Sounds more like a pub!Tempest414 wrote:If we are going to this then maybe HMY Royal Oak
Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Well it will be a Gin clubtopman wrote:Sounds more like a pub!Tempest414 wrote:If we are going to this then maybe HMY Royal Oak
maybe HMY Boudica
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
In tribute to Faith, Hope and Charity, how about HMS Desperation as that is what the MoD / Government seems to be running on.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
It's not going to be a Royal yacht, it's going to be a national flagship for conducting diplomacy and trade related meetingsSW1 wrote:Assuming of course the newspaper is correct.RichardIC wrote:The fact that the idea of a new Royal Yacht has been flagged to The Queen, she's indicated she wants nothing to do with it, and Boris is pressing on regardless shows a staggering lack of respect for HRH.
It's the sort of thing only a screaming narcissist would do.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Now HMQ has indicated she wants none of it. Boris just presses on regardless giving it another title. Hugely disrespectful. And without the Royal association it loses all pretense of prestige. It's just a flash boat.dmereifield wrote:it's going to be a national flagship for conducting diplomacy and trade related meetings
And FFS, what even is a "national flagship"? The Royal Navy already has a flagship, and this is allegedly going to be a Royal Navy vessel.
This is just a vanity project for our lumpenly vainglorious PM and a handful of charlatan Tory backbenchers.
It's the worst kind of faux patriotism.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Not on the MoD's watch, they'll have to had that bit overTempest414 wrote:Well it will be a Gin clubtopman wrote:Sounds more like a pub!Tempest414 wrote:If we are going to this then maybe HMY Royal Oak
maybe HMY Boudica
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
FWIW, I think soft and hard power are two sides of the same coin, and HMS QE, which is the true "National Flagship", will be the best exponent of both over the next few decades.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
At the risk of repeating myself, anything "royal" involving gin has to be calledTempest414 wrote:Well it will be a Gin club
HMS Agincourt
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Clearly you have strong feelings about this, and a hotline to Her MajestyRichardIC wrote:Now HMQ has indicated she wants none of it. Boris just presses on regardless giving it another title. Hugely disrespectful. And without the Royal association it loses all pretense of prestige. It's just a flash boat.dmereifield wrote:it's going to be a national flagship for conducting diplomacy and trade related meetings
And FFS, what even is a "national flagship"? The Royal Navy already has a flagship, and this is allegedly going to be a Royal Navy vessel.
This is just a vanity project for our lumpenly vainglorious PM and a handful of charlatan Tory backbenchers.
It's the worst kind of faux patriotism.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
HMS Agincourt (S125) is already the name of the seventh and final Astute class submarine. She was originally to be called HMS Ajax.Caribbean wrote:At the risk of repeating myself, anything "royal" involving gin has to be called HMS AgincourtTempest414 wrote:Well it will be a Gin club
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
I'm afraid I have no hotline to Her Majesty, and if I did I wouldn't tell you about it.dmereifield wrote:
Clearly you have strong feelings about this, and a hotline to Her Majesty
However there is an acid test on this.
A few weeks ago Central Office was furiously briefing that the new "national flagship" was going to be a tribute to the Queen's consort. That was the justification. Which, given he had only passed away a very short while before, was incredibly insensitive.
If the Boris Party Boat isn't named after DoE it's fair to say Her Majesty wants none of it.
Thanks.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
I have no problem with a national flagship. If done with purpose and energy it will pay for itself, not only for business but as an ambassador (especially with a meaningful secondary role such as HADR / Hospital Ship). It will become part of the nation’s identity, like Britannia was, as the Red Arrows / Trooping the colours are.
Not making a statement about any commentators here, but what I do not understand is why the same people who fight for the right to make personal identity statements are the exact same ones that believe that the UK shouldn’t have one based on its history and shaped by its elected government.
Not making a statement about any commentators here, but what I do not understand is why the same people who fight for the right to make personal identity statements are the exact same ones that believe that the UK shouldn’t have one based on its history and shaped by its elected government.
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Erm - A Gin CourtSKB wrote:HMS Agincourt (S125) is already the name of the seventh and final Astute class submarine. She was originally to be called HMS Ajax.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
My concern is what spending £200m on a floating "conference centre" says about the identity of the UK. It seems somewhat backward looking in a world where the nature of soft power has been changed somewhat by the information age and the ubiquity of instant global communications. In a globalised world, the best propaganda is not propaganda but that scarcest of diplomatic resources, credibility, and I don't see how a £200m floating "conference centre" provides credibility.Repulse wrote:Not making a statement about any commentators here, but what I do not understand is why the same people who fight for the right to make personal identity statements are the exact same ones that believe that the UK shouldn’t have one based on its history and shaped by its elected government.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
If the same people who paid for the scrounger's curtains paid for his party boat, and if it didn't take scarce resources away from the Royal Navy, I'd be fine with it.Repulse wrote:Not making a statement about any commentators here, but what I do not understand is why the same people who fight for the right to make personal identity statements are the exact same ones that believe that the UK shouldn’t have one based on its history and shaped by its elected government.
What does this have to do with the UK's history?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4076
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Here are my five questions for the Royal Yacht proposal.
- Why is it being called a Royal Yacht if the Royals don't want it?
- As it will have no role in defending the UK why should it be procured within the defence budget?
- Which department is going to pay for its maintenance and running costs? Foreign Office? Department for Trade and Industry?
- Putting a boat load of British VIP's on a yacht in a foreign port seems like a seriously soft target without meaningful and expensive security. Which department is going to pay for such security?
- What other role will the vessel have apart from its primary role as a floating Embassy? HADR? PCRS?
Currently we don't have any answers to the above questions so IMO the case is not yet made for this vessel regardless of the boost to UK shipbuilding.
A class of 3 multi-role HADR vessels permanently forward deployed that could act as floating Embassies if required would be a much better advert for Global Britain and probably recieve much wider public support.
- Why is it being called a Royal Yacht if the Royals don't want it?
- As it will have no role in defending the UK why should it be procured within the defence budget?
- Which department is going to pay for its maintenance and running costs? Foreign Office? Department for Trade and Industry?
- Putting a boat load of British VIP's on a yacht in a foreign port seems like a seriously soft target without meaningful and expensive security. Which department is going to pay for such security?
- What other role will the vessel have apart from its primary role as a floating Embassy? HADR? PCRS?
Currently we don't have any answers to the above questions so IMO the case is not yet made for this vessel regardless of the boost to UK shipbuilding.
A class of 3 multi-role HADR vessels permanently forward deployed that could act as floating Embassies if required would be a much better advert for Global Britain and probably recieve much wider public support.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Her Majesty had tears in her eyes when she left Britannia for the last time as she was very attached to the ship. But times have moved on and as pointed out the Royal Family do not want a new one, so the new ship seems to be just another means of transporting Ministers and VIP to go with the Special Voyager and the Airbus A321 seen recently.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
At a guess :Poiuytrewq wrote:Here are my five questions for the Royal Yacht proposal.
- Why is it being called a Royal Yacht if the Royals don't want it?
- As it will have no role in defending the UK why should it be procured within the defence budget?
- Which department is going to pay for its maintenance and running costs? Foreign Office? Department for Trade and Industry?
- Putting a boat load of British VIP's on a yacht in a foreign port seems like a seriously soft target without meaningful and expensive security. Which department is going to pay for such security?
- What other role will the vessel have apart from its primary role as a floating Embassy? HADR? PCRS?
Currently we don't have any answers to the above questions so IMO the case is not yet made for this vessel regardless of the boost to UK shipbuilding.
A class of 3 multi-role HADR vessels permanently forward deployed that could act as floating Embassies if required would be a much better advert for Global Britain and probably recieve much wider public support.
The running costs should be paid by whatever department is using it at the time, same deal as the A330
Security should in reality be much easier to manage than in a hotel downtown in a teeming Asian metropolis.
I suspect the vessel won’t be just sitting in port but will spend much of its time discretely cruising outside the 12 mile limit. This any attempt to interfere with it would be, you know, “war”
All of the concerns listed above could apply equally to any UK embassy anywhere in the world. It’s just that this one moves and cannot be bugged by our enemies
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4076
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Excellent overview here with lots of new information.
https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... vy-vessel/
Many questions answered but I think it is still going to be difficult to overcome the suspicion that this vessel will, over time, turn into a party yacht for the PM and Govt ministers without a clear HADR or PCRS role.
https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... vy-vessel/
Many questions answered but I think it is still going to be difficult to overcome the suspicion that this vessel will, over time, turn into a party yacht for the PM and Govt ministers without a clear HADR or PCRS role.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4076
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
HMG need to find a way around this asap.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... yal-yacht/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... yal-yacht/
New £200m Royal Yacht Britannia's successor may have to be built abroad
Boris Johnson risks being forced to use foreign companies to build the Royal Yacht Britannia's successor to avoid breaching global trade rules.
The Prime Minister had hoped that the £200m trade vessel will be made by a domestic shipbuilder.
However, such a move risks breaching a World Trade Organisation agreement struck just eight months ago.
Mr Johnson is now being urged to take advantage of a loophole in the deal that allows the vessel to be built by UK shipbuilders if it is capable of being used for military service.
The WTO deal, signed last October and covering eight countries, did not exclude the construction of civilian ships from those contracts that must be open to global competition.
Plans to build a successor to the Britannia are being considered by a national flagship taskforce.
The Ministry of Defence is responsible for the new trade yacht, which will have Royal Navy crew. Crucially, the vessel will be used for business purposes rather than national security.
The WTO’s “government procurement agreement” was hailed by Liz Truss, the Trade Secretary, as a success of British companies that could bid for public sector contracts around the world.
However, the agreement includes a clause that contracts to build “ships, boats and floating structures, except warships” must be tendered international with the winning bidder selected without discrimination, the Financial Times first reported.
Other countries, such as the US, Australia, Japan and Canada have agreements that carve out the building of civilian vessels.
Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee, told The Telegraph: "Were the hull of this ship to be taken from the design of the new Type 32 modular combat vessel it could be then classified as a warship and would not be subject to WTO rules.
"This ship could then be built in a UK dock yard and have the added advantage of including adaptability to be used for humanitarian missions when required.
"If this ship is built entirely for business and not security purposes then it is likely to require a second naval ship to defend it when our surface fleet is already overstretched."
Mr Johnson announced last month that the successor to the Britannia would enter service in four years time.
Its name is yet to be confirmed after Whitehall sources indicated that the intention was to name the yacht “Prince Philip” after the late Duke of Edinburgh.
The Telegraph has campaigned for the building of a trade ship following the Brexit vote in 2016.
Her Majesty’s Yacht Britannia was launched in 1953 and decommissioned in 1997. It was used to host "trade days" in its final few years and is estimated to have helped the UK win contracts worth £3bn between 1991 and 1995.
Boris Johnson risks being forced to use foreign companies to build the Royal Yacht Britannia's successor to avoid breaching global trade rules.
The Prime Minister had hoped that the £200m trade vessel will be made by a domestic shipbuilder.
However, such a move risks breaching a World Trade Organisation agreement struck just eight months ago.
Mr Johnson is now being urged to take advantage of a loophole in the deal that allows the vessel to be built by UK shipbuilders if it is capable of being used for military service.
The WTO deal, signed last October and covering eight countries, did not exclude the construction of civilian ships from those contracts that must be open to global competition.
Plans to build a successor to the Britannia are being considered by a national flagship taskforce.
The Ministry of Defence is responsible for the new trade yacht, which will have Royal Navy crew. Crucially, the vessel will be used for business purposes rather than national security.
The WTO’s “government procurement agreement” was hailed by Liz Truss, the Trade Secretary, as a success of British companies that could bid for public sector contracts around the world.
However, the agreement includes a clause that contracts to build “ships, boats and floating structures, except warships” must be tendered international with the winning bidder selected without discrimination, the Financial Times first reported.
Other countries, such as the US, Australia, Japan and Canada have agreements that carve out the building of civilian vessels.
Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee, told The Telegraph: "Were the hull of this ship to be taken from the design of the new Type 32 modular combat vessel it could be then classified as a warship and would not be subject to WTO rules.
"This ship could then be built in a UK dock yard and have the added advantage of including adaptability to be used for humanitarian missions when required.
"If this ship is built entirely for business and not security purposes then it is likely to require a second naval ship to defend it when our surface fleet is already overstretched."
Mr Johnson announced last month that the successor to the Britannia would enter service in four years time.
Its name is yet to be confirmed after Whitehall sources indicated that the intention was to name the yacht “Prince Philip” after the late Duke of Edinburgh.
The Telegraph has campaigned for the building of a trade ship following the Brexit vote in 2016.
Her Majesty’s Yacht Britannia was launched in 1953 and decommissioned in 1997. It was used to host "trade days" in its final few years and is estimated to have helped the UK win contracts worth £3bn between 1991 and 1995.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Is Tobias freestyling likely programme names, or is he wise to further details on Type 32?Poiuytrewq wrote: Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee, told The Telegraph: "Were the hull of this ship to be taken from the design of the new Type 32 modular combat vessel it could be then classified as a warship and would not be subject to WTO rules.
"This ship could then be built in a UK dock yard and have the added advantage of including adaptability to be used for humanitarian missions when required.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
I think we need a dedicated thread for this as the conversation is no longer about Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia or a direct replacement for HMY.
We need a dedicated Boris Party Boat thread. That's what this conversation has become.
We need a dedicated Boris Party Boat thread. That's what this conversation has become.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
freestyling just like his app based aircraft strategy he should stick to infantry where he has experience.Jensy wrote:Is Tobias freestyling likely programme names, or is he wise to further details on Type 32?Poiuytrewq wrote: Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee, told The Telegraph: "Were the hull of this ship to be taken from the design of the new Type 32 modular combat vessel it could be then classified as a warship and would not be subject to WTO rules.
"This ship could then be built in a UK dock yard and have the added advantage of including adaptability to be used for humanitarian missions when required.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Just build another T26, but a one off GP Light, and paint her Dark blue with a nice Gold band down the side and a Red funnel. Obviously a T31 would be cheaper, but not really a UK design, so defeats the object. Plus the mission bay space would make a cracking conference venue.
Sorted
Sorted