Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

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

Her pole mast is back up.
Image
(RN in Scotland)

Image
Image
(Joanne wibberley)

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:I honestly cannot bring to mind a large aircraft carrier design that has ever been exported as a design for someone else to build due to wanting the design.

That is quite a coup for British design if that goes through, the only large carrier in modern times to achieve an export contract!
Perhaps not the same, but the Indians relied far more heavily, than they want to admit, on Fincantieri for their Vikrant design.

Does the Kuznetsov count for the Type 001A design? Not sure stealing counts as an export contract though....
Poiuytrewq wrote:Interesting that BAE is taking the lead on what was a Thales/BMT design.
The design and IP are owned by HMG, as seen in the opening up of the design to the French for £100m when they were looking at PA.2. Presumably (hopefully) if there is an order BAE will pay the government a fee for it...

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

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

Ron5 wrote:Why on earth does it fold that way instead of swinging back like the Sea Kings? Looks daft.
SW1 wrote:Looking at the picture my guess would be due to the fact they’re using the weapons mounting pylon location any rotation aft may have cause ground clearance issues in the event of a tire deflation and gear strut full compressed condition along with potential clearance issues to the landing gear sponson when fully swung aft. If they had decided to swing fwd it would cover the air stairs door.
Definitely to do with the mounting on the weapons pylon fit...or British Gas no longer make the pipe section that was used for the Sea King mount....
Jdam wrote:Are the dimensions of the missile different? I guess the benefit of going with Sea Ceptor is she would use stock of standard missile rather than having a one of a kind missile just for the carriers.
CAMM-ER is longer but that's it. It isn't as manoeuvrable as CAMM so has a longer minimum effective range, but obviously a longer range overall. If QE ever got fitted for it (which is still very doubtful) CAMM on its own would be sufficient as the objective would only be to defend against missiles that popped up really close or were not successfully engaged by T45. CAMM-ER would make sense for T45, possibly to replace the Aster15 capability, leaving more space for Aster30.

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 »

Timmymagic wrote:Does the Kuznetsov count for the Type 001A design? Not sure stealing counts as an export contract though...
The thought did occur, although I dismissed it. Kuz didn't "win" the design in that case as an export like this would be. It was just China happened to have one, and copied it to learn about shipbuilding techniques of larger vessels.

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 »



:wtf:

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 »


(Jim Ramsay) 4 April 2019
Thursday 4th April 2019 saw an attempt by 7 tugs to pull HMS Queen Elizabeth back into the basin at Rosyth to be maintained in the dry dock.
Due to winds you can see the ship rocking about, the operationw as stopped and later cancelled for the day.
You can see the weather was .. variable!

Forth Bridges webcam: https://transport-scotland.panomax.com/forth
QE went back to the Forth's deep water channel for the night.

User avatar
Phil R
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Phil R »

Timmymagic wrote:...or British Gas no longer make the pipe section that was used for the Sea King mount....
Far too true, have a like. :thumbup:

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 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
RetroSicotte wrote:That is quite a coup for British design if that goes through, the only large carrier in modern times to achieve an export contract!
Fingers crossed. If India were ordering the F35b it would be very likely that a QE class would get the nod but the CATOBAR with EMALS redesign for India is still somewhat unproven. Undoubtedly though, having 2 already in the water will make a massive difference.

Interesting that BAE is taking the lead on what was a Thales/BMT design. It also proves that if HMG does invest in British industry to produce cutting edge designs the rest of the world will be very interested. The T26 is the obvious example. If only HMG had of shown the same commitment and support for British industry in the T31e programme then we might have had a better outcome to look forward too.
Poiuytrewq wrote:
RetroSicotte wrote:That is quite a coup for British design if that goes through, the only large carrier in modern times to achieve an export contract!
Fingers crossed. If India were ordering the F35b it would be very likely that a QE class would get the nod but the CATOBAR with EMALS redesign for India is still somewhat unproven. Undoubtedly though, having 2 already in the water will make a massive difference.

Interesting that BAE is taking the lead on what was a Thales/BMT design. It also proves that if HMG does invest in British industry to produce cutting edge designs the rest of the world will be very interested. The T26 is the obvious example. If only HMG had of shown the same commitment and support for British industry in the T31e programme then we might have had a better outcome to look forward too.
It would be so awesome if india did go for the QE design with CATOBAR ! I would of thought most of the design changes for CATOBAR has already been done as we had the F35 b or C debate a few years back where they looked into converting POW ? unless it was a sham......

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 »

RetroSicotte wrote:I honestly cannot bring to mind a large aircraft carrier design that has ever been exported as a design for someone else to build due to wanting the design.

That is quite a coup for British design if that goes through, the only large carrier in modern times to achieve an export contract!
Fewer and fewer countries are maintaing a complex warship design capability. It is very expensive.

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 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:Interesting that BAE is taking the lead on what was a Thales/BMT design.
It was a Thales concept. The design was created by a team of hundreds, mostly from Bae.

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 »

Timmymagic wrote:CAMM-ER is longer but that's it. It isn't as manoeuvrable as CAMM so has a longer minimum effective range
CAMM-ER is just as maneuverable as its shorter range cousin. The longer minimum range is because the booster fires for a longer period of time before it drops away, and the missile goes faster at the end of the boost phase. Hence the longer range.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jake1992 »

This is what we should be investing in for the QEs.
From what Iv read it’ll have a longer on station and higher altitude than a merlin and is incorporating radar elements from the Hawkeye for its AEW set up, that long with an electronic warfare version and and attack version would be spot on.



So crows nest isn’t a waste I’d transfer it to the army as it’s ment to have an over land ability like it’s predecor ( which really impressed in Iraq )

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

And the RAF will be happy because they get all the F-35s and can buy the A model.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jake1992 »

Lord Jim wrote:And the RAF will be happy because they get all the F-35s and can buy the A model.
Why would they get that ?
I was looking at the AEW as a more capable alternative to crowns nest and the EW capablity that would be lacking in our air wing.

If those 2 are acquired then the attack version makes sence aswell but not as a replacement to the F35Bs but a add on.
From what Iv read and watched the attack version has a similar capability to a reaper drone, now people on here have mentioned having that sort of capability off the carriers and this would allow that but in no way would be a replacement for F35Bs.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

Sorry a few days late with my last comment :D

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 »

16:00, 17:00, 18:00, 19:00 - QE's still anchored in the Forth's deep water channel....
https://transport-scotland.panomax.com/forth



(both: John Fraser) 5 April 2019

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 »

Guess you had to be there

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

Keep wondering about this India qe carrier design option and we might be in with a really good chance here as stated by others an in other articles because the other RFI request 1) qe already built and in the water for them to get a good idea and assess ,2) Russia will only assist with plans for a new design they not or can't build themselves atm and it already cost them loads and time delays on there last carrier project with them although India would build in-house ,3) loc mart haven't built carriers before but I'm sure they could get outside help.4)and the time scale for a French carrier for India as india have said they bringing forwards to start in 3 yrs apparently ,also if it's a non nuclear design it might be an Indian only vessel for them to find the problems building a first in class and an expensive one off design, I'm thinking because I'm sure France will go another nuclear design again, too keep there hand in the nuclear ship buisness and India stated it's not going the nuclear route now ,so all in all why reinvent the wheel again with France and have to wait when there is a fantastic option already out there the size and scope they say they want ,I do recognize it would be an altered derivative for the India's needs but there already derivative qe plans out there or part way there more specific for their needs ,in my view it's a no brainer surly ? So hence it might stand a very good chance . proviso; as stated many times I could be wrong I am lots of times folks :-)

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

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

I seem to recall that the plans for the carrier were sold to France for 100 hundred million pounds would such a cost be the same to India? of course having the plans and having the expertise to build can be different things

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 »

QE 6Apr2019 1210.PNG
Looks like another attempt is happening now, QE is on the move.
https://transport-scotland.panomax.com/forth
Camera updates every 10 minutes.

Marine Traffic shows tugs AIS, but not QE's.
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/ho ... 13/zoom:15
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



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 »

Video from inside Rosyth's basin:

Image
Image
Image
Image

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
(@RoyalNavy)
The view from @HMSPWLS as her big sister, @HMSQNLZ arrives back in the basin at Rosyth, Scotland. A tribute to British engineering.
Image
(@RoyalNavy)
After successful sea trials, which included landing the first F35B on deck, @HMSQNLZ will now enter a period of scheduled maintenance.

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 »

She's in!
Video from PoW CO Commodore Stephen Moorhouse RN.

:clap:

And a timelapse video from QE's forward island:


Image
Image
(NavyLookout)

Post Reply