Figures obtained by a Freedom of Information request show the number of sorties by British RC-135 Rivet Joint surveillance aircraft go from 6 per month in December to a peak of 18 per month when Russia invaded Ukraine.
The figures are no surprise given the massive effort underway by NATO and partner nations to collect intelligence on the invasion.
UPDATE – The headline of this article has been changed. As you can see from the URL, I incorrectly claimed that the number of flights had doubled when it, in fact, had tripled from Christmas.
I asked the Ministry of Defence about the total number of sorties between November last year and June this year, the information is as follows.
| Month | Sorties |
| November 2021 | 10 |
| December 2021 | 6 |
| January 2022 | 9 |
| February 2022 | 12 |
| March 2022 | 18 |
| April 2022 | 12 |
| May 2022 | 14 |
I also asked about the cost to the UK of using American aircraft to refuel these aircraft as Britain doesn’t operate an aircraft with the correct refuelling system able to refuel the RC-135s.
“As close allies, a range of UK and US aircraft types routinely refuel from the other nations’ tanker aircraft, but charges raised are not calculated by specific aircraft fleets. Aircraft from both nations are refuelled by reciprocal arrangements under a memorandum of understanding, which predates the introduction of the RC-135 Rivet Joint into RAF service and covers a range of aircraft types.
For example, RAF Voyagers regularly refuel US Navy fighters, and RAF Typhoons are regularly refuelled by USAF KC-10 drogue pods in a similar manner on combined operations. For ease of administration, the overall “balance” of total fuel costs between the two nations and across all fleets is reconciled and invoiced several times a year, which reduces the number of individual transactions required. We do not, therefore, hold full reimbursement figures specific to the RC-135 Rivet Joint.”
As of this week, British RC-135 electronic surveillance aircraft continue to operate over the Black Sea near Ukraine, keeping an eye on Russian forces.
As demonstrated by the above figures, the UK has been increasing the frequency of such flights in order to gather intelligence with US aircraft also present.
As we need to post this each time, here’s the usual disclaimer. This isn’t a new occurrence, in fact, it is quite routine. The UK has long been gathering intelligence about Russian forces since long before the invasion of Ukraine and it should be noted that these flights are designed to be visible so that the public and Russia know they’re happening. If it were a secret, I would not know. Also, for those remarking ‘this isn’t new’, that’s right but people only know this often happens because it is reported often.
British surveillance aircraft being over the area isn’t unusual but we are seeing a significant increase in the frequency of the flights over the last few months for obvious reasons.
What does the RC-135W do?
According to the Royal Air Force website, the RC-135W Rivet Joint is a dedicated electronic surveillance aircraft that can be employed in all theatres on strategic and tactical missions. Its sensors ‘soak up’ electronic emissions from communications, radar and other systems.
“RC-135W Rivet Joint employs multidiscipline Weapons System Officer (WSO) and Weapons System Operator (WSOp) specialists whose mission is to survey elements of the electromagnetic spectrum in order to derive intelligence for commanders.”
The Royal Air Force say that Rivet Joint has been deployed extensively for Operation Shader and on other operational taskings. It had been formally named Airseeker, but is almost universally known in service as the RC-135W Rivet Joint.
The UK operates three of these aircraft.
Strange that the British Rivet Joints aren’t flying out of Cyprus like some of the American ones. Heck of a lot closer to where the action is going on.
Dan,
I wondered about that as well, after putting my thinking cap on (And a glass of Estrella Damm to keep things fluid) I arrived at the following:
Cyprus (with its similar subscription to the Orthodox church) has long viewed Russia as a potentially useful ally over its longstanding dispute with Turkey regards the north (explainsthe huge raft of Russian weapons in use by the Cypriots)
Ak 101
Ak74
Kornet Missile
T80U
BMP3
BREM-1
BM-21 Grad
TOR M-1
Buk M1-2
Mil Mi-35P
And lets not forget that the purchase of the S300 almost ended in a war with Turkey, (Swapped with Greece for the Tor and Buk) . Since the end of the cold war, Cyprus has seen a huge influx of Russians (including a lot of Russian Mafia) currently 6% of the Cyp population is Russian. Kind of explains why Cyprus is known as Moscow in the Med
Finally there’s the potential of a drone strike on the runway at Akrotiri by some unknown element (like we see in Iraq) when I say Rouge elements I of course refer to a smoke screen by a state player. Naturally Moscow would deny having anything to do with such, but the risk is still there. Far safer to keep such high value targets during this current time away from Cyprus.
Akrotiri is UK sovereign territory. I have never heard that we worried about the Cyprus government’s sensibilities or the presence of Russian touristsmon the island before deciding on mounting a particular op from there.
Granham,
I didnt say that the Uk was worried about the Cypriot government, I pointed out out that Cypruses close links with Moscow had resulted in a huge influx of Russians into the country, who are more than capable of carrying out an act of terrorism, also I see more of a threat of a UAV attack from Syria which the Uk would be foolisg to ignore.
Hi Farouk, I agree that Russia could commit an act of terrorism against the British bases in Cyprus – but to what point? They would risk a tightening of sanctions, forced withdrawal of diplomats, or even incur initiation of Article 5 response. Same/similar would be true of Syrian UAV attack on the SBAs.
That’s an interesting point. Really shows how russia has been playing a very long geopolitical game with the resources to gain influence, like moving money and encouraging ethnic Russians to move. Especially where you have a nation with the old facist view that any ethnic people from that population are under that countries rule and or protection no matter where they reside or what nation they are citizens of.
I suspect that most of the so called Russian mafia would if you track back have an element of permission from the Russian state ( especially with extra national criminal activity.
China has the same, if not more extreme view, that any ex pats are by law expected to do anything it’s government wishes.
I know and for chinese companies is actually in law, to the extend all chinese companies are effectively an extension of the state. Therefore any actives with Chinese companies should always be looked on as a potential national security issue and with an eye to the geopolitical balance, every pound spend with a Chinese company is a pound spent supporting a totalitarian regime with plans of world hedgmony.
More to do with security of the aircraft, which is quite strict by the USA standards, Not to allow there Sniffer tech to be at risk.
With only 3 a/c we probably dont have multiple sets of support equip/crew(ground &air) to provide full support to operations at 2 locations
The ELINT picture for the Ukraine crisis is quite complex – the USAF is flying Rivet Joints out of Mildenhall and Suda Bay, Crete, the RAF from Waddington, and the Swedes flying their S102B ‘Korpen’ (Gulfsteam IV based) equivalent out of both Sweden and Cyprus. Both the USAF and NATO fly RQ-4 Global Hawks out of Sigonella, Italy, and the USN EP-3Es on SIGINT missions from Suda Bay. The US Army also has RC-12s (similar to the RAF Shadow) flying from Poland and Lithuania. RAF Shadows have operated from Cyprus too, along with some USAF U-2S. USAF RQ-9s are in Poland. Polish, French and German SIGINT types are also occasionally deployed over Romania and Poland.
Good, excellent use of a superb resource, and passing on as much int to the Ukrainians as is allowed!
I don’t understand why you would bother Asking about the refuelling cost, UK WAS well below the predicted path of the Air Tanker matrix, even with the 2-surge aircraft standing up.
UK Trades its tanker Slots with Allies in return for Nato Slots, you don’t need a freedom of information act for that. it’s in the contract.
of all the question you could ask, and that was it.
I asked a question because I didn’t know the answer, surely not a difficult concept? Take your condescension elsewhere.
Some people are very sure they know the answer to complex things even when they have not asked the right questions or researched and looked for all the evidence that gives the true answer.
Just tells me he is a Lazy cunt and doesn’t do his research.
No need for such language
What you state is an inference, a reasonable one I will grant you.
What Georgie states is fully researched fact from a primary source.
As a responsible journalist, in febrile times, George is right to sometimes ask the relatively obvious. This establishes a factual baseline.
Opinions like ARSEHOLES and you just proved you a gapping one.
and dont like it when pulled on a stupid question, or poor Journalism
need to get your degree checked which Cracker it came out…..
Fucking snowflake
Johan, you’re the one signed up to read what I’m saying mate, not the other way around. Please do feel free to leave at any point.
Johan,
Really?
You need to get a grip with your rudeness. If you don’t like the article don’t post. Dimwit.
Your no expert you posted about 3 times about leonardo Edinburgh only making the housing for radar and got corrected every time. Nobody was personally rude about it to you.
To go after the owner of the site like you did is out of order.
I think the MOD response may be a little disingenuous. I’m sure what they say about tallying up the swapping of fuel between UK and US is correct, however I’ve read somewhere, possibly in these pages, that the PFI contract with the Air Tanker Consortium has a penalty clause that imposes an extra cost whenever UK aircraft are refuelled from foreign tankers.
No the Penalty clause stipulates that all suitable UK Aircraft must use the Air Tanker, when positioned. basically, means we must use air tanker where possible. so a mission is booked with a Voyager but in a emergency event or non-position. allies can be used. But does Allow A/T to deliver the rates of Fuel set in the contract, to who ever. But also allows AAR of other types without a Boom. it does have a knock on effect with the Carrier Aircraft which was never included with that contract.
Why do we still use this silly American computer generated name – Rivet Joint? I thought we had called it Airseeker sebveral years ago?
I guess it just stuck. If buy a Vauxhall and call it Betsy most people with call it a Vauxhall.
Airseeker isn’t a great name. A better one might of stuck. Snoopy, big ears, the hoover would be good aircraft names.
Actually are the aircraft named?
Good points. RAF aircraft type names have ranged from the dynamic and active (storm-related!) – Typhoon, Tornado, Tempest – to the strong bird types (Hawk) – to the descriptive but non-dramatic/bland (Voyager, AirSeeker).
Names of naval ships and submarines are generally all good as are army equipments, but ‘Ajax’ keeps reminding me of a bathroom cleaning product!
Ajax is a project needing a spring clean?
it would also be interesting to understand the length of time of each sortie as that would give you a good idea how much time these assets spend in the air. I also wonder how much more use we could have got out of the sentinels in the present situation.
Ask George he can write another FIA letter, as he cannot work the National Audit Office search page.
I think your time here has come to an end.
Good.
Second good
Dump him. He’s a wank
Mate, you cannot speak to George like that! He provides us all with this site to enjoy and discuss topics of shared interest.
It’s undeserved and out of order.
Sure what a useful asset they are.
Hi everyone, so does this plane just soak up everything and put a picture to what’s happening?
It detects emissions.
The “picture” is created and disseminated elsewhere.
Hey George, keep up the good work, I really enjoy reading your articles, please don’t let the mindless idiots get you down !!
Does the tanker contract end any time soon ? With E7, P8, Airseeker and C-17 all needing a boom to refuel, we really do become reliant on our allies, is there an option to modify our tankers within the contract ?