Model Boat Mayhem

Mess Deck: General Section => Chit-Chat => Topic started by: Colin Bishop on November 24, 2010, 06:28:29 pm

Title: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on November 24, 2010, 06:28:29 pm
Just watched the BBC coverage of the last Harriers taking off from Ark Royal.

She returned from a £12m refit a year ago, is at peak efficiency and is just being thrown away.

Crazy!  >>:-(

Colin
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: matphoto on November 24, 2010, 06:31:07 pm
I agree totally crazy, all of Britain's enemies must be jumping about and clapping with glee. :(( :(( :((
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: pugwash on November 24, 2010, 06:53:49 pm
September 6th 2010 Ark coming out of drydock at Pompey having nearly finished a refit.
What a waste.
Geoff

Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: fatcat123 on November 24, 2010, 07:42:47 pm
Any ideas as to where its actually going to be cut up?

Dan
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 24, 2010, 07:56:27 pm
apparently shes up for sale ! . i cant see the logic of spending 12 million on a vessel only to want to scrap it within 6 months , im not sure what the crackpots at downing street are on , its certainly not on the same island or plannet that im on !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Bryan Young on November 24, 2010, 07:57:06 pm
I hate to think it, but I believe that in the not too distant future we, as a Nation, may come to regret all this.
As the Defence Of The Realm is the prime duty of Her Majesty's Government....how on earth did the so-called Financial Experts become predominant. I'm not being jingoistic here. Our United Kingdom is being riven apart by political stupidity going back many years but really brought to a head by the actions of our previous "Government" ..some of which (to my mind) verge on the edges of treason. It's almost as if they intended to bring this nation to its knees. And they have almost succeeded.
Smouldering civil unrest (mild up till now) fermented in the belief that the "State should pay" attitude is probably at the heart of it.
No matter how sympathetic the private minds in Government actually think, they are hamstrung.
Although far from being a supporter of a more authoritarian sort of Government, I'm becoming more and more inclined to believe that it's becoming requisite. Sorry. BY.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 24, 2010, 08:07:22 pm
i was under the impresion that elect a government party to run the country on our behalf ? ? who voted for this robbing gang ? think its time to join the students on mass , to show that were not a happy population with the way "our " leaders are suposedly running our country !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on November 24, 2010, 08:29:30 pm
The problem with the last Government, and Gordon Brown in particular, was that no importance was attached to Defence as such. They tried to run two wars from a peacetime budget which is why everything is now massively overspent. If you want to run a war then it has to be paid for. They even had a part time Defence Secretary. Defence expenditure was simply seen as a means of pacifying the Unions in key constituencies.

The problem with the present Government, with Defence and in other areas, is that they are trying to use their 'cleverness' to offset their lack of experience and their  ignorance. They lack the skills to be able to evaluate differing arguments being made to them and the whole thing gets boiled down to finance as dictated by the Treasury. Neither Cameron or Osborne strike me as people with much of a grasp of historical persepective.

The basic issue with both the present and last set of politicians is that they were and are functionally incompetent to a significant degree. They may learn from their mistakes but by then it is frequently too late.

Colin
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: FsASTSyd1 on November 24, 2010, 08:32:28 pm
Another disasterous decision from our "Lieders".  I have a feeling that if you look back over the last 50 years nearly every change,amendment or decision made by our so called government has sooner or later turned into a pile of ***.   Ah the benifits of professional politicians!!! most of whom have never done a real days work in their life.
Syd J
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 24, 2010, 09:11:22 pm
they are all completely out of touch with reality , or how the rest of us have to live !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: longshanks on November 24, 2010, 09:58:08 pm
In this time of budget cuts how about puttting the Falklands up for sale ! Were going to loose it soon anyway !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: brianB6 on November 24, 2010, 10:15:27 pm
Sounds as if you would prefer to put the Houses of Parliament up for sale.
How about turning them into a Fun Park?  %%
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 24, 2010, 10:18:02 pm
thats not parliment , that where tiered mps go to sleep !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: yorkiej on November 25, 2010, 12:29:44 am
thats not parliment , that where tiered mps go to sleep !
I would like to see the lot of them 'tiered', on the steps to the gillotine for high treason, with the expenses thieves first in line.
Anyone under 30 with any sense should emigrate as this Country is finished, I am very sad to say that but I feel it is now true.
John   :(( :((<:( <:(<*< <*< <*<
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: brianB6 on November 25, 2010, 02:56:19 am
Well orztralia is still taking boat people
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: bigfella on November 25, 2010, 04:58:08 am
I would not grumble, at least you have an Aircraft Carrier or two. Our navy consists of a bunch of patrol boats whose main job is a ferry service for asylum seekers who find their way into Australian waters on leaky boats. Our fleet air arm consists of a few outdated helicopters. It would seem that defence in both countries is last on the list come budget time.

Regards David
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: sailorboy61 on November 25, 2010, 10:48:22 am
There's alot of blame and fingers being pointed at the previous as well as the current governments. neither of whom had much going for them....... lets not forget these problems actually started with a certain lady running the country....... her belief that there is no society only individuals has come to fruition, she must be very happy..... the 'loads a money' class of the 80s looking after number one have too deep a hold on this country. All politics and politicians eventually become corrupt..... they forget that they are working for the country and further their own ends.Todays 'don't care' generation are the off spring of the generation that was look after yourself first and foremost, why is their attitude any suprise? Its easy to blame governments....... it saves people having to point the finger at themself.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on November 25, 2010, 10:56:17 am
100% correct Sailorboy, I couldnt agree more. >:-o
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Circlip on November 25, 2010, 11:38:51 am
Gerra Life, at least you'll all be able to buy a piece back after it's been converted into a new shiney car or the latest Plasma Tele. :-))

  Regards  Ian.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: pugwash on November 25, 2010, 11:47:51 am
You can blame Mrs T for a lot of things in this country but the defence cutting started way before she came into office
Dennis Healey in 1968 really got the ball rolling with cancellation of the TSR2 project (which 10yrs after its scrapping the Americans
admitted was a better aircraft  (and cheaper) than anything they had) the CV01 project and the phasing out of big carriers, the decimating
of the traditional regimental system ( I remember the "save the Argylls campaign" and they were one of many fine regiments which went to the
wall. There are too many things to list.  She carried it on into the 80's and nearly got caught out with the Falklands war - How much different could it
have been with the old Ark giving air support with Phantoms for inteception AEW Gannets for radar cover and Buchaneers for bombing - think what it cost us
in ships and men.   Successive governments have carried on this tradition of hitting defence first but now we are two or three cuts too far.
Geoff
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Perkasaman2 on November 25, 2010, 12:11:22 pm
I'll go along with sailorboy61 and add that we have recently avoided a banking meltdown of staggering  proportions that has destroyed ALL government spending/planning in every country affected by the fallout. The meltdown/globalisation of trade is having huge repercussions on so called 'successful' or growing economies - Japan, Germany, China and India etc.
Our post war social/economic progress could never have been achieved by retaining a war economy through the Cold War era. The rotting soviet fleets are largely still around.
The army/navy have 32 Harriers left. Nostalgia aside, the A R class were a naval expedience to cobble a fleet air arm based on a vstol ground attack design of  limited yet novel design. It was never pilot friendly and requires the highest level of piloting skills to use safely and fight effectively. Our territorial waters can be protected by multi-role land based aircraft of much greater capability.

 

 

 
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: pugwash on November 25, 2010, 12:24:21 pm
Too flaming right - Don't forget the reason for scrapping the big carriers was because we would have no committment
East of Suez.  Correct me if I'm wrong but the Navy has spent most of its time up the Persian Gulf in the last few years.
Governments cannot foretell the future so we need a credible defence for most eventualities.

