Tag Archives: MoD

Nuclear submarine to get new core after test reactor problem

HMS Vanguard (file pic) HMS Vanguard makes up part of the UK’s Trident nuclear weapons system

Low levels of radioactivity have been discovered in the cooling waters of a nuclear submarine test reactor at Dounreay, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has said.

Mr Hammond told MPs that no leak had occurred and said there were no safety implications for staff working on the site, or risks to the environment.

But, as a result, HMS Vanguard is to be refuelled with a new nuclear core at a cost of £120m.

The problem was discovered in 2012.

Labour criticised the government for not announcing the information earlier, calling it a matter of “national importance”.

‘Below scale’

Although the news is only being made public now, the Ministry of Defence says the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the defence nuclear inspectorate were kept informed.

Mr Hammond said the Vulcan Naval Reactor Test Establishment ran at higher levels of intensity than those on Britain’s fleet of nuclear submarines and was designed to pre-empt any similar problems with the reactors on board those vessels.

The defence secretary said: “These low levels of radioactivity are a normal product of a nuclear reaction that takes place within the fuel but they would not normally enter the cooling water.

“This water is contained within the sealed reactor circuit and I can reassure the House there has been no detectable radiation leak from that sealed circuit.

“Indeed, against the International Atomic Energy Agency’s measurement scale for nuclear-related events this issue is classed Level 0, described as ‘below scale – no safety significance’.”

The refuelling of HMS Vanguard – the UK’s oldest nuclear submarine – will take place during its next scheduled “deep maintenance period”, due to last three and a half years from 2015.

‘National security’

Mr Hammond said: “This is the responsible option: replacing the core on a precautionary basis at the next opportunity, rather than waiting to see if the core needs to be replaced at a later date which would mean returning Vanguard for a period of unscheduled deep maintenance, potentially putting at risk the resilience of our ballistic missile submarine operations.”

Mr Hammond said a decision on refuelling the next-oldest submarine, HMS Victorious, would not need to be taken until 2018.

New submarines for the Trident replacement programme, known as the Successor submarines, will not be affected by the problem, he added.

For Labour, shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker said the government should have told the Commons earlier about the fault.

He added: “There must be public confidence in the government to be open and transparent on these matters.

“A fault, however small, that develops in a nuclear reactor is something that the British people and this House should have been told about. This is an issue of national security and national importance.”

Source – BBC News

UK – Nuclear submarines banned on two lochs following safety failures

DEFENCE watchdogs took action after Navy exercises at Loch Goil and Loch Ewe showed up inadequate plans in the event of accidents.

HMS Ambush
HMS Ambush
t

NUCLEAR submarines have been banned from two lochs over safety fears.

Three Royal Navy exercises to test responses to simulated submarine accidents in March and April failed assessments by Government safety regulators.

And the MoD’s internal watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR), have responded by imposing the ban.

It prohibits nuclear subs from berthing in Loch Goil, near the Faslane naval base on the Clyde, and in Loch Ewe in Wester Ross.

Nuclear subs have been banned from Loch Goil

Loch Goil

 Loch Goil is used for testing the noise range of the Navy’s 11 nuclear subs to ensure they can navigate oceans undetected.

But the DNSR are demanding a satisfactory rerun of Exercise Strathport, which was staged last month, before the subs are allowed in the loch again.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation, who work with the DNSR, said: “Exercise Strathport was deemed an inadequate demonstration as their plan was considered inadequate.

“This needs to be revised and reissued, after which the DNSR and ONR will reinspect as a basis for providing consent to use Loch Goil on a case-by-case basis.”

Nuclear subs have been banned from Loch Ewe

Loch Ewe

Emergency exercises at Loch Ewe have been plagued with problems for years, prompting the DNSR to secretly ban submarines from the loch in 2008.

An exercise late last year failed “due to an inadequate plan, communications and facilities”, said the ONR spokesman.

The DNSR have also ordered an emergency exercise at the nuclear weapons depot at Coulport, near Faslane, to be rerun.

The specifics of the exercises are classified so it is not known what failures were recorded. But in past exercises, there have been communication breakdowns, radiation exposure risks and
failures to properly account for the number of casualties.

