Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Well done HMS Richmond!

Supportive Bloke

Excellent – another UK system proved effective.

Cheaper per shot than A15 too.

Now for the ER & MR versions.


No . Spend money thats short on getting more on board its new ships and T45


Agreed, the focus of all available cash should be on the replacements- what we have in the water now is sufficient for the here and now.


I have seen a few people say this but I can’t seem to find a cost for Sea Ceptor per missile! Do you know what price different is between Aster 15 and Sea Ceptor?


Well done to all involved. I just hope there’s a plan for cutting the supply of these UAV’s and missiles from Iran to the Houthis. Otherwise this could turn into an indefinite commitment. It doesn’t need a conspiracy theorist to see a plan from the otherside. China predominantly, playing out here.


There already is enforceable UN Security council sanction on arms deliveries to Yemen, meaning vessels may be boarded in the high seas.
China voted for it. Brazil, Ireland, Mexico, Norway were abstentions


Talkon UKDJ about using five missiles to down two drones? Is that correct? Checking here as I trust this site more.

Zue Gaspar

A concern of mine as well. Videos show 5 launches, presumably all targeting those 2 drones. If that is the case, I’m wondering what system could be at fault for the 3 misses, or alternatively why 5 were fired.

I hear the engagement occurred within eye shot, had the Artisan radar not stopped rotating then the CAMM may have then had to be slaved to some of HMS Richmond’s secondary radars to fill in for the Artisans lacking track. Artisan’s only a single panel radar that slews at 30RPM, I believe that means part of the sky would lack coverage intermittently in 1 second intervals. Perhaps the secondary radars are at fault for not providing accurate targeting data, even though ideally Artisan would have dual panels.

HMS Richmond may not have utilized her secondary radars at all however, in which case – within that 1 second the Artisan was not on target, a launched CAMM could have been headed somewhere the target was not. In which case the CAMMs terminal homing sensors may not have been able to pick up the target, by which point when track would be reacquired by the Artisan – the CAMM may have already flown past the target.

Perhaps the fault lay in the CAMMs propulsion or other parts instead. Or maybe as with the Hessen, user error was the cause – perhaps the CMS HMI could be improved.

Last edited 4 months ago by Zue Gaspar
Paul T

What secondary Radar ? HMS Richmond has Artisan for AAW and that is it as far as im aware.


Yes. ‘Secondary’ radars are for navigation now . The Sea wolf configuration had its own fire control guidance radars but they are removed and a data link used instead for Ceptor guidance from the new Artisan 3D radar system.

While the radar is 30 rev per minute , the combat system holds all the tracks in its computer memory between refreshes , and this is a slow drone which isnt manoeuvring much. Tracks arent lost like you suggest

Last edited 4 months ago by Duker
Zue Gaspar

I would imagine the Type 23s would have radars for navigation or weather or what-not, though perhaps I’m being presumptuous. The Type 45s have the Type 1047s and Type 1048s for example.


I heard 4 launches in the video and assume they were double tapping the targets. The ranges they called out as they were firing were 6.35km then 6.24km then 7.35km and 7.35km. If they were firing one at a time and waiting to see if they were hit you would expect the range to significantly change between shots.

Last edited 4 months ago by Watcherzero

Good catch


It is the first combat use so caution is a good thing. I wonder when(if?) we will learn wheher the first missiles hit?


Most navies and missile systems use a two missiles per target approach..seems like sea ceptor is the same as most contemporaries…


I have seen posters particularly on UKDJ claim the US launches two missiles due to limitations in their missile tracking and the UK would only need to launch one missile, usually referring to Sea Viper, which never made the slightest bit of sense to me.
The main purpose of the second missile is contingency if anything fails on the first missile, its a little late if something goes wrong and your seconds away from losing a ship to an anti ship missile.


Yes the sea viper system is a single target single shot system, the US us a 2 standard missile per target’s the difference in performance of the two systems apparently..the sea viper is a near guaranteed intercept within its engagement envelope, the an SM2 is just a high chance of interception so the USN use two.


