HMS Defender, one of the Royal Navy’s six Type 45 destroyers, is in the midst of a significant refit that will substantially increase its missile capacity.
Images shared by naval observer Steve Wenham shows the installation of a new 24-cell vertical launch system (VLS) for the Sea Ceptor surface-to-air missile.
The new silo is being mounted forward of Defender’s existing Sylver A50 launchers, which currently house the longer-ranged Aster family of missiles. Work at Portsmouth shows advanced preparations clearly under way for fitting.
The modification represents a major firepower increase. Sea Ceptor, also known as the Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM), provides short-to-medium range protection against aircraft and missiles. By adding 24 dedicated cells for CAMM, Defender’s close-in air defence capacity rises by around 50 percent. Crucially, the change also frees up all 48 Sylver cells to be devoted entirely to Aster 30 long-range interceptors.
In practice, the addition means a single Type 45 destroyer could now field both more missiles overall and a sharper mix between long-range area defence and short-range point defence. The refit is part of a broader programme of Capability Insertion Periods across the destroyer class, intended to extend service life and address long-standing gaps in weapons loadout.
Sea Ceptor has already been proven at sea with the Royal Navy’s Type 23 frigates and is a central element of the new Type 26 and Type 31 programmes. It uses active radar homing and a soft-launch system, allowing more missiles to be carried in compact vertical cells. The system can engage multiple targets simultaneously and is considered highly resistant to electronic countermeasures.
For Defender, the upgrade brings the ship closer to the level of layered air defence seen in comparable European fleets, where a combination of long-range and short-range interceptors is standard. It also increases the destroyer’s ability to operate independently in contested environments or as a high-end escort for carriers and amphibious groups.
When complete, Defender’s refit will mark one of the most visible missile upgrades to a Royal Navy warship in decades.
It’s a welcome upgrade especially with NSM being added however I still feel the space would have been better used by a Mk41 VLS. Having 16 Strike length VLS on T45 would have been a real game changer and would have opened up the possibility for SM6, SM3, TLAM, LRASM as well a multi packed CAMM MR or ER.
That being said having 74 top rate SAM missiles and up to eight next generation anti ship missiles is an immense capability that few European vessels can rival.
It’s not really about what European vessels capabilities are, it’s what our our probable opponents capabilities are, and that is a completely different story.
Yes you are correct, out probably opponent is Russia and they don’t even have a multi VLS system or much of a surface navy.
I would say there is a far greater likelihood that the RN ends up in a conflict with the PLAN.
Neither is very likely. The US isn’t going to war with china as a nuclear country anymore than we are with Russia. It’s all about deterrence and avoiding the need to decide not to do it. Anyone who thinks the US would support twaian is fouling themselves
Fouling themselves …I hope not!
Shit happens !
Would be far better for the RN if ship happens for a change.
Agreed with a huge👍
God only knows what a mess we would have been in if we had actually built 8 or 10 or even 12 of the things. We’d need another Port just to store them all.
If the US was serious about it they would have troops on the ground, they don’t. It will be another Ukraine situation, with them having no cards and having to give away stuff for US to support them from afar.
Taiwan only hope is that China is looking at Ukraine and having second thoughts, as a messy war could result in the ruling classes finding themselves kicked out with a revolution in china.
I’m afraid any thought of a revolution in china shows a profound misunderstanding of that nation, its internal politics, internal security and its culture.
1) china a nationalist communist state, that breeds essentially the worst fantacism of communism and fascism.
2) Xi jinping has complete control of the the communist party central committee, the armed forces and the security forces, he personally leads each and has hand picked every senior leader in each state leadership role.
3) the communist party ( which xi has complete and total control of) has control of every facet of life in china its 100 million members control every facet.each company has a shadow board of CCP members ready to take control, every senior position in the security forces are held by party members.
4) Xi has utter control not only by the communist party and security apparatus, but by a cult of personality, he is the only leader since Mao Zedong to hold power for 3 terms of office, he has been named “ rénmín lǐngxiù” which was essentially a term held only for Mao Zedong.. you have to understand, Mao caused the death of up to 55 millions oChinese people, yet they still love him.. they love Xi in the same way.
5) the Chinese people themselves, the Chinese have a core belief around suffering, they believe Chinese destiny will only be achieved through suffering…that is why the accepted the cultural revolution and 55 million dead.
6) finally if none of that works china has about 8 million political warfare and internal security forces in total on top of the PLA 2.5 million forces of the PLA.. all able to access the most advanced and abundant civilian monitoring on the planet.
There is a farts chance in a colander of a “revolution” in china.. far more chance infact in a western democracy.
US troops are rotating through Taiwan and are embedded with sovereign forces, shit happens and Americans are going to die; we will be involved.
Tiny numbers. They will be pulled out the moment china gives them the warning that the attack is going to happen. The US has proven not to be a reliable ally and that has just confirmed my view they would not defend it.
I don’t see any indication that either china or the US are backing down an inch from the western pacific..to them it’s both a red line.
It’s deference on both sides. Crossing the line and actually going to war with each other is a whole different topic. It would wipe out the US economy for starters. China is prepared, it’s why they won the tarrifs battle with trump, the US isn’t. Plus post Vietnam no polictical party is going to have the stomach for a war that involves hundreds of thousands of body bags.
I sincerely hope he DID mean what he wrote.
Hi Steve, I’m afraid it’s not really about the US going to war with China, it’s China going to war with the US. China has very specific geopolitical goals and if the US interferes with one of China red lines it’s very likely China would go to war. Also it’s not just about what the US would do it’s about what China thinks it’s likely to do. The Chinese are the ultimate pragmatists in achieving their goals and they are not utilitarian, they are nationalist communists ( they don’t believe in the greatest good for the greatest number, they believe in the destiny of China and if mass suffering is needed so be it). So if China thinks it’s very likely the US will intervene in its core goals and its greatest chance to overcome the US is via strategic surprise, then the US will find its first and second island chain bases swamped by ballistic missiles one day.. if China thinks it can get the US to back off the western pacific via political warfare it will do that instead.. as I said the ultimate pragmatists in achieving their goals.. but utterly extremist in their goal setting.
Three is no indication of china going to war with the US. There is a significant indication that they will against Taiwan and then it will be down to US politics if they get involved. My money is on no, as it would risk a nuclear war and even if it didn’t go nuclear it would make US losses in Vietnam look small. There just isn’t the polictical will on either side republican or democrats.
Both yes and no, simply put china will go to war with the US if it thinks it will get involved.
China is balancing a couple of decisions.
1) The US has significant forces in the western Pacific, but they are isolated and on china’s doorstep.
This is a strategic opportunity for china that it will need to make a decision on and it will balance that decision on the likelihood of the U.S. defending Taiwan. If china thinks it will, then if china decides it’s invading Taiwan it will launch a strategic surprise attack on the U.S. forces in the western pacific, it will do this because it would have the opportunity to essentially knock out 2 US carrier groups and an amphibious group early doors before the USN can concentrate if it does that its essentially gutted the USN before the campaign for the western pacific even starts… as for intent there is very very good evidence that china is practicing and planning this, it has mock-ups of all the major US western pacific bases ( with mock-up ships tied up) that it’s basically practiced shooting its cruise and ballistic missiles at.
So unless the U.S. makes it clear it’s not getting involved china will likely assume it is and if it decides strategic surprise is its best option it will take that.
You have to remember china has sunk untold trillions of dollars into preparations for a war with the U.S. it’s not only up for it it’s getting ready and practicing how it will start it.
As for the US not getting involved, Geostrategically tiawan is massive, it’s the key to the first island chain and domination of the western pacific. That’s before you add the fact it’s semi conductor industry is essentially a geostrategic asset all of its own, so he who owns or controls Taiwan’s essentially has a grip on the balls of all the western pacific nations as well as the worlds advanced economies. Essentially together china and Taiwan control the majority of the worlds semi conductor production.. with most of the rest being nations that are essentially next door to china.
So china takes Taiwan it essentially controls the shipping lanes across the first island chain and has South Korea and japan in a maritime stranglehold, it has direct and easy incontestable access out to the second island chain and can from that point take complete maritime control of the western pacific, this essentially means domination one of the most important set of sea-lanes in the world. That is why the U.S. cannot allow china to take Taiwan.
