Royal Transportation (land, sea, air)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I support this proposal to bring Britannia back.
 
Why?

It is massively expensive to run.

There isn't the need for a floating home anymore as tours are generally a week or two and with the speed of flying these days there isn't the need for somewhere to unwind.

It isn't going to happen as the government that decided to do that would be voted out of office very quickly.
 
Is Boris Johnson really thinking that in the third millennium, with internet, social media, et al, Britain's shrinking post-Brexit influence is halted by the sight of the Brittannia sailing into the port of Lisbon or something?
 
I'll believe it when I see it. I think this idea comes back every few years. Wasn't there going to be a new yacht for the jubilee too? I remember reading the same things about how it was going to be financed privately, etc.

I'm sure it was nice to sail in, but I doubt that there was enough utility to justify the expense. Britannia was launched in an era where most overseas travel was still done by ship. But even ten years later the jet had completely changed international travel, and it was only able to be used as a residence for visits to coastal cities (which tend to have the most ample accommodations). If there was really a decline in trade agreements starting in 1997 because of the absence of the yacht, I suspect we'd be hearing firm figures rather than hazy memories about how wonderful the good old days were.
 
Last edited:
Given the billions needed to bring BP into the 20th century (that isn't a typo by the way) and even more to bring it into the present there is simply no money for a new 'home' for the BRF.
 
Now that you've all gone off half-cocked, it seems to me the whole point of 'bring Britannia back' is not to have 'a new home for the BRF'. It's for use in overseas trade missions, the whole tone of the article seems to me to be about officials using it to impress people, not because the Queen deserves a new boat.

The people who want to bring it back, are the officials who had personal experience of its value in the past in terms of overseas trade, NOT for the royals to go on holidays. Can no-one see the benefit of British officials, freed from the shackles of the EU, taking movers and shakers overseas on a magnificent evening cruise on Britannia, hosted by members of the world's most famous Royal Family, with the Band of HM's Royal Marines (best military band in the world) serenading them as the sun goes down? Really?!

I despair at some of the knee-jerk reactions on this website, I really do.
 
The royal family used the yacht for official business on behalf of the government and also used it towards the fall months. I don't think anyone expects the royal family to be given a holiday luxe yacht.
 
PetticoatLane said:
Now that you've all gone off half-cocked, it seems to me the whole point of 'bring Britannia back' is not to have 'a new home for the BRF'. It's for use in overseas trade missions, the whole tone of the article seems to me to be about officials using it to impress people, not because the Queen deserves a new boat.

The people who want to bring it back, are the officials who had personal experience of its value in the past in terms of overseas trade, NOT for the royals to go on holidays. Can no-one see the benefit of British officials, freed from the shackles of the EU, taking movers and shakers overseas on a magnificent evening cruise on Britannia, hosted by members of the world's most famous Royal Family, with the Band of HM's Royal Marines (best military band in the world) serenading them as the sun goes down? Really?!

I despair at some of the knee-jerk reactions on this website, I really do.
Click to expand...

Maybe because about 33% of people experience motion sickness on calm water and about 2/3 when there is a chop. Not ideal for wining and dining. Maybe because there are many spectacular dining rooms in which they can wine and dine on land (and book the band as well). I think we all get that it is romantic, but a very costly romantic.
 
A secret naval design for a replacement for Britannia could provide the basis for a new £100million royal yacht, the retired naval officer who helped draw up the original plans has said.

The Telegraph can reveal full details of the 1997 design, which was drawn up by naval staff and approved by representatives of the royal family before Tony Blair’s Labour Government refused to pay for it.

Commander John Pritchard, the project’s officer in charge, said that there was no reason why the new design - which is currently languishing in Ministry of Defence archives - could not be used as a model for a replacement for Britannia, which was retired from service in 1997.

The Daily Telegraph has launched a campaign to return a modern-day version of HMY Britannia to the seas to help secure trade deals once Britain has left the European Union.
Click to expand...
Read more: Revealed: Details of secret naval plans for a new £100million Royal Yacht Britannia replacement scuppered by Tony Blair*
 
If this was possible it would be wonderful for the Queen to have a sparkling new royal yacht. However, in these harsh economic times in the wake of Brexit, I can't see how the government could justify it. At a time when families are really struggling I can just see the bad PR.

The Sun, the Daily Fail etc would be screaming their heads off, and it wouldn't be just the tabloids.

Anyway, I thought it was maintenance and running costs that caused the decommissioning of the Britannia all those years ago. Has this been factored in?
 
Curryong said:
If this was possible it would be wonderful for the Queen to have a sparkling new royal yacht. However, in these harsh economic times in the wake of Brexit, I can't see how the government could justify it. At a time when families are really struggling I can just see the bad PR.

The Sun, the Daily Fail etc would be screaming their heads off, and it wouldn't be just the tabloids.

Anyway, I thought it was maintenance and running costs that caused the decommissioning of the Britannia all those years ago. Has this been factored in?
Click to expand...

I think it has been factored in. I think they're trying to figure out a way to upgrade Britannia or come up with a new yacht that would be privately funded. A floating yacht for the Royal family to work on behalf on the government in this new world of trade.

We see the younger royals now getting into trade on behalf of the U.K. Why not add a new Royal yacht to the effort in order to do this? I'm sure people had the same issues with the idea of commissioning Royal Britannia back in the day.

I support the idea.
 
Apparently the Queen holds dear memories to the Brittannia. But do the Prince of Wales and Prince William have the same memories too? With other words: are the future King Charles and the future King William interested at all?

Besides that: the King or Queen can always use ships of Royal Navy. When Queen Beatrix made a State Visit to Norway, she came with Hr Ms Tromp, and escorted with naval ceremonial, the Crown Prince of Norway sailed to the ship and picked up the Queen: picture.

The same happened in 1982 in London: Queen Beatrix sailed on the river Thames in the British capital with Hr Ms De Ruyter and was picked up, with necessary ceremonial, by a royal barge to transport her to the quay, where Queen Elizabeth was awaiting her.

A royal yacht seems unpractical and arch-expensive.
 
Given the questions about the funding of the royal family now I can't see any way that the massive costs of such a vessel would go down with the public.

Charles may have fond memories as a child but his first honeymoon was on that yacht and that ended disastrously.

The only 'young' royal who has anything to do with trade in the last decade of more is Andrew and that was also disastrous.

I don't think William or Harry would be good ambassadors for trade anyway given their level of education and lack of interest in anything other than sport, the military and stopping others from doing what they do - killing animals.
 
Iluvbertie said:
Given the questions about the funding of the royal family now I can't see any way that the massive costs of such a vessel would go down with the public.

Charles may have fond memories as a child but his first honeymoon was on that yacht and that ended disastrously.

The only 'young' royal who has anything to do with trade in the last decade of more is Andrew and that was also disastrous.

I don't think William or Harry would be good ambassadors for trade anyway given their level of education and lack of interest in anything other than sport, the military and stopping others from doing what they do - killing animals.
Click to expand...

I didn't think that Andrew was highly educated, or had broad interests, so how come he was put in a trade position, if you feel that Harry and Wiliam aren't up to it.
 
He wasn't that highly educated - that is a major reason he was such a disaster at it. He did get 3 A levels at school and then bypassed university to go into the navy and spent the next 20 years there.
 
I'd have said the main reason he was a disaster at it was that he is lazy and fun loving, and seems to have used the job for dubious purposes.
 
I don't mean this to sound crass but given the Queen's age I highly doubt, even if work started straight away on building a new royal yacht, that the Queen would get to sail in it.
 
The new Royal yacht can be for the new Royal family. Charles and his family will use it.
 
I'm sorry, but it makes no sense to commission a new royal yacht or refurbish the old one. Firstly, it is of no use for landlocked countries. Secondly, it's of no use for inland cities - is Boris going to tell John Kerry, sorry, we can't hold trade talks in Chicago because we can't get our yacht there. Even where it can be used, for example here in Australia, it will take weeks to get here, so a nice journey for the crew but not actually being used for trade during the trip there and back.

Britannia was perfect when even long range aircraft had limited range resulting in numerous stops along the way to, say, Singapore or South Africa. Not a valid argument now when those countries can be reached with one refuelling stop. Even the set up of long range aircraft now allows for the traveller to arrive fresh and rested given that first and business class cabins come with flat beds, noise cancelling headphones and, in first, virtual mini private rooms (and let's face it, the royals or government ministers will not be flying cattle class on long trips).

And as others have said, the first time it is used for anything even remotely private - such as a summer cruise of the Western Isles of Scotland or honeymoon, the media will go ballistic about the cost. If it is used solely by the royals then the media will again be up in arms about a very wealthy family getting tax payer funded perks - I presume it will be crewed by the Royal Navy meaning even if it's built or maintained purely by private donations there will still be some tax payer costs involved.
 
You can actually get to Chicago via water from the St Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes. Although it's much quicker by air.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Skippyboo said:
You can actually get to Chicago via water from the St Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes. Although it's much quicker by air.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Click to expand...


Fair enough but my point is that not every major city is accessible by water. It would also be a lot of trouble to navigate the Atlantic, the St Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes simply for two or three days of trade talks.
 
The royal yacht would be used for State and official visits. Trade is part of diplomacy within these visits.

People of today have to remember that the Royal Yacht Britannia wasn't a floating pleasure palace. In fact, it was far from it. The Yacht was a floating working home for the royal family to do their job around the world. Britannia served the nation and Commonwealth for many decades.

It's a very good idea to recommission or build a new yacht for diplomatic purposes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Janet H
Forum Update - We're back! Ask your questions here.
2 3
Replies
78
Views
9K
Janet H
Janet H
iceflower
Pierre Casiraghi, Beatrice & Family Current Events Part 19: August 2023 -
2
Replies
45
Views
11K
priyanka
P
iceflower
Queen Margrethe II, Current Events Part 3: September 2023 -
2
Replies
54
Views
10K
iceflower
iceflower
iceflower
  • Locked
General News about Frederik, Mary and Family Part 19: September 2023 -
14 15 16
Replies
467
Views
140K
Hans-Rickard
Hans-Rickard
T
"End Game" by Omid Scobie - 2023
21 22 23
Replies
666
Views
117K
Alison H
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom