Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[swoop]

Approaching GRF from the rear as a bogey might not be the best idea..

I was thinking the same with the LHD USS Makin Island.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ht_ope.jpg

[seaspear]

There,s a story that some years age when things were a little different a P.L.A.N officer asked a U.S.N officer the best way to attack a carrier and was told from the rear .

[SKB]

UK.gov confirms it won't be buying V-22 Ospreys for new aircraft carriers
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/2 ... _carriers/

[Pymes75]

April '17 'Carrier Waves' is up:

http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.com/ ... -final.pdf

[Thorvicson]

I do wish we would get some real updates on the QEC's the PWLS must be coming along in the dry dock as she must be getting close to be ready for float out, and QNLZ must be nearly ready for Sea Trials. They could do with another aerial photo flypast of the two ships once the scaffolding is off so we can get a look at the completed ship (or as near damn it - as I guess the weapons my be added at Portsmouth over the winter ? ).

[KyleG]

It's about making sure that aircraft that need to go into a holding pattern on return from ops due to, for instance, the deck being obstructed, don't drop into the sea. There's sometimes a lack of diversionary airfields in the ocean.

We do have a bit of an advantage there with the B model, as they don't require most of the deck to land, unlike CATOBAR configurated aircraft. That is of course assuming the obstruction only affects part of the deck, though.

[Jake1992]

Can anyone on here clarify for me what the true maximum airwing is that the QEs can carry and operate, because Iv been seeing so many different numbers batted about 50, 60, 70 and even today UK defence journal on FB said that its 54.

[2HeadsBetter]

Depends what you mean by "maximum airwing." They were designed to operate 36 F35s and 4 Crowsnest. The hangars IIRC hold 22 aircraft but with plenty of parking space on deck.

Also depends on just what you're carrying. Chinooks and Apaches don't fold . Well, not if you want to use them afterwards!

[Jake1992]

I understand it all depends on what aircraft are carried, I was thinking in full strike carrier mode. Like I said Iv seen so many numbers out there from 50 up to 70, the 70 number I saw on a video post on here with a RN officer.

[shark bait]

The f35b though a good aircraft does have an issue with the short range compared to contemporaries like Rafale ,to have a buddy sstem which is not expensive in the scheme of things adds capability and capacity

It's not really shorted ranged, the only aircraft that can go further when launched from a carrier is the F35c on internal fuel.

The internet figures I've seen compares the F35 on internal fuel only, to others with drop tanks. When external tanks arrive on the F35 it will be the longest ranged carrier aircraft.

Since no one outside NATO operates CATOBAR, we will certainly have a range advantage for a decade or so.

We never had AAR for Harrier carrier borne ops - but like most things connected with Harriers and carriers we got away with it...

Same for F35b ops.

For F18's buddy fuelling is essential, because there will be occasions where aircraft can't be recovered. The chances of that happening on a QE are tiny.

[MRCA]

V22 and buddy refuelling are self licking lollipops for anything other than Bolter patterns. You buy a LO platform with high speed then think your gona refuel it from one of the biggest radar reflectors flying and not only that one which flys 150knts slower gd way to give away your position and with so little offload it can't even fill a single f35b.

F35b actually only carries about 2000lbs of fuel more than a harrier. It just carries it more efficiently than a harrier so it goes further. Most carrier aircraft will depart fuel light and plug a tanker (a proper one) shortly after take-off. The majority of RAF tanker fuel offload while on operations for the last couple of decades has been to US Navy a/c. Hornets have an SOP on some recent operations where they've had to operate with the fuel probe deployed will be interesting to see what happens going fwd with f35.

F35b in uk service won't have tanks so park that idea in the never land basket. Fastjet wing tanks are only really useful when filled at altitude and the aircraft is in cruise and are nearly always emptied first. About 30% of the fuel carried in wing tanks is used to overcome the drag of carrying them in the first place. These are tactical a/c with relatively standard range for jets I wish people would stop trying to turn them into strategic bombers. It's there non traditional istar capability that will be of most benefit over legacy jets.

[swoop]

Chinooks and Apaches don't fold.

The WAH-64 has folding rotors. Presumably this is what you are referring to since it would be pointless to fold the tail on a helo that operates from larger vessels.
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/1998-10-15- ... -Worldwide

[Pongoglo]

Always thought one of the best things we did was put folding rotors on our WAH-64, not just for putting them on ships but for moving them by air as well, my concern being will we have them an Apache E ? My understanding is that our 'E's will be absolutely standard to the US spec without any of the bespoke Brit bits of kit we fitted on our Westland birds...

[Gabriele]

Folding rotors were adopted by the US Army as well, mainly for air transport, so should not change much.

Problem is Chinook.

[Pymes75]

I've always thought that the greatest contribution V-22 could make to a QEC Air Group is COD and AEW/ASaC. I would still like to see the Crowsnest AEW kit fitted to Ospreys. A 'Bag WAFU' once told me that anything that reduces the time to get upstream would be very welcome in the squadron wardroom!

[MRCA]

Well as we're spending billions effectively replacing apache with new build apache E should not of been saying as there now gonna spend time at see instead of buying apache we will buy AH-1Z instead. perhaps we could only buy 40 new instead of 50 apaches but it would probably work out better long term.

[shark bait]

V-22 would be awesome for AEW. Something like that should be looked at 15 years down the line.

[Jake1992]

Would AEW varient of the V-22 be worth looking at to have in say 10 years while the crows nest kit still had life in it, that way we could transfer the crows nest kit ( not helos ) to the arm giving them an AEW capability

[Thorvicson]

V-22 would be awesome for AEW. Something like that should be looked at 15 years down the line.

It probably will be although possibly earlier than that, the USMC were very interested in our AEW Sea Kings when we used them in Afghanistan and they will be looking at Crowsnest as must as we will be looking at V-22 when they join us for the first QNLZ cruise. The fact that Crowsnest is a bolt-on system will be of interest as it opens the way for alternative host platforms.
(Speaking of which I wish they had ordered new HC4s for the QNLZ to act as both COD and the Crowsnest platform as the original design had Crowsnest deploying from the rear ramp of the Utility Merlin rather than bolted onto the side of an ASW Merlin. Much more efficient as the radar retracts inside the fuselage and it leave the ASW airframe to do what they are best at - hunting subs !)

The RN, RAF, MOD and USMC will all be studying the lessons learned form the first QNLZ operational deployment and that will form the basis of how Carrier Strike evolves and what force enhancements they will want to add to their wish list for the following 10 yr procurement plan. We may have new platform alternatives in the pipeline by then.

[Thorvicson]

Anyway more importantly - What's Happening with the Ships !!!!!! were now in May, enigmatically said they have started to switch the Propeller blades to the real ones last week, how long before the ship is cleared of scaffolding and tents to reveal her true glory and shes ready to leave the basin and steam out the Forth under her own power and start Sea Trials ?

[Pymes75]

Anyway more importantly - What's Happening with the Ships !!!!!! were now in May, enigmatically said they have started to switch the Propeller blades to the real ones last week, how long before the ship is cleared of scaffolding and tents to reveal her true glory and shes ready to leave the basin and steam out the Forth under her own power and start Sea Trials ?

My guess is that changing the brake blades for the propellor blades is an indication that the ship is very nearly ready to sail... at leat, that's how I've taken it!

[cockneyjock1974]

No where near 100% sure yet, need to firm up details but I think Artisan is on POW. Those of you that like to draw pictures please don't update until it's confirmed by the ACA.

QE is still very much under wraps, aka tenting evident on the flight deck, the stern though, up to a third of the flight deck is uncovered.

[Thorvicson]

Interesting news CJ as the Artisan was fitted to QNLZ some time after float out but quite possible they have revised the schedule as it must be easier to use the big overhead crane than a mobile one on the pier side.

Nice to hear QNLZ is now partially revealed although it sounds like a few more weeks before she is finally unveiled in all her glory with a completed flight deck and fitted out.

[Jdam]

Do we have any idea when the POW will be launched, I'm just wondering if we will get the chance to see both the QE and POW in the water in Roysth.

[SKB]

Can't launch PoW until QE's vacated the basin for sea trials. Otherwise, where are you going to berth PoW with QE still tied up ?