Model Boat Mayhem
Mess Deck: General Section => Full Scale Ships => Topic started by: MCAT on August 15, 2007, 09:03:59 am
-
Just thought this may be of interest pictures of HMS Daring finishing sea trials
http://news.sky.com/skynews/picture_gallery/picture_gallery/0,,30100-1279904-1,00.html
-
still looks ugly though. ::)
-
Its good to see that she is performing aswell as they expected, she is going to make a fantastic model.
stu
-
With that forward tower does look decidedly ugly.........
Roy
-
I quite like it - beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say.
Doug
PS who changed the smileys? Good job I don't suffer from epilepsy :D ;D :o ::)
-
Looking at it through my good eye :D
it would be easy to build, its all flat surfaces ...does anyone make a hull yet :P
-
Looking at it through my good eye :D
it would be easy to build, its all flat surfaces ...does anyone make a hull yet :P
maybe PS SHIPS does!
With that forward tower does look decidedly ugly.........
Roy
personally I think that the new Daring class ship is actually a good looking warship
-
Not as nice as the old Thunderer or 1890s Dreadnought, but quite attractive. I wonder why the false deckhouse around the fwd missile silos - earlier missile boats didn't seem to need them for spray protection - I wonder if it's to hide the launching flash? However I suppose if anyone answers this we'd all have to be shot!
-
I wonder why the false deckhouse around the fwd missile silos - earlier missile boats didn't seem to need them for spray protection - I wonder if it's to hide the launching flash? However I suppose if anyone answers this we'd all have to be shot!
the Missile silo housing is the same set up as the Type 23 frigates
and it is not a false deck House ;)
Colin
-
Seems that it it's now been confirmed that the Government will not order the last two Darings - quite rightly it seems they were dubbed "Dubious" and "Doubtful". The original requirement was for 12 ships, now reduced to 6 and the Government was trying to flog two of those off earlier this year. There are rumours that HMS Victory and HMS Warrior are to be refitted and made ready for sea and that a feasibility study is in hand to rebuild the Mary Rose.
A Government spokesman said that reactivating Victory makes environmental sense as the ship is constructed from sustainable materials and all replacement wood will be met from organic sources. There will also be huge fuel savings as the ship is confidently expected to do at least 10,000 miles to the galleon.
Sob! :'( :'( :'(
-
So where do we get the Battle Group for the new carriers now, France?
Bob
-
We may not need a battle group for the Carriers as according to Wednesday's daily mail we may have to hand over 1 of the carriers to Brussels under plans for a joint European naval fleet.
have attached a link to the article..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1027332/How-French-planning-hijack-Royal-Navy-create-European-naval-group.html
-
The French already have the Charles DeGaulle ans are supposed to be building another Carrier with us, so if they are so keen they should give one of theirs first.
Bob
-
The daily wail always goes OTT.
-
I really do hate to say "I told you"....but the cancelled destroyers were actually under construction. What's the betting that "they" will wriggle out of finishing the carriers as well. Having said that, can someone, somewhere, tell me just why we need these things anyway. We cannot afford to put aircraft on the ones we already have. No destroyers for protection, no subs left for protection, no fleet train to supply them, no skilled people to man them and to cap it all "they" say they will be fastened together at Rosyth. Miles away from where the "bits" are being made. And I am also dubious that Rosyth has a big enough dock to build them in...unless "they" are going to build another white elephant. BY.
-
Bryan, I fear much of what you say is quite true. Even if the carriers do get built there are doubts about whether the planned aircraft complement will be available.
With regard to whether we need them I think that is a moot point. History teaches that if you are going to do the job at all then it's worth doing it properly. OK, the carriers will be of limited use against the Taleban but ten years down the line we may be looking at a resurgent Russia with a need for a more conventional defence capability and we could be grateful for them then.
That said, the multi role aircraft carrier types as exemplified by the US Navy's Wasp Class amphibious assault ships, see July Ships Monthly, do seem to offer a very flexible and adaptable weapons platform which may be more useful. The RN equivalent is the Albion class ships or HMS Ocean which appear to be substantial and effective ships.
Colin
-
Bryan raised some interesting stuff about the carriers.
some more strange facts about them,
1) the contract to design them has been signed
2) the steel has been ordered to build them
3) the contract to enlarge the drydocks at rosyth has been signed and work started
4) the contract to design and build the aircraft lifts has been done
So with all these contracts signed why is the most important one not done
the contract to build the carriers
maybe it is because our illustrious leaders are still thinking about it?
-
Perhaps the answer lies where someone already has touched on the EEC navy, if you own the carrier part you have the big cheese part. Plus one will always be in reserve as the CVH's were.
-
Announcement in today's paper that the contract for the two new RN carriers will be signed on board HMS Ark Royal on Thursday.
-
Warship handed over to Royal Navy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7774289.stm
-
Don't know if anyone has posted this yet, interesting for RN modellers?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7848174.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7848174.stm)
-
PSSHIPS do a 1/96 Scale Semi-kit of the Type 45
Fleetscale are producing a 1/72 Scale Semi-kit.
Bob
-
It'll look nice when they finish it. ;D
-
I really do hate to say "I told you"....but the cancelled destroyers were actually under construction. What's the betting that "they" will wriggle out of finishing the carriers as well. Having said that, can someone, somewhere, tell me just why we need these things anyway. We cannot afford to put aircraft on the ones we already have. No destroyers for protection, no subs left for protection, no fleet train to supply them, no skilled people to man them and to cap it all "they" say they will be fastened together at Rosyth. Miles away from where the "bits" are being made. And I am also dubious that Rosyth has a big enough dock to build them in...unless "they" are going to build another white elephant. BY.
Here's the neckyest man in NATO, Aircraft is true but we have 6 new T45s so thats the destroyer bit said to be "xxxxx", no subs well we have the astute class o look more BS we have plenty of fleet train in GUZ from elder ships that have been and gone/going and skilled people to man them? The Royal Navy provides the best training in the world which is why we train many foreign navies that pay top dollar for it. i'd say your knmowledge is based on newspapers and just hope your not a serving member!!
-
O and forgot the dock part, there's only 3 docks around the UK that can hold them, the one in question at rosyth, the one in Belfast where Titanic was built and the one in Southampton that is used to refit cruise ships bigger than the carriers!!!!!!
-
O and forgot the dock part, there's only 3 docks around the UK that can hold them, the one in question at rosyth, the one in Belfast where Titanic was built and the one in Southampton that is used to refit cruise ships bigger than the carriers!!!!!!
There is no dry dock in Southampton anymore, the dock is still there but the gates have gone
-
i'm sure they could refit gates, but the point is the rosyth dock is where the refits will take place.
-
Perks842 If you check Bryans posts you will realise he was once and officer on that Fleet Train and has a good working
knowledge of it.
Geoff
-
Perks
Did you ever do a Portland Workup?
The Guzz Thursday war is nothing like it
Ned
-
Perks842 If you check Bryans posts you will realise he was once and officer on that Fleet Train and has a good working
knowledge of it.
Geoff
It seems his day in the Navy is no use in this conversation, modern warfare is some what different as knowledge alike does expire O0.
No Ned I haven't done a Portland work up but I don't think very highly of Thursday wars either. Small ship BOST a couple of years ago wasn't bad and the DCT in the gulf was a little bite into reality. Big ships haven't been purchased in work ups for years.
-
If anyone was interested in a kit heres a 1/72 scale full kit under products
http://www.fleetscale.co.uk/system/index.html (http://www.fleetscale.co.uk/system/index.html)
-
Seems that it it's now been confirmed that the Government will not order the last two Darings - quite rightly it seems they were dubbed "Dubious" and "Doubtful". The original requirement was for 12 ships, now reduced to 6 and the Government was trying to flog two of those off earlier this year. There are rumours that HMS Victory and HMS Warrior are to be refitted and made ready for sea and that a feasibility study is in hand to rebuild the Mary Rose.
