so lightweight to me anymore and with their gun selection they are starting to sound like an excellent picket ship for a CSG.
        It would require HMG to sort out the logistical issues of doing it so I don’t expect it will actually happen as like most here I have little confidence in our politicians to do the intelligent thing.

      • Having Mk41s though would give the T45 the opportunity to be loaded with many more things other than SAMs, Tomhawks and ASROC which greatly enhances its combat effectiveness.

      • I get the argument both ways for this.
        T45 should have had it’s Mk41s fitted from the start to increase the ships versatility.
        Now however, I can accept the loss of the Mk41 and introduction of CAAM as it allows for Aster 15s to be replaced by longer ranged Aster 30s, possibly including BMD variants.

    • I’ve been having exactly the same thoughts Quentin. Someone mis-interpreted a very similar comment I made on another thread thinking that I was saying that should have installed MK41 on T45. That is definitely not my view, I was actually of the opinion that using the FFBNW space on T45, originally reserved for MK41, for a dedicated Sea Ceptor silo would be a great way to cost-effectively increase the T45 load-out but my issue is this. If the reserved deck space is sufficient to host the originally planned 16 x MK41 that deck space would have then been sufficient to host 64 Sea Ceptor so now using that space for only house 24 CAMM seems to me to be a very low packing density more akin to a T23 mushroom farm that say using LM stand-alone 3 cell ExLS which I have been told some other CAMM (Sea Ceptor) users are planning to use.

      Might it be the case that only some of the reserved deck space is being used so in fact it might be more like 24 CAMM for the funded upgrades plus another 24 CAMM FFBNW? If a 16 x MK41 footprint could theoretically house 64 CAMM then surely there must be some other technology (e.g. LM ExLS) that is cheaper than MK41 but could get a packing density high enough to get more than 24 CAMM into that reserved area.

      • Same same. We’ll have to see what eventuates. Maybe someone from those called “they” is reading ukdj and be influenced to our way of thinking for this one?

      • That seems reasonable. MRSS look likely to have nearly frigate level defensive armament. See Damen Enforcer, which has been put forwards for the project and has the option to include even a 5″ to provide its own fire support. Also 40mm Bofors to allow small boat defence. Damen Crossover would also be nice; it includes VLS for air defence missiles like CAMM and a 57mm, so vastly improved over the Albions.

        • interesting isn’t it…is the day coming where the most powerful navies do have fast moving escorts but also the concept of a much larger ship c/w replenishment cargo decks, missile handling systems (with heave compensator systems as used in the oil and gas industry) and significant volumes of missiles, multi purpose medium caliber guns and direct energy weapons ……death star coming…who plays Vader….and there has to be a canteen!

          • More like a Star Destroyer, I would think. Launching multitudes of small UAVs, with powerful defensive armament and the ability to operate both alone and in a fleet.

  3. Is the issue the lack of missiles per ship, or is it the number of ships? If HMS Diamond could carry a thousand missiles, could the crew remain on station at this level of alert for 12 months, 6 months, even 3 months? Two ships sharing the load with a swap out every 2 or 3 months (or less) sounds like a better scenario than lots more missiles.

    • It’s a combination of both. Like all RN ships they are under armed with just 48 Aster15/30 silos, and we only have 1 out of 6 vessels operational! Says it all.

      • The size of the missile load was less of an issue before drones etc came along.
        Having 48 aster would be ok if the only threat was another nations aircraft/anti ship missiles. If the houtis only has missiles the load would last longer.

      • So is a USN AB with 96 tubes under armed when it needs to fire salvo shots of 2 x SM2 missiles at a target when the T45 needs to only shoot one?

        • A US AB has 96 x Mk41 vls and carries a mixture of SM2s & Tomahwaks so is far more flexible plus of course there are a lot more of them!!

          • Even better, they have to dilute their AD missiles with land attack, rather than NSM in separate canisters

          • You cannot shoot anything down with a Tomahawk. So actual AAW missiles available for use against air targets is actually lower than a T45.

      • There’s the option to build a couple of AAW T31/A140s to complement the T45s while waiting for the T83. Even if CAMM-ER is added into the Mk41s of the T26 fleet in addition the 6 siloed CAMMs.

  4. A decade from announcement to get Sea Ceptor on the T45’s says a lot about the complete lack of urgency in defence circles. I’m sure the retort will be around budgets but you’d think adding them at the same time as their PIP upgrades would make a lot more sense!

    In terms of HMS Diamond / The Red Sea apparently there’s now a stock of Sea Viper at an overseas base. In this context Oman would be very handy, Gibraltar not so much!

    Ultimately yes all surface vessels need plenty of gun systems and Sea Ceptor to avoid burning through expensive/limited amounts of Sea Viper as a first recourse.

    But it’s also about the number of vessels and the classic ‘two places at once’ argument. Regardless of missiles, ships and crews tire and need replacing on enduring operations and with 17 destroyers and frigates it’s going to be really difficult to keep 2-3 committed without cutting back elsewhere and completely ruining training/maintenance cycles.

    • The issue is more around insertion cycles.

      T45 needs to be fixed now to cover for the period when T23 starts to seriously fall apart.

      Do you delay T45 PiP and risk a total availability calamity?

      That said some of the Sea Ceptor work can be done alongside. The cabling etc can be done at sea or in short periods alongside.

      The main issue is that you would need to fully de store the ship to do the cutting and welding for the Sea Ceptor silos.

  5. The solution is not ideal but there is no other way – when HMS Diamond is short of Missiles she will have to make her way to the designated port to restock and replenish.A stock of Aster Missiles have been forwarded but as yet we don’t know where.Duncan and Dauntless are also key ,as soon as it is practical one of them or ideally both of them should set sail there to add to Operation Prosperity Guardian, to relieve Diamond for restocking or for doubling up.Also in might not be a bad idea to have a stock of Starstreak MANPADS on board as these will be of some use and be more cost effective in dealing with Drones.

  7. I’ll hazard that very few warships could have repelled unscathed the sustained attack made on HMS Diamond. T45 does what it says on the tin, but it was designed before the advent of drone swarms. I am sure the plan to add 24 Sea Ceptors ( a much cheaper missile) will be reviewed to see if it can be accelerated. The pressure is on to get T26 and T31 completed and into service. In the meantime Richmond with Sea Ceptors will relieve HMS Diamond if she needs to reload. Kudos and thanks to the USN who are dealing with the bulk of this problem. Its going to be a long 2024 weeding out the Houthi missile launchers. As the saying goes…one year’s seeds, 7 year’s weeds.

    • 24 CAMM can be made to 36 if the want. Or more if quad packed into 1-2 MK41s and if they’re looking at doing that on the T31s there’s got to be some benefits here?

    • Indeed, kudos to the US but questions to international partners as to why they are happy to benefit from the protection but not happy to share the load?

      • Quite. National self interest at work. The UK hasn’t been able to feed itself since the middle of the 19th century. Remember the Atlantic convoys; Hitler attempted to starve us into submission. Mainland Europe is much more comfortably situated as regards food. Energy is a great leveller, France built a lot of ( now aging ) nuclear power to reduce its dependence on foreign energy. Germany did a deal with the devil Putin and has been forced to look to imported US gas. The UK has a significant dependence on Gulf gas.
        All of our plastic toys, solar panels, cotton clothes, computers are coming from Asia. The good news is that Renault are making cheap EV cars so no need to buy Chinese 🙂
        We are an island nation and 90% of our imports come by sea. We need a much bigger navy to be secure. Simple as that.

  8. Not enough for a sustained fight. That could be the assessment of every single aspect of the UKs military. Sadly there is no sign that those in a position to change that actually give a fuck.

  9. Seems all very well some people saying they should have been prepared for this, the ship should have a thousand silos, and more AA guns blah blah.
    But isn’t mass drone attacks a relatively new thing, that all navies etc need to adapt too, and that doesn’t happen overnight, but also, I’m pretty certain that the UK isn’t the only country that relies on goods transitioning through the red sea, so whilst this particular class of ship may be one of the best of its type in the world,likely the best, isn’t there any other navies who can deploy similar ships to share the work load, instead of leaving it on the shoulders of the UK and the USA, whilst bashing the UK from the sidelines at every opportunity for not having fitted a thousand silos to each and every Royal Navy war ship.

    • Drone attacks, drone swarms etc have been talked about for 20 years now. Whilst the tech is only just starting to really appear the threat was seen coming a long time ago. As usual though heads were buried in the sand and no proactive work done on defending from the threat.

  10. I like the comments about what weapons systems should be available and what ships should be available , HMS Diamond is the only UK warship there , we have nothing readily available to back her up , if she were to come under constant mass attack tomorrow how long would it be before she runs out of ammo and is vulnerable to getting sunk ?? The Houthi’s I think are smart enough to work out how they would benefit from such tactics, if they are brave enough to risk the wrath of the US responding. Cheap drones in large enough numbers have been proven to overcome modern defensive systems , hopefully we won’t see this happen.

