RFA - Mothball

Burned Toast
10th November 2010, 12:36
It seems the RFA have decided to mothball three vessels and bring another back into service.

Ray

dab
10th November 2010, 13:28
Ray, Do you have the names of the vessels involved.

Burned Toast
10th November 2010, 13:51
Ray, Do you have the names of the vessels involved.

No I was just informed this morning, hopefully no redundancies, will post when I get more info.

Ray

Pat Thompson
10th November 2010, 15:49
Greetings,

It looks like it will be Fort Austin re-activated and Fort George, Bayleaf and one of the NEW bay boats out of service.

wigger
10th November 2010, 16:57
If Bayleaf goes, I wonder how much longer Orangeleaf will soldier on for?

the brit
10th November 2010, 17:16
just hope for the sake of the galley staff when FORT AUSTIN gets re-activated that the aft lift starboard side is in good working order, i remember many a time lugging 400lb of spuds up from the fridges and everything else we needed for the galley,due to out of service, although half way through we'd get a well deserved RAS in the crew bar. great ship, great times and great memories of my four trips on her. oh and then to find out that the lift up to the galley on the main deck itself was out of service.

N84C
20th November 2010, 00:07
The bay boat in question will be the largs bay all should be removed from service by april 2011

NickNZ
26th November 2010, 12:58
I have often wondered about their ...... suitability/effectiveness. Can anyone enlighten me. They (to me) look like cheap versions of the Bulwark/Albion, and have never felt they would be a big loss.
Can someone enlighten me?

Burned Toast
26th November 2010, 15:02
Fort George to be de-commissioned on the 9/10th,Dec at Liverpool. So I have been informed.

Ray

OLD STRAWBERRY
26th November 2010, 15:36
I think perhaps at least one "Leaf" will have to remain as FOST Tanker?.

Kinnie
26th November 2010, 17:41
The Galley Radio is wrong again. On 10 December, Fort George will be alongside in North Shields, holding a farewell reception.
Association Members may wangle an invitation HERE (http://www.rfa-association.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=325:rfg&catid=11:san&Itemid=46)

Kinnie
26th November 2010, 17:45
I have often wondered about their ...... suitability/effectiveness. Can anyone enlighten me. They (to me) look like cheap versions of the Bulwark/Albion, and have never felt they would be a big loss.
Can someone enlighten me?

They are considerably larger replacements for the LSLs and have this capability - Military Lift Troops: 356 Landing Craft: 2 x LCPV or 1 x LCU Mk10 Mexeflotes (powered rafts): 2 (Transported fixed to hull sides) Vehicle deck: Approx 1200 linear metres
Aviation facilities: Chinook capable flight deck Armament: Self defence capability Military communications package. -
Without them our Amphib capability would be seriously reduced.
So whats not to like?
As it is the plan appears to be to reduce from the capability of landing a Brigade to a single Commando Group which is yet more folly on a par with the Carrier/Harrier farce.

Burned Toast
26th November 2010, 19:32
The Galley Radio is wrong again. On 10 December, Fort George will be alongside in North Shields, holding a farewell reception.
Association Members may wangle an invitation HERE (http://www.rfa-association.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=325:rfg&catid=11:san&Itemid=46)

Already have two passes, Thanks anyway(Pint)

Ray(Pint)(Pint)

wigger
26th November 2010, 19:33
The Bays just get a bit of flack because they 'don't look very nice' and some people are hung up on appearance these days. Bearing in mind they replaced the old Sirs...could we have done without them? I think not!

Mick Spear
26th November 2010, 20:10
I have often wondered about their ...... suitability/effectiveness. Can anyone enlighten me. They (to me) look like cheap versions of the Bulwark/Albion, and have never felt they would be a big loss.
Can someone enlighten me?

They are very capable ships, so capable the RN tried extremely hard to man them. Guess cost and was the main reason why the RN did not get their wish?
As an example the ME plant on the Bay boats is roughly the same size as Albion and Bulwark. The RFA mans that plant with 18 the RN with 65. RN salaries are currently higher when comparing stripe for stripe. I will leave it at that.
Mick S

GBXZ
26th November 2010, 22:13
Will the ships be laid up or will they be placed on the disposal list? Largs Bay would be an attractive proposition to a developing navy or an established service such as Australia.

Kinnie
26th November 2010, 22:14
The word is disposal.

canon1
1st December 2010, 01:02
It seems the RFA have decided to mothball three vessels and bring another back into service.

Ray
If you check the link below you will see some pretty drastic 'mothballing' going on at the Mersey docks. I was told this was Grey Rover by someone who came up and said he served on her, and the one behind was Black Rover. He said they were 'pigs' and the new double skinned FAs were much better. A week or so later others arrived for breaking.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41272196@N02/4435460775/in/set-72157622632619344/

Purser52
1st December 2010, 10:31
I'm not sure I would agree the description "pigs" - my memory is the Rover boats (I served in Black Rover) were popular appointments. Whilst the ship being broken in the foreground is indeed Grey Rover, the one behind her is (was?) Sir Percivale. Black Rover soldiers on as does Gold Rover as evidenced elsewhere on this site

Kinnie
1st December 2010, 14:10
And whatever arrived "a week or so later" wasn't for breaking. This thread is fast becoming full of ill-informed comment.

George.GM
1st December 2010, 14:46
Grey Rover arrived in the Mersey for breaking in October 2009. Sir Percivale in November 2009.
Black Rover is alive and well and based in the Falklands.
Gold Rover is in refit in Liverpool. (She never served in the Falklands despite what Flikr think)
Blue Rover is the only Rover class tanker to have served there. She is still going
strong with the Portuguese Navy.
The other one, Green, is with the Indonesian Navy.
Apart from the Ness class, these were the best ships I served in in the RFA and
I had three (Green, Grey and Blue).
I really do think that people should check their facts before posting on this site.
You never know, someone might believe the rubbish that is fired in this direction.

blobbybluey
1st December 2010, 15:33
The word is disposal.

Oooooooo Get You, kaiako(Applause)

Burned Toast
1st December 2010, 20:16
Oooooooo Get You, kaiako(Applause)


Never mind him, he does give you a chuckle(Applause)(Applause)

canon1
1st December 2010, 22:34
Grey Rover arrived in the Mersey for breaking in October 2009. Sir Percivale in November 2009.
Black Rover is alive and well and based in the Falklands.
Gold Rover is in refit in Liverpool. (She never served in the Falklands despite what Flikr think)
Blue Rover is the only Rover class tanker to have served there. She is still going
strong with the Portuguese Navy.
The other one, Green, is with the Indonesian Navy.
Apart from the Ness class, these were the best ships I served in in the RFA and
I had three (Green, Grey and Blue).
I really do think that people should check their facts before posting on this site.
You never know, someone might believe the rubbish that is fired in this direction.

Thanks for the information, and delivered in such a friendly manner too! However, if you had read the post, you will have noticed that I said I had been approached by a man, at the dock, who said he had served on RFAs (a little like you have just claimed) and as with you, I took him at his word. He gave me the rest of the information which I passed on in good faith.
Personally I have no knowledge of RFAs and joined this site to post some of the many photos left by my grandfather, b.1899 and served in the merchant navy all his life. As a Shetlander based in Aberdeen much of his time was with Ben Line, he died on board 1960, and is buried in Genoa. There are even 1950s christmas menus from the Ben Alder (with photos) when families were invited to eat on board whist docked at hull.
I thought they may be of interest to some forum members. However, I have no way of checking that any of the comments, or the names, he wrote on them, will pass your accuracy requirements. As I have no desire to offend you further they can stay in his box, and I will resign from this forum. Who is a clever boy now then!

Billieboy
2nd December 2010, 06:54
C'mon canon1, no need to quit, have you seen the marine paintings in the Gallery?

Welcome aboard, count to ten and have another look around. I'm sure that you will find lots to interest you.

Kinnie
2nd December 2010, 09:37
Never mind him, he does give you a chuckle(Applause)(Applause)

At least he checks his facts and doesn't spread rumours.[=P]

Kinnie
2nd December 2010, 09:41
Thanks for the information, and delivered in such a friendly manner too! However, if you had read the post, you will have noticed that I said I had been approached by a man, at the dock, who said he had served on RFAs (a little like you have just claimed) and as with you, I took him at his word. He gave me the rest of the information which I passed on in good faith.
Personally I have no knowledge of RFAs and joined this site to post some of the many photos left by my grandfather, b.1899 and served in the merchant navy all his life. As a Shetlander based in Aberdeen much of his time was with Ben Line, he died on board 1960, and is buried in Genoa. There are even 1950s christmas menus from the Ben Alder (with photos) when families were invited to eat on board whist docked at hull.
I thought they may be of interest to some forum members. However, I have no way of checking that any of the comments, or the names, he wrote on them, will pass your accuracy requirements. As I have no desire to offend you further they can stay in his box, and I will resign from this forum. Who is a clever boy now then!

No need to be so precious. Perhaps best to stick to what you know and what will be of interest instead of repeating inaccurate and out of date tittle tattle.
At least not in this forum. There are others where such stuff is more acceptable.

Burned Toast
2nd December 2010, 15:40
No need to be so precious. Perhaps best to stick to what you know and what will be of interest instead of repeating inaccurate and out of date tittle tattle.
At least not in this forum. There are others where such stuff is more acceptable.

Maybe another BD(Applause)(Applause)

boulton
2nd January 2011, 21:29
Greetings,

It looks like it will be Fort Austin re-activated, and Fort George, Bayleaf and one of the NEW bay boats out of service.

Before I start writing to the Government to complain and ask them to provide an answer . . . can someone please try to explain to me the rational - if there is any?! (EEK)

. . . why such a new, efficient and flexible ship such as Fort George should be taken out of service, when both the older, more (manpower) demanding and single role Fort Rosalie and Fort Austin, are to continue in service ?! :(

Note: Although both class of ship require a crew of 134/134 RFA/civilian stores staff, those on the older, more (manpower) demanding ships, ONLY provide a single role of supplying “dry stores”.

Name . . . . . . . . . . . . In service . . Weight . . . . . . Crew

FLEET SUPPORT STORES SHIP RFA (AFS)
“The role of these ships if to replenish RN warships with dry stores such as food, spare parts and ammunition while underway”.
Note: Dry stores capacity of 13,500 cubic meters.

Fort Rosalie .. A385 . . . 1978 . . . . . . 23,384 tonnes . . ( 105 RFA plus
Fort Austin . . A386 . . . 1979 . . . . . . 23,384 tonnes . . ( 30 civilian stores staff

AUXILIARY OILER REPLENISHMENT RFA (AOR)
“These two ships combine the functions of fleet oilers and store ships . . .”
Note: Dry stores capacity of (only) 3,000 cubic meters - PLUS - POL capacity of 10,000 tonnes.

Fort Victoria .. A387 . . . 1994 . . . . . . 34,000 tonnes . . ( 134 of which 95 RFA.
Fort George . . A388 . . . 1994 . . . . . . 34,000 tonnes . . ( 90 RN air group (as required)

I understand that the Fort Victoria and Fort George were the first two of a planned class of six. The class were “ . . . planned to support deep ocean submarine hunting operations conducted by (a far more basic) Type 23 Frigate”.

. . . The Type 23 Frigate originally having been planned as an Anti-Submarine Frigate, being nothing more than a “tug” for the towed sonar - with not even any anti-air defence/strike capability - the “mother-ships” Fort Victoria and Fort George being intended to provide area-air-defence, having been “designed to carry the same Sea wolf GWS26 system (subsequently) fitted to the Type 23” itself, when it metamorphosed into a General Purpose Frigate.

Quotations from: “SHIPS, AIRCRAFT AND MISSILES OF THE ROYAL NAVY & ROYAL MARINES” Publication CP38 JANUARY 2004. Prepared by the Directorate of Naval Recruiting.

Kinnie
11th January 2011, 10:27
Incredible as it now seems 14 AORs were planned at one time! Complements change over time, so I wouldnt put too much faith in your quoted figures and solid AOR capacity is quoted on the official website as 5700m3. And they are hardly new.

The only logic I can come up with is that there are new tankers in the pipeline (orders later this year?), so the maximum solid capacity is being retained.

slick
11th January 2011, 15:55
All,
The RN will need the RFA more than ever if as the Brazillian's and Uruguayan's close their ports to visiting RN Warships other SA Countries join in the anti colonial blockade.

Yours aye,


slick

craigiemitch
11th January 2011, 17:36
In regards to the fort boat question by "Boulton" we stil need to remember that the New forts are still only single hulled tankers and will not be fit for task in the next few years. We are already having seeing changes in the certification procedure which will not last for ever making these new Forts basically the same as the old Forts in the sense of them being able to carry fuel in the future. Fort George will most likely be sold with Ark Royal in some kind of deal i think.
Does any one know what the Plans For Largs Bay are going to be?

Kinnie
11th January 2011, 21:10
Disposal to the highest bidder no doubt.
As far as I can see the new certification for single hulled tankers will last as long as anyone wants it to.

LouisB
11th June 2011, 22:07
Thanks for the information, and delivered in such a friendly manner too! However, if you had read the post, you will have noticed that I said I had been approached by a man, at the dock, who said he had served on RFAs (a little like you have just claimed) and as with you, I took him at his word. He gave me the rest of the information which I passed on in good faith.
Personally I have no knowledge of RFAs and joined this site to post some of the many photos left by my grandfather, b.1899 and served in the merchant navy all his life. As a Shetlander based in Aberdeen much of his time was with Ben Line, he died on board 1960, and is buried in Genoa. There are even 1950s christmas menus from the Ben Alder (with photos) when families were invited to eat on board whist docked at hull.
I thought they may be of interest to some forum members. However, I have no way of checking that any of the comments, or the names, he wrote on them, will pass your accuracy requirements. As I have no desire to offend you further they can stay in his box, and I will resign from this forum. Who is a clever boy now then!



Having been around when the 'Rovers' were being commissioned I think it's (from an engineers point of view) fair to say that they were a pain in the backside. I was in touch with several senior engineers who initially sailed on them (prior to re-engining) who stated that they were the worst vessels that they had ever sailed on - unheard of liner wear and ridiculous l.o. consumption etc etc etc.

I think it depends on what department a person is in that allows comments of a 'good' or 'bad' ship to be made. One CEO I spoke to bitterly regretted the day he had ever walked aboard a Rover. I personally did not serve aboard one of these vessels, there were however very bad reports with reference to the mechanical state of the newly built ships. (Sad)(Sad)



Dave C.
RFA 1965 - 1977

King Ratt
21st June 2011, 14:49
LouisB may agree with this statement. I had heard that when the Rover Class were being built, many Senior Engineers were very unhappy about the Ruston engines being fitted and said they were unsuitable for a seafaring role. The present Minister of Technology at that time, one Tony Wedgewood-Benn, refused to take the advice and the rest is history. Crossley Pielstick engines eventually replaced the Ruston engines after much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Correct me if I am wrong, DC.
Regards
Rab T

LouisB
30th June 2011, 20:47
LouisB may agree with this statement. I had heard that when the Rover Class were being built, many Senior Engineers were very unhappy about the Ruston engines being fitted and said they were unsuitable for a seafaring role. The present Minister of Technology at that time, one Tony Wedgewood-Benn, refused to take the advice and the rest is history. Crossley Pielstick engines eventually replaced the Ruston engines after much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Correct me if I am wrong, DC.
Regards
Rab T

That's exactly correct Rab. Although a long time ago, the facts as related stick in my memory. The hours worked trying to get the Rustons up to scratch nearly broke several people that were personally known to me.(Ouch)

Hope your keeping well.

D.C.

King Ratt
30th June 2011, 21:55
For Louis B. Yes, keeping well thanks. Recently celebrated the three score years plus ten but take heart, 70 is 21, in Celsius.
Take care DC.

Rab T

LouisB
1st July 2011, 00:35
For Rab,

Also 70 in 12 months - thanks for the calorific tip, hadn't thought of that one!
You've given me new hope. :)

73's