HMS Daring has taken on fuel for the first time in years, in the clearest sign yet that the destroyer is close to going back to sea after nearly a decade tied up alongside, according to the ship.

The ship’s own account posted the moment on Tuesday evening, noting she “hasn’t heard this over main broadcast for quite some time” before giving the pipe: “Do you hear there. No smoking, no naked lights, fuelling Ship.” A photograph with it shows a bunkering tanker secured alongside, hoses run across to the destroyer, and a rating on the upper deck watching it happen.

The pipe warns the ship’s company that fuel is going aboard and that ignition sources are banned while it does. Warships take on fuel because they are going somewhere.

Daring has been out of service since April 2017, and we reported last year when she passed 3,000 days alongside. She is now at roughly 3,470 days, or nine years and six months.

The vessel underwent the Power Improvement Project, the replacement of the diesel generators that had left the Type 45 class at risk of losing all power at sea, along with a wider package of refit work. She came back to Portsmouth in early 2023 and has not moved since.

Crewing began ahead of trials, with shakedown expected from around the turn of this year. That would be her first time off the wall since 2017.

The Power Improvement Project has worked through the class ship by ship, with Dauntless completing the same work before her. The intention is to hold the destroyers in service into the 2030s, and a study is now running on whether their out of service dates can be pushed further right.

George Allison
George Allison
George Allison is the founder and editor of the UK Defence Journal. He holds a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and specialises in naval and cyber security topics. George has appeared on national radio and television to provide commentary on defence and security issues. Twitter: @geoallison
X

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

108 COMMENTS

        • NO. 🫣 Blind leading the blind. Healey has conveniently forgotten defence now he has his nice new job and as for Streeting. Less said I think.

        • we could do worse, just ask Denmark about the Red Sea.

          All navies are struggling; modern warships are massively complicated and built in small numbers and so rarely designed.

          One only has to look at the USA to see just how bad things can be, all that money and so little output. Zumwalt, Constellation and LCS. Every ship they have designed since 1989 has been a complete failure and now they are moving to the Trump Class (frying pan to the fire )

          • Agreed. Complex means issues.

            Personally I think we should look to providing, in this country, many of the new ships for Europe.

            Get a decent tested and trusted design and build quickly churning them out for all European navies so that the Europeans can focus on land based systems to address their immediate threat. You could end up with various countries chipping in to fund various ships, drones, etc.

            Need to get ahead of the game.

              • I think you need to inform yourself. UK yards have more ships in production than other EU countries. If you include British derived ships like those in the global combat ship programme, substantially more, British derived output.

              • Which was deliberate, so all the skilled people don’t lose their jobs. Last ship finished, followed by first of the new type immediately

            • Good idea. The Global Combat Ship enterprise expanded further. I think it’s currently 34 ships across 4 nations, if memory serves.

          • Correct. Those comparisons you raise are rarely made. A greater issue as I see matters is recruitment. Does the navy have the numbers to crew the few ships it has?

      • At the moment there are very few signs sadly. Everything is painfully slow. If the government really wants to get involved they need to find a way with industry of sppeding all the processes up.

        • I know what a joke of a defense minister. What is labour doing. I mean they are ruled by the UN and the Organisation of Islamic co operation OIC that runs the UN. It’s why they won’t stop the small boats. All part of the plan.

            • Of course it is a plan. what you don’t think 55 countries that make up the OIC that always vote with the global souths 77 countries in UN resoluttions, cannot control what our government has to abide by when it comes to immigration and international law? You are daft. We do not control the UN anymore and Labour are obviously trying to destroy this country. If you cannot see that. of course there is a plan.

              • Don’t think we ever controlled the UN. We left that attempt to Russia, China and the US.

                I’m no great fan of Labour at the best of times but I don’t think they are trying to destroy anything. That does not mean that they are doing stuff which might end up doing harm.

            • I mean why do you think Sergei Lavrov got a standing ovation at the UN the other day for spouting absolute nonsense about ukraine bein g Nazis and the west being the enemy, Because the UN is not on our side and you need to wake up.

        • Yes there are plenty of ways of speeding up the process which suggests automation. Trouble is Labour will reject that in favour of getting people into job. In truth more automation will result in more productivity and consequently more jobs.

      • To be fair T45 has had problems and we are nearing completion of the fixes plus upgrades.

