'Grand old lady' sails into Plymouth for the last time
A CLOUDY sombre sky with bursts of sunshine reflected the mood as city submarine HMS Trafalgar returned to Devonport for the last time.
The Trafalgar-class nuclear-powered boat is being decommissioned after 26 years of active service.
-
HMS-Trafalgar-sails-into-HM-Naval-Base-Devonport
In her Royal Navy career she has seen her fair share of excitement and controversy.
But yesterday at Devonport Naval Base, officers focused on the positive points.
Her Commanding Officer, Commander Charlie Shepherd, described the event as being the “end of an era”.
“There is a mix of sadness and pride,” the 48-year-old said yesterday.
“She has been in service for 26 years and today was her last day at sea. It is the end of her career at sea and the end of an era.
“It is clearly a very emotional day and it is sad that such a grand old lady is ending her life.
“The ship’s company is like a big family which will now be broken up in the coming weeks and months.
“The majority will be serving on other submarines in the fleet.”
Cdr Shepherd said the submarine had achieved a great many things since being commissioned in May 1983.
He cited one achievement as her being the first British nuclear-powered submarine to circumnavigate the globe, a feat she achieved in the early 1990s.
Abel Seaman (Sonar) James Launce, from St Budeaux, has been serving on HMS Trafalgar since March 2003.
The 29-year-old said: “It is a sad day coming in for the last time. The lads are feeling it.
“I’ve been on board since 2003 and seen a lot of people come and go – now it’s her time to go.”
He said he enjoys being a submariner.
“It’s just different for the surface fleet,” he added.
“It’s the thrill of the job that I like. It’s like a big family.”
The boat’s Executive Officer, Lieutenant Commander Scott Johnson, from Cornwall, added: “This is very much the end of an era. It was quite emotional for us coming home for the last time and seeing the flotilla of boats and the guard of honour.”
HMS Trafalgar, an 85.4m attack submarine, has recently returned from a successful five-month deployment east of Suez.
Like other submarines in her class she weighs 5,200 tonnes (dived) and is capable of carrying Spearfish torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missiles.
She is the first Trafalgar-class submarine to be decommissioned.
She will now be moored up at Devonport Naval Base for the foreseeable future before being prepared for being laid up.
There is the chance that she could be cut up and dismantled in Plymouth at a later date.
The Ministry of Defence has said that Plymouth is one of two sites being considered for the controversial Submarine Dismantling Project.
An official decommissioning ceremony will take place on December 4 to mark the submarine’s exit from the fleet.
HMS Trafalgar is one of seven Trafalgar-class attack submarines which, together with the Faslane-based Swiftsure-class boats, form the backbone of Britain’s submarine strike force.
HMS TRAFALGAR A colourful career
NOT many submarines can boast such a colourful and controversial career as HMS Trafalgar.
Since being commissioned in May, 1983, the nuclear-powered vessel has hit the headlines around the globe – for positive and negative reasons.
Arguably her finest hour came in October 2001, when she teamed up with another Devonport submarine, HMS Triumph, to fire Tomahawk missiles at suspected terrorist targets in Afghanistan.
The firing on the Taliban training camp marked the start of Britain’s direct involvement in the war on Afghanistan.
On November 6, 2002, more than £5million worth of damage was caused to HMS Trafalgar when she struck the seabed during a training exercise.
Two Royal Navy submarine commanders were reprimanded following the incident close to the Isle of Skye.
The incident injured three sailors and caused the entire crew to fall over. She went into refit for 15 months.
In April 2004, 11 crew members on HMS Trafalgar walked off in protest over a host of alleged safety problems, including faults in her nuclear reactor, escape hatches and emergency rescue equipment.
At the time Defence Minister Lord Bach denied there was a mutiny aboard the boat.
And in November last year an investigation was launched after 280 litres of radioactive coolant spilled into the River Tamar from HMS Trafalgar.
The Royal Navy confirmed the water, likely to have been contaminated with tritium, poured from a burst hose as it was being pumped from the submarine.
The submarine was alongside at Devonport, after undergoing routine maintenance.
Asked about the boat’s past its current Commanding Officer, Commander Charlie Shepherd, said yesterday that he preferred to look at the “finer points” of HMS Trafalgar’s career rather than the “chequered parts”.
“She has had her ups and downs, but any warship will have had that,” he added. “I think she will be remembered more in a positive light.”
28 Comments
View all
by Jim Oxlade, Ipswich
Thursday, November 12 2009, 5:14PM
“Love the comment ' she weighs 5200 tonnes (dived)'. If so she would have gone down like a rock. Dived she weighs nothing. She DISPLACES 5200 tonnes of water.
Incidentally, did the drafting authority lose track of that A.B? That's along time to stay in one boat!
Ex-submariner (many years ago!)”
by Steve, Scotland
Thursday, November 12 2009, 1:35PM
“Radiological safety is the issue and is paramount.
All the safety recommendations and consultations mean absolutely nothing. Simply because Babcock are the "Steptoe and Son" of this industry and try to run things on a shoe string to maximise profits.
The Dockyard should go back to the MOD and send Babcock packing.
If that happens the biggest cheer and sighs of relief would not be the general public.
It would be the employees!!!!!”
by Mick, Barbican
Thursday, November 12 2009, 6:48AM
“I don't want to be alarmist, but what if there's a russian sub just outside Plymouth Sound watching us through its periscope and listening to our rock n' roll while it conducts missile drills?”
by Mick, Barbican
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 5:35PM
“Kdude quote- "You are all fools who know nothing about the Cold War, nuclear power plant, grammar or humour."
I know plenty about the cold war mate, i saw it on TV. And nuke power is easy to understand, it simply means a lump of stuff stays red-hot for years because its batteries never run out.
As for grammar and humour, I plan to sign up for night school classes to learn”
by Martin, Liverpool
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 5:14PM
“bigredbus007 ~ "..... why can't she be opened up to the public like Victory?"
Good grief bigredbus007. They don't even want the ship that was BUILT there AND named after the city, so why would they want the Trafalgar?!!?
You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think those that hold sway in Plymouth give two hoots about Naval heritage.”
by Vor, somewhere nice
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 5:04PM
“Couple of things.
This is quite sad as like it or not it has been part of what has made Britain great over the last few years.
Secondly at least it will be cut up away from Hartley!!”
by kdude, Safedepth
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 4:55PM
“j williams, north prospect
&
zoot the magnificent, zoots throne
&
Mick, Barbican
You are all fools who know nothing about the Cold War, nuclear power plant, grammar or humour.”
by Mick, Barbican
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 3:49PM
“Perhaps the threat of nuclear contamination isn't so serious. I wouldn't rule out the chance to preserve a nucleus of human specimens, it would be quite easy at the bottom of some of our deeper mineshafts as the radioactivity would never penetrate a mine some thousands of feet deep. And in a matter of weeks, sufficient improvements in dwelling space could easily be provided.
Greenhouses could maintain plantlife and animals could be bred and slaughtered..”
by tooz, stooz tooc
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 2:07PM
“Mick Barbican, seven years is a long, long time. The love that develops between a man and a man. The sailors might not want to get off....they may paint it pick and sail to San Francisco..
In the navy.....
I want to be the Indian, he was my favourite.”
by Phil, Mutley
Wednesday, November 11 2009, 1:30PM
“At last an informed and sensible contribution on this subject (from Chris in Ford).
The scare-mongers love to use terms like "nuclear scrapyard" when it will be nothing of the sort.
As for the de-fuelling etc, of course this should happen at Devonport. Or are the anti brigade saying that this should happen somewhere else that doesn't have the skills and the capacity that Devonport does?
How irresponsible - a mixture of NIMBYism and misinformation. If these people are truly interested in safety, why advocate taking this work to somewhere less suitable and, by extension, less safe. Not to mention the threat to skilled local jobs.....”