Aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales has departed from Portsmouth heading to Rosyth for repairs, following several delays before sailing to Scotland.

As first reported by the UK Defence Journal, the vessel broke down off the Isle of Wight in August as it had deployed to the United States. As it was unable to make the trip, sister-ship HMS Queen Elizabeth deployed to the U.S. instead.

According to the Royal Navy in a statement, inspections by divers revealed the shaft coupling had failed and the “fastest and safest way” to fix the massive warship is to return the vessel to the drydock in which it was assembled at the Babcock yard in Rosyth.

“The aircraft carrier is heading for Rosyth for work on her starboard (right hand) propeller shaft which suffered a mechanical defect as the ship left for New York last month. Inspections by divers revealed the shaft coupling had failed. The fastest and safest way to repair it and return the ship to operations will mean the carrier will enter dry dock in Rosyth, one of the few yards capable of accommodating the 65,000-tonne warship.”

Timescale for repairs still unknown

The Royal Navy HMS Prince of Wales departs Portsmouth for Rosyth (mod.uk) that since the aircraft carrier returned to Portsmouth Naval Base in early September, the ship’s engineers have been working with divers and expert naval architects and engineers from Babcock – who run the dockyard at Rosyth – and the MoD’s Defence Equipment and Support organisation to work out what is needed to return HMS Prince of Wales back to operations.

“The extent of and the timescale for the repairs will not be fully known until the ship is in dry dock and has been thoroughly inspected by engineers, but the goal is to return HMS Prince of Wales to front-line operations as quickly and safely as possible. In the meantime the mighty 33-ton starboard propeller was removed ahead of her journey to the Firth of Forth.”

Top brass remain optimistic

The Royal Navy were also keen to point out in their statement that the ship has sailed with a full complement of crew – 750 men and women – who will remain with the ship and continue training for renewed operations as well as supporting the maintenance package while in Rosyth.

“While alongside in Rosyth, they will continue to crew and train on the ships systems for their operational roles while also taking advantage of their temporary new home’s stunning Scottish landscape to undertake leadership and adventurous training activities during the autumn and winter months.”

Captain Richard Hewitt was quoted as saying:

“While our plans to push the boundaries of the UK’s carrier innovation are temporarily on hold, I am immensely proud of the ship’s company who have risen to the challenge of preparing for repairs while facing the short-term disappointment of a postponed deployment. Now that the initial engineering challenges have been overcome to allow us to sail, we will transit to Rosyth where we will continue to work hard with our industry partners in the dockyard to ensure the shaft is repaired as quickly as possible and return HMS Prince of Wales to the front line to continue her operations.”

While under repair, her autumn programme that included operating with F-35B Lightnings, MV-22 Osprey tiltrotors and drones off the Eastern Seaboard of the USA is currently being rescheduled for 2023.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

141 COMMENTS

    • About time.

      Some say we’ve not given Putin an exit strategy. All he has to do is withdraw his illegal, brutal, atrocious invasion after he swore blind beforehand he wouldn’t invade. He could’ve ended this any time. Then there should be reperations & war crime trials.

      • Wish the Ukrainian drones had done some damage to all the 🇷🇺 Kilo subs sitting in Sevastopol a couple of weeks ago too. A missed opportunity there but
        hope the Ukrainian forces can push on into Crimea and even south East to reclaim Mariupol the surrounds. All strength to them! 🇬🇧 🇦🇺 🇳🇿 🇺🇦. Hope someone finishes off Putin, Lavrov and Medvedev soon too… and then we’ll all have to deal with whoever comes next,!

      • His exit strategy should be alone in a room with a revolver and a bullet. It was good enough for his role model, though I don’t know if Putin has his own Fuherebunker…

    • Also off Topic
      why not just give Ukraine some Tornado’s with B61 with a non first use directive.
      taking the nuclear option away from the west and placing retaliation in the hands of the Ukrainians. They did after all give up their own nukes because the west said it would protect them (USA Uk oh and the east Russia)

      • Unfortunately we would be breaching the 1970 none proliferation treaty signed by at total of 191 states and remove any moral authority the west had to try and prevent states like Iran gaining nuclear weapons. In one swoop we would remove the validity of the treaty and Remove any ability of the UN to enforce and sanctions on Iran and North Korea under chapters VII of the charter of the United Nations, infact the only way to keep the NPT treaty in place would for the UN to try for sanctions against the U.K. and Ukraine, which would not go through and so still effectively end the UN and any functional facade of a World order.

        • Very good informative answer. Thank you. But it might just stop the highly likely use of nuclear weapons in the near future.
          Not the best way as you say due to previous Treaties. But I do not think that Russia would doubt for one second that Ukraine would retaliate, compared to a country without skin in the game. As for non-proliferation I think that ship has now sailed. All nations will now be rushing to acquire WMD. The Uk and America under MORAL authority should already be at war with Russia since 1994. Legally not. And last Time I looked IRAN could not care less about our morals and is running at full speed to get nuclear weapons.

          • Iran is hobbling along as the Israelis keep chopping their feet out from under them.

            I recently watched a programme about the Israeli cyber attack on the centrifuges. They used a virus to loop the video when only cameras were watching, Mission Impossible style, and sped up the centrifuges beyond normal tolerences, only putting them back again when the engineers were present. After a few weeks of this abuse, the centrifuges “inexplicably” broke down.

          • My reply simply meant that while we play according to the rules others are not. So do we wish to lose by playing by the rules or do we wish to win.
            By that I mean confirming to the established world order and promoting peace whilst not getting stabbed in the back.
            Israeli hit and runs missions are slowing down Iranian progress but ultimately will not stop the process.It buys time in the short term but continues to remain a problem to overcome in the end. Technology continues to evolve and get cheaper (Roflmao) so it is going to happen.

          • You may be right. As things keep going, you most certainly are. But things in Iran aren’t stable, and I dare to hope.

          • Any kind of cyber attack on the u.k should be retaliated immediately these attacks are warlike but by diffincient not an act of war(a clear difference between the two of them) similar comments were made after the poison attack in Salisbury. Korea, Russia China should all get a real taste of the west’s ability to do the same thing to them this is a dangerous game these nations are playing, they must have to pay for their attacks on us.

          • Im not sure if it would put Putin off or give him more ammunition. In the end what would stop Putin using a nuclear weapon again the west are the strategic forces. if Ukraine had only tactic nuclear weapons, Putin may just call them out and threaten to use strategic forces, knowing the NATO nuclear powers would not respond. He has after all pretty much lost any functioning touch with reality.

            so I’m not sure it’s worth the backlash, the only thing likely to hold Putin back from using tactical nuclear weapons is:

            1) western/nato military intervention ( the us would intervene to rebalance the situation if Putin used a nuc).
            2)Russian would loss the backing of the second and third world nations, which are actually important markets for russia
            3) China would loss its shit and may just actually join the west in sanctioning Russia. Whatever you say about China they have a very strict no nuclear first approach to the world order and are not keen on other nations sticking it militarily to other sovereign nations, they are closer to the British Empire in their approach to the world domination, where as Putin is most assuredly a follower of the third reich approach.

          • You maybe missed one. Can he be certain if he orders the dropping of a nuke, it will be dropped, rather than himself? If Liz Truss ordered a nuke to be fired today, would it happen, or would she end up in a straitjacket?

          • I agree Jon, one thing to hope for is that the military would decided it’s to much and remove him.

          • If the rumours of discontent behind the scenes are true,then Putin could face a coupe it wouldn’t he the first time a Russian leader was removed from within, he’s getting desperate, his military has failed to deliver, the nation is nearly bankrupt, mumblings of discontent around him, his efforts to squeeze the west over energy cut’sis open to question, the west can up their own production of oil and gas . The energy issue is going to be a stalemate and only. The west, with its relations with the likes of Saudi Arabia and America’s ability to up it’s own production my upping it’s own production rate will make another nail to bang into Putin’s coffin, which, I expect, will be getting its last polish before being use. One issue for thought is, what happens if he is ousted?

          • Can you imagine the humiliation if Mad Vlad tries to use a nuc and;

            • uses a 8″ launched one that is taken out before it actually gets anywhere close. The units are unique and are easily spotted from the air/space; or
            • used a short range ballistic that is taken out by Patriot or Ceptor; or
            • uses an air launched one and the plane is shot down if the RuAF actually have the guts or skills to fly with one; or
            • tries to use a longer range one and that is taken out or more likely blows up in the silo.

            I don’t think this is very fanciful. We can see that his tech is totally overmatched and it must be increasingly obvious that NATO knows that is going on better than he does.

            Also, increasingly, those surrounding him will be trying to wash their hands by leaking what madness he is up to in the hope that this will make rapprochement with the West easier once the Mad one is no longer there or to mitigate vengeance once this is over.

            Whilst it is humiliating for Putin that he has lost a conventional war it would be a total destruction of Russian status is they managed to loose a tactical nuclear war too. Given the present set of circumstances that is very likely as there are no massed ranks of tanks to blow up with a tactical nuc anyway that all that happens is that Putin creates an enraged world that unit against his madness.

