HMS Diamond returns to Portsmouth today after an historic Middle East deployment that saw her shoot down nine drones and a Houthi missile.
The Type 45 spent six months helping safeguard vital international shipping lanes against indiscriminate attacks on merchant vessels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden – through which 11 per cent of global trade passes.
According to the Royal Navy in a news release, the ship’s momentous mission saw her sail nearly 44,000 miles, spending 151 days at sea and, in one night on January 9, shoot down seven drones aimed at merchant vessels by the Houthis in Yemen – the most aerial threats neutralised by a Royal Navy warship in modern times in one day.
“Her tenth and last target shot down was also a landmark moment. Never has a British ship, aircraft or otherwise engaged a target travelling so fast as the Houthi missile Diamond destroyed in the Gulf of Aden in April.”
Lieutenant Freddy Hamblin, Diamond’s Officer of the Watch 4, was quoted in the news release:
“I’d just come on watch after sunset when we anticipated the large-scale drone attack. As they closed on us the apprehension and excitement built and it was great to see the crew’s training kicking in.
When US Navy units began engaging the sky lit up with orange sparks like fireworks. When you engage with Sea Viper, the whole bridge shakes and there’s a bright flash and a loud whoosh, followed by silence and darkness.
We have such trust in the ship and in each other. The professionalism and skills we’ve built as a team is hard to replicate and we’ve built absolute faith in the command and in the capabilities of the ship. After seven months we’ve built a great team but it’s good to be coming home now.”
Deputy Marine Engineer Officer, Lieutenant Jack Langham, added:
“I think of the general alarm sounding with only moments to react but being totally reassured by the professionalism of my crew mates. Also, witnessing an allied missiles streak overhead from the flight deck. My department has kept this ship running through extreme heat and demanding operational requirements and we’ve provided the highest levels of availability. We were only able to do so through relentless hard work and the application of engineering excellence that has fast become a standard.
The success of the Marine Engineering department has underpinned the success of Diamond and I am immensely proud of the team. I feel relieved to be coming home now, but also proud of what has been a phenomenal journey. We return to base port with heads held high having saved lives in a highly operational deployment. I’m looking forward to spinning some steely war dits (stories) to my colleagues, playing some village cricket; most of all, relaxing.”
Welcome back. A job well done.
unfortunately the decision to only build six has come back to haunt…simply put six is not enough to provide escorts for a CBG, amphibious group and and now ongoing air defence in the eastern Indian Ocean..especially now we live in a world in which everyone and his dog seams to have anti shipping ballistic missiles. Infact in reality six is what you need for the CBG..then we need another 6 for the other stuff..which makes 12…or the planned number..funny that.
Disagree. There are no resources to build one mission ships.
The problem is that Type 45 Type 26 and Typer 31 are one mission ships.
That is a serious mistake by Royal Navy.
All of them should have anti ballistic capability.
Italians can do it with Horizon, FREMM, PPA.
I’m not sure I would call the Horizon and the FREMM able to do every mission well…the Horizons have no hull quieting or electric drives so although they have functional ASW sensors they are not ASW escorts by any stretch..in a one to one match with an SSN the SSN will hear and hold them well before they will do the same…It’s the same with the FREMM they can do AAW, but the are in no way high end AAW vessels..the French gave upgraded AAW to the last two FREMMs but even they are still well below a Horizon in AAW capacity and can’t engage ballistic missiles…
Even the U.S. burkes are know to be not great ASW escorts…essentially you cannot get high end capabilities in both ASW and AAW in one hull..something has to give .what you can do is get high end capability in one area with reasonable capabilities in other areas…that’s what FREMM, T26 etc do..they get pretty good AAW capabilities…but not the very high end you need if your parking off someone else’s real estate..especially of they have ballistic missiles,
Point taken on Horizon for lack of ASW capabilities. I suspect that was one of reason for to have only 2.
For everything else i disagree and you are incorrect.
Italian FREMM have an even better radar as Horizon. Lacks the high volume one, but it is not essential. They have been usual participants in anti-balkistic missile exercises.
PPA will have the fixed Kronos radar in dual band are prepared to have Aster BN1
French FREMM-DA frigate already downed ballistic missiles…
French Navy Air Defense FREMM Intercepts 3 Ballistic Missiles
from Naval News.
—————
In my opinion RN surface force is badly designed.
The only thing i consider positive is the CAMM missile and adding 48 to T45 is a very good decision, also same number for T26.
For the current times you need long range AAW in all combatants, otherwise you have slow medium drones firing small missiles at 50km from you and can do nothing about it. 2-3 medium guns to down decoys and cheap drones.
I would say not, the FREMMs can do air defence but the are not in anyway as effective as dedicated AAW destroyer like the T45…
we will start with the French FREMMs..
1) they are slower than dedicated air defence destroyers and that matters in a carrier battle group that will be operating at high speed…their single gas turbine is simply not ideal…neither is 27knots.
2) 16 A43 and 16 A70 silos and the A70 silos are also dedicated to land attack, that is a very very limited loadout for an AAW escort..fine for self defence and limited area defence.
3) Herakles is simply adequate, nothing more nothing less…
4) as you noted there is no S1850 set for wide area search..and that is actually really important for a high end AAW asset.
Of the Italian FREMM most of them are not even ASW ships anyway and don’t have a towed array..they are GP frigates and their biggest weakness is only 16 A50 silos which is a tiny load out…
so yes they can do AAW but a 1 to 1 replacement for dedicated AAW destroyer they are not.
But yes I agree that the RN escorts could have a bit more multi purpose..so the AAW destroyers should be able to participate in the ASW screen..even if it’s just being able to sanitise an area with active sonar..the same with the type 31…but the T26 is profoundly multipurpose..and has a far better loadout than the Italian FREMMs..even if the radar may be a weakpiont.
Yes they would not be has effective but the extra effectiveness of Type 45 is only shown against high performance targets and a large action with hundreds of targets in the air.
Hitting a SCUD was already possible for 90’s tech, that can be put even in a corvette today.
Can have the search volume of Type 45′ of course not, but can a part off the work.
RN choice have only 6, 4 in operation and damages soon pill up and then only 2. Then what?
Instead Italians and now French that finally saw the light added also Aster 30 to their 4500t FDI frigates. Yes they have less depth in magazines but they have many more ships. The loss of one ship is not so dramatic as what would be for RN and they can cover much more ocean.
Carriers are not that fast except the Americans, that said , in excess of 27Kt is at usual bracket for frigates, only Italians are generally faster.. the Type 26 blurb says in excess of 26 kt.
Type 26 UK can’t destroy an aircraft or drone at 40-50km, FREMM can do at 150-200km.
The range to a target at 12km altitude is also severely diminished, because one of problems with relatively short range missiles is altitude reach.
Morning Alex, is it confirmed that they’re adding 48 and not just 24 CAMM to the T45s in addition to the 48 Aster’s? If they’re not going with 1-2 MK41s then that’s a next best. Things are looking up and I’m checking my ☕… Lol 😁
You are correct 24 CAMM instead of 48 for Type 45. For some reason i put they would have same number of Aster and CAMM.
All good. I still reckon they could squeeze in 48 CAMM but it would have to be in 2 x ExLS 24s or additional 6 CAMM silos down the sides. Anyway, 24 it is.
GP warships – e.g. the 1950’s Type 81 Tribal class, the 1960’s Type 12I Leander class, and the 1970’s Type 21 Amazon class – are jack of all trades but masters of none. They were very useful in a relatively low threat environment such as the East of Suez in the 1960’s. But many of the Leander’s were modified in the 1970’s at great expense in order to become very specialist warships because that was the only way they could provide the high-end capabilities needed to counter the Soviet Navy in the North Atlantic. In the late 1970’s the RN decided that specialisation was the only viable option – hence the Type 23, Type 45 and Type 26 classes. The Type 31 is the first exception to that rule, and its an enforced decision due to the Tory government deciding in 2015 not to fund the approved number of 13 T26’s.
There is being a specialist from a 2500t frigate hull and being a specialist of 8000t frigate hull.
Welcome home. Good work, well done. T45….does what it says on the tin.
Well done Diamond. Yet, the Osborne era defence cuts halved the numbers of this inspiring class of British built warships. Savings that cut the nose from our own face.
The order was cut from 12 to 8 in 2004 and then to 6 in 2008.
Thanks. I stand corrected. My horizon was blotted out by the 2010 Defence Review – or blinded by the ‘peace dividend’.
Thanks for doing that, it’s a long term task of mine reminding just who cut what and when.
The 2008 cut of T45 numbers, maybe a kneejerk response to an impending financial crisis?
That particular idiot cut was all on Labour.
Yes first they said the 12 hulls was basses on the T42 numbers so as T45 is so much more capable we will only need 8. Then they said we will fit T45 with cooperative engagement like the USN so they will only need 6. We did not get the USN system. So they cut the order in half. It was all cost saving and the arguments we paper thin to try and justify their stupid actions.
👍Correct!
Just watched her come in, needs a bit of rust treatment !