The Shrunken Royal Navy

[scottystitch]

21 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

... I didnt know Harpoon could be launched from a truck.

 

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14214005/taiwan-coastal-defense-harpoon-missile

 

Best

Scott.

[Legend]

39 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14214005/taiwan-coastal-defense-harpoon-missile

 

Best

Scott.

 Cheers Scott. I don’t think we have any though! 

[scottystitch]

14 minutes ago, Legend said:

 Cheers Scott. I don’t think we have any though! 

No, that's correct. We don't have any.  

 

I understand there is a Dutch mobile launcher, however, that can fire Harpoon.  Maybe (if the land-based Harpoon story is correct) it's in conjunction with a launcher like that?

 

Best

Scott.

 

EDIT: Found it. It was Denmark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Danish_Navy (Ctrl F and search for MOBA)  Not sure if it's still operational so it may be irrelevant.

 

Scott.

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by scottystitch

[Bon Accord]

5 hours ago, Legend said:

 

Well I'm not quite believing it , but there is a YouTube film that says we are sending Harpoon , but apparently truck launched !

 

I'm not really believing because as far as I'm aware not all Type 45s have Harpoon , so surely we would arm our own ships first . They really dont have much offensive weaponry . Secondly I didnt know Harpoon could be launched from a truck.

 

 

During Op Telic we were using Phalanx bolted onto the back of flatbed artics as a somewhat desperate last ditch measure to provide base defence from incoming unpleasantness, the systems having been robbed from the RN/RFA as I remember.
Must admit I did a proper double take when one drove past!

[KeithMacdonald]

On 29/07/2021 at 04:12, OnTheBranchline said:

Yes, but what about St George's Island?

 

Bermuda or Looe?

 

 

[peanuts]

 iirc didnt the argies  manage to launch an Exocet from a childrens climbing frame during the falklands war hitting hms glamorgan  with enough ingenuity anything is possible ?

[billbedford]

11 hours ago, scottystitch said:

NEDIT: Found it. It was Denmark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Danish_Navy (Ctrl F and search for MOBA)  Not sure if it's still operational so it may be irrelevant.

 

 

It's not still in use, but then most of the equipment being sent to Ukraine seems to be past it's sell by date. 

[pete_mcfarlane]

The UK seems to have sent the Ukraine some Martlet missiles. There's a video doing the rounds of the shoulder launched version taking out a drone. Their main function is to take out (small) ships and boats, but they can also be used against drones, helicopters and lightly armoured vehicles (which probably includes most Russian tanks, based on recent form...)

[The Fatadder]

On 11/04/2022 at 09:45, Legend said:

I'm not really believing because as far as I'm aware not all Type 45s have Harpoon , so surely we would arm our own ships first . They really dont have much offensive weaponry . Secondly I didnt know Harpoon could be launched from a truck.

I wouldnt be so sure on that, if we have offered Harpoon to the Ukrainians their need would almost certainly trump that of the remaining 45s.  I would suspect given the quantities we have already shipped, the Army's stock of NLAW must be running very thin now.  

[Barry O]

Missile have a "use by" date so providing people with these in the knowledge that it saves the UK time and money to sort them out is very sensible thing to do. 

 

Baz

[Legend]

Reports this morning that the Russian Cruiser Moskva, their Black Sea Flagship,  is burning either because of a fire in ammunition (Russia) or strike by two Neptune missiles (Ukraine) . 

[polybear]

1 hour ago, Legend said:

Reports this morning that the Russian Cruiser Moskva, their Black Sea Flagship,  is burning either because of a fire in ammunition (Russia) or strike by two Neptune missiles (Ukraine) . 

 

And apparently all 500 crew are safe.  Yeah, right......

[JeremyC]

5 hours ago, Legend said:

Reports this morning that the Russian Cruiser Moskva, their Black Sea Flagship,  is burning either because of a fire in ammunition (Russia) or strike by two Neptune missiles (Ukraine) . 

Of course both reports could be correct, the ammunition fire being caused by the missile strike.

[The Fatadder]

46 minutes ago, JeremyC said:

Of course both reports could be correct, the ammunition fire being caused by the missile strike.

That was my first thought as well.  Has there been any confirmation that it’s now sunk?

 

great win for the Ukrainians either way 

[polybear]

5 hours ago, The Fatadder said:

That was my first thought as well.  Has there been any confirmation that it’s now sunk?

 

great win for the Ukrainians either way 

 

The Ruskies have now owned up to it having sunk "whilst under tow and due to choppy seas and the fire damage"; they're not admitting to it having been hit by missiles though.  I read a report earlier (sorry, I've lost the link) which claimed the Ukrainians harrased the ship with drones to distract them (and their defensive systems, presumably).  Seems to have worked, too.

[pete_mcfarlane]

What bemuses me is that the Russians seem to be implying that the ship was destroyed by a random onboard fire, rather that by enemy anti ship missiles. So claiming incompetence is preferable to admitting military setbacks?

 

At this rate they'll be claiming it was a deliberate plan to allow the ship to conduct special military operations against secret underwater Azov Nazi bases. 

[Ozexpatriate]

Is there any reporting about the relative location of where the Moskva "caught fire", where it was heading under tow and where it sank? (I'm assuming it was at sea *somewhere* in the Black Sea, but some reports I've seen are accompanied by satellite images from Sevastapol on April 7.)

 

1 hour ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

... claiming incompetence is preferable to admitting military setbacks?

I saw a similar opinion in a news report earlier today.

 

Loss of stability under tow in heavy seas after a fire is exactly what happened to Felicity Ace, the RO/RO carrying German cars that caught fire and sank off the Azores in March. It's easy to imagine stability problems after fighting a magazine fire (however it began) particularly if a lot of water (or possibly compartment flooding) was used in fire-fighting.

[polybear]

Some here - including a claim that the ship couldn't be evacuated due to storms and some 300 died.  Guesswork on the numbers, but if it was hit by two missiles then a much more believable story in my book:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/destruction-of-moskva-another-example-of-russian-military-failure/ar-AAWeha4?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=52b2484fdacd4361b4a57c92e6b682ba

[Legend]

7 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

Is there any reporting about the relative location of where the Moskva "caught fire", where it was heading under tow and where it sank? (I'm assuming it was at sea *somewhere* in the Black Sea, but some reports I've seen are accompanied by satellite images from Sevastapol on April 7.)

 

I saw a similar opinion in a news report earlier today.

 

Loss of stability under tow in heavy seas after a fire is exactly what happened to Felicity Ace, the RO/RO carrying German cars that caught fire and sank off the Azores in March. It's easy to imagine stability problems after fighting a magazine fire (however it began) particularly if a lot of water (or possibly compartment flooding) was used in fire-fighting.

it was in the Black Sea , Michael. There’s a satellite sighting of her just off Snake  Island on April 13th .  It’s certainly an interesting one . Got to spare a thought for anyone that’s lost their lives , even if they are Russian aggressors . But I bet there’s a lot of naval strategists and planners looking at this wondering how what was a relatively well protected large cruiser could be sunk by 2 missiles(allegedly but I’d say likely). From my old books when she was new as “Slava” she seems to have 6 30mm Gatling CIWS so pretty well protected as last line of defence . Lots of Surface to Air missiles too .   Interesting use of drones too if they were used to confuse defences . I think there’s a lot to learn from this one .

 

it seems that other units of the Black Sea fleet are now staying further out to sea , which further supports the fact it was a missile attack . 

[Metr0Land]

One report I saw said the Moskva's radar only had 180 degree coverage.  Can this be true?  The Ukrainians have certainly been creative in their tactics in this war.  If it's true the Moskva didn't have all round coverage then one explanation is the drone was a distraction to allow Neptune missiles in through the back door and/or the drone was grabbing their attention one way whilst also guiding the Neptunes.

[rocor]

I was just musing that, at the moment, the title of this thread could be 'The Shrunken Russian Navy'. 

[Metr0Land]

1 hour ago, rocor said:

I was just musing that, at the moment, the title of this thread could be 'The Shrunken Russian Navy'. 

 

FIFY

[pete_mcfarlane]

1 hour ago, rocor said:

I was just musing that, at the moment, the title of this thread could be 'The Shrunken Russian Navy'. 

Do you mean 'sunken'?

[rocor]

38 minutes ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

Do you mean 'sunken'?

When a navy has been partially sunk, then it has shrunk.

Edited April 15, 2022 by rocor
It sort of makes sense now.

[rocor]

In a little over a months time, the Russian navy will be able to celebrate their victory 117 years ago at the Battle of Tsushima. Or then again, maybe not.