Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
stephen ball

UN still say Crimea is Ukraine, not just UK.

China will be fun I guess.

Supportive Bloke

Yes, that is why it is a legitimate FONOP.

UK is following international law properly as recognised by the relevant body being the UN.

Similar with South China Sea. That has been through the proper process and China refuses to recognise the proper process under international law.

Under International law creating islands does not give you control of the surrounding sea.


‘UN still say Crimea is Ukraine, not just UK.”
What does UN or UK for that matter say about ‘occupied Northern Cyprus’, or what does UN say about occupied Kosovo ( or southern Serbia as some might call it.)
Thats the trouble with such statements, a UN General Assembly resolution is meaningless, pointedly it was moved by …Cyprus

Last edited 3 years ago by Duker

Exactly. The UN also ruled the UK to be illegally occupying Diego Garcia. As for the Russians they are just upset because they think the Black Sea is their personal play-pen. It’s the same tactic China is using in the South China sea. I might add in this regard the BBC seem to be their useful idiot.

William Ward

Felt the navy and the mod handled it well, it’s a good demonstration to the public of what the navy does on a day to day basis.


I feel this is only the starter, Once the CSG get into the SCS the Chinese will do similar as they did to HMS Albion.


Yes, it won’t be surprising! 🙂


Do we know where HNLMS Eversen was during this event or was it just an “imperialist” incursion <sarcasm> in case anyone takes it seriously?


I hope she was as her ASW and SSM capability would make up for the T45’s deficiencies in those areas making them an effective pairing.


Look at all the comments on the UKDJ site. Folks. Don’t go in and comment though, you’ll get banned.

stephen ball

Cap p I see.

Navy lookout and UKDJ don’t post everything as fact, both make mistakes.

I like both sites and the comment’s sometimes inform more detail’s, or where to look for the detail’s.

stephen ball

More the grey zone, sure Nato will be trying there own grey zone now.

Last edited 3 years ago by stephen ball

No, the UKDJ do have an opinion/analysis section but the main articles in the homepage are meant to be factual.


Can you explain this? I’ve just seen the reply by George and still ain’t got a clue

David Steeper

UKDJ is an excellent site i’d recommend it.


He was one of half a dozen accounts posting on our site but all with the same owner and IP address, he was caught out and was pretty nasty to one of our team members. He then started creating tonnes more fake accounts. All of the comments are still there, he didn’t take kindly to being called out.


UKDJ has sadly dropped drastically as a readable site, with 9 advertising intrusions per article, that makes for a very unpleasant read. A once enjoyable weekly Saturday morning catchup has now been retired. I venture there every few months and regret it instantly. They “must” have seen a readership reduction, for a while there adverts overlaid text, images and entire articles. I’m so glad this site remains true to the cause rather than a money making venture.

Bloke down the pub

The last time I saw HMS Prince of Wales on AIS she was apparently flying the French flag.

Bloke down the pub

Worth remembering that every time a Russian warship transits the English Channel, it is in the territorial waters of either France or the UK but has as much right to be there as HMS Defender did of being off Cape Fiolent.
On the subject of spoofing AIS signals, I was curious as to how much of a problem would be created if , for example, a large gas tanker was shown to be travelling the wrong way up the Channel? Would other ships be obliged to take evasive action or would they rely on radar?

stephen ball

Belgium and Netherland water too. Topside UK Bottom side those three.

Ryan Brewis

I’d imagine they’d check the radar and get a bloke out with a pair of binoculars for good measure, can’t jam the Mk 1 eyeball after all. If neither see a colossal tanker heading towards them then it would probably be a case of shrug and assume AIS is on the blink again.


Of course you can jam the Mk1 eyeball…
Smokescreens, shining bright lights or lasers into the eyes (see the canal defence light from WW2) are all valid ways.
I think some sort of face-targeting preserved fruit launcher would be a good way of jamming the mk.1 eyeball.


You might get worried when you see the AIS track on your electronic chart overlay (if you had one) but, as above, you’d trust your eyeballs and radar. AIS is a good aid but you should definitely not rely on it for collision avoidance.


There seems to be some confusion over AIS when it is used as originally intended as a shortish range ship- ship communication of the location, speed heading etc as a text only display and the AIS that people can see at home or even on a ship with internet capability . That later system is an extension which is picked up by satellites and maybe even shore receivers and passed onto a central servers and thus to the internet.


