Royal Navy warships and RAF Maritime Patrol Aircraft tracked a number of Russian vessels in the waters close to the UK in a concerted monitoring operation.
HMS Tyne, HMS Portland and P8 Poseidon aircraft from RAF Lossiemouth reported on the movements of the Russian Navy in the English Channel, North Sea and North Atlantic.
Images from the operation are shown below.
According to a news release:
“Plymouth-based HMS Portland and the Poseidons worked together to monitor Russian vessels, including corvettes Boikiy and Grad, cruiser Marshal Ustinov, the Udaloy-class destroyer Severomorsk and others. With their collective array of powerful sensors for locating and tracking, the British submarine-hunting frigate and maritime patrol aircraft are a formidable duo for locating and monitoring operations, allowing for constant surveillance from the sea and air.
Having detected a ship or submarine, the aircraft can communicate the position, allowing a warship to intercept and track. Royal Navy ships and aircraft routinely conduct training with the long-range RAF patrol aircraft, enabling a seamless transition to operations to protect the sea areas around the UK.”
Lieutenant Sam Charleston, one of HMS Portland’s bridge watchkeeping officers, was quoted as saying:
“It was rewarding to conduct operations protecting UK waters and interests. The team worked hard in rough weather and difficult conditions. This is my third time conducting this type of operation and I enjoyed seeing the wide-area search capability that the P-8 brings and working with the RAF aircrew.”
Commander Ed Moss-Ward, HMS Portland’s Commanding Officer added:
“P8 aircraft operating with a Type 23 frigate with an embarked Merlin helicopter provides the UK with a world-leading anti-submarine warfare capability.”
Many of the Russian vessels were associated with the Russian Navy Day, which was held in St Petersburg on July 30.
The Royal Navy also say that Portsmouth-based HMS Tyne shadowed three Russian ships in separate tasks, including Merkury, a Steregushchiy-class corvette and research ship Akademik Nikolaj Strakhov, taking over duties from NATO warships.
HMS Tyne’s Executive Officer, Lieutenant Ryan Grieg, said in the press release:
“The operations Tyne has executed over the last few weeks are a reflection of the hard work and dedication delivered by her ship’s company all year round. She has again demonstrated her alacrity and flexibility in proving herself as an efficient asset providing assurance and security in UK home waters.”
Common denominator on RN/ RAF assets – none of them carry any ASuW capability.
Apart from Portlands Main gun, Sea Sceptre, Martlett, and Sea Venom ( which I think is only IOC )
At that range when they’re shadowing an OPFOR what else would they require?
And sometimes french « Atlantic » planes come in UK and provide a little contribution to hunt submarines.
Indeed. They did when we stupidly removed our MPA capability and had a “capability holiday”
Well people did say the Nimrod MPA 4 was to Expensive , costs over runs etc nothing like Ajax 🙄
House of commons answer said something like £400-500 mill spent on cancelled Army armoured vehicle projects
Ajax is ongoing, but sunk costs are quite small in relation to the ‘system cost’ which is what you are thinking of
Remember always the system cost is often 3x the actual production cost
Sea Venom not yet IOC, Martlett/4.5” wouldn’t scratch the paintwork. This peer threat has invaded Ukraine and has openly threatened the UK. The RAF send QRA properly armed, why don’t the RN. Thankfully NSM on it’s way.
Would they not?
Sea Ceptor does have the ability to target surface contacts. 32 Mach 3+ missiles weighing circa 60kg impacting an enemy ship is going to do a tad more then scratch the paint.
‘Has the ability’. So much so the RN have acquired NSM (and rightly so!). Portland won’t be given 32 to carry, and I’d be doubtful if the WSOs are cleared for surface engagements.
And neither would the Russians… And yes of course the RN is acquiring NSM. CAMM is a Surface to Air weapon with a secondary ground attack role and a range of about 20m, NSM is a dedicated surface attack missile with a range 10x that.
At the end of the day, in a tracking operation like this, getting within CAMM range is not a big deal.
“…..Wouldn’t scratch the paintwork…”?
Pretty certain that it would be the exact opposite. Several rounds of 4.5″ shells together with a few hundred rounds of AP and HE 30mm shells would almost completely destroy any vessel and reduce it to a smouldering, non operational dead in the water hull.
It took only one Exocet to destroy Sheffield, one bomb to destroy Antelope…..
Modern ships don’t have armour like the gun armed ships of old. A few volleys of 4.5″ will fuck most ships these days.
never get that close , thats why the 4.5 in is for shore bombardment duties or small speedboats with some AA fire capability , drones cruise missiles … do they have chaff rounds still ?
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/4623502.jpg
Well they demonstrably do get that close.
And use a 4.5 in ???.
This is just like a High Street parade all for show
Attacking a *freedom of navigation* naval vessel suits China, Russia, Iran 100% and just maybe maybe starts WW3
Do keep up with the hypothetical child. If you can’t follow the conversation don’t jump into the middle of it.
That is clearly not what Dern, myself, and others have been saying in this thread.
It is exactly that close proximity, which is common in these scenarios when the RN escort Russian units through the Channel, that makes me believe the ASM assets we DO have, even if they’re not NSM and big fat long ranged ASMs, will do damage.
And which then set off arguments on this thread as those on the receiving end of that suggestion did not like it.
So when theres a military parade say in a city centre that represents a scenario for real hostilities.
Russian warships transiting the Channel is exactly like that.
You arent going to be close enough to use the 4.5 in gun in a real hostilities situation is all I commented on.
Mate the thing I’ve learned with Ducker is he’s not interested in what’s actually being argued, instead he invents a fictional argument that nobody is having in his head and then tries to portray everyone as if they’re opposing the his stance, even if they’ve said nothing of the sort, or are still trying to work out what his exact position is.
I know, I’d moved on already!
Put a martlet through one of those launchers strapped to the side of that cruiser and watch the fireworks.
If the ships are as badly maintained as the rest of the navy they won’t even see it coming.
Russia isn’t going to attack nato in its own back yard, it’s a suicide mission.
This is the peer threat that invaded Ukraine and lost multiple ships to a nation without a navy.
Well said Sir!
USS Stark was disabled by Iraq, a DDG destroyer disabled by a launch.
Ukraine was given targeting coords by USN P-8 above the Romanian coastline
Remember HMS Glorious a carrier, sunk by a battleship. Often the real problem is wrong people in command rather than the vessel itself
So you arguing that even a non peer threat can make a big damage?
Obviously?
That’s why training and maintenance are important.
This is just Russian posturing and trying to remind everyone that it still has a navy, even if half of it is barely workable, it obsolete I’ll maintained and frankly useless. We don’t need to get our knickers in a twist over this kind of thing Russia has learned the hard way that state of the arts, western hardware is far too good for them
I agree, but it’s worth engaging with the hypothetical from time to time.
None of which could do much to damage such a large vessel beyond annoying it. However being Russian it might just sink itself from rust, so no real risk.
Or hitting it in places that remove it as a threat.
Who mentioned sinking.
And no one mentions EW, Cyber, or NATO, nor that the Russians are haesky going to kick off in the English Channel surrounded by NATO.
Are these ships of the same vintage of the Moscva that had no problems blowing up?
Assume it Is another Baltic or Northern Fleet rotation with the Med based units?
Hardly!
We Will probably never know what went wrong with moscva, as Russia are too busy pretending it wasn’t hit. Its equally likely it was hardware failure as human mistake.
Or design failure when being hit. So why not with these ships too, as posters are telling me the AS capabilities we have “would not scratch the paintwork”
Harpoon on this site has been slated for years and it blew Moscva sky high. I believe the UKR used their own version of it?
Bottom line, I don’t dismiss our capabilities so easily just because Russian warships sail past.
None of the UK ships or planes in the area had harpoon and the difference in explosives packed into harpoon vs the helicopter launched ones is huge. If they can be carefully targeted to hit a specific point of the ship then it could do significantly damage but that’s a big if and would also involve the ship not shooting down a very slow flying helicopter that would have to be well inside defensive missile range to fire as they are super short ranged.
This little flotilla is nothing. Strap a few harpoons to a river, and I’d back the river to cause carnage. This is posturing and should be viewed as such
Yes harpoon is same as Ukrainian Neptune anti ship missile that did the job on moskva
Thanks, I thought it was. So, if Harpoon can do that, why not a number of smaller missiles hitting with accuracy.
That’s before NSM arrives.
Moskva hit a fishermans lobster pot bout and just fell apart from the rust.
It was hit. By 2x Ukrainian Neptune anti ship missiles. Well documented. The Moskva series cruisers have a serious Achilles heel or 3. Their targeting radar is uni directional Their CIWS are not independent but linked to central sensors in the combat centre The ship was sat in amongst a busy shipping lane in amongst merchant vessels, obviously hoping to complicate targeting. It didn’t work and only contributed to a lot of background clutter that missed the incoming anti ship missiles closing from a direction their uni directional targeting sensors weren’t expecting. Eg not the threat axis expected. All this… Read more »
It’s well documented that Ukraine said it was hit, there is no actual evidence of that, but yeah seems highly likely it was. But that wasn’t my point, my point was we don’t know why the missiles got through multiple layers of air defense systems that the ship had, and that part I doubt we will ever found out as Russia is not likely to be transparent about it, like happened with hms Coventry etc.
The missiles got through because all the Multiple Layers of systems/sensors are old 1970s junk that don’t work a lot of the time.
If u ever get a chance to see the inside of one of these cruisers or find a video of it have a good look at the kit they have, it’s remarkable it ever would work effectively even with constant training.
The ukrainian missiles are hardly cutting edge tech either. Hopefully one day there will be a public enquiry and we might find out the full story. It’s entirely possible it was just a pile of junk but that at this stage is just an assumption
It is irrelevant even if was a late WW2 anti ship missile the Russians would not have detected it probably. I think the main issue were the old Moskva search radars.
But it is also possible that the ship was not alert and the Russians did not expected that capability from Ukraine.
For example in Sheffield the CIC replacement went to bathroom or some place else, while the CIC boss was resting.
I never got how the RN didn’t think that risk through. It’s pretty common for a rotation with the boss being resting and it can’t be uncommon for the guy on station to need to pop to the toilet, at some point in their shift leaving a gap. With missile detection range being in the seconds out range, surely someone would have thought through the scenario during the years before, it was not like sea skimming missiles were cutting edge tech at the time they had been around for at least a decade.
Skipping off to finish the vodka bottle more like
Missiles got through on USS Stark too.
Its command failure on ship [see USN destroyer collisions], which is the same issue with Sheffield.
The crew was problem ‘bombed’out in vodka to operate any kind of layered defence
I seem to recall reading that the Ukrainians distracted the Moskva’s AD with two Byraktar drones then hit from the other side with the Neptunes. Mr Bell’s comment about the unidirectional radar fits in with that.
The Ukrainians did have the advantage that they built the Moskva and they likely have retired officers that served on the ship. So they would have been well aware of the ship’s limitations.
There’s no sign of the world usual accompanying tugs.
These weapons present a very real risk to Russian warships. Sea Ceptor also has a anti ship capability. But at the end of the day. This kind of monitoring operation is as routine as they come. The RN have been doing this for decades. Plus, you don’t have to sink a vessel to take it out of the fight. And after the loss of several Russian warships due to Ukrainian drone strikes, I think we can sleep safely at night knowing the RN can handle anything.
Haven’t they only been able to take out a couple landing crafts in dock other than the famous one. I don’t remember any other vessel being sunk that has defensive capabilities.
Clearly its not a realistic threat, as Russia would be absolutely insane to attack a nato country with a single ship, which couldn’t not hope to achieve much.
It does however demonstrate how badly defended the UK really is, should it ever need to defend itself and its water ways.
They have displayed how incompetent they are many times. No good having lots of weapons if none of them reliably work or are maintained.
Nope, Ukraine has taken out (either sunk or rendered unoperable): Saratov, a landing ship in harbour the Moskva Several landing and assault craft around Snake Island Veliky Ustyug, on or Russia’s modern Buyan class Corvettes that was damaged by the Ukranians and had to be towed away for repairs Vasily Bek, a tug (and therefore a high value asset for the Russian navy) that was being used as an amphibious asssault vessel, struck by harpoon missiles and sunk. Ivan Golubets, a minesweeper, despite having CIWS and 25mm guns was struck by Ukranian USV’s. Another landing ship that was put out… Read more »
It toom dozens of these hitting an Iraq patrol ship in the first war to sink it, they aren’t not designed to take on such a big ship.
