HMS Richmond has fired her Sea Ceptor missiles, shooting down two Houthi drones.

On Saturday 9th March, HMS Richmond fired missiles and shot down hostile Houthi drones heading towards the ship.

Plymouth-based type 23 frigate HMS Richmond fired sea captor missiles to defend the ship and merchant vessels in the vicinity. HMS Richmond is currently taking part in Operation Prosperity Guardian, protecting merchant shipping in the Red Sea from Houthi rebel attacks.

HMS Richmond, which left Plymouth at the beginning of January, has a crew of 200 sailors and Royal Marines and a Sea Ceptor missile system, capable of protecting shipping spread out across an area the size of Greater Manchester – some 500 square miles of ocean.

HMS Richmond is also armed with a range of medium guns, machine-guns, small arms, torpedoes, a Royal Marines boarding team, and a Wildcat helicopter which can search vast areas on patrols for hostile threats on the water – and destroy them if necessary with Martlet anti-ship missiles.

Defence Secretary Grant Shapps said:

“The UK is committed to protecting freedom of navigation. I visited HMS Diamond in January and thanked the Ship’s Company for their incredible work defending freedom of navigation, saving innocent lives and ensuring merchant shipping is protected from the illegal Houthi attacks. I am confident that HMS Richmond will carry on her impressive work.”

What is Operation Prosperity Guardian?

The operation is a United States-led military operation by a multinational coalition formed in December 2023 to respond to Houthi-led attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.

Following the breakout of the ongoing Israel–Hamas war in October 2023, the Houthi movement in Yemen launched a series of attacks against commercial vessels passing through the Red Sea.

The operation aims to ensure both the freedom of navigation and the safety of maritime traffic in the Red Sea, Bab al-Mandeb and Gulf of Aden and involves warships from many nations.
George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

94 COMMENTS

  1. Reading the news, the Houthi launched a mass attack of 15 UAVs (Drones) on a ship escorted by the US Navy (Not sure if HMS Richmond was part of this) as the Age (Australian news outlet) doesn’t mention the RN but rather just the Us and the French (who shot down 4 UAVs one of which was by a aircraft) on the other side of the coin, the Houthi claimed they launched 37 drones,

  2. I think this might be the first time Sea Ceptor has been used operationally to protect a RN ship… good to see it works.

    • Yep, but I would think that drones are an easy target for Sea Ceptor we know the Houthis have much more advanced anti ship weapons.

      I am wondering what exactly hit the Rubymar, it must have had quite a large warhead to cause enough damage to sink such a large ship..

        • Agree. Ballistic missiles travelling at +2000 mph conveys a lot of kinetic energy into a target. Likely penetrating into the superstructure and hull all the way through and out underneath the waterline. The ship keeled over pretty quickly indicating massive internal flooding.

          • From what I heard/read, the warhead of the missile exploded on the outside of the vessel, near the engine room. It didn’t actually hit the ship.

            The warhead’s concussion split loads of weld lines, right down below the water line. This proved too much for the pumps and emergency repairs. Hence why it took on so much water in the stern so quickly.

  3. Good Evening!

    Perhaps Mr Schapps after of course congratulating deservedly our forces explain why our forces are being ever diminished and under funded in a Europe which is in a war situation which will as it continues require strong Defence to repel Russian forces.

    Nick

    • Could be we like to spunk £15 M a day on illegals and £32m policing marchs that have got sod all to do with us😡

      • Perhaps! But nevertheless the UK is not ensuring it is capable of defending its self! It is very weak let’s face it! The Government is ignoring reality and therefore does not deserve to govern further!

        • Agree they have failed continue to fail and are unfit to govern. Any government facing the deteriorating security situation that sits on its backside doing nothing to respond is guilty of nothing other than treason.

      • This is a poor argument. Let’s close all the schools, and hospitals. That would free up lots of money for defence too. Too often on this site the argument is confused by this kind of pseudo “cause and effect” which does’t exit in the real world. I may not agree with every protest march (or any of them) but the whole point of defence is to defend a these freedoms! And do we just let people drown? A society that does that isn’t worth defending at all. Spending more on defence is a clear priority, but carping about a select few others things ( often immigrants and lefties, it seems) we must necessarily spend money on policing is totally missing the point.

      • What illegals?
        70%+ of asylum claims are granted.

        We have the right to protest – our forefathers gave their lives that we might do so.

        • And if you believe that you are part of the problem! A right to protest ok but when that spills into intimidation and threats to MPs, shop keepers selling coke, disrespecting monuments to our dead etc then enough is enough! Has any of the above made the slightest bit of difference in Gaza?

          • You’re right!

            We need a new Moseley and with nice black shirts, sign me up.

            Let’s not be half hearted and get ALL dissenters and others we deem undesireable, into the gas Chambers, pronto. Good idea.

          • And there it is! Just because someone doesn’t agree with you we are all on the rabid far right!
            answer me this,on the way across the ditch the illegals ditch all their ID so we have NO idea where they are from,correct?
            Then when they get a solicitor all of a sudden they get a name and claim asylum. Again HOW does that prove who they are or where they are from?70% get granted because of the incompetence of this stupid Governments handling of the problem and it will not improve under Labour either! TBH we might as well charter two rferries a week and say all aboard.for whoever wants to come.
            you still haven’t explained how these protests solve or help in Gaza either.

          • Oh dear, you doubt my sincerity in wanting a new Black Shirt movement?

            Reverse order, I have to explain nothing to you.
            I have nothing against the Israeli State; however their PM is directing genocide for political gain against the people of Gaza.

            Two wrongs do not make a right.

            Once more you propagate the counter factual that people crossing the Channel are illegals; repeating something does not make it correct.

            Anyway, 30p Lee is going to represent you from now on; and what a wonderful individual he is, voting for Brexit when we could have deported almost all the Channel crossers at min. cost was a self inflicted gun shot wound.

            Some people live and learn, you?

          • So you have no answer to the questions I asked you then?
            Who are you to make assumptions of what I do or don’t believe in.

          • How exactly does the general crime you’re describing relate to protest? I once saw someone beaten up in a pub, should we permanently close that pub and, for good measure, all of the others as well?

          • What? So the intimidation has nothing to do with with Gaza then? Any MP who didn’t vote for a cease fire had their names made public and hay ho a mob descends on their offices and homes!Council meetings have been disrupted for exactly the same reason.Why? Where does it help the Gaza situation? And just to top it off we get a total idiot in Galloway elected.

  4. Good. But guns which are much cheaper also need to be used. Until now Germans and Italians used the 76mm at distance, And it seems the French tonight.

    • We do need to be replacing the 4.5inch with something that can do anti air or even put the anti air capability back into the 4.5inch.

          • The thing is Frank, gun systems are absolutely perfect for asymmetrical warfare, you don’t want to be lobbing million pound missiles at £8,000 pound drones, Iran can replace each one we shoot down with three more…

            They are just watching us deplete our stocks of missiles and rolling around with laughter I would imagine.

            It increasingly looks like we have gone and got ourselves in yet another bloody sandbox war!

            Sandbox war part 3, The high seas….

            How long will it be before we are commited to a SF deployment in the Yemen, one that gets very hard to extract ourselves from….

            I think Iran is behind the scenes, dragging us all into yet another unwinnable war bit by bit.

            The only answer is to forget the monkey and go straight to the organ grinder.

            Iran needs to be told in no uncertain terms that if they continue to use asymmetric warfare against the West, we will use it again them, destabilising them from within by arming and funding opposition groups, deniable air and SF operations etc…

            Time to take the bloody gloves off.

          • Absolutely, time to take the gloves off and give them a taste of what they dish out…..

            Arm, equip and train Iranian anti government groups, SF/ MI6 ops and precision stealth airstrikes and deny the lot, just like they do….

            ‘Nothing to do with us guv’

            With the F35B , we already have the means to deliver deniable air strikes….

            Remove the Radar amplifier tech and send one in, high altitude and the Iranians wouldn’t have a clue what hit them.

          • I assume the guns have way shorter range than the missiles and so if the guns miss there probably isn’t time to move to plan b of firing the missiles. Better to use missiles and be safe with guns as backup.

            Missiles might be expensive but they are way cheaper than the cost of losing ship and all on board.

        • Would it be possible to fit a single 40mm Bofors mount on the front, it would give the ship an extremely capable self defence gun system….

      • Problem is that i suspect that AAW 4.5″ rounds from depots went dodo when the capacity was decided to be taken from the operational guns.
        And obviously there is no rounds manufacturing anymore.

        • There were originally specific AAW rounds that were used on things like Counties in the twin turrets

          When T42 came around the triple fuzed multipurpose rounds came into being. There were three exposed fuzes. The two irrelevant fuzes circuit cables were cut by projecting knife blades as the shell is/was lifted vertically.

          The knife blades are set by the WO and it is automated. Primitive but pretty cool proof.

          I’ve no idea if the huge piles of dedicated AAW 4.5” shells exist or are in date – probably not in date.

          And I’ve no idea if the 4.5” shells are still triple fuzed.

          • 4.5 is triple fuzed and applying a specific voltage, in a specific polarity to the blades/fuse wiping gear blows a link in the fuse immediately prior to the shell being moved from the top of the hoist by the loading arm and rammed into the gun.
            3 settings. DA (Direct Impact) and High or Low Proximity. Proximity is used for AA and airbursts.
            The issue with the latest 4.5 shell is its now base bleed to increase range. This messes up the ballistic calculations for AA so it wasn’t required when the RN went to long range base bleed shells.
            Now it appears it is.
            You could add it back into the system but have no doubts the Contractor would require a metric s*** tonne of money to do it because …well they can!
            The GEPOD system can track air targets in EO/TI mode with ease. I did it plenty of times. The gun can be put on the end of the GEPOD and follow air targets. With a bore camera in the barrel you can see aircraft… however, it’s the predictor /ballistics that are the issue. You need to put the shell ahead of the target in AA mode to allow for time of flight and that’s where the issue is.

          • I seem to remember a three position rotary switch on the gunners console……

            I’m genuinely puzzled that adding the necessary parameters into the software is such a big deal. There are not that many variables to the way a shell behaves and all of those will be well known from the testing of the other two modes. You need to know the interactions in order to be able to exactly calculate the temperature/air/wind interactions.

            That should give the starting parameters then it is off to a range to test against simulated targets and compare intended shell flight path against actual range calibrated tracking and radar. I appreciate that bit isn’t a 5 minute job. Then it needs to be proved against some drones…..plenty of those being provided Free Issue for testing in The Red Sea area.

            There has to be an AAW gunnery module already in the BAE CMS although that might be small calibre only…..be interesting if the T26 5” didn’t have AAW capabilities….

            I’m not seeing how hitting in front of the predicted intersection spot, as it isn’t a hittile but a debris field, is tough for a computer made in the last 20 years…..

          • The gunnery console is a separate stand alone unit taking inputs off the data highway from the ships CMS and EO sensors.
            Any changes in the CMS wont affect the console. You need to do a bunch of separate things to the console.

            A point to note. The HK Patrol boats fitted with OTO 76mm and GSA7 Sea Archer (I was a Level 3 Base Maintainer on both systems) had the AA capability disabled/removed as it was deemed unnecessary for the job that they were doing. So its not a new thing to have a gunnery system without its AA capability.

      • It should be a relatively easy to do adding the AA function back into these guns and especially if the T23/T45s are going to be in service another 5+years. Even adding a Phalanx to the back of the T23s and or adding some Martlet.

          • Thanks GB and great posts with SB above. I didn’t realise how tightly balanced or “strung” these ships are. Disappointing that Marlett 30mm combo couldn’t be added to the T23s. Even if they separated the Marlet and maybe had some vertical cannister packs along the sides of the hangar, if there’s any room, to complement the CAMM?

          • Back in the day the original idea for T23 had a second silo aft adjacent to the hanger on the external Mez deck stbd side. Never came to fruition so it was just a sunbathing deck and somewhere to put fenders and shotmats!

            This late in the ships life it’s not worth the time and effort to make it happen now.

  5. Let’s hope these ships are properly armed. Too many stories of empty silos and low stocks of bullets make me concerned.

    • I didn’t notice any Harpoons or NSMs included in the weapons fitted. Russian warships seem very vulnerable to ASMs. Chinese anti missile ship defences remain to be tested.
      Massive own goal dropping AA capability from our 4.5 inch medium guns.

      Well done HMS Richmond.

      • I have a feeling China is deliberating keeping its ships back to avoid any failures. As their gear is heavily based on soviet designs, I suspect they probably have concerns about whether it actually works. Most of Russian kit has turned out to be highly unreliable.

    • Sea Ceptor would definitely be fully loaded, but only Lancaster has Harpoon fitted, Richmond and Diamond don’t, no preliminary NSM work obvious too but that will change in time.

      • I would hope so, but as they were sending them out not fully armed in the past for unknown reasons, it is concerning.

    • I wondered also, perhaps it’s a loop, perhaps allies took down other ones, or perhaps 5 were launched.
      I have wondered other things to like are the warships spoofing sensors to make them seem like big targets to attract weapons or creating multiple larger targets within its firing zone?
      On other thoughts is there a need for self contained units that could go on merchant ships. Say container with phalanx and a few SAMs another with sensors and data links. A few operators on board. Load it before going through the area and take off at other end for another ship.

    • That’s what it sounds like in the video, 5 launches, 2 reported hits of slow moving not very stealthy drones.

      Any chance different warships targeting the same target…..?

      First use in anger…overcautious use?

      Video gets cut very sharply after 5th launch….wonder if there was a 6th

      • That’s concerning. If they launched more than the incoming targets then the captain didn’t have 100% confidence in the capability of the missiles. Launching 4 would be cautious 5 or 6 seems excessive.

        Does make me wonder why it’s a frigate there rather than a destroyer and why the frigates don’t have phalanx for layered defence. I thought the Falklands taught the need for layered defence, so never got why the frigates didn’t have phalanx or gatekeeper as part of their original design.

        • Suspect Phalanx may be too short ranged to deal with potentially multiple incoming targets concurrently. Wouldn’t 49mm or 57mm with airburst / smart ammo be a better option for incoming uavs at range as well as any leaky cruisers that get past CAMM.

        • The CO orders the launch but the system advises what to do…unless its in full auto where it does its own thing unless you intervene.

          PK on cepetor is well over 90+% which is very very good and better than old RN systems and other nations systems. A second missile (Salvo) would apply that 90+% hit rate to the remaining 10 ish% which is something like a 99.999% kill guarantee.

          T23 first had VL seawolf which was PDMS a missile based close in system with a really short min engagement range. Ceptor has a similar really short min engagement range but also has the added bonus a lot longer max range. You don’t need Phalanx to cover the vessel out to the Phalanx engagement range of 2000m because that’s what the missile does.

          • Its not – for a short range missile RIM 116 is very expensive and it lacks the range of Ceptor.

          • Lot of inputs needed for it from ships systems. EW, command system etc. Incoming missile needs to be transmitting in the original version but latter versions also have IR homing. If you you stick it under a phalanx mount it adds weight and cost for a massive 11 shots. I was looking at one on an LCS recently.

        • Phalanx was in service in 1982,im not sure if we had commited to buy it pre Falklands but HMS Illustrious had them fitted when she was rushed out of build to sail down south.

    • Not that you are saying it, but comparing the cost of expensive SAMs to bring down relatively cheap drones is only half of the equation. The point ommitted is the cost of loss or damage to the target ships, the loss of lives & injuries to the crews or passengers & costs of disrupting merchant trade.

      • Yep but if it had been the first of our T31, Venturer, being fitted with only twelve she would now have only seven left. Another brilliant decision IMHO. oh yeah and don’t blame the Treasury – it’s only the RN that signs off operational decisions such as these.

    • Very hard to tell anything from the video. It’s been heavily edited. Could well just be two firings looped – the RN often does loop footage of firings.

      You’ll never have a 100% pK though, so depending on scenario and target you might well pre-determine to fire 2 or more to get a satisfactory pK on the engagement overall. For many air defence systems the conops is to fire a minimum of two per target for real world engagements. The Saudis have regularly been firing 6 Patriots to engage one ballistic target, for example.

    • There are 2 x Take calls on the targets from the Ops Room. At least 2 missiles launched. No sure if they salvoed them because that wasnt heard on the audio The video may be on a loop.

  8. Actually sounds like quite a night with multiple attacks. Read that French Aircraft got involved as well ! Mirages based out of Djibouti where a QRA force of 6 are held

  9. Using small numbers of PGMs against supposed Houthi targets seems to have had little or no effect. Perhaps it is time for the US to deploy B52s to inflict much greater damage, with a warning that such strikes will be repeated unless attacks on shipping and their crews stop. The Houthis are the effective government of most of western Yemen. Their attacks, like those of the Hamas rulers of Gaza are acts of war, so effective retaliation to put a stop to them is legally and morally justified.

      • No idea what the Proxy response will be to an attack on Iran. Within Iran it may enbolden the Freedom movement, however backlash to that type of opportunism amongst many would ensure it is short lived.
        It would be portrayed as foreign controlled and that would under mine it. Please do not think hitting Iran solves any long standing issues.

        • Long standing issues is the Islamic Regime, its Constitution specifically says that the Regime should work to put the world under ummah. Using more prosaic words put the world under Islam.

      • I suppose any depot would do to make an example,they have been getting along with these little attacks for years! It won’t happen but just maybe a stop or else demo would make a point🤔

      • Thank god there is some sanity here. Carpet bombing would achieve what I wonder? After all the mass destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and associated loss of life has hardly stopped Hamas. Plus they could very possibly bring a B52 down in time which means it could only use stand off weapons which is pretty much what they are doing now at less mass. But Drone launchers are notoriously hard to target only the ballistic or cruise missiles might be easier to locate and destroy but that doesn’t need B-52s and it’s unlikely there are major warehouses available to attack, if there are they will be in inhabited environs no doubt. Seriously let’s not get fanciful here.

        • Hamas attack capabilities are basically stopped. they launched +5000 rockets against Israel in first week. They now now launch in single numbers per week.

        • To be fair, I used quite a few B52s for precision air support, when in Afghan. Then they carried a mix of weapons. But the predominant ones were JDAM 500lbs and 1000lbs bombs. The B52 can carry at least 24 1000lbs JDAMs. Not to mention the Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW), which is another precision unpowered glide bomb.

          A B52 would definitely provide the means to carryout a large precision strike on designated targets using JDAM/JSOW. There is no need for conventional “old” style carpet bombing, as a B52 has the means to carryout precision strikes.

          If suppression of the Houthis SAMs can be guaranteed and definitive targets are located via ISTAR etc. A strike by 2 to 3 B52s could literally remove the Houthis ability to conduct strikes against shipping, until they got resupplied by Iran that is!

  10. Whilst you would expect an air defense system designed to stop sea skimming missiles would have no problems with a drone, post what has gone on with Russian vessels its reassuring that that expectation appears grounded.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here