John Ainslie, of Scottish CND, said: “We cannot sleep easily in our beds so long as these floating Chernobyls remain in our lochs. The MoD has been given a red card by its own internal regulator. It is clearly not ready to respond to a nuclear accident at Coulport, Loch Goil or Loch Ewe.”

SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson promised to raise questions in Parliament.

He said: “Any suggestion that there are inadequate safety plans in place will be deeply disturbing to the local communities and to Scotland as a whole.”

The MoD last night declined to say what impact the loch bans might have on their submarine operations.

A spokesman said: “The MoD takes its nuclear safety responsibilities seriously and conducts regular training to maintain high standards.

“We are taking steps to address issues raised by regulators following recent exercises but there is no risk of harm to the public or to the environment. The Royal Navy continues to operate submarines safely out of HM Naval Base Clyde.”

Source – Daily Record

Fears over Rosyth nuclear submarine waste

The issue of storing retired nuclear submarine at Rosyth has been a source of anger.

SCOTLAND has been chosen for the pilot project to break up some of Britain’s old nuclear submarines, prompting fears it could become a dumping ground for radioactive waste.

 

Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials will test the removal of reactors in Rosyth, but politicians and anti-nuclear campaigners have hit out at the plans, fearing nuclear waste will be dumped in the area.

A total of 27 submarines are to be dismantled at UK naval bases, with one at Rosyth the first to be cut up.

The Fife yard has been home to the old vessels for years, but concerns have been raised that the site could become a toxic dump after the MoD ordered the “demonstration of the radioactive waste removal process”.

However, the pilot will not go ahead until a storage facility for the waste is identified and further consultation is undertaken, expected to start next year.

SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson MP said: “The Ministry of Defence’s approach to nuclear safety in Scotland clearly leaves a lot to be desired.

“Instead of experimenting with cutting up these submarines and worrying about the consequences later, the MoD needs to put a credible plan in place for what to do with the radioactive parts of these subs before it begins work.”

The Nuclear Submarine Forum, a coalition of pressure groups, has called for an end to building such vessels until a proper way of dealing with the resulting waste is found.

Jane Tallents of the forum, said: “Communities and local councils close to the Rosyth and Devonport have said clearly that the dockyards are not suitable sites for the storage of radio- active waste from submarine dismantling. We will be watching the MoD to ensure they stick to their promise that no radioactive waste will be removed from submarines until a storage solution has been agreed.”

There are seven retired vessels understood to be at Rosyth: Britain’s first nuclear submarine, HMS Dreadnought, HMS Churchill, HMS Resolution, HMS Repulse, HMS Renown, HMS Revenge and HMS Swiftsure. Another eight are in Devonport, in south-west England, including the Churchill-class HMS Conqueror, which sank the Belgrano during the Falklands War in 1982.

More vessels are due for decommissioning, bringing the total to at least 27.

Minister of state for defence equipment, support and technology, Philip Dunne, said the most radioactive part of a submarine – the 70-tonne reactor pressure vessel – will be removed intact and stored whole.

He added that an interim storage site for “intermediate level waste” – the classification for the fuel that once powered the nuclear vessels – could be found in any “UK nuclear licensed and authorised sites that might be suitable”.

More than 1200 people were consulted before the MoD made the decision, said a spokeswoman.

The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) regulates the disposal of nuclear waste in Scotland, as laid out under the Radioactive Substances Act 1993. The MoD is largely exempt from the act, but insisted it would work with Sepa on the pilot at Rosyth.

A Sepa spokeswoman said: “Now that Rosyth has been selected, we will require any radioactive waste generated at Rosyth to be properly disposed of.”

A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government declined to comment, directing The Scotsman instead to the SNP.

Source – Scotsman

 

Thales sonar for new British submarines

Thales UK is to supply its Sonar 2076 fully integrated search-and-attack  submarine sonar system to BAE Systems for use on new British vessels.

The submarines, the sixth and seventh Astute class vessels of the British  navy, are being built by BAE Systems Maritime-Submarines in Cumbria.

“Thales is proud to be supplying Sonar 2076 for all seven Astute class  submarines,” said Phil Naybour, head of Thales UK’s naval business.

