HMS Middleton, a Hunt-class mine countermeasures vessel, has undertaken training in the Persian Gulf, firing her 30mm cannon.

HMS Middleton’s primary role is to protect vital sea lanes and ensure access to sea bases.

There are always a number of Royal Navy’s Mine Counter Measures Vessels operating in the Persian Gulf at any one time, which means HMS Middleton plays a key role in maintaining peace and stability in the region.

The vessel uses high-powered sonar, remote underwater vehicles and a crew of divers to deal with sea-bed threats. Her role in providing safety at sea is vital to protecting the UK economy and clearing the way for military operations.

Last year also saw the ship celebrate her 40th year. Most warships have a lifespan of 25-30 years, but thanks to their fibre-glass hulls, minehunters can last much longer – as long as the kit aboard is maintained to the highest standard, refitted, and replaced to move with the times… which it is.

Middleton was the first Hunt-class ship to be fitted with Oceanographic Reconnaissance Combat Architecture (ORCA), allowing the ship to classify underwater contacts from a greater distance than was previously possible. Coupled with her 2193 Sonar, SeaFox Mine Disposal System, and highly-trained mine clearance divers, she remains at the leading edge of mine warfare.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

20 COMMENTS

  1. “Showcasing our precision and power with the 30mm canon 💪” yes righty ho lol, i remember my first cap gun, it was replaced by a spud gun and rather dramatically upgraded to the mighty Gat gun. The later .177 BSA was of coarse a game changer in back yard plinking. 😁

    • I started with the BSA.177 and got the M at Penhale sands range Cornwall as a 15 year old cadet with the Lee Enfield .303

      Sorry Baker – memories of youth

      • Speaking of plinking pellpax are selling a bb steel pellet SLR. Not that I collect such items but I am tempted just for old times sake. Don’t think wifey will be impressed though

        • I have a great collection of vintage Airguns including some of the first, it’s an interesting little hobby and always good fun getting them back to accurate firing condition.
          My wife just can’t see what the appeal is, latest gun is a Zulu era Martini Henry converted to .303, de-activated, it’s a well balanced and lightweight gun.

  2. Many a time I sat in that seat when there was an Aimer never lost a Barrel ,but boy was I deaf I my left ear with internal external Ear defenders and Comms

    • Get the claim in!
      MOD has said it won’t contest every single one of the 5000+ people group claim for hearing loss. Some test cases going through to work out the court awarded damages and then they will make an offer based on years served, exposure and how damaged your hearing is (mine is bad… Left ear worse than right but bad across both)

      My exposure is for everything from small arms, 20mm, 30mm, twin 30, 40mm, demolitions, 76mm, 4.5 and Flight Deck work, comms as FDO and those bloody bleep phones!

      • They’ll be inundated with claims, even from those ratings who were shouted at by Parade staff .This may end up like that class action taken against the MOD for Ptsd ,when the high Court judge looked at all the evidence and in his words dismissed the claim as ” you knew what you were getting in too and you signed the dotted line freely” I would expect the MOD will fight this ,after losing £700,000 on one claim last week from a former Marine .

        • They are already inundated. Look up “Hugh James” in the MSM reports. I had a letter from them detailing how things have gone. MOD wont contest using its usual delaying tactics as its pretty much bang to rights. It’s more of a H&S issue as the PPE issued (ear duffs etc) wasn’t fit for purpose for the noise levels experienced. It’s from 1987 onwards as crown immunity ended that year.

          MOD will make offers dependent on service length and if agreed upon by the claimant the payment will be at pace and in a timely (within 6 months) manner.

          You dont have to agree to it and you could just as easily carry on through the court on an individual basis.

      • The only exception too yours is never worked on an Otto otherwise if your putting a claim in . Be wary of a firm named May and a class action against the MOD, apparently as I’ve posted in my last post it didn’t fare well for the claimants. IT all boiled down too : you signed the dotted line ” .I do believe that case was in court ,the Last time Labour were in power

        • Hugh James (https://www.hughjames.com/services/military-legal-services/military-hearing-loss-claims/)

          Here is the agreement. You need to talk to them asap.

          The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has agreed to drop legal defences that have long hindered armed forces personnel from securing compensation for hearing loss. The MoD reached a settlement with law firm Hugh James, acknowledging a duty of care to military members who suffered hearing loss during service. The MoD will no longer use the ‘limitation’ defence, which blocked late claims, or dispute noise exposure levels. This historic agreement benefits many current and former military personnel, who now only need to prove their hearing loss occurred during their service.

          The agreement includes a ‘matrix’ based on the claimant’s service end date, ensuring easier and cost-effective settlements. The MoD will waive previous defences for those who sign up with Hugh James by January 30, 2026. Servicemen and women who served post-1987 and can demonstrate noise-induced hearing loss are entitled to compensation. However, the MoD may not extend the same terms to claimants represented by other law firms.

          This development follows the case of former Royal Marine James Barry, who was awarded £713,715 after the MoD was found negligent in providing adequate hearing protection. The MoD’s acknowledgment reduces the scope of an upcoming trial to determining compensation amounts. The trial is expected next year, and it is likely that subsequent cases will be resolved without court proceedings. The agreement marks significant progress for military personnel seeking justice for hearing loss due to service.

  3. I do wonder if we’ll ever again hear about the 30mm/martlet missile combo that was seen on one of the T23 a (couple?) Years ago. Would be a welcome upgrade in lethality to these vessels and similar.

          • On the t23 the efflux at Red/green 90 was right onto the 30mm Mag door. Not a good thing…
            At R/G 45 and 135 it would be over the mid ships cross passage blatting anyone down there or onto the sea boat…again not good.

            If they developed a standalone lightweight launcher that looked like say a mini RAM launcher for the hangar roof where there is now little interference save for the Sea Ceptor datalink dome, that could be a solution. That would do for T23 for a few years until they left service. T45 there are some upper deck clear spaces they could use. T26/31 I cannot say.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here