        Both Daring & Defender are due (I believe) to be available this year which means we will have 5 out of 6 available probably for quite a while.

        That will leave Diamond still under PIP however that must be heading towards completion.

        In theory we could end up with all the T45s available for quite a while.

      • Also it is probably worth mentioning that during the next few months up to three Astutes should be available for tasking.

        It is disappointing that we don’t have sufficient available however we are on the cusp of sorting that out.

        Ajax is a completely different problem. Design issues are causing problems which require a temporary and permanent fix.

        True it has been bad news but the programme seems to be continuing.

        • Re Ajax: Probably needs another thread, but I read somewhere that the reason there has been little news recently is that, disenchanted Boxer and stuffed by Ajax the army, the MOD and key suppliers are engaged in ‘A, B, C’ ( Ajax, Boxer, Challenger); a holistic assets review / remodelling program in which nothing is off the table except an outcome which has more than 148 CR3s. Be interesting to see the outcome.

            • Yeh, that’s what I was thinking – put more of the money into the systems / drones / anti-drones and mobility and less into ‘heavy’ armoured vehicles.

  3. This should be subject to an enquiry but that would cost a lot of money and all that must go on the fleet, instead of lawyers’ pockets.

    • No the PIP only takes a year or so. It was due to crew shortages and using parts for other ships!

      All the other ships have been way quicker. Dimond should be back I think 2028

      • There are 32000 people in the RN, including RM. With so few ships at sea, what are they all doing? Is the problem shortage of key specialists?

        • Take about 15k off of that, RM, FAA, Submarine Service.
          So the pool for those streamed into surface ships is smaller.
          Add the shore based posts, those in purple postings, off with NATO, working in the various MoD organisations, and so on.
          All adds up.

          • Good point. The Marine Navale has @ 12000 people in its action force( ie the surface fleet) out of an overall manpower total similar to the RN. No equivalent to the RFA so support vessels manned by MN personnel.
            I’m still not convinced that crew shortages explain the long delays in getting T45s back into active service.

            • Not sure I am either, if I’m honest.
              Throw in a lack of spare parts and money.
              Whatever, it looks very poor.
              Any other precedent, from the Cold War on? Leander, T21, T22, T42, County Class idle for so long? Don’t know.

              • Now that does make sense.
                One thing we should learn from this and other fiascos like Ajax is to choose platforms with proven reliability. A lesson even more important to the USN which has wasted $b on failed programmes.

          • It does all add up but we also have to look at the reality of its the navies job to put ships and people to sea. An organization of 32,000 people should never be in a position where a ship with a crew of less than 200 can’t go to sea for lack of sailors when there are fewer than 1,000 at sea at any given time.

            Only a government agency could accept such a low output vs its labour input. Any private company would go bankrupt on these figures.

            • But when you break the total down between General service, FAA, Submarine service, RM. People in training, people on promotion career courses, leave, medically downgraded, the shore establishment drafts that need filling. Its not a lot of people.

      • Well maybe.

        T45 is large and has large crew requirements and is therefore expensive to operate.

        When it became clear that both QEC had to be operated with full crews and the Camerloon 1.9% budget wasn’t going upwards any time soon various cuts had to be made. In essence this meant using T23 for presence and not T45. Added to which Daring had various, first of class, engineering issues that were expensive to fix. As other said she was used as a spares donor for her sisters.

        When the penny began to drop that T23 were finally falling apart and that the ‘quick into service’ T31 wasn’t going to cover the escort gap then getting all of the T45s off the wall became an urgent priority.

        Also the open conversation around last GE that T45 is really the only ABM defence that the country has made getting them back into service something of a priority. T45 were the only answer to the issues to hand without getting into fresh R&D projects with their associated uncertainties.

        The timeline is then predicated by the general shortage of skills as the push-pull of building two classes of frigate; fleet solids ships; two classes of submarines and trying to fix T23 and T45 all at the same time bit badly. It is another reason why T23 refits were abandoned as it was soaking up too much manpower. It is all a question of resource focus.

        • Glad to see someone else labelling him as Camerloon, I usually add “& Osbod”, the reason they are bigger than their predecessors is because building small was neither efficient nor cost effective.
          The lessons learnt from the Leanders (upgrades were limited and very expensive) led to going back to the Old Admiralty Board Margin which allowed room for growth / upgrades during a ships lifetime. And it’s certainly getting used now, and as for a large crew they actually operate with a smaller crew than the T23 Frigates (which really were a tight design).
          IMHO if I had a magic wand I’d actually get out the plans and figure out how maximise the R&D and build a B2 T45, but ditch the Hanger and maximise the AAW load.
          My reasoning for that is it’s probably a cheaper, more deployable, mobile and hence resilient option for U.K. GBAD ! Japan came to a similar conclusion when they ditched AEGIS ashore and opted for 2 very enhanced AAW ASEV DDG’s (Cruisers TBH).

          • The 2010 defence cuts were made; cost a fortune longterm; damaged op Relentless; catastrophic for SSBN; catastrophic for frigate replacement.

            I think you might underestimate the size of the deployed crew on a T45. It is a very large ship that is not fully automated.

            I have some sympathy for iterating the T45 design as it is now debugged – even just stretch it enough for another 48 cell VLS would be fine. Argument always is ‘wouldn’t do it that way now….’…the real argument is the a ship like that is designed around the sensor fit/effectors and that determines the hull when all that is fitted in the ultimate defence constraint of £££££.

            T45 is a very, very strongly built ship with a superb sensor fit. Just needs a some missile barges that can keep up with her to gain the full fat.

    • With other ships getting CAMM and NSM ahead of her thry B should be getting better at upgrading these time wise if independently done of PIP. Would still like to see another bank of 4×6 CAMM added, split sides of Aster silo or amidships or on hangar roof but 24 is still pretty (half) decent. Plus to add Ancilia anf Dragonfire I believe?

  7. Incredible maintenance work can take almost 10 years. No point holding an inquiry I think we can guess what most of the findings would be and yes it would cost money but no where near as much as having this asset along side since April 2017. The RN MOD etc really needs to do a lot better than this utter shambles.
    On a positive it’s good news she is going to return to service. Does that mean we will have 3 type 45’s available?

    • Crew shortages ! The pip doesn’t take long, robbing parts for other 45s also caused issues.

      The other vessles upgrades are way way shorter. Dimond shold be back I think 2028.

      Yep and HMS Defender should be back next year.. a much shorter 3/3.5 year overhual

    • Currently, Dauntless and Dragon are available. Dragon will need a bit of maintenance after her six-month deployment, so it’ll just be Dauntless for a while. My guess is that it’ll be Dauntless and Daring for the rest of the year, then Defender relieving Dauntless, and so on.

  9. No senior leader in uniform has taken responsibility for this utter shambles. Surely with so little sea time they can remain in service until at least 2050.

  10. As much as I like to see her back on operations I do wonder if it would have been better to keep her a bit longer in refit for the SAMPSON upgrades and installation of Sea Ceptor.

  11. Good to see her return to the fleet. The lack of money is preventing the refit these ship badly need to be a 21st century goal keeper of the fleet.

    They need the utterly useless and totally obsolete 4.5 ” landed and replaced with a Bofors gun fit, the 57mm and twin 40mm guns, plus dragon fire to provide robust defence against mass drone attacks.

    • True … (except the Mark 8 Mod 1’s are far from obsolete.) The MoD’s budget for the t45 class has been prioritised on fixing the catastrophic power generation crisis (9 years … some crisis!) and then rolling out the Sea Viper Evolution / Sea Ceptor missile upgrades and installing DragonFire later.

      Swapping out ‘Kryten’ wasn’t considered a cost-effective use of funds given everything else they had to tear apart and rebuild, as retrofitting that larger gun onto a t45 requires massive structural weight changes and below-decks magazine redesigns … having said that, I think costs were the main constraint.

      The rollout and physical installation of Sea Ceptor / CAMM silo integration which adds 24 cell Sea Ceptor silos in front of the existing main vertical launch system is actively underway. HMS Defender is serving as the first ship to receive this upgrade, with integration work continuing through 2026. The plan is to stagger the refits across all six t45 destroyers sequentially, with the entire class wide upgrade projected to be completed by the end of 2032.

      The ‘Sea Viper Evolution Programe’ focuses on ballistic missile defense and radar software / hardware package with the intention to enhance the SAMPSON radar processing and upgrade the missiles to the Aster 30 Block 1 / Block 1 NT standard to give the destroyers anti-ballistic missile defense capabilities; acording to Naval News, with an IOC formally slated for February 2028, closely following the initial blocks of engine overhauls and missile cell additions.

      • Hi Magenta, all good points, but the Mk8 gun is totally obsolete in every way that matters, it no longer has an AA mode, its incapable of being used with smart fused modern ammunition types too.

        So unless we intend to do a battle of Jutland style ‘ close and engage ‘ with the Russians, or use a precious T45 for coastal bombardment, what use does it have?

        • As you said it’s useless for AAW which is the prime role of the T45s, if you accept money is tight and prioritise accordingly then using the criteria “To Float, to move and to fight” then replacing the MK8 is on the nice to have list but there are more important things to spend any money on. And it does have a use, it can carry out Naval Gun Support and frighten any small ships nearby.
          The T45 was built with a very big growth margin (unlike the T42, T23, Leanders etc etc), and that’s being used to ensure they can move and maximise their AAW ability. Yes she was designed to take ASW torpedo tubes, but that’s not her role so never fitted, rebuilding the power plant, fitting 24 CAMM, upgrading Sea Vyper and adding NSM are the priorities.
          It’s great to have Daring back !

          • Yep, that being tbe case, I would replace the Mk8 mount with a further 24 round extension to the CAMM mushroom farm and replace the twin Sea Whizz with Bofos 40mm units.

            The additional Sea Ceptors are of Greater utility than a washing line mk8, with limited capability and ageing ammunition, that in all likelihood will never fire in anger again.

            Make it simple, remove the gun, just leave the below decks equipment and pop a camm farm extension over the top..

      • T45 will have an orphan gun with the Mk8 shortly
        Binning it and putting a 57mm on is a low risk and affordable fit proving an excellent inner lay air defence against flying threats from drones to older anti ship missiles

        • The upgrade program should reach FOC by late 2032, across all six destroyers, as they receive the upgrade one by one during their own scheduled deep maintenance periods.

      • I think the 4.5 is a really useful calibre. Our 5.25″ was when fixed and firing an 80 lb shell as good as the 6″ and better than the US 5″.

        • @Jonno,
          Although NGFS is facing a strategic dead end, the Mk 8 will just have to soldier on, the”penny wise, pound foolish” doctrine forced onto the MoD by Treasury and the financial and structural reality means it is staying until the t45’s retirement.

          Even though the shell and powder case were handled separately, the heavy weight (36.3 kg) severely tired out crews, capping its rate of fire to about 7–8 rpm. By contrast, the US 5-inch/38 fired a lighter 25 kg shell at a devastating 15–20 rpm. The whole ‘QF’ wasn’t QF enough.

    • Could make good sense specially if 57mm & 40mm are already being ordered for the T31s. Or even to give the 4.5″ its AA capabilities back?

      • The thing that makes the 57mm so very capable is the smart ammunition, combined with twin 40mm guns, it would create a wall of shrapnel, not much is coming through that broadside!

        The old mk8 AA mode was ( I have been told) very much a last ditch effort anyway and very minimally effective in that role.

        • Be careful on the Mk8

          That statement was based on the old hydraulically controlled gun coupled with older radars and CMS.

          Totally different story with EO or SAMPSON and the servo electric turret.

          I wouldn’t be too surprised if the AAW mode hasn’t been quietly restored.

              • It’s not an AA round with a fragmentation payload – it’s just random shrapnel.
                It has no proximity fuzing – it’s just using VT fuzing to explode at a point in space.

          • SB,
            Hmmm … seem to recall a similar statement re potential unannounced reestablishment of hull based sonar for T-45 class. Efforts restricted to T-45s, or are the blokes at the Admiralty quietly generally preparing for hostilities? 🤔

            • All that stands between AAW on 4.5” being reactivated is a software module.

              Given the utility of a large shrapnel field against drones……

              On the sonar very few T23 left in service. The sonar crews need to be active somewhere to keep numbers up ready for T26 and there are not that many hulls so they are somewhere.

              The idea that a T45 sonar office unmanned at all times came from one person who posted regularly for a while. It then caught on.

              • Without proximity fusing, the 4.5″, AA mode would be next to pointless.

                57mm with a range of different ammo and proximity fusing options, chucking shells at a rate of 200 rounds a minute (used in conjunction with the extremely capable 40mm Bofors for any leakers), against 4.5″ Mk8, simple range fused and 25 rounds a minute and sea Whizz.

                One combination will destroy hundreds of incoming drones in a saturation attack, the other would be lucky to stop 10% of them and is quite simply obsolete.

                In reality, the 4.5″ gun mount was already approaching obsolescence when it was specified for T45 at the end of the 90’s.

                • I’d read @Gunbuster’s comments about the tri fuzed shells from a few years back.

                  Yes, T45 was meant to have 155mm gun that was protyped at Barrow and never went further because of the project budget blowout following the departure from Horizon.

                  • The 155 was an absolutely stupid idea. 10 rounds per minute of HE only, oh, and back to bagged charges – what fun!

                    5” packs nearly as much HE bang as 155

        • JC,
          If RN feasibility study of extending T-45 OOS timeline significantly is proven credible, wouldn’t the cost effectiveness of gun mods be validated? Especially desirable if defence spending percentage gradually increases through 2035? Some decisions are not yes/no, but rather not yet. 🤔🤞

          • It’s a beyond obvious modification really. Fitting the Bofors guns systems to T45 would dramatically increase its effectiveness at its one and only job, defending the fleet from Air attack of all types.

            At best there will only ever be 3 operational, so retaining the creaking old 4.5″ mount for shore bombardment/washing line use, really is nonsense.

            Its being retained because there is no money to provide a capable gun fit, it’s that simple, will that change, we can hope…

  12. When looking at the roughly 3,300 total days, nearly 9 years, that HMS Daring spent out of service, the breakdown of how that time was spent reveals a stark imbalance.

    The actual physical cutting of the hull, and the removal of the old WR-21 gas turbines, then welding in the three new V16 diesel generators, and structural shipyard work took roughly 1.5 to 2 years of active labor … primarily while she was at Cammell Laird and during her initial/final phases in Portsmouth.

    Those remaining 5.5+ years; over 2,000 days, were spent completely sidelined without physical engineering work happening. That massive block of non-engineering time breaks down into a combination of administrative, logistical, and workforce bottlenecks.

    The initial lay-up 2017–2019 saw her sitting untouched in cold storage in Portsmouth for years simply because the Royal Navy lacked the sailors to crew her and they prioritised other ships.

    Due to dockyard queue backlogs she waited years for a heavy dry-dock slot to open up in the UK’s severely restricted defense industrial base before she could even be towed to the shipyard.

    There was a supply chain and post-refit gridlock after years lost to component sourcing, combat-system re-integration, and crucially sitting pierside after the engineering was finished because the Navy still didn’t have the specialised personnel ready to take her back to sea.

    Thus … while the ship was designated as being “in refit/upgrade” for nearly a decade, the actual spanner-turning engine replacement only occupied a fraction of that timeline. The vast majority of those years were spent waiting in queues, sitting empty, or stalled by manpower shortages.

    HMS Dauntless was the first of the t45s to enter the yards, complete the PIP, and finish her trials to return to active service after finishing her heavy refit phases around late 2022.

    HMS Daring was the very first ship where the engineering design, blueprints, and structural cutting schemes were originally mapped out, because she is the lead ship of the entire class. However … because HMS Daring got bogged down by administrative delays, funding pauses, and long stretches of sitting idle after her initial planning, HMS Dauntless actually bypassed her in the queue, entered the shipyard later, and managed to complete her physical refit much faster … Crazy.

    • “ The actual physical cutting of the hull, and the removal of the old WR-21 gas turbines, then welding in the three new V16 diesel generators, and structural shipyard work took roughly 1.5 to 2 years of active labor”

      WR21s still very much power T45

      3 new DGUs are for sure being fitted through the opened hull.

      • @Supportive Bloke.
        You are correct, in my head I was thinking “… ‘removal’ of the old WR-21 gas turbine’s intercooler and recuperator units (ICR) to be redesigned and rebuilt, I know parts were sent back to specialised shore-based overhaul facilities (Roll Royce) to be redesigned, stripped and reconditioned. However … my little brain typed ‘removed’ instead and left it at that. FF, in the aft engine room the ICR accounts for about 25% of the WR-21 main propulsion module, around 11 tonnes.

        The original version failed because it couldn’t handle thermal cycling; the constant expanding and contracting that happens when shifting between high and low speeds in hot water. To correct this, the unit underwent several physical design changes. Apparently, over 2,000 components were changed. Engineers modified the actual alloy metallurgy, structural geometry, and fastening systems within the heat exchanger matrix. They re-engineered the internal airflow, remapping the physical pathways inside the core to better distribute the intense thermal stress across the system. The aim was to ensure that once a swapped unit was installed, it could physically last through two entire deployment and maintenance cycles without a structural failure. The internal engineering of the recuperator system was significantly altered from its original 1990s Franco/US design.
        –

        I saw above you wrote “… T45 is a very, very strongly built ship with a superb sensor fit. Just needs a some missile barges that can keep up with her to gain the full fat.” – Does that mean you are comming round the idea of distributed USV’s, like the t91 missile barges?

  13. George, we know it’s Advanced, but this glazing title is Daily Fail language, not a defence focused userbase. Saying “Type-45 Destroyer nearing upgrade completion” is better or “HMS Daring Destroyer nearing Upgrade Completion”.

    • Thanks for the feedback. I do understand where you’re coming from, but UK Defence Journal’s readership is much broader than the core defence audience who already know what a Type 45 is or why HMS Daring returning to sea matters. A significant amount of our traffic comes from search, social media, Google Discover and readers who may have little prior knowledge of the subject, so headlines have to explain the significance of a story in fairly plain language while still being accurate. “Type 45 destroyer nearing upgrade completion” is perfectly accurate, but it assumes a level of familiarity with the programme that a large proportion of readers simply won’t have, and in this case the actual news point is that Daring appears close to returning to sea after years alongside. “Advanced British warship” is also a fair description of a Type 45 and gives a general reader an immediate reason to understand why the story is significant. We try to strike a balance between serving the specialist readership and making defence reporting accessible to people coming to the subject for the first time.

  15. Ok
    So, the problem preventing Daring sailing was crew shortage?

    What happened to the crews from all the ships that were decommissioned in the last 8 years?
    Could they not have been transferred?

  16. Great that she’s back on sea trials ? One of the last class of Destroyers for the RN has we know it .I rather like the Japanese and Italian navy’s idea of how the next new Destroyers will be rather than theses drone ships for our RN .Bye bye Tape 83 . 😟

  17. So what do we have T45 fleet wise.. it is starting to turn a corner and will only get better,

    Daring: returning to readiness had PIP will need weapons upgrade refit
    Defender: in full refit, PIP and weapons upgrade return to readiness mid 2027
    Diamond in full refit, PIP and weapons returning to fleet end of 2027 ?
    Dauntless PIP will need weapons refit active
    Dragon PIP will need weapons refit active
    Duncan entered PIP and weapons refit return 2028

    So hopefully once the last PIP is completed around 2028 it’s just three shorter weapons and systems upgrade refits as well as standard Lloyds between 2028/9 and 2032…

    • Getting as many T45s back to “Active” status has to be the plan. As you suggest, weapons or systems upgrades are secondary to having a useable vessel available after so long. Would it be too much to hope that the long maintenance period has not been used to improve weapons etc also?

  20. Cool, once again “My comment Is awaiting moderation”……..
    Thank god offline Life still allows free speech……….

    • I asked you to stop two things: arguing moderation out in the threads, and the guessing about who’s posting under which name. Both are back, there’s now a second account on your email address, and the reply to me was that I should stop taking things personally.

      Much of it has been aimed at me and at what we publish, phrased so that anyone objecting looks humourless. You told me it wasn’t. It clearly was.

      And it takes up more of my time than any other account on the site. I run a website not a moderation queue for one commenter.

      The account is closed. If you want to discuss it further, email me. I’m not doing it here.

      George

  21. Thank God we are safe now! No more nights in the Anderson Shelter. Every little step forward helps I guess but Burn Ham’s total failure to mention defence once in his one man play was very telling.

  22. Lets hope this isn’t just moving it so it can go for more repairs /service and instead it’s on its way to active service. The UK got very lucky with the Russia v Ukraine war, has it spilled over the navy was clearly years off being ready to do it’s job.

  23. So going forward we should have 2 (on occasions 3) type 45’s available for active service which is far better than earlier this year.

  24. Good news. $64k question. What’s the feasibility of the European navies putting together a force capable of keeping the bab el Mandeb strait open.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here