In a recent parliamentary query, Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell raised eyebrows with a question about converting Royal Navy warships from diesel power… to nuclear power.
For smaller surface vessels like frigates, the benefits of nuclear power do not outweigh the significant costs and potential environmental concerns. Furthermore, integrating such systems into existing fleet designs would pose significant engineering and logistical challenges.
Rosindell asked the Secretary of State for Defence, “what his Department’s projected spending on nuclear powered surface vessels for the Royal Navy is in the (a) 2023-24, (b) 2024-25 and (c) 2025-26 financial year; and if he will make a statement.”
Not stopping there, he further inquired about the Defence Department’s plans, asking “what his Department’s timeline is for converting the remaining diesel-powered Royal Navy surface fleet to nuclear power.”
In a straightforward response, James Cartlidge, the Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, clarified, “The Royal Navy has never had any surface vessels that are nuclear powered and there is no programme or intention to convert the current fleet to be nuclear powered in future.”
Thus, the notion of the Royal Navy converting its frigates into nuclear-powered surface vessels remains firmly off the table for the foreseeable future, there are no plans to add warp cores or hyperdrive engines either..
” Warp cores and hyperactive engines” Love it. LOL
Nice to hear that our elective representatives have a firm handle on defence !
The general level of our political representatives in recent times sadly. Why would anyone competent in another technical or commercial expertise wish to become a politician and most of those that had shown competence outside Parliament (like Rory Stewart) were ousted as being a threat to the popularist idiots that are deemed adequate to lead us forward. Let’s be honest those who upon leaving school do nothing but pursue politics at Uni, become thereafter political assistants or advisors are the last sort of people to become MPs and run the Country. Yet that’s what we are getting.
Yes Roy Stewart, now there is was a man that could have been a true heavyweight old statesman….ex high level diplomat in some of the most difficult postings you can get, being in charge of an area falling into civil war ( the compound he was leading was besieged)…set up and run a number of humanitarian organisations across the globe…solo walked on foot for 18months through Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, India ( as in hiking 25 miles a day solo on foot)….is a heavyweight academic in the field of human rights and has been a professor at Harvard university..was a member of the Labour Party in his youth…was the personal tutor to the two princes….
Yes he can from privilege, but beyond that is a heavyweight mind that, has walked the world and shown huge levels of compassion understanding and a need to make the world better. He was a man that would also not compromise on his bedrock principles and he would not follow Boris Johnson and the pursuit of a potential no deal Brexit model.
All in all a conservative I would vote for against most Labour candidates. to note I did not vote for either Johnson or Corbin no matter what as I think both character and morals ( something Johnson did not have) and ability to lead ( something Corbin lacked) matter more that any party political issues.
I initially thought the same. He was articulate and clearly knew a great deal about Iraq and Afghanistan. But his utterances became more and more bizarre, almost a parody of himself. In the end he has turned out to be another privileged old Etonian with an inflated opinion of himself and barely concealed contempt for everyone else.
It is worrying to see the kind of politicians that the democratic processes throw up in countries on both sides of the Atlantic. Perhaps they were always pretty awful but now we are more aware of it?
And yet, and yet – look what we’ve actually ended up with in critical cabinet positions. If only some of them would have the good grace to quit.
Just to be clear, this comment has no especial political bias, since whatever takes over’ll be no better. There are still examples of good constituency MPs, but few good Ministers since loyalty to The Party becomes all consuming.
In this case, asking such a ridiculous question makes the party look bad by association. I doubt that Cartlidge or any other minister was impressed.
It was a written question, one of 8 that day 13 Sep
Im pretty sure the MP hasnt actually done this, their staff or volunteers etc would ask nonsense questions just to make him look busy.
https://members.parliament.uk/member/1447/writtenquestions
Doubt he would even read the answers either . Its just a KPI or something they get assesed on. The most important job of back benchers where they do spend time is raising money and thats the path to promotion
Hence the Rt Hon Schapps
Indeed, I think that’s the key issue it’s all about climbing the party ladder and nothing else.
Then why is getting oxygen for making an ass of himself over defence?
I’ve not voted for years and years and I’ve never noticed the difference between anyone in charge so they’re all obviously cretins
You lost my respect with Rory Stewart 👎
👍👍👍⚓
Doesn’t matter what party it is, there are too many pillocks in places where they become a liability.
More than they have on reality
Has he the solution to the Polaris boats disposal? He knows nothing about the subject.thats for sure
If anything, maybe we should see a return to sail power for merchant ships at least, with engines only for necessary manouvering or when becalmed. Maybe his brain was becalmed that day he made his enquiry.
He’s a Tory. Probably got shares in RR. Aren’t they looking to build small reactors for nuclear power stations of the future.
Pass the tin foil.
I suppose if you not an engineer then its not such a stupid question….
Perhaps the number of nuclear submarines awaiting dismantling (some more than 40 years), could have given him a clue?
Another pointless square peg in a round hole
I’m not an engineer but I would hope before asking a question like that would at least do enough research to understand the basics of what I am asking and why I even pose the question in the first place. All round basic expertise should be a requirement for our elected representatives surely and at least the nous to get the information from outside sources rather than waste much valued time in asking them of Ministers without any obvious purpose.
The only excuse I see for asking a question of this nature would surely be to present the views, proposals and ideas of outside experts and/or reputable sources who had studied such possibilities and who saw a logic in the subject being proposed to or asked of the Govt for a response, but the question wasn’t posed in such a manner to support such a notion. So if that was indeed the case in this instance I think it would be much more useful to hear about such debate and why it is taking place, over a seemingly vague unfocused question that thus rightfully gets this dismissive response, to political masters who probably themselves are ill placed to answer it in specifics anyway. In these circumstances it seems as relevant as asking what moves are afoot to convert our frigates to operate F35s… or hypersonic weather balloons perhaps. Or was this guy simply trying to initiate a perception amongst flat Earthers, conspiracy theorists and the Twitteratti that Britain was going to become a widespread nuclear danger to the World by twisting the response to a self serving agenda.
The main qualification for the defence job should be of personal experiences.then we might not be saddled with Idiots Ben Wallace was the best we had in decades.
Yes it is…..
If you’re not an engineer and have not the slightest grasp of how anything in the world works. But even then you’d also have to have hallucinated the existence of a ‘nuclearisation’ programme for surface vessels when no such thing has ever existed.
He’s obviously unaware of the 19 retired nuclear boats clogging up rosyth and devonport.
Could we at least retrofit them with phasers and quantium torpedoes?
What about making them more sustainable with solar power sails or carbon capture and storage?
Youve got to laugh about our current crop of MPs they really are utterly useless and have zero intellect or common sense. This lack of intellect, common sense and real world experience stems from the fact that large numbers of them studied politics at university and went straight into politics as a career and have no real world experience to weigh their views or judgements upon.
We parody ourselves, Mr Bell, and good job to. But the real Fantasy Fleeters are mostly to be found in Westminster.
Why are they allowed just to study a single subject like politics? So it looks like the universities are to blame, by not mixing politics with a range of other subjects, it is not a heavy weight subject like engineering!
And time machines and magic hat’s
I think they should be converted to wave power. I mean they’re never going to run out of waves are they?
Do you mean the politicians? Most of them are already running on wind.😆
Cough, cough, that’s a very old T23 photo up there…lol ☺️
It must be the prototype for fitting with the nuclear engines and warp drive.
How sad that he’s being mocked for this. Shows how childish and pathetic people can be. In light of the mini-reactor obsession in the media, it isn’t quite as stupid a question as people might think. It still won’t work as an idea, but credit to him for at least putting his head above the parapet and asking.
If you want something to laugh at, go watch the Russians release another hysterical threat to the West or something. This guy doesn’t deserve your mockery. Grow up.
I understand what you mean but if you read the MP’s questions they give the impression he believes the RN is currently in the process of buying new nuclear surface ships or converting existing ones. He was not enquiring whether there were any plans to look into the possibility long term.
Oh, come on. He has asked for it. If you don’t know what you are talking about there is always the option of keeping your mouth shut 🙂
He could of asked the question of how much a nuclear surface vessel would cost to build, and minimum size need to be. He may have got a sensible answer, and it would shut him up!
Looking up Mr Rosindelll’s profile I would say he can best be described as a ‘colourful’ character. Who knows what was in his mind. He might have been reading RN news, seen articles on the T45 PIP program and Astute and concluded we were fitting nuclear power to the destroyers. The human mind works in strange ways. The Russians do have a nuclear powered cruiser. Maybe he thinks we should follow suit. It’s been a good laugh and its an opportunity for someone to sit down and educate him.
USN Nuc Cruiser such as Virginia (Back in the day) cost 40+Mil USD a year to run, not including refits/refuels.
A Tico doing the same job cost around 28Mil USD a year, not including refits.
Simply not cost effective.
As for modular reactors…you still need to produce steam and go down the turbo alternator route. Steam hasn’t been an RN thing for decades. The corporate knowledge and safety culture from using Super Heated steam are long gone.
I for one would not want to go looking for a secondary steam leak by waving a broom handle up and down in front of me so it gets cut in half and you don’t.
I do agree with that point. It isn’t a completely idiotic question to ask. We should be directing our time (and anger) at those who actually make the decisions that are idiotic, rather than those daring to ask questions. If anything, questions like this offer a chance for education, rather than mockery.
That said, the individual in question should have done some research on the RN’s power systems before asking the question. However, I bet they’d just spin their argument to say “well, a submarine is a surface vessel when it’s on the surface!”…!
It is a very stupid question.
He implied that there were already nuclear powered surface ships in the RN. Why did he think this? Why did he not check to see if this was the case?
He must have somehow believed that we had nuclear powered surface vessels, perhaps he also thinks that we have a moonbase to?
A basic grasp of the facts is required before asking a question, after all our current in service frigates are very old and being retired, does he think converting Type 26 or 31 before they even enter service with non existent technology makes any sense?
I’m sorry but he might just as well have asked when HS2 trains (which might never exist!) would be converted to nuclear power, and then would busses follow suit.
Normally when you don’t know much about a topic, keep quiet, listen and learn. This plum is one of the people that thinks what they have to say is so important all the time he opens mouth and lets belly rumble.
A know it all.
Or he’s having a joke. Not very funny but it’s happened before with MPs asking stupid questions for some kind of laugh
Exactly. Best to stay quiet and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt…
He made Grant Shapps with his RAF aircraft carriers comment look almost competent.
George ,
The article is factually incorrect.
That is understandable considering the super duper super-secret classification associated with the only UK ship to ever have 8 x 10 Gw reactors fitted.
Perhaps the MP in question was using parliamentary privilege to refer to HMS MASSIVE?
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1084587658163167240/MIhK7l_K_400x400.jpg
Rather than being snide and dismissive, perhaps some research on the advances in small modular reactors might be useful? The government continues to rattle on about the need to decarbonise transport and nuclear offers the only realistic option for warships. Bill Gates is currently seeking new employees to introduce nuclear reactors to power Microsoft’s data centres so the nuclear options are only likely to expand. As with the development money the US is putting into blended body aircraft for their future transport requirement, there are many examples of the armed forces being used as pace-setters in technological advances.
A much cheaper option to decarbonise transport is to be fuelled by Hydrogen. It is still a engineering challenge.
And a chemical engineering challenge as well!
Hydrogen is currently an expensive way to turn fossil fuels inefficiently into a less energy dense substitute. Cost and energy efficiency may improve in future but I still wouldn’t fancy performing a RAS with hydrogen.
Super heated steam. Fkin horrible stuff. Stay well away from anything that produces it.
Isn’t this the guy who was arrested for sexual assualt eighteen months ago and is still on bail? I understand he hasn’t attended parliament since then. I wonder if this is some way to get publicity so that he stands a ghost of a chance of reselection. A “hello, I’m still here” bid.
Looks like I was wrong. Although according to the press he been asked by the Conservative chief whip not to attend parliament since May ’22, he has continued to ask written questions. This doesn’t look to be a one-off deliberately dumb play to get publicity.
The frigates COULD be converted to coal, hence saving on importing petrol.
In the future, a hybrid system, say a small low enriched reactor (Canadian Slowpoke or similar) + diesel, may be a viable option. Someday.
I enjoy mocking MPs in general and Tories in particular as much as the next person.
But…………
How big is a Frigate? The USN had Nuclear powered Frigates (by name if not by current role and size). The T26 is not small.
What’s the power output of RR’s new Small Modular Reactor?
How much volume do current machinery spaces and mission bays provide on T26 and T31?
I fully agree that T23s are too shagged out to even consider the surgery and investment required to replace their (technically diesel-oil fuelled) CODLAG plant.
Invest in Thorium fuelled reactors, combine with SMR. Licence to countries claiming that they only want to use reactors for civil uses. Then why not consider this for T83 and onwards?
There’s a thin line between genius and madness.
Evidently this chap’s staking his claim for Defence Secretary, since surely Grant Shapps must have been in post about as long as he’s held any job? Come the hour, come the next idiot.
Oh dear. See what happens when you let one Clown speak to another Clown. Clown speak. Where do they become professional Clowns? Madness 🤡🥳💩🤡🤪
You mean that photon torpedoes don’t really exist?
I wonder if this is a consequence of the assertion that “there are no stupid questions”- something I hear in problem-solving workshops far too often and have never agreed with. In a properly functioning political system, coming out with a question like that would be equivalent to resigning from politics. You can’t make governance decisions if you’re lost in a fantasy world.
Having looked up what’s been going on in this guy’s personal life in the last couple of years, it’s possible that he’s given up on his political career and is just trolling for his own amusement.
Gosh April has come around quickly
Lmao 😅
Who is this clown?
Yep 👌
The question reflects the low level caliber of many MP’s and displays a worrying lack of background knowledge in elementary engineering.
Or he maybe being insightful; what is the green energy answer for RN surface fleet; wind turbines. Most heavy commercial have ruled out battery packs, hydrogen seems to be too expensive. Both Russia and USA have nuclear powered ships. Proven tech……
Massively expensive hence for everything bar carriers the USN binned it.
Plus icebreakers as they have a unique heavy duty engine power requirements
Plus a ice reinforced large cargo ship for resupply along arctic
There isn’t one. Nor is there for most energy-intensive requirements, barring some unlikely technological breakthroughs. But when you set a relatively long-term target it takes a while for inconvenient reality to intrude.
LOL i can just imagine the RN in a few years will have conventional carriers and nuclear powered frigates. Makes perfect sense.
The more apposite question is why weren’t our aircraft carriers built using nuclear power.
Please educate yourselves people. The US currently has 11 nuclear aircraft carriers for a start. So it is possible and better than diesel. Just expensive. So yes. The technology has existed since the 1960’s. End of.
I don’t think you understand what the point of contention is here, “end of”.
Although somebody does have to start planning for when using fossil fuels becomes uneconomical.
Notice I didn’t say “have run out”, they’ll never run out.
It’s just that with ever decreasing solar, wind and 4th gen nuclear it will become too expensive to ruin the drills, pumps, refineries and transport costs to get diesel to the ships.
So yeah, maybe it won’t be nuclear.
But it certainly have to be something.
Typical political moron. Have no concept of what happens in the military :wpds_eek: