Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Yeh, bit of a waist, the only upside is that the construction would maintain a few jobs for a while - my vote would be invest the money in the support ships to maintain the jobs or a dedicated hospital/disaster relief ship... better for PR aswell & they could "spin" it as not a cut to the aid budget...
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
serge750 wrote:Yeh, bit of a waist, the only upside is that the construction would maintain a few jobs for a while - my vote would be invest the money in the support ships to maintain the jobs or a dedicated hospital/disaster relief ship... better for PR aswell & they could "spin" it as not a cut to the aid budget...
Not much chop for the dignitaries and there cocktail parties tho,
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Would a VIP converted container be good enough
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
According to the Sunday Times HMQ wants nothing to do with the Boris yacht and has refused to let it be named after the Duke of Edinburgh.
So maybe need a new Boris yacht thread.
So maybe need a new Boris yacht thread.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
I suspect that the £200 million won't come from defence budget, so it's not really an either/or vs e.g. 2 x F35 (or whatever). On the plus side, it will have some tangible economic benefits (if data pertaining to HMS Britannia is to be believed) and it's another (small) boost for UK shipbuilding
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
This is the problem. Where is that data? Some people have tried to come up with a big number for the amount of trade generated, but that's not data. Data is the detailed stuff that allows you to come up with the big number and to the best on my knowledge there isn't any.dmereifield wrote:On the plus side, it will have some tangible economic benefits (if data pertaining to HMS Britannia is to be believed)
The advantage of the former HMY was that it was intimately associated with the monarch in a much more parochial age. We're living in a different era, where Chinese credit does the talking, not cocktails on a Royal Yacht. And the Royal Family seem distinctly unimpressed with the Boris yacht.
Pinstriped can talk a lot of BS. What he has got right here is the possible impact on the defence budget and the need for a proper audit trail. Actually, if this is supposed to be about boosting trade, what there needs to be first of all is a detailed and robust business case.SW1 wrote:A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Well, let's see how this floating embassy and conference centre goes. We'll better understand the rational and it's merits (or otherwise) when we see the winning designRichardIC wrote:This is the problem. Where is that data? Some people have tried to come up with a big number, but that's not data. Data is the detailed stuff that allows you to come up with the big number and to the best on my knowledge there isn't any.dmereifield wrote:On the plus side, it will have some tangible economic benefits (if data pertaining to HMS Britannia is to be believed)
The advantage of the former HMY was that it was intimately associated with the monarch in a much more parochial age. We're living in a different era, where Chinese credit does the talking, not cocktails on a Royal Yacht. And the Royal Family seem distinctly unimpressed with the Boris yacht.Pinstriped can talk a lot of BS. What he has got right here is the possible impact on the defence budget and the need for a proper audit trail. Actually, if this is supposed to be about boosting trade, what there needs to be first of all is a detailed and robust business case.SW1 wrote:A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
It’s an argument however I thought that was the champion of the grey funnel lines fwd deployed vessels when they pull into port. Having said that the countries we want to do the trade deals with already have significant embassies that can host parties and are much closer to the location of decision makers than ports.dmereifield wrote:Well, let's see how this floating embassy and conference centre goes. We'll better understand the rational and it's merits (or otherwise) when we see the winning designRichardIC wrote:This is the problem. Where is that data? Some people have tried to come up with a big number, but that's not data. Data is the detailed stuff that allows you to come up with the big number and to the best on my knowledge there isn't any.dmereifield wrote:On the plus side, it will have some tangible economic benefits (if data pertaining to HMS Britannia is to be believed)
The advantage of the former HMY was that it was intimately associated with the monarch in a much more parochial age. We're living in a different era, where Chinese credit does the talking, not cocktails on a Royal Yacht. And the Royal Family seem distinctly unimpressed with the Boris yacht.Pinstriped can talk a lot of BS. What he has got right here is the possible impact on the defence budget and the need for a proper audit trail. Actually, if this is supposed to be about boosting trade, what there needs to be first of all is a detailed and robust business case.SW1 wrote:A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
"Ambassador" might be a good name for this ship. Although that name also reminds me of Ferrero Rocher chocolates....
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Dignitaries, politicians and businessmen/women will love the pomp and prestige of being hosted at the events on board (a nice change of scenery from the Embassies they're used to). There are potential upsides (time will tell of they matierialse), and I don't see any downsides....so I'm happy to see how it goes, and look forward to a UK shipyard having some extra workSW1 wrote:It’s an argument however I thought that was the champion of the grey funnel lines fwd deployed vessels when they pull into port. Having said that the countries we want to do the trade deals with already have significant embassies that can host parties and are much closer to the location of decision makers than ports.dmereifield wrote:Well, let's see how this floating embassy and conference centre goes. We'll better understand the rational and it's merits (or otherwise) when we see the winning designRichardIC wrote:This is the problem. Where is that data? Some people have tried to come up with a big number, but that's not data. Data is the detailed stuff that allows you to come up with the big number and to the best on my knowledge there isn't any.dmereifield wrote:On the plus side, it will have some tangible economic benefits (if data pertaining to HMS Britannia is to be believed)
The advantage of the former HMY was that it was intimately associated with the monarch in a much more parochial age. We're living in a different era, where Chinese credit does the talking, not cocktails on a Royal Yacht. And the Royal Family seem distinctly unimpressed with the Boris yacht.Pinstriped can talk a lot of BS. What he has got right here is the possible impact on the defence budget and the need for a proper audit trail. Actually, if this is supposed to be about boosting trade, what there needs to be first of all is a detailed and robust business case.SW1 wrote:A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
"Parochial" is not the first word I would have chosen to describe the British Empire .RichardIC wrote: a much more parochial age
Having spent a little bit of my life "abroad", I can assure you that there is a significant difference between a routine embassy bash and the Royal Yacht pulling into port. British Embassies have a justly deserved reputation for hosting rather good cocktail parties (all that bonded booze helps), but if you want to do business, as I was once told, go to the US Embassy (the UK Trade Attaché will be happy to give you their number).SW1 wrote: the countries we want to do the trade deals with already have significant embassies that can host parties
Unfortunately, British Embassies seem to have something of dysfunctional relationship with anything to do with "trade" - it's one of their responsibilities, but they are, after all, diplomats, not shop keepers, don'cha'know. Britannia brought top level trade negotiations and the potential for major contracts, which was a completely different proposition (and getting falling-down drunk in front of Royalty does little to raise your social standing, whereas seems to be expected at a common-or-garden Embassy "do").
There again, there is an old Sumerian proverb that runs something like "all business deals should be done in a bar. In the morning, when they are sober, everyone should return to the bar and ask the barkeeper what was agreed", so maybe the Embassies (as the barkeeper) have the right idea.
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)
Well to be honest, I like the idea to a degree but the ship must be multi-role if it’s to be HMS
In my mind the ship can host the dignitaries for trade missions convert to a hospital ship at a time able to do a little bit of HADR and quite possible become a training ship for jnr officers and a helicopter training ship
A enlarged MV Sycamore comes to mind
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Sycamore
Other ideas
https://www.boatinternational.com/yacht ... ike--42967
In my mind the ship can host the dignitaries for trade missions convert to a hospital ship at a time able to do a little bit of HADR and quite possible become a training ship for jnr officers and a helicopter training ship
A enlarged MV Sycamore comes to mind
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Sycamore
Other ideas
https://www.boatinternational.com/yacht ... ike--42967
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
I am happy with it if the the money comes from the Departments of International trade and Business energy & industrial strategy as long as they pay for the ship and pay the RN or the RFA for the crew its all good
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Caribbean wrote:"Parochial" is not the first word I would have chosen to describe the British Empire .RichardIC wrote: a much more parochial age
Having spent a little bit of my life "abroad", I can assure you that there is a significant difference between a routine embassy bash and the Royal Yacht pulling into port. British Embassies have a justly deserved reputation for hosting rather good cocktail parties (all that bonded booze helps), but if you want to do business, as I was once told, go to the US Embassy (the UK Trade Attaché will be happy to give you their number).SW1 wrote: the countries we want to do the trade deals with already have significant embassies that can host parties
Unfortunately, British Embassies seem to have something of dysfunctional relationship with anything to do with "trade" - it's one of their responsibilities, but they are, after all, diplomats, not shop keepers, don'cha'know. Britannia brought top level trade negotiations and the potential for major contracts, which was a completely different proposition (and getting falling-down drunk in front of Royalty does little to raise your social standing, whereas seems to be expected at a common-or-garden Embassy "do").
There again, there is an old Sumerian proverb that runs something like "all business deals should be done in a bar. In the morning, when they are sober, everyone should return to the bar and ask the barkeeper what was agreed", so maybe the Embassies (as the barkeeper) have the right idea.
Caribbean wrote:"Parochial" is not the first word I would have chosen to describe the British Empire .RichardIC wrote: a much more parochial age
Having spent a little bit of my life "abroad", I can assure you that there is a significant difference between a routine embassy bash and the Royal Yacht pulling into port. British Embassies have a justly deserved reputation for hosting rather good cocktail parties (all that bonded booze helps), but if you want to do business, as I was once told, go to the US Embassy (the UK Trade Attaché will be happy to give you their number).SW1 wrote: the countries we want to do the trade deals with already have significant embassies that can host parties
Unfortunately, British Embassies seem to have something of dysfunctional relationship with anything to do with "trade" - it's one of their responsibilities, but they are, after all, diplomats, not shop keepers, don'cha'know. Britannia brought top level trade negotiations and the potential for major contracts, which was a completely different proposition (and getting falling-down drunk in front of Royalty does little to raise your social standing, whereas seems to be expected at a common-or-garden Embassy "do").
There again, there is an old Sumerian proverb that runs something like "all business deals should be done in a bar. In the morning, when they are sober, everyone should return to the bar and ask the barkeeper what was agreed", so maybe the Embassies (as the barkeeper) have the right idea.
We could be waiting a while for it to pull into Zurich harbour mind.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Upgrade the Royal Barge, maybe?SW1 wrote:We could be waiting a while for it to pull into Zurich harbour mind.
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)
Good. Naming the yacht Philip would not go down well in some parts of the world.
How about "Winston Churchill". Less popular in Islington but then again they don't contribute much to the UK economy there so who cares?
How about "Winston Churchill". Less popular in Islington but then again they don't contribute much to the UK economy there so who cares?
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
If we are going to this then maybe HMY Royal Oak
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
A good place to hide from republicans bent on regicide?Tempest414 wrote:If we are going to this then maybe HMY Royal Oak
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
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.
It's the sort of thing only a screaming narcissist would do.
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
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.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
To be fair everyone always knew that the hospital ship role was a load of nonsense, it was just a cover for its real role as a mobile seat of government in the event of WW3 (hence the extensive comms suite and huge number of RN Signallers who were permanently onboard...).SKB wrote:So HMS instead of HMY. Will they try the "she could be a useful hospital ship in a conflict" thing next?!
Apparently one of the plans was to station the Britannia in a remote Scottish loch as it would be shielded from any near explosions and fallout..
I actually think that the Royal Family are not that keen on the Royal Yacht either...both Charles and William have tried to keep any excess to a minimum (or at least largely out of the public eye). Boris building them a great big yacht I suspect might not have their full backing...
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia (1954-1997) (ex RN)
Used to enjoy a fair bit of his stuff....but he's gone a bit 'native' recently...wonder if he's reached a little higher in his career...SW1 wrote:A case for such a ship made here
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... p.html?m=1
Have to say I’m not that convinced