The UK defense journal is pretty much a joke. I wouldn’t believe it goddamn thing you hear there.


Not a very clear video. The timeline looks off and its possibly repeating the engagement. They call a take on two contacts for sure. Number of missiles out was definitely 2. Possibly a Salvo shot or other contacts where engaged.

Yes, you can use secondary target sources, but Artisan is the main radar to use. The Ceptor uses a data link to update the missile with target data to get it within its own homing head basket. Radar rotation time isn’t an issue

Supportive Bloke

I think part of it is a timeline repeat.

So first we hear the launches externally then we get, part of, the ops voice comms over the second pair of launches.

It is all very heavily edited, understandably.

None the less a very confusing video if you don’t start with that understanding.

Could easily have been fixed with a timeline or explainer titles…..


Doesn’t help that the image goes pitch black between launches.
On UKDJ it was suggested that one of the launches might have been a soft kill countermeasures, but you can clearly see a reflection in the water moving towards the starboard bow in every launch sequence.


To be fair, for a missile never tested before in action, at 6 kms out, in the dark, with DS30s as the back-up, I’d launch a couple per drone too. This is the crew’s first shot in action too, if I’m not mistaken?
It may be that they go down to one missile per target as they gain a bit of confidence in the weapons system.


Agreed and I want them to be cautious.

I have heard various suggestions for up arming them against drones including doubling the DS30s and adding a Phalanx.

I think at the moment it is just one DS30 and 2 x GPMGs a side, all run by mark 1 eyeball.


I think the DS30s at least have E/O sights that are pretty good, although not sure how the servos are when it comes to fast aiming at airborne targets. Not terrible, I imagine, as I’m assuming that’s the gun type that HMS Diamond used to shoot down a drone when she was on station. They also have a couple of mounts for .50 cal machine guns in addition to the GPMGs (according to Wikipedia).
I think that’s probably good enough for the threats they’re facing, I’m really wary of trying to fit out ships that are going out of service in the next few years. That said, it may be worth revisiting the armament of the T26 and T31 (more the former). If we haven’t placed orders for the 5″ gun for the batch 2 T26s, I’d like to see it changed for the 57 mm that the T31s are getting, and the DS30s switched to the same 40 mm Bofors as well.


Would leave the Batch 1 T26 with an orphan trio of 5 inch guns, at that point they’d be a waste. Pretty sure they’ll be sticking with the 127mm
And the 30mm mounts are on the rear of the ship near the hangar, I doubt they’d support or have the room for 40mm.


In all honesty, I’d be OK with only having the sub-class with 5″ guns; Their range isn’t long enough to be able to provide NGFS safely, and I’m not sure what surface ship targets we’d want to be engaging with it. If it’s bigger, then we hit it at longer range with AShMs, if it’s smaller then a 57 mm would do just fine- if Sea Ceptor hadn’t already sorted it.
Fair enough on the 30 mm, I wasn’t aware where they were located so may not be possible to swap out. That said, I’ve always been a fan of the CTA40, which is smaller in form factor thana normal 40 mm gun, so could fit. Probably not, though.


The Navy wouldn’t be happy with a change halfway through. Pretty sure they won’t be swapping out the 5 inch.


I’m quite sure you’re right, and my comments are more wishful thinking than anything.
Just seems a shame that the gunnery armament (which is now becoming more relevant again) is going to be less than optimal from day one.


There are some great opportunities with the 5inch gun as an ASW tool…the kingfisher rounds that are being developed can us a five inch gun to swiftly set a line of passive sensors…dump a load of active sensors on a target to flush it out or even dump a load of depth charge patterns on a target. So the 5in is still probably the correct weapon for the T26.

Last edited 4 months ago by Jonathan

With modern ammunition and fire control, the 5-inch gun also has a not insignificant AAW capability, at least against slow moving targets like drones. Obviously I’m not sure on the veracity, but I remember seeing some reporting that the USS Carney used its main gun when engaging some of the Houthi drones back when it was essentially alone at the beginning of this crisis, before Diamond and the French frigate arrived on station.


Yes I believe the 5inch gun has reasonable Anti air’s not going to be much cop against very fast high agility targets…but that is what missile systems are for as well as close in Weapon systems ( 20-40mm). But for drones etc it’s probably pretty good…it’s also still got its ASuW function…add in the future ASW function and it’s a proper swizz army knife for larger combatants….I like the 57mm for the T31 as the RN has specifically specified a combatant than can manage a large number of close range targets ( essentially an enclosed seas combatant) but for a Carrier battle group escort a 5inch is probably better.

I would like to see a 57mm on the type 45 but that is because they are older ships and it’s not worth all the effort of trying find the space and extra work of replacing the 4.5in with a 5inch and as an AAW ship that’s going to be down the threat axis of an AAW threat the 57mm may be good for some self defence…as is the 4.5inch has no AAW capability any more ( they removed the software support for AAW engagement) and needs removing.


Agreed that 57mm would be a good fit for T45, especially once all the T23s are out of service leaving an orphan fleet of 6 4.5 inch guns with no AAW capability.

I think T31 has good potential to become a respectable workhorse for the RN, especially if a decent missile armament and numbers beyond the initial 5 are committed to.

Billy Baker

You were right, this site has worse censorship than North Korea it seems. Just how many comments got deleted here again. It seems like Duker’s site after all.


I have had a very resonable and helpful exchange with them about it.

When the person accused me of lying I could have just complained and gotten their comments deleted.

Instead I allowed myself to be provoked into a suggestion that contraviened their guidelines. Probably the intent and I fell for it. So we learn.

billy baker

Censored again !


How did the Dutch and French warships down the drones? What weapons were used?


French posted in twitter pictures of missiles and the 76mm. So might be both systems and they say 4 were downed also with an air interception, might be French fighters in Djibuti.
Germans and Italians already downed drones with 76mm.

No details on Dutch.


The Dutch are not in theater yet. The first Dutch frigate just left port today and won’t be in the area for the next two weeks probably. You are talking about the Danish navy with their Iver Huitveldt frigate. They probably used ESSM Block 1 missiles.


Correct my mistake, Danish.

They have quite heavy artillery too 2x76mm 1 x35mm. Yes i have read in a Danish media they don’t have Standard missiles so only ESSM

Last edited 4 months ago by AlexS

They have both, 32 Mk41 ( SM-2 size) and 12 Mk56 ( each 4 ESSM size) VLS

Denmark not having SM-2 missiles on board ?
I find that hard to believe

Last edited 4 months ago by Duker

Make that 24 Mk56. Not shown is the MU 90 torpedo tubes
Clearly Britain doesn’t have such a requirement for any of it’s T31 frigates based on Iver Huitfeld

Last edited 4 months ago by Duker

Danish media says there are no Standards in service for their frigates and was pointed that was an issue.

FMS notice is not confirmation of sale.


As I said – Find hard to believe and telling the media about the exact missile load is even harder
Even includes image of the successful launch of a missile you say they dont have


I am only saying what appear in Danish newspapers.


Well thats the difference between you and me. The FMS sale was a clue to me that they had bought, and the Janes story fleshed it out why they were very late to have them in service- $$$
Sounds like you still want to believe the popular press

Billy Baker

The French Ship was raising it’s white flag when all of a sudden a drone snagged its prop.


Why the gratuitous insult?
We work well together and the MN and the RN are good partners

Billy Baker



Totally blinding Richmond.


Hms Richomd is a T23 frigate and as such doesn’t have the Sea Ceptor system. It has VLSW ((Vertical Launch Seawolf).
So it must have been a T45.
Pretty naff reporting in my opinion.


I think you may have to check facts before you post . All type 23s had VLSW from launch. Richmond has sea ceptor which was probably added during or after it’s lifex upgrade.


Please, sea wolf was removed from service in 2020..all the type 23s are now armed with sea ceptor…the type 45s are not armed with sea ceptor.


Type 45s are not armed with Sea Ceptor….YET ???????? They better follow through and add them like promised


No, the contract was only announced like a year or 2 ago. They have to install a whole new VLS silo for it.

Paul T

HMS Defender will be the first to be so equipped – she is in refit now but don’t expect to see her back in action till 2025/26 at the earliest.


The reporting is way more accurate than your ridiculously counter-factual post.


Calm yourself.


Incorrect, it was replaced, she has Sea Ceptor after a recent refit and upgrade.


Many types of weapons are used in this “Red Sea drones war”.

CAMM worked, great. If any improvements needed, we will see it as “CAMM blk2” requirement, which may come in due course.

Other navies use 76mm guns. Looks like working well against such drones. Although there is DARTS guided rouns for 76mm, I understand they are using normal proxy-fused ammo? Such ammo was a powerful AAW tool against slowish air threats.

As RN already selected 57 mm 3P gun and 40 mm 3P guns on T31, will they be added to T45 and T26? How about replacing the 4.5 inch gun on T45 with a 57mm gun, and their two 30 mm guns with two 40mm 3P guns?


I agree with you on updating the Type 45s Gunnery systems. The guns themselves are not 3P…its just the ammunition but I get what you mean 😉 40mm/L70 has APFSDS anti tank ammunition available that could penetrate Light Cruiser Armour (100mm belt eg) in addition to Proxy and 3P ammo. The 57mm Bofors Mark 3 is ideal for an air defence destroyer as it is able to provide continuous fire with 200 round magazines with 30 second reloads using an intermediate magazine system. The downside is the 57mm is not useful for Naval Gunfire support and is very limited for Anti-ship (given the Type 45s role this isn’t a big issue)

Last edited 4 months ago by Samuel
Paul T

With the threat demographic changing now with the advent of Drones, i wonder if there are discussions taking place within the RN regarding the Type 31 Gun suite – 76mm has proved capable out to 8- 10 km and hits the sweet spot before Missiles are needed,57mm might not give as much reassurance in that respect.


Guns all the way! Contrary to Italians that heavily invest in AA guns in their ships with radar directors and electo optics(EO), the French only coupled their 76 with radar director and AA EO in their 2 air defence frigates.
Now from Naval News seems they will have AA EO in all their frigates. Still don’t fixes the issue of lacking radar directors in those ships

In response to the escalating threat posed by kamikaze unmanned surface vehicles (USV) and unmanned air vehicles (UAV), the French Navy has issued an “urgent operational requirement” to fit Safran Electronics and Defense’s PASEO XLR extra long-range naval optronic identification & fire control system on all its first rank vessels. The move is a direct “RETEX” (return of experience) of the situation in the Red Sea. 

Meanwhile, on 9 March 2024, the French air defense frigate destroyed a number of UAVs using its 76mm main gun. This was likely a first as previous engagements by both Languedoc (which hased been deployed on location since the end of November but just came back to her homeport in Toulon) and Alsace involved ASTER missiles. The destruction of the UAVs by gun fire was likely possible (or at least eased) thanks to the PASEO XLR (and the STIR fire control radar fitted on both FREMM DA ships).


The 76mm has a bit more range (especially with Strales and DART ammunition) and is more effective in the Anti Ship role, the 57mm with a below deck fitting has substantially more ammunition with 200 rounds per magazine with a 30 second reload with intermediate magazine. TBH I would have chosen both with the 76mm as the Main gun and 2x 57mm Bofors instead of the 40mm Bofors


76mm also have a revolving magazine that can be continuously supplied even when firing.

Btw news on German missile interception, it seems the failure of Standard missile and also an ESSM missile was due to fire control not be prepared to deal with such slow air targets.


The SM missiles were fired at a high altitude US Reaper drone, which has a cruise speed of 160 kts .
Claim of ‘too slow’ doesnt add up and doesnt explain why they targeted the wrong altitude and user !
Surely they know the engagement envelope of their brand new SM-2.IIIA missiles, and the USN has had no problem using their SM-2 against slow Houthi drones.

Is these reports from ‘danish media’ who are clueless


If you don’t really know what you’re doing and you don’t really practice it often, sometimes things don’t work


57 and 40mm are BAE, I image they get a better deal buying those that 2 separate manufacturers


The 30mm guns are on small platforms, kinds doubt they’d support 40mms.
Dunno if the main gun will be replaced, certainly won’t be considered till the T23s retire.


The Royal Navy was at some point looking at upgrading the OPVs with a 76mm…nothing came of it but a 40mm shouldn’t be a big stretch for said OPV 🙂


Was talking about the gun platforms on the T45.

Still unlikely the OPVS will get such an upgrade though.

Bloke down the pub

I’m presuming that the video repeated the engagement and that it didn’t take five rounds to destroy two drones?


Excellent work! This is exactly what Sea Ceptor was designed for. This will hopefully be a very valuable validation of this weapon system for the Royal Navy, as well as, all of the other Sea Ceptor export customers, which in turn will hopefully drive future Procurement Contracts and further development of this System i.e., Missile Guidance Technologies, Quad-Packing and the future CAAM-MR Requirement.

I do hope that this operational firing of Sea Ceptor encourages the RN to move towards the standardisation of the Mk.41 VLS across its upcoming Type 31’s, to allow for routine Quad-Packing of Sea Ceptor, as well as, accelerated procurement of CAAM-ER. This is wishful thinking I know, but surly it would make sense to extend this Local Area Defence Capability.

Much as the Dedicated Sea Ceptor Mushroom Farm type soft cold launch VLS system has advantages in simplicity, cost and reduced gas efflux management, I feel that It hampers missile options flexibility and overall payload volume that Mk.41 offers, thus the Type 45’s will ultimately have a payload cap placed on them, after their armament upgrades have been completed. But anyway, it is really positive news that HMS Richmond’s crew can draw upon a successful operational engagement and validate the observed capabilities of a relatively new Missile system brought into service with confidence, albeit it is still early days in terms of confirming the full capability potential of Sea Ceptor.


Cold launch is the only method with sea ceptor/land ceptor and is used in the Mk41 with adapter as designed by LM

Supportive Bloke

I don’t think there is wishful thinking in saying that all RN escorts are to carry Sea Ceptor – that is what has been announced!

Sea Ceptor is pretty mature it has been around since 2017 so it is well understood with a decent number of test firings.

It is also worth bearing in mind that Sea Ceptor is really a replacement for Sea Wolf and Sea Dart combined into one package.

billy baker

Love this place, such great articles, shame about all the comments being removed every single time that a couple of sad acts report them.

love the UK, love free speech, shame those values are not shared here.

Seriously chaps, get a grip, it’s not good to censor free speech and independent thinking., it just makes you look amateurish and out of touch.

Anyway, that’s my rant over, delete this like all the other stuff you seem to enjoy doing, I’m out of here now, hope this comment section continues to massage the few massive Ego’s that inhabit it.

See you soon Duker and X.


The moderators say all the time that this is NOT a chat room for off topic stuff- like you have just done here, nor is it for personal attacks.
For me its a great bargain, wonderful articles for free as long as obey the rules.


Which is carrying the party line for the UK. Any disapproval or questioning gets deleted but it is a beacon of free speech compared to UK. DJ

[…] dovada maturității și eficacității sale în condiții reale de luptă în Marea Roșie (sursa Navy Lookout). Astfel, pe 9 martie 2024, undeva între 4:00 AM și 8:20 AM (ora locală), HMS Richmond a angajat […]