BBC reporting Kinloss Nimrod going to aid of sub.
Why would they send the B-team (120 or 201), when 206 (the A-team) are available? If 206 need more crew, my Dad's up for it, he says, and it's only 60 years since he first joined them......
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is being reported that it's an Upholder that was handed over to the Canadians on Saturday.
It is 100 miles NW of Ireland with an electrical fault. Fire has apparently swept through the submarine with some crew members needing emergency treatment for smoke.
A Nimrod and Sea King are enroute the area and HMS Montrose is also aiding i believe.
Razor
It is 100 miles NW of Ireland with an electrical fault. Fire has apparently swept through the submarine with some crew members needing emergency treatment for smoke.
A Nimrod and Sea King are enroute the area and HMS Montrose is also aiding i believe.
Razor
Yes, it's one of the splendidly reliable Upholders, now named HMCS Chicoutimi.
As well as the Nimrod, HMS Montrose is on the way, along with RFA Wave Knight.
Edit - Ah. Beaten to it!
As well as the Nimrod, HMS Montrose is on the way, along with RFA Wave Knight.
Edit - Ah. Beaten to it!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update:-
RAF Valley Sea King is being re-tasked and is asked to go enroute to Ronaldsway, IOM and await tasking via landline.
RAF Wattisham Sea King is enroute to Lyneham with 2 divers onboard.
RN Sea King from Prestwick is currently at Ballykelly picking up portable radio gear for the Sub to use.
RAF Sea King from Chivenor is currently airborne from Lossiemouth and enroute. (bloody long way!)
The Nimrod has been asked to ask the submarine the status of the steerage, water tight integrity and how many people onboard.
Razor
RAF Valley Sea King is being re-tasked and is asked to go enroute to Ronaldsway, IOM and await tasking via landline.
RAF Wattisham Sea King is enroute to Lyneham with 2 divers onboard.
RN Sea King from Prestwick is currently at Ballykelly picking up portable radio gear for the Sub to use.
RAF Sea King from Chivenor is currently airborne from Lossiemouth and enroute. (bloody long way!)
The Nimrod has been asked to ask the submarine the status of the steerage, water tight integrity and how many people onboard.
Razor
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
This wouldn't be the same HMS Upholder that BWoS turned into a harbour queen to get the other three going would it? The same one the Canadians bitched about as being of sub-standard quality only last week and demanding compensation? Oh it is!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Especially like the fact that BAE Systems chose today to announce an $8.6 million support contract for the class.
Edited in light of the news of a fatality - I/C
Edited in light of the news of a fatality - I/C
Last edited by Ian Corrigible; 6th Oct 2004 at 22:59.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nautical tradition says that you can't change a ship's (or presumably a boat's) luck by changing its name. Upholder is nearly thirty years old, what would one expect of a vessel of such antiquity?
Edited to say that I stand corrected below by Mad_Mark. Launched in 1983 delivered in 1986, so that should read 'nearly 20 years old', not 30 - although Upholder was mothballed from 1993. The original design dates back to 1973 and used railway locomotive diesel engines to keep costs down. These engines were not designed or capable of being started or stopped rapidly. Meanwhile the electric motors were prone to exploding into flames if put into reverse with forward speed remaining. To put it simply, once the boat was up to speed it was impossible to stop quickly - no brakes! These design deficiencies were the subject of modifications after entry into service so they presumably are not involved in this unfortunate incident that has cost one crew member his life.
Edited to say that I stand corrected below by Mad_Mark. Launched in 1983 delivered in 1986, so that should read 'nearly 20 years old', not 30 - although Upholder was mothballed from 1993. The original design dates back to 1973 and used railway locomotive diesel engines to keep costs down. These engines were not designed or capable of being started or stopped rapidly. Meanwhile the electric motors were prone to exploding into flames if put into reverse with forward speed remaining. To put it simply, once the boat was up to speed it was impossible to stop quickly - no brakes! These design deficiencies were the subject of modifications after entry into service so they presumably are not involved in this unfortunate incident that has cost one crew member his life.
Last edited by Blacksheep; 8th Oct 2004 at 05:04.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HMS Upholder
Laid down - Nov 83
Launched - Dec 86
Commissioned - Jun 90
Decommissioned - Apr 94
The Upholder Class was a victim, allegedly, of the 1993 Defence Review. In reality the MOD realised what a bag of s#!t they were and decided to get rid! In Apr 98 Canada agreed to lease-to-buy the 4 Upholder Class submarines from the UK (suckers
). The first, HMCS Victoria (ex-HMS Unseen), was delivered to Halifax in Oct 00.
Mad Mark!!!
Laid down - Nov 83
Launched - Dec 86
Commissioned - Jun 90
Decommissioned - Apr 94
The Upholder Class was a victim, allegedly, of the 1993 Defence Review. In reality the MOD realised what a bag of s#!t they were and decided to get rid! In Apr 98 Canada agreed to lease-to-buy the 4 Upholder Class submarines from the UK (suckers
). The first, HMCS Victoria (ex-HMS Unseen), was delivered to Halifax in Oct 00.Mad Mark!!!