A Government spokesman said that reactivating Victory makes environmental sense as the ship is constructed from sustainable materials and all replacement wood will be met from organic sources. There will also be huge fuel savings as the ship is confidently expected to do at least 10,000 miles to the galleon.
Sob! :'( :'( :'(
Tut, tut and more tuts Colin. Surely "Warrior" isn't a HMS (at least, not yet). Bryan.
-
Basically for "Perks842".
I've only just caught up with this site, and really must protest at both your comments and the way it was expressed. We may agree to differ, but "going personal" is not really a nice thing to do.
Perhaps, with a bit of hindsight, you may actually begin to agree with me. The carriers are being built....so I was wrong there, but built as a bit of political expediency/job protection in the Broons constinuency. Their future is more or less the same as if they were never built in the first place. Your version of the "Fleet Train" just isn't going to happen. Frigate and Destroyer numbers have been decimated and promised new ones are being cancelled if not sold off after construction. I believe that the "Astute" programme has been similarly cropped back.
As far as the RFA is concerned....a not insignificant part of "the whole"....both Fort Austin and Fort Rosalie are up for disposal at more or less the same time as the 2 (?) carriers hoist the white ensign. So that leaves only "Victoria" and "George" as suppliers of non fuels. I know they do both, but they can't be in 2 places at the same time. Flexible movement? Not really. The smaller "Rovers" have more or less gone away now. So the RN have only the 2 "Waves" to rely on. And where are they at any given moment? A couple of new tankers are "mooted", but the jury is still out on that one.
To put it all into a nutshell, Brown and his left wing hatred of anything to do with the "elitist" Military have basically screwed up the defence of the realm for their own political agenda.
Please, never again try to "educate" me in the workings of the RN or the RFA. Bryan Young.
-
Sorry, Bryan, Warrior does indeed fly the Red Ensign at present. Still, put a couple of redundant Olympus engines out of the Ark into her and she'd frighten the French to death again.
Colin
-
Amazes me Bryan. Many civilian workers of the dockyards who work on the ships day in day out still make up rumours of what's going to happen in each situation, the defence review the other week brought out some special ideas. Yes the UK has a poor style of military funding but this doesn't stop many things that we commit to happening. The other NATO countries running auxilary supplies do sell stores and fuel to us so don't think it's a completely independent program of NATO (that being a task force) which we always deploy in, in terms of Carrier groups. No carrier in NATO is left without anti-air protection when under way unless in home waters conducting sea trials etc. But of course looks like you have taken this into account by your findings {:-{. SPOT ON
-
Perks, how long have you been in and also what rank /rating are you if still in?
Just a question.
Paul...
-
Last night Discovery Channel Canada ran "21st Century Warship" about H.M.S. Daring. A very informative documentary about this ship. Sure looks beautiful, and capable too!
Iron99
-
Last night Discovery Channel Canada ran "21st Century Warship" about H.M.S. Daring. A very informative documentary about this ship. Sure looks beautiful, and capable too!
Iron99
Capable? Well, I suppose she would be if "fitted with" as opposed to "fitted for". Must be very frustrating for her crew. BY.
-
Most of my ships over 23 years were" fitted for but not with" %% %% %%
Ned
-
Most of my ships over 23 years were" fitted for but not with" %% %% %%
Ned
Yes Ned, I agree with you, but "Daring" was presented to the dirty unwashed (you and me etc) as an all singing, all dancing ship that was better equipped and "capable" than any other ship of her size afloat. Now it would appear that what we've actually got is a fighter with a glass jaw. No chance of the "rapid response" we were told she was capable of. I must admit to writing this sort of stuff with feelings of both despair and anger. Mainly anger that our previous "government" has so denuded this realms' capability to defend itself that posturing is the only thing left to do. In more than one way, I'm pleased that I probably won't live long enough to find out first hand just what legacy our now so-called "Her Majesties Opposition" has really bequeathed to this Nation. BY.
-
Perks, how long have you been in and also what rank /rating are you if still in?
Just a question.
Paul...
I wouldn't give any details of me serving, I've served for 4 and a half years but been in and out of devonport since I was 8 as my old man was a civil servant for 45 years, basically brought up on all of it.
-
Well Its seems to me the Royal Navy has changed greatly in the last 4 years as I find you very disrespectful to Brian, one thing I remember while serving was to respect the older senior guy past and present as they paved the way for the younger guys coming through and without them you learnt nothing. Glad I left when I did if this is the current attitude circulating whats left of our fleet.
-
I wasn't trying to be disrespectful, I just don't like being disrespected by someone that has probably been out of the game for 15+ years.
He said there's no skilled people to man these carriers, That is my colleagues and me.
-
Capable? Well, I suppose she would be if "fitted with" as opposed to "fitted for". Must be very frustrating for her crew. BY.
The type 23s, albion class, ocean and T45 have all come under the fitted for not fitted. That's the defence cuts for you
-
Fitted "for but not with" is a system that the MoD has been using for many years, not just recently.
The Type 45's are unique in the fact that they were built with "empty" spaces to ensure any new equipment would have the physical space to fit in the hull.
Bob
-
I wasn't trying to be disrespectful, I just don't like being disrespected by someone that has probably been out of the game for 15+ years.
He said there's no skilled people to man these carriers, That is my colleagues and me.
Lets just get this straight.
1. I realise that modern ships need less manpower than older ones.
For the carriers, even less than predicted if no air group is to be carried, even less if they spend as much time tied to the wall as I expect
them to be.
2. My earlier remarks about skilled and trained people was based on the then goverments' own announcements that new frigates, destroyers and submarines et-al would be coming on-stream to provide the new carriers (both of them) with a capable fleet and air-arm screen.
At that time the RN was having manpower difficulties, so it was reasonable to ask just where all the extra bodies would be coming from. We'd just put the then new "Albion" and "Bulwark" into service. Heavily manned.
3. Now we know that the RN is not going to get all the ships it was promised, indeed; the fleet strength is actually being reduced. So manpower requirements are actually liable to fall. A complete turn-around from what was anticipated a couple of years ago. As a follow up to that, do you not also expect to see a reduction in training establishments? This now becomes a self perpetuating downward spiral.
All "new kit" requires trained and skilled people to operate it. From electronic charts (as recently highlighted) to being trained to operate missile systems etc. that can be fitted in modular form pretty quickly. But how can you train operators on gear they haven't got?
Hence the lack of skilled and trained operators. EOP. BY.
-
ersonnel go on courses known as PJTs for kit fitted on there future draft or phase 2 if in training, also any new kit that is due to or is newly fitted. The personnel that will be operating get sent on those PJTs, man power has always been low in the years however the RN is making arrangements to get those manned I promise you. I've seen the plan of action within the fleet. I'm sorry Bryan that I miss understood your term of unskilled men.
-
Aaagh The old Pre Joining Training
Six weeks in Collingwood learning all about a new bit of Kit
Bit of kit sat in shed with loads of room all around it
Join ship bit of kit is three mods ahead of C'wood's pre production model
Stuck in a compartment with no room for the maintainer.
Get the manuals out and relearn on the job
When I was drafted to the Survey Navy (Hydrographic Service if you are posh)
I went on courses with the civilian makers of all the non service electronics
and the training was superb
We had as many ships surveying the worlds oceans as we now have policing them.
We had more frigates of one class than we now have ships in total
Good luck to all
the lads and lasses doing their bit today
I'm glad to be ashore and making waves on the local pond
Ned
-
Aaagh The old Pre Joining Training
Six weeks in Collingwood learning all about a new bit of Kit
Bit of kit sat in shed with loads of room all around it
Join ship bit of kit is three mods ahead of C'wood's pre production model
Stuck in a compartment with no room for the maintainer.
Get the manuals out and relearn on the job
When I was drafted to the Survey Navy (Hydrographic Service if you are posh)
I went on courses with the civilian makers of all the non service electronics
and the training was superb
We had as many ships surveying the worlds oceans as we now have policing them.
We had more frigates of one class than we now have ships in total
Good luck to all
the lads and lasses doing their bit today
I'm glad to be ashore and making waves on the local pond
Ned
Ned, If I'd had the choice of which branch of the RN I could join I would have eagerly grabbed at the chance of joining the Hydrographic section. But I didn't get that chance, which made my decision to join Cable & Wireless (after completing my cadetship) so much easier. The 2 outfits have much in common. I learned so much in my time with C & W.
The "Bible" was (to me) always the volumes of the Admiralty Manual of Hydrographic Surveying". It taught me the need for neatness and accuracy in any form of chartwork, along with the need for precision and a willingness to realise that if you do a bit of "cheating" (be it in fudging star-sights or whatever) the only person your'e cheating is yourself. A career I missed out on! Bryan.
-
Aaagh The old Pre Joining Training
Six weeks in Collingwood learning all about a new bit of Kit
Bit of kit sat in shed with loads of room all around it
Join ship bit of kit is three mods ahead of C'wood's pre production model
Stuck in a compartment with no room for the maintainer.
Get the manuals out and relearn on the job
When I was drafted to the Survey Navy (Hydrographic Service if you are posh)
I went on courses with the civilian makers of all the non service electronics
and the training was superb
We had as many ships surveying the worlds oceans as we now have policing them.
We had more frigates of one class than we now have ships in total
Good luck to all
the lads and lasses doing their bit today
I'm glad to be ashore and making waves on the local pond
Ned
Spot on {-)
-
We had as many ships surveying the worlds oceans as we now have policing them
Shame non of them did charts for the channels round the Isle of Sky %)
-
Might be interesting to hear readers versions of what a "chart" actually is.
A clue.....theyr'e nothing like a motoway map. BY.
-
Im thinking about depth of water recorder chart.
-
Im thinking about depth of water recorder chart.
Depth of water as shown on a chart? As water level changes with tides etc. where do you wish to draw a datum line?
Shallow water with sandy bottoms (no pun intended) tends to change minute by minute. A "recorder" will only show you where you've been, and not where your'e going. The "trend" may be useful, but not 100% reliable as the depth may suddenly increase.
More ideas? BY.
-
Many yachts now have forward looking depth sounders. Do not naval/commercial ships have similar? Granted they are short range and yachts can stop pretty quickly but they are low power instruments.
Colin
-
I though this thread was about the type 45 destroyer HMS Daring, not how charts are made etc? ;D
-
Point taken Colin. But the forward looking thing doesn't tell you what's on the other side. If you see what I mean.
On more than one occassion as a Nav I had to make a decision to either let the ship "slide" over a sand bar or find a way around it.
Only 2 areas in the world did I find it "expedient" to charge at the sand bar (fingers, toes, legs and so on crossed) and just hope I'd made the right choice. The main area of concern was always the SE corner of the UK. Those sand banks moved with every change of tide, so they had to be "soft" and not puddled in. If the operational requirements hadn't sort of demanded that "some risks" had to be taken then I could well have not recommended it to the command. As one (well respected) Captain observed, it was my Masters Certificate at risk as well as his. But get the mathematics right, hold the nerve and trust in the lord.
I very much doubt if commercial ships have something as exotic as a forward looking sonar/depth finder. Just the opposite I think. Observe the standard commercial ship approaching a port. See how far away from the port entrance the ship stops and waits for a pilot. Close quarter meetings and shallowish water give many "deep sea" Masters palpitations.
But, having said that, and I know you are sort of familiar with nautical charts, many forum members are not. Hence my query.
To somebody living in (say) Nottingham a nautical chart would just be gibberish. So many symbols, odd lines and so on.
I also know (to my cost) that this is a "Model Boat" forum, but that in itself indicates that the members are at least a little bit interested in ships. Marine charts are a vital part of that. Sorry to go on for so long, but so many misconceptions get aired here. BY.
-
I though this thread was about the type 45 destroyer HMS Daring, not how charts are made etc? ;D
Darlek, as you should have realised by now, all topics on this forum tend to go a bit sideways...BY.
-
Can this topic be split please guys? Charts have absoloutlely nothing to do with the original topic.
Paul...