Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told Forces.net here that it is likely that HMS Prince of Wales will have to go into dry dock to have problems with a shaft and propeller fixed.

We had originally reported that the Netherlands was being touted as an option is Rosyth was untenable. However, a source has told me that Rosyth is once again the likely option due to the level of damage.
Earlier this year, a £30 million contract for dry-dock maintenance for the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers was awarded to Babcock at Rosyth. The contract covers routine and emergency dry-docking periodically throughout the carrier’s lives to undertake maintenance and repair activities.

The reason the Netherlands was being considered, I was told, is that it is closer and potentially easier to get to, but this has yet to be officially confirmed and now seems unlikely.

What happened?

Rear Admiral Steve Moorhouse recently provided an update on the situation with HMS Prince of Wales, confirming what the UK Defence Journal was first to report.

HMS Prince of Wales suffers propeller shaft issue

We reported yesterday that aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales was feared to have suffered damage to her propellor shaft near the Isle of Wight. The UK Defence Journal was the first news website in the country to break this story. 

Rear Admiral Steve Moorhouse said in a statement posted to Twitter.

“Good afternoon to you all, from HMS Prince of Wales off the coast of Portsmouth. I’m Rear Admiral Steve Morehouse, and I’m responsible for making sure Royal Navy ships are ready to deploy wherever they are needed. Shortly after the ship sailed on Saturday, a mechanical fault was discovered with the starboard shaft.

I’ve been to the ship today to see for myself what the issue is, and how we in the Royal Navy can work together to make sure that the ship can successfully returned to her tasking. After the initial assessment, it’s likely the fault will require repairs, which may impact the ship’s programme. The ship is now moving to a more sheltered anchorage for further inspection.

And then we’ll be able to provide further comments on the nature of the issue and the impact to her current schedule. We’ve reacted quickly to the emergent defect and are working closely with industry partners to resolve this as soon as we can. Rest assured the Royal Navy continues to meet its commitments to deliver operations. And to keep the UK our partners and allies safe.”

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

195 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bean
Bean
1 year ago

Should have extended the largest of dry dock in her home port.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Bean

Alternatively, for less money, recommission the KGV Dock in Southampton.

Bean
Bean
1 year ago

I doubt it.
Navylookout wrote a good article on dry docking options back in 2019.
https://www.navylookout.com/dry-docking-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers-what-are-the-options/

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Bean

I’d read it. It does not cover KGV, which I found odd. It’s the nearest extant graving dock to Portsmouth, an easy commute by sea, road and rail, it is big enough, and putting the gates and pumps back and adding cranes and cherry pickers would be far cheaper than building a new dock in Portsmouth.

ATH
ATH
1 year ago

A dry dock is fine but without the shipyard and workshop facilities it’s just an expensive parting spot. KGV doesn’t even have a proper security fence.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  ATH

You build a new gate and float it into place, just like the old one, which was made on the Tyne and towed South. You overhaul the pumps, which are still there. You put the blocks back. You build a fence, and you put in cranes and cherry pickers. You put up a workshop for light overhauls, because the big stuff can be trucked or moved by sea to Portsmouth. The work force spend half an hour each way commuting from Portsmouth. You have a good facility which can also do commercial work from time to time, and you have… Read more »

Jonno
Jonno
1 year ago
Reply to  ATH

What nonsense. All of it. A fence is simple. Its also questionable how much infrastructure you require since Portsmouth has all of these with good road and rail links. You need a fairly simple large shed and a large crane, portacabins etc. I simply dont understand why this isnt fixed for an economic sum. If I was running the Navy I’d make it a priority for the safety and convenience of the Fleet flagship and her sister. ABP has shed loads of money and are short sighted not to investigate the possibilities. I see they aren’t short of land at… Read more »

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

Clearly you didn’t read it because it does cover the KGV and why it’s not an option.

Jonno
Jonno
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

What because of the pump house? Come on that would be gone in a week. If you need workshops what cant be done by a new (mobile) repair ship isnt worth having. We need one anyway for when we reinvest Portland.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonno

No if you read the article you’d know KGV isn’t an option because

“ is now a wet dock-only, with the caisson gates and keel blocks removed”

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

Yes. We know that. Some of us have been in the ship repair business. You build a new gate and float it into place, just like the old one, which was made on the Tyne and towed South. You overhaul the pumps, which are still there. You put the blocks back. You build a fence, and you put in cranes and cherry pickers. You put up a workshop for light overhauls, because the big stuff can be trucked or moved by sea to Portsmouth. The work force spend half an hour each way commuting from Portsmouth. You have a good… Read more »

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago

Would cost as much as another T31.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  andy reeves

£268m in 2019 money?

I hardly think so. You would have change from a tenth of that.

Ian
Ian
1 year ago

Or even less money,send it to Rosyth as the dock is ready to take her in already!

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Ian

The point is, it’s “the” drydock, and at the moment, it is indeed available, subject to tide, subject to weather…

Another drydock seems like a good idea, given the lengths of time that RN ships spend in them.

Steve
Steve
1 year ago
Reply to  Bean

It is amazing that they decided to use a dry dock that was only usable at certain times of the year, due to a bridge being in the way. Would love to know the real thought process behind that decision.

Bean
Bean
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve

I put it down to past budgetary restraints. I can only hope future budgets will enable for more than one dry dock for the carriers.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  Bean

Such infrastructure should have been in place as part of the overall carrier project a what do we do if something breaks should be part of the infrastructure. Things do go wrong but you. Must have contingencies for if an issue like this arises.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  andy reeves

I would be extremely if such matters were not considered. However, unless HMG puts it in the budget, it doesn’t happen – that is the painful reality of today’s micro-managing politicians.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago

This is why it was such a smart idea to build 2.

Frederick Speight
Frederick Speight
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

It would have been even better to have built three. Active, leave
/stand by, refit.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago

And apparently the cost for the PoW was 20% les than the QE, a 3rd could have see cost further reduced.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago

Can’t argue with that. But I can’t see the UK ever breaking out of the ‘congestion use the hard shoulder’ short term thinking mentality.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Why do you think it’s a short term mentality? We have two fantastic aircraft carriers, the largest that could be built in the UK. Even with 3 vessels it doesn’t mean you can just deploy the spare at short notice.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

I could have said it better; minimalistic would probably be a closer word. Grant Schapps recently suggested cyclists should pass driving tests and register bikes with the DVLA….because our roads are not wide enough for cars and cycles. It’s just a UK cultural thing to short yourself and rationalise it by saying you are being careful with tax payers money. We do it everywhere, roads, the NHS, the armed forces, water privatisation, generating capacity…short term profit / cost versus long term contingency / security. Its always cheaper to do a job properly first time.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul.P
andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

While you’re on the energy subject the, I was wondering if any of the still fueled submarines in Devon port could have their power plants reactivated to supplement the national grid?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Well, in a way, indirectly that looks likely to happen. I believe HMG is working to get safety approval for RR flat pack reactors. Prospect of overseas sales too. No doubt RR conceived the idea from experience with SSNs.
https://www.rolls-royce.com/innovation/small-modular-reactors.aspx#/

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

No government in my lifetime has ever operated in the only rational and logical manner – decide what things are essential / important / nice to have, assess the associated costs and then set taxes accordingly. Instead a budget is decided, ministers argue for their share of the pot and then have to make difficult and/or silly decisions because of the lack of available funds.

peter fernch
peter fernch
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Yes well we cant even provide 2 air wings of F35.s for the moment let alone equip another carrier

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 year ago
Reply to  peter fernch

We have never intended to have two full airwings. We have two carriers so one is always available 365. I have lost count how many times this has been gone over. We are not yet at full operating capability. 48 F35s are on order, about 27 have been delivered. And a commitment to go to 74 F35s, with a desicion due in 2025 about numbers beyond that.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

A substantial proportion of the aircraft on the carriers will be US machines. HMG is trying to reduce numbers as much as the contracts will allow, mostly due to horrendous maintenance costs and consequential low availability.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 year ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

They are waiting for the blk 4 upgrade.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  peter fernch

Another carrier could have been designated with a CATOBAR system

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Absolutely no chance. Notwithstanding the massive interoperability problems, the “discussion” about CATOBAR/VSTOL was incredibly divisive and there was never the remotest possibility of a compromise.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  peter fernch

If you had seen the maintenance budget for the F35s we do have, you would know why HMG is so keen to limit their numbers.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

I am pleased that we got two big carriers into service. Look at CVA01……for last time RN wanted some big flattops? Even a lot of people in RN thought that the Invincibles would be the end of fixed wing carrier ops for RN. So I was pleased and surprised when Gordon Brown ordered them and even more pleased and surprised when David Cameron said that PWLS would go into service. Let us count our real blessings. The bigger problem is not have 2 x helicopter carriers and being 1 Bay short of the full set of toys because of the… Read more »

John N
John N
1 year ago

We didn’t get Choules (Largs Bay) for free, cost us A$100m.

In any event the UK has squeezed plenty of blood out of us Aussies since 1788, including my family’s blood in the Boer War and WWI.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

A$100M was, respectfully, chicken feed given how useful her sisters have been to RN.

John N
John N
1 year ago

And again, respectfully, I think the balance of the what the UK has squeezed out of Australia since 1788 puts us in ‘credit’, not debit.

In any event, we paid the fee being asked, true?

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

The agreed fee was paid. No question.

All as part of the Osbourne fire sale. Which was nearly as intelligent as Gordon Brown’s gold sake methodology.

But it was crazy low compared to the replacement cost of a fully worked up member of an in service class of ship that RN desperately needs now.

John N
John N
1 year ago

Agree, yes it was a dumb decision by the UK Government of the day, one that probably wouldn’t be repeated today. But when there is a ‘fire sale’ and you’ve got an urgent need for an amphibious ship (the RAN had to retire the LPAs early), then Choules (Largs Bay) was too good an opportunity to not take up. By all initial reports here, Choules was seen only as an ‘interim’ capability for the RAN (until the LHDs commissioned), she also had a breakdown that cost $s to fix and put her out of service for a while, but since… Read more »

Paul Irving
Paul Irving
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

That breakdown was caused by operating her wrongly. The RAN cocked up.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

For someone who spends a lot of time and effort on a UK defence site you seem to have very big ‘issues’ with the UK ?

John N
John N
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Sorry what? How did you come up with that? Are you stalking and counting my posts? Very odd…

Anyway, sounds like someone has a very thin skin, in any event I only stated some historical facts.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

Listen Pal. I’ve drunk a lot of your wine over the years. Must go someway towards balancing the money side.😉

John N
John N
1 year ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Ha ha! Very good!

I’m actually propping up the NZ economy at the moment with all the Kiwi Sav Blanc I consume (including right now, 2.45am!!).

Cheers,

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

Yes. I have a Kiwi friend, Ross by name, wine drinker by nature. I’ve been introduced to a few NZ whites.

Klonkie
Klonkie
1 year ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Hi Geoff do spoil yourself by trying a good Kiwi Otago Pinot Noir (if you enjoy red).

geoff.Roach
geoff.Roach
1 year ago
Reply to  Klonkie

I will look into the benefits of this recommendation very soon.😃

Klonkie
Klonkie
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

interesting observation John. Here in NZ I enjoy Aussie Jacobs Creek reserve Shiraz.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  Klonkie

New Zealand has a tiny navy and I think a couple of the retiring typ23’s could go their way.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

More than can be said about the Romanian purchase of the two type222’S

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

We lost plenty of our blood in those as well…

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago
Reply to  John N

And forever grateful we shall be.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago

I think Radakin would like a couple of LHPs or LHDs ( to replace the LPDs)…through deck designs. But there is also the school of thought that says the LHDs and the LSDs and Argus should all be replaced by numbers of something like Ellida. I believe the idea of converting Argus for the LRG role is meant to ‘inform’ the strategy. Makes sense I suppose…pros and cons of various options.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago

Ah, helicopter carriers. Soon we will have lots more new helicopters, no?
https://www.airmedandrescue.com/latest/long-read/spotlight-aw149
I also read the AW149 has recently been tested ‘in an unknown european country’ firing laser guided rockets.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

We do have quite a few Merlin + Chinook + Apache?

It is for the Chinook + Apache function that the helicopter carriers are needed.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago

Yeah, you are right. AW149 or Blackhawk is mainly to replace Puma. That said the Egyptian navy are flying AW149s off the French Mistral they bought. Handy to have a medium option.

Louis
Louis
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Apparently the polish AW149s will carry half the weapons of an Apache- 8 missiles or two rocket pods. As a transport helicopter I don’t know the usefulness of this but the US Blackhawks can be heavily armed.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Louis

Interesting. I’m just thinking…if you are a (cheap) littoral response LPH or LSD with limited deck area and landing spots would you prefer to carry a larger number of a medium type of helo which was multirole; transport, attack, rescue rather than a mix of very large and very small helos…? Just asking.

Louis
Louis
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Very good point actually, it would probably be better, given it will be a relatively small fleet, to standardise across the three services. It would free up merlin to either be converted to ASW (if possible) or if not to provide spare parts to bring some mothballed ASW merlins back into service.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Louis

More ASW Merlin’s sounds good. Currently I think we are navalising Apache to embark on whatever flat tops. Would it not be better to use new AW149s armed with 50cal and rockets / missiles to replace both Apache and the commando Merlin in the helicopter littoral assault scenario? AW149 can carry an underslung L118 gun. Just asking?

Louis
Louis
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Of course, I didn’t even know it could carry an L118 underslung. If we are going ahead with solely MRSS as our amphibious capability we should definitely do this and save the apaches for the army.
However if larger LHAs or LHDs were to be procured I think it would be better to go down the route of merlin, chinook, wildcat and apache, since it covers all roles.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Louis

I don’t think the underslung L118 has been done. I just checked the weights. Agree with you that if we get larger LHD/ LPH ships then Chinook/Wildcat/Merlin would be fine.

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago
Reply to  Louis

My opinion is that it would be a good decision to give support helicopters better offensive weapons. Traditionally, they have been equipped with purely defensive armament, ie GPMG and mini-gun. In both Afghan and Iraq, they were overly relying on Apache for over watch. In that every drop-off or ex fill, wanted an Apache in attendance. Meaning the Apache was removed from its CAS and hunting role. By giving support helicopters more offensive armament, it would mean the Apaches would be less needed for the supporting overwatch role. As the armed-up support helicopter can do it. Most of our support… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  Louis

Yeah the Polish AW-149 are supposed to have long range missiles.
In pictures it seem something like Brimstone but that might be just for show.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago

I like the fleet carriers concepts where smaller assault ships are configured for use as small carriers like the way the Americans use the America class I’ve never been a fan of the supercarrier and its ‘all your eggs in one basket’needs

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

Yes

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 year ago

Then we could share 23 aircraft between three carriers and the RAF.

peter fernch
peter fernch
1 year ago

Well why not then 4 or 5 any no you can think of

Alan Ferguson
Alan Ferguson
1 year ago

What an utter dreamworld you live in. Two are unaffordable in the limits of the defence budget, three would be ludicrous, especially in the context of the limited capability and high vulnerability of these ships.

andy reeves
andy reeves
1 year ago

And bang a replacement for OCEAN while we’re at it ☺️

John Goreing
John Goreing
1 year ago

If it is the case that the damage was caused by hitting the seabed then how is it possible that the Royal Navy do not know how to drive out of their home port?
Presumably the Captain & Navigator have to go.

SteveP
SteveP
1 year ago

I’m the first to criticise the political decisions that have led to the RN becoming a world leader in Fitted For But Not With capabilities largely driven by the misuse of the defence budget as a job creation budget. However, I think that the torrent of press criticism of this issue is misplaced. Things do break down and this event shows the sense of having two ships so that we retain the ability to continue to conduct carrier operations even with one vessel out of service. If I’ve a criticism of our carriers it’s not over this event but is… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by SteveP
Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

It’s a blessing that this didn’t happen with the carrier wasn’t fully kitted out like the QE, imagine the furore if that had happened!

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

*not, not “wasn’t”…

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

The press love to over-dramatise everything, they think it makes for exciting reading and sells papers. Of course in the long term it completely undermines public trust in their accuracy…

Roy
Roy
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

Over dramatize? It broke down within minutes of leaving port! The deployment was planned for months. Portsmouth has to be the most surveyed harbour in the UK. Yet a debacle. Something is seriously wrong.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy

Congratulations, you’ve escalated from “overly dramatic” to “hysterical”. Perhaps you might considering the facts before reacting? She at no point “broke down”, they stopped to examine the starboard prop and shaft better. It’s pretty clear looking at the photos she left harbour only using the port prop. There clearly already knew there was an issue and it was a question of whether they went to the USA or Rosyth after leaving port. She could proceed with her tasking to the USA on just her port prop. But depending on a single prop is an unnecessary risk which is why they’ll… Read more »

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

It a good job she didn’t break down or else she would have had to go to dry dock and wouldn’t have been able to continue to the States…

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

As things stand she can go to either, under her own power, because she hasn’t broken down.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

Send her to America then to keep our Yank overlords happy- lets see how far she gets- Tomato-Tomato.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

Well that comments says a lot about your world view… or rather lack of grip on reality.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

Do you think they should send her – or do you think she should be sent to dry dock to be repaired?

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

Obviously the prudent thing to do is to send her for repair, as with only having one prop working they have zero redundancy. I’d rather not see her impersonating a Russian carrier and being towed by a tug.

Besides which, the broken SKF coupling isn’t going to miraculously ‘heal itself’, it’s going to need fixing at some point. Might as well do it sooner rather than later.

Roy
Roy
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

I guess nothing really does matter. Carrier prepares months for deployment but breaks down a few minutes out of port. Not a serious issue. Half of 12 Type 45s are built, but the remaining vessels have continuous and serious problems. Not a serious issue. Two 65,000-ton carriers enter service with only a handful of fighters delivered to actually operate from them. Not a serious issue. Escorts sink from the 32 originally regarded as minimal to 18 (soon to be 17). Not a serious issue issue. Remaining escorts lose their SSMs without replacement. Not a serious issue. Operational SSNs sink from… Read more »

Sean
Sean
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy

The only serious matter is that democratic governments don’t fund their militaries adequately, in part because they don’t see going to war as being a constructive thing to do.
Unfortunately totalitarian regimes have no such qualms, which means democracies invariably do badly initially as they have under finder in peacetime and have to catch-up.

As for your claims about about F35s, we’ll your obviously ignoring the facts so little point repeating them here, again.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

A very cheap tabloid today seemed convinced that the shaft had not been greased extensively – and made some very lewd headlines accordingly.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Fitted for but not with grease😂😂😂😂

Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

If it developed the fault because they failed to grease it properly they deserve to condemned. Lets not forget why we lost a F35B, utter incompetence.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

Very well said.

We do have another high readiness carrier QE which is preparing for its own deployment.

This would actually have seen both deployed at the same time which wasn’t really ever the plan but would have been a nice show of force.

I think and hope that some of the FFBNW is going to stop given the clearly heightened tensions and the realisation that war is not predictable or can be controlled by good wishes and a treasury spreadsheet!

John Hartley
John Hartley
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

Umm, Well, the Italian carrier Cavour is fitted with Leonardo Thesan WASS SNA-2000 Mine avoidance sonar. I did wonder if QE/PoW could also do with this.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago

So TUK who will a bidding for the FSS will build in Rosyth, sudden and unscheduled need to dry dock a carrier they have suggested an incomplete FSS could be moved between dock 1 and 3 but if needed but its an unnecessary stop in construction, risk the program and a zero value add task in the build.

I really don’t like the TR make up but it could see the H&W reinvigorate their yard and provide the RN with options.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

You are not alone in thinking that.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

But alone in terms of people with knowledge of ship building. FSS is not a merchantman but a very complex ship to carry a lot of things that go bang. H&W have zero people and zero facilities for that kind of work. So ‘giving’ it to H&W Carrie’s massive risk. QEC build worked reasonably well because they were several teams onboard with specific knowledge of military grade ship building and integration. All those people are fully occupied with Astute, Dreadnought, T31 and T26…..where are H&W going to magic a team from? There is more to it then training people to… Read more »

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

You make an interesting assumption, there.

Where is this and do you suppose is going on, here?

A tail shaft, propeller and stern gear can be found on most ships and you take the stuff that goes bang off before you dry dock any ship.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

I should have been clearer but H&W have zero current complex ship building experience. I’m not talking about ancient history.

Never mind the things that go bang.

My comment was about FSSS.

My thing used to be warship survivability: so I do have a vague idea of what is involved….

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

Let’s be clear. I also have a vague idea of what’s involved. We are not talking about the FSS, which anyone with any sense would order in Japan, but about facilities for emergency drydocking a carrier. The idea of Babcocks moving a set of block sections of FSS out of a building dock in order to emergency dry dock a carrier in it when the tides permit is just silly, when there are more practical alternatives. Our NATO allies across the Channel are the obvious first choice, par une kilometre de campagne, but a quite practical second choice would be… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

As I’ve said previously I’m in favour of a new shipbuilding campus, like the Australians are doing, designed in a optimised manner with dry docks.

That could be Southampton or whoever the space is TBH.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

Oddly enough I’m against any attempt to carry on shipbuilding in this country, where it’s just a system of outdoor relief for Babcocks, BAE and RR, who don’t do it very well. Order all new warships from Japan, who do it extremely well at competitive pricing in terms of both design and build man hours, but I’m in favour of improving the ship repair business in this country. Ship repair and ship building are two totally different businesses, and the last time I was involved in setting up a newbuilding yard our first move was to build a wall between… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

Warships are sovereign as is the tech. Please don’t underestimate how advanced UK defence tech is. It is a lot better than most people would believe or assume given the paltry levels of investment. I don’t agree that our warships should be built in Japan but I do think that T31 is a new beginning and that T26 BII, T32 & T83 will benefit from a laser focussed approach to new look heavy industry. The two biggest single impediments to UK heavy industry are energy costs and skill levels. Skills can be fixed and energy costs will hopefully get fixed… Read more »

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

Sorry; someone else raised the security point. I’ve built merchant ships in Britain and in Japan, Korea and China. Japan is best on all counts. A friend who was in the design team for the carriers passed me the design and build man hours for Aegis cruisers, ex armament outfit (which was common) in the USA and in Japan. Japan was far better. I think the impediment to British heavy industry – specifically shipbuilding- is that we no longer have the components suppliers, we are not cost competitive on merchant ships and the only customer for a British warship is… Read more »

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago

‘the only customer for a British warship is the MOD’ Are you positive about that ?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Pretty much, yes. The RN sells secondhand stuff, and there is an occasional export order from places like Ukraine, plus parts kits and drawings for local building, but basically we no longer have a warship export industry; Vosper Thorneycroft Woolston were the last yard focussed on warship exports and engaged in developing their own designs for the export market. The point about developing export designs is important. Note the dropping of the “e” from “Type 31e”.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

We still do make a good range of pumps and valves.

Even RR do marine engines in Derby!

We do have the capacity and capability to backfill other stuff.

It isn’t perfect but it isn’t hopeless!!

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

I think it’s pretty hopeless.

RR sold Bergen Diesels last year as part of their fire sale. Derby can sell you a nuclear reactor, subject to export controls, or a gas turbine, should you want one. You could add Woods Air Movement in Colchester who are pretty good for marine fans. I am now starting to struggle!

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

RR own MTU?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

Motoren und Turbinen Union Friedrichshafen are indeed owned by Roll-Royce. As the name implies, they are in Germany, not Derby, and I’m not aware of any R-R design input. Indeed, considering that they were founded by Maybach and have always had a reputation, like Bergen Diesels of, er, Bergen, for very good engines, unlike R-R, whose adventures in marine diesels have sometimes been a bit iffy, I doubt if any bright ideas from Derby would be welcome.

John
John
1 year ago

Let’s say that we do buy everything from Japan and just scrub shipbuilding in the UK. What then happens in a hot war scenario where when these ships need major repairs or even replacement all the facilities to do so are literally on the other side of the planet? Seems to me that this would be simply wrecking our ability to actually fight a war for the sake of a few saved pennies.

Last edited 1 year ago by John
Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  John

I think you are perhaps confusing shipbuilding and ship repair, which includes maintenance; they are quite separate businesses. At the moment we don’t have an adequate ship repair base in the UK (see the discussion on dry docks for the carriers) and I want to see that expanded. I would happily trade naval shipbuilding to Japan (as a rough guide, we could have had three carriers for the price of two) but I want to see our ship repair business built up. In the event of a hot war, there would not be a problem (well, there might be many… Read more »

John
John
1 year ago

All the supply chains for spares and so on will be in Japan since that is where the ships are made. You are talking about getting rid of shipbuilding entirely. That is no small small thing. Look at the supply chain chaos we are in right now. Now imagine it when it’s a warship that is somewhere in globalisation limbo while Ivan is knocking on the door.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  John

My day job is running a fleet of large container ships. (No doubt you will blame me for the “supply chain chaos”!😉) I do know a bit about organising repairs and spares for large ships built in Japan. As we are, the RN like the Air Force and the Army, are desperately short of spares for the equipment that they do have. Don’t imagine that all the parts of a “British built” warship come from Britain – we have no propeller maker, we have no diesel engine maker, and so on. What I’m saying is that we should give away… Read more »

John
John
1 year ago

In a large part our current problems are exactly from giving away all our industry to places like China you realise?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  John

No, I do not. And I know quite a lot about it. Nobody « gave away » British manufacturing industry; most of what it made was overpriced crap of poor quality, and was out competed by better stuff at lower prices. Bicycles, watches, televisions, washing machines, motorcycles, cars, aircraft, ships… all junk. Better to make use of Daniel Ricardo’s law of comparative advantage and make and export what we are good at. We are good at defence electronics; we are not good at building surface ships. Our current problems come from sitting back and thinking that we were still « the workshop of… Read more »

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

Not sure it is the RN stuff he was refering to. If memory serves the last RN ship at H&W was RFA Fort Victoria and the IRA made a right mess of it.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

When I was ordering the big bulker in my picture above at H&W John Parker was very funny about the Royal Corps of Naval Constructors, who turned up with a sheaf of drawings, on one of which there was a large blank space. “What’s that?” said Dr Parker. “We can’t tell you; it’s secret. “So how do I bid on it?” “You just guess!” John said he decided to take H&W out of Naval work after the RFA “Fort Victoria”; no doubt the MOD said they crossed H&W off their list, the truth will be out there (and will probably… Read more »

Steve
Steve
1 year ago

Hand me the ‘ammer

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

There are three working dry docks able to take her, without a bridge in the way, all much nearer.

But they are in France, at Brest and at Dunkerque, and it seems that Mrs Truss doesn’t know that the Napoleonic Wars are over.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

The optics would be terrible of sending her to France for repair.

Azincourt
Azincourt
1 year ago

Hang on , Macron and his spokesmen such as Beaune have done nothing much short of making France a hostile country during and since the Brexit process .

Emp
Emp
1 year ago
Reply to  Azincourt

sigh

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Azincourt

Odd comment. France is a NATO member which has its own carrier and has a very solid record in modern naval and merchant shipbuilding and shiprepair.

But fine, throw some more British taxpayers’s money at your Brexit.

Azincourt
Azincourt
1 year ago

A NATO member who went absent for 40 years . I know having been sent there as a liaison Officer if for no other reason then to gauge their appetite to return to the integrated commands. There seemed plenty in the military but their government took another 25 years ! Their carrier , which ironically had its own propeller problems , ignominiously replaced by an old one from the decommissioned Clemenceau , will spend around 20% of its operational life in their supposedly numerous dry docks having its nuclear fuel renewed. They know about repairing submarines . They even welded… Read more »

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago

Ahh brexit. It’s been 6 years. You lost. Grow a pair and get over it.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

It’s been 19 months. Si calamitatem quaeras, circumspice.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago

Pretentious ? Moi ?

Azincourt
Azincourt
1 year ago

Well if we’re going to do languages your earlier “ par une kilomètre de campagne “ does not directly translate not least because kilomètre is a masculine noun “un “ . “De loin”would suffice and if by chance they used the imperial mile measurement “ Un mile pays “ or “D’au moins un mile for “not by a country mile “. That’s why I was there ! That’s why I understand their defence capabilities.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Azincourt

It wasn’t intended as French; it was spoof Franglais for “by a country mile”. Thought that was obvious?

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

No it’s been 6 years since you lost the democratic referendum, and you’re still sulking. Nobody likes a bad loser.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

1975-2016: a forty one year sulk since you lost a democratic referendum. Nobody likes a man bought and paid for by Russia.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

Ah next you’ll be comparing me to Hitler, always the sign of infant throwing a tantrum when he starts making wild accusations. I was still as school, but I believe the referendum in 1975 was to stay in the European Community. I had no- problem with being a member of that. What I objected what’s it’s gradual transmogrification by stealth to a European federal superstate. History has shown such political structures are inherently unstable and collapse. And I don’t want to see a europe plunged into chaos or war as some United States of Europe tears itself apart. As for… Read more »

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago

An after the fact referendum – wasn’t it? Hardly the same thing.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

I don’t think I understand you. The Labour Party included in their manifesto for the second General Election in 1974 a commitment to firstly renegotiate the terms of British accession and secondly to hold a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the EEC. This was arranged and the question in that referendum was: “The Government has announced the results of the renegotiation of the United Kingdom’s terms of membership of the European Community. “Do you think the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?“ I was 22 at the time and worked for the “stay… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Ah, Brexit; a two pipe problem Watson! I think Brexit is Nature’s way of resolving the Irish question.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul.P
David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

😀😀

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Oh god, not another one. 🙄

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 year ago

👍👍

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

They maybe be a NATO member, but there are still things classified as “U.K. Eyes Only” and I’m pretty sure every other NATO member has an equivalent classification. Even allies have secrets from each other.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

The propellers were made in Finland before Finland was a NATO member. Britain no longer has facilities to make propellers.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

And what’s that got to do with the price of fish 🤷🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

Do we have to be able to make domestically every single component that goes into our military?
Because nobody else does.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

The point is that the part of a ship that you get to see when you dry dock her is the bottom, and the part needing attention in dry dock is probably the starboard propeller and perhaps the starboard rudder, so the
« national secrets » that our NATO allies get to see are the bits that were actually made in Finland. You seem to have forgotten the point that you set out to make in the first place.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

So what you’re saying is only the bottom of the ship, the rudder and the propellor go to the dry dock, while everything thing else stays in the U.K.?
Well if we can dismantle PWLS to separate the secret from the not so secret before sending the not so secret bits to France, we can probably repair her here too. In fact, that’s probably an easier job.