    • The limited stocks of high tech weaponry is a problem faced by every protagonist. The Yemen based terrorists don’t have an endless supply and neither do their Iranian suppliers. Once the fancy weapons have gone, we can always resort to cheap drones or pitchforks. Although shovels make a much more effective weapon.

    • We were ,and still are a Navy which has too rely on ” Make do and Mend ” without creating a scene and just get on with the task at hand

  11. The weapons deployed by the Houthis are not the most sophisticated. In the scenario in which surface warships are targeted by land based ASMs as capable as those available to western navies, the anti access tactics will likely prevail.
    On the issue of missile numbers, few modern destroyers carry more. The larger ABs load is 90/96 but the missiles are generally launched in pairs to be effective. With the planned addition of sea ceptor, the T45s will be at least as well armed as the ABs..
    But some less expensive defence against cheap drones also needs to be considered. We cannot afford to use a $1m+ missile against a $50k threat.

    • Better at least than the Americans, for whom SM-6 costs nearly $5m; SM3, according to a quick google, costs at least $10m. Aster is between £1-2m and is launched singly, so we have an enormous advantage in cost efficiency. I’d bet that if we just multiplied the British armed forces by our difference in defence budget, we’d outmatch the Americans in nearly every field.

      • The difference is in the RN arsenal there isn’t a sm3 or sm6 equivalent. That’s not to knock the aster in any way but the sm3 is a abm/anti satellite weapon while the sm6 which is the usn most modern missile is a do it all anti air, anti surface, abm, land attack, and soon to be anti hypersonic weapon.

        • Well, once we have ABM capability, that gap won’t be as bad. My point was that, while people attack MOD waste, we aren’t actually that inefficient relative the the US system

  12. Perhaps the Aussie idea of packing more VLS on the Type 26 is not so crazy.
    We should be looking at this across the whole fleet.
    If it has got through Slasher Cameron’s dense cranium that we live in a very much more dangerous world hopefully it will get through Sunak’s and get the defence budget nearer 3%, do something about retention and recruitment.
    And build our defences back up before we are royally caught up the creek without a paddle AGAIN!!

      • Hi David, Please help

        Is it a technical loading problem for the missiles?

        Oman, an old friend opened Duqm port in 2022 on the Indian Ocean The UK signed an agreement with Oman to use it as a logistics base including QE2 carriers Fly a C17to the newish airport at Duqm with the replacement missiles.
        On another note down the coast towards the Yemeni border was the famous battle of Mirbat where in 1972 10 SAS men held off and defeated 100’s of Dhofari rebels. Also I think the rebels were supported by a pro Soviet Yemen Nothing changes

        • Gunbuster is your man re. loading missiles, what I understand is that the sea would have to be dead calm for both the ships to transfer live ordinance otherwise expect things to go boom.

          The problem is the Gulf States are being undermined by Tehran and being pulled into the Chinese sphere of influence…

          As to Mirbat, the SAS were supported by local troops and, Robert Blay, RAF Strikemasters (?).

          The environment today is very different.

          • Yes you’re right 50+ local militia 30 Balochi Askari 25 Omani police and the 3 Strikemasters turned up just at the right time
            It was still very special that small international bunch of SAS

          • I was in the Gulf States around that time and was friendly with some Gulf Air crew. The ladies were excited about an upcoming visit to Muscat and the RAF!

        • UKJLSB would be ideal, but it is well within the range of Houthi / Iranian missiles and Diamond would be a sitting duck. Also I doubt Oman wants to paint a Bull’s eye on their backs.

          • Yes
            A very good point! The Omanis unlike most Arab states have kept on goodish terms with Iran and have managed to steer clear of trouble with Yemen since their unification in 1990?
            So not UKJLSB Diego Garcia? Cyprus? Haifa? Souda Bay? Naples? Gib? I can see that Cyprus and Greece might object

    • Hi Peter,

      I don’t think they can do that. The ‘nearest port’ has to be friendly and allow our naval ships access plus allow reloading of munitions. I’m not sure that too many ports will allow that. And even if they did, I think the port needs to have some fairly sophisticated loading facilities so any port won’t do.

    • Which port? Is it available, secure and do we have the people ashore with all the right kit and missiles? What happens about taking our one deployed T45 off station for some time?

