Thread: A nautical story

Originally Posted by 4bee

It says a lot about the so called "Technical Experts" who surveyed her & she must have done sea trials & technical inspections so how come Oz not only bought a lemon but paid for their "junket" possibly at the Ritz?

Any thing is possible, but the survey was carried out by RN engineers.

Here is some nice new frigates. BAE Systems got the gig over Austal

Hunter Class Frigate Program | BAE Systems | Australia

but the survey was carried out by RN engineers.

bob it doesn't matter who did the survey but nice to know though it was RN person-ell (shiny bums or grubby handed hard grafters notwithstanding) but I still cannot understand how this vessel passed the survey to be commissioned into the fleet. Were RAN Engineers looking over their shoulders?

I have a dreaded feeling in my water that this venture into using Pods will be fraught with never ending problems & doesn't just apply to RAN vessels, as many Cruise ships relying on this propulsion method have also come to grief around the world, & some have also been delayed in Adelaide, one being the Queen Mary 2 I think it was (?) prior to a cruise to WA a couple of years back on it's way back to the UK. It sat for a whole day at Outer Harbour being repaired.

Electrically powered they may be but there seems to be a lot of ongoing trouble which is something Oz cannot afford to exist in our Taxpayer funded service & we deserve better.

Emergency Event boats? Send the Mooring Launches. They don't have pods except in the Ration Box for the Nespresso coffee machines.

I came across this article, from South Korea. What I found interesting is they are building diesel electric submarines fitted with ballistic missiles.

South Korea Green-Lights Key Naval Projects – Defense Security Monitor

The submarine, interesting.

KSS-III Class


Specifications. 10 SLBM's. on the batch 2.

KSS-III Class

Originally Posted by 4bee

bob it doesn't matter who did the survey but nice to know though it was RN person-ell (shiny bums or grubby handed hard grafters notwithstanding) but I still cannot understand how this vessel passed the survey to be commissioned into the fleet. Were RAN Engineers looking over their shoulders?

I have a dreaded feeling in my water that this venture into using Pods will be fraught with never ending problems & doesn't just apply to RAN vessels, as many Cruise ships relying on this propulsion method have also come to grief around the world, & some have also been delayed in Adelaide, one being the Queen Mary 2 I think it was (?) prior to a cruise to WA a couple of years back on it's way back to the UK. It sat for a whole day at Outer Harbour being repaired.

Electrically powered they may be but there seems to be a lot of ongoing trouble which is something Oz cannot afford to exist in our Taxpayer funded service & we deserve better.

Emergency Event boats? Send the Mooring Launches. They don't have pods except in the Ration Box for the Nespresso coffee machines.

I have to point out the RAN LHD's are fully operational, and have been for some time. The problem with the pods has been sorted, and pods around the World have no more problems than conventionally powered ships. All new ships and submarines have teething problems, as indicated by the RN's first Astute submarine still sitting alongside, not fully operational, while follow on boats have learned from that and are travelling well. My only reservation about the LHD's is, they would have to have the best defensive armament available, because they a big slab sided block of flats, you couldn't miss them.

[QUOTE=bob10;2905982]

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

We should charge them for coming to their aid in WW1, and WW2. I watched a show today, by some English twit talking about WW1. He rabbited on about the 'British ' innovation of combined arms, saying it won them the War. No mention of the fact it was Monash who invented it, and Monash and a Canadian General [ insulting of me to forget his name, I know, but I don't want to get it wrong.] who organised the push in 1917/18, with Canadian and Australian troops spearheading the offensive. No offence to the rest of the ' British ' and Commonwealth troops who fought and died for Britain.

It was the Australians who advanced up through the retreating Brits at Villers-Bretonneaux and stopped the German assault.

Colonel Blimps and associated flag wavers and bugle blowers should take note that the only war Australians fought in in defence of Australia was in the South Pacific theatre in 1942-43. All other wars in which Australians fought and died were someone else's war.

Originally Posted by bob10

I have to point out the RAN LHD's are fully operational, and have been for some time. The problem with the pods has been sorted, and pods around the World have no more problems than conventionally powered ships. All new ships and submarines have teething problems, as indicated by the RN's first Astute submarine still sitting alongside, not fully operational, while follow on boats have learned from that and are travelling well. My only reservation about the LHD's is, they would have to have the best defensive armament available, because they a big slab sided block of flats, you couldn't miss them.

Bob, those propulsion systems are complex and by the Law of Colonel Murphy USAAC will have problems simply due to complexity and operating in a hostile environment (salt water). What is wrong with a large powerful modern engine? Have a look at the eight E class container vessels built for Maersk Line. Over 120,000 tons, 13,500 to 15,000 TEU containers, cruise 20+ knots, single diesel engine and shaft, 109,000 horsepower. Then note how the yard in Copenhagen builds them in months. We take years to build small warships.