The Westminster government recently extended by three months Continue reading
Tag Archives: collision
Anglian Prince woke the sleeping Astute with a Glasgow kiss
Grounded on the Isle of Skye on 22nd October 2010, for reason yet unknown, Continue reading
Biker dies on A83
(Updated 09.00 2nd June 2010) A crash between a motorbike and a car at Ardgartan at around 4.30pm Continue reading
Serious road accident on A815 at Loch Eck
A Fiat Punto and a Mazda were in collision Continue reading
1st March for FAI into death of Scotland’s champion cyclist, Jason MacIntyre
34 year-old Jason Macintyre was the cyclist who: Continue reading
MoD, Argyll, redundant submarines and nuclear waste disposal

Much of the Scottish Media has spent the last two days headlining the Ministry of Defence’s Continue reading
Gary Mulvaney – no standard Tory

Gary Mulvaney – relaxed, interested, sits back in his chair and plays it as it comes. Continue reading
HMS Vanguard moved from Coulport to Faslane under cover of darkness and with heavy escort
At 3.00am on Friday (20th February) HMS Vanguard was moved, under cover of darkness, from the explosive-handling pierhead at Coulport on Loch Long into the nearby naval base at Faslane on the Gare Loch. The entire operation is thought to have taken around seven hours.
Vanguard was filmed by peace activitists as she came into the submarine base at Faslane with a heavy escort convoy of tugs, Royal Marine inflatables, Military Police boats and overhead helicopters.
The British nuclear submarine, carrying armed Trident missiles at the time, was involved in the now notorious collision on 3rd February with an equally armed French Navy nuclear submarine, Le Triomphant ,somewhere in the Atlantic. She was seen but not photographed coming into the Clyde on 14th February to unload her missiles at Coulport – and described then as bearing clear visual evidence of hull damage in dents and scrapes.
The ships’s move into Faslane in the hours of darkness is likely to be interpreted as an attempt by the MOD to disguise from the public the extent of the damage she has suffered.
For Argyll has already compared the widely varying return times to port of the two submarine’s involved and asked if this disparity can be interpreted by anyone as other than evidence that Vanguagrd was badly damaged and had to come home at very low speeds. She took over ten days to get back to Coulport from wherever the collssion occurred. Le Triomphant took three days to get back to her home port of Ile Longue near Brest in Britany.
So far, although our reports have received heavy viewing traffic, no one has come up with any other intrerpetation. It is hard to identify a possible location for the collision which would allow two relatively undamaged submarines, travellling at approximately the same speeds to return to these two ports in their respective known times.
All that the MOD has said of Vanguard’s post-collision condition is that the incident created ‘no compromise to nuclear safety’.
HMS Vanguard conundrum – how badly was she damaged in the collision with Le Triomphant?
Wherever the submarines were when they collided, it is known that Le Triomphant got back to Ile Longue, near Brest, in three days. Vanguard took ten days to come into Faslane. We cannot identify a sea area producing such widely divergent relative return speeds. Can anyone suggest what this indicates other than that Vanguard had to come back at a very reduced speed? If this was the case, the damage she has sustained is more than superficial.
Did HMS Vanguard fall foul of France’s ultra secrecy in the nuclear sub collision with Le Triomphant?
It seems to be becoming increasingly well authenticated that a central cause of this collision is France’s non-membership of NATO’s military command structure. Nations belonging to this provide information on the movements of their submarines and are kept informed centrally of the relevant movements of the submarines of fellow member nations.
There are operating areas reserved for submarines from the UK, Norway, The Netherlands, Canada and America. If one wants to enter the other’s area of influence, they let them know and tell them what they’ll be doing there. But nations outside the NATO command structure are obviously not privy to that information nor do they supply any information on their own movements.
France has traditionally been ultra-secretive of anything to do with its nuclear deterrent capacity, hence its choice to remain outside the NATO military command structure.
However, Britain and America too keep their information tight. They have the information on the movements of the submarines operated by fellow NATO command structure members but they do not supply information on the movements of their own.
So HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant would each have been blind-sided on the other’s movements and locations and each must have been running on invisibility capacity.
There’s an interesting article on the NATO element of the situation at Time World.
The photograph above of Brittany-based French nuclear submarine,Le Triomphant, is reproduced here under the Creative Commons licence.









