Subscribe
Notify of
guest
42 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Fedaykin

£16 million over five years to store those submarines is tiny! Vs the Billions it costs to actually de-fuel them it is hardly surprising that the MOD is dragging its heals over the process.
Until costs get into the hundreds of millions or billions it really is a drop in the ocean when it comes to budgets!

Morgan Livie

it does say to dispose of the 27 subs will cost £16.8 Billion over 25 years ending 2040

Iqbal Ahmed

The article highlights another good reason we should not renew Trident. Can’t get rid of your old toys and you want new ones, eh?
Nuclear submarines and missiles are a toxic legacy we leave for future generations. The fuel hasn’t even been removed from
some of the submarines!
The public have a legitimate fear of living near any dump/disposal facility. Forget ‘ideological opposition’ and just keep in mind issues related to personal health and environmental degradation.
This is the real life detritus of the penis measurement contest this countries leadership are obsessed with. All so they can ignore reality of our dominished status post Empire and Post Brexit , to claim we are ‘punching above our weight’.
The Russians got Canadian assistance to decommission their old submarines and I think that we need outside supervision as well. It least to ensure politically convenient ‘slippages’ in schedules!

Steve

I’m sorry Iqbal, but you really do not have a clue what you’re on about.
Firstly, the article states that Submarines are arguably Britain’s most important defence assets, and your first comment is entirely misguided. Secondly, Fedaykin correctly says that it is only a small amount of money to store these submarines and the still-fuelled ones actually represent no harm to the environment at all. Why do you think extra radiation monitors were fitted and the fuel rods treated to make them inert??? Thirdly, despite the size of the Armed Forces, I, personally, think that we can and do punch above our weight. Put the size of the UK in context with the world and then you realise that we do have a status envied by other, much bigger, countries. Fourthly, there is nearly everything in place to begin dismantling the submarine, so why on earth have you put that we need “supervision”??
Finally, I have come to the conclusion (again) that you dont have the slightest clue as to what you are on about, you are exceedingly anti-british, and that you need to save your breath and dont comment on here in future.
Thank you

Gfor

Time to be unpopular on two counts.
I agree with some of Iqbal’s comments.
The current situation with regard to dismantling and disposal is unacceptable. It isn’t right to leave a large stockpile of medium and low level nuclear waste at the respective dockyards, it is a political decision to pass the buck to future generations for them to dispose of the waste, and live with the consequences until it is disposed of.
Let some get this straight, there are disposal options, but they need money and politicians to have a spine.
Either we get the nuclear engineering industry prioritised as a nation, invest some money and get the job done, or we contract it out to a third party (the US), take the political flak and pay up. Leaving these boats tied up alongside is costing money and credibility.
Nuclear boats are in my opinion, vital to the nations security, but this government doesn’t agree. As I have said many times on this site and others, we have too few boats to work too much ocean. Increased capabilities are all well and good, but I if the bad guys come streaming through the GIUK gap in numbers, you still need the assets to track and potentially neutralise them.
Finally, it’s really disappointing to read comments as disgusting as some above, swearing and throwing around the word Jihadi just because you don’t like someone’s point of view and his name doesn’t sound like your own. Please stop with this, some of the armed forces and emergency services have names like Iqbal, Mohammed, Ibrahim, etc. They love the Royal Navy and this country as much as you do and I would be ashamed if they read some of the comments on this site.

Dern

Iqbal has made it clear he does not love the Royal Navy nor this country. I make this very clear: I’d have nothing against him if he didn’t show consitently anti-British, Anti-Armed Forces sentiments in his comments, but he does and makes it abundantly clear that he is either morally in line with or paid by this countries enemies.

GFOR

Then perhaps try to discuss that rather than throw out obscenities and accusations of being a jihadi then?
I never said that this particular Iqbal did love the royal navy and this country, I don’t know him, I suspect you don’t either.
I struggle to make the leap that you have from his comments on this thread and others, can I ask if his name was John Smith would you use the same language?
I repeat, there are people with ‘different’ names serving this country, people that i work alongside, what do you think they say when they read your comments?

Rick

GFOR, Mr. Ahmed is, at this very moment , having a good belly laugh at all the arguing and in-fighting he’s instigated. Okay, DERN called him a Jihadist, so what? Mr. Ahmed has had multiple chances to refute that allegation and never has. Therefore we can draw are own conclusions about this man. We don’t molly-coddle are enemies in this country.

Iqbal Ahmed

Dern, nobody should have to undergo a public loyalty test to comment on this site. The RN is publically funded and as a taxpayer, I should be able to comment here as freely as any other taxpayer.
I comment on this site in reaction to some of the more militaristic and right wing nationalistic attitudes here. Just as I comment against fellow British Muslims who may be flirting with right wing Islamist ideologies.
I comment on a site called 5 Pillars as well (Islamist site with impressionable young Muslims) in support of recruiting Muslims into the army.
https://5pillarsuk.com/2017/03/01/29396/
Way back on 17 March 2017 I posted the following:
‘The British army is our army. As a Muslim, I would not have a problem in serving my country. The Imam is correct in taking this
As for Iraq, the vast majority of civilian killings took place in the civil war between Iranian backed Iraqi Shia militia and govt death squads and Sunni insurgents. Why blame the British army? At least Britain investigated the few times their soldiers did wrong eg. Murder of Baha Musa. Can we honestly say the same for Muslim majority nations and their armies doing the same?
‘Some deluded and ignorant British Muslims take all the economic benefits and rights of living in a first world democracy and then start talking about ‘Muslim unity’ and the ‘ummah’ because they have a weak knowledge of their deen and confusion over identity/personal issues and want to politicise our religion. They are a minority who appear on sites like 5 pillars. They don’t represent the vast majority of Muslims in Britain that just want to get on with their lives rather than engage in fifth columnist activities.’

TrainMong

..

Rick

Iqbal doesn’t love the Royal Navy or this country. He is continually disrespectful. His motivation for being here is to disrupt and piss people off.

GFOR

He’s disrespectful?
Most of the stuff I’ve seen that hes posted I’ve disagreed with and said so, but I cannot recall him using the words “traitorous f**k”, calling other people Jihadis and other disparaging phrases.
This site has a reputation that it strongly supports the RN whilst being balanced, and as such is looked at by a cross section of society. People will look at the bigotry and intolerance of some posters rather than the substance of the debate.
Is that what you want?

Steve

Agree with what you say up to a point. Unfortunately, there are some people on this site who don’t strongly support the RN and there are also some people on this site who are not balanced. Therefore, you have some people who build up a reputation for somewhat traitorous comments and they provoke others to scorn and correct indignation. So, no matter the name, if they make stupid, pathetic comments and continue to do so over a period of time, shouldn’t they expect just a bit of flack???

Rick

Referring to the Royal Navy’s vital inventory of defence platforms as a “penis measurement contest” is disrespectful in my books. The Navy lost a lot of men
in WW2 so people like Mr. Ahmed can lead a comfy life. He needs to show some respect for this institution and he does not require our sympathy.

Iqbal Ahmed

Rick, the funny thing is that one of the constants of posting simultaneously on a British nationalist site like this and an Islamist site like 5 Pillars is the ever present paranoia against voices arguing against the self contained ‘bubble’ on either site.
On this site, I’m hilariously branded a putinbot, jihadi and lord haw haw, while on 5 Pillars, they believe I’m a paid MI5 agent! Lols
Personally, I think my positions on naval expenditure, lack of public enthusiasm for foreign adventures Post Iraq and healthy scepticism about the utility of our oh so costly nuclear deterrent that is skewing the rest of the fleet are closer to the position of the government of the day and loyal opposition than the more nationalistic members of this site.

Barry Larking

Taqiyah.

Iqbal Ahmed

Barry, do you even know what that term means?

TrainMong

Troll will troll.

ian

I agree.. just because someone disagrees with you dosent mean you can slag them off or criticize their patriotism…
ian

A Feather

He does sound a bit pompous, but being ex service and some background in Selerfield. I just wonder how much Nuclear waste UK can dump. UK is a funny joint, reminding me of the Mouse that Roared! I met a Chinese visitor in Melbourne. He likened UK between his fingers, China with his arms spread.
UK Navy like the Empire is a bit of a joke! “History”

Michael

The fact that you call weapons systems that are vital deterrents, and critical to the security of of the UK, “toys”, shows what an absolutely clueless, stupid ignoramus you are. You are nothing but a political hack who is so poisened hatred of things British, and anything military, that you are utterly incapable of contributing any syllable that is worth consideration.
This website forum is for those of us who take the welfare and security of our nation seriously, and most of us are veterans who have something intelligent to offer here. You do not. There are plenty of other places on the web where you can commiserate with your like miserable souls, so please bugger off, leave us alone. Thank you.

Iqbal Ahmed

So you’d be happy to live next to a dismantling facility or radioactive dump?
NIMBYism isssure sign that people outside this forum don’t support nuclear weapons as strongly as you do.
Renewing Trident is a controversial subject. According to the Independent, Britain is split down the middle on whether to retain nuclear weapons. Some 51 per cent of people back full renewal of Trident, while a total of 49 per cent prefer either non-nuclear submarines or reject any renewal.
You wouldn’t know this from opinion on this forum detached from reality.

