HMS Sheffield D80 Type 42 Destroyer
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 тра 2024
- Thank you to the original Bohemian Eagle, The Mighty Jingles, for sharing his experience while writing this Ship Brief in 2023. He was a great help. Any mistakes in this video are my own and not a reflection of Mr. Jingles knowledge and experience.
/ bohemianeagle
VERY IMPORTANT NOTE The SEA DART missile system was initially semi-active homing. An upgrade made it a 'more autonomous' active homing. Thus SEA DART was both Semi-active homing and Active homing in it's life time.
The HMS Sheffield (D80) was a Type 42 (Sheffield class) destroyer in the Royal Navy, commissioned in 1975. This warship was among the first of its class, designed primarily for area air-defense to protect carrier battle groups from aerial threats, including low-flying aircraft and anti-ship missiles.
Technical Specifications:
HMS Sheffield
Propulsion: It was powered by COGOG (Combined Gas or Gas) propulsion systems, consisting of two Rolls-Royce Olympus TM3B high-speed gas turbines for high-speed operations and two Rolls-Royce Tyne RM1A cruising gas turbines, generating a combined output of about 36,000 horsepower. This setup allowed the ship to operate more efficiently at different speed ranges, with a top speed of over 30 knots.
Armament: The primary armament of the HMS Sheffield included a twin Sea Dart missile launcher, capable of engaging aerial targets at long ranges. It also featured one 4.5-inch Mark 8 naval gun for surface targets, two 20 mm Oerlikon cannons, and two Phalanx CIWS (Close-In Weapon Systems) for last-minute defense against incoming missiles.
Electronics: The ship was equipped with a sophisticated suite of sensors and radars, including the Type 1022 long-range air search radar, Type 996 3D surveillance radar, and Type 909 fire control radar for the Sea Dart missiles. It also had sonar equipment for anti-submarine operations.
Aircraft: The destroyer had facilities to operate one Lynx helicopter, enhancing its capability in anti-submarine warfare and surface warfare operations.
Operational History:
The HMS Sheffield gained historical significance during the Falklands War in 1982. It was tragically hit by an Exocet missile fired by Argentine forces, leading to severe damage and the loss of 20 crew members. This incident underscored the vulnerability of modern warships to missile attacks and led to significant changes in naval tactics and defense systems.
The Sea Dart missile
Key Components and Functionality:
Missile Design: The Sea Dart missile was typically about 4.4 meters in length, with a wingspan of around 1 meter. It was equipped with a solid rocket booster for initial launch and a ramjet sustainer motor for flight. This design allowed the missile to accelerate to speeds over Mach 2.
Guidance System: Initially, Sea Dart missiles used semi-active radar homing for guidance. This required the ship's radar to illuminate the target until the missile impacted. The system was later updated to include a more autonomous active radar homing capability, allowing greater flexibility and the ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously.
Warhead: The missile was armed with a high-explosive blast fragmentation warhead, triggered by a proximity fuse. This was designed to detonate near the target, maximizing the likelihood of destroying or disabling it through shrapnel.
The missile system operated by first detecting and tracking targets using the ship's radar systems. Once a target was identified and within range, the Sea Dart could be launched. After launch, the missile's booster would activate, propelling it away from the ship and towards the target. Upon booster burnout, the ramjet would take over, maintaining high speed as the missile approached the target area.
During its terminal phase, the guidance system would home in on the radar reflections from the target, guided by the ship's radar or its own onboard radar in later versions. The proximity fuse would detect the optimal moment to detonate the warhead, intending to destroy or incapacitate the target with a blast and shrapnel.
Historical Context and Legacy:
The Sea Dart proved its effectiveness during the Falklands War, where it was credited with several Argentine aircraft kills. However, its performance also highlighted some limitations in cluttered environments or against low-flying targets. These operational experiences helped inform subsequent developments in naval air defense systems, aiming to address these shortcomings.
📫 Contact Gene Dayhaw gene@solaromgmt.com for paid promotion.
🐦► / subbrief
🕺► / subbrief
⏰► / subbrief
😃► / subbriefmedia
🏴☠️► www.SubBrief.com
💵► / subbrief
🔗► / aaron-amick-9538a4171
💌 Contact Aaron ► Aaron@subbrief.com
🦃 Jive Turkey / @jiveturkey1
Thank you to the original Bohemian Eagle, The Mighty Jingles, for sharing his experience while writing this Ship Brief in 2023. He was a great help. Any mistakes in this video are my own and not a reflection of Mr. Jingles knowledge and experience.
/ bohemianeagle VERY IMPORTANT NOTE The SEA DART missile system was initially semi-active homing. An upgrade made it a 'more autonomous' active homing. Thus SEA DART was both Semi-active homing and Active homing in it's life time.
Sea dart was also very very very loud. Completely irrelevant, but my ears are still ringing from being underneath the launcher a deck down when we loosed one off! Very interesting weapon and cool to see moving around in the magazine and stuff.
Paul is an absolute Gem, and as of today, by his own admission on his channel, he is CANCER FREE, and recovering nicely. Cheers to Paul!
Fun fact about the Olympus, it was originally an aircraft engine, and it powered the concorde and the victor.
The Type 82 Bristol class was cancelled when CVA01 was cancelled, the RN didn't need them without an aircraft carrier to escort.
@@dwgray9000 I just had a giggle at the idea of a destroyer with an afterburning engine. lol. Obviously not the same variant as concorde. lol.
Jingles?! Here?? Wow it's a small internet sometimes!
Best wishes on your recovery sir!
I would like to add that 'The Mighty Jingles' or Paul has recently had a diagnosis of bowel cancer. He has been in for treatment, Has been operated on, and because they caught it early he is expected to make a full recovery. He'll probably be out of commission for a week or 2 but he is over the worse of it.
i think it would mean the world to him to show him some love in his time of need.
thats a paddeling! good to know he will be back up to speed.
Thank you. I saw his video, but it came out at the time of my own diagnosis with leukemia and just... didn't have the bandwidth/emotional energy to watch it.
I am so glad he's expecting a full recovery. He's been a bright spot for me, and I'm sure many, many others, for a long time.
Cancer f***ing sucks.
One of the men killed in the attack was Tony Norman. He was from the same town as me (small, 4K ish people in South East England.) there’s a memorial plaque to him inside the main church in town, and 2 years ago I had the honour of watching his mother lay a wreath at our war memorial in his memory on armistice day.
We will remember him.
I served on HMS Gloucester, my dad served on 5 Type 42s, my brother in law on 2 and, my Uncle was on Sheffield when she sank, and my other uncle was Coventry when she went down. I haven't started this video yet, but I'm looking forward to it. These were the work horses of our fleet for a number of years, and amazing ships to serve on. I went to T45 after Gloucester and it wasn't half as much fun to work on. They were my Dad's favourite ships as well and he served on all sorts of different classes!
I'm told the t45's are like going from a garage to an office block kind of thing?
Wow, that's a lot of service from a single family! Thanks very much!
@corvanphoenix thank you. We have done some years between us all. My Dad's dad was in the RN as well. It's a family business ha ha.
@icarus_falling going from 42 to 45 is that sort of thing. Much more technologically complex, but not as hands on mechanical. Lots of complex digital systems.
@icarus_falling it's also like that size wise. 42 is a like a row boat in comparison.
Love to see Jingles in the wild. Congrats to him for overcoming bowl cancer in recent weeks.
BOWL 🥣 CANCER..
Yeah. Pretty much anything today that most people consume is highly processed and goes in a bowl can give bowl cancer..
Then a person may catch bowl 🥣 cancer and get bowel cancer.
Bowl 🥣 cancer sucks.
Happens when things are bought from China.
May even lead to bowel cancer😊
I served on a Batch 3 42. Sea Dart was steered by the 909 radar, of which there are two (the white domes). There were 3 live firings whilst I was on board including one surface to surface. All three hit. HMS Gloucester's Sea Dart took out a Silkworm missile that was aimed at the USS Missouri during the Gulf War. The Torpedo launchers were not internal, but were 2 Ships Torpedo Weapon System (STWS) one each side of the ship on 01 deck just aft of the uptakes. The Lynx HAS Mk 3 cruised at 120 knts, max was about 140 knts. The Lynx that obtained the speed you talked about was G-LYNX, an Army variant which was very much lighter than the RN version (skids instead of oleos, no radar, etc) fitted with British Experimental Rotor Programme (BERP) blades (now standard) flown by Westland Helecopters test pilots for the record breaking flight of 249 mph. There were 2 182 towed Torpedo decoys, don't remember the other one you talked about.
The Mighty Jingles is truly missed on World of Tanks.
Agreed. I remember when he and QuickyBaby and Circon would platoon up and stream
Just a quick note the P2 Neptune was not a UK build aircraft it was built by Lockheed from the late 1940's they had over the years 16 aircraft and they did aquire 8 from the RAF in 1958... during the war they finally ran out of spare parts and the Lockheed C-130's took over looking for targets... also for HMS Sheffield a message was being sent out on her SCOT (SATCOM) system which caused issue for her UAA1 sensor which was part of her ESM suite which could detect radar emissions from aircraft and missiles for example the Agave radar on the Super Etendards which would have given her some warning as she also didn't receive any data over the datalink from HMS Glasgow which had the updated radar system the 965M which detected the Etendards when they popped up at around 45nm... As to the reasoning for the Phalanx gun it was simple it was lighter than Goalkeeper and the Type 42's had little in the way of excess weight to be added high up which is why the Batch 3's where longer and heavier, Batch 2 design was already set at this point. As to the Type 22's they where running goalkeeper duties on the carriers at that time to defend them from the Exocets... and a final note on the Mk8 4.5inch gun it was a pretty good gun system and was used by the Type 21 frigates for shore bombardment on multiple occasions though yes it did jam on a few occasions it was a more reliable weapon than has been made out...
The attack on HMS Sheffield discussed is missing several factors. Argentina launched the SUE earlier, but had to turn back because of fuel issues. The may4th attack was launched with 2 SUE, each with an exocet. 1 was launched at the first target that was a type 42, the 2nd exocet launched at the largest, which was HMS Hermes the carrier. Sheffield was , using datalink at the time and had to shutdown their radar to transmit. Sheffield did its job and protected the fleet as a picket, the idea is not to lose the ship, but a bruke would be used in the same manner
As a Brit Thank You For doing this Video.
I will say that a Sea Dart can be effective against a Silkworm missile, as the HMS Gloucester D96 did indeed shoot one down that was headed straight for our ship the USS Missouri BB-63 in the Gulf War. Big thanks to all the British Sailors that helped us during the Gulf War! I can't thank you enough as I and my shipmates were sitting at repair 2 which is on the second deck between turrets 1 and 2, with three red hot glowing barrels, and we are standing on the armored deck so not much protection.
You may be interested to know that Captain Salt did have a redemption arc, going on to command another Type 42 (Southhampton) and as Assistant Chief of the Naval Staff he was responsible for the Royal Navy's planning for the execution of the Gulf War. So the lessons learned from the sinking of Sheffield may have contributed to the Gloucester's defense of Missouri.
It should be mentioned that those were Sea Dart Mod. 2s in the Gulf War. Those had their old vacuum tube electronics replaced with modern stuff giving a lot more features incl. capability against sea skimming missiles. Much improved over the original Sea Darts from the Falklands.
@@alanmcclenaghan7548 he was never court martialled for the loss of his ship - something which nearly always happens when a ship is sunk... make of that what you will.
@@alanmcclenaghan7548that is really interesting, I have read Sam Salts book about the loss of Sheffield and many about the Falklands war, I was unaware of this but it makes sense, anything that I can read about the events surrounding it???
we are very proud of all military branches in the uk there service and sacrifice is not forgotten , thank you for covering this
Only one Type 82- Bristol- was built. No more were ordered because the large aircraft carriers they were to escort were canceled.
In response to Glasgow's warning, an order to stand to was issued to the crews of the 4.5 inch gun, Sea Dart and 20 mm guns. The aircraft were detected on the forward Type 909 radar but not on the aft set.[3] Sheffield's UAA1 sensor was then blocked by an unauthorised transmission by the ship's satellite communications systems (SCOT)
Yes, that was very interesting. Interesting that the Scot SATCOM caused interference with the beadstead radar! Not goot
Yes it was
Sorry to bombard you with stuff but did the 4.5 gun have a low level anti aircraft capacity?
@@howardtayloresq. The SCOT didn't effect the 965, it "jammed" the UAA1 ESM system due to the proximity of the Antenna. Parabolic dishes do have side lobes.
@@howardtayloresq. The 4.5 inch shell did have a proximity fuze. HMS Avenger did claim a kill on the last air launched Exocet fired on 3oth May 1982 with her gun. whether she actually got a kill on it or not is another matter.
The Clyde is absolutely hammering out these new frigate hulls there’s 4 already
I've always wondered why the Sheffield was lost, when US Sailors were able to save the USS Stark under similar circumstances. No coordinated DC effort is bad. Did they not have portable pumps like the P-250s that could be connected to the fire main like we had back in the day? Fires at sea suck. That was a great video. A lot of respect for the guys on the Sheffield who didn't make it and those who fought with everything they had.
I don't think they were particularly similar, here is a quick rundown of events.
The exocet that hit her detonated and basically started a chain reaction in the galley, also by pure chance the missile hit (probably) the second worst place for it to hit on the ship - the Forward Auxiliary Machinery Room/Forward Engine Room and so when it impacted and exploded the missile took out the ship's electrical distribution systems and breached the pressurised sea water fire main.
Due to the loss of water mains the crew were basically forced to tackle the blaze with handheld portable electrically powered pumps and buckets, the damage to the fire system severely hampered any firefighting response and any attempt at fire fighting to save the ship was basically pointless, but still the crew fought on for 4 hours trying to halt the blaze until it threatened to detonate the sea dart magazine and the Captain ordered abandon ship.
To top this all off the CO, XO, and AAWO and his assistant were all not on the bridge at the time and the response to the actual hit was slow, in fact there remained confusion onboard and amongst other ships as to what had actually happened until some time after impact.
There was a Board of Inquiry on the 7th of June 1982 and amongst their report you can find the following findings;
1. The spread of the fire was not adequately controlled due to the presence of ignitable material coverings, lack of adequate curtains and sealing to restrict smoke and fires. There was also a shortage of breathing apparatus while the forward escape manholes were found to be too small for men who actually were wearing breathing apparatus.
2. ( Refering to the events leading up to impact ) The board, found that the principal warfare officer and the anti-air warfare officer (AAWO) were guilty of negligence. Admiral John Fieldhouse, the commander in chief of the navy, decided not to court-martial them.
24:00 the black on the masts was painted out with gray paint, to make it less observable
Then there was a wide vertical stripe added from funnel top to waterline, to differentiate them from Argentinian Type 42s ...
I went on board for some beers in Pompey with shipmates who were serving on her the night before they sailed for their Armilla Patrol. Next time I saw them was in Gib, they had spent Christmas away and were returning home, we were there for Exercise Springtrain 82. From there, well, we sailed South. Lost a couple of mates on Sheff. Antrim was way luckier, we got to go back to Pompey with our ship. RiP Shippers.
Hi there...
a way less common knowledge is that Argentina had 2 type 42 destroyers, purchased in late 70s from UK. the "ARA Hercules" and "ARA Santisima Trinidad". They were purchased as AAW destroyers to be deployed with the Argentine carrier "ARA 25 de Mayo". a surface group complemented by "ARA Py" a Gearing (Fram II upgrade) US built destroyer and a fleet tanker.
Fun fact is that Argentina had an exact replica of the Type 42 that UK had, so they could train the best range to perform a strike like the one on Sheffield. it was quite an intel to have the exact ship to train with.
back to 25 de mayo CVBG, This consisted in a pretty good surface group for late 70s and up until mid 80s, since the air group of ARA 25 de Mayo included S2E Trackers, which had onboard radar and the capability of performing AWACS tasks up to a prudent range (something UK could only do with Sea Kings at a much shorter range).
Of course the Argentine navy had an achilles heel:
The carrier wasn't large enough to carry 20 trackers (it only carried 6) + 10 choppers (it only carried 3 sea kings and 1 alouette) so despite having 2x Sea Lynx capability in the Type 42 to enlarge numbers, the ASW capability was limited to vetor coverage against non-nuclear subs. The defense was pretty solid against diesel-electric submarines, since the trackers could form an arrow shape coverage in front of the CVBG, and any contact would have to face the reinforcment from Sea King with sonnar and torps. Furthermore any surpassing sub would have to deal with one of the best hull mounted sonars in LatinAmerica, so odds were pretty good, considering most L.A. subs had a 10mile max range, so a propper attack should need be performed at a range of around 5km to be realistic. Not so easy job for an SSK
Just for fun i will say that "25 de mayo" jet airwing was very limited, (with trackers and helicopters onboard, it could only take as much as 15 A4, but more realistic were an air wing between 7 and 12, the late introduction of the Super Etendard caused some problems bc space was very limited). The airwing was pretty limited number for just about everything and the only AA capability were the A4's AIM-9B and unreliable colt 20mm cannons (and later SUE with "average" agave radar, Magic 1 Missiles and 30mm DEFA 553 cannons). It was an ok airwing for naval strike in a short term war or to join a large coallition in a secondary role but it was not a valid airwing for a high intensity war against a larger fleet.
