Future Carrier (Including Costs)
......
I'd say you're on the money there Davef........... Are there any Merlins based in Scotland these days ?
I would guess the cost of a Merlin per flying hour way exceeds the total discounted fleet lease/purchase cost of a Galaxy (Ford that is, not Lockheed) ..... Does anyone know if the offending vehicle has RN plates or is it civvie DVLA registered ?
BTW the ships gone 'stealf'
..........
(I did see a Merlin approaching her late yesterday afternoon)
I would guess the cost of a Merlin per flying hour way exceeds the total discounted fleet lease/purchase cost of a Galaxy (Ford that is, not Lockheed) ..... Does anyone know if the offending vehicle has RN plates or is it civvie DVLA registered ?
BTW the ships gone 'stealf'
..........
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: avro country
Age: 72
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...reported-crew/
Navy captain Nick Cooke-Priest was allowing wife to use ship's car before he was reported by own crew
The RN has been handling this situation with unbelievable clumsiness.
But if indeed he was "..reported by his own crew", I can see the ship getting a reputation as being an 'unhappy ship'.
But if indeed he was "..reported by his own crew", I can see the ship getting a reputation as being an 'unhappy ship'.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,755
Received 2,740 Likes
on
1,166 Posts
Well done to the crew to stand up to this sort of thing, assuming the vehicle was a service provided vehicle for service use would she actually have had a services licence whatever it is called these days or insurance to drive it?
I agree with the handling of this too, poor, he should have been removed straight away and as for sailing it south his second in command should have been elected to the task if a replacement couldn't be found, if the second in command isn't deemed competent enough to do this by those further up the food chain, then he shouldn't be in the job.
i remember a certain Station Commanders wife in the past. who was driving her husbands car to collect him with the pennant on and was insisting on being saluted, she was soon put right on the subject.
..
I agree with the handling of this too, poor, he should have been removed straight away and as for sailing it south his second in command should have been elected to the task if a replacement couldn't be found, if the second in command isn't deemed competent enough to do this by those further up the food chain, then he shouldn't be in the job.
i remember a certain Station Commanders wife in the past. who was driving her husbands car to collect him with the pennant on and was insisting on being saluted, she was soon put right on the subject.
..
Last edited by NutLoose; 24th May 2019 at 07:34.
I once (decades ago) had to pick up a MSO (Mildly Senior Officer) one evening from a train station. Finally, in desperation, used my beat-up car. "Where's the MT?". Wearily, my response "Out of hours, Sir, and you are only a MSO!" did not go down well. I silenced further grumbling by suggesting "Well, there's always a bus out to camp! Next one in about 3 hours!". How many rules that trip broke I'd hate to think - including the latest barking "union rule" governing out-of-hours use (or not!) of MT......
Hot 'n' High wrote:
I assume you meant a quiet word with the person suspected of using a service vehicle contrary to the rules?
One thought - why not equip such high profile 'company' vehicles with tracking devices which can send vehicle location, speed and time to whatever passes for MT Control these days? Many other fleet users have such systems.
I'd report it if it were illegal and ongoing after a quiet word!
One thought - why not equip such high profile 'company' vehicles with tracking devices which can send vehicle location, speed and time to whatever passes for MT Control these days? Many other fleet users have such systems.
They do. All service vehicles are GPS tracked. Possibly how he was found out...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lordflasheart
Does anyone know if the offending vehicle has RN plates or is it civvie DVLA registered ?
In the past, ship captains were loaned vehicles by Jaguar Land Rover but the agreement with the British manufacturer ended and the Ford Galaxy used by the Queen Elizabeth captain was paid for by the MoD
Update - Saturday 0900A
...
QE came past Dungeness an hour ago at a cracking 23kts, Now slowed to 18kts in traffic.
I wonder who's in charge ? Destination still showing as Portland.
..........
QE came past Dungeness an hour ago at a cracking 23kts, Now slowed to 18kts in traffic.
I wonder who's in charge ? Destination still showing as Portland.
..........
Well done to the crew to stand up to this sort of thing, assuming the vehicle was a service provided vehicle for service use would she actually have had a services licence whatever it is called these days or insurance to drive it?
I agree with the handling of this too, poor, he should have been removed straight away and as for sailing it south his second in command should have been elected to the task if a replacement couldn't be found, if the second in command isn't deemed competent enough to do this by those further up the food chain, then he shouldn't be in the job.
i remember a certain Station Commanders wife in the past. who was driving her husbands car to collect him with the pennant on and was insisting on being saluted, she was soon put right on the subject.
I agree with the handling of this too, poor, he should have been removed straight away and as for sailing it south his second in command should have been elected to the task if a replacement couldn't be found, if the second in command isn't deemed competent enough to do this by those further up the food chain, then he shouldn't be in the job.
i remember a certain Station Commanders wife in the past. who was driving her husbands car to collect him with the pennant on and was insisting on being saluted, she was soon put right on the subject.
Taking up Nutty's point about the command of QUEEN ELIZABETH, the Executive Officer should indeed be able to take over temporary command, but as alluded to earlier, the best replacement at least in the short term is clearly the incoming Captain of PRINCE OF WALES.
Jack
Looks like the MoD needs to sort out its service vehicle policy and do so rather quickly. This event and a few significant others have caused confusion and consternation. There are many service personnel who, by the nature of their role and duties, are required to be on-call at all times (except on leave) and must only be driving service vehicles due to the equipment carried or their role. It was understood that COs had broad powers to determine who fell into such categories and that these vehicles would inevitably be used for domestic travel, including things like taking kids to school, in order to meet the out-of-hours response times.
A number of VSOs are also required to respond out-of-hours and are issued with a vehicle and sometimes a dedicated driver. Some even require CPOs at all times when traveling in their area, including any domestic journeys involving their family. There has also been a well-established practice of using MoD vehicles for carriage of civilians and family members (medical, compassionate, repatriation et al) but these too have fallen foul of contradictory policy. Apparently the least helpful document is an AGAI that effectively prohibits vehicles from any domestic use or carriage of civilians. Further confusion exists as the AGAI is, by its name, an army document under army control. Some in the MoD think the AGAI applies equally to all 3 services and MoD civil servants; the RAF and the RN are unclear but some of their documents also point at the AGAI. Of course, with the increasing number of joint establishments the level of confusion increases.
Whilst we might smile of the thought of a VSO being punished for carrying his spouse in his vehicle as a formal +1 to whatever dinner, royal event, baby kissing, grin-and-grip et al, it is having an effect on the lowest ranks and their families - often at the worst of times. I have come across recent examples where family members have been kicked-out of service ambulances, or left abandoned during a repatriation of wounded, injured or sick. The army even directed that family members could not travel on service MT even when participating on a families course for the most seriously injured service personnel as part of their rolling-recovery programme. In that particular case a service charity had to step in and hire vehicles to move families around as a group.
Any remaining command flexibility in MT rules will have evaporated with this public sacking. The tension between the desire to reduce service family accommodation and encourage personnel to live out whilst maintaining an ever-increasing 'informal' out-of-hours commitments may have turned into a loud 'snap'. Moreover, even simple gestures of sending the CO's car to pick-up an injured serviceman's wife will be lost under the crunch of bureaucracy. Those that require weapons, crypto, controlled drugs etc when out-of-hours will face one set of orders that say 'service vehicle only' with another one that effectively says that the issued service vehicle has to stay at work.
I left the Service recently but joined at a time where the majority lived on base, when families could use the medical centre, service youth clubs had MT support, families could fly on MoD aircraft as indulgence passengers and the CO could do whatever he liked with his car and driver unless he was on formal leave. Now just moving civilian passengers across the pan at Brize on an MT coach for their flight to the Falklands has become a prohibited use of MT that the current CO can no longer ignore.
As a final point, whilst we all like to throw stones at VSOs anyone on the MoD system can view their diaries and see how crushing their diaries are by day and by night. Some of these will be the same VSOs dragged-in when a civilian airliner enters UK airspace and causes a big thinks bubble, or when a counter-terrorism response is needed. A CO can be recalled to his ship or command at any time; deprive them of a vehicle or a driver then the 'any time' bit has to be removed too. No doubt the PM will be returning from her constituency home this weekend by driving her own car back to Downing Street...
A number of VSOs are also required to respond out-of-hours and are issued with a vehicle and sometimes a dedicated driver. Some even require CPOs at all times when traveling in their area, including any domestic journeys involving their family. There has also been a well-established practice of using MoD vehicles for carriage of civilians and family members (medical, compassionate, repatriation et al) but these too have fallen foul of contradictory policy. Apparently the least helpful document is an AGAI that effectively prohibits vehicles from any domestic use or carriage of civilians. Further confusion exists as the AGAI is, by its name, an army document under army control. Some in the MoD think the AGAI applies equally to all 3 services and MoD civil servants; the RAF and the RN are unclear but some of their documents also point at the AGAI. Of course, with the increasing number of joint establishments the level of confusion increases.
Whilst we might smile of the thought of a VSO being punished for carrying his spouse in his vehicle as a formal +1 to whatever dinner, royal event, baby kissing, grin-and-grip et al, it is having an effect on the lowest ranks and their families - often at the worst of times. I have come across recent examples where family members have been kicked-out of service ambulances, or left abandoned during a repatriation of wounded, injured or sick. The army even directed that family members could not travel on service MT even when participating on a families course for the most seriously injured service personnel as part of their rolling-recovery programme. In that particular case a service charity had to step in and hire vehicles to move families around as a group.
Any remaining command flexibility in MT rules will have evaporated with this public sacking. The tension between the desire to reduce service family accommodation and encourage personnel to live out whilst maintaining an ever-increasing 'informal' out-of-hours commitments may have turned into a loud 'snap'. Moreover, even simple gestures of sending the CO's car to pick-up an injured serviceman's wife will be lost under the crunch of bureaucracy. Those that require weapons, crypto, controlled drugs etc when out-of-hours will face one set of orders that say 'service vehicle only' with another one that effectively says that the issued service vehicle has to stay at work.
I left the Service recently but joined at a time where the majority lived on base, when families could use the medical centre, service youth clubs had MT support, families could fly on MoD aircraft as indulgence passengers and the CO could do whatever he liked with his car and driver unless he was on formal leave. Now just moving civilian passengers across the pan at Brize on an MT coach for their flight to the Falklands has become a prohibited use of MT that the current CO can no longer ignore.
As a final point, whilst we all like to throw stones at VSOs anyone on the MoD system can view their diaries and see how crushing their diaries are by day and by night. Some of these will be the same VSOs dragged-in when a civilian airliner enters UK airspace and causes a big thinks bubble, or when a counter-terrorism response is needed. A CO can be recalled to his ship or command at any time; deprive them of a vehicle or a driver then the 'any time' bit has to be removed too. No doubt the PM will be returning from her constituency home this weekend by driving her own car back to Downing Street...
........
Thank you JTO - a nice dose of hard home-truth and common sense there.
HMS QE just entering Portsmouth Harbour 1730A - Sorry about the Portland duff gen earlier. - Ships Twitter had it all along.
.......
Thank you JTO - a nice dose of hard home-truth and common sense there.
HMS QE just entering Portsmouth Harbour 1730A - Sorry about the Portland duff gen earlier. - Ships Twitter had it all along.
.......
What the actual argument is here (quite apart from my earlier military humour re sand banks and bridges - please, do lighten up a bit) is (i) either the RN completely over-reacted over this or Nick, nice guy, (ii) stuffed up big time ...... orrrrrrr .... (iii) there's some agenda where Nick is a fall guy. That's the real question on PPRune. What is it? (i), (ii) or (iii)?
Just sayin', H 'n' H
Last edited by Hot 'n' High; 26th May 2019 at 09:12. Reason: Delete material to prevent thread drift! :-)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It strikes me, that this has been a PR disaster, OK the question of who drove the MOD vehicle and why, is on the face of it interesting. How much has been invested in a career for on the face of it, it all to be poured down the drain because of use of a vehicle.
More on the PR disaster, is why was a Merlin detached to transport a ship's captain from his ship to dry land, at a cost of what, when as I understand in the Queen Elizabeth has a number of ship's boats, the captain could be piped off the ship and instructed to drive the offending vehicle to an appropriate location to return it, saves a lot of money and embarrassment.
More on the PR disaster, is why was a Merlin detached to transport a ship's captain from his ship to dry land, at a cost of what, when as I understand in the Queen Elizabeth has a number of ship's boats, the captain could be piped off the ship and instructed to drive the offending vehicle to an appropriate location to return it, saves a lot of money and embarrassment.
Thread Starter
it seems I am not the only person to be frustrated by a boss who does not understand technology. Nor are we the only navy to suffer political retards:
Trump’s obsession with steam sets up collision with US Navy
US President Donald Trump is ratcheting up the pressure on the US Navy to return to the days of steam-powered catapults for launching jets from aircraft carriers – a multibillion-dollar shift that could take nearly two decades to achieve and would likely spur a clash with Congress.
Trump has spent two years criticising the US Navy's decision to switch to an electromagnetic launch system for its newest class of aircraft carriers, citing delays in rolling out the technology and complaining that “you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out”.
Perhaps he meant Micheal Faraday?
I was surprised about eighteen months ago when I heard someone claim that if we had gone for CTOL and F/A-18 when would have regenerated Carrier Strike by 2017. He did not say why he thought that. Political dithering delayed the construction, political interference caused no end of problems, and political toxicity made it harder to mitigate against the consequences.
Trump’s obsession with steam sets up collision with US Navy
US President Donald Trump is ratcheting up the pressure on the US Navy to return to the days of steam-powered catapults for launching jets from aircraft carriers – a multibillion-dollar shift that could take nearly two decades to achieve and would likely spur a clash with Congress.
Trump has spent two years criticising the US Navy's decision to switch to an electromagnetic launch system for its newest class of aircraft carriers, citing delays in rolling out the technology and complaining that “you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out”.
Perhaps he meant Micheal Faraday?
I was surprised about eighteen months ago when I heard someone claim that if we had gone for CTOL and F/A-18 when would have regenerated Carrier Strike by 2017. He did not say why he thought that. Political dithering delayed the construction, political interference caused no end of problems, and political toxicity made it harder to mitigate against the consequences.
Thread Starter
Some months ago, the Human Security Centre published a report on threats to NATO's Northern Flank, and one of the things it recommended was that:
The UK’s Royal Navy should take the lead in any early effort to counter offensive Russian submarine operations via a multi-national task group centred upon one of the new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.
Remember the embarked Merlin ASW helicopters offer a task group the capability for 24/7 dipping....
Now MOD has announced that we will be making one of the carriers available to NATO.
Sea Control and things like defence of amphibious forces or logistics shipping against submarine, air, and surface threats are very much back on the agenda as much as power projection.
NATO’s ‘Readiness Initiative’ aims to improve the readiness of the alliance’s forces to deploy and move within Europe and across the Atlantic to safeguard international security. The UK will look to make its aircraft carrier a key part of those plans as the country continues to play a leading role in the alliance which has been the cornerstone of its defence for 70 years.
On that note: Qinetiq will provide a new ASW training capability:
Significantly, the new training service supports the Royal Navy’s forthcoming introduction of Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers and will increase ASW training opportunities while also maximising operational deployment of the submarine fleet. Is it significant that it specifically mentions the carriers?
The UK’s Royal Navy should take the lead in any early effort to counter offensive Russian submarine operations via a multi-national task group centred upon one of the new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.
Remember the embarked Merlin ASW helicopters offer a task group the capability for 24/7 dipping....
Now MOD has announced that we will be making one of the carriers available to NATO.
Sea Control and things like defence of amphibious forces or logistics shipping against submarine, air, and surface threats are very much back on the agenda as much as power projection.
NATO’s ‘Readiness Initiative’ aims to improve the readiness of the alliance’s forces to deploy and move within Europe and across the Atlantic to safeguard international security. The UK will look to make its aircraft carrier a key part of those plans as the country continues to play a leading role in the alliance which has been the cornerstone of its defence for 70 years.
On that note: Qinetiq will provide a new ASW training capability:
Significantly, the new training service supports the Royal Navy’s forthcoming introduction of Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers and will increase ASW training opportunities while also maximising operational deployment of the submarine fleet. Is it significant that it specifically mentions the carriers?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 5th Jun 2019 at 21:28.
"Is it significant that it specifically mentions the carriers?"
No - and I can't imagine the shelf life of a 65000 ASW ship in close proximity to a Russian Submarine...........
No - and I can't imagine the shelf life of a 65000 ASW ship in close proximity to a Russian Submarine...........