Battle of Jutland survivor gets £11million HLF grant

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29672262

Tom

 

Not sure what that "Peel Holdings" reference is all about but if its about HMS Plymouth then all interested parties over a period of 7 years had an opportunity to do something about it but the sad fact of the matter no one was interested or there was no money to preserved and maintain it for the future in any other of the UK. In the circumstances, Peel Holdings had no choice but to let it go - sadly for scrap in Turkey. What was the alternative rust away and sink in the Dock? It was not Peel Holdings fault that the controlling Trust in HMS Plymouth and HMS Onyx went bust! Dont get me wrong I'm not a lover of Peel Holdings but in this instance I don't think they had much choice.

Regardless, it is excellent good news for HMS Caroline and hopefully as part of the work, the gun turrets (or replica's) are restored to the ship - it looks lost without them.

 

The spec. which I've seen for the refit indicates that the hideous shed on the main deck is to remain. It's quite possible that the ship could return to Cammell Laird for its refit, 100 years after leaving. I don't think that Harland & Wolff are geared up for this kind of work & apart from the poorly equipped dry dock at Garvel on the Clyde, the nearest dry docks are at Cammell Laird. It would be a change to work on a project like this after a succession of Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships.

Bob.

 

Although on a smaller scale, Harland & Wolff did carry out the restoration work on SS Nomadic. So I would have thought that they would be tendering for the work, as they are right next door and have carried out work on Caroline several times in the recent past.

Keith

 

Edit

 

Just a thought, if they are hoping to restore/replace her armament has she still got her original WW1 fire control systems ?? now that would be a treat to see development-wise.

 

£11m.. railway preservation can only dream of such grants..

 

My impression has always been that it was precisely the level of rent expected by Peel that lead to them going bust, as well as seem to recall a forced closure to visitors that meant paying any rent would be impossible, but I am quite happy to have this impression corrected if wrong!

Steven

 

Ahh.. so they were given a hint to leave, but didn't take it ?

 

They were told to leave - brief details here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warship_Preservation_Trust

Not clear as to what part, if any, berthing fees paid but this was at least the second time that Peel acquiring berthing sites lead to eviction of historic ships leading to their scrapping.

Were other options available to the Trustees of the Warship Preservation Trust? I don't know, but you will note the quoted costs of moving the collection.

Still, I am sure to some, historic relics, even if preserved as a memorial to those who made the ultimate sacrifice to ensure that they can live their lives the way they do, should not be allowed to get in the way of making money. I am not one who believes that.

The loss of HMS Plymouth, especially with the proceeds pocketed by a business that at best obtained her by default, is a disgrace and probably akin to had Flying Scotsman being scrapped by creditors of a former owner, if you want it in Railway terms.

Steven

 

First thing I would day - that "Wikipedia" cannot be taken has true facts or otherwise although some details are correct - information / details is generally input from members of the public, informed or otherwise. I was also interested to read the contents of the first link - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4625102.stm - which seem to suggest that it was not Peel who forced the "Trust's" hand to go into receivership. They may have a played a part, I accept that but again Peel Holdings are not wholly to blame for the Trust's demise.