A really stupid question..ARK ROYAL

WestWittering

WestWittering

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 May 2012
Messages
1,077
Location
West Wittering
Visit site
Feel free to put me on any ignore lists as I am becoming somewhat of a prolific poster this morning...

On the basis that HMG have decided to scrap the ARK ROYAL and are only going to get a few million quid for her, what is to stop a squillionaire from buying her and kitting her out. Then for about £50 mill, you could really have the biggest motor yacht in the world NO question....

Just wondering....

And yes, I know this is Scuttlebut, but I dont know them over on the MOBO side....


Di
 
WestWittering said:
Feel free to put me on any ignore lists as I am becoming somewhat of a prolific poster this morning...

On the basis that HMG have decided to scrap the ARK ROYAL and are only going to get a few million quid for her, what is to stop a squillionaire from buying her and kitting her out. Then for about £50 mill, you could really have the biggest motor yacht in the world NO question....

Just wondering....

And yes, I know this is Scuttlebut, but I dont know them over on the MOBO side....


Di
Click to expand...

The MoD Approved Purchasers list would stop you.

Even these days, the MoD are quite fussy about who they sell things like that too.

After all, you wouldn't want it sailing back up the Solent, this time fully armed with fundamentalists from Loonistan would you...
 
chanelyacht said:
The MoD Approved Purchasers list would stop you.

Even these days, the MoD are quite fussy about who they sell things like that too.

After all, you wouldn't want it sailing back up the Solent, this time fully armed with fundamentalists from Loonistan would you...
Click to expand...

Oh Lord!!! YES PLEASE!!!! That would clear out all the resident nutters!:D
 
Get real, guys

The Ark is almost certainly well past her use by date. All three of the class have had no end of bits welded on over the years, probably with no concern for corrosion prevention. I don't know what the design life of the hull was, but I would bet it has been passed, as with all major warships since the war ( think of her predecessor and her sister EAGLE). The engines are obsolete and eye wateringly thirsty, and the gearboxes are staggeringly complicated besides needing support from the hull to prevent distortion to the point of jamming the rotating elements. A 20,000 ton hull will need a lot of horsepower to move her at even a gentle cruising speed, so the necessary re-engining would entail major hull surgwry and cost a king's ransom.

Like all warships, she will be a rabbit warren of tiny compartments (apart from the hangar!) with dozens of pipe and cable runs coated with years of paint. And.....

She is FUGLY!!

Why would anyone with the intelligence to assemble the necessary fortune want to squander it on this kind of vanity project?
 
Valley Forge,

I take it you are aware a certain favourite sci-fi film was made on your namesake ? :)

As for the Ark Royal as a mobo yacht, I suspect even Russian ogliarchs couldn't stomach the fuel bill; she uses Olympus gas turbines, the same things which powered Concorde !

Admiral Sandy Woodwards' book '100 Days' mentions the problems changing gearboxes in the Arks' sistership HMS Invincible.

It would have made sense to keep the Ark Royal & Illustrious as 'Harrier Carriers' with Sea Harrier FA2 fighters & ground attack GR9's until the F-35B comes into service, but sense is obviously lacking in Camerfools' government...:rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6h8i8wrajA
 
It's be fun to root out all the hazardous substances like asbestos! Isn't this the reason most big ships go to Bangladesh?

It would have made sense to keep the Ark Royal & Illustrious as 'Harrier Carriers' with Sea Harrier FA2 fighters & ground attack GR9's until the F-35B comes into service, but sense is obviously lacking in Camerfools' government...
Click to expand...

100%, an ageing fleet is bound to be better than no fleet at all? "Don't worry chaps, we'll still have a few helicopters" :P
 
Last edited:
ValleyForge said:
But you could have your own floating golf course & one heck af a big jacuzzi installed ....
Click to expand...

It's already been done:D

aircraft-carrier-with-golf-course.jpg
 
Seajet said:
Valley Forge,

I take it you are aware a certain favourite sci-fi film was made on your namesake ? :)
Click to expand...

Indeed, another forumite 'Silent Running' enjoyed the film too. The opening couple of minutes is quite remarkable, even today. (edit - no its not - the one on utube is rubbish. The original was a bit like the start of red dwarf with a close up of Bruce Dearn doing the washing up then panning ouit by backing through the window - into space.)

It doesn't seem two minutes ago since Invincible' was being built at Barrow - she towered over the road bridge and was a fantastic sight. Seems kind of sad that they take so long to design & build, then their service life is so short - makes one feel quite old to see something so massive born & die. Same with the subs too, I had a walk through Trafalgar when she was being built and thats gone too. How time flies.
 
Last edited:
Seajet said:
As for the Ark Royal as a mobo yacht, I suspect even Russian ogliarchs couldn't stomach the fuel bill; she uses Olympus gas turbines, the same things which powered Concorde !
Click to expand...

I recall stooging around in a Type22 more years ago than I care to mention, on the "Tyne" engines. Once in a while the MEO was allowed to flash up the Olympus engines in addition, which made the ship take off like a rocket! 28 knots or more :D
 
Grumpybear said:
The Ark is almost certainly well past her use by date. All three of the class have had no end of bits welded on over the years, probably with no concern for corrosion prevention. I don't know what the design life of the hull was, but I would bet it has been passed, as with all major warships since the war ( think of her predecessor and her sister EAGLE). The engines are obsolete and eye wateringly thirsty, and the gearboxes are staggeringly complicated besides needing support from the hull to prevent distortion to the point of jamming the rotating elements. A 20,000 ton hull will need a lot of horsepower to move her at even a gentle cruising speed, so the necessary re-engining would entail major hull surgwry and cost a king's ransom.

Like all warships, she will be a rabbit warren of tiny compartments (apart from the hangar!) with dozens of pipe and cable runs coated with years of paint. And.....

She is FUGLY!!

Why would anyone with the intelligence to assemble the necessary fortune want to squander it on this kind of vanity project?
Click to expand...

They don't have to use the gas turbans, they also have diesel engines, Paxman Valentas. The same engines as the original HST. I remember them screaming out of Carlisle station. (HSTs, not "through deck cruisers" as the Govingment of the day called the Invincibles).
 
But I thought they'd taken the weapons, engines and all the useful machinery off Ark Royal?

I think she's just a floating steel shell ... ... ...
 
Cappen Boidseye said:
They don't have to use the gas turbans, they also have diesel engines, Paxman Valentas. The same engines as the original HST. I remember them screaming out of Carlisle station. (HSTs, not "through deck cruisers" as the Govingment of the day called the Invincibles).
Click to expand...

The diesels are just generating sets, not for propulsion. They are (were) driven by the thirsty marinised Olympus engines (derived from the units used in Concorde) via complicated gearing. These ships are, from the engineering aspect, three generations earlier than today's electrically propelled destroyers. In between came Spey/Tyne GT driven later batch Type 22 frigates then diesel electric with Spey boost (Type 23). If you wanted to re-engine the Ark, you would have to install cabling, switchgear, controls, motors etc in place of the existing power turbines and gearboxes. If the bottomless pockets of the MOD weren't plundered to upgrade their forty year old propulsion plants, I suggest that either the cost was considered prohibitive or other bits such as the hull plating, auxiliary systems etc were so clapped out as to make the idea pointless.

However, all you need is a billionaire with more money that the government and/or an even bigger ego.......
 
There was an idea to allow loaded Harriers or future F-35B's to land on carriers such as Ark Royal and the following larger ships, with very large fans on the bow to give the aircraft a windspeed to land into; I'd love to know what effect that would have on the ship's speed !
 
Grumpybear said:
The diesels are just generating sets, not for propulsion. They are (were) driven by the thirsty marinised Olympus engines (derived from the units used in Concorde) via complicated gearing. These ships are, from the engineering aspect, three generations earlier than today's electrically propelled destroyers. In between came Spey/Tyne GT driven later batch Type 22 frigates then diesel electric with Spey boost (Type 23). If you wanted to re-engine the Ark, you would have to install cabling, switchgear, controls, motors etc in place of the existing power turbines and gearboxes. If the bottomless pockets of the MOD weren't plundered to upgrade their forty year old propulsion plants, I suggest that either the cost was considered prohibitive or other bits such as the hull plating, auxiliary systems etc were so clapped out as to make the idea pointless.

However, all you need is a billionaire with more money that the government and/or an even bigger ego.......
Click to expand...

I stand corrected!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top