HMS Quorn, decommissioned from the Royal Navy in 2017, has been sold to Lithuania.
According to DE&S here:
“HMS Quorn, which patrolled the seas as part of the Royal Navy fleet of Hunt Class Mine Countermeasures Vessels (MCMVs) until 2017, has been sold to one of the UK’s allies. As well as creating a return and savings of £2.5 million for Navy Command, a need for upgrades could see a British-based shipbuilding company win a large contract to carry out the work.”
Clive Walker, the Head of the Defence Equipment Sales Authority (DESA), said in a release:
“I am very pleased to see HMS Quorn move on to a new lease of life, in particular supporting the excellent working relationship that we have with Lithuania as our NATO ally, and potentially supporting British Defence with the regeneration package once the competition for the refurbishment is launched.”
The Hunt Class vessels specialise in active mine-hunting. They use high-definition sonar to scour seabeds for mines, which are then destroyed by the ship’s clearance diving teams or mine disposal system.
HMS Quorn is the third mine hunter the UK has sold to Lithuania, following HMS Dulverton and HMS Cottesmore in 2008.
Let’s hope they don’t try to eat it…..
Being married to a veggie, I don’t mind it. 😉
@Andy PANDY the CLOWN
So you Satisfied by your Clowning proformce of the day!
Nothing unusual here!
Morning Marion, I guess you finished The Mail early this morning, enjoy your day.
You two not pals, then ?
You are right, HF we Not pals!
He just makes an appearance just to take the piss!
It is he, who makes the FOOL of himself!
Is there anything in my posts that I come across as A Mail reader?
I’m afraid I don’t know – I’d have to go back to look. You don’t sound like one from this.
Seems that way mate, its a shame as I see him/her as one of the intellectual ‘heavy lifters’ on here, full of… insight and wisdom. Hey ho, with God’s help and a lot of counselling I’m sure I’ll get over it. 😉
If this was a French ship it would be a condition of sale that a French company got the refit. We are too fair by half.
Quite right by half!
If only you had done some research……
I am aware that the MoD does have some refit work on some RN vessels been sold, and done before handover.
Given that the other two Hunts that they operate and the Estonian Sandowns all use Thales’ MCUBE system I would expect that will be what they get. That’s also basically what the RN is getting with ORCA. Developed and supported by Thales UK in Cheadle for the most part.
I feel such ships may be required as fisher protection vessels post Brexit? Typical of her Majesty’s Government not to look too far into the future.
She needs a lot of work to update the mechanical side of things.
Although they have done Fish Protection duties the Hunts do not make decent Fish Protection vessels. That job was an addon and not its primary role.
As an example All of the old and unused sweeping winches under the aft canopy deck , which weigh many tons, are still there. They cannot be removed as the stability of the vessel would be completely thrown out. They only carry a couple of Gemini Boats, not Ribs on the canopy roof.
I know Gunbuster that they are not ideal for ‘FP,’ but they would be better than nothing. I feel sure there will be tensions in and around our fishing grounds post -December, as the issue over fishing rights always mean trouble?
Agree Maurice but in ww1 and WW2 we had hundreds of armed trawlers, just refit a few dozen or purchase them in new, add UAVs, a couple of RIBs and maybe a few guns and hey presto ready to roll. Much cheaper then batch 2 River class
Life isn’t that simple any more Mr Bell, you have to do the right courses etc etc and the ships have to ‘work up’ and we’d need the bodies to put on them. The courses and that can go out the window in war time but not practicable normally.
Think about what you are saying. Of course unused equipment can be removed, even if it involved replacing it with lead plates.
I have heard that they roll like a piggies already though.
Nope… It was looked at as they wanted to see if they could use UAsV boats from them. Its not technically feasible.
So make the bezt of it and sell them on. The hulls are still sound. They will last at 50 years and probably a lot longer than that.
So do you think the sale will leave us short of spare MCMVs?
Well yeah, maybe, but not because of some stability problem. Take 10 tonnes off, add another 10 tonnes if necessary. There must be another reason.
Apparently the disposal cost is £750000.As usual the price paid is murky. I suspect that they got it for free in exchange for regeneration costs. This would be no bad thing, as at least the ship will be now serving NATO instead of dead weight.
Yet another sacrifice on the alter of big empty carriers.
There is no place to put the ammount of lead to counter the top weight loss. The New CAT engines where lighter and they lost the Mag Sweep Pulsing engine as well which was a big loss of deep down displacement weight below the waterline. That has already been adjusted for. Remove the winches, the divers decimpression chamber, the Sea Fox rounds etc and the stability calculations become very iffy. Thats why deploying a remote boat was discounted.. It would be fine when onboard but once it was deplyed the ship would unstable unless you had a water ballast system… Read more »
If the ship could take the weight before, then it can take the weight of extra ballast to make up the difference. Lead is extremely dense, so no problem there either.
Having now researched the what you said, it seems that the problem to do do with the difference between loaded and unloaded condition. There is plenty of room for water ballast now, but it seems that combined with possible structural work it was all too much bother.
Disposing of GRP vessels is not enviromentally friendly. All you can do is cut them up in to pieces and put then into land fill.
You can burn them to recover the energy in cement plants like they do with car tyres, but that’s not that great either.
If the fishing industry actually helped restock, it would not be a problem, and stopped destroying the habitat with dredging.
Why use military ships when a refitted fast trawler would be much better? Employ the poachers, with anything confiscated going back to port.
We won’t have many left soon. Shame we got rid of so many! This was an area where the UK was great at.
Down to 13 I think? 7 Sandown and 6 Hunt. Used to have well over 20.
An excellent example of salami slicing.
I think the term “the UK is great at” is better, as we still have the experience and skills Cam. I guess the USV’s will eventually take over?
Something the Americans were very keen that the RN retained its capability in.
mainly because their ships and skills are in such a dire state
Are you just referring to MCM ?
I couldnt possibly cimment!!!
Comment
My guess this is Lithuania decided to buy the vessel to allow them to retire the elderly German mine sweeper M52 SÅ«duvis which entered service in 1958.They already operate two Hunt class mine sweepers and HMS Quorn was for sale at a rock bottom price.
This actually suits Britain’s strategic needs as it will enhance anti mine countermeasures in the Baltic sea vs the Russians.
Its sad to see our mcm capability being whittled away. I think we still need specialist mcms as well as autominus units. Even Belgium and Holland are building new specialist mcms.
Well HMS Quorn had already been whittled away in 2017, I do think two different classes of very similar vessels is not the most cost effective solution.
Certainly retaining a strong MCM capability is an area for the UK to borrow the cliche ‘Punch above its weight’.
I am open to new ideas but I think feelers need to be put out to industry for a cost effective replacement for the Hunt and Sandown class MCMV.
Originally they had two seperate jobs. Non- Mag Hunts to enter a field and combine influence sweep and the low mag Sandowns using a variable depth sonar to the hunt in deep water at a stand off distance from mines
Now the Hunts have lost the sweep capability and only hunt mines using a hull sonar it is a bit of duplication. But the kicker is the non mag Hunts. They are the best things to put into harms way because they have such a ridiculously low signature.
I think it’s good that we sell off equipment we don’t need or has been surpassed by more modern equipment to our friends that are unable to fund new or 1st rate equipment, I’m sure this vessel will enhance the capability of the receiving country. I would like to see the same done with Tranche1 eurofighter
As long as it is not needed, I agree, to save a bit of money is a different topic.
The decision seems to be short term saving of cash rather than capability focused.