David Stephen

Ok then, is 51% more than 49%? Then the majority of the country supports renewal just like the majority supported Brexit so shut the hell up and stop whinning about both.

Steve

Spot on. Couldn’t have said it better. Let this be a lesson to you Iqbal, if you want to avoid all this flack, push off and dont bother to comment on here. If you comment for the sake of it, shove off. Either way we will be very happy.

Michael

If you want to debate the points that you just mentioned would be fine. But you don’t leave it at that, you constantly inject comments that are stupid and uncalled for. You call our nuclear arsenal toys and equate it with “penis size”. You have in other posts in insinuated that that the UK is a has been power, and that more money he spent on yet more social welfare, which to a great degree is why our armed forces are where they are at.
Btw, I could not care less about your nationality or race.
There are plenty of Anglos who are very much anti British and anti military.

Dern

I know that you would support anything that weakens this nation you traitorous f**k. As long as a position invloves weakening the Royal Navy you’ll stand by it, even if arguing for it requires contradicting yourself.
So any “facts” your Jihadi mouth spouts can be safely ignored.
I also love how you bother to reply to me but not to the two comments above me that take you apart piece by piece. It just shows how little you actually have to say beyond arguing for the end of the United Kingdom and the Rise of our enemies.

Dern

So my question is can’t this be handled by the same people who defuel Nuclear powerplants? I mean how different is a Submarine Reactor compared to a Power Plants reactor? Couldn’t they both be handled by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy? Seems like having one body handle all of it would be more economical and probably faster?

XYZ

Difficult to be sure from Google maps but No15 dock looks to small for the Trident boats. I wonder what the plan is for them? Using the No9 dock might work but it would block the dock from supporting the active fleet for a long time.

Paul

15 Dock is an SSN dock, and can only accommodate the smaller boats. As all four of the old Resolution class are moored at Rosyth and will no doubt be dismantled there, I would assume the Vanguards will end their days there.

sisyphus

STRN
i know this is a really crazy question… but given the lack of submarines in the RN, and the growing threat of some of our peer adversaries, is there any way 3 or 4 of these could be reactivated?

Rudeboy

HMS Torbay has only been decommissioned 18 months ago and is still fuelled so could technically be returned to service. But only with an enormous amount of work, and only for a limited time.
The last T boat retired prior to then was Tireless, and that was over 4 years ago. Realistically you’d be better off buying a new one than trying to get a 4 year decommissioned nuc going again. Anything older is a non starter.

Paul

It’s a non-starter. The de-commissioned boats are stripped of every piece of resusable/sensitive kit, and all the sonars/sensors etc are ripped out. Props and and hydoplanes are also removed. What’s left is a well maintained hulk.

Barry Larking

“A very simplified diagram …”
Simplistic means ‘inadequate or incomplete’ not simple merely. ‘Diagrammatic’ or ‘schematised’ would be acceptable.

GFOR

Really good interview about just this subject on BBC local news, south west region with Save the Royal Navy’s Peter Sandeman. He hit on many of the issues made above.

Steve Thomas

I’m curious to know whether anyone can identify the location of each submarine currently decommissioned at Devonport.
An aerial photo published in the Plymouth Herald shows 11 boats:comment image
The museum ship HMS COURAGEOUS is berthed on her own near the lock gates, while her sister HMS CONQUEROR is in the bottom-left corner. Then there’s a mix of seven ‘S’ and ‘T’ class boats (which ones are which?) leading up to the VALIANT and WARSPITE, both with their sails removed.
I guess the remaining two boats – TIRELESS and TORBAY – are moored next to the VALIANT or WARSPITE (the single boat moored alongside the quay at the top of the picture).
Could someone help resolve this please?
Many thanks.

Morgan Livie

where does the waste end up probably underground or in a pool at sellafield.

GEETHA KUMARESAN

DeWan Won! You Lost London Royal Navy. Your Radioactive material is null. Hell with you. Get in the prisons forever. Royal Navy employees to be disposed.

Roger

Geetha – run that past me again would you; there’s a good chap.

Whitty68

Why can these boats not be utilised as energy sources and top up into the national grid?

ian

four years just to decide whos taking the waste..omg..how much longer to remove one reactor and vessel..when will it be done and dusted.??? the rpv should be in capenhurst already..complete this decommission and start process for next five…90% steel, costs will then come down if recycling commences…Babcock/MOD needs to pull their finger out…