Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?  (Read 6845 times)

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,856
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2011, 10:30:09 pm »

Well, well and well again. Has a little common-dog eventually squirreled its way into the collective (normally empty) brainboxes of the MoD and the transient Politicos?
Perhaps, just perhaps, that collective wet sponge may now be harbouring some private regrets for the rather precipitate axeing (literally) of the Harrier force. But I'll bet they're a bit too embarrassed to admit it.
I always thought that the "Ark" would be the first to go, but equally I thought that "Lust" was the best of the 3. My only reason for saying that is because (from the rather amateur viewpoint of an RFA Officer) she always seemed to be the most mechanically and fully functional one. Not because I appreciated the "activities" of her Staff Officers!
I would suggest that her return to active service may well be quicker than reported.
Which brings me back to pondering on the deployment of the RFA. There was a very readable article in the Sunday Times about the activities of HMS "Liverpool" a few days ago.....but she was being re-fuelled by an Italian ship. Nothing wrong with that...happens all the time between navies. But the RFA has been decimated recently.
A recent report I've read points out that there is now no RN presence in the Carribbean (drug interdiction duties) but that a major RFA asset is doing that job instead. That ship may be a "New" Fort or a "Wave" class ship. There are only 2 of each class. They can't be everywhere at once. Short term thinking? You bet. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

pugwash

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2011, 10:42:48 pm »

according to the article Lusty sails from Rosyth on 3rd June for sea trials following a 40 million refit.
Surely even our stupid governent wouldn't shell out that sort of cash and then immediately sell her for
scrap value of 2 million.  Would they????

Geoff
Logged

DavieTait

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,130
  • Location: Fraserburgh
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2011, 10:51:55 pm »

Geoff back in 1993-4 the Tory government let MAFF spend 4m completely updating and refitting the Torry Research Station in Aberdeen ( fishery and fish processing research ) then promptly shut it down and sold it for 200,000 to a developer..... Labour were worse in their time so I wouldn't put anything past any of the numpties we have in government.

Bryan I did see this week that one of the laid up RFA's was being towed to be refitted and put back in service but can't find the site it was on and can't for the life of me remember which RFA it was
Logged
Davie Tait,
Scotland

pugwash

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2011, 11:09:27 pm »

Davie, There is a comment in this months Warship World that Fort Austin is in Portsmouth at extended readiness
and is to refit at Birkenhead.  Would that be the one?

Geoff
Logged

class37

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2011, 11:13:21 pm »

off topic I know, but as a matter of interest, does anybody know :

1. how many ships the navy has now

2. how many admirals the navy has now

would be interesting to see the ratio, or to put it another way, how many admirals does it take to run one ship ?

cheers

class 37
[ex the proper blue colour}
Logged

pugwash

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2011, 11:18:28 pm »

I read an article the other day listing the admirals we had - it is vastly reduced but still far to many. I think is was
33 but don't quote me on that.  What concerns me more are the number of Civil Servants we have running Mod.

Geoff
Logged

DavieTait

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,130
  • Location: Fraserburgh
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2011, 11:29:49 pm »

Geoff , yes thats her and I've found the photo of her under tow

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1321384
Logged
Davie Tait,
Scotland

Liverbudgie

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,168
  • Model Boat Mayhem is the Best!
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2011, 09:04:36 am »

Davie, There is a comment in this months Warship World that Fort Austin is in Portsmouth at extended readiness
and is to refit at Birkenhead.  Would that be the one?

Geoff

Fort Austin arrived at Birkenhead two days ago see: http://www.demotix.com/news/712337/rfa-fort-austin-arriving-birkenhead-re-fit
Logged

pettyofficernick

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2011, 01:26:36 pm »

Fort Austin is indeed in Birkenhead, the East Float to be precise, saw her this morning as I was taking a Viking SMB from West float to the East Float. Heres a couple of phots.

Logged

pettyofficernick

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2011, 01:29:16 pm »









Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2011, 11:59:51 am »

Re Fort Austin. How times change! If any of you can recall, I described the almost comical efforts of the MoD to flog it off. Even the Aussies refused it! Then Marks and Sparks were invited to "look after" the non weapons bits of the "cargo". Didn't happen. Then the Gulf things came up. "Grange" served with distinction during Round 1 (I was doing the "Austin" refit throughout that one), and had retired before Round 2....but she was there. They (ex-"Grange" and "Austin") are both very capable and popular ships, but must be showing their age by now having been in service all over the world since 1979. Then the 2 "new" Forts (Victoria and George) came along 1993/4 ish. Then lo and behold, the Fort George was taken out of service last year, leaving the 2 older versions to soldier on. All very strange. Especially as the 2"new" ships are "one stoppers". Not that I'm a great fan of having all the eggs in one basket. If (and I repeat "if") it is a "Fort" that's left alone in the Windies....well, that's one of only 2 major assets out of contention. Not just for "stores" (covers a multitude of "stuff" does that!) but also removes a fast re-fueller as well. Oh, dear. The politicos really have "lost the plot" here. But that's just my opinion!. Bryan Y.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

richtea

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2011, 12:19:02 pm »

Have the politicians ever had the plot ?
Since the end of WW2 all the politicians of all parties want to cut the military budgets
and get MORE for LESS.
We just scraped through in the Falklands, if the Argentinians had acquired a few more exocets
then we might not have been so lucky.
Our Armed Forces do a bl**dy good job despite the interference of the bean counters,
but sooner or later that luck will run out and its the people in the front line that pays the price
while the politicians make mealy mouthed speeches about lack of adequate equipment.

If it was politicians and their families on the front line, then you could bet a pound to a pinch of pig excrement
that there would be no shortages of up to date vehicles and kit.

Logged

Liverbudgie

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,168
  • Model Boat Mayhem is the Best!
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2011, 12:48:56 pm »

Bryan,

Wave Ruler with Shaun Jones driver her, is at present in the area. There are two major problems with the "Fort's" 1) they only have a single hull and are technically illegal to operate though they and the other oilers have an extension until 2016, they are not allowed anywhere near the US because of this. 2) They are the most expensive ships to operate in the RFA fleet, so I'm told, which is of more importance in the present climate i expect. As far as I'm aware they no replacements being designed, let alone being built so, what is going to happen after 2016 is anybodies guess perhaps they will be chartering tankers to see if they fit the roll and then buy them, cynical old me suspects.

Fort George is at present sitting forlornly in Canada Dock, Liverpool, being stripped of all valuable parts well away from public gaze, or so they think, with her name and number painted out.

From the outside the Austin looks to be in excellent condition BTW.

LB
Logged

pugwash

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2011, 01:04:43 pm »

Several years ago they started planning the MARS (military afloat reach and sustainability) ships to be the new class
of RFAs.  It has suddenly gone very quiet in that direction and they haven't even decided on the design yet
even though they have listed what they want to be included and have been offered two designs by Rolls Royce
and BMT.  By the time they get them we will be reduced to recommissioning the old US "ghost" ships up at
Hartlepool

Geoff
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #15 on: June 04, 2011, 11:44:34 am »

LB, when did the rule about single hulled ships arrive? As far as I'm aware (via the RFA journal "Gunline") RFAs still visit US ports...be difficult not to considering the Drug Interdiction programme and the level of combined effort with the US authorities.
Does the law only apply to civilian manned/registered ships? If not then all NATO navies are going to be in massive trouble. The USN in particular! (Good news for the building yards though!).
Don't quote me on this, but I was led to understand that at least 2 new refuelling ships (for the RFA) have been designed and the tender for building by an Italian(?) yard was accepted. I'm confused again. Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #16 on: June 10, 2011, 12:43:22 pm »

So now we know. One "Wave" in the Windies and the other sitting with the Marines on board off Yemen. So that's the summ total of the UK's fully capable re-fuelling ships "out of theatre". BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

farrow

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2011, 01:14:48 pm »

Listening to the news last night the Lusty has been converted to replace the Ark as a Commando carrier, in that it was stated she had been converted to take 600 men and 22 heliocopters, if that is the case then it could well be good night Vienna to that other useless heap the Ocean.
Logged

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,856
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2011, 01:30:37 am »

Saw Illustrious in Portsmouth tonight when inbound from Ouistreham.

Colin

Logged

Spook

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2011, 12:29:05 am »

Is she now being used as a car ferry or car park?
Logged

derekwarner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,484
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2011, 12:46:11 am »

 :embarrassed: ........ even from 22,000 km away Lusty appears to be low on ballast [kero = avaition gas for her 4 Olympus gas turbines]..........

I stood on her sister's deck many years ago........very impressive when a few chopper pilots from Invincible removed some prostesters from the bow of BB63.... {-) O0 Derek
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,856
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2011, 04:44:54 pm »

Quote
even from 22,000 km away Lusty appears to be low on ballast [kero = avaition gas for her 4 Olympus gas turbines]..........

No choppers aboard yet!

Ark Royal's captain has transferred to her as he only had 6 months in the Ark before she was put up for sale. She now languishes where Invincible used to be.

Colin
Logged

triumphjon

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #22 on: July 13, 2011, 09:30:36 pm »

lusty sailed at around nine am sunday , i spotted her being loaded saturday morning with several other olive green vehicles , to go with the white transit mini bus & blue swb land rover
Logged

Spook

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #23 on: July 13, 2011, 11:48:06 pm »

So, car ferry it is then?  :}
Logged

Kangaroo1

  • Guest
Re: Lusty's back - but for how long I wonder?
« Reply #24 on: September 06, 2011, 08:05:59 pm »

I saw a pretty good R/C scale model of Lusty on Sunday....

She was about 7 feet long, and based on details post her first refit (Phalanx replaced with Goalkeeper etc.).... sadly the high winds on the day had apparently caused steering problems on the water, so I didn't see her sailing, but I got some great pictures....but they're too big to upload onto here I'm afraid.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up