davknigh Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 1 hour ago, jjb1970 said: Well, that went well: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/britain-s-flagship-35bn-aircraft-carrier-hms-queen-elizabeth-pulled-off-major-nato-drill-due-to-mechanical-fault/ar-BB1hKr4a Any chance of raising the Ark Royal? She might be in better nick… Cheers, David 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 4630 Posted February 4 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 4 12 minutes ago, davknigh said: Any chance of raising the Ark Royal? She might be in better nick… Cheers, David Don’t you mean the Mary Rose. 😀 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 5 hours ago, jjb1970 said: Well, that went well: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/britain-s-flagship-35bn-aircraft-carrier-hms-queen-elizabeth-pulled-off-major-nato-drill-due-to-mechanical-fault/ar-BB1hKr4a What was it? Quote During last-minute checks ahead of sailing for NATO exercise Steadfast Defender, it has been discovered that HMS Queen Elizabeth has a significant issue with her starboard propeller shaft. The ship will not sail on 4th February as planned and instead, HMS Prince of Wales will be readied to replace her. Is it the same problem as PoW? Quote The RN has instituted additional checks on the aircraft carrier’s shaft lines as a result of the painful lessons learned from past experience with HMS Prince of Wales. In the course of an inspection, concerns have arisen around one of the couplings on the starboard shaft. It should be noted that this is not the same problem that afflicted HMS Prince of Wales. Although the ship remains in class (ie. technically seaworthy), it has been decided as a sensible precaution, to withdraw her from the exercise until the issue can be thoroughly investigated and remedied. https://www.navylookout.com/mechanical-issue-prevents-hms-queen-elizabeth-from-sailing-on-nato-exercise/ 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted February 5 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 5 It's slightly embarrassing for the RN. Bad stuff happens and ships break down, but the T45 destroyers and the QEC carriers appear to have been somewhat troubled by any stretch. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) 7 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said: What was it? So long as full speed ahead wasn't "rewired to go backwards instead of forwards". Edited February 5 by Ozexpatriate 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 10 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said: So long as full speed ahead wasn't "rewired to go backwards instead of forwards". Too true - we don't need another HMS Banged-up by HMS Troutbridge. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben B Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Maybe the Fleet needs to start press-ganging again, get galleries of oarsmen... the carrier won't get to the Red Sea very quickly, but without engines it'll at least meet environmental targets :) On a related note, maybe the RN can recruit out-of-work actors as deck crew... if they can realistically mime servicing planes, maybe we can trick Putin into thinking that -instead of being unable to afford a carrier air wing- we have in fact invented fighter-bombers with fully functional cloaking devices ;) Sorry for the thread drift... silly comments because the reality of a battle fleet with non-working ships and no air cover, on the verge of a 3rd world war, is nail-chewingly horrifying... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 On 04/02/2024 at 14:45, davknigh said: Any chance of raising the Ark Royal? She might be in better nick… Along with Terry Loughran (Big Tel) as "Team Leader / #1 Driver", I'd willingly serve with him. https://hmsarkroyalassociation.org/index.php/about-us https://www.flickriver.com/photos/rn_topten/15752917813/ 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Has this been mentioned before? Quote The Royal Navy's officer training college in Devon has been rated "inadequate" by Ofsted. Inspectors at Dartmouth's Britannia Royal Naval College found mould, rot and some areas so structurally unsafe they were out of bounds. Staff shortages, medical inspection delays and ill-fitting kit were also cited in the report. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-66603297 Quote Dartmouth military college has 'worst case of rot' Ofsted has ever seen and rated 'inadequate' https://www.forces.net/services/navy/female-military-recruits-given-ill-fitting-uniforms-report-finds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 minute ago, KeithMacdonald said: Has this been mentioned before? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-66603297 https://www.forces.net/services/navy/female-military-recruits-given-ill-fitting-uniforms-report-finds They're just trying to get back to the conditions when the college was based on a wooden battleship*... * Think HMS Victory with terminal rot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted February 6 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 6 Chickens coming home to roost . Bet they wish they had Ballistic Missile Defence for type 45s now short sighted indeed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Yer, but... Drones are cheaper than missiles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 hour ago, billbedford said: Yer, but... Drones are cheaper than missiles. ... and easier to produce relatively rapidly in relatively high volumes. For swarm attacks which can overwhelm defenses intended for small numbers of incoming. I can recall seeing a promotional video from Intel Corp on their own work on drone swarms, maybe five or so years ago. Back then, it was promoted as intended for pretty civil aviation displays. Seems to have gone dark, or been weaponised since then. Which reminded me of the old saying : Quantity has a quality of its own. That's usually and falsely ascribed to Stalin. Was actually from Thomas A. Callaghan Jr., a US defense consultant in the 1970s/80s, and director of the Allied Interdependence program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies - very much a NATO Think Tank. Coincidently, first used in connection with US warships/carriers. Quote “Quantity has a Quality All Its Own,” Allied Interdependence Newsletter No. 13, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 21 June 1979 (which Callaghan produced and presumably authored), cited in Naval War College Review, “How much is not enough? The non-nuclear air battle in NATO’s central region”, Volume 33, March-April (1980), footnote on p. 77, quotation on p. 68 https://klangable.com/blog/quantity-has-a-quality-all-its-own/ While we may lament the shortage of air-crewed aircraft on QE and PoW, from the logistics point-of-view, there's no doubt they could make very good stand-off platforms for long-range drones. They might suffer less from the supply-chain constraints that our current fleet already has with missiles. Limited capacity onboard, with the need to return to a safe port (somewhere away from the action zone) to resupply from a limited and very expensive supply. Not that I would encourage such escalation, because (from the same logistics point-of-view) for every carrier at sea there could be dozens or hundreds or thousands of small tarmac roads ashore that could make for effective drone launch-strips. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alastairq Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Not quite shippystuff, but I thought this was an interesting enlightenment 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 No idea why the Royal Navy never bought these. Must be stupid politicans or something. https://www.twz.com/news-features/cmv-22b-osprey-not-operationally-suitable-according-to-test-report 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 We could have used the Fairey Rotodyne More sensible than an Osprey? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundy Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 3 hours ago, pete_mcfarlane said: No idea why the Royal Navy never bought these. Must be stupid politicans or something. ....... or that it never had any significant priority in the UK programme, to justify funding. Best wishes Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 13 hours ago, burgundy said: ....... or that it never had any significant priority in the UK programme, to justify funding. Best wishes Eric It's always high up the priority list for armchair admirals (and their unlimited budgets). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 14 hours ago, burgundy said: ....... or that it never had any significant priority in the UK programme, to justify funding. Best wishes Eric You didn't get the sarcasm then? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundy Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, billbedford said: You didn't get the sarcasm then? Sorry. No! After 38 years in MOD, I am seldom surprised by the lack of understanding about how the system works - not least from journalists (apologies to @pete_mcfarlane, I was not accusing him of being a journalist). Best wishes Eric 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Are these the ones that couldn't get delivered to Ukraine? Quote In a recent meeting in London, Greek Minister of National Defence, Nikos Dendias, and James Heappey, UK Minister of State for the Armed Forces, discussed the potential transfer of British minehunting vessels to Greece. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-minehunting-ships-could-be-transferred-to-greece/ 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted February 13 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 13 I see there is talk in the press again (presumably around next gen destroyer) referring to reducing manning of future warships to as little as 50 men. While I can see how you could get to this with the use of automation etc, I wonder if this starts to get to the point where damage control becomes very difficult. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted February 13 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 13 I suspect it's much more a case of the RN adjusting crewing to meet available bodies than anything else. They always carried a lot of surplus bodies to provide an attrition reserve and for damage control but forces recruitment seems to be a wreck. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Only noticed today, but from pictures of POW's departure on exercise she does not have any Phalanx CIWS fitted. Now 20 years ago the RN/RFA was 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' as there wasn't enough Phalanx to go around, especially after a load of were pinched, bolted down to a flatbed artic and used for base defence in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, all these years on and with a corresponding huge reduction in the fleet of operational vessels it's rather unforgivable and really quite embarrassing that one of our two most expensive and high profile naval assets is heading to sea with only small arms available for self defence. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted February 13 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 13 You’d have thought with all the talk of PoW heading down to the gulf to cover when Ike leaves station, they would have already been scrambling to find ciws just in case… 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now