The 3rd series of the Channel Five TV documentary Warship – Life at Sea, following HMS Northumberland on patrol inside the Arctic Circle, has revealed a Russian SSN collided with her towed array sonar. Here we take an overview of events and their context.
After briefly participating in the Joint Warrior/GROUPEX with the Carrier Strike Group (October 2020) off the east coast of Scotland, Northumberland was tasked to head north. Intelligence had been received that Russian submarine were heading out into the Atlantic from their bases around Murmansk. This is interesting in itself as it indicates that NATO is still more than capable of detecting Russian submarine movements early in their outbound voyages, most likely through a combination of SSNs operating in the Barents Sea, underwater acoustic sensor arrays, maritime patrol aircraft and satellite imagery.
The footage shows that Northumberland has been in contact with the Russian boat for some time. Clearly, the Type 2087 Towed Array Sonar (TAS) remains highly effective and able to detect submarines at long ranges. The passive element of the TAS is a thick rubber-coated tow cable, attached to a string of hydrophone elements that can be streamed from a reel on the quarter-deck through a small hole in the stern. The array can be up to about a mile in length, keeping it well away from any noise generated by the ship. It also allows the sensor to get well below thermal layers in the water column that may limit the noise that a hull-mounted sonar can detect. When streaming the TAS, the frigate is constrained in how she can manoeuvre.
Entering service in 2004, the 2087 (CAPTAS-4) is made by Thales and has gained a formidable reputation. It underwent a major technical refresh in 2017 and is still subject to ongoing incremental processing and AI software upgrades under the ASW Spearhead programme. It is planned that as the Type 23s are decommissioned, the 2087 equipment will eventually be migrated to the Type 26 replacements.
Northumberland appears to have been only using passive sonar (ie relying on noise emitted by the submarine). This may indicate that it was an older boat as the latest Russian submarines are much quieter and hard to detect using passive methods only. The CO decided to close the range to a few thousand yards to ensure that the submarine becomes aware that she has been detected by the frigate. The Type 23s are designed to be quiet and hard for submarines to detect when running on electric motors, power is provided by diesel generators sited well above the waterline. Deliberately letting the submarine know it has been detected is a way of signalling the hunter’s superiority and indicating that in a shooting war they would likely have been sunk some time ago. (Likely by a Sting Ray torpedo delivered by the embarked Merlin helicopter.)
To the obvious surprise of everyone in the ops room (followed by some nautical language), the submarine then manages to collide with the towed array. It is unclear whether this was a deliberate act in response to the embarrassment of detection or just an accident. There would be a modest risk to the submarine of wrapping the cable around its propellors or catching on hydroplanes. Although unlikely to stop the boat or impair its control, a snagged cable could create unwanted noise. Contrary to the suggestion of many media headlines, the ship itself was not hit but the impact with the TAS was loud and clear in the Ops room and it is likely there was damage to the TA, even if it was not severed.
The Royal Navy is no stranger to the Barents Sea and the freezing and stormy waters in the Arctic Circle. The bravery and endurance of the naval and merchant sailors serving on the notorious Arctic convoys of World War Two is one of the outstanding feats of naval history. In the Cold War that followed, the RN and USN began to send conventional and then nuclear submarines to gather intelligence on the expanding Soviet Navy close to their home waters. The majority of RN submariners serving at the height of the Cold War were involved in demanding patrols in the Barents Sea, what they called, “going up around the corner”. Hunting and tailing Soviet submarines to record the sound signatures and gather intelligence on operating procedures was the primary goal. These tense patrols yielded enormous intelligence and gave NATO a major advantage in countering the huge Soviet submarine fleet but often entailed considerable risk. ASW frigates have always been deployed in the North Atlantic, North Sea and GIUK gap, although more rarely in the Barents Sea.