“This successful program reflects the skill and dedication of our teams …  and also the close support and cooperation we have received from BAE Systems and  the Ministry of Defense.”

The sonar system to be supplied will include both inboard and outboard bow,  fin, intercept and flank arrays and inboard processing equipment.

“BAE Systems is pleased to award Thales UK these important contracts for the  sonar systems for the sixth and seventh Astute class submarines,” said Ian  Hawkes, head of Combat Systems, BAE Systems Maritime-Submarines.

“Placing these contracts not only continues a well-established and enduring  relationship with Thales UK, it also helps the submarine enterprise to meet the  submarine program affordability challenge by obtaining economy of scale through  batch procuring the sonar.”

Thales said its involvement with the Astute class building program is not  limited to sonar gear. It also supplies two non-hull penetrating CM010 optronic  masts, electronic support systems and communications and emergency buoys.

Source – UPI.com

UK – Rolls-Royce secures £800m MoD contract

Engineering giant Rolls-Royce has struck an £800m deal with the Ministry of Defence, cementing its place as supplier of nuclear propulsion technology to the military for the next decade.

HMS Vanguard

In a written statement to MPs, Defence Minister Philip Dunne said the contract covered the overhead, running and business costs at Rolls-Royce Submarines sites. Photo: AFP/Getty Images

 

In a deal which the MoD says will save the public purse £200m and sustain 2,000 British jobs, the government has committed to covering Rolls’ overhead costs for the next 10 years.

The contract follows on from an agreement made in June last year, when Rolls secured £1.1bn from the government to revamp its Derby production plant.

It consolidates around 100 existing contracts between the manufacturer and the MoD and is the first of three deals the Ministry is expected to sign.

In a written statement to MPs, Defence Minister Philip Dunne said the contract covered the overhead, running and business costs at Rolls-Royce Submarines sites.

He said the new deal consolidated costs, focussed on efficiency and secured future terms and conditions between the firm and the MoD.

Jason Smith, Rolls-Royce chief operating officer and head of its submarines unit said: “I am pleased that we have agreed this enabling contract with the MoD which delivers significant savings to them over the next ten years and provides us with the stability to deliver these activities efficiently.

“It further reinforces the commitment to the submarine programme.”

The deal was struck weeks before Chancellor George Osborne unveils his 2013 budget, which is widely expected to feature further defence spending cuts, after the MoD absorbed around a fifth of total savings announced in the Autumn statement.

Britain’s 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) set the course for future UK defence spending, in which the government said it would cut spending by 8pc up to 2015.

Source – The Telegraph

UK – Amec appeal refused over £94m costs on submarine job

 Screen Shot 2013-02-12 at 07.55.42

Amec’s legal battle to reduce the amount it must pay of a £93.6m cost overrun on a nuclear submarine jetty contract at Faslane has failed.

Now Amec and partners Morgan Sindall face a huge bill as they hammer out with the Ministry of Defence what proportion of cost overruns were properly incurred on the troubled project.

A costly legal battle has been running as both firms struggled to finish the Faslane SSN Berthing Project, first revealed in the Enquirer, more than four years late and at an expected final cost of £235.7m.

When the project was first awarded Amec was sole contractor for the jetty. But after Morgan Sindall acquired Amec’s construction arm for £26m back in 2007, the job became a 50:50 joint venture between the two firms.

Under the terms of the contract, the contractors are liable to pay the first £50m of overruns on the agreed maximum target price for the job, which has itself already risen from £89m to £142m.

This element was not challenged in the latest legal contest, but Amec held that the remaining £43.6m cost overrun should be split between client and contractor, with Amec due any costs howsoever incurred.

An arbitration panel rejected this saying the only costs payable were the actual costs reasonably and properly incurred within the contract.

A High Court judge has now refused Amec’s attempt to appeal this decision in a written ruling this week upholding the arbitration decision.

Source – Construction Enquirer

UK – Ruling on submarine facility costs

Faslane Naval Base (Scotland)

The cost of creating a nuclear submarine support facility at a Royal Navy base could be £145 million more than the initial estimate, a High Court judge has said.

Experts originally quoted an £89 million target figure for the facility at the Faslane base in Argyll and Bute, said Mr Justice Coulson.

The current “agreed maximum price” was around £140 million, said the judge. But engineers thought that the “ultimate cost” could be as much as £235.7 million.

Details emerged after lawyers debated terms of a contract, drawn up when the Ministry of Defence (MoD) engaged engineering firm Amec in 2000, at the High Court in London.

Mr Justice Coulson said the MoD and Amec could not agree on who should foot the “extensive overrun” bill.

The judge said a difficulty had arisen out of “badly worded” contract provisions.

He decided that the MoD should pay a “reasonable” amount but not costs incurred as a consequence of Amec’s contract breaches.

His ruling did not specify exactly how much of the overspend would be footed by the MoD and how much by Amec.

He had heard legal argument at a hearing in December and published a written judgment.

Source – Paisley Daily Express

Devonport – Nuclear accident at Dockyard “would cause thousands of deaths” campaigners say

  1. HMS Vanguard, one of the Trident-carrying submarines, arriving at Devonport naval base

    HMS Vanguard, one of the Trident-carrying submarines, arriving at Devonport naval base

THE Ministry of Defence has not ruled out the possibility of moving Britain’s nuclear armed submarines to the Devonport naval base, despite safety concerns from campaigners.

The Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) asked the MOD whether the fleet of armed Vanguard class submarines carrying Trident missiles could move from its current home in Faslane in Scotland to Devonport.

The response stated that neither the Devonport Naval Base nor the dockyard would safely permit the berthing of an armed Vanguard submarine.

But the campaigners were also told the MOD’s internal safety watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator, “has not provided any advice” on the feasibility of docking a Vanguard class submarine at Devonport.

John Ainslie, co-ordinator of Scottish CND, has drawn up a report looking at the risk of nuclear contamination in Plymouth in the event of a serious accident.

He told The Herald: “If Scotland were to go independent there are questions over what would happen to Trident. I have always been a bit wary about how easy it would be to move them.

“I was thinking they would have real problems basing them at Devonport because of the whole safety issue.

“You have got such a high population close to the submarine base at Devonport, there would be a very serious risk of fatalities and so forth.

“A missile accident at Devonport, in the centre of Plymouth, could result in thousands of deaths.

“In addition, a large proportion of the city would be abandoned for hundreds of years.”

Scotland is due to vote on independence in 2014, and the SNP has stated it hopes to remove Trident missiles from Faslane.

But an MOD spokesman said there are currently no plans to move the submarine fleet.

Ian Ballantyne, editor of Warships magazine, said in the event of Scottish independence Devonport would be the only feasible alternative for the submarines.

“They already spend years of their lives here, they already come and go and get re-fitted at Devonport,” he said.

“If Scotland goes independent and says ‘take your nuclear submarines away’ then they would have to operate from Devonport. “There is no way if we are a nation that operates nuclear submarines they would go anywhere else.”

Source – This is Plymouth

MoD: Trident submarines cannot be moved from Scotland to Plymouth

Devonport is ruled out as home for submarines, raising questions over future of fleet if Scotland votes for independence

Trident submarine

A Vanguard-class submarine carrying Trident missiles at Faslane naval base in Scotland.

Britain’s nuclear-armed submarines cannot be moved from Scotland to the Devonport naval base in Plymouth because they do not have safety clearances to dock there.

The disclosure has huge implications for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) if Scotland votes for independence and a new government demands the withdrawal of the nuclear fleet.

The MoD has revealed that the safety arrangements for Devonport do not permit the presence of submarines carrying Trident nuclear warheads. The MoD’s safety experts are not considering changing that.

The problem is that the dockyard is in a densely populated area and, if there were an accident, thousands of people would be put at risk. The worst accident scenario envisaged by the MoD would kill up to 11,000 people in Plymouth and would not meet the official criteria for what is acceptable, according to a new report.

The Scottish government, which is run by the Scottish National party, has said it would eject nuclear weapons from the Faslane submarine base on the Clyde as soon as possible after Scotland became independent. A referendum on Scottish independence is due to be held in the autumn of 2014.

Experts and politicians have repeatedly suggested that the Vanguard-class submarines that carry nuclear-tipped Trident missiles could be relocated to Devonport. In evidence to a House of Lords committee in December, the former head of the Royal Navy, Admiral Lord West, said “they could go there”.