    • No problem look at a Map and consider just how dangerous it can be, most of the obvious Ports will be unavailable as their leaders don’t want the Houthi firing at them.
      The nearest RN Base is HMS Juffair which is in Bahrain, it has the necessary facilities and hosts a Bay class, a couple of MCM and a T23.
      However to get there you have to transit the Straits of Hormuz so a sitting target for the Iranians, and you need Bahrains permission to dock there.
      Nearer is the Joint Logistics Base at Al Duqm in Oman which has refitted a T23, it’s only about 1000 miles from the operational area, but is well within the range of Houthi / Iranian missiles.
      IMHO the best and safest bet would be either Eilat in Israel (under Iron Dome) or Transit Suez and go into Taranto in Italy.
      Taranto is probably the best ideal option, it’s a NATO base, it’s secure and Italy also use the Aster missile so know how to reload, Plus Diamond had to put in there during CSG21 and had a GR swapped out so it’s a known quantity.
      And whilst there they can replenish stocks, do some maintenance and more importantly the crew can get a run ashore (it’s traditional).
      I’m sure Jack and Jackie will happily be excellent cultural ambassadors, boost the local economy by visiting Museums, foster close ties with the locals, try the local cuisine and maybe partake in some liquid refreshment’s.
      After all they have had a load of folks lobbing nasty things that go bang in their direction so deserve a break.

    • The Americans asked. China refused. So I would love to compare the US or British destroyers to a Chinese one, but there’s no comparing a ship that is there with one that isn’t.

      • China was invited to join in providing Naval escorts
        But diplomatically declined Politely saying that as they have consistently stated that the only possible solution to
        Israel / Palestine scenario is for a immediate cease fire and talks to broker
        A 2 state solution
        Not by adding more fuel to the fire which can only increase the chances of the situation spreading out of control
        In the long run The West is slowly but surely losing any influence it has with Middle East Nations ,this is also true for
        Nearly all Arab , Islamic and Global South
        Nations
        All this merely a continuation of US and UK failing to look before they leap
        And one day both are not going to like the hard thud as they hit the ground
        Stupidly they seem to enjoy the view as they fall

        • The current issue with the Houthis has very little to do with Gaza, and a bit more to do with Israel. The Houthis have got high on the thrill of poking the bear.
          China ought to realise that they have a lot to lose from the increased costs of world trade, arguably more than the UK. Hard-nosed refusal to engage with the West over a global issue will cost them in the long run. Aren’t the CCP all about magnanimous generosity in victory and would leap at the chance to demonstrate US dependence? Or are they worried that displaying their military capabilities would reveal the paper tiger for what it truly is?
          The Chinese have not learnt the lesson of quality over quantity. A Type 55 will probably have to fire 2 or 3 missiles for each target, meaning that the “kill capacity” of the silos is actually less than a type 45. This is an equation that can be applied to American ships as well, and the reason that the T45 is held in such high regard by the Americans and globally.

          • Are you stupid enough to not realise that all Chinese shipping has almost certainly
            Been already given the all clear to sail on regardless by Iran and it’s proxies
            Tis good to/ From other sources in Bed with the USA that are extremely vulnerable
            With the resultant economic inflationary effects
            Strategists in Iran and Yemen are the fools of none
            The West has blindly sailed into a situation that the future of which is far from certain and within their ability to contain

  16. The quickest and easiest would to have another type 45 nearby the swop while HMS Diamond is replenished at the closet friendly port, a bit of a tag team style.

    • This is where the RFA comes into its own they could carry sufficient spare missiles to replenish the type 45s. I wonder how long it would take to replenish 48 missiles someone on here will know 🤔

      • We only have one remaining RFA Fort that can carry munitions and she is in CL dock being fixed. So no can’t be done, it will have to be a C17 airlift job.

        • Think your Taranto idea above is probably the RNs quickest and most effective reload as the Italians probably wouldn’t need us to deliver them immediately just replenish what we take.

  17. The answer to this is our inept governments should have built the eight t 45s.then manned the recruiting offices with rn personnel, not some agency.then we would have had both ships and manpower to do the job.

  18. Looking at the post’s others have been saying. Is the planned introduction of 24. Sea Scepter enough. Could two MK 41 systems be fitted in the same space as the 24 mushroom farm? this would 1 give a posable load out of 64 Sea Scepter quad pack missiles, or a combination of a wide array of missiles that are used by the US.

    • The Dutch Tromps and Aus Hobart’s have 2*32 =64 ESSMs and 32 SM2s. If they do this with the 64 CAMMs and 48 Aster, that’s a hell of a lot better than just 24 CAMM + Aster.

    • Hi, you’re poorly informed on this. The Royal Navy list the number of cells each ship carries on its website. Id recommend you become a wee bit more familiar with the topic.

        • Please expand. If we don’t know what we have, we can’t push for more. Like in China, they could have converted container ships as warships for all we know and the population would still lap up the propaganda

  20. As usual our mod mandarins have made sure we are unable to fight, we have less than 10 operational ships, 2 more and the marines about to be scrapped, no bullets, no shells, no missiles, and all to ‘save money’ while we have 20 or so admiral’s and at least 3 civil servants per fighting man

    • Dave, it’s a mess. Our politicians will never take our defence seriously until it’s too late. To be fair, a significant portion of our voting public won’t take defence seriously either. Our politicians feed off that complacency and give the public what they want so they can get back into power. This is why we have only six T45s and why we may lose our assault ships.

    • Yes bad isn’t it. Defence spending must be raised, also the housing and conditions for all 3 services. If we wish to retain trained people. As for the RN the ship’s in build and planed take far too long to get off the computer screen and into service. The type 23 is well passed its best. Government medalling changing there minds and delaying construction is partly why we are in this mess. Ask your self when was the Type 26 conceived. The hole system needs changing. Im not sure if any political party has the answer. It’s a very sad state of affairs.

      • We could do with getting rid of all the consultants in the NHS paid a fortune to ‘ensure’ we cater for those that identify as a tree and those who never learn the language and all the rest. That would pay for a doubling of the armed forces.

        • Yes Dave something like that. It’s just a crazy world we are living in and I don’t think it’s going to get any better any time soon. The Type 26 Started way back in 1998 . I hope someone is working on the replacement 😂

  21. can T45 quad pack sea captor in its VLS

    30 tubes with Seaceptor would increase the load out from 48 to 138 and allow it to be on station longer.

    realistically I don’t think aster 15 is better than seaceptor, so quad pack is a major upgrade

    this goes to show how we need to have quad packing silos on all major ships

    • Except if you want to do serious ABM or long range air defence when you need Aster 30 out to 70+miles as opposed to SC out to say 12 miles.
      Keep all the Aster 30s and add SC in its easy to install launch system.

      • hi Gunbuster – hope you’re keeping well

        you are right in an ideal world, but once Diamond has fired off its 48 missiles it needs to go off station, the above is what can we do in the very short term with minimal effort.

        for the threat at hand -surely a cheaper missile backed up by 18 aster 30’s is a better mix

        I was also under the impression that CAMM is 25km+ range – if this is incorrect then so is my logic.

        I would like to see the additional 24 cells being added to T45 – mk41 strike as that really does open up a lot of options.

        72 missiles is probably not enough these days when a drone is cheap as chips. but that’s all we can fit to these so quad packing is essential imo

          • By that point, 10 or so Russian jets have been shot down and the CSG is steaming at full speed away from the coast. F35s have been launched, shooting down even more jets. I doubt the risk to the ship would be too great, as the ship would never be allowed into a situation where it runs out of missiles, the risk would be too much for that mission to be undertaken.

          • Yeah, i hope you are right but we have but 2 carriers and planes for just 1, personally I would like to see the UK government make service attractive, i.e. decently paid, decent (British) equipment and a future of growth not the abrupt cut backs we have seen every year for the last 50.why would anyone join today, sent ill equipped and prosecuted if you dare fight back and if you survive a p45 and minimum redundancy pay. We should have a couple of aircraft carriers per ocean, a couple for home defence, a couple for the med, all with decent numbers of planes and nuclear power. They of course should be accompanied by frigates, destroyers and cruiser’s. We are totally dependent on the sea and frankly far from able to defend it

          • That’s America level investment and not something we will ever match. I think the best possible outcome from here will be to have our two carriers so that one is always, if not operational, at least available. I too would like the service to be a proper career path. Many ads at the moment would appeal to the young person who has failed to achieve their dream job and wants to make a difference. The Forces need to show that they can be a dream job in their own right

          • I know it is. We have either the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world, it is time we stopped paying for people to do unimportant things like inclusion courses and building gender neutral toilets in schools and invested heavily where it matters, ensuring we have freedom ourselves. This means vastly increasing the fleet and the carriers. 2 is NOT enough, not even if both were actually operational. Even for the Falklands we needed 3 – only 2 on station at a time but we deployed 3, yes they were smaller but actually those new giants hold very few extra planes and it would take just one lucky hit from the right missile to send one straight to the bottom with NO backup available anywhere. This, for a nation so dependent on the sea, really is pathetic.

          • At present they are on station 24/7 which is a very exhausting business for the crews and what happened off Italy against the German glider bombs and against the kamikaze in the Pacific later on with Okinawa which was intensive action over weeks. For the most part even the the carriers stayed out and only came in for say 12 hours max to launch strikes and recover as with the tungsten ops vs Tirpitz. From the armchair we should be arming up and running convoys and clearing off out of it. Maybe we are doing just that.

  22. Replacing the 4.5 inch gun for a 57mm is the way to go. Ultimately you cannot carry sufficient missiles for all eventualities, or it becomes prohibitively expensive.

    Engage slower targets with the 57mm at max range, use ceptor closer in if getting worried/missing/leakers.
    Target supersonic threats with your big hitters, as these will be more serious weapons.

    Ultimately having marines on board with manpads could be a last resort/extra contingency.
    AA

  23. During WW2 people didn’t realise the effect air power would have on naval warfare. As the war went on ships kept upgrading AA guns to cope. I think we’re at the beginning of that kind of slope with drones – what’s the point of even 96 missiles if the enemy sends 100 drones after you? Every ship around is beginning to look woefully under-gunned at the moment.

  24. Asters are heavy and awkward to reload, but how about CAMM? I don’t know how much the full canister weighs but the missile is only 99kg, a fraction of Aster 15. Perhaps a mobile reloading machine that can be driven to the silo, like a forklift rather than a crane?

    • Sea Ceptor pose the same reloading problems as with Aster,smaller and lighter yes but without a Crane and a stable Ship awkward.

    • Shouldn’t be beyond a competent group of engineers and a hydraulic or electric powered system on rails, maybe an AI controlled arm.

  26. Time we bought SeaRAM, add one to the beak(above the bridge?) one to the bum (well on top of the hanger) in addition to the gun Phalanx, then saddle packs of SeaCeptors either side of the hanger.
    In the meantime hold our breath and hope the Iranians don’t have a copy of Janes Fighting Ships or Internet access to figure it out.
    We need to up our CIWS game for ALL our ships.

  27. We could start thinking about using really thick steel hulls?
    A number of large calibre canons firing a form of buckshot?
    Of course the ship would need a large number of those barrels, maybe in quads? I’m thinking maybe 14 or 15″ guns?

    Back in the real world SeaRam is a quick fix standalone that we could literally bolt on and it uses the same Phalanx radar and can be reloaded on the move.

  28. They really need to fit adaptable deck launchers or similar not only could these fire virtually every missile that goes in a mk 41 but they don’t need the deck to be cut into & as angled unlike a VLS can be reloaded meaning if you have an RFA in tow you could access a larger magazine. No brainer in my personal opinion BAE CMS will have to have MK41 weapons programmed for T26 anyway.
    Adding SM-3, SM-6 potentially some more quad packed Sea Ceptor

  29. I still think we need tiered armourments and a weapon system that can determine between threat levels. Don’t get me wrong, spending $1m to save $100m+ per ship saved is a no brainer. But we need large stocks of cheap munitions for lower grade threats and knocking out the decade old armour. Can’t spend $0.5m each time we need to take out a rust bucket tank that’s been in storage for 20yrs or a “home made” rocket.
    It’s like nuclear ballistic missile defence. Yep, try knocking out the vehicle in space but as a back up just nuke a 1mile dia sphere through which a reentry vehicle is passing. Sometimes I think we try to be too clever and pay a massive cost for it, in terms of money and sustained capability

  33. Not technically proficient in these matters, so this may seem dumb:

    1. By the time the stock of missiles have been used up in heavy combat, the crew will need rotating, won’t they?
    2. The real problem is not having another fully operational Diamond Class vessel to take over the duty
    3. Conclusion: we are going to need to triple the number of “Diamonds”, given that Iran, Russia and China will be working in concert over the next 5-10 years, and a Trump Presidency could finally force the Europeans to pay the full cost of their defence. They having been living off the Yanks (and the British) for decades.
    4. Our national mood will not countenance the necessary expenditure (“what about the NHS!”), so we need to stop pretending to be a World player, and put up, or shut up.

    This is deeply depressing – I was born into an Army family in 1946 (Catterick), and my country is fast becoming unrecognizable…

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here