Two RN Destroyers unable to fire their missiles due to funding problems

[CougarKing]

More bad news from the UK MoD?

Two Navy destroyers unable to fire their missiles - because they've been removed to save cash
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:07 PM on 09th June 2008

Comments (0)  Add to My Stories
Two Royal Navy destroyers could not fire their missiles if they came under attack - because they have been removed to save cash.

Type 42s HMS Exeter and HMS Southampton have been working without their Sea Dart guided missile system since Christmas, it was revealed today.

To go with the cutbacks, at least half a dozen operating crew have been transferred to other ships.

The missiles, used to protect the destroyers and larger aircraft carriers against air attack, have been stored away even though HMS Exeter has sailed to the Mediterranean twice and joined a NATO-led operation in that time.


Two Royal Navy destroyers could not fire their missiles if they came under attack (file picture)

It has provoked anger from defence sources who claim the navy is suffering from short-term cost cutting.

Rear Admiral David Bawtree, the former Commander of Portsmouth Naval Base, said: "It seems to be a sign of the times that there is a lack of willingness to spend money.

"It is surprising that the destroyers are sailing without their primary defence, though I would add they still have lesser gun defences.

"But you only have to look at the comments in the media about Army pay to see there is disgruntlement, and spending is much, much lower now than during my time."

Sea Dart - first used successfully in the Falklands War in 1982 - will be phased out as the new Type 45 Daring class destroyers come into service.

But Southampton and Exeter are still supposed to be fully operational until 2009.
Even the Navy website for HMS Southampton advertises that Sea Dart is her primary armament.

Former naval officer and editor of Warship World, Mike Critchley, said: "You cannot claim to have ships doing a job before the Type 45s come in when in fact they are missing vital abilities.

"As a taxpayer it is not reassuring to see an expensive destroyer like Exeter engaged in not much more than a PR tour."

Defence Select Committee member and Portsmouth South MP Mike Hancock said: "I am very surprised to learn that we have warships coming out of British waters without their main air defences.

"Questions need to be put to the Navy asking how that was allowed to happen because you cannot have ships deploying without important equipment."

A Royal Navy spokesman said: "I can confirm that Sea Dart was deactivated in both ships last year, as part of a short-term financial planning decision to save money.


"It was carried out in Exeter during the summer, and then in Southampton after her deployment to the South Atlantic at the end of the year.

"The ships have a specific operating staff for Sea Dart and they have been transferred to other ships, and the missiles have been moved to storage. However, the firing equipment has remained in the ships and that means Sea Dart can be reinstated if operational priorities change.

"With regards to HMS Exeter and her visits to the Mediterranean, a risk assessment would have been carried out and the level of danger was not felt to be excessive."

The Sea Dart is a surface-to-air missile system built by British Aerospace (BAe) and has been in use since 1977.

It is fired from the deck of the ship out of a cradle carrying two missiles at a time, and targets planes and other missiles.

A specially-trained weapons crew and warfare team operate the system, which can protect a fleet from threats up to 40 nautical miles away.

It was originally fitted to both the Type 42s and Invincible class aircraft carriers, but was removed from the carriers during refits between 1998 and 2000 to create space on the flight deck for the RAF Harrier GR9 aircraft.

Since then the destroyers, which are supposed to support and protect the carriers, have retained the system.

The Sea Dart was used during the Falklands War and is credited with seven kills, including a British Gazelle helicopter downed by friendly fire.

The system continued to be used in the 1991 Gulf War, and was credited with the first validated engagement of a missile by a missile when it downed an Iraqi silkworm weapon.

The Type 42s have a range of other weapons. The ship carries a 4.5 inch medium range gun, which is maintained for use at any time, and with a Lynx helicopter embarked the ship gains further offensive power.


The navy's new Type 45s will not carry Sea Dart but will be fitted with a more modern missile system.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025254/Two-Navy-destroyers-unable-missiles--theyve-removed-save-cash.html

 

[cameron]

One would have thought after the Falklands War the British MOD would be the most aware of the importance naval air defence.

 

[karl28]

          I think this goes hand in hand with " Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it "  also in regards to  the MOD and  the Falklands .    Any military asset should be able to be used at its fullest capabilities and not be subjugated to budget restraints or what is the point of having it .   

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Don't forget these are the same people that got rid of Sea Harrier....

 

[Ex-Pat FlagWagger]

Don't forget these are the same people that got rid of Sea Harrier....

... and who are replacing the 12 Type 42s with only 6 Type 45s while at the same time increasing the number of HVUs that would normally require a mixed ASUW / AAW escort that, in turn, is drawn from a shrinking number of platforms! Perhaps there's an implicit assumption within the UK political elite (spit!) that the UK will in the future never be required to deploy outside NATO or the EU and that therefore the escort problem will be solved by using FF/DDs from other countries.

 

[daftandbarmy]

... and who are replacing the 12 Type 42s with only 6 Type 45s while at the same time increasing the number of HVUs that would normally require a mixed ASUW / AAW escort that, in turn, is drawn from a shrinking number of platforms! Perhaps there's an implicit assumption within the UK political elite (spit!) that the UK will in the future never be required to deploy outside NATO or the EU and that therefore the escort problem will be solved by using FF/DDs from other countries.

It looks like the LibDems in the UK are killing the forces there in the same way that the Chretien Liberals nearly did to the CF in the 90s. Gawd 'elp 'em all puir wee buggers....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Could it also be that the Sea Darts are so old and so few that they may not be functioning at all?

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Could it also be that the Sea Darts are so old and so few that they may not be functioning at all?

The Mod 3 version came in service around 4 years ago. Like the Sea Sparrow they have kept working on it.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Umm...we pretty much did the same with the TRUMPs. The RN is just formally acknowledging it.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Umm...we pretty much did the same with the TRUMPs. The RN is just formally acknowledging it.

The 280s never did a overseas deployment without the SM2 since I have been in.

 

[Ex-Pat FlagWagger]

It looks like the LibDems in the UK are killing the forces there in the same way that the Chretien Liberals nearly did to the CF in the 90s. Gawd 'elp 'em all puir wee buggers....

It's not the LibDems, they're the 3rd party in the UK - the current party in power is the Labour party which re-branded itself as New Labour under Bliar, and which has spent the last 11 years royally screwing everyone! Defence spending is being perpetually squeezed while operational deployments are up. Personally, I'm glad I was able to escape over here!

 

[retiredgrunt45]

De-ja-vous. Seems the British military is going through its own form of the "decade of darkness".

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

The 280s never did a overseas deployment without the SM2 since I have been in.

No, but they've gone without the ability to fire them often enough.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Any open source to back that up? if not withdraw your claim.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

I'll see what I can find. There was a lot in the news a couple of years ago over how bad the TRUMP/SM2 serviceability was, and how many missilex's had failed due to equipment inoperability.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

There are a few links out there dancing around the issues, but I couldn't find the original article detailing the missilex failures.

I withdraw the comment.