Royal Transportation (land, sea, air)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Muhler said:
I don't agree.

Look at it from a nationalist point of view.
This is our ship!
A British ship!
Build by Britons in a British shipyard!
Sailing around representing Britain with the finest of what Britain can do.
Yeah!! Rule Britannia...

There is another floating British symbol, the air craft carrier Queen Elizabeth, but she is mainly at sea somewhere, or behind fences in a navy base.
This ship will be seen all over the world, connected with members of the BRF and get a lot of focus.

It depends on how you sell it.
And if it means work for several thousand builders, designers, craftsmen, suppliers.

Keep in mind that the Eiffel Tower was supposed to have been dismantled, but who would dream about suggesting that now? ;)
Click to expand...

The Eiffel tower was not built during a global pandemic costing millions of lives and jobs across the Globe.

The man of the street doesn't care about prestige right now. He's just worried about his life, his family and his job.

This soon to be decision is so out of touch it's laughable.
 
Last edited:
Nico said:
The Eiffel tower was not built during a global pandemic costing millions of lives and jobs across the Globe.

The man of the street doesn't care about prestige right now. He's just worried about his life, his family and his job.

This soon to be decision is so out of touch it's laughable.
Click to expand...

No, but as you have no doubt read, there are going to be huge investments worldwide in not least infrastructure but also other fields, in order to kickstart the economy both locally and globally.
It depends on how you sell it.

A royal yacht build in Britain, will employ thousands of people.
She will need a permanent British crew. - No cheap foreign sailors.
She will need running maintenance all her life, also in Britain.
She will remain in British hands and thus remain a British symbol.
- It all depends on how you sell it.

You can easily present a case against pretty much anything, as too costly and really not necessary, but that means no one will be employed.

I deliberately used the example of the Eiffel Tower, because it was a (not that costly actually) highly visible symbol of what French builders, engineers, constructors and manufacturers could do at the time. With hyper-modern materials.
Just like the Crystal Palace.
 
Muhler said:
No, but as you have no doubt read, there are going to be huge investments worldwide in not least infrastructure but also other fields, in order to kickstart the economy both locally and globally.
It depends on how you sell it.

A royal yacht build in Britain, will employ thousands of people.
She will need a permanent British crew. - No cheap foreign sailors.
She will need running maintenance all her life, also in Britain.
She will remain in British hands and thus remain a British symbol.
- It all depends on how you sell it.

You can easily present a case against pretty much anything, as too costly and really not necessary, but that means no one will be employed.

I deliberately used the example of the Eiffel Tower, because it was a (not that costly actually) highly visible symbol of what French builders, engineers, constructors and manufacturers could do at the time. With hyper-modern materials.
Just like the Crystal Palace.
Click to expand...

Sadly, nowadays, the vast majority of people don't see the investment long term but the costly extravaganza short term. I've seen some reactions on social medias about the Telegraph article and they were, not suprisingly, pretty much all negative.

Again the project itself is not bad, not bad at all, and i, personally, agree on all your points. Still timing is everything and i do think the timing is pretty bad to annouce such a thing.
 
Last edited:
Nico said:
Sadly, nowadays, the vast majority of people don't see the investment long term but the costly extravaganza short term. I've seen some reactions on social medias about the Telegraph article and they were, not suprisingly, pretty much all negative.

Again the project itself is not bad, not bad at all, and i, personally, agree on all your points. Still timing is everything and i do think the timing is pretty bad to annouce such a thing.
Click to expand...

I would not fully trust social media reactions even under The Telegraph twitter post as a true reflection of British public view, given that it is almost the same audience who make vile comments on Prince Philip's death and tend to be heavily leaning on the progressive side (The #youthquake before December 2019 election, not reflecting the actual results)

There is an old slang that twitter is not real life.

If I'm not mistaken, The Sky News article is stating that it was Downing Street spokesperson that confirm the leaks/rumours that HM Prince Philip is going to be commissioned, not the Prime Minister making the official announcement (which will happen within weeks). There was even rumours that there was going to be a new Royal Yacht straight after Brexit in early 2020,but I think that news died down.
 
Last edited:
AC21091968 said:
I would not fully trust social media reactions even under The Telegraph twitter post as a true reflection of British public view, given that it is almost the same audience who make vile comments on Prince Philip's death and tend to be heavily leaning on the progressive side (The #youthquake before December 2019 election, not reflecting the actual results)

There is an old slang that twitter is not real life.

If I'm not mistaken, The Sky News article is stating that it was Downing Street spokesperson that confirm the leaks/rumours that HM Prince Philip is going to be commissioned, not the Prime Minister making the official announcement (which will happen within weeks). There was even rumours that there was going to be a new Royal Yacht straight after Brexit in early 2020,but I think that news died down.
Click to expand...

The Torygraph, eh pardon.. The Telegraph has the most royalist attitude. When even the comment section under a royal article in that Tory newspaper is filled with negativeness, then this learns something.
 
Tatler December 2019:

Sir Donald Gosling leaves £50 million in his will for a new Royal Yacht

A friend of the Royal Family has left them £50 million in his will, in order to replace the Royal Yacht Britannia, which was decommissioned in 1997.

Sir Donald Gosling, the founder of National Car Parks, died in September aged 90.
(...)

Throughout his lifetime he donated £100 million to charity, mostly to causes relating to the navy. He had previously attempted to raise £60 million for a new yacht to replace the Britannia, back in 1994.

(...)
Click to expand...
 
So if the funding ends up being largely private, does that mean less outrage?
 
Who is going to man (and woman) this royal yacht? In the old days of Britannia and previous yachts it was officers and men from the Royal Navy, who were picked for the job. If this occurs with RY Prince Philip I can see the Press asking questions about the ongoing cost, even if merchant seamen are used.

And who is going to pay for ongoing maintenance, especially if it is used relatively rarely. It’s going to have to berth somewhere and there are those costs to be considered. It’s not just a question of covering the expense of constructing this vessel.
 
Another issue apart from crewing & running costs would be providing an escort when the monarch was on board.
 
Last edited:
Another issue apart from crewing & running costs would be providing an escort when the monarch was on board.

Th RN currently has only 19 fleet escorts (destroyers & frigates). Down from 37 at the time of Britannia's decommissioning. This might go up to 24 with the new type 32's. There are the 8 River Class OPV's as well which are as large as an old WW2 corvette but these are lightly armed.

Despite all these concerns it's a great idea. Maybe selling this as a national rather than royal yacht might make more sense. Possibly incorporating scientific research & youth training as part of the vessel.
 
Last edited:
Indeed. Having this new yacht doubling as a cadet-ship is very much an option.

The Danish yacht Dannebrog is the basis for basic practical seamanship for some 50 or so conscripts each year.
Especially the specialist tasks like baker and cook, is something that counts on the CV.
In that capacity she also doubles as a floating ambassador, because she usually sails to a foreign port before the summer cruises start. Providing training for the conscripts.
And she functions in the basic tasks that all navy vessels perform when at sea: Surveillance and rescue.

Serving aboard Dannebrog is very sought after and there is currently a three year waiting list for conscripts wishing to serve aboard Dannebrog.

- So surely something similar could be arranged in Britain? Let her double as an advanced school ship.

ADDED: And when sailing in British waters an escort is hardly necessary.
 
Britannia always had an escort when the monarch was aboard as far as I'm aware. Wherever it happened to be. But an OPV would suffice in UK waters I would think.

The problem is that the RN has been cut so much since the end of the Cold War that it barely merits being called a blue water navy any more. Thankfully there is renewed awareness of the importance of the RN to Britain & a commitment to expanding its numbers & capabilities as the two new aircraft carriers & future type 26 frigates (destroyer sized) demonstrate. That's the context in which the construction of a new national/royal yacht makes sense. As part of a continuous national ship building industry.

Although I'd be more than happy if the Turks would let us buy the Savarona. A gorgeous ship.?

Prince Philip said that Britannia was structurally sound & could easily have been modernised with new engines. A great pity that didn't happen. Ships like Dannebrog & Norge are beautiful classic vessels & show what could have been done.
 
Last edited:
And would make things easier for say a tour of the Scottish isles. It won't be necessary to flood the local hotels and manors with royal staff members and the BRF members won't have to fly back and forth, but can stay aboard and put their feet up the moment the guests are off the ship.

I can easily imagine the W&K family doing that, with their children.
 
I believe the cost for upgrades in the 90s was £10mil. Guess the are still regretting not paying it then.
 
It was very short sighted to decommission Britannia but unfortunately it didn't chime with the politics of the incoming 1997 government.

I mentioned Savarona up thread. Ataturk's former yacht. Originally built for the US heiress Emily Cadwallader. It's of a similar size to Britannia & was launched in 1931 & restored after fire damage in the nineties. Britannia could easily have been similarly maintained but the political will wasn't there.
 
Denville said:
No, its a ridiculous waste of money....
Click to expand...

A lot of people think so. And some don't. I'm a supporter but I'll only believe it when there's a formal announcement.

It would be a great promotion for British expertise from ship building to interior design to engineering. The yacht market's a valuable industry. Builders like Lursson are very profitable companies. A real life royal yacht built in Britain would be a great advert for British maritime industry.
 
:previous: See all the posts above; or is there something new in the article for us to know about?
 
Here is two Telegraph articles about this royal yacht which been quoted by other papers and have answer to several question discussed on this thread:

From 10 April 2021 (not long after DoE's passing):
Boris Johnson urged to back new Royal Yacht Britannia as memorial to Prince Philip
Archive: https://archive.ph/TnxfY
(...)

MPs, Cabinet ministers, businessmen and a former captain of Britannia are backing calls for the successor to be named HMY The Duke of Edinburgh as a sister vessel to aircraft carriers Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales.
One Cabinet minister said the yacht could form a major of the Prime Minister's ambitious ship-building programme, set out last autumn.

(...)

Political support could increase if the Government said the yacht would double as a hospital ship or a training vessel for young people. The minister said: "Britannia was built to be a hospital ship as well as a royal yacht. Building a vast pleasure cruiser is not something that anyone is going to support.

"But having a symbol of the nation that can travel the world, be used by the Royal family and have another sensible purpose such as helping young people is a better scheme. It could also be a flagship for reinvigorated British shipbuilding."

The original royal yacht was retired in December 1997. She is now berthed at Edinburgh, where she is one of the UK's most popular tourist attractions. A secret naval design for a £100 million replacement was drawn up by naval staff and approved by representatives of the Royal family, but the Labour Government refused to pay for it.

(...)
Click to expand...

Several names who vioce their support as mentioned on above article:
  • Tory MP Craig MacKinlay, who has been co-ordinating a Westminster group backing plans for a new yacht
  • Jake Berry, the chairman of the Northern Research Group of Conservative MPs
  • Commodore Tony Morrow, the yacht's last captain
  • Ian Maiden, a millionaire businessman who has been campaigning for a new yacht to connect the UK to Commonwealth countries after Brexit
  • Sam Armstrong, a spokesman at the Henry Jackson Society which has called for a replacement for Britannia

From 1 May 2021:
Exclusive: Britannia to rule the waves once more, with new royal yacht named after Prince Philip
Archive: https://archive.ph/C8eXV
Boris Johnson will announce within weeks a new national flagship named after the Duke of Edinburgh that will be seen as a successor to the Royal Yacht Britannia.

(...)

The new ship would be crewed by the Royal Navy, senior sources said. It will be the first official government commemoration to Prince Philip.

The announcement – dubbed Project Leith, after the Edinburgh district where the original yacht is moored – had been held up by a wrangle over whether the new ship was to be paid for by the Ministry of Defence or the Cabinet Office.

(...)

The Telegraph has been campaigning for a replacement for HMY Britannia since Britons voted to leave the European Union in 2016.

(...)

The hope is that as a MoD asset, ministers can direct that the vessel is built in UK shipyards in order to create jobs, reinvigorate the UK’s shipbuilding industry and showcase the best of British design, engineering and ingenuity around the world.

One senior source said the plan was “ready to go”. Another said: “There was a bit of a fight between the MoD and the Cabinet Office about who pays for it.

“The lawyers are all over it because in order to stipulate that it is made in Britain it has to have a military use, otherwise it will go out to procurement and could be made in Italy.”

(...)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
:previous:

"Britain to rule the waves once more"

:ohmy: Media really has no limits over there... :whistling:
 
But it means a new version of Britannia (as in the old royal yacht) not Britain which is set to rule the waves once more. It's just a flowery way of saying they'll be a new royal yacht sailing again. Fingers crossed.?

Nothing to do with Britain ruling the waves. That's not happened since at least the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty.
 
Last edited:
(...)

As well as being a resource for British firms looking to export globally, the ship will also be a tangible manifestation of British ingenuity and shipbuilding expertise. The Government’s intention is to build the ship in the UK. This will create jobs, help drive a renaissance in the UK’s shipbuilding industry and showcase the best of British engineering around the world.

The Prime Minister said:

This new national flagship will be the first vessel of its kind in the world, reflecting the UK’s burgeoning status as a great, independent maritime trading nation.

Every aspect of the ship, from its build to the businesses it showcases on board, will represent and promote the best of British – a clear and powerful symbol of our commitment to be an active player on the world stage.

As well as promoting trade, it is expected that the flagship will play an important role in achieving the UK’s foreign policy and security objectives, including by hosting summits and other diplomatic talks.

Construction of the ship is expected to begin as soon as next year and the ship will enter service within the next four years. The tendering process for the design and construction of the ship will launch shortly, with an emphasis on building a vessel which reflects British design expertise and the latest innovations in green technology.

The ship will be crewed by the Royal Navy and is expected to be in service for around 30 years.

(...)
Click to expand...

You're spot on, Muhler!!!????

Muhler said:
No, but as you have no doubt read, there are going to be huge investments worldwide in not least infrastructure but also other fields, in order to kickstart the economy both locally and globally.
It depends on how you sell it.

A royal yacht build in Britain, will employ thousands of people.
She will need a permanent British crew. - No cheap foreign sailors.
She will need running maintenance all her life, also in Britain.
She will remain in British hands and thus remain a British symbol.
- It all depends on how you sell it.

You can easily present a case against pretty much anything, as too costly and really not necessary, but that means no one will be employed.

I deliberately used the example of the Eiffel Tower, because it was a (not that costly actually) highly visible symbol of what French builders, engineers, constructors and manufacturers could do at the time. With hyper-modern materials.
Just like the Crystal Palace.
Click to expand...

No Royal approval though
Palace sinks plan to name £200m royal yacht after Philip
Archive: https://archive.ph/Op1TP
(...)

But the prime minister’s plan to honour the Duke of Edinburgh by naming the national flagship after him has been abandoned after the idea was greeted with coolness within royal circles.

A senior royal source said it was considered “too grand” a symbol for use by the monarchy in the modern age. “It is not something we have asked for,” the source added. The idea is understood not to have won the support of the monarch.

(...)

But the Queen, 95, no longer undertakes overseas travel because of her age and courtiers are understood to be less than enthusiastic about the idea of a vessel presented as a new “royal yacht”. The royal family will not use the new ship for their personal travel or holidays.

It is understood that the Palace was not involved in the commissioning process. A palace source said: “It is a government decision, Buckingham Palace has not been involved in the decision, but we respect it.”

(...)
Click to expand...

It seems the BRF is unwilling to be the scapegoat for the upcoming flaks.

PS: After the Boaty McBoatface debacle, I shudder to think what the name would be if they pull another poll for the public (read: netizen) to name it.
 
Last edited:
So this "Flaghip" will be a Royal Yacht in anything but name and WITHOUT a Royal approval ?
Sounds rather ... fishy.
 
Nico said:
So this "Flaghip" will be a Royal Yacht in anything but name and WITHOUT a Royal approval ?
Sounds rather ... fishy.
Click to expand...

It won't be used by the rf in the way Britannia was. There won't be any holiday cruises or honeymoons I'm sure. It will be strictly royal duties only.
 
Durham said:
It won't be used by the rf in the way Britannia was. There won't be any holiday cruises or honeymoons I'm sure. It will be strictly royal duties only.
Click to expand...

Yeees, but on the way to and from whatever destination... - Well, some might think that's almost like a cruise. :D
And the ship and crew will need some practice from time to time, plenty of opportunity for a BRF member or two to hitch a ride - and help train the service-crew.
I can several ways of getting around that one.

And the ship will be a floating promotion of Britain wherever she sails - even more so if there is a royal or two aboard.
 
Muhler said:
Yeees, but on the way to and from whatever destination... - Well, some might think that's almost like a cruise. :D
And the ship and crew will need some practice from time to time, plenty of opportunity for a BRF member or two to hitch a ride - and help train the service-crew.
I can several ways of getting around that one.

And the ship will be a floating promotion of Britain wherever she sails - even more so if there is a royal or two aboard.
Click to expand...

Unlikely.

The gov press release states:
A typical six month itinerary for the flagship might include docking at a port in a country where a British Prime Ministerial visit is taking place to accommodate parallel discussions between British and local businesses, hosting trade fairs to sell British products to an emerging market and providing the venue for an international ministerial summit or major trade negotiations between the UK and another government.
Click to expand...
Most likely it would be same for the royals.

Besides, with the future plan of slimming down, the royals have no time nor numbers for any "cruising" trip. In fact, it seems they're trying their hardest to distance themselves from this. And after the whole "flying commercial" (or the Cambridge's school run before leaving and arranging return trip for bed tucking), cruising for royal tour seems to be counterproductive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iceflower
Royals at the Paris 2024 Summer Olympics & Paralympics
12 13 14
Replies
402
Views
61K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Sun Lion
Better Quality Mary Documentary.
Replies
4
Views
807
Sun Lion
Sun Lion
Somebody
Earning a living as a non-full time royal
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
Silverpot
Silverpot
Misskitty
Question about Queen Camilla
Replies
6
Views
1K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
Marengo
Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Durek Verrett: 31 August 2024
9 10 11
Replies
302
Views
39K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom