UK Defence Forum

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Auxiliary Oiler: mysteriously coming (?) hot on the heels

I suspect this is a replacement for the MOD oiler MV Maersk Rapier.

benny14 wrote:MV Maersk Rapier

Have we bought it (from its chartered status) by stealth?
"As of June 2017, it appears that the vessel has been sold to an unnamed party for $6.5m"

And why build one, when it has been our flexi-fleet (others have been chartered from the same owner, when needed)? Has the size that suits the replenishing of our bases gone out of favour in commercial ops - and such will therefore not be readily available in the longer run?

Tempest414 wrote:if the Wave class is really not needed at this time for it core role would it not be better to use the 2 of them on AP-N with the ships doing 6 months deployments and 2 crews doing 3 months on 3 months off I feel we must be able to find 160 men and women who are looking to leave the RN and would like the better living standards of the RFA ship given the lack of escorts at this time I feel selling this still very useful ships a bit short sighted

If T31e is to be canceled or severely cut (say, 40%, -60% reduction) in this MDP, then Wave-based APT-N ship may be good to consider.

RN sometimes do something in hurry, to bias the political decision, I guess. For example,
- doing very sophisticated upgrade on HMS Ocean, a few years before its decommission.
- HMS Illustrious was also the same, I remember? She got good modernization right before her decommissioning.
- RN purchased 3 River B1, which was in lease, a few years before they decommission them.
But all these were in vain, and hundreds of millions of pounds were wasted (in total). With this cost, RN should have purchased bunches of NSM or Harpoon blk-II+ for interim Harpoon replacements, OR add 2 or 3 MPAs, OR secure "3rd hull" of SSS and make it even built in UK.

I'm also afraid RN is doing the same on T23GP upgrade program, in hope of stopping their cut. BUT, I think T23GP is at the top of the candidate list for cut, and not-modernizing it will in addition secure hundreds of millions of pounds.

# By the way, Tempest414 -san, sorry but if you could please use "." (periods) or "," (commas)? I am just a Japanese and need some effort to read English.

donald_of_tokyo wrote: I am just a Japanese and need some effort to read English

I think your English is much better than my Japanese

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Have we bought it (from its chartered status) by stealth?

Not sure.

"Maersk Tankers, part of Denmark’s shipping conglomerate Maersk, has disposed of two older MR1 tankers, VesselsValue’s data shows.

The ships in question are the 2000-built Maersk Rapier and the 2002-built Maersk Rhode Island, both constructed at CSSC OME shipyard in China.

As disclosed by VesselsValue, the 35,000 dwt Maersk Rapier and the 34,800 dwt Maersk Rhode Island were sold to unnamed parties for USD 6.5 million and USD 8.5 million, respectively.

With a gross tonnage of around 22,180 tons, each of the ships has a length of 171 meters and a width of 27 meters.

“We can confirm that we have reached an agreement to sell Maersk Rapier. The vessel will be delivered to the new owner in the near future. The other vessel can not be confirmed,” a representative from Maersk Tankers told World Maritime News.

In 2016, Maersk Tankers said that it plans to replace approximately 20 percent of its fleet within the next few years with newbuildings already ordered and scheduled for delivery between 2017 and 2018.

Currently, the company’s fleet consists of around 160 owned and commercially managed product tanker vessels."

“we have no plans to sell the Wave Class tankers to a foreign nation and there have been no such discussions with the Brazilian Government” Probably means they will be scrapped instead...

Repulse wrote:“we have no plans to sell the Wave Class tankers to a foreign nation and there have been no such discussions with the Brazilian Government” Probably means they will be scrapped instead...

Weren't similar things send when the media first talked about Brazil buy hms ocean and then that quickly changed.

To me it seems very short sighted it's pretty much saying we have no plans to get the fleet back close to what was pre 2010

Jake1992 wrote:To me it seems very short sighted it's pretty much saying we have no plans to get the fleet back close to what was pre 2010

There was never, and is not a plan to get back to 2010 levels.

benny14 wrote:

Jake1992 wrote:To me it seems very short sighted it's pretty much saying we have no plans to get the fleet back close to what was pre 2010

There was never, and is not a plan to get back to 2010 levels.

Ok let me re-frase that, it shows there is no ambition to return to pre 2010 levels, and that is not only a very said thing in of its self but its completly counter productive to HMGs so called global Britain plans.

The one thing that gives a nation a large voice on the world stage above any thing else is a strong military.
Look at Russia for example -
Economically not even in the top 10
Manufacturing not even top 10
Soft power I belive out of the top 10
Culturally pretty insignificant in the world
Population large but only mid size in world rankings

But despite all this they have world power status and that is soley due to there military power.

But except for their submarines, and most of these are getting long in the tooth, the Russian Navy is totally outclassed by NATO. Yes it has grand plans but then again so do all the Russian Armed Services, yet in most cases we have seen many PR stunts and presentations and parades but only small amounts of current generation kit is actually reaching the troops.

Jake1992 wrote:But despite all this they have world power status and that is soley due to there military power.

The UK is in a completely different situation to Russia. It has a massive amount of soft power backed up by a moderately sized military.

SKB wrote:

Change the plans please. You have 4 Tide class entering in service, and we need a new tanker for our fleet.

Brasil wrote:

SKB wrote:

Change the plans please. You have 4 Tide class entering in service, and we need a new tanker for our fleet.

HMAS Sirius/Success will be on the market soon if the poms don't come to the party

Brasil wrote:Change the plans please. You have 4 Tide class entering in service, and we need a new tanker for our fleet.

Don't be too greedy, you can have one of the Rover's if they're still knocking around...

Timmymagic wrote: HMAS Sirius/Success will be on the market soon if the poms don't come to the party

Will they retire those ships?

Timmymagic wrote: Don't be too greedy, you can have one of the Rover's if they're still knocking around...

I do not think they have remaining life as big as the Brazilian Navy needs. Our requirement for buying by opportunities is that ships can not be more than 20 years old


Greetings

Brasil wrote:Will they retire those ships?

Yes. They're scheduled for replacement by new builds. But they'll be very old and tired. Success has had a recent refit and is now double hulled so is the best of the 2 (and is a proper naval oiler).

Brasil wrote:I do not think they have remaining life as big as the Brazilian Navy needs. Our requirement for buying by opportunities is that ships can not be more than 20 years old

Only joking, the Rover Class are knackered. Fit for the breakers. They don't meet MARPOL either.

Realistically the only vaguely new Oilers you could get would be the Wave Class if we were stupid enough to sell them. Everyone else runs their auxiliaries until they're broken.

Or wait until the Canadians sell MS Asterix when the Protecteur Class arrive fully in service in 2022. But that depends on Canadian procurement...

Brasil wrote:Change the plans please. You have 4 Tide class entering in service, and we need a new tanker for our fleet.

Why not treat yourself and buy new. Tanker's aren't that expensive and you deserve it.

A sale wouldn't be the worse thing in the world, the RFA has a massive increase in capacity now, and the RN has a decrease in platforms, so is a sale preferable to having tankers constantly laid up?

Definitely the first thing to do if cuts can't be avoided. The loss of the Waves at this time would cause minimum damage anyway.

Gabriele wrote:Definitely the first thing to do if cuts can't be avoided. The loss of the Waves at this time would cause minimum damage anyway.

How much would it save? Fairly insignificant I would imagine

They sold Largs Bay to save 12 million a year, i'll remind you...

Gabriele wrote:They sold Largs Bay to save 12 million a year, i'll remind you...

Manpower and fuel costed 8.7M GBP per year. It is well known that the "running cost" does not include equipments maintenance. (As shown as, MCMV running cost cheaper than Rivers)
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2016/05/ ... ing-costs/
So, 12 million a year includes all, I guess?

Then, with Wave class's running cost being 9.2M GBP per year, banning 1 will save 13M GBP or so. But, as currently Waves are laid-up, running cost is much less, while maintenance cost remains, so, I'm not surprised if selling Waves saves less than 10M per year...

Keeping a singleton would make little sense. If they go, they'll both go.

Thanks for the info guys