Perkasaman there is a huge difference between a full wartime fleet,army,airforce and a viable defence
Don't forget we are a maritime trading nation. 88% of what we use in this country comes in by sea. Coastal defence is fine
but you have to be able to extend your reach past the Western Approaches.  for instance the last set of figures by the IMO states
it is costing the world economy £16 billion with the priacy problem worldwide.
Geoff
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 25, 2010, 12:47:09 pm
i still cant understand how as a nation supposedly saving money you can spend 12 million pounds to refit a vessel in september to decied a month later to scrap it ? then to throw another 4 million at hms bristol which has no props on her shafts , and is used as a floating hotel for personell ? ? surely thats at least 4 million that could have been saved on the hotel ? and spent more wisely keeping our mobile airfeild afloat !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Martin (Admin) on November 25, 2010, 01:21:16 pm
Topic cleaned up.  :police:
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Bryan Young on November 25, 2010, 06:56:38 pm
This topic has gone far beyond the original "Ark Royal" starter hasn't it.
But most of the posts have concentrated on the decimation of the "Bits That Matter"...that is, ships, aircraft,tanks and so on.
Very little has been said about the bits of the MoD that aren't "front line". The newspapers seem to equate everyone not in uniform as a "pen-pusher". Whilst I agree 100% that we have too many "office staff", there are many, many people employed by the MoD who "do" stuff.
When we read about (for instance) the thousands of people employed, the news always seems to think that they are all siiting behind a desk. Not so. The MoD demands a huge maintenance staff without whom the "front line" bit would just fall apart. You name it, the list is too long. But think about it. Research, Development, Testing, all has to be done. Mainly by employees of the MoD.
My personal poisoned finger would be aimed at the suits in Whitehall who seem to be so overmanned that complacency has become endemic. Just witness the laxity within the procurement section. BY.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: brianB6 on November 25, 2010, 08:43:38 pm
Agreed. Without support no armed force will last long.
Lets hope that neither UK nor Australia need carriers before 2014.
At least new ones are being built even if they get mothballed.
For the Australian ships see:-
http://www.navy.gov.au/Canberra_Class and Wikipedia Canberra class.
We just hope that Spain does not go under before the hulls are complete.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: snowwolflair on November 25, 2010, 11:46:10 pm
Just watched the BBC coverage of the last Harriers taking off from Ark Royal.

She returned from a £12m refit a year ago, is at peak efficiency and is just being thrown away.

Crazy!  >>:-(

Colin

I guess this means they could sell her along with the harriers to India or another ex-Commonwealth navy.  the money the fetch might save two more frigates.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: pugwash on November 26, 2010, 12:15:05 am
And what would the Indians want with a 25 yr old carrier when they have a 40,000ton carrier being built and a 65,000ton in the
pipeline (albeit both are behind schedule)
The days of them taking our castoffs have long gone but the Trinidad and Tobago defence force may be interested.
Geoff
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: RaaArtyGunner on November 26, 2010, 08:28:08 am

We just hope that Spain does not go under before the hulls are complete.

Brian,

Not too worry we can buy American mothballs like last time. %) %) %)
It's only for the Navy %% %% %%

Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: derekwarner on November 26, 2010, 10:51:05 am
mmmmmmmm  : OK...I stand corrected....my apologies to all.............Derek
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Barry on November 26, 2010, 11:01:42 am
The names Kanimbla and Manoora spring to mind. Not so much ships but floating rust by all accounts.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Nordsee on November 26, 2010, 02:03:03 pm
There's alot of blame and fingers being pointed at the previous as well as the current governments. neither of whom had much going for them....... lets not forget these problems actually started with a certain lady running the country....... her belief that there is no society only individuals has come to fruition, she must be very happy..... the 'loads a money' class of the 80s looking after number one have too deep a hold on this country. All politics and politicians eventually become corrupt..... they forget that they are working for the country and further their own ends.Todays 'don't care' generation are the off spring of the generation that was look after yourself first and foremost, why is their attitude any suprise? Its easy to blame governments....... it saves people having to point the finger at themself.
You should remember that that Lady organised a Task Force and sent it 7,000 miles to fight a superior sized army and Airforce, and win. All to save the lives and living qualities of British citizens. I can't see any of the current crop of "Leaders" doing the same.And as for the Labour Opposition of the day, well they would have rolled over and given the Argies anything.UK cannot do a similar action now, no fixed wing jets on a Carrier.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 26, 2010, 03:15:58 pm
for those who may be interested there is to be a farewell service for the ark when she returns to portsmouth , as and when more details are known i shall post them here ! she is due back in portsmouth on the 3rd of december . jon
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: DieselDo on November 26, 2010, 04:40:49 pm
Nordsee,
That lady oversaw the complete decimation of the RN under John Nott.
Had the Falklands Conflict started 6 months later we could have never mounted such a campaign.
It was true that Dockyard "Mateys" were storing the fleet with the redundancy notices in their pockets.
It was just a matter of timing or that lady would have been blamed for losing the Falklands and destroying the RN.
Just like now it is happening all over again.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Bryan Young on November 26, 2010, 06:09:09 pm
Sorry DieselDo, but history does tend to distort a few things. All Prime Ministers act under received advice. No matter how clever, how well educated and so on, it's naive to think of any Prime Minister as an all-seeing oracle. No matter how they present themselves or how the press represents them. The base line here was surely the fact that one well connected (British) family more or less "owned" the Falklands, hadn't looked after the place or its people and basically just wanted out at some profit to themselves.
The then Governor of the Islands remonstrated with the Foreign Office but his opinions were largely ignored on the grounds that he "wasn't one of them", whereas the absentee Landlord was. It also didn't help that Salvesons had more or less said that anyone who wanted were quite welcome to go to South Georgia and help themselves to whatever they wanted. South Georgia comes under the auspices of the Governor of the Falkland Islands. And that's how it started. I know this because I got it first hand over a convivial few wets with the then Governor and his wife about a month after the liberation. So please don't blame Margaret Thatcher. Blame Lord "X" and in all probability Lord "V" who'd recently liquidated his vast holdings in Argentina.
Just as a rider..."The Argentine" as it used to be called before it coalesced into the country called "Argentina" had never "owned" the Falklands. Almost since the time of its discovery the islands had been colonised (to a minor degree) by the British (and some others) and was an important way-station on the trade route to the Antipodes.
So, Mr.Diesel, apart from not knowing your history, you are actually blaming the wrong person. BY.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: DieselDo on November 26, 2010, 09:41:57 pm
Bryan,
Time after time we as a country disarm and reduce our armed forces.
It now seems that Korea is sabre rattling, we are over stretched as it is so we should not participate if anything happens, but with the US so paranoid about coalitions I have a feeling we will.

As to the Falklands specifically,
During the last previous labour Govt to M. Thatcher the Argentinians made overtures towards the Falkland Isles.
The response was to send a  Guided Missile Destroyer overcomplimented with Marines to make a "show of force".
What did M. Thatcher do, decommission HMS Endurance and make plans to decimate the RN.
What signs did this send out to possible invaders.

Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Bryan Young on November 26, 2010, 10:19:14 pm
Bryan,
Time after time we as a country disarm and reduce our armed forces.
It now seems that Korea is sabre rattling, we are over stretched as it is so we should not participate if anything happens, but with the US so paranoid about coalitions I have a feeling we will.

As to the Falklands specifically,
During the last previous labour Govt to M. Thatcher the Argentinians made overtures towards the Falkland Isles.
The response was to send a  Guided Missile Destroyer overcomplimented with Marines to make a "show of force".
What did M. Thatcher do, decommission HMS Endurance and make plans to decimate the RN.
What signs did this send out to possible invaders.


    Hi again. Moving on to 2010, in more than one respect I have to agree with you. However, my previous response was to your blaming one person....unfairly. John Nott really was a square peg in a round hole, but as Minister of Defence the PM whoever it may have been, had to listen and take advice from him and his "Department".
    I'm not to sure who listens to who this time around. Suck it see I suppose. BY.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on November 26, 2010, 10:39:04 pm
I think the problem this time round is that the services are all trying to fight their own corner due to financial rather than strategic considerations and the PM is not necessarily getting truly unbiased advice. The priority at the moment is Afganistan but in my view this is ultimately a lost cause and in the bigger perspective a side show, just like Iraq was between the wars.

The truth is that genuinely serious military situations can arise with frightening speed from unexpected quarters but because the risk is unquantified politicians prefer to ignore it. This has always been the case and is the case now. Literally throwing away our most potent naval asset is very, very unwise.

Colin
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: brianB6 on November 26, 2010, 10:48:58 pm
Maybe the current Korean 'war' will save her.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: RaaArtyGunner on November 27, 2010, 12:31:51 am
Maybe the current Korean 'war' will save her.

Probably not.  <:(

Don't forget that the Korean war occurred very shortly after WWII when we all had decent sized Armed forces albeight winding down.
In comparison today we all have zilch.  >>:-( >>:-(

Even allowing for technology, "supposedly Australia punches above its weight"  Our Armed Forces are weak, everyone is relying on everyone else, such as NATO, UN, coalitions, but it doesn't work.

Pollies still think they can negotiate rather than commit to having decent adequate Armed Forces. <:( <:( <*< <*<


Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Circlip on November 27, 2010, 11:52:50 am
Don't forget, we can always rely on our Nuclear Submarines, - - - - that's providing the sand hasn't moved recently  {-)

  Regards  Ian.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: dreadnought72 on November 28, 2010, 05:42:13 pm
And while on this subject - does anyone want 10000 tonnes of scrap steel (http://www.edisposals.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/Disposals-Public-Site/en_US/-/GBP/ViewProductDetail-Start;pgid=MieqQ4wkQg8000ArvQ_8K1sp0000HoxnOvCt?ProductUUID=38jAqBIQwVwAAAEsaApaBWLN&CatalogCategoryID=VaLAqBELPagAAAED8GeasfoP&JumpTo=OfferList)?

Going rate is a couple of million.  :o

Andy
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 28, 2010, 06:01:25 pm
not enough room in my shed for that much ! although reading our local paper last week the price is good for iron , unfortunatly it will drop around christmas due to low demand !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on November 30, 2010, 08:48:39 pm
TO ALL THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE SHIP FOR POSSIBLY THE LAST TIME she is due back into portsmouth on friday the 3rd of december at approximatly 1000hrs !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: offshore1987 on November 30, 2010, 10:53:16 pm
They are tryin to sell the other one in the dock yard for 2 million lol, if i was rich id buy it and turn it into a airsoft site :P whats dream  :embarrassed:
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: dreadnought72 on December 01, 2010, 01:36:42 pm
Not airsoft: I think the Invincible would make a perfect floating museum for remembering the Falklands Conflict.

...but then, what do I know?

Andy
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: adam_goodin on December 03, 2010, 10:08:03 am
...so, who watched Ark Royal come home for the final time this morning?

 A very emotional moment for many people I imagine, but She looked great coming in through that mist with her Crew all out on Deck.

Farewell to a magnificent Old girl.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on December 03, 2010, 10:21:05 am
Betrayed by an incompetent Government!  >:-o
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Circlip on December 03, 2010, 11:19:19 am
Yep, the two "B's" have a lot to answer for :-))

  Regards   Ian.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on December 03, 2010, 03:59:41 pm
it was an eiree sight seeing her appear through the morning fog , but worth the wait in the cold for ! forgot to pick up my camera so ive only got some pics on the phone which my partner will try to download later (its her phone really as i broke mine returning from the lake )  jon
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: polaris on December 03, 2010, 07:13:47 pm

Dear Jon,

Please post the pics., meant to watch but was delayed.

Regards, Bernard

Dear Colin,

Which Govt. do you mean? 'Our Tone/Broon Govt.' set to and did it, it just carried on unfortunately. What a dispicable shower the last lot was... at least this lot were voted in. B.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on December 03, 2010, 07:15:24 pm
Both lots, one caused the problem, the other has made things worse.

Unfortunately, voting people in doesn't mean you get competence along with it.

Colin
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: polaris on December 03, 2010, 07:24:18 pm

Dear Colin,

In fear of getting into trouble over this, Labour started it, the others just went on with it - once started into the system it can't be stopped. She is as we all know 25 yrs. old, and that is a good operating life.

However, surely, the most important thing is not what has been 'lost', but what is she going to be replaced with.

This is way off Topic, and that is all I will say. All else is to Posters own risk!

Regards, Bernard
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on December 03, 2010, 07:41:13 pm
The US Navy reckon to get 40+ years of service out of their carriers!
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on December 03, 2010, 08:53:51 pm
but then how many of us would scrap a perfectly good vehicle after spending vast sums to overhaul it to scrap it without a replacement ready for it ? . the so called elected party / parties arent doing what its public see fit or want to happen in order to defend our island ! . im not able to work out how to post from phone till later sorry . jon
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: polaris on December 04, 2010, 01:04:37 pm

Dear Colin and Jon,

40 yrs. is pushing operating effectivness a touch? It is a bit like brooms... how many new handles, how many new brush heads? Granted the hull is singular, and as with all things - even modern vessels - improvements are made all the time.

As to the infinite wisdom of the Navy Board and Govt., well, maybe the former were misled into thinking there would be replacements, and the latter then became caught up in the World recession and bailing banks out. All in all I suppose it's all down to timing... but that doesn't excuse not giving the RN the basic needs. Mind you, who knows what deals have been done 'elsewhere' to balance things out?

Rergards, Bernard
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: sailorboy61 on December 05, 2010, 05:22:27 pm
One would hope that any navy would get more than the 'standard' 25 years expected from a working commercial hull, after all they have infinitely more money 'thrown' in their direction (OK, so where government money is involved there is a high percentage of waste and the cost of everything is double that of the real world), but a commercial hull doesn't get a 6 month refit every two years...... a 5 minute drydock once every 5 if lucky, plus they are run on a shoe string of resources both financial and manpower wise between then, and of course they only 'work 5 days a week too most of the time!!
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on December 05, 2010, 08:16:27 pm
the ark may well be twenty five years young , but has nobody pickec up on the fact that she came out of a big refit only a matter of weeks ago that cost 12 million pounds , that was to make her usable for the next 4 years . NOW WHOS WASTING MONEY ?
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: pugwash on December 05, 2010, 11:33:03 pm
September 6th 2010 Ark coming out of drydock at Pompey having nearly finished a refit.
What a waste.
Geoff


Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on December 06, 2010, 10:15:58 am
my sentiments exactly . its this current party of jokers that keep on we have to save money as a nation , bet they still get a pay rise while the rest of the country is in fear of loosing their jobs , or have already no work so on the bread line !
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Circlip on December 06, 2010, 01:45:30 pm
Yep, but have you noticed, when you turn a light off, the current stops flowing??

  Regards  Ian.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: unbuiltnautilus on December 08, 2010, 01:11:34 pm
It was a cold day indeed, in more than one sense, but politics aside for a minute....
(http://s4.postimage.org/2k81ls2s/IMG_6852.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2k81ls2s/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2kd07tk4/IMG_6855.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2kd07tk4/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2kenr61w/IMG_6858.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2kenr61w/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2kjmd7j8/IMG_6861.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2kjmd7j8/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2kl9wk10/IMG_6862.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2kl9wk10/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2kmxfwis/IMG_6864.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2kmxfwis/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2krw1y04/IMG_6866.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2krw1y04/)

(http://s4.postimage.org/2ktjlahw/IMG_6869.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2ktjlahw/)
Heres hoping that any future threats are tempered by the 'bean counters' on their side...!
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on December 19, 2010, 11:04:57 pm
And now Illustrious is due for the chop in favour of HMS Ocean. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-12001932

I think some on here have listed Ocean's basic shortcomings apart from her slow speed. I believe she was originally due to be replaced shortly until the Defence Review came along.

Maybe the Navy should just buy a few obsolete car ferries and have done with it.  :((

Colin

Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: gingyer on December 19, 2010, 11:14:35 pm
I may be wrong but.....
I am sure the lifts are bigger on the ocean than illustrious
That may be why we are keeping ocean.

The Apache helicopters made by Westland are the only apaches
In the world for use off carriers hence their rotor blades fold up.
The apache has a long length so may not fit on illustrious's lifts

Would make some sense then
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: sparkie on January 02, 2011, 02:37:46 pm
I thought they were keeping Her until the queen was ready. Has something changed??
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on January 02, 2011, 04:20:04 pm
Slightly off topic but could you give details of the vessel with the name "Cameron" on it shown in last picture. PM if you like.
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: dreadnought72 on January 02, 2011, 04:22:57 pm
Hmmm...with that name, and in a rich Tory blue, maybe that's the replacement?!  %%

Andy
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on January 02, 2011, 04:43:02 pm
Naw, they`re not getting it back ! {-) {-) Oh I see what you mean, DAVID Cameron, no relation. I thought the blue one might be good for my next Springer barge seein`as that it has MY name on it. %)
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Shipmate60 on January 02, 2011, 05:43:11 pm
arrow5,
The Cameron is an exRmas Powered Mooring Lighter, the same hull as the RMAS Moorhen/Moorfowl but with an extra deck added for accommodation.
She is now owned and operated by Briggs Marine

Bob
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: triumphjon on January 02, 2011, 08:48:08 pm
she has been moored around by the wight link vehicle ferry terminal portsmouth  over christmas , see if i can get moor photos in the morning should people want them ? jon
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: unbuiltnautilus on January 05, 2011, 11:22:18 am
Slightly off topic but could you give details of the vessel with the name "Cameron" on it shown in last picture. PM if you like.


A few photos of Cameron, one taken on the day, and the rest up close for rust reference...
(http://s1.postimage.org/1slxhqebo/IMG_6876.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1slxhqebo/)

(http://s1.postimage.org/1sm2gcft0/IMG_7003.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1sm2gcft0/)

(http://s1.postimage.org/1sm43vsas/IMG_7004.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1sm43vsas/)

(http://s1.postimage.org/1sm5rf4sk/IMG_7008.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1sm5rf4sk/)

(http://s1.postimage.org/1smaq169w/IMG_7010.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1smaq169w/)
Hope this helps...
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on January 05, 2011, 12:28:17 pm
Thank guys, I`ll look up the Briggs Marine website. Wonder what she is doing so far south?   Details of rust eh ... planning something are we?
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: unbuiltnautilus on January 05, 2011, 01:21:58 pm
Thank guys, I`ll look up the Briggs Marine website. Wonder what she is doing so far south?   Details of rust eh ... planning something are we?


I am planning a pristine paint job..... followed by lots of rust and inground deck dirt. On which model??? Why, all of them :}
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on January 05, 2011, 04:57:43 pm
Just the way it should be..no just the way it shouldnt be ...but is O0 {-) :}
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Shipmate60 on January 05, 2011, 05:02:46 pm
There are plans and a hull for RMAS Moorhen from Model Boats magazine I think.

Bob
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Arrow5 on January 05, 2011, 05:36:29 pm
I think you are right, memory getting rust spots too :((, thanks
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 14, 2011, 04:17:03 pm
Ark Royal will be open to the public next weekend at Portsmouth as part of her official farewell:

http://www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/Hampshire/Portsmouth/PO6/News/Local-News/184837-Say-Goodbye-to-the-Ark-Royal-at-Weekend-of-Celebrations

Colin
Title: Re: Farewell Ark Royal
Post by: Mr Andy on January 17, 2011, 04:36:51 pm
Sounds as if you would prefer to put the Houses of Parliament up for sale.
How about turning them into a Fun Park?  %%

It already is a fun park, why else is it full of clown's

Andy.