At least two Royal Navy submarines are known to have sustained serious damage after underwater collisions with Russian boats they were trailing. There were probably other incidents involving US, RN and Soviet boats that are not in the public domain or were officially attributed to “collisions with icebergs”. (There may have been collisions between RN warships and submarines but if so, they have not been publicly documented). In 1982, just after her service in the Falklands, SSN HMS Conqueror participated in ‘Operation Barmaid’. She was fitted with a pair of remote-controlled heavy steel cutting blades and television cameras specifically for the purpose of cutting and stealing a Russian TAS. She succeeded in her mission, taking the array from a Polish-flagged vessel and bringing the ‘trophy’ back to Faslane for analysis by US experts.
Barents-Sea-MapThe development of towed array sonars in the 1980s allowed the frigates to become a more effective contributor to tracking the underwater threat. The number of Russian submarines is far smaller but today the RN has just 8 frigates with a TAS ‘tail’ and allocates at least one to be active or at very high readiness as Fleet Ready Escort (FRE), sometimes overlapping with Towed Array Patrol Ship (TAPS) duty in northern waters.
The RN rarely comments on these ongoing ASW operations or only provides very vague summaries. Allowing this documentary crew onboard Northumberland was a great decision and is helping to shine a light on the shadow war with the Russian navy that the RN (and NATO allies) have been continuously engaged with at varying levels of intensity since the 1950s.
In a typically bland statement confirming events, the MoD said: “In late 2020 a Russian submarine being tracked by HMS Northumberland came into contact with her towed array sonar. The Royal Navy regularly tracks foreign ships and submarines in order to ensure the defence of the United Kingdom.” The work is arguably one of the RNs most important tasks but TAPS deployments in northern waters are not much fun for ship’s companies which have to endure long and sometimes boring periods, often in foul weather and freezing conditions. There are also limited options for a run ashore – short visits to Scottish ports, occasionally Norway (£8 a pint!) or Iceland. There can however be great professional satisfaction to be gained from being right at the ‘sharp end’, conducting operations with a challenging adversary and contributing in a very tangible way to UK security.
The TV Documentary was filmed in Autumn 2020 and follows two previous series recorded on HMS Trenchant and HMS Duncan. It is very watchable but obviously edited for maximum dramatic effect with music and excitable narration at times which sailors who do the job for a living may find slightly irritating. This style of documentary may not be to the taste of the purist but is generally effective at keeping viewers engaged. This first episode of this series showed HMS Northumberland monitoring the Russian AGI Viktor Leonov attempting to gather electronic intelligence from the Carrier Strike group. The next episodes promise to show more encounters with Russian ships and aircraft. There was also another twist in the story – the entire ship’s company subsequently contracted COVID and were forced to abandon the patrol early, returning to Devonport on 23rd December, spending Christmas in isolation.
We need a ‘frigate’ up there all the time.
Isnt that what ‘hunter killer’ submarines are for…. wide area patrol for other submarines with watchful waiting
The entire RN couldn’t protect the UK territory never mind our over sea territorys..
Hi, I think your spot on, as the security of our sovereign maritime territories particularly around the UK itself, should be a primary focus with ideally multiple ASW Frigates and SSNs working in conjunction with each other. I feel that during the current instability with our waters being continuously probed this should take far more precedence than sending the carriers half way around the world to make political statements.
The BBC headline this morning was “Russian submarine collides with British Frigate” It always pays to find out the true facts.
At least no submarine will never collide with the sonar on a Type 31!
On a serious note though, I wonder if a lack of submarines is causing us to have to use frigates in the Barents sea? There are typically only 2 submarines on station at any time. One has been with the carrier group in recent months and the other is probably East of Suez acting as a cruise missile carrier (a total waste of a £1.3bn asset; the Russian’s have got this right in putting land attack missiles on small vessels so you don’t waste a costly and valuable asset on that mission).
The decision to get rid of SS’s in the RN in the 1990’s was understandable at the time in the context of believing that the cold war was over. However, a very resurgent Russian bear means that they have become relevant again. The £2bn spent on the Type 31 Offshore Patrol Vessel (I refuse to call the T31 a frigate) would buy 3/4 SS’s by buying an existing design (German?). That would have released two towed array frigates for other operations. We could of course have had 7 SS’s for the money spent on MR4 or 11 for the cost of Ajax. Still, money spent on five T31 OPV’s, zero Maritime Patrol Aircraft or an armoured vehicle that makes the crew ill is a far more sensible use of resources (or at least it is to politicians who are only interested in spending the defence procurement budget on job creation).
The RN have had a frigate presence in the Barents on and off since at least the early 1980’s, irrespective of whether or not any NATO SSNs have been on task or not. Nimrod’s were also used to conduct patrols ‘up round the corner’ during the height of the cold war. This is nothing new, we are just returning to what the RN used to do prior to the collapse of the ‘Eastern bloc’ as it were?
The omission of SSKs in our fleet is a major loss in our capabilities, as our 6, later 7 SSNs are not enough to fulfill all the tasking they receive.
Thanks for the info. The article suggested frigates up there were unusual. I appreciate you putting that right
Certain O-boats were kitted out just for that role.
A 9th T26 would allow us 1 ‘oop north’ and 2 to follow the carrier.
Oberon and Opportune are two that spring to mind, you are teasing, harking back to a navy that could muster some 20+ SMs not counting the boomers. Alas, we will probably never get to those sort of numbers again, nor will we have a tot again unless it’s a special occasion.?
Ah what memories.
The numbers back in the olden days were scary. PLAN will be a bigger threat than the old Soviet navy. Yet Western governments don’t seem to realise the threat.
I think, or know they do, they just don’t broadcast it…
I agree the coffee smell has percolated.
Even a Boris-the-clown has realised that RN needs urgent building up.
Fortunately Parker happened and a strategy to do-something was already brewing.
It is much easier when the top man says do-something and the something is actually ready to go – note I did not say oven ready!
Otherwise you end up with the politicians syllogism:
– We must do something!
– This is something therefore we must do it!
Back to my morning coffee.
They aren’t interested in true defence only defence as a way of making money for industry and pushing political agendas.
For Britain and the European nationans in Nato the threat is practically zero.
Taiwan spends less on GDP for defence than UK or Australia, that shows their priorities even the risk for them is much higher.
I wonder if that is partly because few countries are actually willing to sell arms to Taiwan? Even the big recent sales from the US – 66 F16’s and 400 harpoons – are not exactly state of the art.
Oh……….
Yeah, China is a threat MASSIVELY Atleast non militarily. They have fingers in so many pies and are abusing the poor money hungry nations…The Chinese have even got involved in our nuclear energy! Madness….Chinese nuclear plants are a funking disaster! Leaking radiation everywhere… The French I can trust, they are building half the parts as we lost that capability…again madness, but Atleast the French are half competent.
Is it not 70 +/- years ago that a USN nuc boat transited the Pacific to the Atlantic under the Arctic?
I think we should be very worried about the PLAN..
Type 31 should be fitted with an Mk.41as they will often operate East of Suez. That would relieve some pressure on the Astutes. A cheap hull sonar should be fitted to the T31 and T45 to be able to at least protect themselves from subs.
How much protection would it actually provide? I suspect a sub would hear and launch weapons on those 2 classes well outside the range of a “cheap hull sonar”. The protection for the T45 comes from being part of a task group. The T31 is designed for high end war fighting.
A hull sonar can hear the torpedo from range and make it a lot easier to “dodge” it. From what I understand T31 is not even fitted with a torpedo warning sonar. All subs are not the same, for example, North Korean and some of the older Chinese subs are notoriously noisy and not that hard to detect. The T31 is unfortunately only designed for low-end warfighting as it does not carry any SSM, 24 or 12 short-range SAM. T31 is basically a corvette in a frigates hull. You don’t even need to purchase a sonar since RN already has 13 2050 sonar arrays. I forgot that T45 is fitted with a sonar already so that’s not needed.
What it is fitted with is nowhere near as good as 2050.
I’m not sure if 2150 for the T23 and the new T26 is new production or just an upgrade? if it’s a new product then it would make sense to fit the remaining 13 2050 to the 6 T45 and 5 T31.
T23s are getting the new 2051 upgrade of the 2050. I suspect it will be moved over to the T26. The upgrade is going onto the 8 ASW T23s.
Sorry that should read 2150 sonar.
That would still leave 5 type 2050 left from the GP T23s.
It’s basically the “Mk2” of the 2050 or next gen. Nothing to get angsty about.
But with modern processors digitisers and interfaces.
So is less maintenance intensive.
HMS Portland is the first T23 fitted with sonar 2150.
Type 45 have had sonars removed btw.
I thought they were still in the hull but no sonar operators are present?
I thought they were taken out, so a type 45 crew guy I spoke to said,
Why would they take them out? Do hull sonars really need a lot of maintenance?
All those electronics, immersed in water inside the dome…
Type 2150
ofc they require some maintenance but it’s not like the crew can even access them 90% of the time so it’s only really in drydock where they would need maintenance.
The T31 is designed for high end war fighting.
Nah! You are having a giraffe. Go look at a PLAN Type 054a and get back to us.
lol.
The T31 does have potential, if only the Treasury would dig out some cash for them!
T31 is sadly exposed to submarines and a crew death trap. Lessons not learned from history – look up Aboukir, Hogue, Cressy to see how ASW deficiencies play out!
not much
T45 already has a cheap hull sonar. That’s the problem!
And they are noisy.
T45 sonar is inactive at present? As for Type 31, its just a cheap corvette in a Frigates hull. Give it a decent hull sonar with Mk41 and ASROC and it might just be useful……
I’ve read somewhere on this website that the sonar was inactive, is this true? I was on the RN website and on there they list the sonar as a capability.
I don’t think that they have enough sonar rates to man the ships, hence the sonar being g fitted but inactive. I believe the GP T23s are suffer the same fate.
Does it have one? Yes.
Is is poor? Yes.
Is is inactive? I believe so.
The point is IT HAS POOR SONAR FITTED not whether it has somebody in ops listening to it.
I really love how posters seize on some irrelevance and parade it like they have some clever counter point. Good grief.
Still a poor sonar > No sonar. At least the subs have to be cautious. As soon as the T31 is classified it’s dead.
Well at least RN recruitment is full to bursting.
So that might well get fixed?
Fitting a sonar to T31 is at least possible and upgrading T45 sonar is very possible.
Neither would be highly expensive or risky projects.
That said I’m pretty sure it will go off board in UAVs of one kind or another.
I’ve been on heavy armed corvettes,almost type 23 armourment..
Yes, such things exist.
What use are they outside of costal protection work?
I’d want to be very far away from a corvette in a hot zone. A lot of the systems they have are cut down versions to get top weight margins and space factors into the envelope.
T31 can go so so much further both in terms of pure range, survivability and upgradability.
I think the idea is to get them into service, on time, within budget, then upgrade them.
You sound like you are banging my drum too!
T45 sonars de-activated to save on crew numbers.
The RAF is now back to 9 Maritime Patrol Aircraft again, Boring P8’s.
Yes SSN’s are expensive to build and take 6-8 years to build, but operate better in the Arctic then SSK’s and the long ranges of East of Suez. ELXXUUS would be a better buy to patrol home waters in the future.
The SSN operating East of Suez came home for Xmas, maybe crew with Covd again?
We did used to build conventional subs on the Clyde, why not again!
Out of the question. Those shipyards dont exist anymore other than as relics, not that the old fashioned ways are of any use.
