HMS Talent recently fired a torpedo at itself – three times – but don’t worry, it was part of the trials process.
According to the Royal Navy, there was no risk to the submarine:
“The Trafalgar-class boat – whose mission is to hunt and, if necessary, kill hostile submarines – fired the upgraded Spearfish on the ranges near the Isle of Skye to rigorously test it before it enters service. During the three-day trial, the cutting-edge Spearfish was fired at Talent three times – and was programmed to safely pass the submarine to ensure there was no risk of the boat torpedoing herself.”
Commander Paul Jamieson, Commanding Officer of HMS Talent, said:
“Talent has been the host platform on two occasions for this trial and my team are proud to have had a role in this important programme. The Spearfish upgrade will ensure the submarine service continues to possess a very credible weapon system, capable of dealing with potential future threats.”
Captain John Aitken, the Spearfish Programme Director, and a former commanding officer of Talent, said:
“This trial marks the culmination of a tremendous amount of hard work from the Spearfish team and our partners in industry. The ‘Mod 1’ weapon is at the very cutting edge of torpedo technology and underscores Britain’s position as one of the global leaders in underwater capability. That Talent continues her proud tradition of delivering exactly what is required of her makes this all the more pleasing for me.”
The Royal Navy added that this was the second time Talent, the second oldest boat in the RN’s flotilla, was selected for Spearfish trials, with a Royal Navy, Defence Equipment & Support and BAE team heading aboard.
“A dummy run saw the first of four torpedoes launched into a target vessel, before three successful firings pitched Talent against herself, avoiding striking her using ‘geographical depth separation’. The torpedoes were then recovered and work is now ongoing to study the data from the trial to support decisions made in the next phases of the programme as the torpedo moves towards Initial Operating Capability.”
The operational version of the weapon will be introduced to all front-line Royal Navy submarines by 2025.
Good to see us working on defence kit again. Think we’ve given the Russians and Chinese long enough to catch up and steal a march on us. Hope we see further improvements and new stuff soon. Two decades marking time can leave you rusty.
We’ve never stopped working on defence equipment
Compared to the Cold War our eye has very very very much been off the ball
The Astute class boats are far more capable than anything the Russians or Chinese can muster. The also don’t have any 5th gen stealth fighters to put to sea on first rate aircraft carrier’s. Don’t do ourselfs down.
Oh I’d never argue we don’t have terrific kit (at least in places), just that the rate of innovation then and now are leagues apart
Either i need my Eyes Testing or the Camouflage is Spot on but i Didn’t Initially Spot the Wildcat in the Pic.
”should have gone to spec savers”
sorry could not resist.
Indeed lol ?
Camouflage scheme working as intended.
Hope you are not driving a car mate.
Amazing camouflage, I thought it was a T class boat!
Takes WW1 disruptive camouflage to whole new level……
The old throw a Submarine in the foreground trick , very good way to hid a helicopter .
Hi folks hope all are well.
Is the spearfish one of the most advanced torpedos in its class, also can they be used against a sea shore in advance of an amphibious attack, to disrupt an enemy’s coastal installations.
Any advice from you experts as usual please.
Cheers,
George
Torpedoes arent used against land targets. What a submarine would deploy to disrupt an enemy port however is mines.
Unfortunately we stopped using mines years ago, along with cluster bombs for the RAF. Too random when it comes to killing, which doesn’t make good PR apparently!
Or torpedo launched Tomahawk cruise missiles.
George,
Watch Zero has answered the question regards Spearfish, however that said the UK subs can also launch tomahawk missiles which could be used to neutralise shore targets from short range prior to any amphibious assault.
Leading on from the previous article, we’re currently developing an effective and balanced surface strike capability. However, the sub-surface fleet numbers are still significantly below what prudence would dictate and what we used to field during the last cold war – we’re back in that scenario unfortunately but with the Chinese a major addition to the threat calculation as well particularly via the northern routes west. I’m not yet sold on the degree to which unmanned subs will level the playing field and still look wistfully towards a number of advanced conventional boats to augment the nuclear flotilla – the… Read more »
We should definitely purchase or build a small fleet of AIP conventional submarines. Something like the German 214 class or Japanese Soryu class. A fraction of the cost of an Astute SSN and we could double to size of our submarine fleet.
Leave the longer-distance jobs to the Astutes, and have AIPs cover the North Atlantic, North Sea, GIUK gap and even the Mediterranean. We could even permanently forward-base one at HMS Juffair.
If we had the kind of spare cash and manpower available for a new fleet of subs, I’d rather that money be spent on more Astute class boats. What’s the point of spending a load more cash for inferior capability.
The problem Robert, it’s the only way of building up sub numbers in the short term. It will take many years before BAE systems can start next generation SSN production.
A modern fleet of 6 SSK’s could be procured relatively quickly and it would be a serious asset.
For a start there isn’t any requirement to expand the submarine fleet. And it’s never quick and cheap to bring 6 SSK’s into service. Manning for a start, support and logistics contracts, infrastructure requirements at Faslane. It’s never cheap. If we had any spare cash for submarines, better to buy a couple more Astute class. And any extra funding for submarines would Rob another vital project of funds.
To be fair the smaller AIP boats are much better in some situations. For instance they can get far closer to the shore and then hide in the noise of the water. They are very very stealthy. Having some of those would not cost huge amounts and would give more capability.
I mate. I understand they are great bits of kit, but we have survived nearly 30 years without SSK’s. I guess the RN doesn’t see a urgent requirement for them.
With China becoming a serious threat and the South China sea being probably too shallow to operate large nuclear subs, I am sure they would like some…
It might seem counter intuitive but you’re better using the smaller AIP boats in places like the Gulf rather than the North Atlantic. Use smaller boats for intel etc as they can get in closer on sneakies and let the A boats to prowl the deep stuff, even if it is on the door step relatively speaking.
The Gulf is around 60m deep over the most part of it. A bit deeper around the Straights.
Fly high enough and have a good pair of polarizing sun glasses on and you can see to the bottom. Not ideal waters for a sub to operate in.
UK SSKs did so in GW1 way up at the top but they where there for int and SF work. They even had a natty camo job on the hull to make it difficult to spot from above.
Never seen that photo. Fascinating.
That photo, or similar, was in the press.
@Gunbuster you have access to a remarkable archive…….MOD should be paying you for your RN PR work setting the record straight.
Sneakies in the Gulf didn’t end with GW1 mate.
I can neither confirm nor deny…if i did I would have to Shred myself!
Quite so. Stealthier than nuclear subs too.
I agree it would be great to add this capacity but where could they built? I understand Barrow is already completely booked up.
The last time we built any SSKs were the 4 Upholders in the late 80’s early 90’s. The first was built in Barrow alongside Talent and Vanguard, the other 3 were built in Birkenhead, we ended up selling them to Canada in the late 90’s.
I don’t think we are in a position to build any SSKs anytime soon for various reasons. If money were available, then we would probably have to buy from abroad or buy in the design and expertise to build them here.
British firm BMT has a number of submarine designs/concepts that management has been shopping around and I think are worth looking at specifically the Vidar-36 (also referred to as the SSGT fuel cell concept). This design is an 80 meters in length with displacements of around 4,000 tons.
Wasn’t aware of that, tavm for info.
BMT also 2 smaller ask designs, the Vider-7 and Wyvern. These are 50 meter 750 ton displacement boats requiring crews of around 36.
If you can build an SSN you can build an SSK. Might have to get some parts from abroad at first, but this capability should never have been allowed to disappear.
The RN needs 8 SSNs and about 6 SSKs. It had 12 SSNs just a few years ago.
Its not as simple as thay im afraid. If building in Barrow, then probably yes, but any other yard in the UK, then not so straight forward, you would need the skilled workforce for starters, you cant just open a box of them with experience in SM construction.
No, we should never have lost this capability, but unfortunately we have. Not only 12 SSNs, but also some 10 Oberon class SSKs, but then ahsin, we had a much larger fleet too!
And you think how ancient the Oberon’s design was by the time it was retired, WWII vintage hull design, and how small they were. But they were very, very quiet for the time.
I am not sure I would have wanted to be on a 2,000t sub down south in ’82 but Onyx was there!
It is worth remembering that there were 5 nuclear submarines involved in Corporate apart from the Oberon which was conventionally powered.
On reflection I would say our biggest weakness is the number of nuclear summaries that we can field.
No such place as HMS Juffair.
Its UKNSF (UK Naval Support Facility) Bahrain or it was 2 days ago when I was inside it!
Agree with both points raised, I personally don’t believe that unmanned subs will level the playing field anytime soon, as already stated, UKPLC won’t be arming them. That leaves them to conduct a surveillance role-which is currently a difficult task in itself. I think that we are not helping ourselves by not investing in SSKs to supplement our SSN fleet, you would get some 5 or so modern SSKs for the price of 2 SSNs with a bit to spare, and crew wise the numbers would be about the same. Alas, money or the lack of it and other priorities… Read more »
Its not just cash, speaking to a mate who’s on a boat and things are grim manning wise. They’re having to bribe lads with their rate to keep them in.
Have to agree, manning has slowly been eroding over the years, certainly since before I left. Part is conditions, part pay, and part is the job itself. Takes a certain type to enjoy it and stick at it. It will probably get worse before things improve.
I think pay is sometimes used as an excuse but for me its generally been about the ‘conditions’ side of it. Being lied to, being taken for granted the ‘life in a blue suit’ approach. I think for many its a trickle of small stuff that just builds up. If the navy started genuinely regarding their people then more would stay. For me 22 was very much a finishing line, I couldn’t wait to go. Another mate was recently ‘pier head jumped’ onto a work up for a boat covering for the rate above him, fair enough, pier head jumps… Read more »
How about clapping them?
Seriously though, we need to pay better & treat better those in vital jobs rather than rock & sports stars, minor “celebreties” & greedy execs. Those who put their lives on the line or save lives or educate us etc have beeen treated shamefully too long.
I like the sound of your world Frank but it ain’t gonna happen and in fairness, most boys don’t join the forces to become millionaires. More money is always nice of course but for a lot of guys not the prime motivation. Guys leave for a number of reasons but ultimately (like a lot of jobs I suppose) its frustration, if you work in most occupations you can move to another company but you’re kind of stuck when in the forces and it can become ‘all or nothing’, once you get the idea in your head that you want away… Read more »
For those puzzled by my ‘previous article’ reference; that concerns the QE carriers and’s on Navy Lookout not UKDJ. Forgive confusion!
Geographical depth seperation… They add minus meters to the targeting computer so that it aims at the targets sweet spot but actually passes under it.
A similar thing was used with Sting Ray during its early trials. They apparently got it wrong and the torpedo kept hitting the sub circled around again and hit it again and again and again until the battery ran out. Glad to see they got it right this time.
Doh!… ,,,,Doh!… …Doh!…
If I remember correctly it was an S Boat. We spoke to them afterwards …they where not happy!
Believe it was HMS Spartan, she was fitted out as trials boat for most of 80’s early 90’s, had a propulser guard fitted for the very purpose.
It was.
If I was the captain of that sub I would have had the chap that programmed it onboard !!!!
Yey, we’ve invented the underwater Boomerang.
How effective are hard-kill anti-torpedo defence systems? The Russians deploy those, and I’m sure that the Chinese have at least considered doing the same. Our attack subs have only one type of weapon for use against submarines and surface ships. Do our potential enemies have a reliable counter?
The spearfish is very stealthy and very fast… which makes it hard to combat. As opposed to the Russian torpedoes that are faster but incredibly loud and give away not only their own position but that of the host submarine! Also the upgrade they are testing includes very advance anti jamming and defence evasion components.
If I were an enemy sub I would not be comfortable if I knew a spearfish could be shot at me.
HMS Talent is 30 years old I see and due to be decommissioned this year.
Yes that is the Case, Stranger that She has had some New Technology Fitted.
Strange even!
Stranger than Strange, it appears.
I could say that they’ve been running them into the ground… unfortunately, that has been quite true.
Numbers are just too low in both platforms and personnel, perhaps?
https://www.instagram.com/p/CKy0Ff_BpWR/
Yes, I thought of this when you mentioned above.
Somebody must have read the end of the Hunt for Red October.
can we get on with other major projects now like the Escan radar for our Typhoons and the Challenger upgrade, I have a feeling we might need them soon.
I am sure many of you are familiar with the story of the loss of the USS Scorpion. Although never proven, a close friend who is a retired submariner who served as a First Engineer on a US Nuclear submarine says that the accidental firing of one of her own torpedos and it’s subsequent homing in on its host as the nearest target, was accepted as the most likely cause of her loss with all hands.
And the Japanese have managed to ram an HK boat with a sub. Norwegian navigation catching on?
Telegraph
“Japanese submarine collides with commercial ship while surfacing in Pacific Ocean”
Some Speculation on What Might have Gone Wrong – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=httacbcqfE4