I blame Fraser .....no, I don't :-)

[Effoh]

http://youtu.be/sL2hNXfQQkQ

[DaveB]

Just as I was about to go to bed

Cheers Colin
ATB
DaveB

[Paul K]

At 11.03... thirty six thousand cans of beer ! So that's what RAS stands for - Refreshment At Sea.

[Filonian]

Damn, so was I Dave.

Another late night/early morning.

Cheers Colin


Graham

[FlyTexas]

Exotic ports of call. Sausages, potatoes, beer, and bread baked fresh daily. I could get used to that. Now if the ship only had a casino, that would be pure heaven. Thanks very much for posting the link Colin.

Brian

[Vancouver]

Very stirring stuff!
Now, being a complete nincompoop (sp?) who can explain to me the difference between a Frigate and a Destroyer?

[DaveB]

The origins of both go back a long time.. particularly frigates of which there were examples when me old mate Nelson was knocking around. Wiki says they were primarily built for speed, carried fixed guns but were not sufficiently powerful to go it alone against the big boys. Destroyers are a fair bit more modern and were originally (according to Wiki) designed and built to combat early torpedo boats. They were (then) known as TBD's.. torpedo boat destroyers. Fast, nimble ships but with little endurance.
Since the end of WWII, particularly with the advent of guided missiles, the role of the Destroyer has changed. They're now much bigger, more powerful and endurance is not an issue. Their primary use is to support and guard the bigger ships.. carrier groups being a good example. Their size means they can also take on the role of command ships. Frigates have grown too although typically.. they're not as big as destroyers and do not carry the same 'punch'.
There's a lot in a name mind you. If you're a hard pushed navy that wants a fleet of new Destroyers.. design them larger and more powerful than frigates but call them frigates and you may just get away with the request being accepted by your government. The perception is that Destroyers are big and costly.. Frigates are smaller and less costly though these days.. there's little difference between the two. This has happened on numerous occasions over the years in the UK. A good example is the County Class Destroyer. In physical size and ability.. the Counties are/were actually light cruisers weighing in at around 6200t. There was no way a light cruiser would ever be accepted so the Navy said they were Destroyers Similar too the now defunct Illustrious, Invincible and Ark Royal V. It looks like a carrier (albeit a small one) and it IS a carrier but they were originally designated Through-Deck Cruisers and are listed as such in my copy of Janes Fighting Ships 73-74. With the then Labour government cancelling everything in sight including the RN's CVA project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVA-01).. there was no way the RN were going to get a full blown aircraft carrier so the TDC's were designed and designated 'cruisers' to get around the problem. Ironically, one of the Destroyer class designed to 'guard' CVA-01.. HMS Bristol.. managed to slip through the net although she ended up being a class of one. These were heavier and almost 100ft longer than the County Class so gad knows how the RN got away with that one

ATB
DaveB

[robbie]

Great video, especially enjoyed seeing a real ships wheel, the helmsman needed muscles in those days didn't they Dave?.

Robbie.

[DaveB]

Oh yeah. The wheels were geared of course but they weren't the little tiddly things we have these days

ATB
DaveB

[SkippyBing]

Technically in the RN a Destroyer is an Anti-Air Warfare (AAW) vessel and a Frigate is an Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) vessel. Although both can perform the other role to a limited degree, e.g. Sea Wolf on a T23 is a point defence anti air weapon (short range) as opposed to Sea Viper on the T45 which is area defence designed to protect the task group. One exception to Dave B's destroyers are bigger line is the T42 which was smaller than the T22 and T23, mainly because the Treasury seemed to think that anything bigger than the smallest thing that could carry Sea Dart was too big. Ironically the original T42 design which was finally built as the stretched Batch 3s was more fuel efficient because of the increased waterline length...