Brasil had a twin of the 25 de mayo, the Minas Gerais, and by later stages of its life they purchased A4Ku and upgraded them with ELTA2032 radar, new avionics and the chance of firing Fox 1 and 2 missiles. It was unrealistic at a political level, but by 1982, Argentina could have had A4M modified with AGP-63 radar adapted (with a reduced antenna) like the A4AR had years after, and have an airwing that despite being subsonic had the chance of firing all kinds of missiles including Aim-7, AIM-120, and Harpoon missiles. pretty crazy power for the scooter in the 80s, but technically it was doable
If they had had enough wind-over-deck, the British might have been in for a very nasty surprise, given the tenacity of the Argentinian pilots to press their attacks home
Create a diversion with a couple S-2 sections at widely different bearings and at full throttle to provide targeting info and serve as bait to draw the Harrier CAP away, and send in the A-4s at wavetop height from a totally different bearing
Hi Aaron, I love your work, but must correct you on 992 radar's purpose. It is target indication radar which is used to refine the fire control solution from 965 (which operates a t a much lower frequency and therrefore much nigher beamwidth) in order to help the 909 dishes under those big fibreglass domes (one on the bridge adn one on the hangar) THis could track targets a long way out, but had difficulty acquiring targets from 965 tracks. (in fairness 965 was a 50d era radar designed for early warning only) HTH James (ex Weapons engineer RN)
Changing the subject, the Royal Navy knew about the vulnurabilites of the Type 42,, but Her Majesty's Tresaury were more interested in dismantling the Royal Navy at that time. We also knew about Damage Control, but nobody had dealt with a incocming missile before. The burning fuel created many unforeseen problems,which weere used in the design of future ships.
Capt Salt was decoraed receiving a DSO and was not held responsible. THe CO of HMS COVENTRY did'n't' fare so well becuase of his mistakes. Having a submariner in command is no exceuse for not understanding the threat adn your ship's limitaitons, but Perhaps the Task Force Commander was deploying the resources the ships and weapons he had, rather than the ones he wanted/ needed. 🙂
It might not be in the scope of this channel but I highly recommend the book 'Sea Harrier Over the Falkland's by Commander Nigel 'Sharkey' Ward. The CO of a Fleet Air Arm Harrier Squadron based of HMS Invincible.
I served on HMS Intrepid. As far as I am aware, the Exocet warhead didn't explode but the rocket motor spread the fire along with the contents of the galleys. Had the warhead detonated then it would have been a catastrophic loss. One thing we were not aware of at the time is that the Argentines had only just received the AM39 from the manufacturers and French engineers were still working with the Argentines to make the system work. There were suggestions that the French disconnected the warheads so they could not detonate. They could not make the missiles miss the target, but they could make it easier for the target to survive a hit.
The same thing happened with Atlantic Conveyor, one of the ships taken up from trade carrying the supplies including spare helicopters. Both missiles impacted and Prince Andrew who witnessed it said that debris fell a quarter of a mile from the ship. However, it appears that neither missile detonated and they set fire to the ship instead. When the fire was burnt out the ship was boarded to see if anything could be recovered but nothing could be salvaged.
According to one of the books written by the Sea Harrier pilots, the Combat Air Patrol was ordered to carry out a visual search away from the Task Force. Command lacked confidence in the Sea Harrier's ability to detect enemy ships using the Blue Fox radar. The tragedy was that had the CAP stayed where they were, they would have been able to intercept the Super Etendards when the RWR was detected.
The engineers in 801 Squadron had been tweaking and extending the range of the Sea Harrier's radar. A pilot from 801 detected the Northern pincer of the Argentine Task Force whilst they were some distance from the British fleet. The Argentine attack was called off due to lack of wind for their carrier. However, the attempt led to the order to sink the Belgrano, lead ship of the Southern pincer of the attack.
I had a nephew on Sheffield during the Falklands war. He left the Navy when he got back. I always wondered why, but now I understand why. Four hours fighting to save the ship must have been a nightmare I am also Ex Royal Navy, in the Fleet Air Arm, 815 sqdn. on HMS Albion in 1960.
Hi. A bit of a long shot, but does the name Fred 'Foxy' Fowler ring any bells? He was fleet air arm same time as you.
@Nick-bp7jf sorry it does not ring a bell, I was 815. Sqdn on HMS Albion to the far east 1960
@@deniermurch8693 I thought it was a long shot. He has sadly passed now. He was aircraft maintanance. I know he served on HMS Ocean.
Argentina had two Type 42s........At least one of them (possibly both) were escorting their aircraft carrier 25 de Mayo when she got within 100 miles of the RN Task Force and was set to launch the A-4s of 3 Escadrilla but couldn't get enough wind over the deck.
You sure? I thought they were with General Belgrano when HMS Conqueror sank her.
Belgrano had a couple (3) Gearings with her. They may have had Exocets fitted. Belgrano supposedly had Sea Cat fitted.
Hercules and Santisima Trinidad. Both gone now too. Neither lock horns in the Falklands I think, though vets may say otherwise.
@@dwgray9000 No, the Air Group was north of the Falklands, with the Belgrano group south in a classic pincer movement.
The Argentinians located the British TF first ! But 25 de Mayo couldn't launch an attack due to insufficient wind-over-deck.
If there had been enough wind, it could well have turned the tide of the war ...
Jingles sent me here back when you where doing mostly Comd Waters. It's nice to see the nod back
As someone that been on-board during a massive explosion and switchboard fire on a NZ leander class frigate in the early 2000's, knowing how scary and stressful that was, i can only imagine how horrible it must of been to know that close shipmates are dead and to have no water to fight and save anyone else and the very high potential of death yourself just of where you and the ship are
You mentioned that you wanted to know how a lynx chopper goes that fast.
I was talking to a Lynx mechanic who told me that the lynx doesn't actually go that fast in realistic conditions. They simply removed everything that wasn't keeping it in the air, gutted the interior so it became a 1 seater, taped over holes where they took out lights and stuff, gave it just enough fuel to make the speed run but not enough to make a powered landing, and only one small pilot was in there.
Very interesting watch. Thanks for the deep dive.
Hello Aaron. I just want to say thank you for all the informing, interesting content! Regards from Essen, Germany!
This one deserves such an in-depth vid. Ship 'Brief' indeed.
Cheers!
A recent Historigraph video here on youtube covered the loss of HMS Sheffield and the rest of the Falklands conflict. It mentions that Sheffield was using its satellite coms at the time of the attack, which blocked the radar from making the same detection as HMS Glasgow had. Also two key officers had stepped out of the operations room which possibly delayed a response to the situation, if any effective response was even possible.
I'm here because Jingles sent me many years ago while playing Cold Waters! Brilliant to see you working together.
Interesting as always!
the crossover with the mighty jingles we never asked for but personaly, i alwase wanted.!!!
Really enjoying your content.
My dad was about to leave with the task force but during his routine medical checks he got measles diagnosed and was put into quarantine. He never got the measles however one of his friends he was in line with did. I still maintain to this day that saved his life due to a cock up in Haslar.
There was a documentary I saw looking indepth at what happened when the ships were hit.
There were a numbers of errors. Even by the Argentinian pilots.
The ships crossed paths which basically meant at one point one of the ships did not have line of sight of the incoming missiles so couldn't engage.
Turned out recently that the French may not have tweaked the exocet initially so they did not explode when they should have.
Shiny Shef did her job. Heroes, all of them.
Budget cuts meant the Gannets we could have had were long gone. Though there was a plan to get them off a scrap heap and fly them up the ramp on Hermes. Not in time for the Falklands though, afterwards the RN got Searchwater on the SKs.
Hello Aaron, enjoying the tribute to HMS Sheffield . . . from Harry Sheffield !!!
Ay iv been on 2 of these! during the queens golden Jubilee in particular, Nottingham & Gloucester. Also spent some on time the type 23's Frigates and yeah they're all round great ships for there time so thanks for doing a ship brief on the Type 42. Also Nice to see Jingles was willing to help he's a top guy.
Mighty Jingles is a good lad.
During WW2 my father was a machinist on a ship in the South Pacific .He was not on a gun crew but he would help by spraying fire hoses on the barrels of 20mm anti aircraft guns to keep them cool.
48:46 the too close "type 64 pairing" would lead to the loss of HMS Coventry, as she manoeuvred into Broadsword's line of fire
Antenna shown at 17:25 is for an older variant never fitted to a type 42 destroyer. Shef had a type 992 with associated ADN (from memory please confirm) antenna, long cigar shape. ADN being an end fed slotted array. No beam forming as described, which was a feature of later RN radars and it was certainly not 3-D.
Another great video
I'd love to see a video on the Type 45 Daring Class Destroyer.
jingles blessing , wow
I've always been a ground-pounder... I was lucky enough to walk onto the USS Mass as a kid, and my brother and I got to traverse and elevate some 40mm... I'd still rather be a knuckle dragger, but... I get it
good analysis
Having served on a Knox class frigate, I totally understand the concept of being a sacrificial target. The nickname of “fast frigate” for FF was absolutely sarcastic.
22:33 6 rotations per minute means the Type 1022 spins slower than the old one. The old one was 10 RPM, or 6 seconds to make a full rotation. At 6 RPM, the 1022 takes 10 seconds to make a full rotation.
For those wondering why HMS Shefield did not survive an unexploded exocet here is a quick synopsis;
The exocet that hit her detonated and basically started a chain reaction in the galley, also by pure chance the missile hit (probably) the second worst place for it to hit on the ship - the Forward Auxiliary Machinery Room/Forward Engine Room and so when it impacted and exploded the missile took out the ship's electrical distribution systems and breached the pressurised sea water fire main.
Due to the loss of water mains the crew were basically forced to tackle the blaze with handheld portable electrically powered pumps and buckets, the damage to the fire system severely hampered any firefighting response and any attempt at fire fighting to save the ship was basically pointless, but still the crew fought on for 4 hours trying to halt the blaze until it threatened to detonate the sea dart magazine and the Captain ordered abandon ship.
To top this all off the CO, XO, and AAWO and his assistant were all not on the bridge at the time and the response to the actual hit was slow, in fact there remained confusion onboard and amongst other ships as to what had actually happened until some time after impact.
There was a Board of Inquiry on the 7th of June 1982 and amongst their report you can find the following findings;
1. The spread of the fire was not adequately controlled due to the presence of ignitable material coverings, lack of adequate curtains and sealing to restrict smoke and fires. There was also a shortage of breathing apparatus while the forward escape manholes were found to be too small for men who actually were wearing breathing apparatus.
2. ( Refering to the events leading up to impact ) The board, found that the principal warfare officer and the anti-air warfare officer (AAWO) were guilty of negligence. Admiral John Fieldhouse, the commander in chief of the navy, decided not to court-martial them.
Would be interested to see you cover the Type 21 frigates, and in particular HMS Ambuscade which is soon coming back to the UK for a new Museum.
HMS Illustrious the carrier that was fitting out as the Falklands war went on got CIWS installed as an emergency measure as she was bound for the Falklands immediatley upon completion. She was comissioned underway.
These should be a series on their own
Regarding the Types
Type 82 Cruiser would have been the escort for the British nuclear carrier had it been built, once the carrier was cancelled the class was essentially without a purpose and cancelled - HMS Bristol was the only one built.
Types are numbered sequentially so Type 42 was because there was already a Type 41 design (never built). In British classificatnions Type 2x (21,22,23 now into the 30s...) are antisubmarine ships (Frigates) Type 4X (42,45 etc.) ships are air defence ships (Destroyers), Type 8X (Type 82 and planned Type 83 Global combat ship) are multirole ships (Cruisers - although it's likely the GCS will be called a "destroyer".
