Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[JimG]

Being reported on the BBC this morning that its a failed shaft coupling. Will probably go to Rosyth for repairs.
Jim

[Circlip]

Precisely Bob, Johnny foreigner is not the only builder to screw up. With ALL our maritime construction history EVEN we can get it wrong BUT, we have the advantage of ours costing more.     


  Regards  Ian.


 Wonder where the coupling materials came from?

[rnli12]

Hydraulic coupling which joins the the tailshaft/intermediate if thats the case.

[derekwarner]

Are not each & every member of the Crew on board the HMS Prince of Wales, all sworn to under your National Security Act?

So any comments are .....'Dockyard Pub talk, being  either 100% correct, to 0% factual'.......

Derek

[Baldrick]

 It's not pub talk that she (or rather HMSPOW) went up the Solent with only the Port screw turning

  NAVY LOOK OUT
Broken coupling
The reason HMS Prince of Wales could not begin her planned deployment is that an external SKF coupling that connects the outer propellor shaft to the drive shaft from the propulsion motors failed. This is a rare event and a situation described by the First Sea Lord as “unprecedented” as few marine engineers can remember an instance of this happening. Random unpredictable failures are uncommon but can still occur even if equipment is well designed, maintained and operated.
However, unconfirmed sources suggest HMS Prince of Wales was already experiencing some significant problems with her starboard motors and under pressure to sail, required special permission to leave on Saturday with a known defect. Her sailing had already been delayed by 24 hours and she put to sea with civilian staff from the original equipment manufacturer (GE Power Conversion) onboard, presumably confident the motor could be repaired while underway. Whether the coupling failure was related to the motor issues is unclear. She appears to have sailed using only the port shaft and her propellors did not strike the sea bed as has been rumoured. Press reports that the breakdown was caused because RN engineers “forgot to grease the shaft” are contemptible nonsense. (The external bearings are sea water-lubricated for starters).

[ScottW]

Press reports that the breakdown was caused because RN engineers “forgot to grease the shaft” are contemptible nonsense.

And everyone thought it was IVAN who was terrible

Maybe it is merely a thing with my brain, but those 2 statements seem to very much go together ...

[derekwarner]

Well, I think we all feel the embarrassment for the Crew of HMS Prince of Wales, and for that matter, the entire RN...... but be rest assured the Legal Team for the Swedish SKF group are on high alert

You have to love the language...."forgot to grease the shaft” are contemptible nonsense" ,


Reading the report, these words could be implied as from the First Sea Lord. It will be interesting to see the amount of dignity, the outgoing PM can muster

Derek 

[Baldrick]

I think the more serious consideration is the statement that" HMS Prince of Wales was already experiencing some significant problems with her starboard motors" which was why the Swedish team were on board  when the coupling let go. I get the sneaky feeling that this is not a quick fix
[/size]               

[derekwarner]

It appears that it was GE Propulsion Engineers signed on as 'Supernumeraries' when the P of W sailed.....and the vessel required special authority to sail.......


https://maritime-executive.com/article/ge-delivers-last-of-eight-propulsion-motors-for-giant-uk-aircraft-carriers


I agree with Baldrick, 'not a quick fix' and am sure the story will have many, many twists & turns as the weeks & months turn over


[in a previous life, I was required to sign on as a 'weapons supernumery' when onboard HMAS vessels during post refit  sea trials']


Derek   

[Circlip]

You are quite erroneous in YOUR assumption of "Dockyard pub talk", but trying to put a bit of levity in the situation, as a tax payer whom yet again is expected to foot the bill for questionable workmanship. Err, didn't the sister (Mother) ship also have a leaky bottom.
 Sadly, the general public seem to be impressed by media reports whose information MAY be obtained from some floppy gobbed rating for the price of a couple of pints. Unfortunately todays sensitivities don't allow the same justice to be metered out for "Loose Lips".
 Only yesterday I read a report from our illustrious press, of the recent attendance by one of our cabinet ministers at the launching of HMS Astute?????????????????? Don't know whether this is a piece of late copy or a time warp.


   Don't forget Derek, while you were employed as weps for HMAS, there are OTHER people with informed knowledge.


  Regards  Ian.

[Colin Bishop]

I saw that report about Astute too. Looks like somebody was actually trying to describe the comissioning of HMS Anson of the Astute class and something got lost in translation.

The problem with HMS QE was an incorrectly fitted shaft seal. Things could have been worse as it might have been a walrus or sea lion.... The media wouldn't have noticed the difference.

Just imagine the media frenzy were it to be reported that the ship had hit a dolphin while berthing....

Colin

[Capt Podge]

Hi Colin, appreciate your bit of humour there 
(not sure if everyone will know what a dolphin is though... apart from being a marine mammal of course).


Ray.

[Baldrick]

   Can anyone clue me up on the propulsion systems of the QE carriers ?   We know that she has two thumping great gas turbines (36Mw each)  and Four Wartsila marine diesels (11.6 Mw each )  Am I correct in thinking that all these prime movers are or can be variously arranged  driving alternators and that the final drive is electric ie. not mechanically coupled ?

[Colin Bishop]

Machinery information here:

https://www.forces.net/services/navy/hms-queen-elizabeth-all-her-glory

Final drive is electric motors powered from a combination of diesel and gas turbine generators. (Very much like the Queen Mary 2)

Colin

[Baldrick]

Thanks Colin, that's what I thought.
  Reading further from that same source they report that diver inspection reports there has been serious damage to both the coupling and the prop shaft, propellor and also some damage to the rudder .   What the heck !  Can only think that a bearing seized and the shaft and prop ran amok

[Atlantic Mouldings]

* We only need one carrier anyway!

[RST]

Hi,

I know it's a sales blurb from RR but it was interesting enough as a very quick read...

https://www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/news/6-page-qe-booklet-tcm92-58802.pdf

Rich

[Colin Bishop]

* We only need one carrier anyway!

Which means in practice you only have one carrier available 50% of the time. Not altogether sensible really.

Colin

[kinmel]

The 2 carriers already provide one carrier for half the time !

[Colin Bishop]

Damage to PoW confirmed as serious, prop and rudder affected.

https://maritime-executive.com/article/hms-prince-of-wales-has-significant-damage-likely-requiring-dry-dock

https://www.navylookout.com/hms-prince-of-wales-to-be-dry-docked-while-hms-queen-elizabeth-takes-on-some-of-her-tasking/

A bit of Deja Vu here as the Battleship Prince of Wales was crippled in WW2 by a torpedo hit on a propshaft which opened up the ship to extensive flooding which led to her subsequent loss.

Colin

[dodes]

The local paper reported lack of lub oil in stern gland, would have thought a visible check before sailing would have resolved the problem. If it is the stern gland it is a very big and expensive job. Is this the vessel which limped into Pompey with two out of three securing bolts snapped with the coupling swinging round and if the final one went the coupling would have gone through the vessels side Only three bolts instead of 5 used to reduce costs!!

[Colin Bishop]

he local paper reported lack of lub oil in stern gland

That claim was rubbish according to the Navy Lookout website. The exterior seals are reported as water lubricated. However the shafting is in sections with couplings between them and the tailshaft coupling apparently failed. As mentioned in earlier posts there seem to have been some other issues with the motor/driveline too but of course the Navy aren't saying!

PoW is not showing up on Marine Traffic at the moment. Presemably she is either en route to or arrived at Rosyth for dry docking. There are auggetions that she may be u/s for a while.

Colin

[Capt Podge]

The saving grace in this instance is that the breakdown occurred early - shudder to think of it happening mid-atlantic. 


Ray.

[Baldrick]

  If my memory is correct they had to plan for a particularly low tide to get her out of Rosyth ( Bridge crossings )   so it seems they might have to plan the same to get her back in again

[Colin Bishop]

Yes. tidal access slots for Rosyth are very specific although the topmast can be folded down. Rosyth has the right repair facilities unlike the more accessible Dutch docks.

Hopefully the ship will be back in action quite soon.

I think that all this highlights the fact that very sophisticated military assets are subject to all sorts of vulnerabilities. The simple days when you just dropped an unguided bomb on the target seem to be long gone. There is a lot of 'eggs in one basket' about modern weapons sytems as is being demonstrated in Ukraine at the moment.

Colin