Talk:HMS Royalist (89): Difference between revisions
125.236.227.210 (talk) wiki code link |
130.216.188.72 (talk) subedit by writer |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
== Gerry Wright. HMNZS Royalist. Compilation -Collection book . A Flawed defense of the discredited Peter Phipps & Frank Corner == |
== Gerry Wright. HMNZS Royalist. Compilation -Collection book . A Flawed defense of the discredited Peter Phipps & Frank Corner == |
||
This recent glossy NZ publication (2018) republishes various published and unpublished works on the Royalist including part of the wiki article in its 2017 state Wrights editorial view is the Royalist was an ill advised and poor investment given its poor hull condition and cramped crew conditions which had hardly been improved from WW2. Wright claims that there no other ships using the RN DP 5.25 gun, although the RN still had 5 battleships in reserve when Royalist recommissioned in 1956 and it was the following years 1957 Sandys defense review which led to the RN deciding to scrap the last four Dido cruisers it had in reserve HMS Euralyus, Cleopatra, Dido and Bellona and the final RN shore emplacement 5.25 battery remained operational until 1980 with four new single 5.25 mounts for AA and anti ship action being installed as late as 1955 Gibraltar. On 25 March 1955, NZ National MP, Sid Holland was considering purchasing HMS Royalist or [[HMS Diadem]] (which was instead sold to Pakistan and transferred after in Mid 1957). Diadem renamed, Babur was given a 18mth refit which far exceeded the estimated cost of 1.5 million dollars (1 million dollars provided by Pakistan and 0.25 million by the UK and 0.25 million US from the MPDA) The huge actual cost of the refit enraged opposition parties in Pakistan . Diadem received a thorough overhaul, a new bridge and light 40mm Mk 5 (3x2) and Mk 7 (8 X1) armament and served in a number of wars with India 1962, 1965 and 1971 the third encounter providing an interesting alternative view to the Falklands and Gulf of how 1950s UK frigates, cruisers and RAF and RN carrier borne aircraft would fare in conflict. It is generally recorded that Diadem was reduced to a training ship in 1961. However Mountbatten (Record Society), RAN CNS correspondence with First Sea Lord) fought with everything to have Diadem enter IPN service as a surface counter to the UK reconstructed Mysore (HMS Nigeria rebuilt to the std if Newfoundland 1952). The Dido AD cruisers were something of the first 'hot' ships and could not really be turned off and like the Royalist could only be briefly refitted and and it had to be half manned, in 1958-61 untilreturned to service as an operational warship. Retired Australian Admiral James Goldrick wrote extensively about the Diadem in his book on the Indian, Pakistan, Ceylon and Bengal Navies and the |
This recent glossy NZ publication (2018) republishes various published and unpublished works on the Royalist including part of the wiki article in its 2017 state Wrights editorial view is the Royalist was an ill advised and poor investment given its poor hull condition and cramped crew conditions which had hardly been improved from WW2. Wright claims that there no other ships using the RN DP 5.25 gun, although the RN still had 5 battleships in reserve when Royalist recommissioned in 1956 and it was the following years 1957 Sandys defense review which led to the RN deciding to scrap the last four Dido cruisers it had in reserve HMS Euralyus, Cleopatra, Dido and Bellona and the final RN shore emplacement 5.25 battery remained operational until 1980 with four new single 5.25 mounts for AA and anti ship action being installed as late as 1955 Gibraltar. On 25 March 1955, NZ National MP, Sid Holland was considering purchasing HMS Royalist or [[HMS Diadem]] (which was instead sold to Pakistan and transferred after in Mid 1957). Diadem renamed, Babur was given a 18mth refit which far exceeded the estimated cost of 1.5 million dollars (1 million dollars provided by Pakistan and 0.25 million by the UK and 0.25 million US from the MPDA) The huge actual cost of the refit enraged opposition parties in Pakistan . Diadem received a thorough overhaul, a new bridge and light 40mm Mk 5 (3x2) and Mk 7 (8 X1) armament and served in a number of wars with India 1962, 1965 and 1971 the third encounter providing an interesting alternative view to the Falklands and Gulf of how 1950s UK frigates, cruisers and RAF and RN carrier borne aircraft would fare in conflict. It is generally recorded that Diadem was reduced to a training ship in 1961. However Mountbatten (Record Society), RAN CNS correspondence with First Sea Lord) fought with everything to have Diadem enter IPN service as a surface counter to the UK reconstructed Mysore (HMS Nigeria rebuilt to the std if Newfoundland 1952). The Dido AD cruisers were something of the first 'hot' ships and could not really be turned off and like the Royalist could only be briefly refitted and and it had to be half manned, in 1958-61 untilreturned to service as an operational warship. Retired Australian Admiral James Goldrick wrote extensively about the Diadem in his book on the Indian, Pakistan, Ceylon and Bengal Navies and the |
||
| ⚫ | In terms of warship raiders, it appears the post war Soviet Chapevs and Sverdlovs were partly intended to play a similar role to the WW2 Kreigsmarine, battlecruisers and armoured cruisers like Graf Spee, given the Sverdlov were near 20,000 displacement and had 6 inch armour on their 6 inch triple turrets and belt, no cruiser may have been the answer. The RN view post war however was the expected standard of the Soviet fleet would be low and a pair of 4.5 gunned Daring Destroyers or even a pair of Type 41 diesels with two twin 4.5 inch would have been adequate. Part of the justification for the Royalist was actually that it might be more of a counter to the Sverdlov transferred to Indonesia , INS Irain than British destroyers or the County GMD unarmoured and with only 4.5 guns. The Indonesians did not seem interested in maintaining the Sverdlov in combat capable condition, but it known that in 1964 the Russian Navy did take the cruiser back to Russia for a refit. Royalists modernisation was only expected to cover a lifespan of 6 years. A RN reconstruction, entailed a high grade short remaining life reequipping to fight in WW3 in 1956-1963 with area defence, AA and surface fighting capability. Reconstruction did not necessarily involve reboilering, new drive train and engines, if the existing boilers, hull and engine would last to the ships, planned 20 year life. A 'Life extension extended refit' was a renewal and replacement of a cruisers worn out or obsolete power and weapon systems, and might involve a physical life extension of 5-20 years for lower level patrol and colonial duties, but without more than point defence AA weapons for the ships own self defence. with L60 twin water cooled bofor, effective with 262 radar to 2 miles. The expected lifespan of a war built Dido or Colony cruiser was no more than 20 years the usual age of their withdrawal and it was to be expected the accuracy of the AA gun alignment in Royalists Mk 6 275 directors would deteriorate from mid 1963 as they did. The real question would have to be why the Holyoake government did not take out another interim lease of a Daring destroyer known to have been recently refitted. Royalist at least looked like a cruiser and was safer than a long low Daring, with an excessive turning circle. |
||
Wright repeats the claim that Rear Admiral Peter Phipps is reputed to have made that the HMNZS Royalist lacked the range to reach Tahiti. The original |
|||
NZ News Herald reports on 21/12/ 56 in the Auckland weekly news reprint is that what he said was that it could not reach Panama unrefueled from Auckland. Secondly in Mr Gerry Wrights previous work on HMNZS Blackpool, Blackpool is recorded as draining its fuel tanks to just make the 2500nm transit from Pearl Harbour to San Diego at 15knots cruising speed where the log of the Royalist 1965 voyage out to Pearl Harbour shows its speed throughout the 3200 mile longer transit from Suva to Pearl Harbour at 18/19K |
|||
| ⚫ | In terms of warship raiders, it appears the post war Soviet Chapevs and Sverdlovs were partly intended to play a similar role to the WW2 Kreigsmarine, battlecruisers and armoured cruisers like Graf Spee, given the Sverdlov were near 20,000 displacement and had 6 inch armour on their 6 inch triple turrets and belt, no cruiser may have been the answer. The RN view post war however was the expected standard of the Soviet fleet would be low and a pair of 4.5 gunned Daring Destroyers or even a pair of Type 41 diesels with two twin 4.5 inch would have been adequate. Part of the justification for the Royalist was actually that it might be more of a counter to the Sverdlov transferred to Indonesia , INS Irain than British destroyers or the County GMD unarmoured and with only 4.5 guns. The Indonesians did not seem interested in maintaining the Sverdlov in combat capable condition, but it known that in 1964 the Russian Navy did take the cruiser back to Russia for a refit |
||
The triple Mk 6 inch and twin 4 inch cruiser weapons used by other RN cruisers in the 1950s saw only a few more years service in the RN. The 5.25 turrets were more modern and accurate and required 60 crew per turret cf with 90 for a Mk 23 triple 6. The twin 4inch X1X was obsolete and inaccurate |
The triple Mk 6 inch and twin 4 inch cruiser weapons used by other RN cruisers in the 1950s saw only a few more years service in the RN. The 5.25 turrets were more modern and accurate and required 60 crew per turret cf with 90 for a Mk 23 triple 6. The twin 4inch X1X was obsolete and inaccurate |
||
Revision as of 23:59, 20 February 2022
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
Gerry Wright. HMNZS Royalist. Compilation -Collection book . A Flawed defense of the discredited Peter Phipps & Frank Corner
This recent glossy NZ publication (2018) republishes various published and unpublished works on the Royalist including part of the wiki article in its 2017 state Wrights editorial view is the Royalist was an ill advised and poor investment given its poor hull condition and cramped crew conditions which had hardly been improved from WW2. Wright claims that there no other ships using the RN DP 5.25 gun, although the RN still had 5 battleships in reserve when Royalist recommissioned in 1956 and it was the following years 1957 Sandys defense review which led to the RN deciding to scrap the last four Dido cruisers it had in reserve HMS Euralyus, Cleopatra, Dido and Bellona and the final RN shore emplacement 5.25 battery remained operational until 1980 with four new single 5.25 mounts for AA and anti ship action being installed as late as 1955 Gibraltar. On 25 March 1955, NZ National MP, Sid Holland was considering purchasing HMS Royalist or HMS Diadem (which was instead sold to Pakistan and transferred after in Mid 1957). Diadem renamed, Babur was given a 18mth refit which far exceeded the estimated cost of 1.5 million dollars (1 million dollars provided by Pakistan and 0.25 million by the UK and 0.25 million US from the MPDA) The huge actual cost of the refit enraged opposition parties in Pakistan . Diadem received a thorough overhaul, a new bridge and light 40mm Mk 5 (3x2) and Mk 7 (8 X1) armament and served in a number of wars with India 1962, 1965 and 1971 the third encounter providing an interesting alternative view to the Falklands and Gulf of how 1950s UK frigates, cruisers and RAF and RN carrier borne aircraft would fare in conflict. It is generally recorded that Diadem was reduced to a training ship in 1961. However Mountbatten (Record Society), RAN CNS correspondence with First Sea Lord) fought with everything to have Diadem enter IPN service as a surface counter to the UK reconstructed Mysore (HMS Nigeria rebuilt to the std if Newfoundland 1952). The Dido AD cruisers were something of the first 'hot' ships and could not really be turned off and like the Royalist could only be briefly refitted and and it had to be half manned, in 1958-61 untilreturned to service as an operational warship. Retired Australian Admiral James Goldrick wrote extensively about the Diadem in his book on the Indian, Pakistan, Ceylon and Bengal Navies and the In terms of warship raiders, it appears the post war Soviet Chapevs and Sverdlovs were partly intended to play a similar role to the WW2 Kreigsmarine, battlecruisers and armoured cruisers like Graf Spee, given the Sverdlov were near 20,000 displacement and had 6 inch armour on their 6 inch triple turrets and belt, no cruiser may have been the answer. The RN view post war however was the expected standard of the Soviet fleet would be low and a pair of 4.5 gunned Daring Destroyers or even a pair of Type 41 diesels with two twin 4.5 inch would have been adequate. Part of the justification for the Royalist was actually that it might be more of a counter to the Sverdlov transferred to Indonesia , INS Irain than British destroyers or the County GMD unarmoured and with only 4.5 guns. The Indonesians did not seem interested in maintaining the Sverdlov in combat capable condition, but it known that in 1964 the Russian Navy did take the cruiser back to Russia for a refit. Royalists modernisation was only expected to cover a lifespan of 6 years. A RN reconstruction, entailed a high grade short remaining life reequipping to fight in WW3 in 1956-1963 with area defence, AA and surface fighting capability. Reconstruction did not necessarily involve reboilering, new drive train and engines, if the existing boilers, hull and engine would last to the ships, planned 20 year life. A 'Life extension extended refit' was a renewal and replacement of a cruisers worn out or obsolete power and weapon systems, and might involve a physical life extension of 5-20 years for lower level patrol and colonial duties, but without more than point defence AA weapons for the ships own self defence. with L60 twin water cooled bofor, effective with 262 radar to 2 miles. The expected lifespan of a war built Dido or Colony cruiser was no more than 20 years the usual age of their withdrawal and it was to be expected the accuracy of the AA gun alignment in Royalists Mk 6 275 directors would deteriorate from mid 1963 as they did. The real question would have to be why the Holyoake government did not take out another interim lease of a Daring destroyer known to have been recently refitted. Royalist at least looked like a cruiser and was safer than a long low Daring, with an excessive turning circle.
The triple Mk 6 inch and twin 4 inch cruiser weapons used by other RN cruisers in the 1950s saw only a few more years service in the RN. The 5.25 turrets were more modern and accurate and required 60 crew per turret cf with 90 for a Mk 23 triple 6. The twin 4inch X1X was obsolete and inaccurate
The Royalist and Dido conversions were considered prototype cruiser destroyers by the RN in 1949 and the late 1940s view in Britain was that anti sub frigates and minesweepers should be all the Navy required. Given the immediate requirements of the Korean war and the UK Treasury restricting any cruiser to 370O ton dimensions of he USS Mitcher the HMS Royalist conversion was a rare major surface warship that could go forward after the success of the similar update of USS Juneau in a unique and rather too succesful USN conversion in 1951 with modern AA radar for 12 5inch guns and 14 twin 3/50 the Juneau outshooting the USS Worchester and early Terrier ships. The decade of problems with Sea Slug and Terrier/Tartar in the USA meant the AA success on test against Jet drones of the Royalist/ Juneau made them a very unwanted development which the RN & USN wanted out of the way. The Royalist was successful against multiple meteor jet drones while Seaslug managed comparable performance tests against slower Firefly drones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.175.44 (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
- Suggest you break it down into short specific issues with room to discuss each. GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
The need to remove Graeme Leggett as a wikipedia editor
This article has essentially been written by me since 2011. My decision to write and edit of the RN/RNZN cold war ship articles followed the development of the Key government and their review of the new OPV class, cut in naval officer pay rates and fuel allocation. There were also the speeches of Mike Moore and Tim Grosser as NZ ambassadors to the USA. Moore and Tim Grosser asserted in speeches in the USA that 'Royalist' was not even in the Med at the time of the Suez crisis. In many senses the Royalist was the last RN cruiser, and the RNZN should have been honoured to run her. Mr Leggat and Gerry Wright, two edition magnus opus on Royalist, the first largely stolen from my various Royalist wiki articles, the second edition largely removing my contribution except for a badly edited section, The reedit removed the fact that Royalist was still on active service with the RN fleet at least of the first day of Muskeeter. I had to counter this complete destruction of historical truth. Essentially the Key government had decided to violate the basic requirement post ANZUS of maintaining any credible relationship with the US and chance of resumption of Anzus lay in maintaining a credible officer core which was essentially destroyed by the pay, conditions and equipment decisions of the Key government and his unqualified Defense Minister Wayne Mapp, now protesting against that vital, national asset and tech advance of Becks rocket lab. Also Mapp's Key staff Deputy Minister Heather Roy and speech writer Stuart Boag were people from Timaru, my original town where I attended TBHS 1970-74 and worked for the post office 1975-6, Waterside Commission 77-8, Waimate CC and OUP 1982 (on the planning of the proposed hydro scheme) and as largely full time editorial writer 1984-5 Anzus crisis. It needs to be pointed out that I have written on RNZN issues for the NZIIA under Ian McGibbon and was interviewed for several MOD A0 positions in 1980/84 and of course have met such RNZN planning officers Ian Bradley, Robert Martin, Ryan and was interviewed by MOD officer Chris Rosanowski, son of a Timaru College teacher and close friend of my mother. The reason I entered journalism after getting a 2/2 MA was the state of the railways and the lack of a real defense or rail policy under Muldoon. My main purpose was opposing the RNZN/RN joint submarine proposal ( 1983 Memo to include RNZN in Collins project) signed up to by Muldoon. Contrary to popular opinion I have never met Helen Clark. My father Alan Miles was certainly not mad and neither was Frederick Fisher Miles slandered beyond belief in SJ Harper's travesty on Gallipoli. Both actually did attend Balliol in 1913-13,19-20 and 49-50 and served as officers in WW1 and WW2 in the Gloucester Regiment and in Alan Miles case presumably as a RNZN/RN War service Reserve Officer on HMS Kledive, Hunt destroyers and in New York on prep planning of the Sth France invasion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.67.34 (talk) 00:43, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- I consider Lynships comments along with the whole efforts of the Roy/ Boag families to destroy and erase me criminal slander. I mean my and my families academic and financial records are on the public record. I do actually have 4 university degrees and serious academic publications. My trust was just a rich boys trust asked for by me. Edgar Bradley LLB ret was supposedly a family friend. His son Stephen Bradley was in the 6th/7th form at TBHS in the same classes as me and my IQ is about ten points higher. So it is just sour grapes on his part that he failed to win in History. in terms of Mr Philip Smith another supposed family friend. He is a national party member and fundamentalist and furthur comments from that direction would make a serious fraud inquiry into the relevant law firms essential.
In terms of my record and that of my family. It is not difficult to confirm that Alan Miles was at Balliol in 1949-50 that he was nominated for a Rhodes Scholarship and on the staff of Vic Uni, Wellington in 1948-49. Likewise with Frederick Fisher Miles. In terms of my mothers money and class, I am sure her share holdings in the first decade of this century can easily be checked. She was an hons student in Alan Miles class about 1947/48. . Do you thing such right wing, families as most of my relatives, would actually marry frauds, beads and idiots. On my fathers death in 1981, I examined his personal papers, re the offer of a permanent commission in the RNZN and the offer of Balliol in 1950, to return to the college for 3 weeks to compile a bibl, to complete a B.Litt. He chose to return to NZ because at Balliol/ Oxford in 1949/50 austerity, coldest and worst conditions re food in UK for 50 years. My aim is to widen the context of the article to include the essential facts that the Bellona/ Royalist mod and Tiger class completion was mainly as interim stop gap specialist AA cruisers to replace the lost unusable AA capability of the KGV, Vanguard and wartime 40-44 fleet carriers with their encase single feed 4.5 twins. The 5.25/ Mk 6 275 fire control gun system was essentially that proven in combat against the Japanese in 1945 on HMS Howe and Anson. Refitting the proven successful AA system postwar was a great problem for the RN postwar. Immediately in 1948 transferring the 5.25 guns or new Tiger guns to the Colonies was planned and rejected. The general argument of Phipps about the superiority of the RN 6 inch Mk 23 and MK 26 ignores the fact their bulk meant the general 1950s RN plan was to scrap the Colony class by 1955 and they could only man 1 turret only if a RM detatchment was aboard and secondly the Tigers are only AA flak ships which whole point and jusftification is fast short bursts of AA fire, and they were not designed for GFS or anti Sverdlov action.
- I did leave a note on the IP editors talk page User talk:115.188.67.34 offering solutions to any issues they had with my editing. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Talkpage conduct
IP editor, you need to read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Especially taking note of instructions against editing other users comments.
Also Wikipedia:No legal threats to make sure you don't misrepresent your intent. GraemeLeggett (talk) 22:55, 15 November 2021 (UTC)