The old Vickers yard is now where they build Submarines (currently the Astute class)
One important thing when reviewing the T42 and the Falklands war is that this was a war fought 40 years ago, sea skimming missiles were a brand new threat that had not been in service or designed against fro more than a couple of years (the USN was only just introducing Phallanx and Aegis). The T22 being designed against that threat was brand new.
Basically the T42 was the cheapest and cheapest ship that could be built in order to have a competent medium range SAM System (Sea Dart) on a ship in a RN task force - their only role was to move those Sea Darts around and provide air defence for RN task groups. It's worth bearing in mind that the threat that they were designed against was soviet bombers firing large antiship missiles from high/medium range.
T42s Olympus Engines were very loud.
The Mk 46 launcers you show aren't the ones on the T42 - they were the old double tube ones that you pivoted out over the side, I was told "if you hear these launching you should grab your lifejacket because you're likely to be swiming soon!" although actually they may now be useful against underwater drones.
Sea Dart is actually pretty good at intercepting cruise missiles - certainly post the upgrades that occurred during the ships life (and post Sheffield) - it was the only SAM system to engage an Iraqi cruise missile during the Gulf War - shooting down a Styx missile that would otherwise have tested USS Missouri's phallanx's... IIRC HMS Exeter also shot down(or claimed to have) an Exocet during the Falklands.
One other thing that you didn't mention but was a big step forward for the time was that it was fully capable of operating in a CBRN environment with a pressurised citadel and airlock for entering/exiting and washing down. Plus a topside/deck saltwater spray system to wash the decks down.
It's worth bearing in mind that the only reason that picket ships were needed was becasue when the Invincibles were built no AEW capability was budgeted for (an era of lots of cuts in the RN during the 1970s). Leading to ship based Air search radars being the best the RN had. Similarly HMS Sheffield and HMS Glasgow both actually detected the incoming Exocet, with their radars with vastly different responses, similarly the T42s ESM system detected the Super Entendard's radar and passed that information to the bridge - but the significance wasn't appreciated (in part due to the ESM capabilities being kept so secret that people weren't well enough aware of what it meant).
There's been an awful lot of stuff written about the loss of HMS Sheffield - alot of it turned out to be false as secrecy restrictions have been more details have been released in general there were an awful lot of mistakes/snafus and failures onboard Sheffield (you can contrast her response to the attack with that of HMS Glasgow which was the next picket ship along) that led to the loss fo the ship - not the RNs finest hour although there was alot of individual bravery once the ship had been hit. Sheffield did not execute a "handbrake" manouvere, Glasgow did. The visual accuistiion of the exocet only served to give long enough for a verbal warning. The hit was a single Exocet that DID detonate. One of the reasons for the complacency on Sheffield was that the intelligence officer had not read the briefing in detail enough to realise that the Super Entendards had air to air refueling capability and therefore believed it was impossible for an Exocet attack to be made at the position they were in and the Prinicpal Warfare Officer (PWO) had left the CIC to pee at precisely the wrong moment which prevented the detection of the exocet being acted upon.
Similarly the experiences during the Falklands including the loss of the Sheffield are the reason that RN and USN damage control equipment, training and performance was so much more rigorous after 1982 (talk to people who were in the USN in 1982),
Phallanx was fitted to the T42s rather than Goalkeeper as it was lighter and didn't require deck penetrations (also the reason Goalkeeper is now out of service with the RN).
Jingles was definitely on a T42 - HMS Newcastle, he didn't handle Sea Wolf Missiles, potentially you mis-heard Sea dart?
The whole point of the escort vessels was to protect the main fleet units (Carriers, landing ships, tankers/merchant ships) which on occasion meant getting themselves sunk in preference - certainly the frigates in the Falkland Sound were deliberately positioning themsleves "upthreat" and doing their best to persuade the Argentinian aircraft to bomb them in preference - often successfully, they were essentially body guards throwing themselves infront of bullets/exocets.
The T42s were in service far longer than they would have been due to France (mainly) messing around the Horizon project leading to Britain withdrawing from the project and building the T45s - which are essentially a 1990s equivaent design - as cheaper faster designed ship that you can get a PAAMS system out on the water following carriers around - similar absence of any real ASW capability. They did an awful lot of work and served their purpose very well, being the RNs air defence ship for decades from the end of the cold war to post gulf wars.
Your statement about the declaration of the exclusion zone is inacurrate - the declaration stated that any Argentinian military vessel in the South Atlantic was liable to attack without warning and ANY vessel within the TEZ around the Falklands was liable to attack, this had no legal standing but the purpose of this was to remove neutral shipping from the TEZ due to vastly increasing their insurance costs and therefore leading to a prohibition from the insurers on merchant shipping entering the area.
26:20 Argentinia's Neptunes were built by Lockheed in the US, and former US Navy planes - not British (although they had also used them)
The Argentine Neptune P2 are the French Navy version they flew from Pacific Island based to patrol the environs during bomb tests off Tahiti
The French P2s had various electronic engagements with the RNZN T12 frigates HMNZS Otago and HMNZS Canterbury sent on an operational mission against the French nuclear trigger tests. The newer HMNZS Canterbury built 1971-74 had been designed for many of the similar op room fits as HMNZS Sheffield and the ECM/ESM and 965 radar fit would have been similar. And pretty much the same full fit 174M/184M solid state passive and active sonar and 992 target indicator were offered to the RNZN in 1970/71 but were rejected by the RNZN due to political decision of the NZ government to fit US equipment which the UK govt refused to do for inevitable commercial reasons and the personal experience of the prototype 184 sonar and 992 radar by the director of RNZN plans in 1970 who I talked to for 3 hours in Auckland in late 1982 or early 83. The Captain Ian Bradley also demanded the RNZN frigate be built without the revised solid state passive 174 which was the RNs main search sonar in the late cold war tracking Soviet cruisers at ranges of up 80km. NZ got the bulb MRS1 fire control rather than the solid state MRS6 fitted to G3 UK Leaders and refitted Rothesays
The 10 minute cold to flank is more to do with a rapid dispersal during the Cold War. Giving a ship, the slim chance to get out of the instant blast zone of a nuke on the port.
Those engines were absolute beasts. Same engine (with an extra turbine and no afterburner obviously), as the ones on Concorde.
Similar engines, but not 'the same'. The marinised version of the 593 was the TM3B, engineered to burn distillate diesel with different components
Gun mounts are usually mounted on the Main Deck instead of a superstructure (above the main deck). VHF radar have a pretty good range and can detect stealth aircraft.
The argies did indeed own two type-42s, hence they knew about the capabilities of the sea dart. Years later one of them ingloriously rolled over and sank at its pier...
Always great stuff here! Sad for the HMS Sheffield (& other British warships) that it took Exocet missiles used by Argentine forces to demonstrate the importance of CIWS. Will just add a footnote on the Lynx helicopters (seen at 15:55). These helicopters also carried (and seen in image in this video) Sea Stuka ASM's (can also be configured as SSM's). Worth noting for they were fired a # of times during the Falklands War (deployed from Type 42 destroyers) and though rather short ranged (25 km), and smaller warhead were highly accurate (especially considering Argentine forces had no adequate defense for these missiles).
I'm pretty sure the acoustic torpedo decoy was originally a British invention and given to the US during WWII (like the cavity magnetron). I will also note that the P-2 Neptune was manufactured by Lockheed (very much a US company). I suspect the "false detections" were first the Neptune, then the attack aircraft popping up above the radar horizon, and then back down. The radar operator should have sent CAP to investigate (hindsight is always 20/20). This was an interesting time to live through (I was friends with some of the US military radar analysts trying to figure out lessons from this war).
Reading a book on the conflict, I was suprised to learn that the type 42 was also in service with the Argentinian navy. I guess it's the nature of war that the very weapons you design and build will, or can, be used against you at times.
HMS Conqueror next please. As you are a former Submariner i am amazed you have not made a 'Sub Brief' about the only nuclear boat to fire in anger. That we know about.
Sheffield didn't have the torpedo tubes. The Batch 1 Type 42s (except for Sheffield) had the US SVTT mounts (STWS in British service) for Mk 46 located on the wings between the funnel and aft mast. Mk 46 was later replaced with Stingray. The tube doors shown in the superstructure of the ship are from a Type 23.
Sea dart was not a beam riding missile, the earlier sea slug was beam riding. Sea dart was semi active, with the missile front antenna using reflective energy from the target which was illuminated by the ships 909 J band radar. The 909 missile reference radar (MRA) illuminated the rear of the missile, enabling the missile to calculate intercept point.
The reason the type-22 frigate was not alongside the type-42 destroyer on the picket was that they were being used in a layered defence strategy. The thinking was that the Argentine Air Force would attempt to sink the carriers as those were the main threat in the task force. To get to the carriers they'd have to fly past the type-42s on picket, the harriers on cap and the type-22s on close defence. The thinking was it would keep the carriers safe, and it very much did. Unfortunately it somewhat left the type-42s out on their own without much cover and the Argentines realised they'd never get to the carriers, so went after the picket instead.
The 2 Canberra-class LHDs of the Royal Australian Navy have no missile and air defence.
Nulka decoys are the only defence. I still can not understand this.
The computer room was beneath the ops room. The largest cross section was just above it.
Anyone interested in this conflict and the type 42 should definitely read "Four weeks in may" by David Hart-Dyke, the CO. Gives a first hand account of their journey to the Falklands and their operations before Coventrys loss.
I recognize that Strike Fleet ship profile.
Given that the Exocet is radar guided, it won't see those infrared decoy rockets. They would need to be the chaff rockets.
Hi - great vid as per usual, thanks - disregarding carrier AWACS, would the the US sensors/missiles of the period have been markedly more effective in the same situation?
I believe it does do lead pursuit as you put it. The manufacturer claims that it has "proportional navigation".
Its public domain that anti helicopter radars use the multi beam technique to find helicopter rotors. They have very wide radar lobes to catch the rotor when its perpendicular and then the radar lobe intersection provides the accuracy
The Type 42 batches 1 & 2 is a perfect case study in how cost saving affects effectiveness - and in the end actually makes the whole spend a waste of money. The batch 3s were 40ft longer (which was the original spec) which resulted in far better sea keeping and the space for more equipment - a Sea Wolf could have been accommodated.
Goodness, how small was a frigate in the 70s?
Grim title, but the book called "Watching men burn" by Tony McNally is a unique read, I had to put the book down a few times, just to shake off the feels it generated.
Good Review over the Type 42.... three main points you missed.... One major reason for the loses was the aluminum water tight doors and superstructure like 1950-80's USN ships had they were all incapable of handling battle-damaged and fires.... The Type 42's had room above the hanger to house a Sea Wolf Point defense launcher in conjunction with the Sea Dart system on the Bow.... the the Royal Navy could have fielded the Phalanx CIWs before the Falkland's War.... but didn't' for money saving reasons.... It's truly a shame what happened during the war as many issues could've been avoided if the bureaucracy hadn't been so involved with procurements.
The only structure on T42s that was aluminium was the funnel casing. Everything else was steel.
I went on HMS manchester as exchange 😂
Best 2weeks of my army career
Treated well and got rat arsed every night whilst on exercise
My understanding of the propulsion paradigm follows, re: COGAG, (is it correct?)
'Why do they have two sets of turbines?' is a common question... Well, it comes down to that turbines have one narrow powerband where they operate at max efficiency. If the set that is meant to drive the ship at 30+ knots was used to go 18 knots, it would use almost the same amount of gas... So it makes sense to have a lower power set that is most efficient for, say, 12-18 knots, and one for 25-30 knots. The alternative being using complex gearing systems, and, having both systems provides redundancy- always desirable in a warship...
OK, SO- That is my understanding of the advantages of this paradigm. If anyone that has actually workes in such, id like to know if the foregoing (basic summation of (COGAG, etc?) is correct... ?