            What is the chess move to resign from a war, that you started, that has made the situation worse than before?

          • its an interesting question, could russia actually succeed in deploying a single tactical nuclear weapon or to ensure success would they actually need to use a large number, which then created further issues.

            The other would be what would it achieve other than kill a load of civilians who since the formal annexation are according to Russia now Russian citizens.

            Problem is I don’t think there is a move in which Putin backs down and survives ( in power and even biologically), so Chris knows what he’s going to actually do.

            I think the other thing that could stop the nutter deploying a nuc are the Chinese, After this russia will only have one meaningful friend, if they loss that they will end up total international pariahs. And there is no way China would ever support nuclear weapons being used. They have one of the strongest and least ambiguous stances on nuclear weapons (no first us ever).

          • I’d say the % for success was very low and the % for humiliation very high.

            Look at the approach with the bridge retaliation? Firing missiles into civilian targets in the main.

            Crazy desperate stuff.

            I’m assuming that Mad Vlad is virtually out of cruise missiles now.

          • We can only hope so, his tactics really are going down the whole third reich vengeance route.

            It does make you wonder why he’s just throwing away is precious precision strike on random civilian targets. Either:

            1) Russia’s ability to collect ISTAR on the battlefield and wider strategic military targets is so shit, they have no valid targets ( very likely considering what was hit).
            2) Ukraine’s ability to guard its key assets means any attacker by missile on key assets are not getting through. they did claim to have knocked down half the missiles fired and they don’t ( as far as is public) have any theatre level air defence system or full coverage across the county from an integrated air defence system (so the knocked down russian missiles must have strayed into local area Defence air defence systems ).
            3) Russia’s remaining stocks of missiles are older Soviet aged dinosaurs that have such a shit CEP they are only any use for shooting at large targets like towns and cities. And they only have a few left that can hit specific targets.
            4) they are just barbarians and actually want to kill innocents for the only purpose of sowing terror…

            Im sort of voting on a mix of all 4.

          • I agree to an awful mixture of all four….

            I do suspect that the Ukranians have found a way to network the Soviet/Russian antiques to make them a more effective trebuchet….

          • Her own party would stab her in the back, butt,whatever Putin does, the west should be prepared to match it.or the whole reason for the existence of NATO night be open to question,

          • Talking about nuclear issues what is the rotation for the u.k trident boats? One always at sea on patrol, one in refit, what about the other two? could we put another one on patrol?

          • From what I understand of the four boat CASD:
            1) one boat on patrol
            2) one boat working up for patrol
            3)one boat in refit
            4) fourth boat is the redundancy within the system ( just incase you end up having to have two boats in long refit.

            So in theory with four boats, there may be an option for two at sea, but I suspect it increases the risk that you would have a gap later and it could not be sustained.

            As CASD is all a bit of a mystery we will never know.

      • Well aside from nuclear proliferation issues, the Ukranians have nobody to fly or maintain them – the latter assumes that spare parts can be scrounged from museums etc.

        • Last time I looked there are still front-line fighters in Germany
          as for flying them. It’s not like they will be reused any time soon after flying a strike mission.
          its more about the political will to respond rather than a long term strategic deterrent.
          And the plane is just a platform.
          if it can fly go in a straight line and drop.
          Yes I know well over simplified that is all the platform needs to do.

          you could strap a b61 onto a Cessna 172 on autopilot if you had the correct firing codes it would still do the job

          • Luftwaffe tonkas, and even the Germans are now looking at replacing. As they are the only means by which the Germans can currently deliver nuclear ordinance I can’t see them offering any.

            The platform also has to avoid getting shot down by Russian air defences, both SAMs and airforce. I’m pretty sure anyone reckless enough to strap a nuke to an unmanned Cessna and hope it flies successfully in a straight line to a target would be condemned globally.

        • But. When the Russian black sea fleet was based there, there was a feeling that tactical nukes were there with them, so, perhaps the Ukrainian can do that.

          • The Black Sea fleet would have had nukes aboard, but I can’t see the Russians offering to loan any to the Ukranians 😆

      • FYI. The nuclear support was taken out of the RAF GR1s in the 90s. It was never included for the RAF GR4 MLU. So there would be no UK options there. Would prob have to be GR/IT aircraft if any.

      • Apart from all the other considerations, all but a handful (preserved) Tornados have been scrapped. The RAF does not store withdrawn aircraft.

          • No it’s not. All the pilots and ground crew will have either retired, left, or retrained to modern aircraft. Better our pilots fly modern aircraft that have a chance in contested air-space than putting them into obsolete aircraft with knackered airframes and engines and hoping for the best.

          • The only use for retained aircraft would be for donation……

            The cost of keeping a jet combat aircraft flyable is eye watering.

            If you are into non flyable preservation a boneyard is the way to go.

    • Don’t care if it’s off topic. It’s good news for Ukraine, bad news for Russia, and interesting news to everyone on either side and neither. Thanks for sharing. Looking forward to JohnInMK’s take. Some of the Russian spins are fascinating.

    • Indeed. Built in double quick time, possibly by the Moskva Krap Koncrete Kompany. Still, profit margin probably ‘ok’. Trying to rebuild as we speak; excellent news.

    • Monobank, Ukraine’s second largest bank, has released the design for a bank card featuring the collapsed Kerch Bridge. Payback’s a bitch!
      🤣😂😁

  2. And apparently some orc got careless with his fag near some fuel tankers on the railway bridge and they are burning nicely, so both rail and road are out of commission and there is reportedly long queues for fuel in Crimea as there are not any large stock kept on the peninsula.

    • That is the key, really.

      They have ground down the ammunition stocks present and now shut oof re supply.

      Fuel supply is now cut off so it is a countdown the number of days that the Orc tanks and carriers will have fuel. Tough for the population, what little is left, but this is the most humane way of bringing this to a close.

  3. Great news she’s on route. The pet that says they will undertake adventure training in the autumn and winter months could be an clue into how long the repairs may take. I guess we will know when she’s been dry docked for a bit.

      • Shorter than that if it was a coupling and not the shaft n itself, then the replacement of the coupling would be a pretty straight forward job.i hope we’ll get some more info soon enough

  4. The Kerch bridge going down I’d say is probably the functional death blow the russia being able to maintain any defence around Kherson and I should think Ukraine will be gunning to force Russian forces back across the Dnieper before the mud shuts everything down for winter.

    its really interesting looking at the picture, one span being brought down without clear blast damage and a train full of fuel passing just at the time of the explosion…….someone has quit effective special forces or there is a very competent insurgency in Crimea.

    • The Russians are claiming a suicide bomber in a trucker to push the ‘terrorist narrative’.
      But definitely looks like the work of special forces placing demolition charges on the road bridge. That they can hit both road and rail sections of such a heavily defended target so far behind the front-lines mush surely be unnerving to Russian forces.

      • Surely the road charges would have been placed under the bridge? That blast looked like it was on the surface of the road deck. Also, judging by the pictures of the damage there is very little blast damage on the bridge and the decks are still attached to the piers. If you want to do it with charges surely you would have placed them under the deck (provides top cover from the CCTV) up against load bearings. Even if the decks didn’t drop it would be a tough job repairing the bearings which protect the bridge from expansion and contraction with temperature changes… Such an attack would leave definate blast damage on visible on the surface of the damaged decks which is just not visible. I think that bast was just above the road surface, e.g. in a truck.

        I am not saying you are wrong, just that the blast looked very similar to truck IRA bombs that were captured going off by CCTV or TV crews…

        Cheers CR

      • I wrote a paper once about blocking allied forces from re-inforcing a Northern Member State by Russia placing a bomb inside a fuel train, with detonation going UNDER a strategic road bridge… hmmm.

      • Blowing up a bridge by just about any special forces shouldn’t be too big a job, either way, Putin could end up with a whole army marooned in the Crimea.

        • Well the bridge is over 100 miles behind the front lines, so not a cakewalk.

          Submarine insertion isn’t an option, and not sure what naval assets they have left. Meanwhile being a prestige project and a strategic target, the bridge is heavily defended.

          Then there’s the small issue of getting back, without being captured, after all Russian forces in the area have been alerted and are looking for you.

          • I seriously doubt it. The capture of any Western SF, alive or dead, has the potential to escalate the war to a whole new level. It would be a gift to Putin and an unnecessary risk that western politicians would not take.

    • Just watched a video of the blast on the BBC lunch time news. It seems it might have been a truck bomb, a huge blast, that was clearly aimed at taking the train out as well.

      Thing is from the brief video I couldn’t see if the there was a parked truck, if it was moving was it remotely controlled or ..?

      CR

        • I wonder if the train was luck or timing. Could collapsing the road bridge and taking out the train at the same time possibly be planned? I’d guess they went for one and were lucky to get both.

          The more I think about it, the more I wonder if Sean is right, that the explosion was road charges and timed to take out the bridge as th train went by. Maybe the truck was the coincidence.

          • Maybe the truck was coincidence, but that blast looked like it went up rather than down. If it was charges surely they would have been under the decking even if only to give someone the chance to place without being seen. Also, the proper place to lay charges would have been up under the bearings where the deck connects to the pier support. If that had been the mode of attack the blast would have looked very different I think.

            The blast reminded me of IRA truck bombs going off only this one was huge… Also this appear to have had a fire accelerant mixed in given the sparks I saw in the blast.

            I could be totally wrong there will be others who are experts whereas I am just going on what I have seen in pictures over the years.

            Cheers CR

          • I think the truck was coincidental to charges beneath the bridge.
            On one video I saw there was a wake from what appeared to be a small boat beneath the bridge before the explosion. I’m not convinced the explosion in the train was caused by the road explosion…

            But then it would be a highly coordinated pair of attacks set off remotely with a charge on the train detonated as it passed the road bridge explosion. If so, that would have been risky as the Russians inspect everything going onto the bridge. If they’d discovered a charge on the fuel train they would have immediately searched the bridge for other devices.

            Similarly a huge truck bomb would have been discovered at the truck checks performed either side of the bridge. My hunch is the truck was coincidentally carrying something highly combustible that was triggered by the explosive charge. If you want to destroy a bridge you don’t want to waste energy on the pyrotechnics seen on the road deck. You want a low key blast as seen when they demolish buildings.

          • If the charges were under the bearings the blast will mostly go sideways unless the charges are tamped. Say with sandbags….

            They may also have blown up through the expansion joints.

            I think in this case there were charges attached mid span.

            If I was betting I would say that the charges mid span were set a fraction of a second before the bearing charges so the bottom chord of the span was cleaved first and then the span was shocked up from the end to snap it in half. The mass of the span then acts against the bearing charges. Creating a huge vending moment. Only a guess……that is how you would do it surgically without humongous amounts of explosives.

            Weaken first then shock the structure…..as somebody one told me…..

          • Agree, What is interesting is there was no detectable pressure wave impact on the cctv and cars very close to the blast seen to keep driving with little impact. If it was a truck bomb with the level of explosive energy needed to collapse a span the pressure wave would have been very significant, which sort of indicates the explosive energy was more directed.

          • You can see the bridge deck lift for the secondary which I am now sure was placed between the bridge deck and the pier.

            There will have been four primary magnetic limpets to blow out the bottom of the main box girders.

          • I think the Truck was a coincidence too due to the blast fragments that occurred in other videos I saw.
            True the road bed the truck was on went down, but looked far more likely to have been planted charges. or perhaps a floating submersible bomb under the road bed got lucky. But looking at the rail bed with only a muppets knowledge about these things I suspect a combined attack on both by placed explosives.

        • In which you can see two closely timed explosions.

          The timing of the fuel train wouldn’t have been a mystery as it would have been satellite trackable from source.

          I would suggest that the train was a missile strike from a drone and the car deck was placed charges as I outlined below.

          Getting charges up on the railway part would be quite hard and the depths of the steel sections makes it even harder to do that thoroughly.

          Nope, two different approaches well thought through and coordinated.

          Also the road decks appear to be supported by two large box girders. If you cut the bottom of the box with a shaped charge and then blast the bearing end upwards you get exactly the effects I suggest. There isn’t enough peripheral damage for massive amounts of explosives?

          Did they, by any chance leave the Crimea -> Russia bridge deck intact as a hint??

        • It does to me as well maybe a propaganda effort of some kind I’m surprised at no bombings in Moscow haven’t happened to take the fight into Putin’s that would undermine his position.

    • Jonathans, either way you look at it it is a problem for the Russians. Either the Ukranians have a very effective special operations command, not good for the Russians. Or there is a anti war group in Russia that is willing to undertake suicide missions, again not very good for Russia. Either way is shows that not all is well with Russian security.

      What caught my attention is an article that said the Russians intend to have the bridge operational by late Sat evening. I would like to know how, with two spans of the outbound road bridge in the water, and potential damage to the rail bridge/tracks either it will be reduced trafic single lane and reduced rail traffic or the Russians are shooting of garbage again. I would have thought that just the safety inspections of the bridge support structure would take several days to inspect.

      Then again I do wonder how this bridge complex was built in under three years for the two bridges each about 11 miles long. It took the Russian only a year for all the piles and pillars was completed withing 18 months. It takes longer than that to test the sea bed for load capacity. I am not sure but I think the concrete will not be fully set in the three years time frame. The bridge is built on a tectonic fault, the bedrock is covered by 50-60m of silt and there are mud volcanoes everywhere releasing acids, rocksalt, methane etc. So how the hell did they manage to do a survey of the sea bed and do the load testing? In fact it would appear to me to be one of the worst places to build a huge bridge. Just as a comparrison, the Queensferry Crossing took four years to plan, six years to build and the designers knew a great deal about the Firth of Forth.

      Now back to HMS PoW, it looks like the repair will take several months, especially with the comments on taking leadership and adventure training courses over the autumn/winter months. So whilst she is in the repair shop possibly some of the upgrades, if any where planned could be undertaking at the same time, e.g. software upgrades, radar/electronic upgrades, weapons fit (30mm). I would rather that she spends a bit more time in the yard than lets get her back to the fleet and put her in the yard again.

      Can anyone tell me what is the diffrence between the QE and PoW as she is several thousand tons heavier? Second question any one any idea on when HMS Queen Elizabeth will get her Bedford array?

    • The question as with everything would be cost. It would have to come from the Defence budget an even part commercial drydock would mean it would not be available for months at a time.

      • Yes, but…..

        Dock gate removed.

        Zero infrastructure to support ship repair. Zero people to either.

        It takes more than a hole in the ground to build or repair a ship!

      • Yes, KGV. But Portsmouth Dockyard is the home port and secure, of course. PoW was berthed metres away from No2 Basin / D Lock during all the past month on the impressive new carrier jetty. The ideal logic of a dry dock enlarged enough for them at those sites was scoped three years back or so. Costs were of course high, as a one off, and Rosyth was then decided upon. At the time, perhaps a pragmatic enough choice. But these assets ought to be around for +30 years, a decent amortization period. I don’t think anyone believes the security situation is likely to get better for some time, mores the pity 🤞
        Since then, Mad Vlad plus the issue of getting PoW to Rosyth, the only available UK facility, with a propulsion problem have thrown that ‘peacetime’ decision into question somewhat sooner than expected, I’d hazard (don’t events always?). Hence my post!
        More broadly, and continuing the inceased threat scenario. There are pointers to the increasing efforts to build up infrastructure – even in these poor UK economic times. The basics, as I’d term them.
        Lately, more news on the provision of RN missile defences. It seems that over the last few months both Martlet and Sea Venom have been intensively trialled for Wildcat operations, in all flight configurations & weather conditions / pelargically and in the litoral, to the extent that they are both effectively operational (still reckon the ingenious weapons wing deserves a commendation).
        I’ll start to look out for signs of increased EW investment from now on, as well.

        • Be better to base the carriers up north. The ammunition jetty is in Scotland. The dry dock is in Scotland.
          Be cheaper and probably easier than rebuilding in a busy active naval yard.
          Rosyth has security and accommodations.
          There’s spare airfields in Scotland for the carrier wing.
          They could even anchor or tie up before the bridges for shorter periods if access wasn’t available for a few days. That’s the main issue with rosyth. Also seems to be really tight at portsmouth

          • But crew wise who wants to be based in Scotland and especially Rosyth? MCMV is on the way out of Faslane over the coming years leaving just the Subs in Faslane.

            I refitted a T42 up there and it was 18 months of purgatory and it didnt / hadnt improved when I visited decades later on ships.

          • Yes but since when has the MoD cared about basing troops in the middle of nowhere? I distinctly remember a twitter conversation in which some SP where complaining about how dire Tidworth was, and a very senior officer waded in and baisically said “There’s a nice pub 20 minutes drive down the road, what more do you want?” Which kind of says it all doesn’t it?

          • Yep, sad, if you don’t actually think about the important things like family life, schools for kids etc, people will leave just as they hit the point where they are most skilled and difficult to replace.Thinks like how well my family life can be managed are the most important questions as you hit your late 20s onward.

          • It’s not even that. Take a kid in their early 20’s living in London (or any vaguely urban place) looking for a job. They have a coffee shop on their doorstep, multiple bars and clubs to meet with friends at, there are shops, hobbies (I always think of bouldering, a hobby I had to give up thanks to basing), etc. Given the way a lot of young people live, they probably get there on foot, or on bike, or possibly by public transport.

            Then they walk into a recruiting office looking for said job, and find out they’ll be based in a field in the middle of nowhere, if they’re lucky in a super-garrison where the only other people are soldiers and their families, but if they’re unlucky in an old, run down, camp that the RAF didn’t want anymore. Even the local Tesco’s is unreachable by any means other than a car (and the cost cutter on camp only sells snacks and monster energy drinks), they can’t even cook their own meals, having to eat whatever the cookhouse slops on their plate, and when they raise the issue the people who have power over them go “Well I can take the family down to the pub on a weekend, so what are you complaining about?”

            And then people go “We can’t recruit from the Urban youth because they’re all left wing.” 🙄

            I am fundamentally against Supergarrisons, they’re universally in bad locations for non-Army life, the concentration of troops means that any attempt to get away from the Army is crippled, and because they’re built on greenfields they limit the exposure of the army to the general population reducing support, recruiting, and understanding (as well as the hope of public transport links, good luck convincing anyone to put a decent rail connection into Tidworth they can’t even get a 1x per hour bus running there). But at least they get investment, and some sort of attempt at building a community, unlike the shitty camps that the RAF build miles from anywhere that now have 1-2 battalions stationed on them. Better hope village taxis haven’t decided to knock off early or your visit to the pub will be followed by a very long stumble back to camp along dark country lanes….

          • All very good points, if your not looking at the lives the people you need to recruit and need to retain, your never going to get the people you need or keep them.

            Very good point about urban centres and needing to have bases close to and accessible to urban centres.

            It also goes the other-way if you want people to feel connected to the armed forces, support them and consider it a key issue, valid career ect you need a connection to the wider population. I had the dubious pleasure of spending my early childhood in married quarters stuck in the middle of fuck all ( which were, sand at the same time my dad would be on very long deployments and min did not drive, Leaving the family stuck). But when I was a teenager we lived in the town about 5-8 miles away, the town was effectively full of military families or people who where building stuff for the military, at 18 a good 60% of my friends joined up because the town and military were so well integrated.

            I think isolating the military away from towns and in the middle of know where is bad on a lot of fronts. I’ve lived in navy towns, RAF towns and army towns and they all benefit (although I’m still in two minds about aldershot).

          • Totally agree.

            Plymouth and Portsmouth have a lot going for them when looked at like that!

            That said messing with the basins there to create a big dry dock will get very expensive and very complicated very quickly.

          • Ironically Leuchers isn’t too bad. It has a station in walking distance with regular trains (About 4 an hour, most common being Edinburgh every half hour, but even a direct train to London), a highly frequent bus service (every 10 mins, last bus at midnight) to St Andrews, a small city but with a Uni so with a vibrant life for young people, and a dedicated, seperate, bike path from St Andrews to the Station/Base.
            Don’t know what the accommodation is like but just going by what I’m seeing it looks pretty much gold standard (or as near as can be for RAF bases).

            Kinloss though, both very much letting the side down. Trainstations far away and hard to reach (1x per hour bus, few trains), nearest city is Inverness, and it’s hard to reach/get back from, last public transport is around 5pm so if you want any sort of nightlife you better have a taxi or a mate who won’t drink… yeah…. I dunno.

          • All around rosyth is the armpit of the universe I was based in Cochrane with the Blake before it was taken off ti cairnryan for scrapping. Half the sailors might desert!

          • Having never stayed in a naval base I will bow to your expertise on that matter.
            In my assessment people’s needs/feeling were not considered.

          • Morning, MS. I not suggesting one over the other, of course, but the need for two. The limits of one UK capability are overcome, ameliorated more than twice in my view i.e. the sum of the parts, by flexibility and security with assets catered for north and south.
            We are talking about docks capable of accommodating your largest vessels, they don’t have to be left standing awaiting just those vessels. In fact two gives you more confidence to allocate other work, which confidence may be lacking if its only one.
            We’ve been talking about UUVs and our vulnerable infrastructure. These subsea robots are of course very patient and perfectly content to await the passing of a high value, crippled asset seeking berthing. In fact, Put’s already screwed with Europe’s energy supplies as part of unattributable(!) action. How about a nice fat…….

          • All of this issue should, with hindsight have been.part of the plans for the procurement of the carrier project in the first place.

          • Well, yes. However, not blaming past decisions. But the threat scenario has decidedly changed. Someone can correct me, but I think we could in theory have dry docked three of the four Invincibles.

          • I am inclined to agree that a 2 large building/repair dry docks would be more useful. With the upcoming solid ships, amphibious replacements and other large vessels that need to be built I could be useful.
            My main concern about Portsmouth was the price of over £500 million! So probably closer to £1 billion when actually finished. Why it would cost so much I don’t know.
            I think the government should of built or taken over a plot or yard that a state of the art ship building facility could of been built on. Renting out the facility to what ever companies put forward the best case. Perhaps for the carriers. Leave rosyth to deal with the work they had and the nuclear decommissioning. Babcock and BAE could of put a joint bid in and shared the yard.

          • What I like about Pompey, notwithstanding it being the Home Port, is it’s inherent sea and air defence potential. I’m currently spending hours a day adjacent to Qinetic, Portsdown. We all know of Portsmouth’s potential, I lived and worked there for years. But it’s not to you become map-intimate in it’s geography that you fully appreciate why it’s the oldest combined UK defended maritime site / dockyard – and by old I mean Roman.
            Rgs

          • Not so hot for recruitment and retention. Whose going to move their family to the middle of Scotland ?

          • Where you pay more Income tax than the rest of the UK…Take home Money talks hence the extra allowances ( COST!) of placing people and units in Scotland to the MOD purse.

          • The tax would be on your income
            The first £12,570 it’s 0%
            Your £12,570-£14,7000 it’s 19%
            Your £14,700-£25,700 it’s 20%
            Your £25,700-£43,662 it’s 21%
            Any money earned above £43,662 is at 41%.
            But with that your family kids get free education including university, free prescriptions, dental check ups etc etc.
            I think in England it’s 20% from 12k to the 43k and perhaps 40% above that. (I’m not expert so don’t quote me)
            What that means for most sailors I don’t know as I don’t know what they earn.

        • Could believe HMG would be quite interested in long term infrastructure development projects. US enacted a $1+T infrastructure plan during 2022.
          Long term infrastructure improvement generally increases productivity, efficiency, tends to raise all boats (pun not necessarily intended). 😊

          • Yes, part of the reason I’m confident that Australia will cope pretty fine with nuclear sub building. As you know, they had god awful issues catering with their Collins until root and branch efficiency and investment decisions. Now they are second to none on productivity and asset availability, I understand.
            Rgs

        • Believe Gunbuster previously stated that there will be significant lag time before T-23, D-45 complete mods to support FOC for SV?

          • Recent announcement on MTLS also covers the Mag handling system which would cover any mods for sea venom stowages.

  8. a very interesting and serious question?
    the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons for peace and security among other reasons
    the question is this, will the Ukraine re-build and regain its nuclear weapons for future security.
    just an interesting thought.
    replies would be interesting to read. thanks

    • To be honest wmd in Ukrainian hands would be a nightmare. It is a corrupt country. Most of the jingoism is misplaced, although understandable. We will see soon Chinese copies of NLAW and Javelin and no doubt some Himars round tech will find its way into the wrong hands too. As for their nuclear weapons, they were old Soviet systems. Easier to give up than pay for a clean up. The NPT would preclude acquiring new capability, and they are desperate for funding for infrastructure and EU membership is a goal. Finally, any country that tolerates the likes of the “Azov” Battalion in its military? Very questionable as to the political elements in some quarters. I think that accounts for British input in training, establishing a core professional military is one step towards international respectability. Just my two pennorth.

      • Which is why the warehouses were cleared of the early generations of each weapon. They haven’t been given the latest versions.

        Once you use a weapon you can assume any misfires will end up in the wrong hands!

        • They were near the end of life anyway. Still does remind me of the desperate attempts by the CIA to repossess Stingers they gave away. That is the price we pay for a proxy war and meddling. Suits the “complex” though eh?

          • I suspect one of the issues with supply some weapons to Ukraine is the ability to find/supply the older version(s) in volume. So searching around NATO and allied stockpiles find the older ones and swap for promises of backfill with new ones.

            The Ukrainians don’t care if the hit to kill probability is 88 or 92%. To them each and every tank that blows it turret or helicopter or combat jet downed is a success.

  9. I’ve just returned from a two week holiday in Lanzarote, and while I was there I didn’t see a single Ukrainian flag. A great difference from here in Scotland where there are Ukrainian flags everywhere you look, even in our very small village the local primary school has a flagpole with an rather unique flag fluttering there, it’s half Union Jack and half the Ukrainian flag , joined together to make one flag. A real symbol of support for Ukraine at this very difficult time for them.
    Why aren’t there any Ukrainian flags flying in Spain, don’t they care about what’s going on there?
    Flying a flag is a small gesture but an important one, is Spain just going to sit on the fence as they did in the last major war claiming neutrality, is it just another extreme case of Nimbyisim ?
    They’re supposed to be in the European Union, what are they doing about it ? We in the UK who are no longer in the European Union are busting a gut and our bank accounts trying to help the Ukrainians, what are the Spanish doing to help them when they can’t even fly a flag in support of Ukraine ?
    It’s time someone brought this up at the UN assembly.

  12. So – How often do shaft-couplings fail? Is this just one of those things or is it unusual enough that people will be asking searching questions of the manufacturer?

  13. Reports in The Times that industry warned of possible shaft problems 3 years ago and advised further checks, but this advice was rejected by the navy. True?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here