But a response under freedom of information law from the MoD now indicates that will not be possible. The “safety case” it has drawn up for regulators to demonstrate that Devonport can be operated without undue risk rules out nuclear-armed submarines.

“Neither the Devonport naval base nor the Devonport dockyard, which is owned and operated by Babcock, safety case permit the berthing of an armed Vanguard class submarine,” the MoD said.

It also disclosed that its internal safety watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator, “has not provided any advice on the feasibility of docking of an armed Vanguard class submarine in Devonport dockyard”.

The MoD was responding to questions from the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (SCND), which wants to get rid of Trident altogether. “This shows that it is wrong to suggest that Trident can just move to Devonport if it is thrown out of Scotland,” said the campaign’s co-ordinator, John Ainslie.

A new report by SCND applies the MoD’s criteria for accidents at Faslane to Devonport. It concludes that Devonport would never be an officially acceptable location for Trident submarines because of the much greater population that would be put at risk.

There are about 166,000 people living within five kilometres of the Devonport base, compared with about 5,200 within that distance of Faslane. In assessing the dangers of a major accident at Faslane’s shiplift in 2000, the MoD concluded that the “societal contamination” that could result meant that “the risks are close to the tolerability criterion level”.

If a similar accident happened at Devonport, the MoD’s tolerability criteria would be massively exceeded, the SCND report says. If there was a light wind blowing from the south-west, it estimates that 800 people would be killed by leaking plutonium.

If the weather was calm, the report says that as many as 11,000 people could die from radiation poisoning. There would also be additional casualties from the blast, which could break windows across a quarter of Plymouth.

The MoD’s worst-case accident scenario assumes that all the conventional explosives in the eight Trident missiles carried by a single submarine detonate. It then assumes that all the plutonium in the missiles’ 40 nuclear warheads is dispersed, amounting to perhaps 160kg.

“A missile accident at Devonport, in the centre of Plymouth, could result in thousands of deaths,” said Ainslie. “In addition, a large proportion of the city would be abandoned for hundreds of years.”

The MoD stressed that the UK government was making no plans for independence, as it was confident that Scotland would not vote to leave the UK. “We are therefore not making plans to move the nuclear deterrent from HM Naval Base Clyde, which supports 6,700 jobs, and where all of our submarines will be based from 2017,” said an MoD spokesman.

“The government is committed to maintaining a continuous submarine-based nuclear deterrent and has begun the work of replacing our existing submarines.”

Source – The Guardian

We’re learning from Astute submarine flaws, admiral promises

MoD should not have boasted about ‘classified’ top speed of hunter-killer boats

Astute arrives at Faslane for the first time

Astute sailing up the Clyde estuary into her home port of Faslane, Scotland, for the first time after the journey from Barrow-in-Furness shipyard.
.

The head of the Royal Navy’s submarine programme has told the Guardian that his team discovered design faults, technical problems and flaws in the construction of the multibillion-pound Astute class boats, but said he was still confident it would enter service on time next year.

In a frank interview in which he spoke in detail for the first time about the challenges of launching the submarines, Admiral Simon Lister also admitted the military should not have boasted about the boats’ top speed.

It was not unusual, he said, for the first of a class to be “a difficult birth”, but he added that the Astute was now the most tested boat in the navy. Lister insisted that lessons were being learned and that changes were already being made to Astute’s sister boats, which are due to come into service over the next decade.

He said he was feeding these modifications into the blueprints now on the drawing board for the submarines, dubbed Successor, to carry the Trident replacement.

Lister said he wished none of the problems on the Astute had occurred, but they were being dealt with and safety had not been compromised. “I wish none of them had happened. I wish I could buy a submarine as if it was a Mercedes-Benz coming off the production line after 10 years of product development. It isn’t that.

“What I would say is that the speed and the quality of the activity to put things right is second to none. The ambition to bring Astute into service in perfect order so that she is able to enter service within three months of exiting the shipyard, if anyone thinks that’s possible, they would be mistaken. A nuclear submarine is a complex beast. It has many different disciplines. It is one of the most complex things man produces.”

Lister said it would be wrong for the military to claim the difficulties were just “stuff and nonsense and teething troubles”, but he said it would also be wrong for critics to write off what is the navy’s most technically advanced boat.

The Ministry of Defence has ordered seven Astute hunter-killer submarines that will cost up to £10bn and expects them to become the backbone of the fleet.

The programme has been hindered by delays and overspends since it was commissioned 15 years ago, and suffered embarrassment in 2010 when Astute was grounded off Scotland – a calamity that led to the commander being removed.

Last month, the Guardian revealed that Astute, which is coming to the end of three years of sea trials, was forced into an emergency surfacing when it sprang a leak, suffered from internal corrosion, and been fitted with equipment and materials of the wrong quality.

Since then the Guardian has discovered new issues. The MoD has admitted to problems with the trays that carry important cables controlling Astute’s sonar, which has led some of them to fray badly. During a recent test, Ambush – the second of the class and also built at BAE Systems in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria – flew its “Not Under Command” flag – which denotes that due to exceptional circumstances it is unable to manoeuvre properly.

Both boats are having to be equipped with an electronic chart system, after a report into the grounding of the Astute in 2010 ordered the upgrade.

Significantly, both have also suffered propulsion problems that have prevented them from reaching or exceeding the speed published by the MoD – 30 knots.

The Guardian has been told that the design is likely to restrict the top speed of all the boats, but the navy will not be drawn on the issue, saying it is a confidential matter. However, Lister insisted the Astute did not have to be a fast boat, and admitted the MoD should have been more cautious about discussing speed when the fleet was first commissioned.

“Is Astute a high-speed submarine? No sir. We have emphasised stealth over outright speed. That is an operational decision we have made, a trade-off, to achieve other capabilities. We haven’t designed this submarine to be quick, we have designed it to be quick enough. Whoever [in the MoD] put ‘this submarine goes at 30 knots’ didn’t understand that the top speed of a submarine is a classified matter and missed out ‘up to’ which is traditionally the formula.

“Because you have poked us, we want to say it [will go] more than 20 knots, which we can say with certainty without giving too much away to the enemy. We don’t reveal the top speed because it would give a potential enemy an advantage. It is a classified number.”

Lister said he had identified three sorts of problems with the Astute: flaws in design that only became apparent when testing started; equipment that broke down too easily; and some problems relating to poor construction at the shipyard.

“In the programme of testing over three years we have identified issues in all of those categories. And got on and fixed them. Is this normal? Where is this on the spectrum of scandalous waste of taxpayers’ money? Is this what we could expect, is this the normal endeavour of dragging any ship out of the dockyard? You will have to make your own mind up. [But] the programme of testing is on track and the submarine will enter service this coming year.

“Every aspect of that submarine has been tested to the limit. It is the most thoroughly tested submarine in the navy today. Point me to any submarine building yard that produces a first of class and I will show you a process that is extraordinarily challenging. The level of challenge in Astute I don’t think has been any more than in the level of challenge in the first of class in other submarines.”

He said he had not and would not compromise on safety, even if that meant further delays to the programme. “I buy these things, I set the pace, I place the demand on the company, I judge whether the product is right enough and good enough.

“My rule is the thing that gives is not safety, the thing that gives is time. Where the shipyard needs to learn to do something it is the schedule that is relaxed to enable that learning to take place. What gives? It is the schedule, which is why Ambush emerged from the dockyard later than planned.”

He added: “The first child has been a difficult birth. We have learned those lessons and every engineering development that we put into Astute has gone into or is going into Ambush. Astute as she emerged from the dockyard will be very different from the seventh one because we learn from Astute.”

Lister said he had 800 people on his Astute team and 1,000 working on the replacement for the Trident-carrying Vanguard class submarines. He said the navy was using the lessons from Astute to refine plans for Successor.

“My policy is to take every lesson I can from every quarter I can find it into the design of Successor and its manufacturing plan. I am having meetings about Successor and attempting to learn the lessons from other areas of the programme – including Astute. You would expect me to. That is what we do.

“I am not sitting down saying ‘Astute has been a failure we are not doing that again’. I am saying what must we learn from our experience on a daily basis in how we put Successor together. Astute is a superb submarine and is going to be the backbone of the fleet, the submarine flotilla, when she enters into service.”

Source – The Guardian