We can track and monitor which is great but if the smelly stuff flies we can do F all about with any of those assets 🙁
Doesn’t all type 23 frigates carry Harpoon?
No only some of them.
Ok thanks, then the MOD navy web page is telling fibs lol
I think they originally did, when they were first purchased along with 4 of the destroyers, but it now seems common for them not to be fitted. I read somewhere only 2 sets were currently being used, maybe the rest are being held back to extend their service life.
Even if a T23 has Harpoon, as GB has explained many times letting that go into one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world isn’t the best idea.
Well if we had cause to use it due to a Russian ship launching a missile strike, I don’t think they will care.
Hmmm, I think they would. NATO and the West go for precision not blow em sky high and damned the consequences.
Why would Russia launch a missile strike within NATO territory anyway, are they suicidal?
I assume these ships are being held at visual range, not ideal for Harpoon use I think.
I was replying to Steve in relation to type 23 armoury not the ins and outs of a possible retaliation by the Uk, and frankly nobody can second guess the mind of a madman.
Indeed. And I was questioning the use of Harpoon in this situation as we ourselves are not mad and that weapon has its advantages, and disadvantages, in thatit’s as likely to go after other merchantmen in the area as the intended target. On Putin, we’ll have to differ. He’s not a madman to my mind. He is ruthless, calculating, and knows what he wants, which includes western division. So even the staunch Putin loyalists on those ships might not obey his instructions to kill themselves by firing on NATO within NATOs backyard. Because, regardless of whether the RN has the… Read more »
Honestly in visual range the 4.5″, 30mm and Phalanx will make a mess of anything naval. And frankly, I wouldn’t fancy trying to launch any sort of ASuM with the kind of lead hitting my ship that a Type 23 can put into the air.
Side point, if a RN Type 23 chucked a few Stingrays within visual range of a Russian Warship would the accoustic homing work on it, or would it just dive deep looking for a submarine that isn’t there?
Yep, I’m sure they would mate. I suggested as such top of thread but I dont know what I’m on about apparently as they’d “not scratch the paintwork”
On Stingray, no idea on that one, one for Deep or GB maybe?
And why would that happen? it isn’t a movie. That 4.5 inch gun could mince a Russian warship. Sea Ceptor also has a secondary anti ship capability.
Bloody hell does nobody listen or read on here. I was not suggesting they use it only that they have Harpoon, too many people on here ready for an argument rather than a discussion, so you saying it isn’t a movie is really rather pathetic.
Hi Mick. No one was disagreeing that they don’t have it, you’re right to point it out. I did not list it in my initial reply top of thread to rmj as I don’t think in this instance it would be a weapon of choice, and I mentioned why. There is no arguing. Arguments happen if the poster who is challenged creates an arguement rather than considering other posters observations. As in my posts that I don’t think the missiles we have are as bad as people make out, and my comment re Harpoon. People have different views and we… Read more »
Hi Daniele – An absolute essential in warfare is to get the first blow in when the enemy least expects it. The element of surprise is a huge force multiplier. Look at Pearl Harbour. The Russians have done nothing except threaten us for months. I know you will disagree, but I recommend that we sink them, solves the transiting problem. They will give us a wide berth next time. Sort it out with NATO later.
Hi mate. You’re right. I do! Plays straight into Putin’s hands.
Besides, looking at the comments on this thread.
We’re crap. We’re useless. We have a popgun for weapons. The RN is clueless.
So no sinken em mate. 😉
Jesus christ, have you heard of MAD? Do you really think opening fire on peacefully transiting ships of a NUCLEAR POWER, is a good idea!? And yes, lets look at Pearl Harbour shall we? Here are the Battleships ships that where “sunk” USS Arizona: Entered service 1916 Total Loss USS Oklahoma: Entered service 1916; raised, sold for scrap, sank en route to scrapyard USS California: entered service 1921, returned to service July 44 USS Nevada: Entered service 1916, returned to service October 42 USS Pennsylvania: Entered service 1916, returned to service Jan 42 USS West Virginia: Entered service 1920, returned… Read more »
Pearl Harbour was only the opening aria… followed with days by action against Hong Kong , US bases in Philippines destroyed, Malaya attacked and Prince of Wales/ Repulse sunk.
The Japanese had a coordinated attack plan across the pacific, and fate that had the carriers went in harbour didnt change a thing
And within 4 months the UK was back in the Indian Ocean hunting the Japanese with 5 Battleships and 3 Carriers, and came within a hairs breath of sinking the entire Kido Butai. Within 7 months the Kido Butai was on the bottom of the Pacific outside Midway. Which kind of goes against the “carriers weren’t in harbour not changing a thing bit btw” (Although given how quickly some of the Battleships where back in service it’s possible the US would have had it’s carriers back by then). All that amazing co-ordinated surprise got the Japanese about 3 months before… Read more »
Back in the Indian Ocean ? Big deal, that was only a limited excursion by the Japanese and when did the RN get back to the Pacific – excluding the time the US was so short of carrier they borrowed Victorious.
Hairs breath goes both ways but Midway was game changer , best to see Coral Sea and Midway as a pair
Thanks for demonstrating you don’t know what you’re talking about, since as I mentioned, the entire Kido Butai was in the Indian Ocean at the time, and had Sommerville not changed course he’d have sunk the Japanese Carrier force long before the Americans ever got an eye in at Coral Sea (at which btw the Kido Butai wasn’t present so pretty interesting that you want do categorise the main Japanese Carrier force as “a limited excursion” but make Coral Sea, where there was a secondary fleet as really important) and Midway. The RN didn’t get “back into the Pacific”, it… Read more »
Good on you for being the only one who sees it this way.
That 5 carriers, a light carrier and 4 battleships were going to be destroyed .
Sommerville didnt know it was that strong and fortunately didnt find out too late and only lost Hermes and 2 8in cruisers.
What ships did Somerville sink ?
Congratulations, you managed a wikipedia read. Slow clap.
Now come back when you actually understand the near miss I’m talking about.
Clearly HMS Sanctimonious survived the war – unscathed.
an Armchair Admiral like you with the what if plans at your fingertips is no contest
Read about some real courage and attacking spirit in asian waters rather than a whole RN fleet which achieved nothing.
Andaman Is and Singapore recovered after main Japanese surrender
Put that in your next book
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Li_Wo
Look whose talking. Did that chip on your shoulder come with Fish or do you have to pay extra for that. M
Maybe learn to follow a conversation and keep to the matter in hand and I’ll take you seriously.
Just to remind you this is a conversation about how the surprise at Pearl Harbour really achieved very little.
But hey, you’re just such an angry little child you feel the need to keep going into the reeds. Goodbye, come back when you calm down.
I’m not an expert on the Pacific War so I’ll take what you say as fact. However, given what happened to the Nord Stream II gas pipelline at the start of the UkR war I think the Russians should be discouraged from sending a naval squadron about the N Sea checking on our energy assets. Its taking the piss The Turkish airforce shot down a Russian jet a few years back. Putin’s response was zilch. Thats exactly what would happen if we sank their ships – nothing. Except the RN would gain experience of using what armament they have and… Read more »
I’m just going to point out that there is a difference between a potential IFF issue with an aircraft that may have been violating Turkish Airspace in a active warzone, which resulted in the death of 1 pilot, and opening fire on a fleet of warships with a combined crew of well over a thousand, that is conducting a peaceful transit in accordance with UNCLOS. The fact that you want to risk a nuclear exchange is troubling, I suggest you take a long sit down and think about what that would entail while destroying our reputation on the international stage,… Read more »
Yes . Sholtz made a special trip to Washington to tell the US , the Ukrainians did it. Coincidentally immediately after the NY Times gave the similar US version but could only say ‘shadowy Ukrainian linked groups’, as to say more would reveal the depth of US intel on Ukraines leadership
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html
They had known for some time but wasnt politic to reveal to obvious over who would benefit the most from ruptured pipe lines
Pretty much on form, Ducker ducks out of the main conversation and gishgallops on one point angrily. Shock.
And suggesting the Russians might a launch missile strike while transiting the English channel on a routine transit is also rather pathetic.
