HMS London in 1991 (Operation Granby): which helicopter, light guns?

[Our Ned]

I fear there's a mixup in the anecdote quoted by bentwaters81tfw.  Gloucester was fitted with Seadart, not Seawolf, the missile fired from shore on 25 February 1991 was a Silkworm, not a SCUD, London had no weapons capable of engaging a target on shore (except for her twin 30mm at close range) and Seaslug missiles left RN service in 1986 when the last of the County class ship had the system removed.

[bentwaters81tfw]

25 minutes ago, Our Ned said:

I fear there's a mixup in the anecdote quoted by bentwaters81tfw.  Gloucester was fitted with Seadart, not Seawolf, the missile fired from shore on 25 February 1991 was a Silkworm, not a SCUD, London had no weapons capable of engaging a target on shore (except for her twin 30mm at close range) and Seaslug missiles left RN service in 1986 when the last of the County class ship had the system removed.

Yes, my mistake, it meant SeaDart. I was surprised when he said a SCUD, as you couldn't hit a barn with one. Silkworm makes more sense. I'll tell him his memory is slipping. Must be age. He's at least 10 years younger than me. The SeaSlugs were 'old stock' still aboard, the ones that fire out metal rods, yes? Going on what I am told here.

[maxim-cruisers]

As far as I know, it was USS Missouri which bombarded the Silkworm batteries with her 16" guns.

 

Gloucester could have used only her 4.5" gun.  I am not sure, if Sea Dart could be used to attack targets on the coast. In theory yes, but probably not very efficient.

[maxim-cruisers]

Here some photos of my model of HMS London in progress:

 

Changes of the superstructure (in comparison to the original kit parts behind)

 

With HMS Gloucester:

 

Current status:

 

 

More details later...

Edited February 13, 2021 by maxim-cruisers

[Chewbacca]

Sadly, as you note above @bentwaters81tfw, I fear your neighbour's memory is fading.  So for the record and to avoid rumour turning into fact, may I be permitted to explain what really happened.  My credentials for this are that I was the Flight Commander of HMS BRAVE; we arrived in the Gulf as part of the Op Granby roulement on 5 Feb 91 and I was involved in some of the incidents referred to above.  My avatar is of me just about to get airborne on 18 Feb 91 with 4 Skua.

 

Firstly, LONDON Flight did not fire any Sea Skua during Op Granby.  Of the 8 Lynx flights/10 helicopters only 4 fired Sea Skua.  The reason for there being 10 helicopters was that the two Batch 1 T22s (BRAZEN and BRILLIANT) were "double manned" though BRILLIANT's 2nd Lynx was transferred to BRAVE from  10 - 28 February because were were further up-threat and the plan was that we were going to effectively take the weight off GLOUCESTER and CARDIFF Flights which had borne the brunt of the fighting.

 

The results of the Skua firings were:

 

CARDIFF Flight XZ730/335: fired 8 missiles, hit 5 patrol boats and one mooring buoy

GLOUCESTER Flight XZ 720/335: fired 8 missiles, hit 3 patrol boats, one landing ship and one minesweeper

BRAZEN Flight XZ 724/331: fired 3 missiles, all malfunctioned due to radar defect

MANCHESTER Flight XZ694 fired 5 missiles, hit 1 patrol boat and 2 minelayers

 

Secondly, the GLOUCESTER incident.  It was on the morning of 25 Feb 91 at about 0545.  My pilot and I were in BRAVE's Ops Room getting the final tactical update for our first launch at 0600 when we heard on the anti-air warfare coordination circuit (AAWC) that a missile was in flight and heading towards the Task Group.  The order was given to scramble the Lynx with Yellow Veil (our jammer pod) and about 4 mins later we were were airborne and a minute later we were on task.  What had happened further north from us was that the USS MISSOURI was sitting off the coast of Kuwait undertaking Naval Gunfire Support (NGS) and was easily visible from the shore, especially at night.  The Iraqis had two HY2 Silkworm missiles (the Chinese built variant of the Soviet/Russian SSN2) (see below) that they had mounted on a headland in Kuwait.  They were aimed visually at the flash of MISSOURI's guns so as to avoid any warning from the targeting radar.

