Feeds

back to article Unarmed Royal Navy T45 destroyer breaks down mid-Atlantic

The Royal Navy's new Type 45 destroyers continue to suffer from technical mishaps, with first ship of the class HMS Daring arriving a week late in Portsmouth on Saturday following emergency propulsion repairs in Canada. The £1.1bn+ ship had previously broken down in mid-Atlantic. The News of Portsmouth reported on the breakdown …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Grenade

No SCADA I hope?

I do hope they're not using Siemens SCADA systems on board. We all know what happens when you use them to control turbines' speed...

3
0
Flame

Actually......

It sounds to me like the ship was designed and rubber stamped by dick heads...

I just sort of hate that really bottom of the barrel logic that gets missed in the whole scenario.

A warship, is both supposed to spend enormous amounts of money for the war profiteers, and to actually kill anyone and anything that moves.

The only difference between the big ones and the little warships - is the big ones have more shooters and bigger loads of ammo to keep feeding them, than the little ones.

But this piece of under armed shit really sounds like 4 guys in viking costumes on a plastic raft, with wooden swords and rubbish bin lids, getting an upgrade to a bucket of rocks to throw.

What? No decks sprinkled with the odd quad barrel 20mm machine gun? A few BOFORS? A couple of torpedo tubes? Some depth charges?

Noooo when the one shot wonder arms take a shit we will give the crew sling shots....

0
0
WTF?

Remind me why we need this sort of thing?

other than for transferring taxpayer money to large corporations.

1
0
Grenade

It's the Falklands Stupid

These are 'Air Defence' Frigates, the idea comes from the embarrassment of the carrier taskforce sent to the Falklands being pretty much useless as they had to sit so far SE of the islands so Argentine Migs couldn't reach them that their Harriers had only seconds over the Falklands so couldn't provide effective air cover. If that task force had been screened by, fully operational, T45's it could, theoretically have been parked between the islands and Argentina itself. Or that is the idea.

Of course we will soon not have any carriers to protect, but it's the thought that counts I understand.

0
0
Unhappy

New Non-Solution to old problem

Unfortunately the laws of physics interfere with this great idea.

Daring has roughly 20mile to the horizon, and aircraft flying below the horizion will not be seen until it is 20 mile away, unless you have AEW. (oh, sorry we forgot to order that)

The exocet has a 40+ mile range, and would be visible to a Type 45 for around 120 seconds from clearing the horizon (asuming the radar operator is awake, and it is a perfectly flats sea with little radar clutter), and thus we prove the RN capability to design solutions to WW1 problems. Designing solution to the last war, would actually be a massive cultrual leep forward.

3
0
Boffin

Re: It's the Falklands Stupid

Migs? They were operating Skyhawks, Daggers, Super Etendards and Mirages. The baddies don't all operate Soviet/Russian gear, you know.

2
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Gold badge

Re: why we need this sort of thing

It would seem that *no* equipment procurement within living memory has been anything other than a total cock-up, delivering zero capability, late, and over budget. So presumably, in a few years time, there will be no part of HM forces with an offensive capability.

At that point, I would simply observe that we could sack the lot of them. Not only would this not actually reduce our defensive capabilities, it might actually liberate enough cash to repair the economy and leave some left over to buy goodwill with foreign aid, so the net effect on national security might be positive.

So, erm, MoD, it would appear that *you* are the country's most serious existential threat. How about falling on your swords. You *do* still have swords, don't you?

3
1
Stop

@New Non-Solution to old problem

Look up EuroHawk, RC135 and all (including EriEye) the long-endurance AEW a/c.

0
0
Bronze badge

unless you have AEW. (oh, sorry we forgot to order that)

What about these then? http://www.spyflight.co.uk/seaking.htm

0
0
Happy

Does Lewis write for Spyflight?

"Given the history of UK defence procurement ... jobs in marginal constituencies and politics will always outweigh the preferred military choice."

1
0
Alert

Plug'n'Pray

Drivers! it's always the damn drivers!

5
0
Bronze badge
FAIL

Helicopter?

Is that like *singular*?

0
0
WTF?

One H pad + no hanger = 1 chopper

So you know of another type of destroyer that has more than one helicopter pad?

2
0
Bronze badge

It's hangAr not hangEr

unless you're putting a coat on it. And it does have one, big enough for a Merlin which isn't small as these things go. I think Top Gear magazine did a photo shoot in it a few issues back.

1
1
Bronze badge

Well it's not an Aircraft Carrier

So presumably no one felt a need to equip it with an air group. On the other hand I believe it can operate two Lynx if it's felt the situation warrants it, and there are any extras going after the latest cuts...

1
0
Coat

Left hand down a bit

Being of an age to remember (with great fondness) the BBC's radio programme "The Navy Lark", I do wonder if the writers of the scripts were psychic! They seem to have predicted with a fair amount of accuracy some of the issues that have plagued the Senior Service over the past decade.

Bring back Leslie Philips, Jon Pertwee and Stephen Murray (Sub Lt Philips, CPO Pertwee and Capt Murray) - they'll get the ship home! (Left hand down a bit it is sir!)

Mine's the one with the inflatable yellow collar, flashing light and whistle on it - oh look, just like yours!

4
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Sadly

Of the main cast, only Leslie Philips, Heather Chasen and Judy Cornwell are still alive. Richard Caldicot, Jon Pertwee, Tenniel Evans, Dennis Price, Ronnie Barker, Chic Murray, and Michael Bates, who all played a variety of parts, are no longer with us.

Epic days of British radio comedy, that my teenage children love listening to.

0
0
Pint

Sadly yes

And I miss them all. Some of the finest comedy output of the last century.

I'll drink a tot to their memory tonight

0
0
FAIL

Sticks and Stones

Perhaps they should equip it with some very sharp sticks, and perhaps a few hand-sized rocks for throwing, just in case, you know, it has to /fight/ or something.

0
0
Pint

Let's Hope...

...that the parts airfreighted in will become a part of ship's stores so that similar repairs can be done mid-ocean.

We could wish for the bugs to be fixed, but that is much less likely to happen.

0
0
Grenade

Are we still at war with the french?

They seem to be doing a good job of disabling our navy.. First No French Asters now failing French Drive units...

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Not French

English drive units.

0
1
FAIL

French Missiles Work

Look up the track record of Exocet. It was British "Muddling Trough Technology" which failed in the Falklands 1982.

Yank ship hit By French Missile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Stark.jpg

Anymore questions, matey ??

It is/was British Neglect which doesn't/didn't give the ships proper defensive weaponry (cannons then, ESSM today. The German navy now has ESSM. HM Navy still trusts cannons, which are ineffective against anything modern. )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-162_ESSM

Canada's also better...

0
0
FAIL

re: Not French

From the article "the Type 45s' buggy electric drive units are supplied by French-based multinational Converteam, formerly known as Alstom Power Conversion."

Which part of that did you fail on?

0
0
FAIL

@In Love With Destructors

fail to understand your post, which point is it arguing against?

The original post referes to missing Asters and does not claim they dont work. however the reason they were missing is outlined here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/07/dauntless_sea_viper_progress/

Basically its cos they didn't work >:oP

here's a Fail for you.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

re re: Not French

> Which part of that did you fail on?

Maybe I know more than Mr Lewis? The secret is in the word 'multinational'

0
0
Happy

Ten of those not so brilliant French missiles...

...would be "dix Asters"

6
0
FAIL

Ten More Exocets

..would be "Disaster 1982".

0
0
Coat

Is it only me...

...or does the concept of a "Kryten" gun turret immediately conjure up images of some bit of armament that - once it has finished shooting at things - likes nothing more than to settle down to a bit of ironing while watching the latest episode of Androids?

"And could I just take this opportunity sir to call the person who ordered these vessels a bit of a smeeee...g, a smeeerrrrrr...gggg, a smeeeeeegggg-heeeeeead!

A smeeeeeegggg-heeeeeead?

Yes sir, a total and utter one."

Alright, alright, I'm going...

3
0

Call this a destroyer?

What a pitiful array of weaponry!

A destroyer should be from the Neo class: Guns, Lots of Guns

1
0
Flame

Guns ceased to be relevant after the first world war

Guns on ships ceased to be relevant a long time back. It is now all about air and submarine threats - despite the FUD that Lewis sometimes shifts around. The only recent conflicts that have seen any relevance from naval guns are concerning some of the naval bombardment that big old battleships did, specifically in the first gulf war. And Naval bombardment of any relevance needs big guns. Missouri's big 16" guns have a range of about 38km, still a tiny fraction of the range of a carrier air wing, and irrelevant in most conflicts.

Lewis likes to tell you that the future is aircraft carriers. If you want aircraft carriers, you want to protect them, and the T45 is essential for that. We could have bought Arleigh Burke class destroyers instead (as Lewis would like since he would only ever buy American). But they are a 20 year old design. You could also look at Ticonderoga but they are almost 30 years old.

Finally, Lewis would like you to think that submarine threats are irrelevant and we don't need most of our destroyer/frigate fleet. Yet many rogue nations have large submarine fleets. If I remember correctly, North Korea has between 20 and 30 submarines as an example. Iran has 13 submarines as another example. Remember that when operating inshore, diesel/electric submarines are a bigger threat than nuclear subs.

What the Royal Navy needs for the future is obvious.

1) Some real catapult and nuclear powered aircraft carriers.

2) Some proper fleet protection ships like the T45

3) Plenty of ASW capability.

4) Some nice helicopter landing ship functionality for landing troops and dealing with pirates.

5
0
Bronze badge

About the guns

Originally the T45s were going to get the Phalanx close in weapons systems from the retired T42s, you know looks a bit like R2D2 but packing a 20mm Gatling gun to take out incoming aircraft, fast attack boats etc. Unfortunately they've all been lent to the Army, along with some of the maintainers, indefinitely as they're very good at taking out incoming mortar fire and the Pongos don't want to give them back.

Hence a number of sailors wandering around land locked countries fixing things and wondering when the next run ashore is...

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Some valid points.....

....but some glaring errors.

The Arleigh Burkes and Tico's maybe old, but they:

A) work.

B) have anti-surface capabilities with Tomahawk or Harpoon missiles.

C) The Aegis system is cheaper, proven and has been tested, even against ballistic targets and a satellite.

As for guns on ships, if you have any conflict against a Coastal country, they come in useful (look at Korea, the second world war, the first Gulf War as good examples). A battlewagon like USS Missouri with some decent AA cover might have been useful in the Falklands, not to mention now the North Koreans might be playing up.

How does an Anti-air warship deal with Somali pirates? With guns - either from a chopper or with it's own.

Guns are far from irrelevant.

0
0
Bronze badge

Naval Bombardment

So you're saying the Naval Gunfire Support provided by the Royal Navy on the Al Faw peninsula didn't happen in the last Gulf War? Read Armed Action by James Newton and you'll see how useful a few 4.5" guns can be...

0
0
Stop

@AC

I wouldn't be to quick to say that naval guns are obsolete. Shells are cheaper than rockets and missiles and can be just as accurate!

They just aren't as sexy or hi-tech, but the hole they create is just as big!

1
0
Silver badge
Boffin

And more naval bombardment

The RN also provided very accurate and effective supporting fire during many of the actions during the Falklands conflict with the old 4.5in guns. The 4.5s also knocked down several Argentine fighter-bombers over San Carlos. It is long-overdue for our destroyers and frigates to be fitted with a 155mm weapon to allow them to fire the NATO rounds as used by the AS70, but in the meantime the 4.5in is definately better than nothing.

1
1

And if it is not possible to have all 4

, please state the order in which you'd like to give up your 4 capabilities. We all know pretty much Lewis wants (something like 2->3->1->4). What's yours.

0
0
Bronze badge

Catapults

You are absolutely bang on the mark where nuclear powered carriers are concerned, since nuclear power is the only properly viable source of energy for modern aircraft. The experimental electromagnetic device in the US might be ready by the time we can afford the air craft for our new carriers, of course. Hmm. Let's gamble shall we? I know, let's tell the markets that we intend to sell our gold and see how much we can lose. Then let's make the MoD pay for our adventurism in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, let's see. I know. Let's completely destroy NHS dentistry (only 24 hours to save the NHS!). Let's have a covert immigration policy, fail to control illegal immigration, sneer at prognostications where new EU members are concerned (while France, Germany and other EU countries take 'steps'), and then let's cut back on border controls, and allow at least 1 million illegal immigrants in. OK that's 4 million. I know, let's have an amnesty. Oh I forgot. This isn't sustainable development, nor were our military and economic policies, but never mind! We can accuse the new incumbents of doing wrong everything that is our fault! People won't remember. It won't be long before they have forgotten, and start to demonise the new government, blame them for everything that is being done.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Propellers !!

Spolling seems to be going downhull on this sight.

0
0
Coat

Have they tried...

turning it off and turning it back on?

Then calling IT support to report it's not working and the Argies are playing up...which button do I press?

Pathetic.

1
0

Guaranty

Surely it's all still under guaranty so it will be fixed by the suppliers as per EU regulation?

0
0
Silver badge

Nice in theory...

...except the nice lady in Bangalore told the captain that they can't proceed until he provides the ship's serial number which is painted in 10 point characters on the ship's bottom.

0
0
Silver badge

Ideal solution

The point of the armed forces is to keep BAe/Thales/RR executives in gravy and workers in marginal constituencies in pot noodle.

Since our enemies de-jour either live in caves in land locked countries or can wipe us off the map with nukes in a few minutes (or just turn off the gas) then the only thing the navy is going to get to fight are icelandic fishing boats and somali pilots = a small cannon seems more sporting.

Not fitting them with big expensive missiles seems like a sensible measure - rather like not giving traffic wardens shotguns.

3
0
Stop

The Royal Navy

Pride of the world ..............of comedy

1
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

None:- I'm just a plain Mr

If Nelson were alive today, he'd be spinning in his grave...

0
0
Coat

Re: None:- I'm just a plain Mr

Good point, couldn't we just strap some magnets to his corpse and replace the dodgy drivers with him?

5
0

@Ted

I spoke to someone in the MOD a while back and he confirmed this - technically speaking HMS Victory (Nelon's Flagship, the one made of wood in Portsmouth Harbour) is still on the navy list. Her commander could actually be ordered to take her to sea. Might find it difficult with all the concrete around it mind.

There was also a big discussion about a year ago about one of the Dunkirk little ships (Resolution? can't remember off hand) - in a very poor state and needing to be re-built. Some enthusiasts wanted to raise the money to pay for the work as it was of such historical importance - and a very cynical person suggested that in a couple of years, it might even become the flagship of the RN!

0
0
FAIL

Ruinous...

Over a billion quid to land 60 Royal Marines and launch a single helicopter?

2
0
Black Helicopters

why is it a suprise ??

Its no suprise to me that the French have a vested interest in giving us shoddy equipment, they have been waiting a long time to get their own back, and our last government has opened the door to that.

There are many people of course worried that perhaps the type 45 will not be fit for purpose, well if i could just allay there fears. Its purpose is to provide protection for our aircraft carriers.

Well our aircraft carriers have been retired and the one replacement is many years away and has no aircraft so this vessel will be able to tie up along side the new ship and fight off boarders with its gun and close range weapons quite adequately in plymouth dockyard.

Many i know are worried about our ability to provide adequate cover for our outlying dependencies like for example the falklands well again this is no problem, we can now eacept that we cant infact help at all as our projected armed forces would be unable to defend the isle of wight let alone such far flung places as Guernsey.

Ministers of course deny that our armed forces are being depleted in any way, these are the same people that say they are capable of running their own checks on expenses and the banking crisis is not a problem.

I

2
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.