British warship escorting Russian vessels through Channel

Under these circumstances, waste of time bothering with a sub. But take a look at my post somewhere below on the reputed Yasen, Steve. As reported, looks it may have not even required a sub of ours. 🤔

Its just a good training op, as it involved both a crusier and destroyer. Way better to practice directly against a potential enemy vessel than again NATO ally ones that you will never have to deal with in practice.

There is confirmation of about 70 F35B now according to Radakind and Wallace.

As Truss is saying budget increase I think that is reasonably secure.

Compared to anyone other than USA 70 F35B is the strongest air force known to man in its own right.

Ssssssh

Saying we don’t need 500 F35B won’t be popular on here!!

The top trumps numbers game against Russian kit is totally over so it is a stand alone calculation if a coherent force in view of likely taskings.

As a few of us keep bleating that we won’t be fighting X, Y or Z on our own. NATO is a thing. AUKUS is a thing.

It’s actually a 1000, you forgot the Chinese.

Silly me.

While it might be in better conditions than Moskva, it is far from good. It has no modern radar, radars are modernized you say, but enough to detect and with reaction times in Fire Control fast enough to detect and fire at a sea skimmer?

No active radar SAM’s, the CIWS are still 80’s not the more modern combo Kasthan missile+CIWS that Russians have in other ships.

You what?

Legally they are the UK’s not England’s.

Not really anyway but it seems like Silver is suggesting that Britain is incapable of defending itself since it would fear being turned to ash? And then, Jim claims that England doesn’t have nuclear weapons.

England does not have any nuclear weapons just like Texas does not have any nuclear weapons. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has nuclear weapons and they are all stored in Scotland so England definitely does not have nuclear weapons. Technically England does not even have a government either so I’m not sure if England actually has the ability to own anything much less nuclear weapons.

The UK warheads are maintained in Berkshire. There is some storage there too.

Apart from those at Burghfeld or in transit and stored at 2 other locations in England.

This is the UK Defence Journal, not the English Defence Journal….

Yes, somewhat unfortunate slip on my part. In touch with my Freudian Russian? On balance, I’m sure Putin would like to name everything ‘Sever’ something-or-other. ☺

You are of course free to doubt whatever you wish Jim and rightly so, however. I will say that my experiences with regard to how quiet they are might well be different from yours.

As a general point, just as stealth aircraft are often flown with radar reflectors to mask their true stealth, is it logical to think that submarines would do the same when traversing areas where they know there is a high chance they will be detected?

Not really.

It would then be very easy to trail them and figure out the real acoustic signature.

As a general reply, Submariners hate making noise of any sort for any reason!
Whilst what you allude to is entirely possible, that’s not the general experience of playing with Russian SM’s, whatever type.

Hi, John good to see you back, we were all worried that you had been sent to the front in the special military operation. I have never heard this before but it makes sense to me now. This is why all Russian and Chinese aircraft that claim to be stealthy have massive RCS and why all their submarines are so loud. They are tricking us in peace time and as soon as the war happens their submarines will instantly become quiet and their aircraft will disappear from radar.

Thank you for clearing this up. I thought that all their technology was just s**t on account of their backward industry, corruption and general stupidity but I see now I was wrong and it was strategy all along. 😜

Where’s a like button when you want it?

Ha ha ha!!!

Sub brief on you tube said that The sub was very quiet when launched but the get louder over time due to less maintenance compared to western subs. I will bow to your experience deep. Closest I’ve been to an operational sub is watching red October.

There may well be some truth in that.

Quiet subs require well matched (mechanically, acoustically and EM matched) and finely machined components.

A lot of the parts will have come from Ukraine……that was where heavy and high tech industry was!

Hi MS, what you have said is very true, as is the fact that this is true of any SM over time. Then it comes down to maintenance as you say.
We spend lots and lots of money in this area to keep noise levels as low as possible, regularly visiting the noise ranges to check our signature.
We also when possible, play against each other, with the exercises reconstructed shore side, which includes the acoustic signatures and detection/tracking sources. Sometimes these signatures are artificially enhanced to aid training, sometimes not.
Whilst the Russians may well struggle with maintenance/spares across their fleet, they put a great effort into getting a SM ready for sea, especially if its going on a deployment. If something goes wrong or breaks down, they only really have their own resources to rely on to fix it, or they turn back home, or worse! They don’t send them out in a shoddy state.
During the cold war, Western SMs held a significant range advantage over our Russian friends, probably some 10-15 times what it is now, such was the impact of Mr Walker and his desire for a bigger pay day.
Detection ranges now are vastly reduced when compared to those several decades ago, whilst said SM may well be noisier than when launched, she will still be quiet. It would be no different if HMS Astute played with HMS Anson, I would expect Anson to prevail, as she is some 15 years younger.

Sub brief is the best navy porn on YT.

Absolutely, but sometimes all you have is a solo asset in contact, whether airborne, ship or SM. Getting them all to the party can be challenging!

Hi mate, its really a case of ‘horses for courses’ and how big your pockets are.

Generally speaking a pumpjet arrangement is more complex to install, significantly heavier than a propeller and more expensive to fit. Although the blades are better protected by the shroud that surrounds it.

Due to the weight issue, they aren’t really suitable for small SMs such as SSKs etc or even smallish SSNs – eg Rubis size. Although I think that the Russians do have a pumpjet fitted to a Kilo SSK as an experiment!

What pumpjets give you, is the ability to go fast whilst keeping your acoustic signature relatively low when compared to a propeller system at any given speed. They greatly reduce the amount of cavitation/compressed cavitation being produced from the rotating blades, and are mechanically more efficient especially at depth. Cavitation is the biggest single source of detection from a fast moving SM. They also eliminate propeller shaft rate/blade rate harmonic resonance/reinforcement by having different prime number rotors and stators ie 11/17.

The downside operationally is that they are not as efficient as a propeller in shallower depths, which, along with the weight issue is the prime reason SSKs still use a propeller, now also aided for shallow water slow speed work by a cruciform rudder/afterplane arrangement. I believe that both the Dreadnought class and SSN(R) will have such a cruciform arrangement to further aid slow speed shallow maneuverability.

In a SSK, I would want a propeller, in a SSN/SSBN give me a pumpjet any day.

Cheers Deep. I guess where the Yasen has been operating in the Black Sea being relatively shallow, a pump jet would be more of a hindrance than a benefit. Does make you think about what type of sub we need for the North Sea and around the coastline. Something that the Astutes aren’t really suited for.

I take it we don’t use variable pitch props due to their complexity?

Hi Davey, I’m afraid I’ve not really been following the Yasen story, just what I’ve seen posted on this thread.
I don’t think she will have been in the Black Sea, not seen anything about her transitting the Turkish Straits. Don’t think that she would have risked a dived entrance/exit of the Dardenalles, far to shallow and twisty. More likely be operating in the Eastern Med if she’s been to Tartus.

The North sea is relatively shallow as seas go, only really deep around the Norwegian coast, if we were to put SMs there or indeed our coast, we would be better served with a modern SSK design – T26 or 212 something like that. Keep the SSNs for the deep ocean stuff.

Our early SSN/BNs all had propellers, as did Swift sure and Trafalgar being ‘first of class’ designs. If memory serves, Swiftsure kept her prop for her entire commission, with Trafalgar having a pumpjet fitted in refit. Whilst I have served on various S/T and V SMs I’ve not been on those two SMs. We have been all pumpjet since then, so couldn’t really comment on whether we used CPP ones or not.

No worries mate. I may have been mistaken regarding a Yasen in the Black Sea. There was definitely one in the Med though. Looking at the Black Sea Fleets order of battle they only use the improved Kilos. Which I guess is due to their smaller size.

I have wondered why we don’t use variable pitch props on ships. My mate bought a second hand sunseeker when he got out of the Navy. Sailed it from Plymouth to Falmouth. It had a pair of monster Volvos powering a pair of VPP. This thing bloody flew. I wasn’t much help, as I was staring at the sea following a mess do at Stonehouse for fair bit of the trip.

I think you may well find that the Russians have also moved on fairly substantially wrt signature reduction over the last 40 odd years, aided in no small part by a Mr Walker – cut some 15 years of development time in one go! You may not like the fact, or wish to believe it, but the Yasens are quiet units, perhaps not up to current US/UK standards, but quiet nevertheless.

Despite what some have posted, no SM Capt knowingly sails with a vessel any noisier than it needs to be. Artificially enhanced signature or not. Your new big mate is talking garbage!

The Russian SSKs (Kilo/Lada) are very effective units, and you don’t need AIP for everything that they do, especially those that operate in the Baltic/Black sea fleets. AIP is really only used to give a SSK more time submerged before needing to recharge its battery, as it provides slow speed propulsion from a non battery power source.

In terms of UK SM Sonars since the 80’s, I am pretty much up to speed with their capabilities as it was my bag for several decades, so don’t really think you can add much there.

The Russian SSN/GN/BN threat never went away after the end of the cold war, the pace of operations slowed down, almost to hibernation level, but has always been present. Despite all the Russian fleet maintenance/supply issues, they are increasing their sortie rates including OOA deployments. NATO has always had an excellent ASW network which starts with coverage from space, and includes air, ship and SM assets. Ships and aircraft always get good coverage, because you can see them.

You are correct about PRC SM capabilities, they are several generations behind the Russians never mind the West. They will however, improve quickly, especially with more Russian assistance. Where they will surpass the West in the coming decades is in numbers. We in the West (US/UK/FR) are over the next 2 decades, only really replacing old for new in terms of SM numbers. Whereas the PRC, are building new and also increasing their numbers of SSN’s. This will become a major headache for us in the years to come, if it isn’t already.

Again, Walker spy ring was a very long time ago 1985, the current generation of SSN’s were designed decades later. Also I take the point that AIP is not everything especially if your Japanese and can make really good LI batteries however no serious country producing SSK’s does not use AIP. I’m not buying the Orcs having super submarine tech but are hitting at the same level as North Korea with lead acid batteries. Platforms like Kilo are old and outdated. Their reputation is based largely on daily mail headlines and admiral west’s recollections which are increasingly dated. The US, UK and France and soon Australia are producing SSN’s way way faster than Russia and China combined and that was before both countries economies fell of a cliff. The SSN being produced by western navies have a far bigger technological and training edge over their eastern counterparts than at any time during the Cold War. The Orcs are so far behind they don’t even know what the game is anymore and the CCP is just playing pretend submarines in the Yellow Sea.

Sure that might change but not for many decades and only if the west decides to give up the game which it won’t.

I think Russian subs is the one area they have kept in an ok state. Maybe after Kursk they gave it high priority.
The pump jet kilo I think has been recommissioned and is part of the Black Sea fleet now.

Yes, their SM service and Strategic rocket forces have always been high on their priority list, and have always drawn favourable funding when compared to the rest of their armed forces.

Believe you are correct WRT the whereabouts of the pumpjet fitted Kilo.

Funny we thought much the same 6 months ago about many of their capabilities and now we find out they have to get microprocessors from used dishwashers.

Russias military budget is tiny compared to the level of forces they claim to have. It’s much more likely that their submarine force is just as useless now as the rest of the crap they have and even their strategic rocket forces are highly suspect. Nuclear weapons and missiles are incredible expensive and difficult to maintain, especially if you have not conducted tests for decades. Look at the massive cost the US DOE goes to at Los Alamos to do this on even fewer weapons than mad Vlad claims to have.

Look at the shear cost, industrial effort and technology that go in to something like Astute or Virginia. No way a third world country using old dishwasher parts that lacks even basic machine tools in many regards can build anything on that level.

Hi Jim,

I do get where you are coming from fella, and some of what you say I agree with. However, some I don’t, largely due to different experiences shall we say!

Like lots on here, much is supposition, guess work with a mild sprinkling of wishful thinking. Not altogether bad or perhaps too far wrong, but not always correct either.

You have been vary dismissive of the Russian SM fleet in general and both the Yasan and Kilo class in particular. Whilst both are older designs, the Kilo the oldest of the two, both are still effective units. Granted nobody actually knows the state of them but they seem to be doing well with time at sea wouldn’t you say?

Look at it another way, if the Yasen isn’t totally trash, why are we expending such a vast effort keeping tabs on her?

The Kilo may be an old design (1980’s), but they are still building them and the ones based in the Black Sea are all less then 10 yo, and all at sea.

