UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 408
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 28 May 2019, 12:01

I was referring to the Flight Deck and F35Bs, not two (or even one) of the Islands.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2104
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby abc123 » 28 May 2019, 21:22

Timmymagic wrote:
benny14 wrote:2 squadrons acheive full operating capacity. 36 is for surge, I imagine it will be tried sometime after 2023 in the form of briefly embarking the OCU or a USMC squadron for training purposes.


It will be a while after that. We've got 35 F-35B on order or delivered to the end of 2022. That will give us 3 non-operational test aircraft in the US in 17(R) sqn and 32 split between 6 in 207 Sqn OCU, 12 in 617 Sqn and the depth fleet of 14 a/c (presumably we'll be standing up a UK Reserve Squadron as the holding area for those). For 809 NAS to stand up we need to order 13-16 more in 2020 if we want them operational by the end of 2024 (the difference in numbers is if we want to count the 3 test aircraft in the 48 number bandied about). And even then to run a 2 x 12 operational, 6 x OCU +3 test we would need more than 15-18 in the depth fleet.


Isn't that a bit high number?
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…

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 1604
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby bobp » 28 May 2019, 21:53

Its fair to say that the 3 test aircraft will never see active/operational service and will remain in the US for the foreseeable future. So we shouldn't be counting them in any fleet assignments.

serge750
Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby serge750 » 28 May 2019, 22:33

Does the "depth fleet" mean these airframes are the ones in constant maintenance on a rotation basis? i.e. 2 x 12 squadrons, 1 x 6 OCU then the remainder in the "depth fleet" in constant maintanace? except 3 x in 17 squadron. so 30 operational ?

SW1
Member
Posts: 723
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SW1 » 28 May 2019, 22:52

serge750 wrote:Does the "depth fleet" mean these airframes are the ones in constant maintenance on a rotation basis? i.e. 2 x 12 squadrons, 1 x 6 OCU then the remainder in the "depth fleet" in constant maintanace? except 3 x in 17 squadron. so 30 operational ?


Depth fleet would be a/c undoing major overhaul or upgrade at one of the major service centres could also apply to a/c held as attrition reserves. A/c at Sqn level or in a fwd fleet will also undergo minor maintenance or be unserviceable due to lack of spares or engineers. You could also have a 3rd smaller group of a/c within that which are at theatre entry standard that have specific modifications.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 29 May 2019, 00:39

SW1 wrote:You could also have a 3rd smaller group of a/c within that which are at theatre entry standard that have specific modifications.


Like for Tornados we bought only 12-14 modern helmets, aka what is std on e.g. F-35s
- or, for Ch2s we bought 22 Streetfighter upgrade kits... so half a rgmnt can enter into MOUT, while the other forms a ring outside such urban battlefield; to ensure no one escapes :)
- the other tank rgmnt will be in deep maintenance (in Germany, but in an A/C facility, if that makes everyone feel better)

Attrition reserve will have been assigned to another continent (BATUS).

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3068
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 29 May 2019, 22:33

We need to avoid having fleets within fleets where possible. Having a small fleet of TES platforms causes problems as if these are locked away until the fire starts then you reduce the availability of aircraft to the squadrons for day to day use as the pool of aircraft available is smaller and these still need to go through deep maintenance and are susceptible to breakdowns and such. IF they are kept as part of the operational fleet then there will be time when one or more of these TES platforms in going to be unavailable for one reason or another. What will probably happen though is the fleet will be the same standard until a fire breaks out, then a number of platforms will receive UOR updates which they will retain after the event, and there not by design you have a fleet within a fleet. This happened to the Tornado F3, Tornado GR1 and Jaguar GR1 in the first Gulf War and many other platform besides. Historically we keep our kit at the best standard we can afford and rely on UORs when it hits the fan.

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby swoop » 30 May 2019, 09:42

Scimitar54 wrote:There will be more motion with a CAMM silo up forward on a smaller ship (Type23 for example), but I accept that vertical movement of the silo may need to be taken into account against the height at which the "cold launch" ends and the missile propellant ignites. Forward movement of the ship should help. Perhaps a variant of "Fire on the up Roll" may still have an application today. :idea:


It would be interesting to see how well the active stabilisers are performing on the hull. Remember that four are fitted under the waterline.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 May 2019, 10:05

swoop wrote:It would be interesting to see how well the active stabilisers are performing


We know that from cruise ships (similar size; perhaps? a different hull form):
- at first they work well
- and past a "certain" sea state they stop working... so the change is a memorable experience for the PAX

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3068
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 30 May 2019, 10:20

Well it has been stated that they QE was too stable during the deployment across the Atlantic that they couldn't carry out some of the F-35 flight operations tests they wanted to. They are hoping for far worse weather next time.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 May 2019, 10:22

But some further thoughts on how the "loadout" on the two carriers, with a lot! of capacity, could be better:

When our carriers were mainly of WW2 design (if not of construction, because so many of them sprung back to life much later)... that led to some ingenious carrier a/c designs that would work within those (size) limits.

Not that we should pull out of F-35 :o but what else (cheaper, smaller) to load out to make the whole thing - carrier strike that is, no doubt they can be amphib substitutes... while we are waiting :) money's worth. So "now" rather than in ten years' time. Provocatively
- we should never have dropped Gannet, but rather proceeded with the version using counter-rotating propellers
- that one (one crew member added too, not just improving on how long it could stay up).

I used the std Gannet as a yardstick for how much space will be required, respectively, in the max folded config (in the hangar, lifts):
Gannet 1
Buccaneer! 1.16
Skyhawk 1.35
SeaHarrier 1.36
(U)K Phantom II 1.8
F-111B 2.6
F-14 Tomcat 2.7

So the cousins only bothered in the age of dumb bombs (Skyhawk) and after that rather built bigger ships than shrink the performance. Just like with Skyhawks (numbers!) keeping the AEW up there 24/7 numbers might come in handy, rather than maximising the performance - and surely that has not been done with the choice of a helo-based solution as the ceiling is so drastically curtailed - numbers, numbers... which translates to size (in the hangar).

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Jake1992 » 30 May 2019, 10:23

Lord Jim wrote:Well it has been stated that they QE was too stable during the deployment across the Atlantic that they couldn't carry out some of the F-35 flight operations tests they wanted to. They are hoping for far worse weather next time.


Is this testament to how good she is or just how calm the weather was lol

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 487
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby RichardIC » 30 May 2019, 12:52

ArmChairCivvy wrote:But some further thoughts on how the "loadout" on the two carriers, with a lot! of capacity, could be better:

When our carriers were mainly of WW2 design (if not of construction, because so many of them sprung back to life much later)... that led to some ingenious carrier a/c designs that would work within those (size) limits.

Not that we should pull out of F-35 but what else (cheaper, smaller) to load out to make the whole thing - carrier strike that is, no doubt they can be amphib substitutes... while we are waiting money's worth. So "now" rather than in ten years' time. Provocatively
- we should never have dropped Gannet, but rather proceeded with the version using counter-rotating propellers
- that one (one crew member added too, not just improving on how long it could stay up).

I used the std Gannet as a yardstick for how much space will be required, respectively, in the max folded config (in the hangar, lifts):
Gannet 1
Buccaneer! 1.16
Skyhawk 1.35
SeaHarrier 1.36
(U)K Phantom II 1.8
F-111B 2.6
F-14 Tomcat 2.7

So the cousins only bothered in the age of dumb bombs (Skyhawk) and after that rather built bigger ships than shrink the performance. Just like with Skyhawks (numbers!) keeping the AEW up there 24/7 numbers might come in handy, rather than maximising the performance - and surely that has not been done with the choice of a helo-based solution as the ceiling is so drastically curtailed - numbers, numbers... which translates to size (in the hangar).