Cheers!
The neptune was NOT a UK built aircraft!!! its an American aircraft sir!!!
The shiney chef.
I already liked Jingles for his snarky World of Tanks playthrough comentary. I didn't realize he was a war hero.
❤
My Scottish Mom always used to say: "There are no cows in Glasgow." Hiya Jingles!
Quick question for anyone in the comments. What happened to the video on the Harsfjarden Incident? I can't find it on the channel.
Captain Salt on the Sheffield was using the satellite communication phone, and the Sheffield had to turn to standby her radar, because radar interferes with the satellite communication. Glasgow Captain had banned the use of satellite communication during daylight hours. Glasgow did detect a possible Exocet attack and informed Sheffield. Glasgow started to undertake anti missile manoeuvres turning and lunching chaff.
Always enjoy Sub Brief, but more than a few errors in this video. For example, Sheffield's sensor and weapons fit in the spring of 1982 was quite different than that presented at the start of the vid. Different radars, different countermeasures gear, different torpedoes, no mention of sonars that were present. For example, the Corvus chaff launcher system was installed, and neither of Sea Gnat, Barricade or DLF were present. Barricade can launch both chaff and IR decoys, but Barricade IR even if present would have had no effect against Exocet, an active radar guided missile that would ignore IR decoys. DLF meanwhile is a floating passive decoy, not a chaff launcher.
40 years? I was in high school when this war broke out. The sinking of HMS Sheffield as a very modern and armed DD shook everyone to his or her core. Except for the Argentineans.
It's Falklands, not Faulk Lands 😉
14:08 are IR decoys, won't help much against a radar guided missile like Exocet or Harpoon
Hello, Have you done anything on the submarines of Sweden? It would be very interesting to hear you view on them.
As a loyal peon of The Salt Mines, I want to let everyone know that our dear overlord Jingles, aka Paul Carlton, is cancer free and at home recovering. Now I must go back to work mining that salt.
No mentioned that the Sheffield wasn't closed up at action stations during the attack
@subbrief, I think there is a small error here, the Seawolf was not deployed in the type 42
Looks like she similar in size and weapons to the FFG-7s
Enforcing 200 mile zone. HMS Conqueror.
Sea Dart is not a Beam Rider!!! it's a CW Semi Active Radar Homer like the Tarter and Sea Sparrow which tracked the target by its doppler shift!!! It could do lead pursuit as the missile control system used proportional navigation. Proximity Fuze was a Pulse Range Gated active radar with a expanding Continuous Rod Warhead. The improved version didn't use active homing, that was the plan for the Sea Dart Mk 2 which was cancelled in the same defence cuts which caused the Falklands War!!! The improvements to the missile were a command link and Trajectory control auto pilot which got the missile up high at an early part of the flight if required and kept the missile there until it had to dive down on the target via a command from the ship. Due to less drag up high it massively increased the missiles range. Sea Dart's original range was around 28 Miles. the ones with trajectory control and the auto pilot could go a bit longer.
909 Radar was a J band Pulse Tracker with a I Band CW Illuminator, plus a I Band wide field aerial that sent a part of the Illuminator transmitter signal up to an aerial on the back of the missile. The target echo was picked up by four rod aerials around the Ramjet intake on the missile (like the SARH aerial on later versions of the RIM-8 Talos). Comparing of the signals received on the four aerials determined target sight line. After down converting both forward and rear signals were mixed and this cancelled out the doppler shift put onto the signals by the movement of the missile, just leaving the Doppler frequency put onto the forward signal by the movement of the target. Yes it could be notched!!!
The Batch 1 Type 42's had two triple torpedo tube mounts..
The Chaff fit on a batch 1 and 2 was twin 8 barrel Vickers Corvus Chaff Launchers. The Sea Gant was a post Falklands thing.
The 966 Radar was based on 1.4 Metre band radars developed by the British in the late 1930's. The Reason they were still using them in the 1970's was attempts to develop more modern radars as collaborative projects with other European nations mainly the Dutch, Failed. The Royal Navy claimed that the 1.4 Metre kit was less effected by Weather Clutter
The 1022 was Natp D Band Radar, made up I do believe of a UK Transmitter and aerial design based on the Marconi S600 Radar used by a number of NATO Air forces and a Dutch Receiver built by Phillips.
The Lynx Air Speed Record was done with rotor blades with weird shaped tips that were swept back. Those blades were never fitted to the early aircraft.
Just to add some info I got off a guy who actually was involved in the assessment of Sea Dart's effectiveness during the war and later. 44 missiles fired for 8 kills (including a blue on blue) in 36 Engagements of which 3 failed due to launcher malfunctions. 10 of the missiles fired failed to hit anything due to them being fired at non aircraft targets or were fired without guidance.
HMS Invincible fired 6 missiles in three 2 round salvos during the attack on Atlantic Conveyer on 25th May at Chaff Clouds fired from other ships. HMS Bristol fired two at what turned out to be birds. HMS Coventry fired one unguided at the Skyhawks that attacked her on 25th May. HMS Exeter fired one unguided on the 7th May which didn't guide due to a software bug. in the Salvo program they used in the engagement.
HMS Cardiff fired a two round Salvo at an Argentine Air Force 707 while she was on the way down to the Falklands at maximum range, which the 707 managed to evade by doing a very steep dive.
A number of missiles were fired in two round salvo's which automatically reduced the Single Shot Kill Probability, plus the fire control computer would inhibit a free to fire on the system if the Probability of a Kill Calculations it did were below a certain percentage. However, this could be and was overridden by the operators on a number of engagements. Take off the Missiles fired that were never going to kill anything and the system got a 25% effectiveness.
The Trajectory control and command link to the missile were in the system from the start!! The upgrades were a more efficient autopilot, an improved warhead and an upgraded proximity fuze that allowed interception of smaller targets.
How big and necessary is Damage Control when you need it?
The crew is the most inefficient part of a ship unless that ship is an LCS 😂