Originally Posted by parapauk

While I believe everything you say about the state of Albion, she was, unlike Ocean, certainly NOT built on the cheap!

I bow to your more accurate knowledge - it's not like I am surprised... expensive yet still shocking quality... oh, that'll be the MoD then!

Originally Posted by jagman

Originally Posted by whitecity

What are the dimensions and current status of the H&W "graving dock". I cannot find any information on their current website to suggest that they have facilities capable of producing a Nimitz sized boat. I accept there may well be a decommissionned facility, but I do not believe it is anywhere as big as this:

Dry Dock 12:-
Length: 2,170' / 661.6m
Width at Keel Blocks: 250' / 76.2m
Depth of Water: 33' / 10.1m

Harland and Wolff Belfast

Building dock specs-
556m x 93m, 1.2m tdw capacity, 200t/keel block loading:
» 8.38m depth water over sill
» six section intermediate gate
» Licensed for the repair of vessels
» Extensive dockside facilities
» Outfit and Commissioning quays extending from Building Dock to optimise movement of equipment, services and personnel


Nimitz has a flight deack size of 333m x 77m, waterline length 317m
Draught 11.9m

The Harland and Wolff dock is a bit shy of depth but that would be a manageable issue during building (considerably shallower draught before fitting out compared to fully laden draught but I don't have that data) What the draught would be on a 102,000T Nimitz prior to full fit out I don't know but as the US dock you give specs on is 2m shy of a Nimitz's full draught I would imagine its workable,
The dock is fully usable although I believe mothballed when not in use on cost grounds.
A Nimitz size carrier wouldn't come close to filling the dock which is still listed as the largest building/dry dock in the world.

Thank you.

Any idea why this dock couldn't be used to build a boat bigger than 65,000T? Is it too wide perhaps?

PS. My apologies for using the word 'bigger' when it may confuse some. DD12 is longer and deeper and of greater volume than H&W. However, H&W has a greater 2d surface area due to it's greater width.

Originally Posted by whitecity

Any idea why this dock couldn't be used to build a boat bigger than 65,000T? Is it too wide perhaps?

I could have a reasonably accurate guess!

£.

Width of the dock wouldnt be an issue, they do have these hovering over it!

Originally Posted by whitecity

Are you saying that the RN is unable to recruit?

It has the largest recruitment shortfall of the three services by some margin. It can't meet its targets in a recession, it certainly won't reach higher targets outside of a recession.

What are the dimensions and current status of the H&W "graving dock". I cannot find any information on their current website to suggest that they have facilities capable of producing a Nimitz sized boat. I accept there may well be a decommissionned facility, but I do not believe it is anywhere as big as this:

Dry Dock 12:-
Length: 2,170' / 661.6m
Width at Keel Blocks: 250' / 76.2m
Depth of Water: 33' / 10.1m

It won't have as large a volume as that, those are the figures for the upgrade of DD12 that is still in progress, the initial stage of which won't be completed until 2011, the final stage won't be completed until 2015.
You can't have looked very hard on H&W's website, it took me two clicks: 'Facilities', then 'Building Dock'.
Length: 556m, Width 93m, depth 8.28m. So while it will have a smaller volume than DD12 when its upgrades are complete, it will still have a 1,294 sq.m larger surface area. It's capable of a lightship in excess of 400,000tns, and there is plenty of room for a Nimitz class with an LWL of 317m, LOA of 340m, and Beam of 78m (41m at waterline). You could probably squeeze a couple of escorts in there with it.
The dock isn't decommissioned, either, it is currently being used for offshore platforms and offshore wind turbines, it was even used for the world's first tidal stream turbine last year. In fact, it's been getting that much work that they had to re-commission Goliath two years ago after four years in mothballs.

Originally Posted by ottar

we're more than capable of building big.

Which contradicts your post 6 hours earlier...
[...snip...]
Then maybe YoU can answer the questions and explain ottar's apparent U-turn... Which statement should I believe: the one where he says a new dock needs to be built or the one where he says we already have the facilities?

I'm referring to two completely different facilities. Building at H&W is not an issue, maintenance is. H&W will not keep their dock empty when it's not being used for CVF. CVF requires a dedicated facility for maintenance.

Flot_Gear

Wasn't Albion rushed into service to fill the gap when Fearless got axed? As a result she had issues which needed a fairly major refit to resolve.

whitecity

The RN does indeed have recruitment and retention problems - perhaps something to do with many ships/people doing six/seven month deployments every year for three or four years on the trot?

This issue has just been mentioned on the local (Westcountry) news. In effect the Government decision to delay means that they are paying for workers and facilities over a longer period. Imagine employing a builder, then asking him to do the work more slowly to keep some cost down (and he cannot do other work) and then being amazed that the charges are higher?

Originally Posted by Flot_gear

Originally Posted by parapauk

While I believe everything you say about the state of Albion, she was, unlike Ocean, certainly NOT built on the cheap!

I bow to your more accurate knowledge - it's not like I am surprised... expensive yet still shocking quality... oh, that'll be the MoD then!

Indeed - I heard similar comments from people aboard Bulwark. Hoofin C3 facilities, but the rest of the ship was gash (including a waste water system that flooded the forward part of the ship when the dock was flooded!)

Originally Posted by ottar

It has the largest recruitment shortfall of the three services by some margin. It can't meet its targets in a recession, it certainly won't reach higher targets outside of a recession.

I am genuinely surprised at how unattractive it now appears to be to serve in the RN.

Originally Posted by ottar

It won't have as large a volume as that, those are the figures for the upgrade of DD12 that is still in progress, the initial stage of which won't be completed until 2011, the final stage won't be completed until 2015.
You can't have looked very hard on H&W's website, it took me two clicks: 'Facilities', then 'Building Dock'.
Length: 556m, Width 93m, depth 8.28m.

The extension of Dry Dock 12 to the dimensions I quoted previously was completed in 1996. Are they planning to make it even larger?

Originally Posted by ottar

So while it will have a smaller volume than DD12 when its upgrades are complete, it will still have a 1,294 sq.m larger surface area.

I have already apologised for a potential misuse of the word 'bigger' and covered these points.

Originally Posted by ottar

I'm referring to two completely different facilities. Building at H&W is not an issue, maintenance is. H&W will not keep their dock empty when it's not being used for CVF. CVF requires a dedicated facility for maintenance.

Not at all clear from your previous posts.

Originally Posted by Whet

I thought the whole point of doing it in sections was so that they could make it as big as was neccesary.

I think the poiunt was to spread work amongst the few remaining UK shipyards. The T45s are essentially a trial of this technique. The big downside of building in sections, apparently, is that you have to simplify the hull shape to aid manufacture, rather than having one that is optimised between sea keeping, speed and quietness (important when you've got submarines around).

These 'boats' are all about Bruin wanting to drive work to his own constituency.Makes the A400M fiasco look like a financial rounding error!

Latest from Beeb:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8127743.stm

Two navy shipyards 'could close'

The yards will complete the Royal Navy's super-carrrier contract in 2014
Plans are being drawn up for the possible closure of two navy shipyards after aircraft carrier work ends in 2014, BBC Scotland has learned.

Note that these are 'shipyards' & not dockyards as I previously thought.

-DC