 

 

Silkworm missile photographed in a warehouse at Ashuyabah, 17 Mar 91.  My photograph though this is taken from a book because I cannot find the original.

 

The first that the task group knew of the missiles was when one of them overflew one of the British MCMVs stationed in the minefield between MISSOURI and the coast who called it on the AAWC circuit.  This alerted the air team in GLOUCESTER and MISSOURI.  The first Silkworm malfunctioned and splashed harmlessly in the sea; the second continued heading towards the force.  GLOUCESTER's air team formed a track on the incoming missile and the on watch Anti-Air Warfare Officer (AAWO) took the decision that it was hostile and not a returning allied jet and gave the order to fire.  The CO of GLOUCESTER was not in the Ops Room at the time but was alerted to the action by hearing the Sea Dart hydraulics powering up and the voice recording of the engagement in the Ops Room goes something like this:

 

"Birds affirm hostile XXXX" (I don't remember the track number)

Whoosh-whoosh

"Birds away hostile XXXX"

Clatter clatter clatter (as the CO falls down the ladder into the Ops Room

"Whose birds?" asked the CO

"Ours Sir" replied the AAWO

 

One of the 2 Dart fired hit the Silkworm and it exploded with some of the debris falling quite close to HMS LONDON

 

Meanwhile the MISSOURI, recognising the threat, fired chaff to seduce the Silkworm.  Unfortunately, the USS JARRETT which was in close proximity to MISSOURI saw the chaff firing and her Phalanx close in weapon system, which was set to fully automatic, assessed the chaff as a hostile missile heading towards her and engaged.  The Phalanx rounds passed through the chaff cloud and hit MISSOURI, fortunately with no casualties.  MISSOURI launched an unmanned air vehicle down the bearing of the Silkworm firing, located the launch site and neutralised it with NGS.

 

I think the "we have 57 Sea Slugs aboard" recollection comes from an earlier incident in which I was also involved.

 

There was a significant minethreat in the North Persian Gulf and in the early hours of 16 Feb 91, USS TRIPOLI, which was acting as both the air MCM platform with MH53E embarked and the northern air controller struck a floating contact mine blowing a large hole in her starboard side.  We launched from BRAVE as usual around 0600 for a surface combat air patrol and again as normal called TRIPOLI for tasking.  They explained that the mine damage had rendered their AVCAT system unserviceable and we were tasked to refuel from USS WISCONSIN before returning to TRIPOLI to carry out minesearch in her vicinity.  On one of the orbits around TRIPOLI we flew around her bow and settled on our northerly heading passing up her starboard side when I looked up and saw in the mist/smoke ahead of us about 3 nm away, the shape of an AEGIS class cruiser.  As I was looking at her, her aft end lifted out of the water before coming splashing back down.  She had activated a Manta bottom mine which caused extensive damage.  Later that day, her damage assessment signal included the wonderful line, which may be where the "57 Sea Slugs" bit comes from, "much regret only have 118 Standard SM2ER missiles remaining serviceable"!  The irony of that was that even with 4 T42 destroyers in the Gulf at the time, we only had 76 Sea Dart in the entire fleet!

 

Hope that helps and apologies if it has hijacked the thread

 

The work you've done so far looks great.  It's very difficult to tell from the perspective of the photo of LONDON and GLOUCESTER together, but LONDON should be just under 20 mm longer than GLOUCESTER in that scale (485 ft 7 in vs 463 ft according to Friedman)

 

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by Chewbacca
formatting

[maxim-cruisers]

The macro mode distorts the proportions. Gloucester is shorter - but I calculate only a difference of around 10 mm in 1/700.

[Chewbacca]

Actually that's my mistake in the maths.  The difference in length converted to metric is 6.88 m which in 1/700 is of course 9.83 mm so pretty much spot on to the actual model lengths; my brain is so used to 1/350 calculations at the moment that I used the incorrect scale when calculating the difference.  My apologies for any confusion caused.