Oh look, Mick going around name calling more people who don’t agree with him…
Agree – they’re very sensitive to anything that challenges the notion that RN is deficient in it’s ability to deal with threats. Complacency is a threat to performance, as is group think. Sending T23s to escort a potentially hostile peer without ASuW capabilities is lazy and complacent. It doesn’t support training for all, nor help develop TTPs. The RAF QRA provides valuable training opportunities for all (armourers, J2) – yet no FGR4 leaves with just a Mauser. Too many on here fawn/ pander over the RN capabilities, which when it matters is what they’re sent into conflict with. People here… Read more »
Thanks a sensible post art last
I think if you read the vast majority of SMEs posts on here you will see the RN weaknesses raised, discussed and hopefully mitigated by other factors! Many posters are critical of the RNs capability gaps, lack of funding and possibly incorrect (on their opinion) priorities but they also correctly research, debate and understand the other factors which come into play, such as skill sets, training, technical etc etc! No one is blinkered and I don’t see much of any group think on here. But that’s your perception and opinion, I think it’s incorrect. Read posters historical posts and then… Read more »
It’s the standard sort of response on here from the armchair admirals who can’t see the obvious weaknesses in our defences.
I don’t care if no rational person would trigger a war with nato, we know pootin is not rational. It can’t be ruled out.
Nato support after the event is no use to the poor buggers on our under armed ships who are in the potential firing line.
Thank you
Bloody Hell is Mick even capable of engaging someone in a polite manner when they don’t have the same point of view as him?
Oh they would care, when 8 missiles launched take out 8 merchant ships instead of the target.
Some RN website pages don’t get updated for years.
Thanks had no idea that was the case
Shockingly Mick has no idea about something…
We cross the finger that Devonport and Falslane shipyard do a great job to soon see UK attack submarines back at sea!
French sailors will be more than happy to navigate with their British allies.
But what long range mission they pulled out! The one in mediteranean sea was a great job! Tribune for their endurance. May be tea was cold back home 😉 I don’t get how it is possible to stay that long at sea.
Hello @Math, Audacious spent a year in the Med undertaking NATO tasking, however, she didn’t spend all year at sea, but came alongside Souda Bay(Crete) for several maintenance/re-supply stops. It also gave the crew a chance for some ‘down’ time and to swap some of them around.
Generally the longest time they actually spend underwater is 3-4 months at a time.
Why would anything kick off? This has been going on for decades. Russian warships don’t just decide to attack a RN warship in the English channel our of the blue. That would trigger article 5. And NATO would wipe out Russian conventional forces.
We need to speed up our NSM procurement, the sooner Russia knows we have good AsuW missiles in service, the better.
Russian navy threat has been fully blunted by turkey, along with it any chance of its navy regaining its respect/threat.
How ? and how does that affect Russian ships transiting waters near the UK? Let’s not forget they have a large submarine too.
**large submarine fleet**
Yes. They no longer have the Dmitry Donskoy, decommissioning it earlier this year. Before that it was the world’s largest submarine. 48,000 tons submerged. That’s big.
Well Grant Shafted will be on Breakfast TV tomorrow telling us how great Britain is… and other vacuous statements.
Then again, Thornbury was on for Labour and talked about housing for heroes… no mention of uptake in Army, T32, improved Tiffies… just the troops need better showers.
Well a shower of shoite Cons or a shower of shoite Labs and who could disagree with her?
Moskvas sister ship. Well we all now know they look formidable but have a tendency to self flagulate when hit by a distinctly last gen anti ship missile. Glass chin. The Udaloy class destroyer has similar heavy weapons mounted in cannisters on deck so presumably is also equally vulnerable. A hit on the missile silos will do the job. The accompanying corvettes are at least a bit more modern. Agree with comments though. TheRN needs more warships desperately and better armed ships capable of engaging and sinking enemy vessels. This task force looks impressive but would be easily sunk by… Read more »
What load would the armourers fit to the F35Bs or Typhoons to achieve this given the SAM rings?
I suspect the range of Paveway is more than generally advertised, as is the ability of UK aggressor aircraft to spoof AA radars and missiles.
Those will be classified. PW1V would struggle against a fast moving target? also suspect they’ll be in range of SAMs before being able to deploy.
Very possibly. It’s fun to play with some (easy ) numbers though. A PW launched at 10 miles and 600 mph would take 60 seconds during which a slowly cruising warship might only move its own length so even GPS might be effective. 10 miles is also within the horizon so laser illumination from a shadowing River OPV might be able to illuminate the target. If the attacking aircraft could remain undetected or unrecognized until it got within 10 miles the AA target’s defences would be tested?
A WS doing 12 kts (transit speed 10-15 kts) covers 400 yds in 1 minute, it might well miss the target!
Yes, indeed, as you say. Just playing with numbers….
I think a saturation attack by Brimstone from the typhoons would do the job. Or we must have some of those old sea eagles lying around someplace surely?
Ah, yes. I’d forgotten about Brimstone.
I think Sea Eagles are way past sell by/use by date & have been disposed of years ago.
Jesus why do people keep going on? The Orcs are being shadowed as they conduct a freedom of navigation exercise! What do people want sail up beside them give a broadside and away boarder’s? This job could be done by patrol boat if we wanted. If it did kick off I’m sure the RNRAF has the plans and capability to give what would be left of any Orc ship that managed to get past Finland,Sweden,Norway and Germany before they got to us🙄
Its just theoretical. An interesting Ruskfascist task force sails past and you cant help but consider what we could do potentially to sink said fascist Nazi taskforce. I find it hilarious that Russia accuses the Ukrainians of being a nazi puppet government when all their actions so far in the war have been breaches of human rights, illegal invasions of sovereign democratic country, use of rape as a weapon of war, illegal bombing of civilian targets with zero military application. Kidnap and enforced emigration of Ukrainian children- who knows exactly how many- tens of thousands are estimated to have been… Read more »
Your right but according to some we can’t sink a canoe🙄😂
Well a canoe is a small target, and it might get in the way of delivering aid, waving at the Chinese and surrendering to the Iranians?.
Oh look, an anti-UK post from an idiot with half a dozen posts on this website… what a shock.
You really are on the agit-prop bandwagon … different time , different country you would be spouting the same lines for another “cause”
Indeed Mr Bell. Nazi is as Nazi does, though when I say that on BBC comments they remove it every time, despite saying similar in their own reports.
Yep. But apparently I’m an “armchair admiral” and “yes man” for suggesting some realism from all the armchair experts who know otherwise.
So I’ll just be quiet and let the children play on this one.
Dissent from the “we’re crap” narrative will not be tolerated.
😂👍!
Morning Airborne, hope you’re well Mate!
Hi mate, all is good here, how’s you?
all good with me thx Airborne.
Cant blame you, that is a smart strategy. I note of late you had to reply to a few “belligerent” posts from some ill informed folk, Well done – good of you to exercise patience, balance and a little wisdom. Stay well Mate ,
Evening Chris. Thank you.
Some posters really cannot handle being contradicted with either knowledge or an alternate viewpoint.
And they need challenging, as it lowers the quality of the comment section of this site and it ends up as a Daily Mail moan fest.
Pompous little person aren’t you, first you don’t read what someone has written, then you decide that you are the only person who could possibly be correct. Nobody minds an alternative viewpoint but most people can’t stand some Pratt bigging himself up. If you had read my post I started by asking if T23 had Harpoon, ? It was a simple question, I did not suggest that as a Russian ship transited the channel we should blow it out the water or hit multiple cargo ships trying to hit it. It was a question that was all. So expect responses… Read more »
Mick 15 hours ago Reply to Daniele Mandelli Well if we had cause to use it due to a Russian ship launching a missile strike, I don’t think they will care. Reply To be fair Mick you did mention Russian ships launching a missile strike! Also, your terminology is a little grumpy, Daniele may actually be 6 foot 3, so not little, he may not be pompous just knowledgeable, and may consider passing on his considerable subject matter knowledge being helpful and certainly not being a “Pratt”! Again I would recommend reading historical posts to get a flavour of how… Read more »
I don’t presume to know much about naval warfare and frankly was just having a chat ref harpoons, 18 hrs ago Steve M messaged about that if anything was to happen what could we respond with. And I asked about harpoon,
I didn’t then need to be lectured by that pompous person and frankly I couldn’t give a toss if he was 6ft 3 he still is pompous and acts very much like a Pratt. I will back off as frankly he bores me and you have at least written a perfectly polite post which I respect.
And I wrote a perfectly polite post to you, way back in thread, which you ignored, didn’t you? Here it is. “Hi Mick. No one was disagreeing that they don’t have it, you’re right to point it out. I did not list it in my initial reply top of thread to rmj as I don’t think in this instance it would be a weapon of choice, and I mentioned why. There is no arguing. Arguments happen if the poster who is challenged creates an arguement rather than considering other posters observations. As in my posts that I don’t think the… Read more »
Know one said we’re doomed, however I do think the RN has a history of under arming it’s warships and being complacent. The Falklands is a casing point. The recent acquisition of NSM is a step in the right direction and a realisation that a 4.5″ and Sea Ceptor are not battle winning capabilities for surface engagements. Up till recently posters on this forum were regularly suggesting we didn’t need a heavyweight ASuW and thankfully the RN disagrees. Maritime QRA is an ideal opportunity to test TTPs, and in my opinion it’s poor drills for a frigate to be sent… Read more »
‘no-one’
Hi rmj “we didn’t need a heavyweight ASuW” That Included me. And I did not say we did not need it, I said such systems should primarily be mounted on a fast jet, as fast jets have greater flexibility to attack OpFor vessels, not warships, and as I understand it ( I may be wrong ) the RN do not operate that way with regards to ASM on ships. NSM is a bonus, and in my view more valuable IMO for its land attack capability, not anti ship. The RN does not plan to sit in an ocean exchanging ASM… Read more »
Just to add, regards China that is another question entirely, but whether the RN would be toe to toe with them I doubt it.
Dude sit the fuck down and shut up with your 66 posts.
No, I can pretty much guarantee I would you little shit.
Daniele has 16k posts, and a proven track record of being an insightful, informed, and polite interlocutor, you’ve rocked up and withing fucking less than a hundred posts shown yourself to be nothing more than an angry little troll. Shut up, learn to post politely, or fuck off. Simple.
Anytime you creep, now fuck off and bore somebody else
Make me.
You have no idea how much pleasure that would give me creep. And how easy it would be. Now go away prick
Really? Come on. Show me if it’s that easy, or is idle threats on the internet all you can muster?
Mate. Thanks for this. I’m awake now, and have read and replied to this imbeciles posts myself.
Nope. That is in your mind as you have issues. I chipped in with a perfectly friendly response, seeming as Harpoon had now entered the conversation, that there are issues using it in congested sea lanes. Quote – “Doesn’t all type 23 frigates carry Harpoon?” And my reply – “Even if a T23 has Harpoon, as GB has explained many times letting that go into one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world isn’t the best idea.” To which you could have said something like “Oh, why’s that then?” or words to that effect? Instead, you stuck to your… Read more »
cheers my friend😉
There’s nothing unusual about this foreign ships come close to uk waters all the time.
Who said it was unusual?
Well why mention it then duh
Because it’s interesting to military bloggers and military interested and concerned posters mate!
Military Really ! You don’t know the half of it , with your stupid stories , watch what’s going to happen to the channel tunnel soon then write a story for your little friends mate !
Oh dear this Kremlin paid poster is angrier than many of his previous colleges.
A new but cheaper version of JohninMK and out disappeared after being gripped Frost002!
Tell you what I was polite, but as you’ve proven to be a child like nob jockey, it may be time to keep an eye on your tantrum level.
I’m stating a fact , no tantrum I’m just fed up of people who have never been in the forces talking garbage and what I said about the channel tunnel is true , within the next 3 months it will be gone, believe me , don’t believe me , that’s your choice my little friend
Wow I take it Co op we’re knocking out white lightening 2 for the price of 1! I love the ones who “state facts” which are not in fact, facts, but delusional versions of their own perceptions and agenda. But he ho, we will play your game! So my friend, what’s going to happen to the channel tunnel? Where’s it going, maternity leave?
Most people on here know what they’re talking about and many will have forces experience. Have some respect, it doesn’t cost anything.
What about a medal for those of us who served during the 1970’s cod war. There were no shots fired but that doesn’t mean we were not in danger. The weather and seas were atrocious and there was the ever present threat of collisions, in fact I’m sure there was at least one collision. To have to abandon ship in those conditions does not bear thinking about. So let’s have recognition for this particular “frontline” service..