This all leads to a massive catch 22 the US cannot let china take Taiwan, so it will not ever go down the road of saying it will not defend Tawain, because china would invade within a profoundly short space of time if it ever did. But it also know that at some point in the near further ( probably within a decade) china will invade Taiwan and when it does if it thinks the U.S. will intervene its best option is strategic surprise and the total destruction of the U.S. forces in the western pacific. It’s the same sort of catch 22 for china, if it thinks it’s possible that the US will intervene its best option is the immediate destruction of the U.S. forces in the western pacific before the USN can concentrate, but this guarantees a war with the U.S.
It’s a bit of a steely eyed game of chicken, but in this case we have an authoritarian, exceptionalists state, controlled by a very clever believer in the cause facing off against a democracy that’s tawny asunder and cannot agree on anything..
The semi conductor reason for the US getting involoved is over stated in my opinion. If the war happens said factories will get destroyed early on. There isn’t anything overly special about twaian that building new factories else where isn’t viable. It’s mainly about extremely stable land but other countries have that.
I just can’t see any party in the US wanting massive US deaths for a far away land. Neither party had the stomach to fully support Ukraine and that wasn’t boots on the ground scenario.
Unfortunately their only hope is the US presence in the region is a significant enough deterrence. But as with Ukraine, large numbers of troops in Taiwan now would stop any invasion from happening, but the US doesn’t have an appetite to annoy china when it realises so heavily on them for trade. They speak a good game about counting china but actions speak loader than words.
My guess china will do something like Crimea to test the will of the US to get involved.
always has been.
‘That being said having 74 top rate SAM missiles and up to eight next generation anti ship missiles is an immense capability that few European vessels can rival.’
Indeed – I believe the only comparable vessel is the Spanish F100 (Alvaro de Bazan-class frigates), which carry just 48 Mk41 cells but can leverage quad-packed ESSM Block 1 to carry a maximum of 192 missiles (though a more realistic load would incorporate the single-packed SM-2 in large numbers).
The Hobart Class, the Australian variant of the Spanish F100 frigates, would also have a max loadout of 192 quad packed ESSM Block II but in practice it would be closer in number to the upgraded Daring Class depending on the mission.
Unlike the Spanish F100 the Hobarts are now equipped with a mix of Tomahawk, SM6 and NSM as well as ESSM and SM2. This includes a tested Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) that allows target hand off to any Aegis equipped ship (US, Japanese and Korean navies).
It’s a versatile ship unmatched in the type of missiles available and mission sets by any European navy (albeit still with too limited magazine depth to go toe-to-toe with PLAN destroyers).
Absolutely. Outside of the US, the only real rival the Hobart-class has in the West are the Japanese destroyer fleets.
I wouldn’t describe the Japanese first-class destroyers as ‘rivals’ to the Hobart’s.
They are effectively a cross between a Burke and a Tico with 96VLS and a better radar positioning (height and fewer blind angles) than the Burke. They have ESSM too, and SM3/6/2.
Not sure what the second-class destroyers are like in terms of ABM? I like the design, with a single hull and VLS arrangement accomodating separate propulsion and radar for AAW and ASW classes.
The Akizuki-class designs? They’re not equipped for anything beyond short-range BMD through the ESSM Block II, though they could theoretically take the SM-2 as well. Their radars are powerful AFAIK, but they’re limited by the interceptors they have available. That’s less of an issue given they were built to escort those larger Aegis-equipped destroyers that already carry those long-range, dedicated ABMs.
Yes, and the ASW Asahis. Imagine having enough escorts that your escorts have escorts!
I like the Japanese ship design in general, I think with some optimisation of the midsection you could fit more VLS and stealthy boat bays. They are based off an existing pre-VLS hull but plenty big enough. It’s a pity, there’s no good Shipbucket image for me to modify.
But the Mayas and the Atagos are superb ships, and they have just started the programme to replace the Kongos. A chance for a joint UK-JPN procurement, perhaps?
Collaboration is certainly worth a though, though I think the Japanese would sooner work with the Americans as part of the DDG(X). That said, we should absolutely explore cooperation on suitable areas, and perhaps we could sell them some RJ-10s?
That’s assuming the Japanese want anything to do with US warship procurement! Our own pace of programmes would probably hamper them, but with the US it would become completely unworkable.
Not sure what Japanese AShMs are like, IIRC they have a lot of indigenous products in that area?
Sea Ceptor also has an anti ship capability. A M3 high diver irrespective of warhead size is going to impart some serious kinetic energy into a target on impact. It’s also very quick reaction… 25secs out to 20+ km
Mate, good to hear from you again. Hope the daiquiris aren’t getting too expensive!
It’s also a fragile missile, with a blast frag warhead, that means every bit of kinetic energy is going to be dumped into the target hull as the missile self destructs and doesn’t come out the other side of the ship.
To put it perspective it’s about 50 million joule of Kinetic energy depending how much weight of fuel has been expended. When you consider a 6inch AP shell probably delivered around a 10 million joules of kinetic energy..that’s a wallop.
Yes Jim. If we have to settle for 4×6 CAMM silos some more questions. Could they even put another 2×6 on the hangar? Not too heavy, space is there but maybe too close to the main radar. Take the missile loads over 80.
Why are they putting a square CAMM cannister into a round silo? If they made a more milk crate silo they might be able to get 9-12 CAMM in the same footprint? Heavier and costlier but in effect a mini mk41. My 5c. But, additional weaponry for the T45s is obviously welcome.
With small size and cold gas ejection you can put CAMM any where, even on a canister on the deck. That’s what makes it such an amazing system.
Seems a total waste to use the part at the front reserved for strike length VLS but if it’s not being used for Mk41 then it’s the easiest cheapest place to fit CAMM.
Though if they had gone with quad packable ExLS (non mk41 insert version), they could have doubled the load out (48 CAMM).
The CAMM silos seem to be almost flushed with the deck too. I’ve wondered in heavy seas with waves slushing around is this a bit of a short coming? Why wasn’t it builit up a bit and sitting on the deck? Many ships even have their mk41s flush to the deck. Doesn’t sea water must get in? And corrosion? Tongue in cheek, if they move the gym maybe they can store some more CAMM there or double stack?
48 plus 24 equals 72!
Good news to wake to!
Being a tad thick but can the CAMMS be quad packed in the Sylver VLS?
Supposedly, though they’ve never been integrated.
Even so, this move is probably the better option, as all 48 Sylver VLS cells will be used exclusively for the Aster.
*Aster-30
Thanks. Couldnt find anything concrete as to if we do that. T-45 going on and up!
It can’t quad pack but they examined triple pack but never followed through as no demand.
No, as far as I can make out the Sylver A50 has a smaller l x b than a Mk41. CAMM can be duel packed into Sylver but not quad packed.
Maybe duel pack eight would give you forty short-medium and forty long range.
Why would you want to replace the Aster 30 with CAMM? Aster 30 is far more capable missile!
Good, it shows that she is proceeding along with her planned upgrades, hopefully by this time next year she will be finished, back to sea and undergoing FOST.
Any bets on her beating Daring ?
(don’t pick on me, I have issues)
Darning.. is like my sons Lego models, half the bits are missing.
Ha, watch where you tread then !
Yay, some good news at last.
Hopefully we will look to buy improved Aster-30s to fill some of the Aster 15 slots.
NSM would make these vessels the package they should always have been and the standard for the Type 83 design.
No need, the existing Aster 15s in them are being upgraded to Aster 30s.
Yes, but we need A30s with ABM capability, which current plans do not include.
I think you’re forgetting HMS Diamond shot down a ballistic missile in the Red Sea last-year with an Aster 30.
You’re also incorrect as a contract (as part of Sea Viper Evolution) has already been signed to upgrade the RNs Aster 30s to the Block 1 standard. This will allow it to intercept medium-range ballistic missiles out to 600km.
Good news, will there be enough missiles to back up the up grade. Most times ships do not carry a full load and wonder if all six were to how much spare ammo would be left? Sadly we buy great kit, etc but try so save money in the short term and our ammo stocks are not high at the best of times. Not sure what the Army will do with up 70 MLRS A2, that is lot of rockets we likely do not have.
Its an issue that needs addressing ie ammo stocks, just very un sure it will be, bean counters will want to save money some where.
That very issue is being addressed at last with 6(?) ammo facilities being opened and a recognition of the need to increase stocks in the build up to war; think 1935, we do finally learn from history… 90 years later.
6 what, depends where you read, it says 6 launchers others say full systems, not sure which is real or what was ordered to be honest. 90 years late is better than never.
6 launchers, we currently have 6 and they want to double it.
Pathetic Honestly, that’s what 3 batteries?
not sure how many are in a bty, so can not answer that
It is good news or a sign of things to come.
48 aster 30 and 24 CAMM is a respectable load. Now we just need to see NSM to give it some strike capability and the gun armament replaced for something suitable for a 21c AAW ship ( pull out the 4.5inch and stick in a 57mm, replace the 30mm with 40mm and add a DEW and jobs good).
Dragonfire DEW is to be installed.
Yep that will be a good step, it will be interesting to see what if any other systems will be removed or moved as the DEW will need a couple of shipping crates worth of power management equipment stashed somewhere.. it’s interesting that the CAMM will only take the top bit of the void space in the bow area of the type 45.. that still leaves a big empty space 1-2 decks deep.. maybe a good place to shove the capacitors needed for the DEW.
It will be interesting.. DEWs are going to be a challenge on smaller ships.. so the RN investing in larger hulls will pay off on this front.
I thought they were retaining the gym as a gym, as it was very popular with crews?
They may get the crew to run really fast on the tread mills to power the DEW…
We just need to remember that this capability insertion was planned well before any uplift in Defence spending was announced, so a minimum cost project. Looking at this I do wonder if they have re used components from the T23s that are OOS ? If they have then it sort of makes sense to re use a capability that’s already paid for and saves money for other things.
It may not be a super dooper $$$ expensive solution like some would have liked to see (MK41, ExLs etc), but we know this works, add 50% Aster 30 capacity and enhances the oa AAW capability of the T41. Just for once a non gold plated solution from MOD, now get them into the other 5 🤔
I was thinking it may have been recycled from the T23.
I very much doubt the VLS Tubes were carried over from the T23, those being the original Sea Wolf Tubes. I’d think the 4 x 6 cell Mushroom Farm is what they are using.
There are no VLS tubes on a T23.
The mushroom is an adaptor on the deck to take the launcher /stowage/shipping box that ceptor comes in.
The boxes are fixed onto a Simple rail On the Mag deck. The mushrooms adapt the existing round hole in a T23 deck, a. Legacy from having to slide VL Seawolf cannisters into the hole and allow the ceptor box to be secured at the top as they are Longer in length than the. Old VLSW cannisters.
That is interesting GB- so from the images available, what you see above Deck,whether it is Sea Wolf or Sea Ceptor,the Round protusions are basically just Caps yeah ?.SC comes in a Container which is basically a long self contained square section Tube from which it is Launched from,would SW have come in a similar Capsule,would it have been the same shape or Round in section ?.
Excellent news! Does make you wonder whether the best option now for T31 is 24 Sea Ceptors and NSM – skip the Mk41 capability insertion and get them into service. It’s not as if we have any missiles to put in the Mk41.
It’s certainly worth a thought. Does the Type 31 need the Mk41 immediately? Would it better suited by more Sea Ceptors and the NSM?
I’m not saying Mk41is not a good idea. But my instinct is that 24 Ceptors and NSM is good enough for the T31 patrol / deter agression role; the priority is RN’s global presence – so get them into service. There’s no lack of other worthwhile ways to spend the money. E.g.lifexing the Bays and pairing them up with T31 might give you a useful raiding / HADR littoral response group while we wait for MRSS.
Isn’t that what are we doing?
The age of the Bays sort of drives you down that path, I guess; which if Argus does retire is a 3 x MRSS path?
We’re only getting 12 missiles currently
Yeh, I know. And I understand Babcock’s contract position- that’s what was agreed for the original £250m.
I think the Mk41 would be a worthwhile addition to the ships, but if money is tight, then just adding an extra pair of Sea Ceptors modules would be sufficient for operations and much cheaper.
Even better, replace the original 12 cells and 24 of the larger Albatross NG cells for the CAMM-ER.
J,
Dunno, obviously not familiar w/ RN doctrine and tactics, but if I am the DDG Captain/Commander, and have just expended 72 SAMs in an engagement, probably would SERIOUSLY consider vacating the area by advancing bravely to the rear at flank speed, and advising any nearby allied surface vessels to proceed in a similar fashion. Generally a better strategy to live to fight another day. Fully realize this may not be in the finest tradition of Adm. Nelson and successors, simply a colonial’s perspective. 🤔😳😉
I think the plan is to replace all Aster 15 with Aster 30, Seaceptor taking on the role of short-range defence.
I’m not a naval type of guy – but RN ships always seem under armed with anti ship missiles compared to other navies. Is this correct?
Yeah it’s been like that for a while and RN ships have only really had a dedicated AShM as Exocet, as Harpoon was partially for ASW on T23.
The argument goes either that we have very well trained helicopter weapons, but we gapped that before Sea Venom came/comes into service, or that we use the SSNs, but they have awful availability.
Yes the gap with sea venom is a real killer to be honest. In later 20c helicopter launched anti ship missiles have killed the most surface combatants of any system in RN service ( 14 vessels sunk, and more mission killed or damaged) and that is almost exclusively with air launched Antiship missiles from small ship flights. The RN had turned it into an art form and the combination of lynx and sea skua effectively removed any range issues RN surface combanants had, the sea skua and lynx combo out ranged any other ASuW system on a warship.
So gapping the capability and not having sea venom for a decade after sea skua left service has been a massive capability hole… it’s probably also massively impacted on the RNs skill set around this capability because if you don’t have it you cannot practice it.
But they will have it soon and in combination with the wildcat you will have a truly nasty weapon system.. people often bitch about the wildcat being small and useless as it’s not the same size as most navel medium rotors.. but the RN essentially loves its small mobile and highly lethal maritime attack helicopter, because more than anything ( once sea Skua has been replaced by ) wildcat is really an ASuW maritime attack helicopter, with is mixture of 20 Martlet and 4 sea viper missiles.
A couple of mass drone engagements and she’ll be depleted of missiles with no way of replenishing at sea. The MOD needs to give it’s head a shake.
Which is what happened to a T45 earlier in the year with the Houthis(?)
Of course, you could always determine the the C2 launch points and mallet them… which is what the Anericans did OR
Mallet the mullahs, which is also what the Americans did.
In other news…
Would be interested to know how many drones in that engagement were dealt with by the DS30 Bushmasters.
You know they have Ds30 mounts, phalanx and soon dragon fire lasers on the type 45s. The drone swarm is getting chewed up.
Soon for Dragonfire? 2027, so you’re looking at 2030. Phalanx is great for 20 secs with it’s limited magazine then 5-10 minutes to reload. DS30 is ok against surface targets but not aerial targets.
Interesting image show four mushroom cells in row. So not the six cell units pictured on type 26 and 31.
For information only, many of the Perry class frigates transferred to our allies have been upgraded to include an 8-cell Mk 41 VLS just forward the 40-round Mk 13 launcher. Conceivable, these frigates, at about 4,200 ton displacement, can field 72 SAM (32 ESSM and 40 SM-1/2). They could fire a Harpoon ASM in lieu of the SM.
That’s a lot of firepower for that size of ship.
Yes very good news these will be very potent ships well into the 2040s there’s a very interesting photo on navy lookout of a t23 alongside at45 you can see the sheer size of a t45 is impressive!
Also a post talking about building t26 air defence destroyers simular to Canada instead of t83 or to augment them as they will be very expensive beasts is food for thought.
Having a single design would be very cost effective but no marine engineer so not sure on the capability drawback.
But plusses and minuses on all options I suppose.
At one point the RN and MOD did have a team looking at the T45 becoming a single escort type for the RN and building a ASW and GP frigate version.
It would certainly make sense using an existing production line in full swing cutting years off design phases for a whole new ship and they do look very gracefully ships.
That old saying if they look good! Ha
I’m sure BAE would be very happy if the Norwegian order for t26 doesn’t come off.
I know the Hull design is specifically for ASW but other navies seam to be able to get air defence and anti submarine on the same Hull design.
What is really interesting is from the picture it looks like the set up of the farms is four missiles wide and two farms across the beam. Now to me the whole weather shield looks to long for only one row of silos ( 2×4 farms ) so there is a sneaking possibility from the pictures we are actually seeing four sets of 2×4 farms. Just a sniff of the possible mind, but it would not surprise as the forced decommissioning of T23s will have left a fair number of spare CAMMs and if the space is there it’s not going to be expensive and we now to a limited degree money has freed up..this would be an easy low hanging fruit.. or it could just be the have a row of 2 2×4 farms and then forward of the row of two a single 2×4 farm…. But that’s a big old weather shield for that set up.
Why the Kazakstan flag on it’s side with Steve Wenham’s images?
Nice.
Defender going all Arleigh Burke….
Great- we need all 6 type 45s PIP upgraded, sea ceptor silo and NSM fitted asap- desperately needed firepower upgrade.