From the abstract school of sentence construction. WTF?

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5327
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 30 May 2019, 14:16



Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3068
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 30 May 2019, 16:26

Jake1992 wrote:Is this testament to how good she is or just how calm the weather was lo

Opinion was she was too stable for stability when operating aircraft trails to be useful which was seen as a credit to the ships design and a negative as they would have to do the trails on the next trip.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Jake1992 » 30 May 2019, 16:29

Lord Jim wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:Is this testament to how good she is or just how calm the weather was lo

Opinion was she was too stable for stability when operating aircraft trails to be useful which was seen as a credit to the ships design and a negative as they would have to do the trails on the next trip.


Well it maybe a pain in the arse for testing but shows how well she was designed and built.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 May 2019, 18:24

RichardIC wrote:WTF?


Why don't you report on DG and get the anger out... unpleasant language, and I deeply disapprove of your sentence construction.
- Or go to the local pub and get your lights punched out; that's the real world, meeting with that kind of approach (putting, should I say :thumbdown: , a 'hard stop' to it).

downsizer
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby downsizer » 30 May 2019, 18:30

Or you could just try making sense! :crazy: :eh:

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3068
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 31 May 2019, 00:52

What's this all about besides the obvious??

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1475
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby The Armchair Soldier » 03 Jun 2019, 11:29

Apaches join HMS Queen Elizabeth for the first time:



Image


User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 487
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby RichardIC » 03 Jun 2019, 12:07

The Armchair Soldier wrote:Apaches join HMS Queen Elizabeth for the first time:


Is that the floatation gear on the inner pylons?

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1250
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 03 Jun 2019, 13:49

RichardIC wrote:Is that the floatation gear on the inner pylons?


Believe the flotation gear (part of it) is between the pylons mounted directly to the stub wing. In the large image it's above the Hellfire launcher on the port side.

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1250
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 03 Jun 2019, 14:15

The Armchair Soldier wrote:Apaches join HMS Queen Elizabeth for the first time


So, so far thats the following aircraft who have landed on QE (although trials need to be concluded for most):
UK
F-35B
Merlin HM.2
Merlin HC.4
Wildcat
Chinook
Apache

For the UK just Merlin Crowsnest to go and all elements of the TAG will have been aboard. Maybe Puma just to cover the set off?

USN and USMC
V-22
SH-60

Just CH-53, UH-1Y and AH-1W to go. Will an AV-8B make an appearance at some point?

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5327
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 03 Jun 2019, 14:47

From British Army website:
An Apache Attack Helicopter belonging to 656 Sqn Army Air Corps has made its debut landing aboard the 65,000-tonne flagship of the Royal Navy - HMS Queen Elizabeth.

Under Joint Helicopter Command, the Attack Helicopter will begin a series of tests and evaluations in what is known as the Platform Ship Integration Testing or PSITs for short.

Over a three-day period, the Apache will be assessed for its compatibility with the ship’s operating systems – how it’s manoeuvred around the flight deck and in the cavernous hangars below, maintenance and arming, testing on the giant lifts which bring the aircraft up on deck, along with a host of other tests.

Once the PSITs have been successfully negotiated in Portsmouth, HMS Queen Elizabeth will take to sea with Apache aboard for its sea trials in July where it will conduct landings and take-offs from a pitching and rolling deck.

Only on completion of this,. will the Apaches be officially certified to be able to operate from both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, when she becomes operational.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
(MoD/British Army)

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2403
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby RetroSicotte » 03 Jun 2019, 14:59

Bagged another aircraft to the collection!

We seriously need a sticky post to keep track of everything that has landed on QE. What is it now?

- Lightning
- Wildcat
- Merlin
- Apache
- Osprey
- Sea Stallion
- Seahawk
- Local Scottish Man's Drone
- Rosyth Dockyard Owl

Anything else? :p


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brad1 and 14 guests