An Awesome Sight Of Transport

Captain Bunny · **An Awesome Sight Of Transport -** 12-08-2002, 06:38 PM

"The Royal Navy warship HMS Nottingham, which ran into rocks off Australia's east coast earlier this year, has arrived in Portsmouth Harbour.
The type-42 destroyer hit rocks and holed her hull at Lord Howe Island in July and has been transported back to UK waters on the heavy lifting ship, MV Swan.

She was gently ushered, stern first, into the harbour on Sunday afternoon, where she is due to undergo £26m worth of repair work.

Defence Procurement Minister Lord Bach has said the work at the Portsmouth naval base could take up to 18 months.

The warship's future had been in doubt after the accident, which nearly sank her and caused extensive damage.

HMS Nottingham had undergone an extensive refit programme in 1999 at a cost of £55m, which extended her operational life to 2012.

A full repair was therefore considered the most cost effective solution by the Ministry of Defence.

The destroyer HMS Glasgow has been "reactivated" to cover for Nottingham while the repairs take place.

HMS Nottingham is a batch two destroyer.

Ship costs
Built 1978-1980 - £115m
Refit 1999-2000 - £55m
Repairs 2002 - £26m

A full board of inquiry into the circumstances of the running aground at Lord Howe Island, 200 miles off the coast of Australia, has yet to report its findings.

The warship's captain Commander Richard Farrington has yet to find out whether or not he faces a court martial over the incident.

The ship tore a 160ft gash in her hull on a submerged but well-charted rock in the Tasman Sea on 7 July this year.

A total of 253 crew were on a routine trip from Cairns, in Queensland, to Wellington, in New Zealand, when water flooded five compartments of the ship."

[img]http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38564000/jpg/_38564699_ship150.jpg[/img][img]http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38565000/jpg/_38565189_notts300.jpg[/img]
[img]http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38397000/gif/_38397619_warship_rescue_300inf.gif[/img]

geRV · 12-08-2002, 07:03 PM

lol what a dinky little ship, im actually suprised at how small it is. eek:

The "royal" (yeah right) navy certainly don't believe in the "bigger is better" philosophy.

Pfc.Green · 12-08-2002, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerard

lol what a dinky little ship, im actually suprised at how small it is. eek:

The "royal" (yeah right) navy certainly don't believe in the "bigger is better" philosophy.

destroyers are'nt supposed to be very large.

geRV · 12-08-2002, 07:39 PM

[quote="Pfc.Green":9a1ac]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerard

lol what a dinky little ship, im actually suprised at how small it is. eek:

The "royal" (yeah right) navy certainly don't believe in the "bigger is better" philosophy.

destroyers are'nt supposed to be very large.[/quote:9a1ac]

Didn't think they were supposed to be of circus midget sized proportions either. happy:

Ive seen destroyers a lot bigger than that though.

12-08-2002, 07:45 PM

they did the same thing with the U.S.S. Cole a few years ago.

Arkan · 12-08-2002, 08:03 PM

Wow, that salvage ship is one neat piece of machinery! It must be awsome to see it in person!

Bazooka_Joe · 12-09-2002, 12:32 PM

Screw the boat that sunk, look at the big red one thats carrying it! It's like those russian dolls, a boat inside of a boat! heh

pest · 12-09-2002, 12:36 PM

Yeah, the transport ship is cool. A destroyer, in todays navy, only needs to be big enough to carry anti-air hardware. Big ships, other than carriers, dont server much purpose anymore.