Compare that with a modern swept up NATO design like the German 212 class. They were designed around the late 90’s built and commissioned from around 2008ish, so a fairly modern SSK, better spec’ed then a KILO. Only problem is, those German 212’s have spent the last 4-5 years in harbour because of defects/shortage of spares and whatever else is wrong with them. So, which is the better SM? One that is at sea doing its job, or one that has all the bells and whistles but cant get out of the harbour????

The point being, that old doesn’t necessarily equate to ‘ a pile of junk/crap’ to borrow a term. Yes we have all seen whats going on in the Ukraine, that’s where much of our views on their capabilities are shaped. However, just like our SM’s theirs are at sea doing what they are tasked with, which in the case of the BS KILO’s unfortunately involves shooting missiles into the Ukraine. Perhaps not too crap a unit then!

Yes, know what you mean, we’ve had more than our fair share of undesirable turncoats too. The majority of which didn’t receive what one might term their just reward!

True, but SSNs as a rule don’t generally spend a lot of time on the surface. They can transit much faster when dived, when deploying the more time in transit equates to less time on station doing whatever you are tasked to do.

I thin FCS stool for Fleet Contingency Ship and could be Destroyer or Frigate. At one time I was on a TA frigate and we were combined FCS1/Duty TAPS – another result of Fleet Downsizing because as we were told modern frigates were 5 times more capable than 1960s frigates.

Ah, ok Andy. That fits.

We still have both the FRE and the TAPS for Faslane/Bomber coverage.

Too be honest Daniele all I can recollect was that being on either Hunts or Drstroyers the task never fell on us always a Frigate down by railway Jetty at the entrance to the Dockyard never did enquire what FCS stood for so I won’t speculate on its official title sorry

That’s ok Tommo. I was interested in your Channel East bound westbound comments below, I didn’t know that.

Yes the land attack missiles on escorts is very interesting. I read a really good piece on the fact that US escorts ( the Burke’s) has actually turned into a conventional strategic/geopolitical assets compared to other western nations escorts which are simple navel assets.

Its all in the mix of the mark 41 silos containing and unknown threat and tomahawk missiles ability to threaten a nations strategic assets. Simple but no nation can disregard the threat of even a single Burke as it could potentially have a large number of tomahawks and strike and destroy any key asset in that nation.

I can shed a little light on that.

After the joys of the Horizon program RN didn’t like the taste of anything Garlic flavoured……

Horizon cost RN dear with running on T42 5-7 years past sell by. This was expensive in itself and stretched other budgets as T42 was crew and fuel hungry.

Also RN had to stretch the £6Bn budget to solo develop Sampson as well as solo develop T45.

You could say that Horizon shaped the surface fleet more than QECs with some validity.

I’m not surprised!

We always had the option of fitting a relatively long range ASM to ship, be they T23 or T45 which wasn’t Tomahawk. This was the derivative of Storm Shadow/Scalp-EG the Naval Cruise Missile (NdCM).

It is predominantly vertically launched, but can also be submarine launched. However, it can also be cannister launched.

On the T23, there would have been the small problem of where to fit the cannisters. On the T45 it would have meant fitting the V70 Sylver strike length launchers instead of the Mk41.

I guess having the SSNs to the long-range strike using Tomahawk, stop this option in its tracks. Though with hindsight I bet the RN wished they taken up the French offer.

Mate,

Yes I do understand the very long standing historical issues, but it is funny to watch (by the way, the Frogs hate us now after cancelling the Attack class, shit happens!).

It is next level compared to the crap that we Aussies throw at you Poms, or our Kiwi mates (and other Commonwealth members too).

Of course we are like siblings that beat the crap out of each other at every opportunity, but if someone else ‘outside the family’ picks on us, we band together against the outsider!

Cheers,

Cheers John , for your comment on both how the French now have the Quasimodo (Hump) with our Aussie cousins over their extremely overpriced Subs cancellation and yet they seem to forget that the Flanders countryside is full of ANZAC hero’s it’s a shame as us Anglo speakers our an extended family that are just like that Froggie Novel whose catchphrase was “All for One and One for All “

Hi CR,

Thanks for the more detailed answer, yes that makes sense to divide up areas of responsibility for the UK and France, you guys more at one end, the Frogs at the other end.

Thanks again mate!

Cheers,

Bearing in mind the restrictions under which we all operate … you are not wrong.