Where did USS Laboon get to? I imagine that all three NATO ships sailing round Crimea together would have been just too much provocation for Yeltsin.

Martin Charlesworth

Putin as well !!


Perfectly executed FON and media Op.

Defender transits Ukraine territorial sea iaw UNCLOS.

Putin media puts out sensationalist report “Rodina stronk – chase off imperialist warship with bombs”.

HMG calm statement, innocent passage, backed up with BBC reporter on scene.

Bugger off Sergei. We’ll do the same next week on return from Georgia, irrespective of your illegal unilaterally declared exclusion zone.

All absolutely in line with new policy to contest the grey zone.


Last edited 3 years ago by N-a-B

There seems to be a lot of media bods aboard the ship.


I wonder if the PM’s or Defence Secretary SpADs had anything to do with that


I am not happy with either sides’ account to be honest.

A British warship with several media teams aboard leaves the rest of its group and may have deliberately entered disputed waters. There is apparently something going on because there was enough commotion for the media team to pick up on it; they were even given anti-flash. Yet then the MoD then said nothing happened. The Russians then call in the naval attache for an interview without coffee. He doesn’t look brimming with confidence to me to be honest.
comment image

Gavin Gordon

Perhaps a good idea to regularly fit our warships with (not just for) a BBC crew, as passive countermeasures in the infowar.


With ITN and Sky Fitted For But Not With 😀


And the Daily Mail, or is it pool reporting, and everyone gets to claim ‘their man on Defender’


I suspect a single pool reporter was used. When Duncan did its tour of the Black Sea, they were so short of space they were putting camp beds in storage spaces for junior officers


Bizarre to film the meeting with the naval attache in that way.

Not sure why you’ve consistently used ‘Odesa’ rather than ‘Odessa’, local spelling or just a typo?


Russians staging a show, trying to look strong and formal with some UK embassy staff member called out of the blue.

Gavin Gordon

Made me smile. The two keenest video channels seem to have been:-
A subsiduary of RT, based in Berlin; AFP, Paris.

Bloke down the pub

Safe to say that the UK embassy had been fully briefed on the passage and had their replies well thought out in advance of the meeting.

Supportive Bloke

Yes, very underrated having known a few…..

Gavin Gordon

Can’t get sound on this on YT (funny that?). All the ‘interesting’ stuff from Putin’s perspective took place in around a minute, apparently. There was not interest in our attache’s sitting back and replying. He wasn’t impressed, by the look of it. Tend to be underrated, Naval Attaches.


Hard to see what the foreign office and Ministry of Defence are trying to achieve here. The Black Sea is a long way from the UK and it’s hard to see that we have any significant strategic interests there. I visited Ukraine in 2019 and it seemed pretty much a failed state that anyone with any kind of money and ability was trying to leave. Big question marks over whether they have their own cash to purchase ships from the UK.

Perhaps there is the view that now that we have left the EU, the empire will instantly return and we will return to the position we were in the 19th century. The world has changed a lot since then unfortunately. Reality is we lack natural resources, which Russia has a lot of and we now have a big external debt (China and Russia are creditor nations).

All this seems likely to do is drive Russia and China closer together, who aren’t really natural partners. Don’t see how this is in the UK’s or the rest of Europe’s interests.


The Ukraine is an artificial state. To the east and south are Russians, in the middle Ukrainians who are Orthodox so more disposed to Russian culture, and in the west there Ukrainians are Catholic. That’s very broad and doesn’t take into account the long history of that region. It’s interest really to the West is as an asset to be stripped and to niggle Russia. Plus perhaps a little something to be seen, in Western eyes, as a support for Turkey in hopes that will contribute to Turkey being more friendly. Why HMG seems to want to go after Russia with such a ferocity I don’t know. In the past both powers were counter to central European powers intent on dominating the Continent. Though Russia still has depth we now lack a large navy.

I would say Russia is as natural ally to China as anybody else could be. Purely in economic terms Russia has vast resources and technical ability that China needs. China provides depth and security to Russia. They are the dominant powers on the world island so a good fit.


Some truth, although don’t forget that China and Russia fought a brief border war in the 1960s. A lot of Siberia was originally part of China. They are not really culturally similar nor do they have any long term history of friendship. Seems mainly western policy that is driving them together.


I think we have fought Germany, France and even the US at various times in history; most of them not brief. Just sayin’…. 😉

Russians are European yes.


Everyone in Europe except the Portuguese where the alliance goes back to 1370s!…take that Macron.

Meirion X

It was despot Stalin that imported Russians into Eastern Ukraine, they were not there before 1920. And mainly Turkmens inhabited Crimea at the time. The former Soviet Union is mainly responsible for this mess!


Who was there before the Turkmen? You can play that game a long time in that region.


Absurd , The russians in Ukraine go back to Catherine The Great. The Crimean Tartars , once a turkic group but mixed with Circassians ,Greeks and Amenians and so on were deported by Stalin for collaboration with the Nazis

Meirion X

A false pretext by Stalin, for his genocidel policies!
Because Tartars opposed Soviet rule they had to be deported.
So did the Ukrainians opposed Nazi rule as much as Soviet rule, they just wanted Independence!

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

They collaborated with the German invaders…. he wasnt a softy when it came to that, looking at the 20 mill dead in USSR


Guess who formed auxiliary units in the Waffen SScomment image

Gavin Gordon

Agree with your breakdown of Ukraine’s demographic, X. But recall a while back seeing a breakdown of the voting percentages during an election there. In that, the population nationwide voted significantly in favour of closer ties to the west, apparently, albeit not the Donbas, for instance. Reminded me at the time that numerous countries vote for self-determination, regardless of their ethnicity. I suppose, from our experience, we can list the US, Australia and a few others as examples.


And that as the rub. Those republics only became part of the Ukraine in the nineteen twenties and they are Russian. Politics in the country is dominated by Ukrainian Catholics to the west who are anti-Russian. If the EU had had their way the industry in the Donbas would have gone through the policy of ‘cash and close’. Their main market is Russia. But they are also the rump of the Ukraine’s industrial base.

As for voting they voted for Yanukovych too at one time. But as he was pro-Russian he was in the way of the EU and US.

I can see the country breaking up. That would give Russia the buffer it wants. Would give the western Ukrainians what they want. The Ukrainian Orthodox in the middle who knows?

It is all very sordid really.

Gavin Gordon

Looks on the mark about breaking up, forcibly, or otherwise. Some countries are just benighted. Still, the closer Ukraine can travel towards accountable democracy, by which I mean the transparency of the voting process rather than the machinations of their representatives as the essential prerequisite, the better, I believe.

Sordid how power blocks, and powerful individuals, always talk about what use a country is to them, when ‘the country’, i.e. its population, always hanker after that self-determination promised by Democracy. Absolutely by no means perfect; but there seems to me a long term strength in its chaos that overcomes the suffocating stasis of rigid central control &/or chumocratic self interest. Once established, the greatest risk to our western system (lazy expression, I know) seems to come from within, not traditional foes.

A recent report highlighted how the most significant element in a country’s advancement had been established as national trust (not the NT!) i.e. what makes our effort worthwhile, not purely what’s in it for me.

I’ll sign off now before I send you into a stupor! Never know for sure where these post will end up.

Pleased the UK has evidently created a good rapport with the Ukraine, anyway (whichever part).



Accountable democracy as we have in the West?

The Ukraine is only useful to the UK as a tool in its Russophobia campaign. As I said above the Ukraine is an artificial state that could easily fracture into three.

It is interesting to note when this crisis began the UK still a member of the EU followed France and Germany who took the lead. UK was very much a follower. I remember watching Cameron trooping in with the Netherlands, Spain, Italy and the other second tier EU powers for a briefing. This is despite the UK then having one of the best armed forces in Europe, nuclear, and lastly being a P5 state. The UK should have been in there directing policy for those reasons but sat outside like a non-entity. Why now when Germany and France are moving rapidly away from that debacle we suddenly see it as a fight to be lead I don’t know.


Russia doesnt need buffers. It has thousands of nuclear weapons . Its policy is the product of having a paranoid retired KGB political warfare officer who believes in meddling , as head of state for life, the belief that you can be a superpower on an economy the size of Italy, and the desire to regain some of the successes of the czars and Brezhnev – like the Crimea and a useless presence in Syria that lost its strategic purpose 50 years ago. Its practical problem is that its lost the critical mass of population and GNP to keep on as a superpower ,will become vulnerable to a vastly more powerful China, and it is terrified that successful democracies in the Ukraine , Belarus , as well as the Baltic states would undermine the current brutal authoritarian kleptocracy.

NATO lacks a consistent policy on the region – largely because Germany and France are focused on money, Trump was focused on himself, and Biden so far seems remarkably like an ineffectual Carter behind the odd tough word.The task however is relatively simple – to provide countries like the Ukraine and Georgia with enough additional defensive weapons to kill enough Russian attackers to deter a further attack , and to create doubt whether an attack might bring significant NATO foces operating within reach of Russia – which would make the attack counterproductive and the risks too high. . Its about enhancing deterrence by body bag and by creating the threat that leaves something to chance as Schelling described it. Its necessary to take some risk as a Russian follow up invasion of the Ukraine and the probable coincident annexation of Belarus, w/could pose an enormous new threat to NATO -changing the strategic geography , potentially putting Russian tanks with a poorly defended short drive to Germany, on the Hungarian border, and in posions that would make the defence of Poland and the Baltic states vastly more difficult.

The episode off the Crimea makes some small contribution to this by reminding Russia it cant go around stealing bits of other countries and their waters and have this accepted. And it acts, by agreement or design, or not , to counter the impression Biden created by sending US Warships to send a message about the Russian build up on Ukraimes borders and then signalling the opposite by not sending them. Biden can have his summit. The UK has sent the warship.


 by reminding Russia it cant go around stealing bits of other countries and their waters and have this accepted.”
Not the ways of the world as it is, old chap
Turkey has occupied Northern Cyprus, Nato troops remain in Kosovo ( Serbia) and were heavily involved in Libya , and theres Saudi Arabia and its neighbour Yemen.
Your view comes down to …its bad when they do it.

Meirion X

There is a large Turkish majority in Northern Cyprus, but it be better if the ireland was unified and Turkey withdraw it’s troops from there.

NATO is keeping the peace in Kosovo between the divide communities.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Nato is not keeping the peace , as the local population is heavily ‘Albanian’, a few fringe areas are still Serbian. But your thrust of answers is that its OK when nato or its members does the ‘grabbing’

Meirion X

NATO is keeping the peace in Kosovo, or otherwise we would be hearing about it a lot. Rarely it is in the news any more!

NATO does Not grab! Interventions are decided by consensus of member countries.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Thank you for your lengthy reply.

EDIT: It is so wrong on so many levels I can’t even begin to know where to begin to form a reply. But thank you again.

Last edited 3 years ago by X
Meirion X

Spot on again, good comment!

Meirion X

You certainly do want Ukraine to be broken up, because you are a pro Putin Russian!


have you forgotten this a referendum to backup the declaration of independence, so its not allowed when Russians do it…BTW same has happened in nato protectorate of Kosovo

Meirion X

If you believe that elections or Ref. in Russia is free or fair, you might as well believe that pigs can fly!

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X
Meirion X

Natural resources are still relatively cheap! Economies based on the export of natural resources are of mainly of low income nations, examples of them are in Central Africa. The UK is an economy based on services and modern manufacturing and of exporting high value products with a very high GDP per capita.
Not true the UK has big external debt! Most of the debt is held by the BoE, which is owned by the UK government.
All the western nations have done the same.

The Ukrainian has future potential to become like a modern western economy. The UK is giving a helping hand for it to transform from like of the rest of the post Soviet economics.

It is your friend Mr Putin that needs to learn lessons here!

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Most of our manufacturing industry has moved overseas and I don’t see how the Bank of England printing money is any kind of sign of strength. I would like to agree with you re: Ukraine, although that wasn’t my experience visiting the country and talking to people there. Where did I say that I am a friend of Mr Putin? Stupid comment.

Meirion X

You didn’t have to say you were a friend of Mr Putin, you implied you were!

So with UK exports of $400 Billion, So manufacturing has moved overseas??


Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Yes . UK exports ‘of goods’ in 2019 was £367 bill , while imports of ‘goods’ £542 bill, thus the imports of ‘stuff’ was far far greater.
My Moscow handler is on holiday in Cyprus so I used Google

Meirion X

I do agree, we could do better in some sectors in making more of the products we need


On the contrary, manufacturing in the UK has grown considerably since the end of WW2. Currently we manufacture, in real terms, approximately twice what we did in 1945. What has changed is that services have grown considerably faster, so rather than being less important than manufacturing, they are now considerably more important.

Meirion X

Precisely, agreed!


Whos comparing 1945 , right at the end of the war, and the modern world?
As I showed , the imports of goods is now 1.5x that what is exported. Like for like in 2019 money


The Russians can put as many aircraft in the air as they like from Crimea. 20 is just for starters near the black sea. If each aircraft carries a few missiles, that’s over 100 missiles without even considering the numerous shore batteries. A few ships is of no concern to the Russians in that part of the world. They are merely making a point.

Meirion X

It is precisely why NATO needs a Black Sea strategy!
A strategy to deter Russia from dominating the whole region, with only a small proportion of the Black Sea coast line.
It will require conventional deterrence to stop Russia from making moves in that region. NATO needs to allocate resources to the Black Sea region for deterrence to work, such as to establish airbases with a considerable number of aircraft based there including F-35A’s, and naval forces based in friendy countries adjacent to the Black Sea. A strategy similar to the time of the Cold War with forces based in West Germany. It will mean British forces forward deployed to the region.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

The concluding sentence argues that “Moscow’s actions [are] likely to stiffen NATO resolve and lead to an increased naval presence in the region”. But what is the end game here? “Stiffen NATO’s resolve” to do what exactly? Unless one believes that NATO would actually fight to defend Georgia or Ukraine then this is primarily a bluff – and not a very good one. It stretches credibility to believe that most NATO states have the slightest interest in potentially fighting with a nuclear-armed state to defend either Ukraine or Georgia. If the real objective is simply to support Ukraine or Georgia short of an active military commitment (as seems to be the case), then one can do that with equipment, training and diplomatic/ecomomic means. If that is the extent of the objective then the naval deployments are pretending, confusing and dangerous. A lot of sailing around with no intention to actually do anything but with the danger that there could be a miscalculation.

Meirion X

It is precisely why NATO has Nuclear warpons, to deter others from resorting to use Nukes.

You don’t think Mr Putin is really
a suicide bomber?
He is enjoying a too good of a life of luxury, with hookers etc!

As I said above, NATO needs a Black Sea strategy.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

And who in NATO will contribute in a serious way to this “Black Sea strategy”?

The UK just cut its defence capability. There is a lot of song and dance about the command paper, but in the end there is little tangible in it other than the certainty of cuts, especially to the army. There is not even enough money to equip either the Type 45s or Type 31s properly. Does that suggest any degree of seriousness?

Does Germany have any interest in a Black Sea strategy that involves seriously confronting Russia? Germany won’t even cancel Nordstream 2.

And what have the Americans signalled? Geneva signals that they want a stable relationship with Russia – that seems to be the overarching priority So who exactly is going to seriously confront Russia? If the answer is nobody, then it’s all just pretending.


Germany won’t cancel Nordstream 2 because it is their project not Russia’s. The Germans need natural gas and they have always got gas from Russia. Even during the Cold War the Russians never switched off the gas or threatened to do so.

Germany’s original interest in the Ukraine was to give the Euro further Lebensraum as the EU runs out of steam. It didn’t happen. The US probably wanted further bases to extend its reach into the middle of the World Island. That both ventures collapsed says a lot. The Ukraine isn’t a stable country. It isn’t a good actor. The US wants to improve relations with Russia so it can pivot even more towards China. They even hope to break the Sino-Russia alliance, but I don’t think they will manage to do that.

All I can is the Ukraine splitting into three countries.

NATO needs a reason to be and the obvious enemy is Russia. Russia isn’t coming West. Why would it? All this posturing is just one facet of the West trying to justify its continued existence.

Russian isn’t our friend. But going after them for the sake of politics here isn’t good.


If nobody insists on international, rule-based cooperation and behaviour, it will be up to the local regional strongest power, be it in the Black or South Chinese Sea, to define the agenda. Refraining from dong so can set a dangerous precedence.
As for Russia not coming West: I wonder what would have happened to the Baltic States had they not been NATO countries.


Interesting. So are you saying we in the West are the good guys and everybody should toe the line? Or the US will park a CBG off your coast and bomb you? Is that ‘international, rules based cooperation and behaviour’ you are on about? Post Cold War the US has done some very questionable things as have we Europeans.

The US has been apoplectic because the Russians have held an exercise off Hawaii. I think it wasn’t really for training more to demonstrate that others can use the sea too. But in your eyes have they broken the ‘rules’? The Russians aren’t the ones with carrier battle groups at sea, ARG’s at sea, and military bases on every continent. But apparently they are aggressive.

Who is right? Who is wrong?

Perhaps with the Baltics. I could see the large Russian populations looking to rejoin the Motherland. I could also see them not bothering and just living with the status quo. But the Russians ain’t coming here and that is all I am bothered about. Why would they come? Why risk nuclear war? What do we have? Resources? No. Land? No. Peaceful cities? No. Technology they don’t have? No. Why would they come if they could come? Why?

Meirion X

The world would be a very different place without USN CBG’s, which arise from the post WW2 consensus to prevent a fascist order arising again.

You seem to forget or not aware of that Mr Putin has always regreted the dissolution of the Soviet Union! So that will be Mr Putin’s priority at the moment, as you said yourself, bring back the large Russian populations in the Baltics, but they are Not the majority in those countries, back into the motherland like USSR.
Then finally go after western Europe just like in the Cold War. Just shows that you Russians are Not good at hiding you desires!

This subject has flushed out the Russian trolls again!

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X
David Graham

Spot on. I worked in Lithuania just after the end of the Cold War. They couldn’t throw off the reminders of the USSR quickly enough. Cyrillic alphabet street names and road signs being changed, Russian style blocks of flats being pulled down, Shops filling with things people actually wanted to buy. I lived in Klaipeda, somewhere I could never had dreamed of visiting a few years previously, and saw changes almost daily both there and in Vilnius. So much for these people loving mother Russia.


I hope you get good marks for your A-level politics essays with that sort of stuff. It is good that you are so enthusiastic, but you need to do more reading.


bring back the large Russian populations in the Baltics,”
Too late .
The populations of the Baltics have declined by 20-25% since they joined the EU, the Russians and younger population have taken the oppotunity to leave for western Europe and beyond. I knew one about a decade ago. The country never meant anything to him another than it being on his passport…


Population drain is serious problem in those states. Roumania has lost no end of professionals. The Ukrainian is losing hundreds of thousands per year.

Trevor Holcroft

America is not apoplectic about the russians doing an exercise near Hawaii. How would Russians get near Hawaii? Teleport?


America isn’t at all happy about what the Russians are doing of Hawaii.

Meirion X

Totally agreed!

Meirion X

I do agree with you in a way, that the present situation in the Black Sea region, is Not taken very seriously at present. Who knows, this might change in the future. Yes of course some cuts would need restoring, and more aircraft Would need to be procured.


The British response has been dreadfully weak. The MoD should have responded to Russian threats of hitting the target next time with an ardent expression such as ” you start firing, you will need to start building 20 new aircraft”. The Russians do not respect anything but firmness. Also, I note our British cousins sent in a 45 (great ship) without anti-surface warfare capacity. Not smart. The 4.5 mount is not nearly enough.


That sounds great on paper not so great for the crew when they end up at the bottom of the black sea. USS Donald cook had zero effect either which is a little better in the asuw area, it’s the Russians back yard and they will call the shots there regardless how well armed one ship is


I’m still interested why the Russians appear to go after the type 45s more than any other ships, HMS Duncan a few years ago and HMS Defender. Think of all the US ships and even yesterday there was HNLMS Eversen, no mention, where was she?

Gavin Gordon

I wonder if HMS Defender was chosen as she’s self-evidenly defensive i.e. not even Harpoons shipped. USS Laboon, which I think was available, and HNLMS Evertsen both carry those, with the former also configured for TLAM.
For their part, the Russians did the expected with a/c, whilst the only vessels to close with the T45 were CG. Even without back-channel communications between NATO & Putinland, there were subtle clues?
I think maybe the mugs are supposed to be russian & western ‘protetariat’! All in the Great Game – until someone takes it just thst little bit too far, perhaps.
Same again when we get to SCS?
Tally Ho!


From the video I have seen, unless you could point to me to some more footage, the reason they did go for her was she was on her own. The Dutch and the Americans were elsewhere.

Gavin Gordon

Hi, X.
Cannot see any other vids than those reproduced to add much. And aware all sides can utilise subterfuge.
But it does seem odd to me just using YT (not a Twitter, et al aficionado) that video news sites seem to have popped out of nowhere on this in a number of instances.
The video firing clarity is – well, crap is a word that came to mind. There’s clear footage of the CG vessels in close proximity, with cannon for and aft as you’d expect for all potential protagonists. Then you get the footage from a further way out with the CG evidently pointing straight at -something? Asking for trouble, perhaps, from the destroyer’s mk8, 30mm and cwis. No claim on any side that Defender turned aggressive, though.
As an aside, I thought the contrast between the calmness of T45 OOW to the excitability of the Russian was, well, a bit like we’ve become used to in the Black Sea, I think.
Just saying, mind ?


I don’t think HMG are telling the truth. And the Russians are perhaps exaggerating in some parts. I am hearing it hasn’t gone done well in NATO’s major capitals. And it was wasn’t welcomed within all parts of Whitehall.

Trevor Holcroft

Dont NATO just take it in turns?

Anyway, all the fuss and faff is all made up by Russia and for home consumption. And anyway, Putin is supposed to not know what his own GRU are up to, so probably the red army and navy dont tell him much either


A warship can only spend so much time in the Black Sea before it has to leave due to treaty.

Gavin Gordon

Hello, Trevor.
Not sure about turns, but I thought maybe HMS Defender the ‘logical’ choice for a run down the traffic zone for the above reason i.e. she would be known not to have SSM, so defensive (even her name fits!), quite apart from her course for Georgia making that route reasonable.

Meirion X

Burks are Not good either at ASW taskings.

Meirion X

The Black Sea is Not Russia’s backyard! She has only a portion of the coast line in the northeast to east central Black Sea. Turkey has the largest coast line in the Black Sea.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

I am not sure where this Burke’s can’t do ASW from. Especially on site that often tells me that the T45’s crappy MOAS set is a world beater and makes the seas transparent when all it is a MOAS / Torpedo warning set.

Don’t Burkes have AN/SQS-53C, TACTAS, VL-Asroc, and two MH-60 Romeos? Might not be as quiet as T23 with CODLAG, but far, far from useless.


If a Navy is too timid to play what are they doing there. This scenario highlights the anemic armament on this platform- zero anti ship capacity. A world beating AAW vessel but a one- trick pony.

Leslie Leveson

One wonders what Commander Rasputin real objectives are, plus what he intends to acheive his objective.
Thankfully we have the Royal Navy which is building up its ships ,but also showing what it is capable of.It is a game of chess with lives at stake,but the bear wishes to show its strength and extending its claws.
Never forget he cut his gums on the K G B now the FSB and pursues its policiesj×&₩


Really? Losing two type 23’s and a long, long time before new platforms are online. RN is paying for decades of neglect. Just not a priority in the Nanny state. This was a humiliation.

Meirion X

Only one Type 23 is to be taken out of service early this year, because it will Not be worthwhile the expense to refit it for just a few more years of service left before being replaced by a new Type 31 frigate.
Some Type 23’s(5) were Not fully equipped for the anti-submarine warfare role. The one being retired early, is a non ASW frigate.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

I don’t like responding to your comments but this is where this RN nonsense of calling T23 without 2087 ‘general purpose’ is shown to be best problematic at worst utterly stupid.

What makes T23 the world’s still, just about, best ASW platform is its propulsion system; the Combined Diesel eLectric And Gas-turbine. It can potter about really quietly using electric motors driving a fixed pitch propeller (no huge VP nonsense)
giving its sensors the best chance of detecting a contact. It can then bring the GT’s online and sprint to a new location before reverting diesels. Or use speed to prosecute a target. It’s sprint and drift. I would say a T23 with a hull sonar, 2050, is still a very potent ASW asset especially when coupled to a high end helicopter like Merlin. 2087 gives an area capability. But 2050 and Merlin would be more than acceptable when ranked against peers. And coming at it the other way I fail to understand how a T23 with 2087 is any less general purpose than one without. The RN has been building ‘general purpose’ escorts since T12(M) because even back then with a large navy distributed world wide the RN couldn’t guarantee the right mix of ships. General purpose being some effective capability in all spheres: air, surface, sub-surface, and electronic warfare. Type 42 was mechanically the same as T22 and even carried the same sonar. It’s prime role was AAW but it could take its place on the ASW screen. T22 and T23 for example had Sea Wolf. And so on. The problem with T45 is that is a specialised ship with only a MOAS and torpedo warning sensor and is noisy; the sonar sets fitted to Horizon are full ASW sets with twice the range. It isn’t really an escort as it something that has to be escorted.

To say the T23 being retired early is not an ASW frigate is nonsense.

Meirion X

It certainly is Not nonsense to say some T23″s are Not fully ASW vessels!

The 16 original Type 23’s built, came with the earlier gen 2031z sonar. Only 8 were upgraded with the 2087 sonar from 2005 onwards with more powerful processor units fitted.

So only 8 T23’s can now do real ASW taskings. The other 5 T23s had their processing units removed as well as TAS. They were very heavy.

If the RN wanted, to upgrade the other T23s without 2087 sonar, to with TAS, they would need a refit to install the new processor units. It is feasible at a cost.

