Thanks Thanks:  60
Likes Likes:  91
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 194
  1. #151
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sofa View Post
    Have the article here now. Surface Search Radar taken off ships going into maintenance and put on ship deploying.
    £6,700 circuit card assembly for torpedo launch system swapped 26 times across 12 type 23 ships.
    MoD to save money only ordered incomplete technical documentation for the Type 45s which made parts IDing and maintenance a nightmare
    Just read the same article....madness..... penny wise pound foolish
    Time for another break I think......

  2. Thanks sofa thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, Graylion liked this post
  3. #152
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sounds like the Batch 2's problems are a bit of a concern, with reports that Forth has been handed back and Tyne is being brought back into service to cover:
    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-...e-than-feared/

  4. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  5. #153
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oh dear. This does not bode well. Lucky they didn't sell or scrap HMS Tyne.
    HMS Tyne to be reactivated as now delayed Offshore Patrol Vessel fleet faults worse than feared
    By George Allison - June 16, 2018
    HMS Forth will be entering dry dock in Portsmouth soon to have major rectification work performed, with the vessel she replaced being brought back into active service.
    Earlier in the year, it was reported that issues with new Offshore Patrol Vessel HMS Forth would be rectified within a few weeks, this did not happen as the defects appear to have been far more serious than feared.HMS Forth has been found to have more than 100 defects, including electrical and safety issues.
    Our contact, currently serving in the Royal Navy and involved with the programme, tells us that the ship has been handed back to BAE due to ďthe very poor standard of buildĒ. We were told:
    ďFor example bolt heads glued back on (thousands over tightened) high voltage switchboard very dangerous, life rafts failed to launch, wiring sub standard, galley not securedÖ list is huge.
    Itís much worse than what they released. Captain of the ship and higher rankers had a meeting with BAE, MoD etc. Iím surprised nothing has been said else where with it being first of class. They reckon 3 months to rectify, I reckon much more.Ē
    We also understand from our contact that the entire Batch 2 River class programme has been set back due to this, with the second vessel in the class having supposed to have started sea trials in October last year but is currently still alongside at the BAE yard in Scotstoun, Glasgow.
    Our contact explained whatís happening with HMS Tyne and the other, older Offshore Patrol Vessels.
    ďHowever as Forth is a long way from being ready and with these new problems, Tyne is being reactivated and the other OPV which was decommissioned is going into refit.
    Safe to say its all very political and no quick way to solve the issues. The whole OPV Batch 2 project has now been delayed to the quality issues.Ē
    ďAnd BAE will be getting the bill for getting HMS Tyne back operationalĒ he added.
    HMS Forth is the first of the five new Offshore Patrol Vessels being built to replace the current River Class vessels. The vessels had been ordered to fill a gap in orders after the second carrier and before the Type 26 frigate build started.
    A BAE spokesman said:
    ďWe are actively supporting the Royal Navy to resolve issues around a limited number of bolt fastenings and the electrical system on HMS Forth. These are unrelated issues and investigations for each are now underway to ensure that we resolve any potential impact and establish the cause. We are committed to delivering equipment that meets rigorous safety and quality standards.Ē
    An MoD spokesman added:
    ďIt is normal for us to work with industry partners to make some rectifications to ships once they have been handed to the Royal Navy BAE Systems is already at work on some areas as we work together to ensure HMS Forth goes on to tackle piracy, safeguard our fishing stocks and protect our coastline.Ē
    HMS Forth had been earmarked to replace half-sister HMS Clyde as the Falkland Islands Guardship and is currently alongside in Portsmouth undergoing repair work.
    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-...e-than-feared/
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  6. Thanks DeV, Tempest thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  7. #154
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is this a case of great minds?
    I wonder if this debacle will have any impact on the 31 decision?

  8. #155
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    163
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Is this a case of great minds?
    I wonder if this debacle will have any impact on the 31 decision?
    Possibly but we are talking about the RN, Whitehall and BAE so anything could happen. It does not give one confidence over the Type 26 project either ... not that I had much faith in it anyway.

  9. Likes DeV liked this post
  10. #156
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Is this a case of great minds?
    I wonder if this debacle will have any impact on the 31 decision?
    Given there hasn't really been a decision on the Type 31s other that they will be built, if its a tender process I don't see how this can impact on the tender process. BAE will need to up their game big time , which would be to the RNs advantage , in that they squeeze a lot more from the tender process.
    Time will tell.
    Time for another break I think......

  11. #157
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Given there hasn't really been a decision on the Type 31s other that they will be built, if its a tender process I don't see how this can impact on the tender process. BAE will need to up their game big time , which would be to the RNs advantage , in that they squeeze a lot more from the tender process.
    Time will tell.
    We know the yards that will be used and the two options that are in the tender, I would have thought previous quality of work would be something that could be factored into a decision as to who wins the bid.

  12. #158
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,743
    Post Thanks / Like
    Snapped off bolt heads glued back on.?

  13. #159
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sofa View Post
    Snapped off bolt heads glued back on.?
    There is probably some humour in this obs. , however because of dissimilar metals in modern ship construction , quite a lot of Bolting occurs between aluminium bridge area structures, including masts , and the ships main steel hull. Attachment is achieved using flanged Nylon bushes and stainless steel bolts at a close pitch and continuous runs of Denso type tape between the dissimilar metals. The mast area is supported vertically by a number of steel pillars, also bolted at the upper end and then welded to the steel main decks. This is to prevent aluminium structure weakened by heat above 250c collapsing downwards.

  14. Thanks sofa thanked for this post
    Likes morpheus, na grohmití liked this post
  15. #160
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Given there hasn't really been a decision on the Type 31s other that they will be built, if its a tender process I don't see how this can impact on the tender process. BAE will need to up their game big time , which would be to the RNs advantage , in that they squeeze a lot more from the tender process.
    Time will tell.
    BAE's game has been upped financially with the announcement that Australia is to build up to 9 Type F26's at home Yards for the Australian Navy. The outfit is not fully declared but no doubt a variety of capabilities with rumours of US Aegis type combat systems in keeping with intended policy for destroyers.

  16. Likes na grohmití liked this post
  17. #161
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    BAE's game has been upped financially with the announcement that Australia is to build up to 9 Type F26's at home Yards for the Australian Navy. The outfit is not fully declared but no doubt a variety of capabilities with rumours of US Aegis type combat systems in keeping with intended policy for destroyers.
    Saw that during the week, it is indeed good news for BAE finacially.....but given the ships will be built in Australia it doesn't adress the quality control issues BAE have had in the UK!
    Time for another break I think......

  18. #162
    Chief Casey Ryback
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,007
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Saw that during the week, it is indeed good news for BAE finacially.....but given the ships will be built in Australia it doesn't adress the quality control issues BAE have had in the UK!
    Maybe BAE are thinking that the Aussies might do a better job than the UK yards .
    Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

  19. #163
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Laners View Post
    Maybe BAE are thinking that the Aussies might do a better job than the UK yards .
    Australia will buy anything decent on offer...once they can build it in Australia........which is not a bad idea.....
    Time for another break I think......

  20. #164
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Australia will buy anything decent on offer...once they can build it in Australia........which is not a bad idea.....
    We had the capability until VCD was flushed, followed by the State Shipping line, followed lately by our bigger Drydock all at the hands of the Mandarins who only have a policy of amputation and putting up with limping along with zero ambition to retain infrastructure for the future.

  21. #165
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    We had the capability until VCD was flushed, followed by the State Shipping line, followed lately by our bigger Drydock all at the hands of the Mandarins who only have a policy of amputation and putting up with limping along with zero ambition to retain infrastructure for the future.
    Unfortunately, often our maritime policies are dictated from people who lived all their lives inland, having no appreciation to the importance of the sea for everything we do. While Charlie was a well known sailor, Garret the good was more interested in Trains than Boats. Albert Reynolds was from Longford. John Brutal is from Meath, A county with no Harbour. Sea Blindness is a serious illness in this nation for too many years, but the Tide is Turning.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  22. #166
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Australia will buy anything decent on offer...once they can build it in Australia........which is not a bad idea.....
    But not without it's issues, hasn't previous projects in Australia gone over budget/behind schedule?
    It will be interesting to see if they get the 26 into service before the UK does however.

  23. #167
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,743
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    But not without it's issues, hasn't previous projects in Australia gone over budget/behind schedule?
    It will be interesting to see if they get the 26 into service before the UK does however.
    Aussies used to have a reputation for screwing things together badly.

  24. #168
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    But not without it's issues, hasn't previous projects in Australia gone over budget/behind schedule?
    Show me any major warship project that in the past 10 years that hasn't!
    Time for another break I think......

  25. #169
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Show me any major warship project that in the past 10 years that hasn't!
    Sure as new build projects, but the Hobarts for example are a design that was already in service and yet had construction issues rather than new development tech that pushed projects off plan.

  26. #170
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hard to see where exactly the problem lay with the Hobarts. Some of the Prefabricated hull blocks were built by Navantia and shipped to Oz for assembly. Other bits were built elsewhere, with some builders having no experience of warship building.
    Oddly the Arleigh Burke class was considered the best solution for the requirement, but the cost factor and the risk of it all going wrong led to the selection of the Navantia design instead.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  27. #171
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like

    Hobart class destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmitÔŅĹ View Post
    Hard to see where exactly the problem lay with the Hobarts. Some of the Prefabricated hull blocks were built by Navantia and shipped to Oz for assembly. Other bits were built elsewhere, with some builders having no experience of warship building.
    Oddly the Arleigh Burke class was considered the best solution for the requirement, but the cost factor and the risk of it all going wrong led to the selection of the Navantia design instead.
    The Hobart costs per ship were/ are greater than that of the USN Burkes and with half of the VLS capacity ie 48 units against 96 on the Burkes. Small runs of ship types bring inevitable scale costs. It is why some countries buy off a run of ships being built for a bigger power or else buy off disposal lists.

  28. Likes hptmurphy, na grohmití, Turkey liked this post
  29. #172
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,269
    Post Thanks / Like

  30. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
  31. #173
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Tell them the peacocks are available too if they want them.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  32. #174
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Indeed. To be relevant you must stay afloat and be equipped to the required standard . Shrinking or expedient Defence budgets leads
    to Jam today and no Bread tomorrow. The last people to run a Navy are those over extended with trying to keep their popularity and jobs.

  33. #175
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    251
    Post Thanks / Like
    HMS Defender is approaching cobh this morning

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •