A Norwegian submarine arrived in Faslane this weekend for a routine visit to the base near Glasgow.

Twitter user Mister Boggers captured an image of the Uredd arriving at Gare Loch, you can find his profile here.

According to Military-Today.com, the six Ula-class submarines are intended primarily for coastal operations, and are, therefore, comparatively small in size and limited in their diving depth to some 250m.

“Since the deletion of the last six of the original 15 Kobben class boats in the second half of the 1990s, the Norwegian navy operates just six submarines in the form of the boats of the Ula class with diesel-electric propulsion. The boats are named Ula, Uredd, Utvaer, Uthaug, Utstein and Utsira.  Though much of the hull and all of the propulsion machinery are German, the boats were completed with a mix of French, German and Norwegian systems.”

Over the last two weeks, an American submarine and a French submarine have also visited.

French nuclear submarine arrives in Scotland

Faslane is the second largest single-site employer in Scotland, after the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow. The base is one of the Royal Navy’s three main operating bases, alongside HMNB Devonport and HMNB Portsmouth. It is best known as the home of the UK’s four Vanguard-class nuclear-armed submarines which carry Trident II D-5 ballistic missiles.

New figures unearthed by Deidre Brock, MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, reveal that just over 6,000 people are directly employed at Faslane and Coulport.

Figures reveal Faslane directly employs over 6,000 people

The figures show that of the 6,068 civilian and military personnel working at Faslane and Coulport, 4,583 are Scottish taxpayers.

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

74 COMMENTS

    • For sure. However an AIP conventional sub would be a useful and probably quick way to add some additional capability to the RN.
      4-5 SSKs could screen the SSBNs as well as provide protection for critical underwater infrastructure.

      • I’d go Japanese Soryu class with lithium ion batteries. Endurance is excellent. Crew of 69.
        £500 million each. Bargain.

        • Is it a bargain when compared to the £1.2Bn unit cost of the massively more capable and comfortable* Astutes?

          No point in acquiring something that we cannot crew.

          I’m always quite surprised how cheap the Astutes are TBH – given nuclear and all the rest of the tech in them.

          *comfort in any sub is a relative concept!

          • A crew of 69 seems quite large. Some of these new euro boats have half that.
            If it was truly to be considered and planned for I would look at Swedish, Netherlands, Norway boats will small crew and space for special forces.
            These would be for coastal landings, uk, Baltic, Middle East ops.
            Only if this didn’t come at the cost nuclear boats.
            I can’t see timeframes fitting together as by the time these could be ready the astute replacement could of been sped up with the monies spent on these boats. Give me 12 of them over a mixed fleet of 8 and 6

          • I’d be tempted to agree.

            Until you get to the Hi-Lo mix of T26 / T31. So Hi-Lo is a thing in RN thinking. Same, I suppose, with RB2.

            That said nuclear is a game changer in the sun world.

            If we are training nuclear engineers en mass for AUS then up scaling the program, slightly further, is more plausible.

          • All depends really if we want to operate in areas like the Baltics or Black Sea really amongst others. Would be useful but not a priority esp as I suspect if we get serious it would already be close to suicide for Russian subs in the Baltics it’s a time factor really.

          • Agree, the SSN fleet is the most important to develop, with electric boats being a nice to have.

            Although it does have its advantages if you can increase the hull numbers significantly over a wholly nuclear fleet, but I doubt it would, instead it would limit the size of the nuclear fleet, as you say if we can we should be looking to maximise the number of SSNRs. Looking at the SSN tasking we really need at least 3 deployed ( carrier escort, supporting the CASD, and one doing SSN stuff) which means at least 9 boats with 12 being nice).

            But as we are not going to be getting SSNR until the 2040s there is possibly a space. Also if we do up the numbers of SSNRs above the numbers of astutes we would need to train up the number of submariners needed, so maybe bringing in a small fleet of electric boats to run from the late 20s, to late 40s gives that method of working up the needed crews.

            from a pure tasking around protecting subsea infrastructure and more local waters work, autonomous UUVs may offer the way for less money…so the way to go may depend on the numbers of SSNs envisaged for the late 40s into the 50s.

          • Hi Jonathan, it is a common misconception on here that SSNs are
            specifically deployed to assist/aid CASD units. SSBNs are more than capable of looking after themselves, with SSNs doing all that ‘other’ stuff which indirectly supports CASD.

          • I have noticed that aswell often. The thought that an ssn is protecting the SSBNs.
            As you say SSBNs are probably the most quiet when operating in sneaky mode on missile patrol. They have spearfish torpedoes and most of the stuff an ssn has.
            The fact the Royal Navy SSBN and French navy SSBN crashed into each other under the water gives an insight into how quiet they are when operating in quiet mode.

        • Reasonably certain we could make you a one time, good deal on some (slightly) used LA class SSNs. Low mileage, hardly ever left port. 😉

          • Slighty? 1 careful owner, only 1 million miles,
            How about a swap for some slightly used and abused trafalgar and swiftsure subs.
            Rumours have it you can still smell deep32 on bunk 14😂😂😂

          • You have Conqueror in Devonport that is open to the public I believe. And both an old A boat and X craft in the SM museum in Gosport also. Unfortunately no other Nuc SMs are open, so you have to rely on port visits and then if they open them to the public. After what happened in Southampton, not sure if they would!

          • Sorry, mate, for the misinterpretation of the question posed. I meant to ask which SSN and/or SSBN classes you had served tours on? Again, apologize for the framing of the question.

          • No worries,
            2 x Swirtsure class (both special fit).
            2 x Trafalgar class.
            1 x Resol class.
            1 x Vanguard class (twice).

          • Do career track sailors typically migrate between SSNs and SSBNs? Always understood most were slotted into one or the other. Not certain re USN.

          • Back in the day(pre 2000), it was basically a geographical split in the country. The Northern half served in Faslane, the Southern half Devonport/Portsmouth, driven largely by personnel preferences. You obviously always had the issue of being sent where needed by the RN, that was mostly non-preference drafts.
            We have always had non-preference drafts, when we finally lost our SSKs, we probably started to get more non preference postings.
            Fast forward today, everything is based in Faslane, now you get the diehards who prefer one class to the other, and those that don’t mind. Nowadays you would probably be extremely lucky not to cross migrate between the classes.

          • Very interesting, someday will ask someone knowledgeable whether USN has similar practice. 🤔

          • Do you shine green at night. Thanks for your service in the dence of the UK. Just out of interset can you say what the special fit was. Or do I have a good idea.

          • HMS Courageous is open to the public.
            We should buy 2 or 3 212’s ourselves. Why buy a set of 4 or 5? They dont need to be there 24/7 do they? Can we do without them? Its a requirement and skill we could do with. Anyway we borrow them from the European navies much of the time.

          • Ah wrong one, my error there then!
            Well, delving into the world of fantasy fleets, the Type 212/CD wouldn’t be my choice of SSK, personally I would go for the A26 design and have 4-6 of them in two different sizes, 2xPeligic and 4xOceanic ER. Failing that I would prefer to have 4x JPN Taigei class SSKs, no AIP, just more Lithium ion batteries. But that’s just my preference!

          • I totally agree. If I could have a fantasy sub fleet for the RN 8 Astute class and 12 A26s or Taigei. The A26s would be 4 Peligic and 8 ER with three tube VLS systems and a SBS mobule. Then again what do I know, apart from this the SSN is a hunter killer a AIP is a extremly quiet platform. Does an SSN want to take on a AIP in a dirrect one to one limited area where the AIP is in defence mode. Not sure. Nuc even at all stop has pumps going, AIP in all stop black hole. As I have said in a diffrent post, if the UK could find the budget for 12 SSNs then I would prefer 8 SSNs and 12 A26s or Taigei class AIP subs. Preferably the A-26 class.

            Deep 32 I do have a question that you could answer, I have argued very often on the stupidity of deploying a SNN to the Med, Baltis etc. My reasons for the stupidity is as follows, lack of deep water, clarity of water, area of ops. I will and alway will argue that for the Med, Baltic, North Sea, Norwegian coast line smaller AIP subs 2-3,000 tons is best suited.

          • It’s really a bit subjective to give an opinion on. The continental shelf (0-200m) is really mostly to shallow for SSN ops, although they obviously do operate here. The closer to shore, the shallower the water, again more suited to SSK ops.
            The Baltic’s whilst deep, is only so in certain areas, also contains a lot of fresh water run off from the rivers that flow into it. This causes deep keeping issues for SMs. Additionally there is only one very restrictive way in/out, so generally not somewhere you want to put a SSN into. It’s really a play pond for SSKs. Back in the late 70s/80s we put our O boats in there on a regular basis.
            The Med, different kettle of fish. Yes whilst the waters are pretty clear to spot SMs from the air, it’s a big sea lots of deep water, and for most of the year, a water column that aids SMs. Again yes there are areas where a SSK has a distinct advantage, but overall it’s good SSN territory.
            Hope that helps you.

          • No mate not mine! Mine was always Stbd side fwd outer middle rack, nice and quiet up there.😴😴😂

          • Thanks for the offer but a LA class, god the Virgina class has nothing apart from a bigger weapons fit on our Astutes. If I remember correctly one of our Astutes was getting up close and personal for several hours on one of your Virginias before the RN skipper got bored. To be honest if you asked any US Sub skipper if he want to take on an Astute on a one to one, I think he will say NO. So thanks for the offer but no thanks. On top of the diffrence in the sub you have the diffrence in training, a US skipper is a nuc engineer/sub warfare trained skipper a RN skipper is combat trained and trusts the engineers. The one is a multi task skipper the other is an out and out sub warfare skipper. Then again if memory serves me right the skippers of the US carriers are air combat officers plus have qualifications in nuclear power then get some surface ship qualifications, whilst the skipper of a RN carrier are surface ship officers. Yes the US carrier as well as the sub skipper are more rounded but to go into combat the skipper must know what he or she is doing, know what the escorts can do and fight the battle whilst trusting his/her officers, crew to do their jobs.

            Put it a simple way, when I use a kettle to make coffee I switch on the kettle boil some water and make a coffee, I don’t think, can the kettle do it, what are the specs of the kettle, I trust the engineers and techs that designed and built the damed thing to do the job that I need. Will I push the kettle to give me 200 C no, if I want it to do that either I get a diffrent bit of kit or I get an engineer to tell me what to do.

            Believe me you don’t want to worry about the engine room when fighting a battle, you worry about the battle and the engine room will do what you need or want. Thats why they have spent many years in college, Uni and they know what they are doing.

            I know the diffrence in the RN, after my time in the Army as a communications engineer I joined the RNR as a weapons electronics engineer. You wanted a signal to get from A-B I would get it there, even bending the laws on signal transmission, god I would get into trouble in the Royal Signals for that with some as the comments you cant do that to the equipment, with others thanks forgetting the signal through. After some time with the RNR I used to volunteer on board ship at the wheel or putting the ship through some tight spots my skipper called me into the office. I really did wonder what trouble I was in or what now. When he told me to sit down I really did think I was in deep do do. Especially as the night before on a combined RN/RAF Herc/SAS I think it was 22 night low level drop and extraction ex where we were to pick up some boats I did a 360 without command to take speed of and to get some distance from the three RIBS crossing ahead, one port two starboard. I then said sorry and asked for relief as I had been at the wheel for ten hours, I took it as my mistake. I was well and trully knackerd, thought I miss understood the situation and acted incorrectly, so I expected a bollocking. Instead the skipper explained he was coming from the bridge to the flying bridge, did not see what was happening and I acted without orders, but acted correctly. I got offered my commision but I had to change from WEPS to Seaman branch to become a skipper. I did ask if I could combine my engineering with commanding a ship of war, the answer was no. An engineer cannot be a captain of a warship. Lesson I learnt, trust my people, to understand enough to know when I don’t understand, and to understand enough to ask the right questions of people who do understand. So when my engineers say it cant be done, then it cant be done I dont need to know why that is their job.

            So again No I do not want an LA in the service of the RN and I never want a US skipper to command a RN SSN. To work with yes then again at a distance.

          • Sorry, assumed everyone realized I was being entirely facetious w/ that answer (hence, winking emoji at end of text). Will strive to either more clearly label attempted humor in the future, or forego attempts altogether. 🤔

      • But additional capability for what? With Russia gone as a threat, our navy will focus even more on far away places, where SSNs are far more effective, due to their longer legs. If we had a fleet of conventional subs, we would also need to build a whole load of new bases around the world for them. Plus subs just don’t do the show the flag job that is needed when operating at large distances.

        • I do agree, from a U.K. point of view we have need for influence far away, but we do have a need to secure sub sea infrastructure, but that may be better done by UUVs.

          • Not really sure how you can realistically protect the infrastructure. Its spread across hundreds of miles, it would be insanely hard to secure it all. Sending ships to protect it I suspect is more about optics than a realistic defensive move. For sure though it’s been proven to be a threat that needs a solution.

      • To be honest, critical infrastructure and home waters is the sort of thing a fleet of Autonomous UUVs Could do very well, they can just plod around at a few knots, with very low levels of crew needed and In far higher operational numbers than we could ever get crewed electric boats.

        • How do you think control of the unmanned stuff should be managed? Being next to communications cables could be very useful.
          I wonder if we will see a mothership concept. I was thinking a conventional sub could be made to launch/recover, charge the UUV’s and provide some control and response to issues. The immediate problem I thought of was power demands if the sub was to be used to charge them. Going to be surface trips required often.
          Again though it may be better to put resources into replacing the broken systems quickly than trying to police them.

          • to be honest the tender for these resources could be quite a basic floaty boat.

            communications through water and between the water air interface are starting to move on as they have managed to push cohesion paired photons through turbulent water, which means we are sort of getting to the stage where quantum comms it looking to be practical. I know the US have practically undertaken an exercise using quantum communications across the air water interface and through to a nuclear sub, the chinese are working hard on this tec as well.

            The truth is they would need to be pretty independent autonomous systems and would likely be looking for and not reacting to. The reaction would likely need to be from something in the air and manned.

            let’s be honest just a UUV discovering someone and reporting, is likely to have them moving away in the other direction.

          • Not so simple as you think. So communications through water, That is a nightmare, so I will start with high levels comms through the air. So yes we all know laser, direct line of sight etc. Laser can carry the most data in a small package. Yet, laser has an issue, blooming, as the air get hot from the laser beam the water in the air causes the laser to ‘steam off’. This will cause a weaknes in signal return.Green laser is better in a high level water/humidity situation, however due to the frequency in the light it will have a limited range. I did ask my friend if it would be possible to use a green light laser to burn a path and a red light laser to go up the middle. Very much like a cable with an outer insulater. He did explain why its not possilble but to do the explaination would be a few hundred knapkings worth of explaination. It was something to do with the frequecy overlap. Or something with the problem of a proffessor and engineer. Proff find reasons why it does not work, engineers find ways to make it work.

            So conculsion we need three types of snoopy boats, one very much designed to go into harms way, possibly a T32 design. One that can be on constant patrol, an upgraded Batch II OPV and the third type which not only undertakes protection of the UK infrastucture but can also do some snoopy work themselves. A big fishing boat comes to mind.

          • It seems to be that they are moving forward with experimentation with blue green phonons, as they don’t suffer the same attenuation as red light in water. So far the greatest column of water I have found is 55m in this paper.

            https://opg.optica.org/prj/fulltext.cfm?uri=prj-7-8-A40&id=416194

            but I’ve read a few papers from China in which they are getting the same sort of results. So it seems the cutting edge are very much thinking it’s possible to crack the problem sometime soon.

            This biggest issue from reading the various papers is both the are attenuation issue but also the amount bits sending using entangled photons they can achieve 215 kilobits per second. The likely max that the Chinese research has looked at is quantum comms through sea water to a depth of 125 meters at 215 kilobit seconds ( but that’s theory, I’ve not see a paper saying they have got there yet.

            I think if your moving away from quantum encryption and entangled photons they have got to a theoretical max of 10megabits per second through 350 meters of water.

            The wavelength they are using is 400 to 500nm.

            for free air it the papers I’ve read give a max of 177km in free air before attenuation becomes a problem for quantum comms. Infact everything I’ve read says that free air is actual better in some ways than fibre cables although The University of Witwatersrand have published showing you can actually push through multiple patterns of entangled photons through a standard single pattern fibre cable, but it’s gets to weird for me to understand what that paper is talking about as I don’t understand high dimensional spatial modes or what the hell a multidimensional hybrid quantum state is…..I sort of just about manage to get my head around 2D quantum states, just ( as much as anyone with a normal brain can).

        • Look this is my area of work, we have had for many decades methods to protect cable systems as long as companies and governments were willing to invest a few extra £s per km. Its what we call load bearing plus some others that I won’t go into. A cable is designed to carry X with a throughput of Y we install a key that can read X/Y when the load is diffrent to what is expected we can give not only a reading but to with 10m a location of the feed off. You give me a cable or a signal, then you try to tap in, give me a few hours not only would I find the tap in but I will find the range of the drain out point. What I always found strange is that to find the tap in was a range of plus minus, the tap in point desination was more accurate.

  1. What, no Ursula? There was one namesake that seemed mighty fine in a bikini… Seriously, gentlemen, you must have some awesome taverns/sports bars in the vicinity, practically every other time I open this site, another sub is arriving–French, Norwegian, American (which are so numerous you probably have to beat them back w/ a stick). Was this the case prior to 24 Feb 22?

    • Allied nations boats have always been regular visitors to Faslane. Even more so when a Joint Warrior exercise is taking place.

    • Haha. It’s in the middle of nowhere. There’s a small town near by and other small towns further away. It’s less than an hours drive to Glasgow so that’s always an option. Or the posh side of Scotland (Edinburgh) is only 45 mins further

      • posh side of Scotland…..?????? the last Northern bastion of posh is in Durham, everything Points North of that Northern bastion is labelled “here be Plebs” the smart set know this…or so I’ve been told ( in a condescending way).

        • Oh if only you knew the truth. It was actually the Scottish that built Hadrian’s wall to keep those uncivilised Romans out.
          I never considered Durham to be posh. Anything south of the border is generally looked on with a skeptical eye.
          Had a few nights out in Berwick upon tweed while doing some work at the old barracks there, could barely understand a word that was being said.
          We stayed on site in some 400 year old army beds and had big metal baths instead of showers. I will always remember to put the cold in first after getting a burnt arse on my first dip.
          Is that not what all English households are like?😂😂😂

          • To be fair most of us have had to sell iron baths to the scrappy for some cash for the electric meter.

    • I do hope the next Royal Navy subs and ships get good names. Hopefully the next destroyers will be the E class.
      The subs went a bit wonky with the dreadnought class. They should have all begun with D.

        • It would seem a friend of my mother was a Stoker, deep below the Waterline, on Ajax during the Battle of the River Plate:

          As he said later to my mother, “Perhaps Little Chance of Survival if Ajax was Severely Damaged in the Cross-fire with the enemy of the day, historically speaking”, apparently.

        • This is still one of my favorite tirades:

          THE SHIPS THAT ALMOST DIED OF SHAME….

          I NAME THIS SHIP…….. Research, even into the most mundane subject, can sometimes bring unexpected rewards. Recently, for reasons too dull to explain, I was attempting to discover the names of battleships which served with the Royal Navy during the Second World War. The reference librarian hopefully provided me with a huge volume which listed the names of every British warship ever built, and as I leafed through the index, I was impressed by the quality of the names that the British have given their warships.

          HMS Relentless, HMS Repulse, HMS Resolution; fine names, names to gladden the heart of every true Brit and dismay any foreigners with a grasp of English. Names redolent of courage and firm-jawed determination – HMS Sceptre, HMS Scimitar, HMS Seadog, HMS Spanker –

          HMS Spanker ? it had to be a misprint, but when I looked at the relative page there it was, HMS Spanker, minesweeper. I turned back to the index and soon discovered that HMS Spanker was not the only warship to bear a silly name. A quick check unearthed the destroyers HMS Fairy and HMS Frolic, the light cruiser, HMS Sappho and the corvette, HMS Pansy.

          My first assumption was that these names had been chosen by some fresh faced innocent unaware of their connotations, but a careful reading of the index suggested that the choice of such names was deliberate and malicious. I have no proof for my theory, but I strongly suspect that they were the creations of an embittered clerk.

          He was a minor bureaucrat who had once dreamed of becoming a naval hero, a second Nelson or Benbow, but had been turned down for active service on the grounds of flat feet and myopia. The Sea Lords, kindly and foolishly, gave him an office job in the Admiralty. There, as he brooded upon the shattering of his ambitions, his envy of the jolly Jack Tars serving in His Majesty’s ships turned to hatred and then into a desire to humiliate those who lived a life on the ocean wave. His big break came when he got a job in the Ship’s Names Department and he set to work with a will.

          Having started with HMS Pansy, HMS Fairy and HMS Spanker, he moved into sexually suggestive names – HMS Teaser, HMS Tickler, HMS Torrid, HMS Thruster and HMS Thrasher. Not content with the damage to morale that these names must have caused to morale that these names must have caused he followed up with HMS Inconstant, HMS Insolent, HMS Truant, HMS Dwarf and HMS Doris.

          The man must have been twisted, but he was no mean amateur psychologist. Would an hard pressed admiral be cheered by the news that HMS Doris and HMS Dwarf (a cruiser and gunboat combination that sounds like an avant-garde cabaret act) were steaming to his aid ? Could he be certain that HMS Truant would turn up ? That HMS Inconstant wouldn’t change sides, or that HMS Insolent wouldn’t reply to his signals with a stream of abuse ?

          This evil minded functionary worked hard to destroy fighting spirit, carefully calculating the result of call a ship HMS Hazard. The cry, “Hazard to port !” must have disrupted countless naval exercises and I strongly suspect that he tried to name a destroyer HMS Mutiny, thinking of the chaos that would result from the signal “Mutiny in Portsmouth”. Someone spotted this and changed his proposed name from the English Mutiny to the French Mutinè, hoping that the ship would stir up trouble on courtesy visits to French ports.

          If my theory is correct, that someone was Clerk No.2 he worked in the same office as Clerk No.1, but his history and beliefs were very different. He had been invalided out of the Navy after a distinguished career and was a ferocious xenophobe who believed that the British had the right to intimidate and bully anyone who stood in their way. his existence is demonstrated by further study of the list of names.

          Most people would consider names like HMS Conqueror, HMS Terror and HMS Vengeance adequate for the purpose of frightening Britain’s enemies. Not Clerk No.2 he though them namby-pamby and decided to rectify the situation. He wasn’t as prolific as Clerk No.1, but he did his best christening such vessels as HMS Arrogant, HMS Imperialist, HMS Savage, HMS Spiteful, HMS Surly and HMS Tyrant. His finest hour came when he got the job of thinking up names beginning with V, he came up with HMS Vandal, HMS Venomous, HMS Vindictive and HMS Violent. He too was a good psychologist – nobody who had dared to challenge Britain could fail to be moved by the news that HMS Spiteful, HMS Violent and HMS Vindictive were turning up to sort them out.

          In later years, as he sat writing letters to the Eastbourne Gazette demanding the introduction of public flogging for litter louts, he must have regretted not calling a ship HMS Vicious. However, he probably consoled himself with the thought that Clerk No.1 didn’t get much of a look in on the V’s. He would have christened the ships Vacuous, Vile, Verminous and Venereal. As it was he only managed HMS Vanity, which was presumably a sister ship of HMS Narcissus. Though Clerk No.2 no doubt deplored the behaviour of his colleague, he, too, allowed the problems of day-to-day existence to intrude into his work, though only after rows with his wife, hence HMS Termagant, HMS Virago and HMS Tirade.

          I don’t know for how many years they worked in the same office, but it must have been a fraught relationship. Each probably spent most of his time trying to trump the names of the other. Clerk No.1 christened HMS Pansy, No.2 responded with HMS Manly. No.1 – HMS Fairy, No.2 – HMS Virle. And so it went on until they retired and the ships they had named were either sunk or scrapped.

          Now our ships have boringly correct names, which is a pity, for names could make a difference. A truly chauvinistic government would do well to study the names dreamed up by Clerk No.2. If we can no longer terrify opponents with the size of our navy, we could try to frighten them with aggressive nomenclature. A good start would be to retrieve the name HMS Violent and call sister ships HMS Psychopathic, HMS Blood Crazed and HMS Criminally Insane. The Vandal class could include HMS Ram Raider, HMS Headcase and HMS Terminator.

          Of course, a more progressive government might go for names which reflected the concerns of the Left – HMS Black Sections, HMS Stop Clause 28, HMS Unilateralist and HMS Binding Decision of the Party Conference. Perhaps not, the Daily Mail would have a field day if HMS Unilateralist was ever sunk.

          In any event, the name of the ship doesn’t appear to have affected its ability to fight, HMS Truant sank the Karlsruhe, HMS Wallflower and HMS Inconstant accounted for several U-boats and I’ve do doubt that other ships with ridiculous names had excellent war records.

          But it is hard not to imagine the crew of HMS Narcissus leaning over the side to admire their reflections in the water, or the crew of HMS Spanker being accosted by leather-clad masochists in dockside bars.

          The crews of such ships must have been relieved when security considerations temporarily ended the practice of having the ship’s name emblazoned on the cap-band. Even so, the change didn’t come quickly enough for the unfortunate University Naval Reserve Unit which, when the orders for mobilisation came, was sent en masse to join a battleship. As they walked up the gangway the regulars on deck burst into hysterical laughter. The full name of the unit was the Cambridge University Naval Training Squadron, which was, of course indicated by the initials on their caps……….

          • Oh I can’t claim credit for writing it, just for finding it and keeping it locked up in my memory banks for moments like this.

          • 😂😂😂
            brilliant Dern. Good thing that your clerks weren’t let loose on the RFA
            Wave Goodbye, Tealeaf, Figleaf, Yellow Ranger etc etc

          • I suspect one of the clerk’s might have been on an exchange programme with the USN during WW2…
            how else to explain “USS Shangri-La”? 😉

          • Actually, a revered name to USA, USN and USAF. Reverence created by Pres. Roosevelt when he answered a reporter’s question who asked where the Doolittle Raiders who bombed Tokyo in 1942 launched from, rather than (USS Hornet?).

          • Excellent! 👍😁 Absolutely convinced both friend and die would give a wide berth to GanS Verminous and especially HMS Venereal! 🤣😂😁

        • I remember former MP George Galloway at an audience with Sadam Hussein, calling him ‘Indefatigable’. Cue Hussein’s translator with blank look on face!

        • Hmmm…judging by recent comments on this site, assumed the name Ajax was considered a four letter expletive in the King’s English….😉

          • Not if you put HMS in front of it.
            I’m a firm believer that vehicles should not be properly named until in service.
            I’m a fan of bringing back rainbow names for prototypes.
            I might actually be having a memory problem. Was it called rainbow codes? Red top, blue Danube, red snow etc etc

  2. Good boats but I think a mixed SSN and UUV fleet will be the way we go to get the numbers up. Hopefully we won’t have long to wait to get some idea. Mr Wallace Sir over to you.

  3. Fine, if the RN gets a few thousand more posts and the effort, money, logistic tail and infrastructure for them does not impact on the SSN fleet. Which I guess it probably would.

    So I choose the SSN.

  4. Speaking about subs I have a question, does anyone know what powerplant HMS Angincourt will have. I did read somewhere that the MoD in June 2012 allocated £600 million to RR ‘for the production of the PWR3 for Dreadnought and the final Astute’ which would be Agincourt? Can anyone confirm. Possibly it is a bad sentence construction meaning the final PWR2 and the new PWR3 for the Dreadnoughts or the final Astute is to get the PWR3. However, if I read the sentence in the way it is written then Agincourt is to get the PWR3. In some ways it would make sense but I think it might mean a design change due to size of reactor etc. Which would make her a half sister but a test bed for the Dreadnought class and the future SSN-X. I came across the comment when I was trying to understand the diffrence in the Chinese MSR reactor for the new carrier 004 to the RN PWR reactor, (molten salt reactor-pressure water reactor), So if someone can help me out with this.

    As for the Norwegian sub visit, good to see them here in the UK, good submariners, a bit carzy and don’t give them anything more than coffee, maybe on a good day shandy. The few I have come across, well, give them a few whiskey’s and Vikings comes to mind. I am supprised that they are going with a German design for their new subs, I would have thought that the new Swedish A-26 would be better suited.

    I really do wish that the RN could get a mixed sub fleet of SSNs and AIP subs. The latest Japanese Taigei class AIP sub that has just been launched costs about £420 million. This would mean if we could get the budget for 12 SSNs we could have 8 SSNs plus 12 Taigei type subs for the same price. We could use the AIP subs in the Med based out of Gib or Brunei, and or Norway, the GIUK gap, they could also do inshore SBS operations. This leaves the SSNs to escort the carriers, SSBNs and go hunting. Thats if we have a SSN escorting the SSBN, I would imagine that we have when she is leaving or entering UK waters but in the deep blue, only God and the big boss knows.

    So why not make a deal with Japan or Sweden but I think Japan is my preference, help and in the design phase and then buy Tempest and we will build with help the Taigei type sub here in the UK under technology transfer. I do prefer the Swedish A-26 and its varients, but for the futre of Tempest I think Japan would bring more to the table.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here