View Full Version : Service Time: How Long is it
ivorthediver
10-07-2009, 18:13
What is the service time of a Ship? Sounds straight forward enough don't it
but think about it ..... with Aircraft it was governed by the amount of landings the undercarriage could be expected to endure safely but what about Ships ?
How many times the anchor could be dropped ?
There must be some form of rational explanation ....surely :confused:
There is no "Set time" for a warship. The Hull, provided that it is kept in good condition can last forever. It is the equipment inside that is important. Some ships might have a weapon system (Devonshire Class) that is so integral with the ship that when the weapon system is obsolete, so is the ship.
Due to the everchanging equipment improvements and add-ons a ship is almost obsolete when it is commissioned. If there is any major improvements or alterations then it is usually done through their half life refit.
Since the war, the main reason for the withdrawal of ships is purely political and cost cutting and Naval policy. Although there is a more of a need for a General Purpose Vessel these times than a ship for one task i.e. Anti Submarine, Air Direction Ship.
ivorthediver
10-07-2009, 19:40
There is no "Set time" for a warship. The Hull, provided that it is kept in good condition can last forever. It is the equipment inside that is important. Some ships might have a weapon system (Devonshire Class) that is so integral with the ship that when the weapon system is obsolete, so is the ship.
Due to the everchanging equipment improvements and add-ons a ship is almost obsolete when it is commissioned. If there is any major improvements or alterations then it is usually done through their half life refit.
Since the war, the main reason for the withdrawal of ships is purely political and cost cutting and Naval policy. Although there is a more of a need for a General Purpose Vessel these times than a ship for one task i.e. Anti Submarine, Air Direction Ship.
Fair comment Dave .....When is a ships Half/life refit or put another way [see separate thread] what is a ships life ?:confused:
I don't know how long a ship's life is - but I know that the ship we came out to Australia on (HMS Orion) had been a troop carrier in ww2. I think it might have had one more trip left in it....to the scrap yard (or where ever). Sadly, it seemed to have been left to dereriorate. Apparently its stabilizers (if it had ever had any) didn't seem to work and it was badly in need of painting (rust everywhere.) Thus our journey was a bit rough.
I can't really remember much of the trip out here...but I do know that we were supposed to be going to Sydney...but by the time we got to Fremantle, my dear Mum wanted off. So here we stayed - the best place in the world (apart from the U.K. of course) :)
Some ships of course get stripped down and sunk for dive wrecks...which seems quite sad...although the fish love them (as do the divers).
My father tried, in vain, to save the HMAS Perth from that fate...he thought it'd have better use with the Naval Cadets here. But the powers that be, decided no and it was stripped and sunk off Albany.
Regards,
Bee
ps: If you do a search on HMAS Perth you can see it, in situ, via an underwater web cam
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 10:22
The comment Dave correctly made in his earlier post "the main reason for the withdrawal of ships is purely political and cost cutting and Naval policy" is something that has concerned me for some time now.
In a climate of severe financial constraint we now seem to be paying the price for this short-sighted policy. In the Royal Navy we now have a situation where clearly there are not enough warships to carry out all of our commitments and more importantly without not enough money on the table for replacements.
How many warships have been either sold off or scrapped over the past decade alone still having plenty of service life left in them - when some of them at least could still be doing a job for us?
Whilst their equipment might not make them suitable warships for front-line defence how many other more "everyday" tasks are being done these days by the over-used surface ships that we now have left in service?
As our severely shrunken fleet will now testify it is easy to sell off cheaply and/or scrap warships but it is a different matter to fund replacements...
It would be interesting to compile a list of the least used and most prematurely disposed warships of recent years.
Any candidates??
harry.gibbon
11-07-2009, 13:41
Terry if the Q was 'least used for original purpose & prematurely disposed of then; these two:-
Matapan as a Battle Class destroyer
and
The Royal Yacht as a Hospital Ship
and the Tiger,Blake & Lion to name but three
Little h
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 13:50
I totally agree with all of your selection Harry, although I was primarily looking for examples from recent years.
Francis Stanley
11-07-2009, 14:08
Is HMS Victory still a commissioned naval ship?
I know it was in the 1980's she must be the longest lifed ship still commissioned
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 14:20
I am sure she is Francis although I dont quite think that she fits the example of recent RN warships prematurely sold or scrapped that I had in mind!
Also I was wondering if anybody agreed with the point I was making in post #5 about making greater use out of the ships we had?
harry.gibbon
11-07-2009, 14:22
I totally agree with all of your selection Harry, although I was primarily looking for examples from recent years.
'twill take a 'little' longer that one Terry, it's kinda out of area so to speak, but might be good bit of research for coming weeks whilst others contribute also.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2165796.stm
Is this the kind of thing you are looking for Terry??
Regards,
Bee
This is the typical statements that these pathetic politicians of ours use to get rid of ships. These would have been ideal to fight piracy worldwide. Fighting Russian Subs? This could have been solved by mothballing the Sonar and sealing the A/S spaces.and placing smaller calibre guns in a way that the weapons and weapon systems could be replaced quickly.
The gunboat diplomacy did work in the past. Why can't it work today and in the future.
We were told, when we were deployed abroad that as "Ambassadors" of the Country we improved relations and many trade deals were gained behind the scenes because the Royal Navy were there!
As I have said before. This Government is endangering our Country Militarally and Economically. Therefore it could be classed as treason. And we know what happens to traitors!
Politicians should be made accountable for their actions long after they have left office with the massive pensions and medical insurance. If this happens then they might, just, might sit back and think of the actions that they are about to put on us.
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 16:19
Bee that is EXACTLY what I meant. Whilst I am sure that the purpose these ships were intended for is now gone, I feel sure that there will be times in the near future when they could well have been put to use saving overworking the few front line warships that we currently have.
I am sure they could for example have done a job in the anti-piracy operations or flying the flag or many other things. As well as that they could have provided a platform to prevent yet another trained crew disappearing for ever, or allow a new one to get valuable sea time without tying down more important resources.
It seems to me that the Navy Chiefs themselves are guilty of being talked into prematurely getting rid of ships like these for half-baked promises of shiny new toys that they will probably never get.
Its about time it was realised that in times of financial restraint it is more important than ever to get full use out of the ships that we have rather than wringing our hands when they and their crews have gone with little or no chance of replacing them...
Thanks Bee these two serve as good examples of what I meant. I wonder how many even better ones have prematurely gone in recent years??
Shame.
Sorry Dave - I have just read what you posted which dovetails nicely with this.
This is the typical statements that these pathetic politicians of ours use to get rid of ships. These would have been ideal to fight piracy worldwide. Fighting Russian Subs? This could have been solved by mothballing the Sonar and sealing the A/S spaces.and placing smaller calibre guns in a way that the weapons and weapon systems could be replaced quickly.
The gunboat diplomacy did work in the past. Why can't it work today and in the future.
We were told, when we were deployed abroad that as "Ambassadors" of the Country we improved relations and many trade deals were gained behind the scenes because the Royal Navy were there!
As I have said before. This Government is endangering our Country Militarally and Economically. Therefore it could be classed as treason. And we know what happens to traitors!
Politicians should be made accountable for their actions long after they have left office with the massive pensions and medical insurance. If this happens then they might, just, might sit back and think of the actions that they are about to put on us.
Dave your comments about politicians reminds me of when I was at highschool. We had one student who was always rattling on about things. He was quite loud and objectionable, and much of the stuff he came out with was nonsensical.
One day one of our exasperated teachers told him he'd make a "good" politician. I thought he was joking...but seeing what we have in most countries now - he was spot on, unfortunately.
They just don't think. They don't think of consequences and don't seem to care about the future. The few that do (and there are always some that start off with good intentions)...get howled down.
Plus, sadly Terry, I'm sure there'll be a lot more examples out there and not just in relation to ships.
Bee
"The few that do (and there are always some that start off with good intentions)."
I honestly believe that many Men/Women go into politics with the best of intentions. And soon realise that they are hitting a brick wall. They are almost forced to back their Party irrespective of how their constituents feel about it.
To get on in politics you have to keep your head down and follow the party lines.
They have a saying over here
"You can't fight City Hall"
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 17:20
Sadly Dave I could not agree more, and it would seem that there is little that can be done to stop it
As you vote out the bad guy to replace him with a good guy who then becomes the current bad guy .....
Dave, I could really get on a soap box here - but maybe I'll leave it for another day...and in the Wardroom...where we can discuss...just about anything.
We're probably straying from the Ship theme just a tad:rolleyes:
But it is the pollies who are responsible for the scrapping of seaworthy ships -I'm sure they could stop it - if they had the......desire....to.
Bee
p.s. Too true Ivor
I suppose this has been going on for a good while
HMS Dreadnought Commissioned 1906
Decommissioned 1919
Although it may be different
These times, Great advances were made in ships and Gunnery and they were definitely rendered obsolete very quickly
Also the ship cutting treaties put paid to many ships.
HMS Vanguard is possibly another one
HMS Bristol
HMS Upholder 4yrs in RN
HMS Unseen 3yrs in RN
HMS Ursula 2yrs in RN
HMS Unicorn 1 yr in RN
All four Upholder Class sold to Canada
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 18:04
But it is the pollies who are responsible for the scrapping of seaworthy ships -I'm sure they could stop it - if they had the......desire....to.
Bee
Ah but as I said Bee in recent years they have been abetted by the navy chiefs seduced by empty promises...
Dave - Yes good examples except I was asking about recent ones because although getting rid of under-used ships has occurred right back through history IMO it is more relevant now because of the miniscule size of our fleet.
It was different immediately after the two wars because then we understandably had to greatly reduce ship and crew numbers to adjust to a peacetime navy. That has not been a factor over the last decade although many still useful ships have met a premature end.
I agree Terry
But the Upholder Class Submarines were sold on the late 1990s
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 18:31
Yes we could most certainly find a use for quality diesel subs - in fact from memory there was quite a fuss about them being sold to Canada, but in the end they did require a hell of a lot of money thrown at them.
A different point but I wonder how pleased our Canadian friends are with them now?
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 18:40
Terry do we have any diesel subs left now or did they all go away to other Navies ?
Ivor
We have no conventional Submarines now. Except for one or two static displays
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 18:47
What is the current number of ships left "on the books" I wonder
It depend what you mean "On the books" there are a number of ships on different states of readiness. Some will have been put there so that it can be claimed that it is "an operational ship" knowing full well that the next time it will go to sea will be behind a tug going for scrap. Besides. If we took these out of "Standby" would we have the crew to man it unless you take another ship out of service to replace it.
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 19:16
It depend what you mean "On the books" there are a number of ships on different states of readinest. Some will have been put there so that it can be claimed that it is "an operational ship" knowing full well that the next time it will go to sea will be behind a tug going for scrap. Besides. If we took these out of "Standby" would we have the crew to man it unless you take another ship out of service to replace it.
Point taken ..so let me put it another way how many do we have including those of operational readiness
44 Major ships (Including Submarines)
16 Minewarfare
14 Patrol boats (RNR)
No mention of "Standby" ships or ships in routine refits or long refits
When I was there we had about 100 Frigates alone!!!!!!!!
Ref.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/surface-fleet/fleet-today/
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 20:12
Pitiful is all I can say..........Are we still a seafaring Nation or has this been removed by stealth and deceit
With all the ships spread around the world and based around the UK. The excuse about no room for HMS Plymouth seems very weak
ivorthediver
11-07-2009, 20:21
I shudder to think of the cost to the taxpayer... which should have been put to better use in the Navy
astraltrader
11-07-2009, 21:14
Terry do we have any diesel subs left now or did they all go away to other Navies ?
Ivor - The Upholder class diesel submarines - which we got absolutely no useage out of at all were the very best and the very last diesel submarines built by Britain.:mad:
TrotOneLower
11-07-2009, 23:04
Apart from the two "carriers", one of which is currently docked down, there are seven frigates and five destroyers based in Pompey. One of the destroyers being the "Daring". Currently, there are no ships up the trots, and "Bristol" remains stripped down as a training vessel, moored off Whale Island.
Invincible is laid-up in 2 basin, and being cannibalised to keep the other two going. Several MCMVs are laid-up in 1 basin, and an OPV in 2 basin.
A few RFAs are also laid-up in 2 basin.
I may be wrong, but I believe the current standing for "real" warships is; 17 frigates and five destroyers.
WTF happened?
harry.gibbon
11-07-2009, 23:29
Trot; If you go down the list as in Dave's post #27 and treat it with what you have advised it'll be about right.
Re post #27 when one clicks on each vessel it gives the status of that ship and as you say Invincible is on standby in every respect but that listing shows her as being part of the fleet. Typical ... freedom of information but then scratch at the surface (no pun) and one finds the true status of the so called fleet.
However that being said:- how long before we don't need crews at all and the vessels are in fact URWP = Unmanned Remote Weapons Platforms controlled via satellite from a hole in the ground??????????????Little h
Ivor,
Across the pond, the general rule of thumb is a life span of 20 to 25 years. Now each country has there own set of guide lines for the operational life span of there naval Ships. But that does not exclude mid-life refit's to extend the service life of the ship as in the USN "FRAM" program of the sixies.
Regards
Charles
harry.gibbon
11-07-2009, 23:50
Yes Charles good point, well understood I think! but if you look at the last couple of postings it can be identified that in the RN listing, some of these vessels are of the 70's, and the depleted numbers are a disgrace for an island nation.
Little h
astraltrader
12-07-2009, 00:26
Absolutely and in all probability never to even partially regain any lost ground.
gone for ever.:mad:
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.