Queensferry Crossing, HMS Queen Elizabeth and all things Royal Navy

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
HMS Implacable in 1942

1643129179462.png


HMS Sensible can be seen in the background not going out to be torpedoed by U Boats!
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
The Implacable being towed out to sea to be sunk is saluted by the captain and crew of HMS Implacable - 1949. Two questions; firstly, I didn't think the RN allowed two ships to carry the same name. Secondly, why the heck did they think it appropriate to just take old ships like this out to sea and sink them?

1645096575582.png
 

Dartman

Pole Sitter
The Implacable being towed out to sea to be sunk is saluted by the captain and crew of HMS Implacable - 1949. Two questions; firstly, I didn't think the RN allowed two ships to carry the same name. Secondly, why the heck did they think it appropriate to just take old ships like this out to sea and sink them?

View attachment 15322
There can't be more than one ship of the same name commissioned, they had enough problems with Olympus (S/M) and Olynthus (RFA) Olympus had a delivery of 10,000 tons of FFO listed in a signal, fortunately prevented as they were over 5,000 miles apart.
It was in 1949, there were plenty of hulks lying about in various UK and commonwealth ports, and they had Victory at Portsmouth, they weren't history then, and upkeep costs would be on the Admiralty budget which after a war was being stretched as the Korean war was being paid for.
 
Last edited:

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
The Implacable being towed out to sea to be sunk is saluted by the captain and crew of HMS Implacable - 1949. Two questions; firstly, I didn't think the RN allowed two ships to carry the same name. Secondly, why the heck did they think it appropriate to just take old ships like this out to sea and sink them?
You're spot on mate. You can't have two serving ships of the same name. This hulk Implacable had long been out of service when she was taken out to be scuttled off the Isle of Wight. She was handed over to a private businessman in the 1920s for conversion into a boys training ship alongside the former HMS Trincomalee, in Falmouth.

Implacable was deemed too expensive to restore and, given that these ships contained almost nothing of scrap value, scuttling was the cheapest option. Parts of her survive in the maritime museum in Greenwich.

Trincomalee survived in use as a training and accomodation ship until the mid 80's and is now a museum ship in Hartlepool.

Back to the theme of "same names" as a result of one of the next generation of RN frigates being named HMS Belfast the museum ship in London will be named HMS Belfast (1938) to avoid confusion.
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
Bloody useless smoke screen. You can see that carrier from miles away. It's right in the middle of the picture.
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
Navy Day in Portsmouth. Can't work out if it's pre-war or post-war

View attachment 15544
I think the picture dates from somewhere between 1927 and 1932. The ship in the background is a Nelson class battleship. They were distinctive for having all three main battery guns forward of the bridge instead of two in front and one behind. The class underwent upgrades in the early 30's which changed the appearance of the masts and the range finder on top of the bridge hence my guess at the date
 

Pokitren

Browser
I think the picture dates from somewhere between 1927 and 1932. The ship in the background is a Nelson class battleship. They were distinctive for having all three main battery guns forward of the bridge instead of two in front and one behind. The class underwent upgrades in the early 30's which changed the appearance of the masts and the range finder on top of the bridge hence my guess at the date
Indeed, why would all three guns be at the front when one would still be more advantageous at the back. How many of these battleships were made, do you know?
 

Dartman

Pole Sitter
Probably because the RN didn't fire running away, the ships were built to fire forward or sideways, the only advantage of rear guns is you get a slight speed increase from the recoil. I think four were built, haven't looked it up.
 
Last edited:

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
Indeed, why would all three guns be at the front when one would still be more advantageous at the back. How many of these battleships were made,
There were two of the class built.

HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney

The design of the ships was heavily influenced by the Washington Naval treaty which placed limits on the numbers, sizes and displacements of ships under construction by the major powers after the First World War.

The location of turrets was carefully planned to give the greatest field of fire and to maintain that while manoeuvring these vessels. The Nelson Class reduced the space required for ammunition handling and storage by placing all three main turrets together while still maintaining relatively wide arcs of fire. The French used a similar solution with their battleship Dunkerque which had 2 quadruple barrelled turrets placed forward of the superstructure.
 
Top Bottom