Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

jcs1959 wrote:Having read many of the news articles on the NAO report I'm at a loss to know why they think merlin mk 4 is due to go out of service at the end of 2021!
It's a misreading.

Maritime Intra-Theatre Lift
The Department’s
interim solution, using Merlin Mark 4 helicopters, ends in December 2021 but
will need to continue. This relies on competing for spare capacity on helicopters
which have other roles and restricts Carrier Strike’s ability to operate where
required because of the helicopters’ limited range.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

Having read the full report, it's grim.

Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) is progressing on a wing and a prayer. There's lots of things that are unfunded and lots of increasingly urgent questions that can't be answered.

Resources are spread absolutely paper thin. There is no wiggleroom anywhere.

Some examples.

Unfunded capabilities needed by the Carrier Enabled Power
Projection programme


The Ministry of Defence continues to have unfunded capabilities.... US/UK interoperability... Additional equipment and training to
enable United States’ Lightning II jets to fly from UK carriers and vice versa.


This is set out in a table which is difficult to replicate here. But basically the integration of US Marine jets and their associated equipment including weapons onto the carriers is still unfunded. And the carrier's maiden deployment complete with US Marine jets is meant to happen next year.

On Crowsnest, time for a bit of tragi-comic relief:
The helicopter needed for trials, which was the responsibility of Leonardo
Helicopters, had received insufficient care during outdoor storage, leaving
it unsuitable for flying. It needed substantial maintenance to make it
airworthy for flight trials and, instead, will be used for testing. The Navy
has reassigned Merlin helicopters to support the flight trials but, in doing
so, reduced its fleet availability. The compressed timeline and accelerated
activity for testing Crowsnest has also created additional pressure on the
provision of Merlin spare parts.
Yep, the trials aircraft got knackered because someone left it parked outside unmaintained in all weathers, leading to further fleet overstretch in a fleet that is already tiny and overstretched. And it's responsible for some of the delays to Crowsnest which is crucial to meeting operational capability deadlines.

Then this.
... the Department will have restricted options
for deploying the carriers for much of 2022 because RFA Fort Victoria will be
unavailable due to major planned maintenance work.
You know how we occasionally snigger at the French for only having one carrier, and when she's in for repairs they don't have any carrier. Duh, how dumb is that???

Well we only have one solid support ship, which is approaching 25 years old, to support two carriers. And that's essential for delivering CEPP. And in 2022 it's going to be mainly unavailable so no carrier strike. Duh... ?

I won't copy and paste the bits about there not being enough spares for the F-35s, with less being bought than recommended and them being used faster than planned. It's on page 44 if you want to read it.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

RichardIC wrote:
Is this correct?

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

dmereifield wrote:Is this correct?
Sorry, which bit specifically? But yes, Pinstriped's conclusions are all in the report.

I think his latter point is potentially but unintentionally misleading. There aren't enough spares for the F-35s to keep one carrier at high readiness and one at very high readiness.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SW1 »

There was a bit of a discussion on Twitter from those that made decisions during the time makes for interesting reading.





dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

RichardIC wrote:
dmereifield wrote:Is this correct?
Sorry, which bit specifically? But yes, Pinstriped's conclusions are all in the report.

I think his latter point is potentially but unintentionally misleading. There aren't enough spares for the F-35s to keep one carrier at high readiness and one at very high readiness.
That last one specifically, thanks for clarifying. Sounds as though the mods to PoW have been binned off. Is that a cost saving or potentially reflection of change of ideas leading to another ship being procured with enhanced aviation facilities?

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

dmereifield wrote:Sounds as though the mods to PoW have been binned off.
Yes, binned. I posted the relevant detail at the top of this page. Basically it was some flight deck modifications and accommodation for two companies of RM.
25 The planned alterations included: flight deck modifications and aviation support for more helicopters,
and additional accommodation and services for two companies of Royal Marines.

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by topman »

None of the issues raised by the report seem remotely surprising. As predictable as night following day.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by bobp »

The 20 percent reduction in flying hours is worrisome, as is shortages in spares and munitions.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »



3 years since QE first left Rosyth?! :shock: :o

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by xav »

Royal Navy’s Merlin Crowsnest AEW Helicopter Faces Delays
Image
According to a report by the UK National Audit Office (NAO), on Carrier Strike, the initial operational capability (IOC) of the Royal Navy Merlin Crowsnest AEW helicopter will face an 18 month delay.
...
The Crowsnest kit transforms the Merlin HM.2 of the Royal Navy into an Advanced Early Warning (AEW) helicopter. Without this capability, the carrier strike group’s capabilities will be downgraded. There is a contingency plan for deploying Crowsnest helicopters during CSG21 without IOC, as an interim capability.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... es-delays/

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by jonas »

Parliamentary written answers 29th June 2020 :-

Asked by Mr Kevan Jones
(North Durham)
[N]
Asked on: 24 June 2020
Ministry of Defence
Navy: Radar
64092
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps his Department is taking to mitigate expected delays to developing the initial operating capability for the new airborne radar system on the carrier strike group.
A
Answered by: Jeremy Quin
Answered on: 29 June 2020

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) was informed in early 2019 by industry that there were challenges associated with the development of the mission systems of the airborne radar capability. The programme was re-baselined in the first half of 2019, which included the adoption of an incremental approach to the delivery of the capability to the Royal Navy.

The MOD has worked intensively with its contractors and sub-contractors to monitor the performance of the programme and manage the schedule of remaining activity. New management systems and control measures have been implemented by contractors and additional resources have been assigned. The MOD continues to engage with industry to ensure that all issues are raised and managed at the earliest opportunity to minimise impact to the schedule. The programme remains focused on fielding an initial capability in time to support Carrier Strike Group 21.

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Digger22 »

Someone needs to get a grip once and for all on Defence Procurement.
This is a complete shambles, a National disgrace and embarrassing!

Evolution of Procurement=reliability, reduction in risk, availability and cost control

Running assets into the ground=capability Gaps, high costs in replacement and procurement, a desire to have 'the Best' replacement while being underfunded means shortcuts, dropped requirements and/or reduction in numbers.

Sound familiar?

We need to have a drumbeat for procurement, even if it means we don't always have the best, we hardly have the 'best' now, but at least it would be available, affordable and work.

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by serge750 »

Does seem :roll: :crazy: imagine how late the poded version would of been if the simpler version is running like it is...
Im grateful though that it will be on CSG 21 though....

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

I wonder what the Thales problems have been. I'll put my money on software.

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Phil Sayers »

Scrambling two F35s:


User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jensy »

Phil Sayers wrote:Scrambling two F35s:

Bet the aircraft handlers wish the jet blast deflectors never got cut from the CVF design. Newly got blown over!

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by serge750 »

Wonder who won the Typoon + F35 dogfight :D :D :D :D

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by abc123 »

Did the "Pirates" arrived according to schedule or?
:lol:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Pitcairn Island

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by swoop »

Digger22 wrote:Someone needs to get a grip once and for all on Defence Procurement.
This is a complete shambles, a National disgrace and embarrassing!
That statement could apply for each and every decade going back to the 1950's...

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

Since the MOD came into being then? :mrgreen:

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by abc123 »

swoop wrote:
Digger22 wrote:Someone needs to get a grip once and for all on Defence Procurement.
This is a complete shambles, a National disgrace and embarrassing!
That statement could apply for each and every decade going back to the 1950's...
At least, if not 1918.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

QNLZ coming home tomorrow apparently, nothing on QHM website yet but I assume HMNB should know!


jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by jonas »

I'm assuming that this is in relation to Kevan Jones previous question regarding Crowsnest :-

Asked by Mr Kevan Jones
(North Durham)
[N]
Asked on: 26 June 2020
Ministry of Defence
Defence: Procurement
65089
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reason senior responsible owners have the power to declare initial operating capability, even when specified requirements have not been achieved.
A
Answered by: Jeremy Quin
Answered on: 01 July 2020

Our senior responsible owners are closely engaged with their programme and project teams and clearly understand progress being made towards the delivery of the capabilities they are responsible for, including any challenges or risks to delivery. They are therefore able to weigh up all the factors to plan and manage course of action that deliver the right capabilities at the right time, including declaring initial operating capability.

Sometimes senior responsible owners are able to bring a capability into service more quickly than originally intended to deliver a benefit to Defence. In doing so they will undertake a rigorous assessment, identifying outstanding actions which require mitigation in the short-term and develop a plan to address these within an acceptable timeframe. This prevents a capability which can provide an operational benefit to defence being needlessly withheld.

Post Reply