Pompey MP: "RN must come clean over future of HMS Endurance"

Re: Pompey MP: "RN must come clean over future of HMS Endura

I'd have thought this was an MOD responsibility - ultimately the Treasury, considering they control the Defence funding ?

Can anyone say what use a Survey ship (Scott, no icebreaker bow, no helos) is if it can't survey in icebound waters ? :?:
Re: Pompey MP: "RN must come clean over future of HMS Endura

If that's a serious question then, as an ex-Endurance officer I'll attempt a serious answer.

Scott is highly specialised for deep bathymetric ocean surveying.

Echo and Enterprise are sort of go-anywhere-except-ice.

The environment down there is just so odd that the sort of ship you need for the work is not something that you could use elsewhere- and vice versa.

Eg, the heating is bloody good but the corollary is there is no air conditioning- meaning that every time it crosses the Equator you've got half the ship's company sleeping on deck every night. Similarly, it's very low geared for forcing its way through ice but can't charge around like a greyhound elsewhere. There again, your normal buff funnel line can charge about but not penetrate the ice.

Horses for courses really.
Re: Pompey MP: "RN must come clean over future of HMS Endura

Thanks K_S,

It was a genuine question.

I also remember the three 'E' boats from my Chatham days, as well as the Bulldog & Beagle, as they were tenders to Pembroke, and I used to audit their accounts on occasions.



War Hero
As an 'also ex-Endurance Officer' I'll chip in with my ten pennorth.

Endurance is a class 1A1 Icebreaker. Her hull and propulsion machinery is specifically configured for working the polar regions, although as Polar Circle, she was designed to come out of Norway with a handfull of scientists and crew, turn right up to the North Pole, tow a sledful of research gear about and come back home in about three months. Over the past twenty years, everyone has had a stab at 'upgrading' a ship never designed to upgrade, so that now you have almost four times the designed manpower on board (kipping in some cases three up in cabins designed for one plus one guest) and a whole plethora of bolt ons, add ons and rabbit runs. Kinross is absolutely correct - transit through the tropics is a massive headache, not only because the ship isn't designed to be in that temperature, but because the machinery misbehaves incredibly and each transit takes just a little bit more out of the ship. In recent years more bolt ons and add ons have been embarked to counter this - only for people on high to max out the ships company even more/bring on 'guests' and other supernumaries to cancel out any effort gained.

The future for Endurance? I've heard it all, and from some people placed very well in high places. I'll not hazard a guess, because you all know as well as I do that 'Change is the new Steady Stste'. Suffice to say, from what I knew about it and know about it now, to get it seaworthy and above all 'safe' (moot point here, readers) it should cost a lot more than some of the prices I hear they are planning to spend. As I have said to many on there who would listen, investment pays dividends in the long run and you really do get what you pay for. We are also still trying to backfill woeful shortages out in the sandpit, so don't expect work to start TOO soon.

But on the other hand, this chuff is coming from the Portsmouth Evening News, and their local rent-a-quote MP. I have a mildly famous* e-mail castigating the News about one of their stories - don't think the RN always puts up with their b*llocks!!!

*If you're a PRO, who was in Pompey about 5 years ago, and were in some way tenuously connected to the story in question. So perhaps mildly famous between me and my Boss!!!

Similar threads

New Posts