Warship Preservation (Formerly HMS Plymouth - Urgent Campaign)

The Peel scumbags apparently set up a separate company to dispose of the ship & then closed it down as soon as the deed was done.

Bob.

 

Seems like it was done with government support (which probably explains the lack of news interest).
Presumably they didn't want a political story about the ship and it's history in the news and hid behind normal secrecy regulations of dismantling the ship as any other MOD ship

 

Im not sure what they mean by closed it down. A company cannot be removed from the register unless it has not traded for more than three months, and no one including all the government agencies objects

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/infoAndGuide/windingUpCompany.shtml

 

Having the read the above - I understand an "Arrest Warrant" was never applied for or issued and the HMS Plymouth's Trust sole director has suddenly vanish off the face of the earth too. So before you start making Peel Holdings the guilty party in all this, there is more to this alleged last minute campaign then meets the eye. Further more, remember there has plenty of opportunities for some one or group or trust etc over a period of seven years to save this ship but sadly it did not happen for numerous reasons and that is not solely Peel Holdings fault either.

Another member has mentioned "Landing Craft -LCT7074" which was sunk in East Float, Birkenhead Docks and Peel Holdings let her staying there - well if you seen on TV or read in local paper's that is no longer the case as she has been successfully raised and will be transported to Portsmouth for restoration and display. Some good news hey.

 

Many of the alleged details of thew scrapping contract appear somewhat suspect. Peel Holdings should be in no position to make threats about contracts issued by for disposal by the MOD. If they are, that is a very serious matter indeed - a private business focused on making profit to the exclusion of everything else (and before the usual suspects start "that is all that any business is concerned with", ironically given the increasingly callous nature of business, actually Companies Act 2006 places other responsibilities on the directors of a business - they are toothless due to the lack of anyone with the necessary resources to take action when breached) having control over any aspect of the activities of the Ministry of Defence and making threats on their behalf would be totally unacceptable.

I have absolutely no time for Peel Holdings, and can fully accept that they and their method of doing business would have much of the present Government fawning over them in a nauseating manner and extolling their approach to business as being what the whole country should aspire to, but I can see no business reason for the alleged requirements of immediate destruction etc. I have to say from what I have heard of them, had an offer greater than the scrapman's been made, they would surely have taken it as providing the better return than scrapping. As has been hinted elsewhere, are elements of this story attempting to cover up the failure of the past owners and current campaigners to actually understand the beast with which they are dealing - Peel want to make money, offer them a proper deal or come up with a threat that will cost more than they expect to make, and they would surely be willing to talk. Had the scrapman had an offer better than their cost, then a clause to ensure that the surplus was shared with Peel would have been suffice - had the scrapman sold at a loss, what problem was that to Peel? The only reason for immediate cutting was to minimise bad press (e.g. pictures of the ship further rotting) and as there has been no real coverage on a national scale, and clearly if the report is accurate no bar on discussing the contract, what point would that be?

Another consideration if the allegation seems to be that the MOD were involved in the scrapping - if I understand correctly, it is the MOD./taxpayer who have mainly lost out here. Had the ship been sold for scrap on decommissioning, the proceeds would have come to the crown. I seem to think the MOD sold the ship to the Warship Preservation Trust for a nominal sum, Peel somehow seized the ship and presumably received the scrap proceeds - no doubt in a manner so as to ensure "tax efficiency". Those proceeds should, at the very least, have gone to the Crown, not private business.

Steven

(Anyone, good to see the huge improvement to the outcome from, to quote above, "Nigel Farage being all over this" - highly effective politician!)

 

I've only just found this thread, wot a damn shame, so that's all the Roteasys gone?.It's always sad to hear of the demise of a “fighting”warship especially in circumstances less than savoury. Our paths only crossed a couple of times during my service. I seem to remember seeing her with bows clad in sleepers in Pompey early 1977 for the cod war, while we were getting a large dent removed (courtesy of Iceland) and in the late 80's my oppo had served on her down south and had a few stories, the pepperpot included. Even if she was Guz based she was still one of ours.

 

When I worked for a marine consultancy we got involved with a few old ships in various capacities, and it's difficult for those groups involved in ship preservation. At least with an item of railway rolling stock you can put it in a shed. A steel ship disintegrates before your eyes when it's in its element and there's not much you can do about it. The size is another big problem--a ship is a lot of steel, and requires a lot of maintenance. The way you make money out of it isn't as obvious as a railway--to put an old ship into Class and Flag, particularly for carrying passengers is an epic and very costly undertaking, although it has been done. A ship is all or nothing too. If your railway scheme fails the rolling stock will be dispersed, but can be used elsewhere--not so with a ship! That said, given Britain's maritime history, it seems surprising that so little of it remains, particularly compared with Germany and the Netherlands. As far as HMS Plymouth goes I can't get too upset regarding the ship itself (although obviously there are many who do have an attachment to it), but more the way in which its disposal represents an almost careless disregard for our maritime history.

 

I visited her in Plymouth, as she was the sole Falklands war veteran. Such a shame it's gone.

I hope the same does not happen to HMS Illustrious Or HMS Hermes, which in service in India

 

The Indian Navy is currently planning a new fleet of warships , in order to keep up with the Chinese. These will be built in Indian yards.
The ex- Royal Navy ships still owned by them are uncomfortably close to breaker's yards.


Bob.

 

is there any chance of saving HMS Illustrious? I heard she was not for sale outside the UK, and it would be really nice to have a carrier museum ship, like the Americans have.

 

Of all the ships currently for sale by the government I believe the best ship in terms of museums would be HMS Gloucester. The type 42s would be far cheaper to maintain (Still expensive) compared to the carrier but also I would say she is more historically significant... plus as the government sold all the Harriers what would you put on the ship?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...to-give-retired-HMS-Illustrious-new-home.html

 

I'd put an Fleet Air Arm / Royal Marines museum on it, and turn suitable accommodation into hotel rooms Ala RN best bunks, for a proper Navy experience, And swish place to have parties, weddings and alike. A ship that big would have a nice galley! You need to think outside the box, and with a carrier there is a lot you can do.

 

If you have endless pots of money to throw at it....maybe. Big ship preservation is usually a road to ruin.

 

Just look at the costs involved with HMS Victory makes the Flying Scotsman overhaul look like pocket change

 

How is it the Yanks have loads of carriers, and battleships parked everywhere, and we have just the Belfast, and Cavalier. OK we have one WWI Monitor, and the Warrior, and a few other historic ships, but nothing recent, and it's time to save one. I bet the reason why Victory is rotting so badly, might have something to do with the fact she is 250 years old, under stress from not being on water, and our crappy warm wet weather, which is well known to rot wood. Anyway, by the time they restore her, she will be a replica. I was happy until I heard of Plymouth's fate, which was stupid. Now there simply is not many ships to choose from other than Lusty

 

One or two ships per state. We also have ships like the Great Western and Cutty stark. Modern naval preservation is a nightmare and it's all down to the change in naval tactics and ship designs. World war 2 era ships were designed with 3 or 4 inch steel plates to protect them against big attacks modern ships are designed not to get hit and steal hauls a 1 or 2 cm big. This leads to high maintenance costs that bankrupts societies.

 

The problem with warship preservation is the recurring theme of this country, the cost of land. Preserved ships are big and need to take-up prime expensive real estate locations - river/sea frontage. Given that, the ship needs to be very important indeed to warrant taking up such valuable space, and I'm afraid HMS Plymouth simply didn't meet that qualification.

As far as the port owner getting rid of it, were they being paid any money for the space it was taking up? Since the demise of the charity - I doubt it. Given that why should they have to put up with it taking up valuable space?