The vessels, formerly belonging to the Royal Navy, are currently conducting training and recently sailed together for the first time under the Ukrainian flag.

The minehunters are now named the Chernhiv (ex HMS Grimsby) and the Cherkasy (ex HMS Shoreham).

The vessels are conducting routine training to familiarise their new crews with their systems and they’re based out of Rosyth currently due to recent modification work.

Image via the excellent Dave Cullen, follow him here.

Image Copyright DAVE CULLEN

The Sandown-class are designed for the clearance of mines in shallow coastal waters, and are constructed of glass-reinforced plastic to reduce their magnetic and acoustic signatures, making them harder to detect by mines. The ships can be fitted with remote-controlled mine disposal vehicles to neutralise mines.

UK giving two Sandown class mine hunters to Ukraine

We reported back in 2021 that the UK was giving two Sandown class mine hunters to Ukraine.

The United Kingdom announced as part of the ‘Defence Command Paper‘, a white paper outlining the shape and size of the British military over the years to come that it is retiring its Sandown and Hunt class vessels as the Royal Navy moves to autonomous platforms for mine hunting work.

The Ukrainian Navy posted on Facebook here (translation provided by Facebook):

“In the near future, the Ukrainian Navy is expecting a transfer to its warehouse of two ships type “Sandown” that are currently in the Royal British Navy, after their full audit, repair, upgrade, additional equipment and adequate preparation of the Ukrainian Navy personnel. In addition, eight missile boats will be built according to the requirements of the Ukrainian Navy, the first two of which will be built directly in the United Kingdom, and the other will be built already in Ukraine. The assistance of the United Kingdom in the construction of naval bases on the Azov and the Black Sea is also planned.”

Announcing the memorandum, the British Embassy in Kiev said back in 2021:

“On board HMS DEFENDER in Odesa, the UK Minister for Defence Procurement Jeremy Quin and Deputy Defence Minister of Ukraine Oleksandr Myroniuk signed an important Memorandum of Implementation for naval partnership projects between a consortium of UK industry and the Ukrainian Navy.

The Memorandum provides for joint UK-Ukraine design and build of warships, construction of two Naval Bases. This is the next step in development of UK-Ukraine bilateral co-operation in strengthening Ukraine’s Navy that faces ongoing dangers in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.”

 

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

81 COMMENTS

    • I think 3 Sandown and 6 Hunt. The Sandowns are being disposed of quicker than the Hunts, which will be around for a while yet.

      RNMBs Hazard, Harrier, Hebe are now at Faslane as their replacements, comprising Project Wilton.

      RNMBs Apollo and Artemis are at Portsmouth, with more to follow I believe.

        • David, Whilst my Hunt was up in the Shed at Rosyth I was tasked with flying down and checking ,aligning arcs and first firing of the 30mms whilst the Sandowns were still under their Red ensign 1 days work and a week off The thought that we’re depleting what was once the largest MCM fleet without a full renewal of assets is confusing the Navy should have waited until full Autonomous Mcmvs are up and proven before the disposal of Vessels once their gone their gone just hope we don’t get caught short

          • Agreed but we don’t know that the Drones aren’t up to spec. We’ve been trialling them for long enough to be so long as there aren’t any fundamental problems.

          • Thanks Davjd , the Navy has been trialing this Concept of Autonomous MCM for a while now just not in a real world scenario just hope that they fulfil their task when required

          • Know and respect your background in the RN Tommo and your knowledge on this subject. 👍

      • We will be, but the tech won’t take over completely overnight. The Hunts will be about to the late 2020s early 2030s I believe, as the other systems developed with France are introduced.

        • Ah I see – thanks. That is taking longer than I anticipated. Is the UK well placed, do you think, to develop and implement unmanned systems at a similar rate (or faster) than other countries?

  2. Will these be allowed in to the Black Sea? Believe Erdogan and Co have banned all military vessels traversing the Bosphorus due to some longstanding policy applicable during military conflicts.

    • Can they get to Ukraine by canals and river systems ? Or are they too big for that ?

      If they are indeed too big to go that way, then I can’t see the point of giving them to Ukraine in the first place

      • I don’t think we will see these or any other Ukraine navy ships heading into the Black Sea until the war is over or has substantially died down.
        That said it’s still important for a nation with a coast to have naval ships ready to go.
        The Ukrainian navy would be mad to return and sail around the Black Sea before the war is over and/or without some kind of safe operating zones set up

      • The only benefit of this stupidity is political virtue signalling to win votes from the sheeple. Most could not find Ukraine on the map before Feb. 2022.

        I have just two question about them flying their national flag in or near our territorial waters. What if a Russian navy vessel or sub sights them, would they be within their rights to engage?
        What could the RN or RAF do about it without starting a war?

        • If they are outside our 12 mile limit they are a legitimate target. Just think Battle of the River Plate and Montevideo harbour. As for what we could do about it, we’ll I wouldn’t be the one to decide that one.

          • No it is the unified inland waterway. Links St Petersburg to Sea of Azov and the Caspian. Google it I have to say it is pretty impressive. Daft as it sounds Russia can move corvettes, small frigates and Kilo subs through it.

          • Impressive indeed wow! It’s not daft to be able to transit vessels across their huge country. The alternative “long way round” is one hell of a journey. No wonder they are so keen on small vessels.
            Looking at the specs for the Lada class, name still makes me chuckle. They obviously designed them with the same internal transit capability in mind. If the Ruskies ever solve the problems with those new boats, they could be worthy adversaries.

          • What really impressed was that they have shipyards on the Bigger rivers. The Zelenodolsk Shipyard at Gorky is over 1000km from the sea, yet it is building 1000 tonne Buyan M Missile Corvettes and yes they send them down the waterway to the Sea of Azov and The Caspian Sea.

          • I was just look at that place on Google earth. A little like the Wuchang Shipyard, Wuhan, China 30°32’N 114°17’EAlmost 700 km from the ocean in a straight line. Yet they produce all of the CCP conventional submarines. Sending them down the silt laden Yangtze river system. We Brits are spoiled by living on an island. Never very far from the mother ocean.

    • Montreaux Convention governs what military vessels can transverse the Bosporus, with Turkey responsible for enforcement. So long as Ukraine states that they’re going to be based at a Black Sea port, then even in wartime they would be allowed passage back to base.

      • Also considering that in most cases it looks like Ukraine will win the war it will need these ships to help clear its ports and sea lanes. Might as well start training them know so they can get to de-mining as soon as they can.

        • Agreed if the ships had offensive capabilities then we might see them return, but as they are they are best kept for post-war clear-up. Though if the Germans keep up their ridiculous stance the war may have many years yet to go.

        • Please define “win” in the context of this conflict.
          As I see it, Ukraine still existing as a separate country is a major win. Even if it is being artificially propped up by western nations at a huge cost. I’d be interested to know what others on here think a Ukrainian win would look like.

          • Interesting question and this may sound an odd personal answer.
            To me a win is to Roll back Russia to the pre 2014 borders as defined by the Budapest Memorandum. Then negotiate on the basis of that
            Memorandum to change the wording regarding borders from Assurances to Guarantees by Russia, US, UK and Ukraine but include China and France this time.
            Unfortunately the sticking point is always Crimea and it is the key to getting Russia onboard a real peace agreement. Russia is a proud country and it sees Crimea as being part of Russia not Ukraine. So that has to be dealt with to ensure any hope of a long term peace as unfortunately I think Russia has a valid point about Crimea.
            Crimea is Historically and majority Ethnically Russian not Ukrainian, it only became part of the Former Ukrainian SSR in the 1950’s as an administrative move. And when the CSR broke up in the 90’s it went too.
            And there are Historical Treaties to back that up, Yalta agreement between the Allies was signed when Crimea was part of Russia and the Treaty of Paris which ended the Crimean war recognised Crimea as part of Russia (signed by U.K, France, Turkey and Sardinia !).
            Besides which it is the only bit of Russia that has a nice Beach and decent weather.
            And if you want to allay Russias gripe about NATO expansion agree a 100 mile DMZ on both sides of the border.
            If history teaches us one thing it is that humiliating an enemy just leads to future conflict.
            Both Hitler and Putin both fed on feelings of humiliation and exploitation.

          • Very well said, particularly about Crimea. If everyone wants peace, something I’m becoming less and less convinced about as time/events go by. Russia’s red line should be recognised and exploited.
            My first thought was a solution similar to the former Yugoslavia, partition and minor relocations along ethnic lines. Clearly that will be difficult now, as those areas of Donetsk and Luhansk with majority ethnic Russian people have been destroyed. Most of the population have fled and their homes ransacked if there was the slightest hint of Russian sympathies. Vise versa if the homes were occupied by Ukrainian nationalists. This is a conflict where neither side will be diverted from their ethnic cleansing objectives.

            Who would have thought it would be like this in 21st century Europe. Other than British Bosnia veterans with PTSD.

          • I’m not convinced on the Crimea point.

            Crimea had a vote in 1991 and all the areas voted by majorities for Ukraine not Russia. For me that is decisive.

            Since then there has been ethnic cleansing, forced deportations to Russia, settling of new populations following the Stalin playbook, and God knows what else – so I think no further credible vote of any sort is possible.

            I don’t think we get peace until Russia is seriously reformed, so we are likely to end up with a further-East version of the Iron Curtain.

            One ray of hope is perhaps that Putin will be assassinated, and the replacement will recognise which side their bread is buttered.

          • Cheers Matt, good points.
            Since the 1991/2 referendum Ukraine has changed quite dramatically. Back then anything that reversed soviet totalitarianism from Moscow was desirable. Most folk were idealistically hopeful for the future and to be honest, a little naïve. Not surprising really, given the end of the USSR without major bloodshed. It looked like anything was possible and prayers were being answered. Then human nature reasserted itself.

            Old hatreds and animosities resurfaced, with scores to be settled. Events permitted Putin to take power Ukrainian nationalism to rise. Splitting the population along ethnic lines. Leading to a coup and the overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government.
            Laws were passed to outlaw the Russian language in local government and removal of some voting rights in ethnic Russian majority provinces. (All officially documented.)
            The polarisation rapidly gained traction with physical intimidation by nationalists groups of Russian speakers. All very,very sad actually.
            Outside influences and internal corruption just sealed the division and exploited it.
            Donetsk and Luhansk wanted autonomy and Crimea was annexed.

            With hindsight, it was as if 1991 was the first domino to fall and the following events cascaded from there. On an ill-fated predetermined timeline.

            We could talk about this for hours arguing minor points and just go in circles. The important thing is breaking the circle and find a lasting peace. I wish you well Matt.

        • As Romania and Bulgaria both have Black Sea coastlines , a coalition of NATo/ UN
          MCMs should be deployed when Putins special operation is over a task similar too that which was used after the Gulf War (OP Granby)

      • Russia already tried that argument to get some of their Med ships through and it is prior home based. The precise working is “returning to their home port”. Besides which the second those Sweepers go into international waters they are legitimate targets.
        They will probably be with us till this is all over and then be pretty busy.

      • Sorry but, you are wrong. As I’ve stated a few times already here, regardless of the Convention’s words, Turkey is not allowing any military vessel into or out of the Black Sea regardless of the location of their home port. That is other than their own.

        • No you’re wrong, as you are about everything else you post. Turkey does not have that power under the convention even during wartime.
          Now Turkey has requested belligerents to not transit the straits since March, but “request” and “ordered” are two different things.

          There was speculation that Russia wanted to transit the Varyag and Admiral Tributs (both from the Pacific Fleet) after they arrived in the Med. A reasonable assumption given the mauling the Black Sea a fleet has taken, but according to Turkey the Russians made no request for this. Presumably they realised that there was a good chance both ships would have ended up at the bottom of the Black Sea.

          • Simple fact is the Russians wouldn’t dare offend the Turks they need them to at least nominally sit on the fence, Erdogan is loving the power this affords him, he can play both Russia and NATO off against each other to the advantage of Turkey and his efforts to gain support in the coming election which he so badly needs.

            And you only need to ask the RN about events prior to Gallipoli how what they thought would be a relatively easy forced passage of the straits turned into a near disaster which sadly led to the plan B of the landings themselves that were of course a resultant disaster.

          • Who would sink them?
            Turkey is a NATO member so if they tried there would be a proper war. Could Ukraine hit moving targets that far from their territory with Neptune. Have they been supplied with anything else. For example did Denmark ever send the promised truck based Harpoon launcher and could it (single quad launcher) do the job.
            Land base antiship missiles are fascinating weapons.

          • The Ukrainians obviously, as they have done previously with Russian warships.

            The U.K. supplied anti-ship Brimstone missiles last year for mounting onto technicals, and more are to be supplied. Western supplied Harpoons sunk Russian naval tug Spasatel Vasily Bekh last June.

    • No. Not until its deemed over. I belive it due to an international treaty rather than policy. Good news is its stopping a couple of serious Russian boats getting in there

      • Been there, Aug 21,2021 saw HMS Blyth sail in for a final visit. Ramsey & Blyth decommissioned 4th Aug then handed over to Babcock, Rosyth 12 Aug to be modified for Ukrainian Navy.

        • I live a short drive from the place, not the nicest coastal town, enough said. It was a submarine base many years ago. WWI and WWII. Our first aircraft carrier or more correctly seaplane carrier HMS Ark Royal (later renamed HMS Pegasus) was built there in 1914. I just found that out today.
          The former HMS Blyth M111 was originally slated for sale to an undisclosed none european destination, then changed to Romania. Now she is heading for Ukraine, allegedly. A shame, we could use something like that to intercept/sink/deter invasion by illegals on the south coast. A couple of 50cal browning M2’s would do the job nicely.

  5. Similar to Germany it seems.

    French President Emmanuel Macron has detailed plans for a major boost to the armed forces, to meet modern threats including Russia’s war in Ukraine.

    The next seven-year budget would increase to €413bn (£360bn) from 2024-30, up from €295bn, he said.

    First France had to repair and restock its armed forces, then transform them, he told soldiers at Mont-de-Marsan airbase in southwest France.

    “We must not do the same with more, we have to do better and differently.”
    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has prompted Western countries to review military spending – and in many cases, increase it significantly.

    • Except Germany is now rowing back on when it thinks it’ll meet its 2% target. The German government are a joke at the moment.

      • A very pro Russian joke. I wonder what dodgy deal they have done with Putin around not allowing the supply of L2 tanks?

    • Macron is just spouting out what their new head of the French General Staff said in a speech in 2021. Namely that France needed to work on its industrial military base so damaged equipment can be retrieved and rapidly repair. Inventory of missiles, ammunition, drones need to be increased massively and that adequate spare parts need to be in stock to keep troops, ships, aircraft on station and in the fight.
      There is likely to be an uptick in cyber, intelligence and some specials forces as well as future combat aircraft and next generation MBT programmes.
      In essence, like Germany sorting out the mess and malaise that had became embedded in most NATO countries at the end of the cold war.
      I wish the UK would announce a similar programme otherwise in the 2030s our armed forces will be ranked 4th or 5th in NATO behind France, Germany, Poland,

      • We certainly need an uplift in spending and something to show for it.

        I was all in favour or Leopard 2 a while back but happy to be corrected now after this current debarkle with Germany and aim for products from Hanwa instead.

        They seem to cover all that we require for the Army in terms of their 5th-generation IFVs, MBTs, and self-propelled artillery.

        Moreover, they can deliver on time and on budget. Poland has already started to receive some of their MBTs and self-propelled artillery, Challenger 3 will not be seen until the end of this decade.

        As for Ajax….

        20.10.2022

        Already Ready: Hanwha Defense shipped the first 24 K9A1 Thunder ACSs and 10 K2 Black Panther tanks to Poland

        • One of the major advantages the K2 has over the Leopard, is the suspension. The Leopard uses torsion bars, whilst the K2 uses semi-active hydro-pneumatics like Challenger, but more advanced.

          Why is this a major advantage? Well for two reasons. Firstly the K2’s semi-active suspension gives a much smoother ride. Which is not only good for the crew, but is significantly more important when engaging targets on the move. But perhaps one of its biggest advantage is that the suspension arms are self contained suspension units and fitted to the outside of the hull. So if the tank hits a mine and the suspension is damaged it’s more easily replaced and gets back in to action sooner.

          With a Leopard, the torsion bar is inside the hull. Which means if the protruding bit in the swing arm gets damaged and therefore requires a new bar as a replacement. You have to extricate it through the hull. If the bar gets twisted or bent due to the explosive force. It normally cannot be pulled out, but needs cutting out, usually by an oxy torch. Therefore possibly turret and engine out and floor up. Not a quick job.

          The K2 also has a party trick due to its suspension. It can alter its ride height and attitude on the fly. Not only can it be made to lean left or right, but also lean forwards or backwards. This adds additional depression and elevation to the main gun, past the normal -10 and +20 degrees.

  6. Interesting article. Some points to consider :-
    1. Under the terms of the Montreux Treaty they cannot go through the straits during wartime. They can’t even use the “going back to home port” exemption because they have never been there.
    2.Even if they could get to the Black Sea they probably wouldn’t get very far unless heavily escorted by Sea and Air power. Russia does still have the most powerful surface Fleet in the area.
    3.What they will be useful for is clearing up afterwards, both sides have deployed mines.
    4.The RN and most western navies are moving away from direct minesweeping to Autonomous Unmanned systems deployed from Motherships. The existing sweepers are too old, small and manpower heavy compared to a OSV like MV Island Crown. So giving them to Ukraine makes sense because getting the Ukraine Grain shipments back up to full pelt will be a high priority post war.

    Now for the bad bit.
    Which idiot decided to broadcast the fact that we have 2 Ukrainian Warships operating in the U.K ?
    Just painted a great big bulls eye on Rosyth and the surrounding waters.
    Russia isn’t exactly afraid of mounting covert ops on NATO territory and if they avoid collateral damage we will do …………..
    And if those 2 ships venture into international waters they are fair game to be sunk; that in the U.K. is 12 miles.
    So I think the next thing we will see is a Russian Warship operating off the East Coast of Scotland and Bears over the North Sea.

    I aplaud our Government for helping the Ukraine and pre loading them with MCM ready for the peacetime cleanup is far sighted, but can they look up the word COVERT 😡

    • regarding opsec, Its fine to let Russia know that as it’d be found out quickly enough and it’s been a fact that the Minesweepers were to be sold to the Ukrainians, hence anyone knowledgable in defence and intelligence would already be aware of these ships and their rough locations. Russia isn’t afraid of covert ops but we’re talking about the past when NATO wasn’t as heavily guarded and the target was usually an individual i.e salisbury. 2 Navy ships? Thats quite a target to reach and destroy, much less transport the weapons capable of destroying them compared to salisbury which theyu probably had Novichok in a jar or something.

      But if the Russians do try soemthhing it’ll be Article 5, Germany won’t be able to weasel out of it and the Russian forces would be faces the full might of NATO. So no I think those 2 ships are rather safe.

      • I tend to agree but Article 5 doesn’t ensure all NATO Countries suddenly join up to fight a war on your behalf only that they are under some pressure to at least support you substantively but not forcibly. In an instance such as that it’s difficult to determine beforehand exactly what overt support would be given and by how many. Turkey would do little I assume other than verbally criticise and who knows precisely Germany and France would do and others would take their lead from them and the US. That said it would be desperate stuff from Russia but by no means totally discounted on previous form and if they did want to ‘punish’ and make a warning shot then clearly they would claim they were acceptable targets a little short of targeting Ukrainian forces being trained in NATO Countries but in theory either if seriously desperate could be seen if they were willing to escalate as testing the water short of a certain act of war against NATO after all trying to split western unity is and has always been their prime objective and we saw how poor responses were post Salisbury especially initially.

      • If you just sink 2 Ukrainian ships in a British Port I don’t see how that constitutes an attack on a NATO member. If killing a U.K. citizen in Salisbury didn’t trigger it I don’t think this would.
        What will be interesting is the outcome of the pipeline explosions !
        Just bear in mind that Article 5 has only been triggered once and that was a year after 2977 US citizens were killed.
        It seems to be a matter of scale.
        Either way I hope MI5 and the SB have their eyes and ears open.

  7. Russia doesn’t have a blue water navy and struggle to supply Brown water navy. Russia doesn’t have a blue SKY Air force .

    • Well in that case what are firing cruise missiles at Odessa Oblast from the Black Sea. Just because UA sank the Moskva and several other ships doesn’t mean Russia doesn’t have naval superiority in the Black Sea. They still have Missile armed Corvettes, Kilo class submarines and heavy bombers all of which carry (and have been firing) Kalibr Cruise missiles at Ukraine out of range of UA forces.
      What we all tend to forget is Russia has been unable to build any large Blue water ships since the early 90’s, because the Big ships were all built in Ukraine.
      To make up for that Russia has slowly built up numbers of smaller very heavily armed corvettes such as the Buyan, Buyan M suitable for Green Water or Littoral operations and a few modern frigates / destroyers.
      In addition Russia does have the unfortunate capability to move corvette sized vessels from the Baltic or Caspian via the Inland Waterways which link the Baltic to the Sea of Azov and the Caspian via Rivers and canals (Google Unified Deep Water System).
      So unfortunately the Russians have had a very Bloody nose but can still dominate the Black Sea.

      • Yes and if Russian as many suspect damaged the Baltic pipelines close to NATO territory then one presumes you can’t rule out that they have the capability to sabotage other targets in our waters risky as it would be. Hey they killed one of our divers in our own harbour once after all.

  8. Has there been any news on the p50u ships that were being constructed at Rosyth, these would provide a decent counter to russian corvettes in black sea , I think originally we would build 2 with remaining 6 in Ukraine, I would hope we could build all 8 now and deliver ASAP. Could Babcock utilise any other UK Yard to speed up build.

  9. So i was in town the other week and came across Warships international fleet review, having never come across it, decided to purchase it and have a quick butchers. Most impressed with this happy snap inside appologies for the quality of the join.

    • Been a subscriber to that journal for over 12 years now. Excellent quality and informative piece of work. Can’t recommend it enough.

    • Wow that must of taken the whole local Aussie football team and their Ute’s to pull them that far out the sea!
      That shipyard a beast.

  10. ‘<i>the construction of naval bases on the Azov … is also planned </i>’
    Good to see that they remain optomistic about getting access to the Azov again.

    • Hasnt it been pretty much running scared of the Ukraine land based anti ship missiles. I read Russia had kept it at distance ever since the sinking. As such mine hunters could operate near Ukraine waters uncontested

  16. The assistance of the United Kingdom in the construction of naval bases on the Azov and the Black Sea is also planned.

    Assisting them in getting a naval base on the Azov Sea might take a little while.

  17. I wonder what armament the Ukrainians will put on them?
    I looks like Estonia swapped the 30mm, mini guns and machine guns for a twin 23mm, couple of 50cal brownings and some MG3 machine guns.

  18. Good Morning from a hot and humid Durban.
    Whilst there are some obvious plusses to the introduction of unmanned mine hunters there are also some minuses-including the fact that they still need to be controlled and monitored elsewhere by humans. Conventionals are a more versatile armed(albeit lightly) ships that have been used as additional eyes and ears assisting in rescues at sea and showing the flag so not sure of the bottom line of the balance sheet here. An analogy is the rush to electric vehicles-refuelled in the main by fossil fuel burning charge facilities, and prone a-la-Tesla to some serious issues in weather extremes, ongoing range restrictions and questions as to the downside of some of the materials used in their manufacture-particularly the mining of lithium and its affects on the environment.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here