(Yes that’s sarcasm, in case you’re too stupid to spot it.)

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Sean

Clearly you have never been in a dry dock. That’s not sarcasm. You don’t know what you are talking about.

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

And once again you both show your arrogance and make a statement that is stupidly wrong.

Michael Livie
Michael Livie
1 year ago

There are 2 working dry docks in Belfast. Deep water and no bridges.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Michael Livie

I know! Either can take a QE class and Belfast is handy for Loch Long where the MOD have just spent £67M rebuilding the ammunition berth, which can now take the carriers. I don’t know how much plant and machinery is still in place at Queen’s Island but they were well able to do heavy maintenance when I was last there.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

Am I alone in thinking this FUBA may actually be a blessing in disguise ? It brings one of the RN’s biggest long term problems to the fore during peacetime and not when it would be critical. The RN needs modernised Maintenance facilities for all its surface ships not just the QE’s. We need a new bigger Frigate / Destroyer refit complex somewhere. I really don’t mind where it is but we need a 24/7/365 available Dry Dock and preferably on the west coast (deeper water and easier to access) and near to a trained workforce. Cheapest option is the… Read more »

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Agree. Strong argument for Inchgreen (but is it actually carrier friendly or does it need rebuilding?) and a strong argument for returning the KGV dock to operation – the latter can also do haircut and shave business for boxboats and cruise ships. KGV certainly big enough and handy for Portsmouth.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

It is big enough the QE2 fitted in nicely, it was built inthe 60’s, isn’t stepped and has sufficient water over the step. And CL know all this as they put Inchgreen forward for the refit contract rather than Birkenhead No 5 dock which can fit in but only just.

Simon
Simon
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Isnt the issue with Inchgreen that there is nothing else there? KGV is missing the gates now

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon

What’s wrong with Rosyth? It’s not that far away. A few days sailing or towing from the English Channel at most I would think.
Will Rosyth not also have the best skills to sort it as they built the thing a few years ago. They have the contract so presumably must have had the best bid in.
Am I missing something?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

The Forth Bridge… and the very restricted access to the non-tidal basin.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago

Lets hope they miss The Forth Bridge on the way up – be more than propeller damage to fix.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

Well, today’s news, as reported by our hosts right here, seems to be that a shaft coupling broke, this might or might not be related to other starboard drive system issues that had cropped up and had delayed the sailing. So she will wait until the tides are right, and will then proceed to Rosyth for docking which might (and I dare say, will) be combined with her first quinquennial survey docking being brought forward a few months.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

I think we might start to join the dots. An SKF coupling is locked in place and released using grease, iirc. That could explain the garbled references to a shaft not being greased, perhaps?

I suspect there will have been a single chain of causation and the earlier repairs to the starboard propulsion system will prove to be related.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

The technically minded may find this helpful:

https://www.skf.com/binaries/pub12/Images/0901d1968072ac3e-17372—Couplings-brochure%284%29_tcm_12-463858.pdf

There is rather a good chance that a starboard propeller and a length of tail shaft are lying on the bottom of the Channel.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

V Doubtful. Even with a cracked coupling the shafts should stay in it. .

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I wasn’t being wholly serious! In the only case that I myself know of where an SKF shaft coupling failed (container ship) it stayed in and was secured.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

👍
I don’t get this unprecedented bit though…Skf couplings break.I suppose to be accurate Its unprecedented to have broken a coupling on a UK carrier…but as there are only 2 carriers and 4 shaft lines that’s no surprise.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I agree. Do you think that, given the very low mileage, there might be another factor, such as an alignment issue, perhaps?

Simon
Simon
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

I think the issue as is Craig say below is the access to the basin. The idear for a second site was somewhere that didn’t have these issues. Cost and availability must be an issue

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon

Why? Has the scrap man been round in the middle of the night ? Happens round here all the time..and Im sure there’s lots of ‘scrap men’ on the South Coast…

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

KGV spec sheet from Peel Ports suggests 8.75m max draught.

https://www.peelports.com/media/zilh2qe0/berth-data-sheet-king-george-v-docks-v2-sep-20.pdf

Inchgreen is about 9m.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago

I meant KGV Southampton, from memory 366 metres x 41 metres x 15 metres, built in the 1930s for the RMS “Queen Mary”, currently missing its gate and pumps but that’s an easy fix.

PragmaticScot
PragmaticScot
1 year ago

I’ve seen a few comments on Twitter in reference to the Grade II listed building status of the dock and the pumping station being an issue, mainly due to the overhang of the carriers hull as it would mean demolishing the pumping station. Not sure how accurate that is but I could see that being the sort of thing that would discount it as it’s just a planning risk that could cause delays.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  PragmaticScot

Thanks. At least it is getting talked about!

Jonno
Jonno
1 year ago

Only in Britain could we waste an asset like the KGV dock, built with public money.
Only in Britain could redundant grade 2 listed buildings stand in the way of industrial progress and national security in Southampton and on the Clyde.
We sometimes seem to live on another planet.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
Andrew Craig-Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonno

Good point. Actually I’m not sure that the pump house is in the way:

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago

This does very much show why you cannot run a navy on the bare minimum of hulls. Even without war or other enemy action, ships work in an incredible destructive complex environment, that is effectively trying to break them every moment they are afloat. If you have not got spare capacity your really only one breakdown or event from loosing that capacity to a dry dock for months or even a founder.

Thank goodness we ended up with two STOVL carriers and not one CATOBAR carrier like France.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Could we not have ended up with 2 CATOBAR carriers?

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
1 year ago

If it’s and accident these things happen. If it’s yet another build fault or it’s down to incompetence somebody deserves a carrier size kick where it hurts.

Pacman27
Pacman27
1 year ago

First thing to say is it’s good to see someone take immediate accountability for this. It’s called leadership and in my opinion something recently lacking in the uk military.

its not what happened but how you react… the Us are dealing with their new Ford class and will understand that shit happens…

let’s move on…

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago
Reply to  Pacman27

A very sound point of view.

No dithering. Stand up and announce a clear decision. Fix the problem. Move on.

Pacman27
Pacman27
1 year ago

Far better than the Nick Carter crap we have had for the past 15 years…

Gordon
Gordon
1 year ago

I was an ERM in the SA Navy back in the 90’s, we would grease up the propeller shaft before leaving, we would grease it again after every two days at sea and we would conduct rounds to check up on the shaft bearings, it saddens me that the engineer responsible for greasing the shaft had not done his job. This goes to show how critical a simple job can be. This is now going to cost a fortune, the ships coxswain has some disciplinary measures to carry out on certain individuals that do not pride themselves to work on… Read more »

Sean
Sean
1 year ago

For the Victor Meldrews on here who think the RN run their ships into underwater obstacles or that the QE carriers are shoddily built, some facts to enlighten you…
https://www.navylookout.com/hms-prince-of-wales-to-be-dry-docked-while-hms-queen-elizabeth-takes-on-some-of-her-tasking/

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Looking at my Tide Tables for St Abbs and makine the adjustment for Rosyth it looks like the 11/12/13 of this month is an optimum tide and some enterprising soul should sell tickets from the bridges.
But I can’t believe how tight a squeeze these ships are to get into the basin, 1m on each side and 50cm under the keel.
Anyone know if they practice reverse parking ??

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Quote from today’s BBC web site.
“Ms Truss has said she will meet her defence pledge by delivering a new fleet of submarines and more investment in cyber and space technology.”
What odds will you give me on Anson going to Australia and acceleration of next generation joint SSN?

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I’d think it would more likely to be Astute or another of the original 3 as they are all worked up and de-snagged. Also they have the earlier 2076 Flank and Bow arrays. But I would bet that we see an Astute based in Australia and used to work up their crews, who knows thay could go for a Gold / Silver approach like the Gulf based T23.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Actually, not certain re the potential downside of this action. RN retains ownership; the Astute SSN would simply be “forward deployed” to the Indo-Pacific region for an extended period of time. Hasn’t the concept been proven w/ T-23 deployment to Gulf, and Rivers on a world-wide basis?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Yeh, forward deployed and jointly crewed with AUKUS spin.

Ben Turner
Ben Turner
1 year ago

Apparently the issue is a shaft coupling failure – bad installation?

In my 45 years working on new Naval ship construction I never knew a shaft coupling to fail.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago
Reply to  Ben Turner

Could you explain what a Shaft Coupler does ?

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Im going to hazard a guess it couples the Shaft…but don’t quote me on that 😉
**** edited to highlight a far more qualified poster than I has provided a far more erudite response below
(but I still stand by my answer 😀)

Last edited 1 year ago by grizzler
Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Ben Turner

I have seen one crack . Pain to get off when it won’t hold oil. Time to get a grinder on it.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

A lot of posts around and about saying that the issue is an unprecedented cracking of a shaft coupling. I was in charge of an emergency docking and repair for a vessel with a cracked SKF coupling a few years ago , way smaller than POW but the issues are the same. The coupling is an interference fit steel sleeve. Basically You inject oil at high pressure into it to expand it(40K psi +)and slide the shafts into it. As you release the oil pressure it contracts on to the shaft.It’s a lot more complex than that involving specific oil… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Do you know what caused the cracked coupling in that case?

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  AlexS

Metal fatigue was the apparent cause due to the steel sleeve having microscopic issues with the steel it was made from.
In other words…shit happens.

AlexS
AlexS
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Thanks.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Metal fatigue on a ship this new surely points to some sort manufacturing and/or materials issue does it not?
Where was the steel used to manufacture the sleeve – do we know?

Steve
Steve
1 year ago

Imagine a war situation, where one of the carriers took battle damage and needed repairing fast. The idea of it waiting to get into dry dock is just nuts, how on earth did miltiary planners come up with that stupid idea.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve

If you need a drydock in a civvy yard you will struggle. They are booked up day in day out for years in advance. However if you are willing to pay you can bump out the other ships but it will cost you…a lot…a really a lot!

Jonno
Jonno
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

You requisition it. You are the Government.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonno

Good look with that. Court case, loss of buisness costs , costs to the shipping company bumped out of the docks.
In wartime , in the UK probably a go’er. In the big wide world no chance unless you pay through the nose for it and then you would still have to wait.