HMS Westminster, a Wildcat helicopter and three Typhoon jets unleashed “fire and fury” at decommissioned American frigate USS Boone using an array of high-powered weaponry.

The Royal Navy and Royal Air Force put on a “formidable display of firepower with United States allies against a specially prepared ex-US Navy warship in the North Atlantic”.

The exercise, named Atlantic Thunder, was the first of its type for the Royal Navy in 18 years and took place alongside US Navy and US Air Force counterparts.

“It was a rare live test of complex weapons against a realistic target far out to sea and tested the power and accuracy of naval and air forces, giving allies real-world experience of hitting targets at sea from long range and proving the capability of several advanced warfighting and targeting techniques.”

Type 23 frigate HMS Westminster fired two Harpoon anti-ship missiles at the same time as a US P-8 Poseidon patrol aircraft launched one of its own – 660kg of high explosive striking ex-USS Boone simultaneously.

The frigate’s Wildcat helicopter quickly followed, punching Martlet air-to-surface missiles into the Boone’s hull. This was the first firing of the Fleet Air Arm’s new anti-ship weapon against a realistic target at sea – to this point Martlet had only been used against purpose-built targets.

The Wildcat’s crew stayed airborne and used the on-board laser-targeting pod to guide in a Typhoon fighter from 41 Squadron RAF to launch Paveway IV precision-guided munitions against the target. This was the first time an RAF Typhoon had dropped live ordnance onto a warship used as a maritime target, and the first time a Royal Navy helicopter had guided the Paveway IV on to its bullseye.

Commander Ed Moss-Ward, Commanding Officer of HMS Westminster, said:

“Atlantic Thunder has demonstrated that UK and US naval and air forces can work together to deliver an end-to-end kill chain against a maritime target at long range. The integration of high-end weapons, sensors and communications with our NATO allies is key to the collective war fighting capability of the Alliance demonstrated by the sinking exercise. The firings have supported the development of the Royal Navy’s targeting and weapon capabilities, and afforded opportunity to conduct realistic training to validate tactics and operating procedures.”

Lieutenant Ross Gallagher of 815 Naval Air Squadron, in command of Westminster’s Wildcat helicopter, said:

“The exercise presented a great opportunity for the Wildcat to showcase the Martlet missile system and to Laser Target Designate for Typhoon dropping Paveway IV.”

The Americans used their own multi-role SM-6 missile launched by destroyer USS Arleigh Burke, before US Air Force F-15E Eagles, assigned to 494th Fighter Squadron, guided several air-to-ground Joint Direct Attack Munitions against ex-USS Boone.

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. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

201 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
MagicGrandpa
MagicGrandpa
1 year ago

Ok, so the target was hit with Harpoon x3, Martlets, Paveway IV, SM-6 and JDAM missiles. I would have hoped it would have been immobilised and potentially sunk by any one of these weapons. Either the old frigate was exceedingly well armoured, or the weapons used are a bit lightweight.

PeterDK
PeterDK
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

As I have understood it, ships prepared for SINKEX have all watertight compartments shut and welded and all flammables removed, thereby making it harder to sink/destroy.

Cymbeline
Cymbeline
1 year ago
Reply to  PeterDK

Absolutely, what would be the point of the exercise if it went down under 1 hit. Targets like these only come along once in a blue moon.

dan
dan
1 year ago
Reply to  PeterDK

But no damage control so it kinda evens out.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  dan

No damage control means no people running around the ship fighting fires and adding water to compartments, Doors being opened and closed. No Gensets or engines running . Some soft wood wedges ain’t going to fill a hole made by a Paveway!

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I’d love to see a softwood wedge that big!

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

You would need something bigger than a 5lb hammer as well…

Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

Frigates aren’t armoured at all, and ships being used for SINKEX are buttoned completely up, such that they can take an absolute pounding for the purposes of research.

In actuality, any one of these weapons would have started fires, leaks and electrical outages which would comfortably achieve a mission kill

dan
dan
1 year ago

The Perry class has survived being hit by 2 ASMs in a combat situation. That’s better than the heavy cruiser from Russian that sank after being hit by 2.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago

Yep that’s the big difference it’s active internal systems and fire hazards that make a big difference. Remember Sheffield it never even listed but was effectively just a shell when we eventually sank it. I do wonder what was left internally on this frigate to represent any of that though II suspect that they were far more interested in simply using it as a target for as many weapons as possible and test those on its structural integrity so logically the former was very much minimised.

Esteban
Esteban
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

The SM-6 is a very interesting weapon.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Yes read elsewhere they are testing it to the full ( this being part of that) to determine it’s full range of flexibility and potential targets. I guess with the improvements in tech, communication, and sensors this is the way many missiles are going.

Andrew Deacon
Andrew Deacon
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Adding an anti surface option to aster would add huge flexibility to the type 45’s for a relatively small outlay

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

And I think extremely expensive! Naval vessels may well have to carry two tier AShMs, high value, lower value. Can’t shoot these things willy nilly!

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

You don’t seem to understand.
If you just sink it you fail to tie up recovery, search and rescue, Dock resources etc. etc.

Trevor
Trevor
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

I believe the OHP class are considered fairly hard to sink for their size/type.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

Understand your concern, and the constraints on realistic testing imposed by structure of SINKEX process. Would submit for consideration the proposition that the most operationally valid test of the capabilities of Harpoon class AShM in the modern era, occurred on April 13, 2022, when two RK-360MC Neptune missiles were salvoed into RFS Moskva. Would be perfectly content to recommend a similar NATO exercise to dispatch RFS Marshal Ustinov and/or Varyag, if they are still located w/in the Black Sea, but somewhat concerned that action might arouse the competitive spirit of Mad Vlad and the slobbering Orcs, on the order of… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Virtually every ship lost to ASM from Sheffield to the Moskva have been abandoned due to fire spreading to missile magazines. Rather the the effect of the explosive.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Exactly, that is why I drew distinction between exercise and wartime op.

Erich W
Erich W
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Yeah. They hit above the waterline – by their nature they don’t sink ships, they just disable them and cause additional damage which can have more serious effects.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

The ships was cleared of fuel and ammunition. In operation it would be full of them. It’s quite difficult to sink an empty metal box bit it’s easy to set one on fire that’s full of flammable liquids and bombs. Also look at Bismarck in 1941. The armour never helped a bit but having lots of water tight spaces will keep you afloat. Conversely this is also why the navy uses SSN’s as its primary anti warship tool. A torpedo can break a ships back sinking it instantly a missile can’t do that. The faster the missile the more likely… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Although you are certainly correct in your assertion that Bismark proved to be difficult to sink, actually thought that you would cite the fate of HMS Hood, the pride of the pre-war RN Home Fleet. But for one extremely unfortunate penetration of the (forward?) magazine…☹️

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Bismarck was flooding her magazines, hard to blow up a ship with flooded powder. Hood was very unlucky, crazy underwater shell penetration from a shell not designed to go under water. If you re-plaid the battle of Denmark straight 100 times you would probably have fond Bismarck and Prinz Eugen a smouldering wreck 9 times of 10. The British had twice the firepower and POW was better protected than Bismarck. Rodney made very quick work of Bismarck later on in conjunction with KGV.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

…and the coups de grace delivered in the form of two torpedo hits by County class heavy cruiser HMS Dorsetshire (per Wiki).

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

There you two go now i’m gonna have to watch the film again. 😃😃

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

😁, evidently there is a documentary entitled “The Battle of Hood and Bismarck” (2002) (2 hrs. 32 min.) that received favorable reviews.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Yeah there’s a few out there but no Kenneth More RIP. 😥

Last edited 1 year ago by David Steeper
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Didn’t the Germans claim that they scuttled it?

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

A claim from the Germans in the same vein as the infantry commander who exclaimed, “Hell no, we’re not retreating; we’re advancing to the rear!” 😉

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

They did but it’s hard to tell as almost anyone down below on the ship died there. She was certainly sinking with or without scuttling charges but takes a long time to sink a ship by poking holes in it. Just look at the USS Hornet.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Well said on Rodney. Biggest bugbear with the film Sink the Bismarck is focus on KGV when it was Rodneys fine shooting that did most of the damage. 16inch shells helped too !

Robert
Robert
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

The “underwater” shell didn’t have to go far under. Hood’s bow wave very nearly exposed the bottom of her belt armour. An aerial photo taken on the day of the battle shows the extent of the hull exposed.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert

Yes that’s true but the German shells at that time should not have been able to plunge through water and detonate. Only France and Japan had such shells in 1941. POW was hit in the same way but the shell did not detonate. That’s why it was a very lucky shot.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

To be fair POW was still in shake down mode and those 4 gun turrets (designed to keep her within treaty rules) were extremely troublesome early on, it wasn’t really ready to take on Bismark though one of its hits did notable damage to Bismark. As you say Rodney though quite old by that time was a completely different kettle of fish and KGV showed the potential of that class’s general design within its treaty limitations. Interestingly the relative difference in sinking at Jutland has been put down to not keeping the ships watertight and secure in the name of… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Yes POW was not ready for action however Hood very much was and there was two county class as well plus escorting destroyers. On a normal day they should have been able to take out Bismarck task force they were just very unlucky.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Interesting, one can sense history rhyming if not echoing, QNLZ virtually ready for action, PWLS, not so much.

Dave G
Dave G
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Thought Hood was struck by a descending shell going through the thinner top armour that was the compromise chosen for battleceuisers (benefit of the long range Bismarck’s guns had) not a below water hit?

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Dave G

The deck armour scenarios were largely discounted. Seems an underwater penetration more likely now with evidence from the wreck. Good video here on it

https://youtu.be/CLPeC7LRqIY

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

“ The faster the missile the more likely it is to just pass through the ship.”

Not if the missile has decent targeting. It will explode in the core of the ship.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

Delay action fuses are a wonderful thing.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

If your missile is traveling at Mach 5 through a relatively thin aluminium or steel box filled largely with air then a missile can very easily pass through it before detonation. Happens all the time even with sub sonic ASM. Even with close in artillery from Rodney and KGV many shells went right through Bismarck with no detonation.

Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

I think you need to consider the kinetic energy of a Mach 5 object. That alone, on a ship unarmoured as all modern warships are, ought to do more damage than an explosive charge

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Ummmm

I was talking about sophisticated weapons which do have millimetres radar and other sensors that give close to perfect timing for detonation.

