HMS Queen Elizabeth has been alongside in the deepwater port of Invergordon for more than 10 days now and there is growing speculation about the reason for her extended stay. The planned stop at Invergordon had always been in the programme to allow refuelling and replenishment after 12 days at sea which included full power trials. Replenishment alone would not require 10 days, so it is clear there are engineering issues involved.
It has been confirmed that while conducting sea trials, sometime in early July, she hit an item of debris in the sea. Whether it was a discarded fishing net or something else, the exact nature of the debris is unknown as it had cleared itself before the ship arrived in Cromarty. What is certain is that she did not hit a rock or a Russian submarine as claimed by some credulous online sources. On arrival, the shaft and propellers were quickly inspected by divers.
Repairs alongside and returning to sea soon
Mercifully the propeller shafts have not sustained major damage which would require dry docking and a complete change to the trials schedule, not to mention at the accompanying negative headlines. However, in the course of the inspection, a defect was discovered that had the potential to have caused significant future problems if it had not been caught at an early stage. Divers have been working on the problem which is expected to be rectified soon. Unconfirmed reports suggest this involves one of the supports for the two shafts being slightly out of alignment. This reduces the efficiency of the propeller, causing vibration and noise. Engineering work that might have required dry-docking in the past can sometimes now be done underwater, thanks to pioneering developments by the offshore oil industry. QE had her propellers fitted underwater in the basin at Rosyth as she was originally fitted with brake blades that allowed the shafts to be turned to test the propulsion without moving the ship.
There is confidence the ship will sail to resume trials in the next few days. These kind of issues are normal during the trials phase of any new vessel and are no cause for alarm. It should be remembered that QE is effectively a prototype design under testing and some way from being a fully capable warship. The trials programme was always flexible and likely to be subject to change. The ACA, who are still the owners of the ship, are understandably unwilling to discuss the details of every engineering problem that is encountered before the ship is handed to the RN and have not made a specific comment on this issue.
In the internet age, a flagship project like the QE is subject to extraordinary scrutiny and speculation that earlier generations of innovators and engineers never had to endure. Apart from the pub landlords in Invergordon, these delays are frustrating for everyone but should not be a huge surprise, and there maybe more. Keep calm and carry on. There is every confidence QE will prove to be a sound ship and remains well on course to meet the original target of handing her to the RN by the end of this year.
The dry dock conundrum
These events do raise an interesting question. In future where will the QE carriers be dry-docked and, if HMS Queen Elizabeth had required urgent docking, what are the options? Unfortunately Portsmouth Naval Base does not have a dry dock large enough for the QE carriers. HMS Prince of Wales, currently under construction, occupies the dry dock in Rosyth. As QE’s departure demonstrated, moving in or out of the dock in Rosyth is a very complex process, requiring 11 tugs and can only be done within certain tidal and weather windows. The King George V graving dock in Southampton, which would be convenient for a Portsmouth-based ship, has been closed since 2005. The Harland and Wolff dry dock in Belfast is currently involved in wind farm construction and would require some time to be prepared. No 5 Dock on Merseyside, or Inchgreen Dry Dock, Port Glasgow (both owned by Cammell Laird) are just large enough for the ship. In these cases, it is unclear if there would be appropriate personnel and facilities available to support work on QE. The nearest foreign option would be in Rotterdam but relying on overseas facilities is likely to be highly controversial. The expansion of D-Lock at Portsmouth would probably be the ideal solution but the funds for this are likely to be hard to find. Expect to see the QE carriers reliant on Roysth when needing to go into dry dock in the long term.
HMS Queen Elizabeth, Invergordon, July 2017. Main photo: Alan Pratt, via Flickr
Regarding the dry dock conundrum, would widening and dredging the entrance to the basin at Rosyth be an option, or even practicable?
I think even with dredging the challenge is more to do with the tides and bridges she’d need to pass on the way up river.
The run down of the KGV No.7 Graving dock in Southampton was a huge shame, then again to fit the QE class the listed pump house would need to be moved, new lock gates and keel blocks installed as well as new pumping machinery.
Lack of a suitable dry dock on the South Coast is rather a pain then again the Scot-Nats will howl with rage if there is any hint of deep repair work being done outside of Scotland.
So KGV Dock it is then. In Britain’s Can Do maritime and navy aware environment these things are done as a matter of course.
Forget the SNP; as shown in the recent election, the National Party do not own Scotland. I originally come from Greenock, and am familiar with the Firth of Clyde Dry Dock at Inchgreen. On Monday of this week the three cranes at the dock were dismantled [blown up, apparently] by the present owners, The Peel Group.
The biggest ship to use the dock was the QE2 when she came down river from Clydebank, circa 1967. It is an awkward dock to enter, as the entrance is at right angles to the dredged channel, requiring the right tides and little or no wind for a large ship to be safely berthed in it.
Maybe someday we will have the proper facilities in place before we build the assets; after all, the plan to build dates back to SDR98.
I live in Inverness so reasonably familiar with local politics 😉
The SNP’s wings have been clipped a bit but doesn’t stop them being a formidable and vocal political force.
I would presume they would push for Rosyth to remain as the primary deep repair and refit yard for the QE class.
The Harland and Wolff dry dock whilst easily able to accommodate the QE class has its own approach issues for a vessel that size and the company has pretty much walked away from the ship repair business which is ironic considering the money that was spent on it in the seventies to make it into a modern ship yard.
In England if there was any serious move to have a dry dock big enough for the QE class it needs to be somewhere where there is an actual workforce and where the ship can get in without too much trouble. I would actually argue it might better to build or upgrade a dock at A&P Falmouth to suit the QE class.
Are you in Inverness?
I wish I were on a cruise drinking margaritas
Agreed
Yes
I would agree that Falmouth would be ideally placed [skilled workforce, A&P actively engaged in ship repairs and their connection to the MoD via their RFA work] as a site for a dry dock. I used to visit Falmouth regularly in the late 80s [my ship used it as a one night stop-over when conducting junior officer training]. My guess is that a new dock would need to be constructed; paying for it is of course another matter.
Harland & Wolff in Belfast are still actively engaged in ship repairing etc [see their current web site for details].
Lots or countries use floating dry docks. Given the price of land in the south of England would one of these be an option to allow dry docking on Portsmouth?
Good point Ath, I’ve always been a fan of dry docks, not only cheaper than building on land they could potentially be moved to wherever they maybe required. However the ships company would have to be messed ashore in the eventuality of th ship going into the dock. I’m sure there must be second hand one out there being unloved.
Not sure in today’s 24h information culture that ” say nothing” is a viable plan. Certainly if she is not back out to sea by the weekend ACA or the Navy will need to comment publicly. The best plan in my opinion be the fullest disclosure that genuine security considerations allow.
Guys, I am sure that you are all excited, however let me share something with you:
The issue with one of the shafts was known at least 6 months ago. Even when she was still in Rosyth there was a talk to put her on dry dock before even goes for see trials. The only reason why ACA and Babcock pushed her out is money….if they have fail to push her out they were risking paying HUGE penalties. Now with HMS QEC out of the dock, they got the money from MOD. Everything from now on will mean even more money for ACA, Babcock and all the contractors.
The obvious question here is, how I know all this….well I worked on her for almost 5 years.
I personally worked on the shafts installation. You can argue as much as you like, however please remember I worked on her for almost 5 years, I’ve seen it all with my own eyes.
So it’s all your fault
Sure it is, I build her on my own. This why took me 2 months short of 10 years 🙂
anyone got a rough departure time?
Suitably low tides (to get under the bridges) and high tides (to get into Rosyth) occur once a fortnight. By the Firth of Forth tide tables around the 24th July is the next window of opportunity. So it’s get moving soon or wait a fortnight.
Would it not be prudent for Portsmouth City Council to do the work on D
lock. They found the money for the commercial port when it was suffering. I realise QE wouldn’t need the facilities all the time but I’m sure it could be put to various commercial uses.
It seems to me to be a proud moment for the city to host these amazing ships so why would we want them to be serviced in Scotland or rotterdam,come on Portsmouth let’s show them just how good a host we can be
Sadly the Queen Elizabeth’s are at the very top limit for shipping access to Portsmouth so it would have no practical use beyond the QNLZ class. The Best thing IMHO is to widen Rosyth entrance AND take KGV dock at Southampton into public ownership and make it part of HM Dockyard Portsmouth for occasional use so it could dry dock the USN CVN’s as well. If the balloon goes up you need a drydock on the south coast.
Why wouldn’t we want them serviced in Scotland? Aren’t we a United Kingdom?
It’s a bit silly to base them in Rosyth though where the bridges are a major obstacle.
I don’t like the look of that crossmember support for the A brackets. I wouldn’t trust that in my boat.
The beer still must be good there HMS EAGLE was at Invergording with other ships many moons ago we drank the pubs dry buy 1900hrs
Yeah they have drank the pubs dry. Ha ha between here and Inverness I would imagine.
Also in my opinion I think it is lovely to see HMS QE in dock.
I still remember when the fleet would arrive in town, it was beautiful to see all the war ships in the Cromarty Firth.
My grandfather ran a motor workshop in Invergordon in WW1 and the inter-war years, and included work on the RN ships, and my mother used to taxi officers around. There was a floating dock, the “Mars” there at that time. (Graving docks are very expensive to build.) If these carriers ever visited Australia they could be drydocked in Sydney, provided more docking blocks were obtained.
Just a thought they havnt by any chance put the props on backwards
Well they shouldn’t have left Rosyth with out the guards for the propeller being fitted, then maybe the chain that wrapped round n caused the damage wouldn’t have
Isn’t there a huge dry dock at Nigg in the Cromarty Firth too? They used to build oil rigs in it. It’s likely to be busy at the moment, but surely it could be used in the future. Invergordon was a former RN base, and all the fuel tank stores are still there….
I was wondering if the global energy dry dock at nigg would be viable as would be a great boost for the areas workforce. live in invergordon and we certainly have had no hassle with having the navy back in port local hostelries have certainly enjoyed having them in port for the last 3 weeks
How about the old dock at kishron dry dock. It’s Europe’s largest and has had some regeneration and upgrading for the energy markets. If they thought a contract for the carriers was possible am sure they would move mountains to get the deal.
Would be ideal for security too.
On a related subject why arent these drydocks used for laid up ships like the 4 Frigates sent for scrapping too soon?
What was the size of Nigg
The Qe two could be docked in Gibraltar would this be a big problem, the dock out there was big enough to dock the Eagle and the past Ark Royal,these two carriers both of the fifths and sixths both around 60,000 tons deep draft.