In a series of alarming attacks, several commercial vessels, including two UK-owned ships, were attacked in the southern Red Sea, triggering a response from the USS Carney, an Arleigh-Burke Class destroyer of the United States Navy.

These attacks, occurring in international waters, have heightened tensions in the region and underscored the growing risks to international shipping lanes.

The first incident unfolded at approximately 9:15 a.m. Sanaa time when the USS Carney, patrolling the Red Sea, detected an anti-ship ballistic missile launched from Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen. The missile targeted the MV Unity Explorer, a Bahamas-flagged, UK-owned bulk carrier. The missile impacted near the vessel, which was manned by crews from two nations. Fortunately, there were no casualties.

At noon, the situation escalated when the USS Carney engaged and successfully shot down an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) launched from Houthi-controlled regions. The drone’s specific target was unclear, but its trajectory suggested a potential threat to the Carney. This engagement occurred without any damage to the US vessel or injuries to its crew.

A second attack on the MV Unity Explorer occurred at approximately 12:35 p.m., this time resulting in a direct missile hit. In response, the Carney provided assistance and during the operation, detected and destroyed another inbound UAV. The Unity Explorer reported minor damage from this strike, but again, no crew members were harmed.

Later in the afternoon, around 3:30 p.m., another UK-associated vessel, the MV Number 9, a Panamanian flagged, Bermuda and UK-owned bulk carrier, was struck by a missile. This incident also resulted in no casualties.

The fourth and final attack of the day occurred at 4:30 p.m. when the Panama-flagged MV Sophie II was hit by a missile. In response to the distress call, the USS Carney intercepted and shot down another UAV en route to assist the Sophie II, which reported no significant damage.

U.S. Central Command has condemned these attacks; here ‘s their full statement.

“Today, there were four attacks against three separate commercial vessels operating in international waters in the southern Red Sea. These three vessels are connected to 14 separate nations.

The Arleigh-Burke Class destroyer USS CARNEY responded to the distress calls from the ships and provided assistance. At approximately 9:15 a.m. Sanaa time, the CARNEY detected an anti-ship ballistic missile attack fired from Houthi controlled areas of Yemen toward the M/V UNITY EXPLORER, impacting in the vicinity of the vessel. UNITY EXPLORER is a Bahamas flagged, U.K. owned and operated, bulk cargo ship crewed by sailors from two nations.

The CARNEY was conducting a patrol in the Red Sea and detected the attack on the UNITY EXPLORER. At approximately 12 p.m., and while in international waters, CARNEY engaged and shot down a UAV launched from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen. The drone was headed toward CARNEY although its specific target is not clear. We cannot assess at this time whether the Carney was a target of the UAVs. There was no damage to the U.S. vessel or injuries to personnel. In a separate attack at approximately 12:35 p.m., UNITY EXPLORER reported they were struck by a missile fired from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen.

CARNEY responded to the distress call. While assisting with the damage assessment, CARNEY detected another inbound UAV, destroying the drone with no damage or injuries on the CARNEY or UNITY EXPLORER.

UNITY EXPLORER reports minor damage from the missile strike. At approximately 3:30 p.m. the M/V NUMBER 9 was struck by a missile fired from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen while operating international shipping lanes in the Red Sea. The Panamanian flagged, Bermuda and U.K. owned and operated, bulk carrier reported damage and no casualties. At approximately 4:30 p.m., the M/V SOPHIE II, sent a distress call stating they were struck by a missile. CARNEY again responded to the distress call and reported no significant damage. While en route to render support, CARNEY shot down a UAV headed in its direction.

SOPHIE II is a Panamanian flagged bulk carrier, crewed by sailors from eight countries. These attacks represent a direct threat to international commerce and maritime security. They have jeopardized the lives of international crews representing multiple countries around the world. We also have every reason to believe that these attacks, while launched by the Houthis in Yemen, are fully enabled by Iran. The United States will consider all appropriate responses in full coordination with its international allies and partners.”

Avatar photo
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. He also previously worked for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

126 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Expat
Expat
1 month ago

With Iran now churning out Shehad 136 drones with a turbine engine and a seeker this is going to become a real problem. They have now shown the same drone launched from pickup truck which means logically these could be launched from a fast boat as well.

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 month ago
Reply to  Expat

A step up from boat swarm attacks, a drone swarm attack is a bit more ominous. LOwer level drones (let’s say, those travelling slowly) need to countered with an affordable response and Perhaps the mix of camm/martlet/40&57mm Bofors is the way to go and the type31 could be the ultimate drone buster?
Who you gonna call…
AA (sorry)

Steve
Steve
1 month ago

Kinda depends on the payload. Great headlines but no real detail on whether the drones were a actual risk to the ships beyond starting small fires. I’m not saying the risk isn’t there but details are important, as an off the shelf commercial drone poses no risk but could be shot down by the US to justify military actions in the region, we hsve all grown up in the dodgy dossier area and so need details/.evidence. let’s not go into another war without it

Last edited 1 month ago by Steve
Mark
Mark
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

To be fair with Iran openly supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Europe (me anyway) is itching for a god damn reason

They need to be very, very careful with what they are supplying and how they are acting right now

I think if Russia says something along the line of “were going to give Iran nukes” it’ll be full invasion time before that happens

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  Mark

The whole region is a powder keg, going to war with iran would be a serious mistake. Not only would it be another Afgan mess after, but likely it would spill over the whole region. Not to mention they would not be easy to beat as they have a lot of experience in paramilitary combat.

That also assumes they don’t already have nukes or at least dirty bombs that they could use.

Last edited 1 month ago by Steve
David Guy-Johnson
David Guy-Johnson
27 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Paramilitary combat, don’t make me laugh. Any NATO armed force would make mincemeat of them.

Steve
Steve
27 days ago

You mean like they did in afgan, a war they lost. Nato would make mincemeat of any army in a conventional warfare situation, but non conventional and political limitations and fear of collateral dmg hits in. Look at Israel, their approach of mass murder would not be permitted by the Western public.

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Exactly. However at the end of the day I suppose you have to shoot them down, big or small, just in case. Whereas a small drone is unlikely to do any meaningful damage, the propaganda value of such a hit would be way above the actual effect, or in a worse case scenario the drone actually manages to strike something important on the ship. OR cause casualties. Given the costs of modern AA missiles, i like the idea of a layered defence using 57 and 40mm guns (or 76/57mm) as the reach and more importantly, sustainability is there for multiple… Read more »

Steve
Steve
1 month ago

I’m just concerned that the US and therefore in turn the UK is headed for war with Iran. At every opportunity the US government blames everything on Iran. I’ve no idea how accurate it is but I fear they are building justification for another war, which after iraq/afgan won’t be easily done as the public don’t want another war. There is however a lot of money to be made by them and I’m sure the firms involved will be putting pressure on starting another.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

So Iran don’t attacks US forces in Iraq, Syria, elsewhere…?

Houthi theme is not ?

God is the Greatest; Death to America; Death to Israel; A Curse Upon the Jews; Victory to Islam.

Mark
Mark
29 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Should it be suggested that Russia will gift Iran nukes, it will be a nato whitewash Give us a reason, any valid reason to cut the land corridor where Iran meets Armenia and Azerbaijan, and and to send more military into the ocean so they can’t touch our shipping lanes. We wouldn’t even have to attack any of their major cities, and they wouldn’t dare go on any offensive. Russia would be scared shitless and forced to move troops to their southern border which stretches miles. The thing is, we can’t do something so tactical as this without a valid… Read more »

Steve
Steve
29 days ago
Reply to  Mark

We can’t go to war with Iran, it would be a blood bath. Thousands of nato troops would die and thousands civilans more in the terrorist attacks it would trigger. Best option with Iran is to open up to them and make them reliant on the west for trade and luxury goods. Make is their friend and not enemy.

Steve
Steve
29 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Don’t get my wrong I’m sure nato would easily win, but they have had decades to prepare for it and they will make it a very bloody war.

Then there is the what next, taking out iraq/afgan worked out so well for world peace…

Cutting them off would just make them double down in crazy.

Last edited 29 days ago by Steve
DW
DW
1 month ago

At the end of the day a ship of any king is a floating bomb, any object as to be dealt with firstly. A fire on board a ship can be fatal

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

off the shelf commercial drone poses no risk

Really? What you think a 4kg explosive does to a ship radar, to a bridge, or explode inside heli hangar while open, or carrier hangar deck?

Gareth
Gareth
1 month ago
Reply to  Expat

At the moment I think Shahed type drones have a limited use as they can only hit static targets with a known location (somewhat inaccurately as well if Ukraine’s experience of them is anything to go by). It’s much harder to develop a drone with some kind of self-guidance system which could intercept a ship. The real threat from them is against fixed infrastructure or military assets which are currently static such as moored ships or aircraft sitting out in the open on a base. The limitation on cheaper quad-copter type drones is range and vulnerability to jamming. If you… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Gareth
AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Gareth

A British report presented to the United Nations Security Council states that a version of the Shahed 136 was used in 2023 against moving vessels in the Gulf of Oman, which required a sensor to lock onto the moving target, and possibly real time communications of sensor data to an operator. An Iridium satellite phone SIM card was found in the debris, indicating possible control beyond line of sight.[17]

And Iran have several more drone models than Shahed.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago

Luckily, we’ll have Shapps and Cameron to the rescue; our longed for Dynamic Duo.

David Lloyd
David Lloyd
1 month ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

I thought it was spelt Schrapps

Joe16
Joe16
1 month ago

Things are certainly getting heated, although I have to wonder why the Houthis are getting involved at all; they have enough to be getting on with fighting the Saudis, and a certain level of global sympathy in that regard considering the way KSA is prosecuting that war. To lose that by slinging some missiles at international merchant vessels seems stupid. Also, minor point George, but your sentence: “In response to the distress call, the USS Carney intercepted and shot down another UAV en route to assist the Sophie II, which reported no significant damage.” I think there needs to be… Read more »

Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Joe16

Houthis are Iran’s puppets they do what they are told, and the safest way for Iran to have a go at Israel /US/UK is to get the Houthis to fire all the shots.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 month ago

Exactly so. Who is the paymaster……you create a bit if medium level trouble…..we gift you another ship load of……and Mad Vlad is happy so he gift the Mad Mullahs some other useless tech…..

Last edited 1 month ago by Supportive Bloke
DaveyB
DaveyB
1 month ago
Reply to  Joe16

I think a lot of this is to do with who controls the Houthis, i.e. Iran. We know that Russia is purchasing a lot of arms from Iran. Plus Russia is going to be “selling/giving” Iran some brand new Su35s, that were earmarked for Egypt, (that have been sitting in a hanger for nearly two years now!), along with some other toys. So I would hazard to guess Russia has had a quiet word with Iran to stir up as much trouble as possible, using its proxies. Which diverts World and in particular US attention and supplies away from Ukraine.… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Maybe someoe should visit the Iranian factory with a tomahawk or two?

Kevin Doherty
Kevin Doherty
1 month ago
Reply to  Frank62

And some for the Kremlin, with genocidal murderer Putin & his cronies inside at the precise strike. 💣💣💣

Jason Harris
Jason Harris
1 month ago
Reply to  Kevin Doherty

Totally agree

Yes
Yes
1 month ago
Reply to  Frank62

International law, no?
Maybe Russia should hit some NATO base where the benderite troops are being trained or a production facility?
But of course it’d be article 5 craze all over the town.
In the meanwhile Iran has been being hit with terrorist attacks from Israel and their buds for 20-30 years and it is… 👌

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

You can bet on that, I don’t believe in such overt coincidences, Russia has become a terrorist state sadly and is encouraging havoc wherever it can.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Exactly, Putin’s strategy is to set as many fires as he can to distract and occupy US and western resources generally. The idea is to weaken the defence of Europe. Poland have said we have about 3 years before Russia attacks Europe.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I had not heard that Polish forecast/prediction. It would account for Poland’s sizable rearming.
Could a weakened Russia really attack Europe in 2026? If they take on a NATO country – it’s WW3 – and the end of Russia!

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Morning Graham, I confess I don’t really have the expertise to know what’s going on with Poland. They seem to be engaged in a battle for their culture – church vs woke, and are behaving as though they cannot rely on either the EU or NATO to defend them. Are they panicking? I don’t know. But both the Times and the Telegraph today carry front page articles highlighting the threat from Russia. The republicans in the US senate have just voted down Biden’s latest aid package for Ukraine ( and Israel). Russia seem to be holding the ground they seized… Read more »

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Morning Paul, My familiarity with Poland is fleeting – I have visited the country twice but as a tourist of course. Poland’s economy is doing very well but I think is stalling a little now. As you mention, their history is one of their country having been fought over many times including by the USSR and Nazi Germany in living memory. They are not far from the Russian bear and Putin is irrational to put it mildly.Poland hosts eFP NATO troops (forward deployment) and that BG contingent includes some British soldiers (lt recce sqn, I think). I had not heard… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Hi Graham, I think Putin’s approach would be to undermine the democracies in the Baltic states by fomenting dissent based on ethnic Russian loyalties. This is the way he turned Crimea.
I think Poland are prudently re-arming and looking at a map I can understand why.
Sadly I don’t think Putin is irrational, I think he knows exactly what he is doing.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

The big difference is that Crimea was not a NATO country or part thereof, but the Baltic states are.

If Putin knew exactly what he was doing he would not be in such a mess with his Ukraine war, which was meant to have the whole country conquered within a few short weeks.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Both fair points. Putin did want Kyiv; it does look as though a Russian Crimea and land bridge is the likely outcome of the conflict in the Ukraine in the medium term. Ukraine split into East and West and Putin in power for another 6 or 12 years.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Maybe, but I hope not. I don’t see Putin being in power for as long as 6 to 12 years.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Indeed. Hard to know what’s going on inside closed societies like Russia and China. Bit of Christmas spirit wouldn’t go amiss. You never know…have a good day yourself.

Simon
Simon
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Hezbollah and Hamas have backed different sides in the Syrian civil war ? maybe something to do with it

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Quite

Yes
Yes
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

And I think it has mostly to do with the definitely-not-a-warcrime Israel operation in Gaza.
What hamas did was ugly and wrong, but understandable, it is their land after all.
What Israel did shows that they’re 2 sets of international law. One for my buds and the other – for the chummers.

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

You have to be very careful on what you state is a war crime. Legally if you put an arms dump under a hospital, the hospital therefore becomes a legitimate target. As there is no other means of taking out the arms dump, Hamas knew this. Similarly when people bandy about the Genocide be carried out by Israel. Again this has no legal standing, as genocide is the systematic execution of a populace. If Israel were putting Gaza under siege, then carpet bombing the whole area, without taken precautions to avoid civilian casualties. Then that would be genocide. However, they… Read more »

Quill
Quill
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Davey, I think you’ll find your defence against the IOF and IDF simply doesn’t make sense. 1) A lot of media sources are claiming that the supposed arms dump looks sketchy, with mismatching evidence from IDF videos and press videos. The videos I’ve seen alone are laughable and I still cannot get over ‘there is a list’. 2) Those safety zones you speak of, how are civilians ever to know which and when to go to without any internet and key communication infrastructure taken down? And yes they have been indiscriminately attacked under siege, the use of white phosphorus alone… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Quill

 the use of white phosphorus alone shows they have no regard for civilians

This phrase alone shows you know nothing you talking about. It is so ignorant and dumb.
Do you even stop to think what is the difference between a HE round and WP round?

A lot of media sources are claiming that the supposed arms dump looks sketchy, with mismatching evidence from IDF videos and press videos.

Are you joking? there are a lot of videos os Israeli bombing with secondaries exploding in buildings and tunnels inside city.

Quill
Quill
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

I do know though, the smoke of the WP has very harmful effects for any civilians in the area, not to mention the particulates can cause severe burns. It indiscriminately afflicts anyone without proper protection.
That too in areas that would be densely packed.

There are also lots of cases of strikes that are not correct or lawful, such as on refugee camps, jdams used on whole buildings.

My other points still stand.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Israel is technically in the right. But you can only play the victim card so many times. Netanyahu and the Jewish fundamentalists in Israel are sanctioning action that goes way beyond even their own eye for an eye values. Israel will lose friends. They are intent on getting the head of Hamas, cutting off the head of the snake. The problem is that the snake will grow another head.

Last edited 1 month ago by Paul.P
AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

What was UK fighting the war against Nazies? Was Churchill a fundamentalist?

Is Lord Halifax now the hero of Britain?

Ireland and IRA decades ago gave it a taste about what we can expect from the supposed moral high ground far away brigade.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Halifax and Chamberlain bought us time to rearm. Churchill knew that punishing your adversary fuels resentment: Europe learned that lesson after ww1. The IRA us still working through Sinn Fein to free Ireland. First step is to get a mediator to get the sides to lay fown their arms. The Israelis were caught with their pants down by Hamas. Netanyahu should admit that he screwed up with his policies, resign and ask for help to negotiate the release of all the hostages. But humility is not his strong suit; being an arrogant man he is doubling down on a strategy… Read more »

S Wilding
S Wilding
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

Aye, indeed. They’re always telling the World to remember, happen be an idea if they reminded themselves what total oppression felt like.
And having said that I fully understand why they are so antsy about protecting themselves from any slieght.

Jordan Chapman
Jordan Chapman
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

Why act shocked and outraged at Israel’s response to thier version of 9/11? Hamas has been attacking Israel for the last 2 decades using human shields and civillian infrastructure to do this. Of course there going to be high civillian casualties: Hamas planned it to be this way.
Every time Islamists attack Israel, Israel is blamed by default–no Jews? No news!

Tom
Tom
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

Hamas has no land, and never has done.
Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Hamas committed atrocities on a massive scale.
Hamas committed and act of war, after crossing into Israeli land.
Hamas knew exactly how Israel would react. So why did they do it?
All countries have an legal obligation, to protect their citizens.
All countries have a moral obligation to protect their citizens.
All countries have every right, to seek out and destroy those who attack their citizens and their country.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

Hamas have/had? Gaza
They could have built a Singapore.
The UN have/had? the Gaza Beach Club and there was a fancy glass building with a Mercedes representative in most posh Hamas district.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

What hamas did was ugly and wrong, but understandable,

You really have a repellent thinking.

 it is their land after all.

Since when it is their land?

What Israel did shows that they’re 2 sets of international law. 

Precisely, it showed you can combat without uniform, use schools, hospitals, fire 10000 rockets indiscriminately against cities and nothing happens to you and you bosses in Qatar.

Oh i forgot nothing happens to you that 1000 of those 10000 rockets fall in your own territory.

Mark B
Mark B
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Seems about right.

Ryan
Ryan
1 month ago

So two British owned cargo ships hit. What can we deploy to the region to guard against further attacks?
Having the Type 31 frigates in service now would have been useful. Should have had a credible T21 GP successor/patrol frigate earlier.

Paul T
Paul T
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryan

HMS Diamond is en- route to the Gulf,it will be a good proving ground for the Sea Viper Missile System.

Tim
Tim
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul T

Aster 30 cost £2m, these 200kg 100mph drones cost $30k. Martlet costs £30k if we can put some teams onboard to fire them.

magenta
magenta
1 month ago
Reply to  Tim

Yes exactly, these missiles cost well over £7.50 each. The RN can’t afford to fire any ordnance.
Maybe cutlasses and belaying pins.

Paul T
Paul T
1 month ago
Reply to  Tim

The mere presence of a Type 45 should act as a deterrent and reassure any Merchant Shipping in the area. Obviously you won’t be using multi million pound Asters to shoot down thousand dollar Drones, it is the threat of Ballistic and Cruise Missiles that they will be there for.

Geoff
Geoff
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul T

Went through the Suez canal couple of weeks ago on the Queen Elizabeth. Captain ordered darken ship on all balconies and open decks.
He explained that her wasnt trying to hide the ship as its position is available on Google,but I assume it was an anti sniper precaution but with whats happened it may have been anti drone caution. We also, reassuringly had 4 Marines on board, anti pirate precaution maybe.

in our convoy was the Dwight D Eisenhower aircraft carrier, now thats what you call reassuring.

Louis
Louis
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryan

The issue is, the combined size of the UK owned and UK flagged fleets are too large for even the USN to protect.

P Brace
P Brace
1 month ago
Reply to  Louis

Interesting to note that the British owned ships were all registered offshore in tax havens.

Jim
Jim
1 month ago
Reply to  P Brace

Yes, I’m yet to actually detect any UK involvement anywhere with any of these vessels. Same as last week apparently the Isle of Man is the UK now.

It’s perhaps time to revert to vessels no flying a flag of convenience and actually paying some tax to cover the cost of the navy.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  P Brace

Can we charge for their protection. Rhetorical question as we know the power brokers get all the benefits without having to pay for it more than nominally.

Louis
Louis
1 month ago
Reply to  P Brace

Sure, that’s the way modern shipping works. Most UK flagged ships are not UK owned.

Even UK flagged ships aren’t safe though, as seen by Stena Impero a few years back.

Ryan Brewis
Ryan Brewis
1 month ago
Reply to  Louis

They don’t need escorted from start to end, just sufficient force at chokepoints like the Bab-el-Mandab strait to prevent this. The Houthis aren’t interdicting shipping in the Atlantic or Med are they? Between CTF-150, CTF-151, Operation Atalanta, Op Kipion and whatever independent national or other joint national deployments exist in the region surely 2 doz plus navies can maintain 8-10 warships in a vital shipping lane increasingly under threat?

Louis
Louis
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryan Brewis

Sure in one choke point like this it is easier, I was referring to protecting the whole fleet in general, I.e. including Iran, Somalia etc.

Galaxy leader was hijacked in the Red Sea quite far from the strait.

Jim
Jim
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryan

If they were British flagged ships I might be worried. Perhaps Panama can send a vessel to protect them or Bermuda could trying paying a bit of tax.

Louis
Louis
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim

British flagged ships are mainly foreign owned with foreign crews.
British owned ships are often flagged abroad, but have some British crew.
It is important to protect both.

All ships flagged in Bermuda or IOM are British ships anyway, can be requisitioned by the RN, and are therefore the RNs responsibility to protect.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago

Good to have friends, particularly as we can’t look after ourselves anymore.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

A T45 is deploying to the region. HMS Diamond.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

So one un modernised T45 to cover 100,000 sq. miles.

Donaldson
Donaldson
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

HMS Lancaster just had a crew change in Bahrain, Maybe she’ll be deployed too.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  Donaldson

Good. Makes sense given where she is.👍

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 month ago
Reply to  Donaldson

No longer in BHR. I wont say when she left more than to say a few days ago.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

One world-class air defence Destroyer that others Navy’s would have your right arm off to have in service and with that level of capability. Other nations do not have similar equipment in numbers. Even the US Navy is pushed these days. Other nations have just the same issues with battling inflation, retention, recruitment and the cost of modern defence equipment. Other nations do not do it better than us. Its a British disease to put ourselves down.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Unfortunately the Chinese have 50 destroyers, 42 frigates and 70 plus corvettes armed like small frigates. Most of these ships have been built in the last ten to fifteen years.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

And how many are operational? a fraction of that number. They have pretty much zero real world conflict experience. The US Navy alone would wipe them out.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
30 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Absolutely Robert. No point us worrying about 160 modern warships when we have a T45 on the way.😃

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
30 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

But they don’t have 160 deployable warships, do they. They have a fraction of that number. They have the same issues with manning and refit schedules that we do. They also are not globally deployed. When did we last see a Chinese task group in the Med or English Channel?? When did we last see a capable Chinese destroyer operating independently in the Red Sea of the Gulf?? That would be never. Don’t be blinded by numbers when our enemies can’t come close to matching what we can do. The Chinese also have zero real-world conflict experience. Stop bigging up… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
28 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

When Churchill was warning Britain about the rise of Germany in the middle and late thirties a lot of people called him a fool and a scaremonger. He was right. When he warned about the rise o communism they did it again. He was right…again. Now, I’m no Churchill but I do not understand why you constantly attack me for warning of the threats that face us. The UK’s armed forces are in the worst position they have been in for decades and yet you persist in saying we can do anything that is needed. We can’t.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
28 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Our Armed Force’s are not in the worst position. You and others are just obsessed with numbers and headline figures. And don’t understand the capability and effects our equipment and people can generate. Are our Force’s too small? Yes. Are most of our allies too small? Yes. You can not compare the past to today. Conflicts of the future will be fought very differently from today. If NATO was fully engaged in the Ukraine conflict, it would look very different. It isn’t going to be the UK on our own against Russia or China. And if we did meet these… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
28 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Very good Robert, but you have made a serious mistake in your post. You actually agreed with me when you said ” Are our forces too small, Yes”. If you look through all the comments I have made over the years you will find only two themes. One is that our forces are too small and that politicians of all parties should get there arse in gear to improve the position and secondly that the men and women who go to war should have the best kit and should be well looked after. If you can find anything materially different… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
27 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

But I can understand that our Force’s are not going to get any larger. Key areas need an increase. The RFA, the submarine service for example. We will not see the Army increase to 100k again. And like I said. Today’s Armed Force’s would eclipse our Force’s from the 80/90’s even though they were considerably larger. Capability is everything Geoff. And looking at Russias performance in Ukraine, NATO would them out.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Well worryingly if one analyses what’s written it seems the Carney was unable or unwilling to shoot down but a fraction of the registered threats, just fortunate the hits were relatively inocuous. Will these that continue to be the case as the weapons become more deadly one fears. Will a T-45 be able to do better? Big question was the problem in eliminating these threats fundamentally range, an assessment of the actual danger or lack of actual capability?

Chris
Chris
1 month ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

The Carney has the latest block II SM3 upgrade, but each missile is in excess of 30 million USD, and you usually fire 2 in a ballistic engagement. Sadly the math isn’t in favor of defending merchant shipping with missiles that expensive. A city yes, a dry bulk carrier, no.

Ed
Ed
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris

The UK has air dominance should it need it, A carrier with f-35 is more than capable of defending UK interest. I would call Iran out on the whole su-35 scheme. Im sure we have knights of the air who are excited at the thought of doing battle with a Russian contractor. You don’t really think Russia is going to give away its prized jets without some kind of insurance. UK and Us need to get a hold of this issue and start declaring no fly zones. If Iranian airspace was off limits to commercial jetliners what is Iran going… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Both. If a threat exists you have to be able to cope or you have to withdraw because of that threat. Remember POW and Repulse sunk in the east, most likely because they had no air cover. If an Ashleigh Burke can’t cope then a T45 isn’t going to do any better.

Tom
Tom
1 month ago

So now we have to rely (even more) on the US to protect UK shipping interests, cos we aint got no boats to do it ourselves?

Jim
Jim
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

We have 6 warships in the gulf area right now, how many other countries have 6 warships in the gulf region?

None of the ships are British flagged or even British owned. They are just owned by Isle of Man and Bermuda based holding companies to dodge tax.

They have zero to do with the UK.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim

Which ships Jim?

SteveM
SteveM
1 month ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

3x minesweeps, 1x LSA, 1x t-23 and 1x T-45 on way but only last 2 could ctually protect against drone/missiles

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 month ago
Reply to  SteveM

Thanks Steve. So effectively one frigate and one un-modernised T45 on the way? And the Gulf is about 100,000 square miles? I thinl we’re in trouble if the sh.. hits the fan.

Tom
Tom
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim

We do not have 6 rocket firing ships in the Gulf or Red sea, at this moment in time!

Rowan
Rowan
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

The only people with that many combatants in the Gulf region are the yanks and the people who actually live there. We are way ahead of most countries by having one permanently deployed there. Our naval priorities are in Europe currently, the fact we can even have ships deploying to the Gulf in numbers as well is remarkable and should be celebrated – not scrutinized as we can’t match to US hull for hull.

Jim
Jim
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

1 ASW 1 AAW and 3 MCM and a support ship. That’s a sea control task force. If the rebels start dropping mines instead of missiles that Burke won’t be much use. Not all warships fire missiles.

magenta
magenta
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim

UNITY EXPLORER is a Bahamas flagged, U.K. owned and operated. – U.S. Central Command.

M/V NUMBER 9 …. The Panamanian flagged, Bermuda and U.K. owned and operated – U.S. Central Command.

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3605010/houthi-attacks-on-commercial-shipping-in-international-water-continue/

David Barry
David Barry
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim

For all the use they are, canoes would be cheaper.

Ruff rider
Ruff rider
1 month ago
Reply to  David Barry

Our new Zealand canoe navy could paddle over and do a mean haka if it would help? We would have to do a few sausage sizzles to raise the funds but all the baddies will pack up and go home after our war dance so it will be worth the wait.

Tom
Tom
1 month ago
Reply to  David Barry

👍hahahaha Top comment!

michael
michael
1 month ago

its not a question of if this is gonna esculate into full scale war its when

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 month ago

Are the Iran’s going to go a step further at some point hitting UK flagged Vessel or some European ship ? Interesting to see what happens when a Type 45 arrives on the since .Hope not but we may fine out what there really can do and not just on paper . 🇬🇧

Paul macpherson
Paul macpherson
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Send the fighter jets from Cyprus for missile fires in Yemen

Chris
Chris
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew D

More concerned about it breaking down. Diamond doesn’t have a good track record.

Cygnet261
Cygnet261
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris

Ever been ro sea in a hostile environment? Probably not. Another armchair muppet.

Jim
Jim
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris

It’s winter the sea is cold

John pop
John pop
1 month ago

As far as l saw in report, not European ones, the Carney was seriously damaged by a drone…. Interestingly not a word about it in the report above…. The internet is full of footages in this regard… Not sure why the constant lying

Lyall
Lyall
1 month ago

Why did the USS Carney not shoot down the missiles too?

Jean
Jean
1 month ago

Where are our Navel presence in Red Sea?

Rat West
Rat West
1 month ago

“We have every reason to believe…”
– oh, well then that must be true.
US and UK propaganda are killing people everywhere

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago

Which is why the T31s were such a good idea; Bofors, Camm, Wildcat with Martlet – now demonstrated AA capability I believe. Better late than never I suppose.

Garth
Garth
1 month ago

Was the Carney not capable of engaging the missiles, just the drones?

John
John
1 month ago

I think the Houthi need a dose of Tomahawk. Then, if they do not give it up? A serious dose of B52.

Yes
Yes
1 month ago
Reply to  John

Gunboat diplomacy of the 21 century.
Lord Palmerston would be proud.

Emmanuel O
Emmanuel O
1 month ago
Reply to  Yes

As for guns and boats, I think Western powers should seek an optimum balance between quantity and quality, range and spread, sophistication and affordability. The attrition rate of weapons platforms in modern war is being shown to be orders of magnitude higher than most Western powers can currently sustain. Ditto the expenditure rate of ordnance and supplies of all types. Therefore, it is vital to rethink our Post-Cold War “peace dividend” approach to military build-up, in a world of fast-deteriorating security and increasingly complex military requirements. We need more lower-level ships for greater overall survivability of the navy, and more… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry
1 month ago
Reply to  John

Bollards. It’s the Iranians that need a B52 reality check; what is the hold they have over the septics, that prevents the septics giving them a new ice age?

Terry Clarke
Terry Clarke
1 month ago

The missile launch sites should be targeted and destroyed in response to these blatant acts of aggression on defenceless ships and their crews.

KentH
KentH
1 month ago

Just needs a Shahed drone to hit a US warship and I predict the Shahed factory will disappear in a massive explosion.

Clem
Clem
1 month ago

WW3 is on its way.

Neasboy
Neasboy
1 month ago

US has been after Iran for a long long g time and its oil reserves. Expect false flags, CIA backed rebels firing on US warships