Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Gabriele »

You can see the MK29 launcher on the huge flat sponson in the stern. https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/CuWXT ... -Ford-.jpg

And the other MK29 is visible here, on a sponson on the side, near a Phalanx: https://geraldrfordfoundation.org/wp-co ... 9-copy.jpg

Each side is covered by a MK29, a RAM launcher and a Phalanx, with a third Phalanx right on the stern.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Thanks Gaby
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RetroSicotte »

Gabriele wrote:You can see the MK29 launcher on the huge flat sponson in the stern. https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/CuWXT ... -Ford-.jpg

And the other MK29 is visible here, on a sponson on the side, near a Phalanx: https://geraldrfordfoundation.org/wp-co ... 9-copy.jpg

Each side is covered by a MK29, a RAM launcher and a Phalanx, with a third Phalanx right on the stern.
Just looking around the edges. Cor, that coverage of missiles and guns is something else.

Not to mention the hard-kill anti-torpedo measures in there.

User avatar
QEC Eye in the SKY
Member
Posts: 277
Joined: 27 May 2015, 12:51
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by QEC Eye in the SKY »





PWLS is looking well ahead of its naming ceremony.

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

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

WhiteWhale wrote:Don't worry, Phalanx has a fantastic service record of successfully intercepting a friendly battleship and several friendly aircraft, it is entirely reasonable to depend on it as the sole layer of defence.
Exactly, I say implement Sea Dart on the QE class. ;)

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 »

Image
Image
'NooooooooOOOOOooooooo!!!"
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

RetroSicotte wrote:Not to mention the hard-kill anti-torpedo measures
The Americans do it, the Germans do it... we always do soft kill (for everything... is it cheaper? :roll: )
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

indeid
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by indeid »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
RetroSicotte wrote:Not to mention the hard-kill anti-torpedo measures
The Americans do it, the Germans do it... we always do soft kill (for everything... is it cheaper? :roll: )
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
RetroSicotte wrote:Not to mention the hard-kill anti-torpedo measures
The Americans do it, the Germans do it... we always do soft kill (for everything... is it cheaper? :roll: )
I think you have it nailed with the cost comment!

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

The U.S.N is equipping their carriers with anti torpedo torpedoes to defeat wake homing torpedoes ,there have been posts about the effectiveness or lack of, of soft kill lures on wake homing torpedoes, its easy to speculate here of course

james k
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 16:51
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by james k »

That steel on her bows looks painfully thin, more so than Queen Elizabeth, has someone been cutting costs or is it an optical illusion? And some of that welding looks more like a school project than proper shipbuilding.

User avatar
CR4ZYHOR5E
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 02 May 2015, 10:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by CR4ZYHOR5E »

I see PoW has been given the same tattoo treatment for her naming ceremony...I think its the font that's used that's offensive...it just looks...naff.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RetroSicotte »

As someone said, the only reason QE doesn't have hard-kill torpedoes or SAM batteries is cost.

As has been brought up time and again in the past, when everyone else in the world does it but we don't, the reason is fairly clear.

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 »

If only....
Ark Royal VI.JPG
;)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

RNFollower
Member
Posts: 46
Joined: 10 Jul 2015, 22:06
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by RNFollower »

PhillyJ wrote:
WhiteWhale wrote:Don't worry, Phalanx has a fantastic service record of successfully intercepting a friendly battleship and several friendly aircraft, it is entirely reasonable to depend on it as the sole layer of defence.
Exactly, I say implement Sea Dart on the QE class. ;)
How about a pair of Octuple Pom Poms :D


Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

RetroSicotte wrote:As someone said, the only reason QE doesn't have hard-kill torpedoes or SAM batteries is cost.

As has been brought up time and again in the past, when everyone else in the world does it but we don't, the reason is fairly clear.
Hard kill torpedo defences are very new. The USN has deployed them on 5 CVN to date, and as far as I know has no plans to deploy them elsewhere. The UK developed the soft-kill and the US developed the hard-kill as part of an MoU. Whether that agreement still holds true I'm not sure as SSTD has not been ordered by the USN yet, quite what they do in that space will be interesting as the reason for SSTD development was to replace Nixie which was seen as ineffective. The difficult bit for the RN if they decide to go for hardkill SSTD on the QE class once the USN have ironed any niggles out is where to put it. QE just doesn't have the openings everywhere that US CVN have..

CameronPerson
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Apr 2017, 17:03
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by CameronPerson »

Just reading about the Gerald R. Ford and whether the US Navy are going to undertake shock tests. Do you reckon QE will go through them at some point? There's an interesting shot of Invincible going through shock tests in DK Brown's "Rebuilding the Royal Navy"

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 »

re-CAMM's on QE's & enigmatics enigmatic comment:

He rules out cost. We mentioned lack of space to fit. So how about the risk of a hovering F-35B cooking off the missiles?

I don't buy the problems of coordinating with flying ops. They have to be solved by the escorts.

CameronPerson
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Apr 2017, 17:03
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by CameronPerson »

Also 1SL has confirmed that the first sea going Captain of PoW will be Stephen Moorhouse.

Commander Steve Moorhouse was educated at King Edward VI School, Stratford-upon-Avon. He entered Britannia Royal Naval College in September 1991 as a University Cadet Aviator and completed his Fleet Training in HM Ships Brazen and Invincible, before proceeding to Birmingham University to read Mathematics and Sport Science. Following basic flying training, he specialised in Airborne Early Warning and gained his Observer wings with 849 Squadron. Appointed to 849 Squadron B Flight, primarily embarked in HMS Illustrious, he experienced a wide variety of flying in challenging environments ranging from the southern Indian Ocean to the Baltic and including front line operations in the Northern Arabian Gulf and Sierra Leone.

In 2002 he qualified as a Principal Warfare Officer and was appointed to HMS Chatham as the Operations Officer and was soon deploying to the Persian Gulf for Operation Telic, where Chatham provided naval gunfire in support of amphibious operations on the Al Faw peninsula. On promotion to Lieutenant Commander in 2004, he joined HMS Bulwark, in build, in Barrow-in-Furness as her first Operations Officer. Following extensive sea trials, commissioning and formal sea training this appointment culminated in Bulwark achieving full operational readiness as the fleet’s amphibious flagship.

A period ashore followed working for the Director of Naval Personnel as a Career Manager with responsibility for the career development and appointing of some 380 junior warfare officers. On completion of this staff appointment, Moorhouse was selected to return to sea in command of the Offshore Patrol Vessel HMS Severn, undertaking Fishery Protection and Maritime Security Operations in UK waters and also the Falkland Islands Patrol Vessel HMS Clyde, protecting British interests in the South Atlantic. On selection for promotion to Commander in 2009, he completed the Advanced Command and Staff Course where he gained an MA in Defence Studies.

A return to sea quickly beckoned with Moorhouse in command of the ‘Queen’s Frigate’ HMS Lancaster. His time in command spanned her work up from a multi million pound refit through to deployment in the Caribbean where they were responsible for the interdiction and disruption of drugs with a UK street value in excess of £1Bn.

His most recent command was that of HMS Ocean from 2015-2016

IMG_1224.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

RetroSicotte wrote:As someone said, the only reason QE doesn't have hard-kill torpedoes or SAM batteries is cost.

As has been brought up time and again in the past, when everyone else in the world does it but we don't, the reason is fairly clear.
An article by Tyler Rogoway in Warzones stated that the wake homing torpedoes were unlikely to be deterred by acoustic counter measures {soft kill }and that Surface Ship Torpedo Defence is planned for all major surface ships by 2035

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by R686 »

james k wrote:That steel on her bows looks painfully thin, more so than Queen Elizabeth, has someone been cutting costs or is it an optical illusion? And some of that welding looks more like a school project than proper shipbuilding.
Can I ask from what Qualifications you base that on?

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 »

Re: USS Ford photo.
That shot from port aft quarter shows what appears to be an exceptionally large block on which that mounting is based. It is not at flight deck level though. I'm now intrigued to know what is inside that section. The starboard side is similar.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Halidon »

swoop wrote:Re: USS Ford photo.
That shot from port aft quarter shows what appears to be an exceptionally large block on which that mounting is based. It is not at flight deck level though. I'm now intrigued to know what is inside that section. The starboard side is similar.
The aft sponsons contain the Plasma gasification plant built by Pyrogenesis. It's formally the Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System, I believe one sponson is the plant and the other storage for the syngas.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Halidon »

I don't dislike the PoW name, and it's not my Navy anyway, but I'm a bit sad George VI seems destined to never have a capital ship named for him. Seems a raw deal for a wartime King who, as a prince, served the RN at Jutland.

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Defiance »

I think it's a bit more poetic, the sinking of the previous Prince of Wales being representative of the decline of the battleship in favour of airpower.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Agreed. And PoW + South China Sea? Isn't that where they will be headed, taking turns, sure

While the name makes a nice pair with the other carrier, and harks back to (building/ solidifying) the Special Relationship
"1941, the very first wartime meeting between U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill took place aboard the Prince of Wales, off the coast of Canada."
the use of the capital ship as a strategic tool was very reminiscent of the emerging RN strategy:
"Churchill and the British naval high command ordered the creation of Force Z [...] with the intention of warning the Japanese away from aggressive behavior."
... single Task Force...all is lost (or won) despite the airpower nuances. Many lessons learnt; this time not embodied in just a document ;)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply