The Russian guided missile destroyer Severomorsk has been sailing in international waters just north of RAF Lossiemouth for around one week.

The vessel, staying outside British territorial waters, is accompanied by the tanker ‘Sergei Osipov’.

Readers should understand that the vessel is in international waters and is doing nothing illegal or inappropriate, in fact, most navies (including the Royal Navy) perform these kind of actions with their ships.

In addition to submarines and small vessels, it is understood that there are two Royal Navy frigates in Scottish waters, one of them currently operating near the Clyde. Additionally, it should be noted the Royal Navy do not comment on submarine operations.

More notable is that RAF Lossiemouth is home to the UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft fleet, currently four P-8A Poseidon aircraft, and the Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon jets for the northern half of the UK.

A military source at RAF Lossiemouth has told the UK Defence Journal “be under no doubt that the Russian vessel is being watched 24/7”.

The UK and US also sail vessels close to Russia. Earlier in the year, American destroyers and a British frigate were in the Barents Sea following seven days of Arctic operations. The surface action group comprised of Arleigh Burke class destroyers USS Donald Cook, USS Porter, USS Roosevelt, fast combat support ship USNS Supply and the Royal Navy’s HMS Kent entered the Barents Sea in May to conduct training and operations in the challenging conditions of the Arctic region.

Many will have noticed the tanker ‘Sergei Osipov’ in the Moray Firth, well, the press team for the Russian Northern Fleet have confirmed she is sailing in company with the Severomorsk.

According to a Russian Northern Fleet announcement:

“The large antisubmarine ship of the Northern Fleet Severomorsk and the large sea tanker Sergey Osipov left the Moray Firth Bay of the North Sea and headed for the Barents Sea. The detachment completed the assigned tasks in the North Atlantic and proceeded to move to the main basing point.”

It is understood that the vessels conducted an anti-sabotage defence exercise and worked conducted replenishment of fuel and fresh water from a tanker.

The Russian Northern Fleet say that Severomorsk together with the tanker Sergei Osipov operated in the North Atlantic after participating in the “ninth cruise of the Arctic group of the Northern Fleet”.

Since the start of the cruise, the ship has covered about 11 thousand nautical miles, they add. The Destroyer will now be moving to the coast of Norway to conduct submarine hunting and air defence exercises say the Russian military.

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

69 COMMENTS

    • I wouldn’t be too worried fella, it’s not about quantity over quality. A lot of their fleet follows the typical Soviet era military doctrine of all bark but no bite in my opinion. Their ships look good with lots of missile systems, guns and torpedoes on deck but they are of far less quality and lack the sophistication that the West has.
      The same goes with their aircraft, tanks, missiles etc…..

      • Russian doctrine from ww2 onwards was mass over quality, which is why things like the AK47 was designed to be cheap rather than high tech, but equally why it is so effective even now as it was designed to be used by anyone.

        If you look at WW2 and before warship battles it took dozens of shells to get even one hit, so the thinking could be the same, low tech missiles but in volume. A western naval ship would rapidly dispense itself of missiles, whilst a Soviet era ship could keep going for a fair bit longer.

        On the flip side the west has gone ultra high tech and low volumes and this was a major problem in Vietnam over the missile vs gun and you could argue it explains why we lost in Iraq/Afgan, lack of raw numbers (ok the russians also lost in Afgan but there they were the attacking force and had the whole country against them, so slightly difficult to compare).

        Then we have the falklands, where lower numbers and better tech won.

        I suspect the only way we will find out which is the right doctrine is for there to be a war, which i think we all hope won’t happen.

  3. Thank you for explaining about the significance of having to replenish fresh water. You would think the machine to convert sea water is fairly standard. Available from many commercial suppliers.

  4. Every time I look at a Russian ship I feel our surface fleet is hopelessly outgunned on a 1 on 1 basis. With our low numbers it’s asking a lot to rely on a numbers game.

    The same applies to our subs who would be the preferred counter to a surface threat. Too few in number and they can’t be everywhere.

    Don’t get me started on the raf and faa lack of an anti ship weapon.

    Truly shameful that our illustrious leaders have left our defences in this state.

    • Agreed. I just checked the equipment listed for this ship class- amazing amount of firepower by our standards. It is very worrying that this one anti submarine specialist ship carries more surface to air missiles than proposed for the entire T31fleet.

        • I know that these (apart from Udaloy) are old Soviet era ships probably with little in the way of updating of weapons or sensors. No-one knows for sure how these might perform today. But the point about the T31 lack of firepower is valid. What will these new large frigates actually do that is of any real value? The proposed weapon fit is quite inadequate. Given that the only real current naval threat is the Russian submarine fleet(not their knackered old carrier or Soviet era surface relics) why are we wasting money on ships with no anti- submarine capability?

          • The Type 26 will provide the role. Type 31 was always designed as a modular general-purpose vessel that we can generate more numbers of (potentially) and as an export option. It’s ironic that the Type 26 seems to be the big export winner so far (design wise at least).

          • The T31 is designed to undertake some of the less glamorous but equally important tasks, anti piracy, patrol in the gulf, fleet ready support ship ect. It won’t be facing the Chinese fleet on it’s own And it will be very upgradable and adaptable, the ship that enters service will be a very different vessel 10 years down the line. We can’t carry on spending over 1bn for one warship, so this is a compromise between cost, and gold plated toys.

          • The issue with that is most of them tasks don’t need a military vessel. A military vessel needs to be able to fight when needed and that needs it needs to be able to bring something to the fight that the opposition does not.

            The t31 appears to be somewhere between an OPV and a frigate, so effectively a corvette, so probably useful for escorting less valuable assets.

        • Bingo!!!!! 75+% of their fleet is Soviet era, same goes with their aircraft, tanks and other weapon systems. The one area that they excel in is air defence, they know that they don’t stand a chance against NATO air forces so this is why they sink a shed load of cash into this area.

    • It’s 33 years old, can’t even produce It’s own fresh water, it will be about as useful as a fishing trawler. To many big up the Russians, and downplay our own capabilitys.

      • Well when we keep cutting the defence budget, I think it is justified in downplaying what we’re capable off. It wasn’t too long ago we were talking the potential of the British Army losing its Chally 2s.

        • Well if that funds the equipment we actually need, rather than holding on to equipment that might have little use. I’m not saying get rid of tanks, but we need to seriously look at the capabilities we need. And be prepared to let others go that are sapping precious funds.

      • We have more capability gaps than capabilities. Surface fleets anti ship capability virtually nil. Air based anti surface capability absolutely nil.

        • We have Harpoon until 2023, then a stop gap will be purchased , spear 3 will have a anti ship capability. And even Harpoon will be way better then anything bolted onto the above old Russian Destroyer.

      • Yes comparing these old Soviet Union ships with poorly integrated sensors and weapon systems is not so meaningful. The most important think is being operational, finding the enemy and hitting the enemy. Not something these old Udaloy’s would be that good at. These old cold war relics make even our our pre LIFEX refit type 23s look like spring chickens and are not comparable to a post refit type 23 in any way.

    • I recall a Story i had Read in an Aviation Magazine many moons ago – when the Cold War (version 1) had thawed and the Eastern Bloc started opening up, there was an Airshow held in West Germany.This was attended by Aircraft from the then DDR ,which at the time was very rare.Exhibited on the Ground were both Tornado’s from the Luftwaffe,and SU22 Fitters from the LSK,and Pilots being inquisitive Creatures they had a good look around each others respective Aircraft.An East German Pilot concluded that the Tornado was basically Built for Peace whilst the SU22 was Built for War.

      • I don’t suppose the article covered why the East German pilots thought that? The only reasoning I can think of is that the easterners viewed the more advanced Western aircraft as being somewhat frivolous and too expensive to risk losing.

        Wouldn’t be the first time people have levelled such claims at modern tech. Admiral Cunningham’s view of the Battle Class destroyers was (to paraphrase) that “they had every modern system except guns”.

        • Lets be honest most pilots have a love for their own aircraft, spoken to 2WW pilots who loved their Hurricanes and Whirlwinds despite both having their critics elsewhere for varying reasons in their case. Unless their mount is awful in which case they reverse the effect up-selling the opposition to compensate. Or of course when its something in-between and their immediate lives aren’t at risk you tend to get snide remarks of this nature to try to rebalance things in their favour. The Su22 was a rugged aircraft but more akin to a Jaguar than a Tornado in capability but can see why a pilot might become attached to it as a reliable if unspectacular warhorse. I seem to remember in its final years they tried to update them with Western systems to make them more attractive to export markets. You could certainly criticise the Tornado as something of a one trick pony too in strike mode I guess despite supposedly being a multi rule aircraft. I think its concept taught designers rather a lot in hindsight and you won’t see that sort of aircraft being designed again, far too specialist, very good at the thing it was designed for but that would prove far too lethal to its crew as defensive weaponry/sensors improved and only average when having to try new tricks to compensate.

          • It’s worth remembering that the Tornado was a multi-role family of aircraft, not one single multi-role type.

            For better or worse though you’re probably right, single-role aircraft are on the way out. The requirements for all roles are becoming effectively the same: stealth, strong radar, range, and payload. Basically take the avionics and other systems out of the Lightning, put it in a 30% larger aircraft, and bam. You’ve got the undisputably best fighter ever made.

    • Yes but anF35B lobbing a laser guided bomb or 4 at it from 5 miles away would wreck this vessels day. Or alternatively I wonder if this ship can detect an astute approaching from 20 miles away to get a bearing and lock on for a heavy weight wire guided torpedo? These ships are heavily armed for sure but have they got the advanced sensors needed to survive in a modern conflict ? I dont think so.

      • I’d be reluctant to risk getting an f35 within a few miles of a surface ship. The loss of just 1 would be catastrophic when we have so few.

        • Also what is the point, Russia knows we have no air borne anti-ship missiles and therefore our aircraft pose very little threat.

    • Numbers do have a quality of their own, and we are certainly lacking a decent kinetic effect on our own dwindling surface fleet, however most of the current floating pieces of Russian garbage are so outdated and unreliable that at this moment, as during the cold war, it’s the underwater threat we need to be concerned about. I think Gunbuster could probably give us a heads up on the current Russian surface assets, and the issues they are facing. Cheers.

  6. Oh, dear. Never mind, moving on … Great Britain formulated the Laws of the Sea and central to that was peaceful navigation. Perhaps the Russians needed to see it in action?

  7. Just further proof that the high seas are fast becoming the most effective place to linger with menace, and this trend will only increase, hence the need to strengthen the RN over the coming decades. How long will it be before these warships begin to intercept and hinder free passage around the globe’s oceans?

  8. Would a good secondary role for the Predator/Protector fleet not be the tracking of such surface vessels, whether it be Moray Firth or English Channel? Allow the meagre P-8 and naval resources we have to track sub-surface contacts elsewhere. Suppose the only issue is air traffic management with civilian traffic?

    • New Predator/Protector being bought and used at home for watching dinghies in the channel.
      I very much doubt it will be popular to see them used like that
      TBH they need to be an overseas asset…
      A Watchkeeper however I think would be better.

    • There is talk of something of this nature in the future and I believe some tests for viability have been carried out but some way off using drones for such activities as yet I think, seaborne work seems to test systems some what from what I gather but surprised more consideration ha been given to its the Ausies once again are far ahead in using unmanned to keep an eye on the vat oceans they have to consider, our needs seen far less extravagant in the first instance.

  9. Now I know why HMS Kent was up in the Moray Firth. Even though this is an old 1980 design she is still a nice looking ship. I looked at her weapons and radar outfit, typical Russian everything they have in stores is put on her. A anti sub missile/Anti ship missile? How does that work, they seems to be an either or with a torp such as the ASROC or the old IKARA or with a warhead for anti ship. As for the RBUs well that nothing more than a modern WW2 Hedgehog. A fully equipped T23 would take care of this type of ship. As for a RN/USN SSN target practise comes to mind.
    As for needing water, what the hell have the Russians not learnt how to manufacture their own onboard water yet. Although it could be a diffrent reason, the manufacture of the ships water would mean that the ships are for blue water long endurance. Possibly in the time of communisim the Russian navy was on a short leash. Would not want a communist crew mid Atlantic suddenly disappearing of to the States now would we. It was the same issue with the Imperial German Navy, well armed ships but was designed for short range work, crews etc would have to stay in barracks etc. RN and USN ships are bigger with less weapons etc as they are designed for world wide operations and to be as independent as possible from shore or RAS requirements.

  10. Very good point Gunbuster to highlight that weakness.

    I presume we don’t need fancy tech to detect this ship – just smell it.

  11. Have asked before, I don’t remember anyone gave me a reason, but why do many Russian ships have the decks painted Terracotta? I guess the USSR era ones. Cosmetic?

    • Its the anti-corrosion layer painted on the deck. Most navies paint it again in grey, the Russians and Soviets before them do not. In Soviet times many observers said it was due to paint rationing, the suppliers were told how much they could produce so why waste quota on a top coat which isn’t needed for anything other than looks.

      Why the Russians still do this….. who knows, tradition perhaps.

    • I also remember being onboard some RN frigates back in the late 70s I think 78 the decks were green. Never did remember why some PO told us kids who spent a week with the RN to see if it was for us. Those were the days that I still remember a navy, cruisers in dock, deisel subs along side frigates and destroyers everywhere and the old depot ship Maidstone where the us school boys were accomadated.

  12. In 2005 the Admiral Levchenko (The sister ship to the Severomorsk ) was part of the fleet review in Portsmouth and was open to visitors . I paid it a visit and was surprised at what I saw. for example there are railway tracks) on the front of the ship alongside the side of the front guns. (don’t ask me how) Those front missile tubes are huge a long walk down the back to the helipad where they had a Helix parked up and then back to the front and off ski. (As I was working there at the time, I had the chance to listen to the crew singing on the evening when all the crowds had gone home for the day. Impressive.

  13. Can somebody give Alan Brown phone let him know the RN has some ships operating just now up here ?

  14. This was the problem on the carrier too apparently.

    It really is a strange thing for them not to fix as osmosis gear is commercial hardware more or less order online. I suspect the other issue is limited power plant. Reverse osmosis uses a lot of juice. But even that is not insuperable as you could just have a simple diesel power pack dedicated to it.

    I think the mentality Is ‘we have always done it this way’ & ‘fresh water freezes in pipes’…

    • Water freezing could have something to do with it, considering Russia vessels to operate long periods in very cold temps. Maybe adequate insulation is not in place.

      Another option could be space, maybe the decision was taken that it is better to use the space for weapons / crew and have fresh water brought to the ships, since the Soviet navy pretty much limited itself to operating near friendly waters.

  15. In past years I was lucky enough to get a look onboard a Sovremenny and some time later an Udaloy when both where fairly new build vessels.
    Its all well and good having the upper deck covered in radars, trackers, guns and missiles but it was also interesting talking to a Soviet Warrant officer engineer onboard the Sovremenny , He was a career NCO engineer. He was conscripted but had stayed.. He also like MARS bars and the ever popular Levi jeans for his kids (MI6 didn’t need spies it just needed an iso container of Levis jeans and you could have gotten anything off those ships!! )

    Anyway basically the Soviets doubled up on everything because reliability and maintainability was appalling. At any one time maybe and on a good day 40 % of the equipment worked. Each system was stand alone and not integrated into a command system. They had a China graph powered perspex plotting board to workout where everything was via internal comms calls that where then drawn on. Looking at the upper deck it was paint on top of rust and more paint. The Hull welding looked like it was done by a year one apprentice. Sea water fire fighting valves where the screw down type and most where seized. It also smelt bad. The aircon/ vent system was really poor and just recirced stale air around inside. Cooked cabbage from what I remember!
    It was an eye opener. For years we in the RN had been looking at the Red Banner fleet as a monster waiting to eat us all alive in the North Atlantic. The reality was that they would be lucky to get away from the pier and survive for a few days at sea.

    Even today I doubt a lot has changed. No conscription and a professional cadre is better but old worn out vessels with newer coming on line. Not a lot of Blue water capability. The new vessels are all Bastion operation orientated or will be limited to restricted sea way operations in the Caspian, Black and Baltic seas.

    Anyway enough reminiscing… I have western navy sleek grey war canoes of death to finish repairs and overhauls on this week. Busy, Busy Busy!!!

  16. Well……what can you say? It really isn’t a major event as UKDJ points out that NATO forces do exactly the same thing in the international waters around Russia, China and the Middle East.
    What is surprising is the fact that she is having to receive fresh water, as the chap below has said in a very precise manner that a ship that size not being capable to do it itself. This is either yet another sign of the Russian Navy being in a poor state or a blatant lie as the ship was carrying out detailed surveillance of our defences there and our ASW aircraft capabilities and number of P-8’s etc…..

  19. Popping over to have a cup of tea and a chat about future defence intentions with the SNP shadow “I know nothing about defence” defence minister maybe.

  20. Lots of talk here of how far behind Russia our navel assets have fallen. Perception is an interesting thing.

    Russia is not really the peer everyone perceives it to be. It’s really a second world nation with its only assets based around population and natural resources. Very much like China was during the Cold War. It has about half the UK total GDP and it’s per capita GDP is more in the ballpark of a second world economy. More importantly is is all heading in the wrong direction, population and GDP are all down.

    It militarily modernisation programme has mostly been based around continuation or restarts of soviet programmes ( they had a lot of programmes in the bank) but these are Running dry and browning long in the tooth.

    Their fleet re-capitalisation is based around brown/green water platforms or their Ballistic Missile sub programme. Their blue water capability is literally nothing more that the navel equivalent of poorly maintained rotting classic cars, with no spare parts left. The Russian blue water navy is on its last legs with no real evidence of any meaningful programme of recapitalisation.

    Yes they have regenerated their ground forces well, but the actual number of deployable units is actually very small. It’s the same with their airforces.

    Most reasonable assessments of Russian military assets mark the fact they have high quality units able to undertake swift effective regional deployment but would not be able to maintain any long term operation against a peer nation ( that the U.K., Germany, France in European terms).

    Their main asset are strategic forces, these have been maintained from the soviet era. What most papers point to is that any Russian action would be limited and swift (needing some form of local mandate or ethnic Russian popular support) it would then use strategic assets to replace its lack of conventional depth.

    They really are not going to be the super bogie man of the high seas. Yes they still need to be respected with the Northern fleets 12 nuclear hunter killers and 3 (or two as one more may be out of commission) oscars. But we must balance this with the fact even their newest generation nuclear submarines ( which seem to be good but not up to modern western boats)that are coming off the slips in very small numbers are dusted off designs started the the 1970s, with the first Yasen class boat taking from 1993 to 2013 to build and commission, the second in class only took a decade…the other boats were all commissioned between 1987 and 2001 with the oldest being laid down almost 40 years ago.

    • I do not think anything RN has is behind Russia.

      The only area things are closer than they should be is sub sea. And that is **possibly** a numbers thing. I’ve heard the rumours on availability there too.

      Whilst I do think most of the Russian surface fleet is junk I don’t think the crews are dummies and they can be very ingenious technically well educated people.

      There is always ‘one thing’ that catches you by surprise and that is the real threat, like in ‘82 using Skyhawks to lob dumb bombs at guided missile ships. And it worked: because it was an out of era threat.

      And that is the kind of unconstrained free thinking which you are forced to use with inferior assets……

      • One thing Russia is very good at is unconventional warfare. It’s likely any action involving nato and Russia would involve Russia using all domains, the population in the target area (saving ethnic Russians), Miss information ( not our troops guv), political ( that’s what friends are for), energy ( do you want your gas Germany ?) and if really pushed probably nuclear blackmail

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here