If modern missiles were popping out the other side of the hull without detonating in a SINKEX then I’d be expecting a lot of very unpleasant questions being asked.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

Well martlets aren’t going to sink it though determining what damage they could would be very rewarding no doubt. Using paveway just shows how unprepared RN is for ship strikes, only useful against already greatly incapacitated or non well armed targets to finish them off, but hey presently we have little else sadly till much later this decade. Hopefully Putin won’t start a war eh.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

If a conventional conflict started it would be nuclear submarines that would deal with surface vessels. But as Russia is proving to be pretty useless, we are well equipped to deal with the threats. And if you don’t have an effective kill chain. Anti ship missiles are useless. People are w bit obsessed with seeing big fancy missiles hanging off warships, yet history has proven them all to be pretty un-affective in the real world, hence why we haven’t made them a priority. We use Subs to take out larger vessels, and helicopters in the littoral. And vessel launched missiles… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

When your enemies have AShMs on their ships but we don’t it’s we who have the problem & lack survivability however HMG fanboys spin it. We recklessly leave our vessels, crews & interests vulnerable.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Its not HMG fan boy’s Frank, the RN share the same opinion. If the RN really really really wanted AshMs on our surface vessels, they could have had them, it would just have meant spending less on somthing else. Same for the RAF. But they haven’t. Because anti ship warfare is incredibly difficult, and nothing like what most people think it’s like. We have the best tools for the job, The Astute class Armed with Spearfish. And our Merlin and Wildcat fleets, and P8. And the submarine fleet along with our allies, especially the USN, would dominate any potential threats.… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Totally agree all major navies are committed to anti ship missiles, you can’t simply rely on a sub being in the vicinity. Fact is this capability was removed from fast jets when tornado and sea eagle retired or allowed to decay with ship borne missiles due to cost cuts in response to the collapse of the Soviet Union and China not seen as a threat back then not because such weapons aren’t useful or indeed lethal. The Russians may be incompetent and stuck with mostly outdated weapons but in a one to one they would still be the more likely… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Morning Spy. A few observations. “Totally agree all major navies are committed to anti ship missiles” As is ours. Harpoon, Martlet, Venom all in service. “Fact is this capability was removed from fast jets when tornado and sea eagle retired “ Agreed, and I support our fast jets having an ASM capability. Especially the F35s. “it’s an increasingly small minority who still claim its not needed” I don’t think posters such as Robert, myself, GB, or anyone else have ever actually said that. They do point out the problems with targeting OTH from a ship launched weapon and that other weapons… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

With you Frank. With so few subs available I think it’s suicidal idiocy. So easy to fix too. Complements the ships gunnery and having an attack ability is always useful. Glad the RAN down here think differently and arm their ships both with AShMs and even ship launched torpedos as a back-up. Obviously no Astute subs in the mix here but the RAN are working on updating their Collins subs and have a decent number of P-8s in service and Triton UAVs coming into service.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Do you think we will sail our escorts in front of the Russian vessels Frank? The Ocean is big, they have to find them first.
Also, why are RN escorts sailing off Murmansk?

Russian ships have to come to us, remember. Geography demands it, as their seas are choke points.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago

Hi Daniele. Who’s suggesting our warships sailing off Mumansk? You’ve lost me there. All I was saying was I think our escorts & interests are vulnerable & undermined without decent AShMs while everybody else has them.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Because that is where the Russian Northern fleet is located, in war that backyard of Russia is not where our ships would be, waiting to get shot at. When Russian ships sortie NATO, especially the UK and the US, track them. By several sources and methods. Do you accept that for Russian ships to actually fire these ASM they have they need to get within range of ours first? And ours move into positions of advantage, in co ordination with other NATO assets. They don’t sit there in a shooting gallery waiting for Russia to get a free shot off!… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago

And to add, I believe the Russian Navy uses primarily airpower and submarines offensively. Their ship assets have traditionally been bastion orientated defending their seas, Black Sea, Kara, Barents.

So where is this high seas ship vs ship missile contest where our ships are vulnerable and undermined by not having a heavy ASM on them? ( Frigates still have Harpoon of course )

“Everybody else” as you say, is not applicable to the situation the RN finds itself and how its ships operate in a war with Russia. And everybody else do not have the constraints that Russia have.

Andrew Peter Smith
Andrew Peter Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  MagicGrandpa

You don’t need to sink a ship to put it out of action
Just take out enough systems to take it out of the battle. These arnt 16 inch shells

Posse Comitatus
Posse Comitatus
1 year ago

It’s now safely tied up at Glen Mallen, following the putting out of a minor fire, with the crew enjoying a barbecue and civic reception before casting their vote in the referendum about Russia becoming a region of Scotland.

Sound familiar JohninMK?

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago

🤣🤣🤣

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

They would have to swap the Vodka for the Whiskey. 😀

JohnM
JohnM
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Indeed, but please note Scotch whisky is spelt without the e. Sacrilege!

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago

It wasn’t hit by missiles just a small fire on board due to a sailor smoking in the wrong area. All the crew are safe enjoying dinner at the arrochar hotel🙈
All the footage is propaganda produced by people wanting to destroy our country.

JohninMK
JohninMK
1 year ago

Hi PC, many a true word…… and responding in kind, I suspect it might be a close run vote if Russia offered to supply gas at the price Hungary are now paying, about 1/6 of the UK buy price, plus help protect Scotland’s North Sea assets. People often vote based on their wallet.

Posse Comitatus
Posse Comitatus
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Not even close. Leaving aside the fact that the ‘result ‘ of the sham referenda in Ukraine was decided many months ago in Moscow, no amount of cheap gas will compensate for the destroyed housing, schools, hospitals, infrastructure etc, nor make up for the raped women, murdered citizens, abducted children, torture, detention, and theft of property by Russian soldiers. Being content with Russian shillings might please Russian quislings such as yourself, most other people have a spine and moral fibre.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

You clearly are not informed well enough to know that Scotland is almost entirely self sufficient in energy so such an offer would be rather pointless. The advantage of large resources and a small population, so don’t count ya chickens just yet.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

It also brings a load of other problems due to living under the sanctions imposed on Russia. Not to mention the draft.
I’ve seen some hilarious videos of the folk called up. There’s a bus with lots of them carrying alcohol with them.
At the camp the instructor says form 2 lines and the answer is f you. You form a line.
What a shame the average Russian is now being dragged into there leaders Willy waving contest.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Someone really should send Mad Vlad a copy of Dr. Zhivago, either the novel or DVD. Highlight the section that deals w/ the Russian Army revolt in WW I. Followed by revolution and ultimate fate of Czar (and family). Could lead to sober reflection, or, could send his sense of paranoia off the chart.

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

They are typical Russian drunken peasants mate!

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

More irrelevant chuff! Any comments in regards to the ongoing recruitment of convicted rapists to join the army of uniformed rapists? Or any comments on the ongoing tactical or strategic situation in the sovereign territory of Ukraine?

JayBee
JayBee
1 year ago

But did it sink?

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
1 year ago
Reply to  JayBee

There is a video on Navy Lookout showing it sinking…

Cheers CR

Dern
Dern
1 year ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Maybe it just suffered a minor fire and is now being towed back to Sev- I mean Scotland.

PaulW
PaulW
1 year ago

Maybe we need to have a chat with the French. I think Sheffield went down from a single Exocet. I realise aluminium super structure had a role to play in that, but that’s still very effective.

Paul T
Paul T
1 year ago
Reply to  PaulW

Hms Sheffield was gutted by fire from the Exocet hit – but she stayed afloat afterwards, in the process of being towed to safely it took in water from a heavy storm which ultimately sank her.

Harry
Harry
1 year ago
Reply to  PaulW

The ship would’ve been prepped to take a pounding in a way an operational ship would not be able to (welded compartments etc).

Ships can stay afloat for some time after a decent pounding though, the USS Stark was struck by two exocets and did not sink.

Damage to electronics probably renders most surface ships combat ineffective after a single strike.

Dern
Dern
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry

It’s a bit like Colonel Burtons hissyfits after Bradley tests had ammunition replaced by sand. We could have fired on the frigate in fully operational conditions but then you’d not have gotten much out of the test, and only learned that ammunition goes boom.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Dern

👍

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  PaulW

Paul the Sheff remained floating for 4 days after the 4th May strike by the 4th day she was completely gutted but her Dart and gun mags didn’t go up as the strike was midshipman and above the waterline she kept afloat until choppy Swells took her if a DC party had got back on board and patched up the hole but as the fallen lads were still on board the power that be let her go Also the 21s had an Aluminiun superstructure, 42s were Steel

Tim
Tim
1 year ago
Reply to  Tommo

It was a shame they couldn’t patch the hole and leave her in situ instead of not doing that and tasking HMS Plymouth to tow her to South Georgia. In situ her empty hulk could have absorbed another Exocet or two.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  Tim

Yeah emotions ran high then Plymouth did her best but too no avail all crypto gear was that wasn’t damaged was retrieved and Plymouth parted company with what is now deemed an official war grave and Lloyd’s of London rang the Lauchins Bell 40 years ago I’m old now those lads are forever young Tim

PaulW
PaulW
1 year ago
Reply to  Tommo

Ok. Looks like I confused with the 21. There was a paper years ago about the DDG51 design that leant lessons from the Sheffield incident. I was sure they referenced the superstructure materials. Need to check my facts better. Cheers anyway.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  PaulW

That’s alright Paul ,21s were designed too be light and fast that’s why the Hull was steel too take speed without deforming and the superstructure was Aluminium to cut down on weight little did we know about the concesquences of being struck with British built 250 and 500 lb bombs dropped by an enemy and temp differencials in bulkhead failure , the lessons from Corporate have been learnt

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  PaulW

Sheffield did not had aluminium superstructure. Type 21 had.

Marked
Marked
1 year ago

Feck me, wouldn’t want to be on board a helicopter lazing a warship for a paveway strike, there are less messy forms of suicide…

Esteban
Esteban
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

Yeah, can’t believe that is even a remotely viable tactic against a neer peer adversary.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Fortunately, the RN and RAF know much more about this stuff then we all do 👍

Esteban
Esteban
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

I think not. A paveway lazed by a helicopter would be state of the art in about 1985. Got to love the headline. Basically this whole exercise shows how fantastically behind the RN and the RAF is in naval surface stike.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Ok mate, I’m sure the guys at 41sqn Typhoon OEU will tell you otherwise, and the Lynx crews with Martlet, and what it takes to bring all these elements together. And offboard laser guiding and ISTAR from drones proved very effective at taking out that Russian junk. The same Russian junk that many on here thought was the bees knees with all those weapons on display and antique avionics. While a new air launched anti ship missile would be great. They are useless without an effective kill chain. And that is what takes a lot of practice.

Andrew Deacon
Andrew Deacon
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

2 pave way iv were used one lased by the wildcat the other by the typhoon itself , guess it’s just about practicing as many options as possible

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

It’s a tactic to be used, or not used! Target and threat dependant. No problem with the people who have some subject matter knowledge.

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Fortunately you are irrelevant to the situation and the subject matter professionals get on with it!

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Not every target is a warship or near peer.
This could be quite viable against a merchy or a static infrastructure target.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Yes to quote elsewhere: ‘Amid all this upheaval, the option to call upon RAF Typhoons to offer an additional anti-ship capability, including against larger warships, is a useful one. However, the applications for this method of attack in an actual war remain somewhat limited. A direct attack using laser guidance could be ideal for finishing off damaged warships, or otherwise attacking poorly or undefended vessels. But with no standoff ability, it would be unsuitable for an attack on a surface combatant with any meaningful anti-air capability. While the dual-mode Paveway IV does have GPS guidance, this is only for use… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Agreed. An jet launched ASM is needed.

Matt
Matt
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

Yeah I thought that too, but maybe there were lessons to be learnt from the laser guided aspect. Perhaps paving the way for that role to be undertaken by a drone in future? Just a thought.
M@

Marked
Marked
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt

A stealthy drone, that’s viable, but still brings a scarce expensive aircraft uncomfortably close though to deploy a weapon, even when using a max speed lob rather than overflying the target.

The RAF and fleet air arm need a long range missile, it’s not a luxury, it’s a must! It’s not like the navy has an abundance of options on its surface fleet either.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

Anti ship missiles will always be expensive and a task force will always have a limited number of them. The Missiles will be expended first and much if not all will be intercepted by Anti Aircraft missiles which are also expensive and limited. After the initial missile engagement two fleets would likely continue to sail towards each other if both are surviving. Aircraft with precision guided bombs would come next followed by naval artillery. Subs and torpedos first, then missiles, then bombs then guns and following that its boarding actions 😀

That’s what they are practicing here.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Arr, me matey, grapeshot to down the mizzenmast, pistols and cutlasses at the ready, boarding party, ho! 🤔😁

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Sod that advanced tec, oars to ramming speed.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

I’m sorry in this day and age with defence cuts around Harsh Words are the order of the day

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Tommo

A couple of spuds chucked at the bridge window would get their attention. Then use the wrong pronouns and they’d surrender in no time.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

That seems so underhanded a tactic that someone like Putin would now threaten too use the use of pro nouns could soon be tabled by the UN security Council as a threat too Humanity sorry refrain that last as a threat too People can’t have the word man it’s not inclusive for every-person

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Actually, when I read Jim’s text a vision of Nelson at Trafalgar or the fictional character Horatio Hornblower (an excellent series of novels) came to:mind immediately. Realize that boarding party training is beneficial/essential for constabulary and counterterrorism duties. There is also the sobering example of the seizure of the USS Pueblo in international waters by nutbag NKs in Jan. 1968. If I had been in a position of authority, might have given serious thought to ordering SAC to bomb them back into the Stone Age.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

I appreciate the training value, but the FAA RAF badly need an air launched ASM on the Typhoon and F35. Be that SPEAR 3 or other long range types the US and Aus are fielding.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

SPEAR will be very handy for F35, not sure longer range anti ship missile is worth it in F35B. We could definitely use something off the shell and cheap for Typhoon like Marte ER although we would then half to start training typhoon pilots in an entire new mission set that they are unlikely to ever use and its a very specialised mission. Remember also we do have ASM capability in the form of P8 which can already take air launched harpoon and soon LRASM. If I was going to spend my precious pounds it would probably be on P8… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

All sensible. Except I feel for the money we are forking out on the entire QEC capability the F35 air group itself needs an ASM. So let’s disregard the Typhoon option.

I get why the RN doesn’t prioritise ASM on escorts so I for one don’t join that clamour. But air launched ASM, yes.

Can P8 use LRASM? Exiting…..😜

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago

Very interesting article regarding the General Electric engine and the F35B. They think they can make it work.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/xa100-next-generation-adaptive-engine-could-now-power-f-35b-too

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Wish they’d get on and make BIV work. 🙄

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago

Yes block 4 has to be highest priority. If the software is so complex and probably old maybe it’s time for a rethink/update to newer software that’s easier to work with.
Speaking as a non software expert. Probably loads of issues with doing that I don’t know about.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Me neither a few web sites is as far as I ever got. All I know is that it is a well known problem that is debilitating trying to adapt and evolve the software to add newer elements and though a rewrite would be the ideal it simply isn’t practical for most of the time so new and old have to co-exist (reminds me of through software making the three different forms of signalling on the Elizabeth line work together as full replacement wasn’t an option, much of the delay was due to problems making it work seamlessly and reliably).… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Very good news indeed. Higher thrust may allow F35B to increase bring back rates above F35C now. The extra range will be very welcome. I can see F35B being followed by F35E in British service.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

If it can get LRASM on board I would agree. However not sure something shorter range like JSM makes sense. If the F35 B is going to have to get with in 100 miles with no stealth to launch JSM ( under wing pylon) I think it would be more effective to maintain stealth and get in to a 60-70 mile range and launch SPEAR. I then get 8 shots instead of 6, as well as maybe some stand in jamming. Not going to sink a ship like that fast but may be a mission kill even for an entire… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

That’s a good question. Remember reading the argument against Brimstone on F35 was that being rail launched it needs to be on a pylon under the wings and the effect on loss of stealth certainly for such a relatively short range weapon makes it very much less attractive. SPEAR thus makes much more sense.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

I think we’re also getting the upgraded Tomahawk which has Ash capability.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

Yes all up to Block V standard.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

If they then put MK41s on the T45/31/32 as with the T26 and Astutes you’ve got some diverse AShM and land attack capability. Updated and affordable, hopefully.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

👍Transformational.

Steve M
Steve M
1 year ago

If SPEAR3 Sead launched fm f-35 works then potentially laser gbu might work?

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve M
Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

Long RN practice utilising Lynx to provide additional guidance data to onboard SSM, though.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Yep, Lynx/Wildcat doing OHT for Harpoon is a well practised drill. Using the PID to find and ID targets, cued from the ESM outfit, means you dont even need to use the helo radar.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Interesting, also capable of discriminating from clutter and/or non-combatants in the littorals? 🤔

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

It does seem to be lost on some people that having long range anti ship missiles brings its own problems with targeting.
Especially if you want to be sure you actually hit a target. For that you need eyes on target.
Can’t just fire 1000 mile range anti ship missiles from a boat and they magically find and kill the enemy ships in that area.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

The current Harpoon is negative data link. With current ROE in limited conflicts etc shooting a Harpoon off where merchies are is not good.
In an all out no holds barred slugfest then yes send them all down the bearing line sent by OHT

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Thanks, understood.

Geoffi
Geoffi
1 year ago

Poor ship….😔

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Geoffi

Yeh, not a good time to be an OHP. They should be queuing at the border by now trying to avoid the draft.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

I don’t get the point of using a Harpoon missile from a T23 ? They are about to go out of service so zilch point in learning anything.
Unless it was to just use stock up or the RN trying to make a point that we really do need an interim replacement.
Also what munition would a US P8 use that weighs 660kg.

Cymbeline
Cymbeline
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

I think that was the combined weight of the 2 harpoon that Westminster fired and the 1 harpoon that the P8 fired at 221kg each.

Bob
Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

I think you misread; two Harpoon from Westminster and one from the P8, 220kg each.

Harry
Harry
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Guess they have to use the Harpoons for something before it exits service and stocks expire.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry

Too good an opportunity to miss I suspect. Especially if they are towards end of life, I mean how else do you test their viability, who knows maybe another life extension is in order even.

donald_of_tokyo
donald_of_tokyo
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

I understand they were trialing “kill chains” with Harpoon, i.e. detect, data transfer and decide? At least, navylookout article suggest something like, “using satellites” or alike.

Regardless of the SSM being Harpoon or NSM, there is almost nothing to do after launch. (Yes, NSM has a two-way datalink to change targets on the way, but that option will be used sometimes, and sometimes not).

What to do before launch, is the essential part, I guess?

Last edited 1 year ago by donald_of_tokyo
Jim
Jim
1 year ago

Yes there was talk of some US satellite targeting system. Would love to know more. Very Tom Clancy.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Bristol and Fife got a mention in the Hunt for the Red October thanks Mr Clancey

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

LRASM

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

In my dreams. I wish we had some

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

P8 can take them soon just need to buy some from the cousins for a few quid. AUKUS covers their transfer.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

It’s more for trading crews. Remember HMS Edinburgh firing off a bunch of sea dart just before decommissioning.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Disposing of munitions is very expensive…..expending then is cheaper and crews learn a lot from a live fire event

David Barry
David Barry
1 year ago

And it’s sodding great fun to brass things up 😉

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago

What’s the progress on deploying Sea Venom since CSG21? Should be right up there for Wildcat under the current fast changing threats.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Excellent question, original IOC projected to be (2021?). Weapon or integration issue?

Jon
Jon
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

I had thought IOC was declared shortly before CSG 21, but I can’t find any official pronouncement and it looks like it was delayed to this year. I’d have expected it to be tested in an exercise like this, so that’s not looking so good.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Jon

Was thinking the same, if it was at all possible it would have happened let’s be honest. Was checking out Brimstones delays last week, even Brimstone 2 was around 4 years late as for version 1 less said the better, yet when laser sensors were needed during Gulf war (for man in loop requirement) they managed to achieve it super quick and most were subsequently updated.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Totally, and no new news on the FC/ASW these days either…

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

In Britain I’ve noticed an ‘official’ trend that sums up as: All excited – we’re going to have this that and something none other has; then total ominous silence for years.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

As I hinted at above that more than sums up the Brimstone development, the prior project for a guided munition cancelled so then a rethink and Brimstone started off as a slightly improved Hellfire with supersonic launch, then a far more complex re-design, delay, cancellation, re-instatement, launch at even higher speeds list goes on and on before it finally got into service, at which point they soon wanted/needed new enhancements to be able to use in Iraq. Which all led to Brimstone 2 then being developed with double the development time expected. Great result in the end especially in light… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

All the talk about the UK being a “world leader in hypersonics” too…where’s the evidence? Absolutely nothing to show for it so far, in the public domain anyway. Others seem to be doing it, like US, Russia, China, where’s the UKs? FC/ASW, where’s that at and are they making any efforts in bringing it forward? Unless the UKs is all under wraps which it could be I just wish people would stop saying things that are nonexistent and only speak more after it exists!

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Venom is out and about. It was deployed on the CSG21 trip. However there are some pretty major alterations to magazines and handling systems required on FF and DD to carry it. The Palletron that the missile is stowed in, handled in and used to wheel out to the aircraft is different from Skua Palletrons. That means new stowage securing arrangements, load testing of handling equipment etc. You will need to empty the air weapons mag first to get the work done.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Up trumps again, GB, thanks.
Aside, we need a blogger on this type of detail like’s so available in US and Australia. Know we’ve got H.I. Sutton, but there’s Aaron on SubBrief, Alex at Sandboxx Perun & Hypohisterical for Aussies. In fact a mini AUKUS, but with a dearth of our own UK on the up to date stuff. Fancy that role on Youtube?!
Same goes for the other two services i.e. an easy search channel for anyone interested rather than searching special interest sites, maybe.
Rgs

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Instance. Aaron gave some likely input to the issues with PoW shaft, and the number of times our own posters actually include a UT link!
Just musing.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Great idea.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Hmmm…by inference, alterations to DD and FF magazines and handling systems to accommodate Sea Venom will be accomplished during planned refit periods? FOC timeframe extended as a consequence? 🤔

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Mag mods you could do the work in a 4 week FTSP alongside maintenance period if you plan it correctly, allocate manpower and have the test and trial teams booked and available. The RN has previously fitted SCOT 5 and some other big systems such as Radar to ships in 4-6 week alongside maintenance periods without any need for docking or a refit. Its the usual 6 P’s… get that in place and all will be good. There are other things that need doing in parallel. You would also need to ensure that the Wildcat allocated to the ship is… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Understood, thanks for explanation! Bottom line guestimate–2025? Later?

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

… guesstimate…🙄

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

We have had since 2014 to think about installation issues mind. Must be part of the T26 / T31 designs already🤔; and on the QEs, I’d hope.
It’s just that our T23s & T45s could do with it ‘soonish’.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Agreed, but as Gunbuster has pointed out, there are a number of intervening steps to actual deployment that are not highlighted in a Program Manager’s (or Government Minister’s) PowerPoint presentation. Real life can be complicated. 😉

FOSTERSMAN
FOSTERSMAN
1 year ago

Nice to see the RAF unveiling it’s latest anti ship missile lol, on a serious matter what is supposed to fit inside the F35bs internal weapons hold? I was under the impression that paveway is too large to fit, otherwise it has to use the pylons denying it’s stealth advantage?

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 year ago
Reply to  FOSTERSMAN

F35B can carry Paveway 4 internally and under the wings. 6 in total, plus 2 ASRAAM, and 2 AMRAAM/Meteor.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  FOSTERSMAN

If Martlet’s effective range is only 8km, shouldn’t they be working on an extended range version already? Seems a bit shortish to me.

FOSTERSMAN
FOSTERSMAN
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Really all it was designed for to be a “cheapish” anti pb, helicopter missile that can be used in large numbers by light forces. It is basically a modified starstreak missile so shares the same roles as a close in system. If you wanted something with further range and a bit of a bite then the navy has sea venom, also wildcat launched I’m suprised that never got used as well. I’m a big fan of marlet LMM as it fits in with our current affordable doctrine of light forces that are use speed and adaptability to our advantage, look… Read more »

Ron
Ron
1 year ago

Well, I suppose if your going to go might as well go out with a bang.

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 year ago

Perhaps the point of us firing two Harpoon missiles is to spread fear and apprehension amongst the Russian fleet. It still kicks ass..that’s the message….?
Appreciate firing Martlet at a ‘proper’ target but unless it was to demonstrate pin point accuracy in (say) hitting the bridge not sure what else it shows.
Dropping laser guided bombs designated by Wildcat, perhaps a tactic to get more stand-off range?
Spear3 please. One Typhoon firing a dozen of them, all hitting from different angles at the same time….now THERE would be a demonstration….
AA

dan
dan
1 year ago

And all it took to sink the pride of the Russian Navy was 2 Ukrainian ASMs. LMAO

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  dan

It was a 80’s tech ship.
The pride of Russian navy should be a Kirov, itself also a 80’s tech – albeit updated.

Mike
Mike
1 year ago

I thought martlet was only meant for defence against small fast moving craft. What was the purpose of firing these at the hull? Radar or control tower targets etc I could understand but puzzled by the hull. Are they capable of damage to a ship’s hull

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  Mike

Maybe to check if they can do mission kill, like hitting a radar.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago

This is a bit off topic but did anyone see the warzone article about the F35b getting the GE adaptive engine. Good news if all three variants can have the same engine upgrade.

DanielMorgan
DanielMorgan
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat
Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  DanielMorgan

Agree but if the decision us made then having 1 engine for all 3 variants is a good thing.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/xa100-next-generation-adaptive-engine-could-now-power-f-35b-too

Maybe not be the right thread here for this but it’s looking like the F35B is getting the new engine as well.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

I also spotted the article. Interesting development. Let’s hope it goes ahead 25% increase in range would be welcome and hopefully this engine doesn’t degrade the stealth coating on after burner. Perhaps even super cruise capability for the F35.

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
1 year ago

Oh aye those imaginary anti ship missiles the wee Harpoon haters keep claiming we don’t have 😂😂😂😂😂

the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the realisation a RN frigate fired 2 of them ……….🤣😂 and a bunch of martlet aswell ,incandescent with rage they must be🤣

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago

👍 The ASM capabilities we don’t have, apparently.

Gary j Purser
Gary j Purser
1 year ago

Wonder how much damage martlet did alone.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago

I might be missing something here but knocking ing the stuffing out a ship like this has some value but in a real live scenario a ship is likely to be able to fight back with its SAM and ECM unless that’s all switched off! . So I’m not sure how successful Harpoon, Paveway and Marlet would be then but good to know that they all work and go bang! There’s no mention of Sea Venom, JSM and Storm Shadow but not sure if the latter was given an AShM capability?

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

With the US selling 60 Harpoons to Taiwan recently I wonder if the RN will also restock a bit? I guess, it could if needed and same with TLAMs. Its latest block 3C must still be considered effective and will probably be one of the cheaper options compared others?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

I thought Harpoon versions only go as far as Block II. Exocet has a 3C version.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/11/french-navy-to-field-new-exocet-mm40-block-3c-anti-ship-missiles-from-2021/

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Hi Paul, yes, you’re 100% right. I got my AShMs mixed up! Please forgive me this once…😆

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

No worries. I wonder whether Exocet is in the frame for the interim missile?

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

It’s always around in the background mix somewhere. Hoping the RN and RAF gets something soon.
There’s talk in the Aus press here of the current Collins class sub getting updated with TLAMs and the first few new Aus nuclear subs now being made in the US. Being an Aus-Brit I would’ve liked the UK to get a slice of this too. I think we all would! It’s still all unconfirmed.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Yeah but 2 mths back the outgoing Aus Defence Minister said to his disappointment UK hadn’t even put in a prospective proposal for the subs.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

This might be very stupid to say but if the UK delayed or even cancelled 1 of the 4 SSBN sub builds as hasn’t the Vanguard just been refitted with a Lifex? Couldn’t they then have made room and afforded for a new batch of Astute/ Astute+/SSNRs, maybe another 1-3 for the RN and 1-2 for starters for the RAN? I think the UK has just lost a whopping great opportunity here to the US. Admittedly the fit out is more likely to be US orientated but did the UK actually try hard enough here? And considering the RAN joint… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Forgot the Marte ER. Six on one Typhoon. A lot of bang.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Sorry, i just read that Jim has mentioned this above already.

Andrew Deacon
Andrew Deacon
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

I’ve always wondered why they don’t use sinkex to test defensive weapons , a nearby barge with mk41 or even mushrooms remotely controlled from an air defence destroyer would make very interesting viewing

peter fernch
peter fernch
1 year ago

Well i understood Harpoon was being taken out of service whats all the fuss about. Great when launched against a static and unmanned target but thats not real war

MagicGrandpa
MagicGrandpa
1 year ago

Thanks to everyone who explain the SINKEX configuration. That now makes sense to me, a simple landlubber!

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago

See Russia are using Shahed-136 drones to attack deep into Ukraine. Back to WWII with V1, then. They’re also characterised by a banshee wail as they dive; so Stuka. All delivered by the Bstds who are, ere, ridding Ukraine of Nazis. Nice one.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Gavin ,apart from the wonder weapons ,the calling up of Civilians, and a more involvement in the running of the Armed forces Putin is still denying the fact that he is following in the footsteps of one Adolf Hitler all that’s missing is the bunker and Pistol fingers crossed

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 year ago
Reply to  Tommo

Putin’s finished, whatever he does. Politics offers many ways of dying; literal and figurative. He favours literal, either administered or gravity-assist, so granting that preferred choice would seem only proper. But We’re too reasonable for that.

The only long term issue is what supersedes. Since Russia historically opts authoritarian, under whatever guise, I don’t hold out much hope. More so as she will now find herself subordinate to China. This latter paragraph I’d like to be proven wrong over, though.

Tommo
Tommo
1 year ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Thanks Gavin ,for your post ,yes it would seem that any voice raised against the Russian establishment is quickly silenced with laws that suit the elite and not the majority .So if and when Putin goes like you said another will take his place securing another authoritian leader who will undoubtedly continue in his predisessors footsteps and the cycle will continue as if nothing has changed for the Russian people it’s as if the time of surfitude never went away as seen with the disproportant calling up of Putins reservists from areas far from the Cities pro kremlin but have… Read more »

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago

Did the USN have in for USS Boone by any chance 🤗

JohninMK
JohninMK
1 year ago

The US have just started testing a Quiksink AShM guide kit for the GBU-31 2000lb Joint Direct Attack Munition JDAM with the bomb targetting the water beside the ship effectively turning it into a torpedo type ‘break the back’ weapon. GPS guidance to the area by JDAM then radar/IIR from the Quiksink. Whilst only a 15 or so mile range weapon it would give a faster way to get a very destructive weapon to a target than a submarine. It is fairly cheap at around $100k plus the JDAM. Big article on it a couple of days ago at the… Read more »

Jacko
Jacko
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

While you here would you like to expand on your opinion that the Orcs could reach the Polish border whenever they wanted? I mean they are going for a border just in the wrong direction!

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Good to see you have not been drafted yet. What’s your assessment of how the war is going? Orcs don’t seem to be the military force you outlined a few months back, or is this just part of some bigger tactic we don’t understand? I know the Russians retreated a lot in the past as part of their tactics to “win” a war. Is that what Putin is doing now? Running away and letting the Ukrainians take Moscow while he keeps his secret war machine in the Urals then conquers all of Europe in a one go.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Interestingly like the UK, the US Airforce does not have an Anti ship missile on its fighters. LRASM on the B1 will be the first time I think the USAF has operated such a weapon at-least since the Cold War.

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Nice AKs some of your new looter squad recruits are getting……..😂😂😂😂😂😂

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago

Not certain this is the correct thread to raise this issue, but is there any serious effort being expended by RN to acquire the capability to replenish supplies of Asters and/or Sea Ceptors while underway? Depending upon adversary, could envision circumstances where inventory expended before battle ends–a potentially lethal scenario.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Nothing on Aster, Sea Ceptor is much smaller and can probably be lifted by a crew in extreme circumstance but no where onboard to store such weapons.

Damo
Damo
1 year ago

You’ve posted some terrible links in the past Nige, but this must be the worst 😉

Tim
Tim
1 year ago

It’s how she would have like to have gone RIP