Autonomous large submarines are the way ahead but if they did want a new conventual design the skills to build the hull are still mostly at Barrow ( the fittings and such come from all over) and it would dilute the workforce to build up another centre
Shame we can’t build for export.. we once supplied lots of nations… chile, Canada, Oz ect
The RN don’t think that large autonomous SMs are the way ahead, hence we are building SSN(R) to replace the Astutes. They are exploring AUVs to see what capabilities they might be able to provide to assist SMs with their operations, not the same as just going down the large autonomous SM route.
Where this all ends up remains to be seen, but we will still have manned SMs for decades to come.
I meant the large autonomous subs would be instead of SSK type.
These sort of intel operations are exactly what a ULUUV could handle. Surface after a few days to a week and upload all the data and then go back and do it all again.
Its like how spys often work in the real world, sleeper agents who gather information continuously and then pass it on in short bursts, then repeat for a loge time. The evaluation is done by others ‘in the back office’
Ah, wondered were you were going with that. No worries ?
Scotts Shipbuilding & Engineering Co in Greenock were the only submarine builders north of the border. Where the yard once was is now a call centre.
The submarine yard manager [the late Jim Morgan] was a neighbour and close friend. The last boats built there were the Australian O boats in the 70s.
Yes, once such a specialist industry is lost/allowed to either as it were, it can take the better part of a decade and lots of money to build up again.
Birkenhead built our last SSKs in the early 90’s, then we promptly went and sold them to Canada before loosing those skilled workers. The same very nearly happened up in Barrow with the v slow ordering/build rate of the Astutes, which required substantial help from the USA to get back on track. One day we might learn a lesson or two!!
T31s will be up sensored by use of unmanned systems that can be added as and when. The 31 is designed as a anti piracy and merchant escort and humanitarian ship and peace time naval presence patrol boat. You don’t need a ASW frigate to go to the Caribbean or go give our common wealth friends assistance after a disaster or go give anti piracy reassuring escort.
It is like you say a large ocean going OPV.
Can’t we put a big hook on the end? Could be useful.
AA
The documentary’s “excitable narration” and attempts to create false tension invites ridicule
Only £8 a pint…that must be in the Norge naffi
Good to see we can still find them….
RN may be looking at the autonomous options for providing enduring surveillance of the ocean. Ministry of Defence looking to purchase ‘special purpose ship’ (ukdefencejournal.org.uk)
Got the impression from the first program that there were two Russian subs heading south, according to Naval Intel
Ive always thought our Frigates “23’s” should have wildcats as they are smaller, the merlin seems far too big for our Frigs.
Designed for merlin, so not ‘too big’. The Merlin has more range and extra capability such the dipping sonar so is very useful
The 23s are designed for merlin? I thought the 23s were designed originally to work with the Forts in asw in the Atlantic? So choppers would be on forts and 23s wouldn’t even have missiles or a gun…nor sure about chopper, Merlins just seem huge on the 23s. The Koreans don’t mind the wildcats with dipping sonar, should we equip ours?
Wildcat doesn’t have much endurance with dipping sonar.
Merlin is m, I think, 4 hours which is a lot as these things go.
Merlin very carefully designed to fit in the frigate hanger… there are a few pics online of it with blades and tail folded.
You need a big helo to get the capability the merlin has. A large dipping sonar, multiple bouys, multiple torpedoes and enough crew (5?) to do the job with range and endurance to match.
I am just worried that with so few ships and subs in the fleet now-days and the commitments we have getting bigger by the day the crew burn out is going to start to have more affect with the senior more experienced hands getting dicked for more and more tours. We are already operating our fleet with the minimum of crews so it dose not take many people to go down either through burn out or an actual illness such as Covid to take a vessel off line. I wonder how many of the crew from the CSG21 got home had a quick pint then were off deployed on anouther vessel. It OK (ish) for the single guys in the crews but most of the senior ranks will be married or have full time partners and so this cause of action leads to divorce and heightened stress levels which is not good in an already stressful environment.
That’s life in a blue suit when on a ship for 3-5 years. 6-9month deployment, back for leave (3-4 weeks) , maint period alongside (4 weeks) bit of local work ups for a few weeks and then out for another 3 months…repeat! Hopefully the people onboard stay within the 2/3 away from base port 1/3 in home port over the duration of their draft. Its a big, big issue for 2nd Sea Lord (2SL) if that doesn’t happen.
Shore draft at the end of it for 18M – 24 months including training courses at the end before joining a new unit.
That’s life in a green one as well, but if you want to retain the wealth of knowledge in the senior messes and the skilled ranks there needs to be more understanding from the top brass both in uniform and out. This normally equates to more personnel in the to choose from.
Might just have been a Russian attempt to obtain the Sonar, like the RN did some decades back.
They would have had to surface to grab the ‘pieces’. That doesnt seemed to have happened
Look up Operation Barmaid, HMS Conqueror managed it pretty well.
During the Cold War a UK warship was sometimes sent up into the Arctic in order to get intelligence published in NISUMs without compromising the source.
Mostly the ‘hot’ intelligence came from a submarine source which could not be alluded to. Often, back pocket ‘dit books’ were updated between the lads deploying on the next sneaky.
This was highly illegal of course and sometimes it was word of mouth only. Among the boats of SM2, those just returned and those deploying next would rub shoulders inboard in the tape trainers.
UCs (in my day) had to stay in date on the latest stuff recorded at sea and we would be briefed ‘unofficially’ by the old and bolds.
Some of the SSK UC1s and CHOPS(S)s would have us in fits of laughter on their escapades in the Baltic and the Med. We on the other hand had our own contribution to make and we weren’t lacking in the ‘steely eyed stuff’!
I don’t suppose much has changed in the 28 years since I left the tip of the spear. They were fantastic times, fun, fun, fun, and sometimes a little bit eeeeeeeeeek!
The patrols in the early nineties were some of the most tense and absolutely knackering I ever did. It’s a young man’s game, it always has been. Stuff that I would take in my stride as a nineteen year old became harder and harder to shoulder as the years passed.
I drove myself into the ground, we all did.
I can no longer do it… however, once, we were kings!
Are we sure rhat this wasn’t an attempt to nick the towed array? It is unlikely the sub would not have not know that the frigate was in the area but it may not have realised that it had been dedected until the frigate closed.
Swingind\g across the stern to try and snag the active element of a CAPTAS-4 would have won more than a few brownie points.
Yup, exactly.
In Barrow in Furness today and walking past Ramsden Roundabout saw a memorial to the Australian crews of AE1 and AE2 both of which went down circa 1913 / 1914 – not directly related to this thread but, of interest given potential Australian acquisition of our tech and that a few from ‘straya’ have also been round the corner or served on our ASW Escorts.
May they Rest In Peace.
Ok folks I need some help. I watched the program Warship, life at sea ch5 on Mon 10th Jan. That a UK naval vessel was sent North to intecept a Russian sub on its way to UK undersea cables. All well and good however, one question sprung to mind. How did the Admiralty know there was a Russian sub in the area as we did not appear to have any assets there, and how did the Admiralty know that the Russian sub was going towards UK cables? I don’t think we hace SOSUS anymore, so how
Taps nose… need to know. Wink.
We Brits might be taking deriliction of duty a bit far but I’d have thought the USN know their bread and butter and be monitoring egress from Rus Naval Bases.
As to intent? Narrative. However, somebody has form for interfering with cables!
My issue is that we need a 24 hour prescence in that neck of the woods, and we simply don t have the resources.
I also watched the series on TV (CH5) but was puzzled when HMS Northumberland went through a storm doing 12 Knots and then developed a leak in the 4.5″ gun. I am of an age where in days of old the war ships going through heavy seas would have the guns on the bow facing aft to stop the water damaging the guns. Is there a reason why the modern gun platform cannot be pointed aft for transiting heavy seas.