T23’s can still deploy their Merlin’s
with dripping sonar, for ASW
taskings, that is if there are any spare available.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Utter tripe.
I have served on Tail and non tail T23s
With regards to ASW All T23s are the same except for the tail.
Some had the tail and winch fitted at build others did not.
No T23 had a TAS removed….they were never fitted to begin with!

S2050 and even more so its upgraded replacement is a a very very capable active set with passive capabilities.
A T23 with just s2050 is still a very capable ASW unit and a very capable anti surface unit.

A tail does not make you the only ASW unit on the chess board..Prosecuting a target at long range using a sonar (passive or Active), a helo be it Merlin or Wildcat, and a magazine full of torpedo reloads makes a good Sub hunter.

Meirion X

I got a Naval Forces publication from 1989, GB. It mentions all 16 original T23 frigates to be built, were to have Type 2031Z Towed Array sonar sets with Processor Cabinets installed, is that still correct?

I know some oldest T23s were sold off at around 2004 with the Type 2031Z sonar sets, which left the RN with 13 T23’s. It would of been odd if the MoD had sold Chile T23s without the sonar sets, which were to be superseded by Type 2087 eventually.

I am aware that HMS Westminster was the first T23 to trial the new Type 2087 sonar in around 2005, and Not all the T23s would get the new sonar sets, only 8. So are you saying that some T23s have still got the original 2031Z sonar sets intact with the computers still on board?

Yes, I agree that T23s could still use their Merlin’s for ASW taskings.

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Some T23s did not have a S2031 winch fitted at all. No winch, no processor cabinets, no displays. The space for the displays was was used as a briefing room as it sits adjacent to the OPS room.
The space below the flight deck was just a big empty space and used as a gym. The easy way to tell is to see if the ships quarterdeck area had the towed array fairlead ( Elephants A’hole) to put the array through.
T23 with S2087 are a bit easier because the big yellow active towed body can be seen sticking out of the port side quarterdeck cut out.
From the T23s I have latterly worked on I cannot recall seeing a legacy S2031 winch. Its either a big empty space with a Gym or a big full space with S2087 fitted.

The old winches would not have been kept. They would have needed manpower and money to maintain, even if to just keep them from turning into a pile of rust, and the same would have applied to cabinets. They would have been removed.

Anthony Raines

Cant we fire warning shots and tell the Russians they are not allowed in our waters as we keep having to do escort duties. Make them go the long way around through the Atlantic and not the north sea as the continually do.


They might be offended – and by the way, when all you have is one nearly obsolete Type 23 and a waste of money – no missiles off shore patrol craft to shadow a Russian task group packed with SSM’s what’s the point?

Meirion X

You really Don’t know much about Royal Navy vessels!

The Type 23 frigate has been the best anti-submarine vessels in the world over the past 30 years , and still is!

They are certainly Not obsolete, but it costs a lot to keep them going with the LIFEX’s.

A Russian vessel maybe pack with warpons, But reliability of the warpons is an issue with them!

Last edited 3 years ago by Meirion X

Make them go the long way around through the Atlantic”
Cant do that as the English Channel is an international waterway, and is truly such not the ‘short cut’ near Sevastopol ( which is allowed as well). They dont even have to ask permission as the Law of the Sea gives it as of right.

Meirion X

It is a short cut to pass Sevastopol to Georgia.


A lawyer’s view. Sorry, you won’t like it.

Russia has the status of an occupying power in Crimea. This is a fact. An occupying power has to legislate on everything that concerns the security of goods and people, within and at the borders of the occupied territory. And this, in accordance with international law. The regulations produced must be made public so that those concerned cannot ignore them.

This is the case in the territorial waters of occupied Crimea.

Vessels that do not comply with these regulations are in violation. The only way to challenge this is to rely on the verdict of arms, that is to say, to undertake military operations. After all, it is conceivable that liberating Crimea is worth some trouble.
Best to think 1853-1856 is over.

The Russian reactions were therefore moderate and proportionate to the threat presented by HMS Defender.

Pete Murdoch

Isn’t there something about Berwick upon Tweed still being at war with Russia over Crimea. Would be great to name one of the type 32 vessels after B.U.T…


So much fuss over a simple FON transit.
Does Britain or France make such a fuss when Russian ships transit through the English Channel?

Sure, we send an escort (more as a symbolic gesture than anything else), we certainly don’t claim the RN fired at them and chased them out of the North Sea?