It's very interesting but completely off-topic. Just hopes this stops two pages of chit-chat about the economy on the QE carriers thread.Roders96 wrote:For what it's worth on the jobs front:
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Some actual thread title related content:
(Forces TV) 3rd July 2020
(Forces TV) 3rd July 2020
The Royal Navy's future flagship HMS Queen Elizabeth has sailed back into her home port of Portsmouth as a "fully trained" aircraft carrier.
The 65,000-tonne warship has completed sea and flight trials with F-35B Lightning jets and is now cleared for frontline duties. We were in Portsmouth to watch her return.
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
So she will be sailing again October for a joint exercise, will be good to see a few more F35 on deck when the usmc come aboard.
Any news on the itinerary for POW will be this year ?
Any news on the itinerary for POW will be this year ?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
When is the 3rd Phalanx being fitted to our “fully trained” ??? Aircraft Carrier?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Wasn't there talk of a 4th or was I dreaming that?Scimitar54 wrote:When is the 3rd Phalanx being fitted to our “fully trained” ??? Aircraft Carrier?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
If I remember correctly, both ships were said to be fitted with three Phalanx each by the end of this year.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
The point that I was trying to make, was that how can HMS QE really be a “fully trained” Aircraft Carrier, without having the full 360° Phalanx coverage? Unless it is felt that simulation of this is considered sufficient.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
In the grand scheme of things, it's a pretty minor factor. The 30mm guns have some anti-missile capability (though they also haven't been fitted yet, I believe) but it's not too important.Scimitar54 wrote:The point that I was trying to make, was that how can HMS QE really be a “fully trained” Aircraft Carrier, without having the full 360° Phalanx coverage? Unless it is felt that simulation of this is considered sufficient.
Compared to the criteria of the carrier being fully operational, Phalanx CIWS make up a tiny portion of the missile defence capabilities in a CSG (local air defence SAMs from frigates; Aster from PAAMS on the T45s being far more important and capable; countermeasures, decoys and jammers on each vessel, targeting the source before it launches missiles) in what only one main field of threat (submarine attacks are probably far more significant) in what is a scenario that is relatively unlikely anyway and only one area of capability for the strike group (defending against attacks as a whole is an important ability, however it is not the role of the group).
In other words, for that third CIWS missing being relevant, it requires any nation to be aggressive enough to actually get within range of the ship and engage which is extremely unlikely in the first place. It then required about half a dozen far more capable defence systems than the CIWS to completely breakdown and then requires for those missiles to be heading in the narrow area that the CIWS won't be able to react to, factoring in the time between detecting the missile and turning so that they do have coverage for that area.
People just tend to make a big deal about weapon systems in particular when it's only really a small technicality. It's like if a specific team within the engineering department hadn't trained for a specific type of engine failure that is theoretically possible but never happens - it would be good to train for it but it's not worth losing sleep over either.
If we're in a scenario before the end of 2020 where we might need to use CIWS or any missile defence, there is something going wrong that is far more concerning going on than the lack of a single Phalanx.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Well, if they can do without missiles like CAMM, they can do without one Phalanx as well...Scimitar54 wrote:The point that I was trying to make, was that how can HMS QE really be a “fully trained” Aircraft Carrier, without having the full 360° Phalanx coverage? Unless it is felt that simulation of this is considered sufficient.
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…
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…
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
How you “Fight a Ship” is NEVER a small technicality. The whole point of the recent training was to see how the Carrier (and its crew) performed in a fully operational scenario. Any one who says that something is “fully trained” when it is most clearly not so, should be avoided like the plague AND sent back to school.
I am sure that the last 10 weeks have seen the Crew’s ability to cope with just about anything increase exponentially and is a cause for great pride in all those involved. However, that should not be allowed to give the impression that “the job is done”. It is not and what is more it never is!
I am sure that the last 10 weeks have seen the Crew’s ability to cope with just about anything increase exponentially and is a cause for great pride in all those involved. However, that should not be allowed to give the impression that “the job is done”. It is not and what is more it never is!
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
But a 50% increase in CIWS capability wouldn't change how that training would go or change how the ship is currently fighting or ever will. At the very least if you don't consider the difference of the Phalanx to be a technicality, arguing that calling the ship not fully trained on account of such a small factor is.Scimitar54 wrote:How you “Fight a Ship” is NEVER a small technicality. The whole point of the recent training was to see how the Carrier (and its crew) performed in a fully operational scenario. Any one who says that something is “fully trained” when it is most clearly not so, should be avoided like the plague AND sent back to school.
I am sure that the last 10 weeks have seen the Crew’s ability to cope with just about anything increase exponentially and is a cause for great pride in all those involved. However, that should not be allowed to give the impression that “the job is done”. It is not and what is more it never is!
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
@NavyLookout claiming next year’s carrier deployment will involve 14 F-35s - 8 UK AND 6 USMC.
With no guarantee there will ever be more than 48 UK F-35s (including three trials aircraft in the US) it’s not looking hopeful that an embarked force of 24 UK aircraft will ever happen.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Biproduct of Huawei lobbying perhaps? Either way, better optics.RichardIC wrote:
@NavyLookout claiming next year’s carrier deployment will involve 14 F-35s - 8 UK AND 6 USMC.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Nope, don’t understand a word.Roders96 wrote:Biproduct of Huawei lobbying perhaps? Either way, better optics.
However I think it’s becoming more and more likely that the carriers will be rotated, like the LPDs, with one in service and one at extended readiness.
It may not be adopted as official policy but, de facto, that’s what it’ll be.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I remember when it was 12 and 12, then 12 and 8....now 8 and 6...RichardIC wrote:@NavyLookout claiming next year’s carrier deployment will involve 14 F-35s - 8 UK AND 6 USMC.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I think 12 and 12 was only ever wishful thinking and supposition on here and places like it.Timmymagic wrote: I remember when it was 12 and 12, then 12 and 8....now 8 and 6...
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
The four escorts selected to accompany the CSG 2021 deployment are HMS Daring, HMS Defender, HMS Kent and HMS Richmond.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
So it’s 9 merlin and 8 f35, I see we’re bounding headlong towards the realms of reality with regard to the air wing who’d of thought it.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Nice, shame.about the airwing, though. Are both the T23 ASW? I'm somewhat doubtful if we could muster 4 escorts regularly for each deployment thoughThe Armchair Soldier wrote:The four escorts selected to accompany the CSG 2021 deployment are HMS Daring, HMS Defender, HMS Kent and HMS Richmond.
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
From what I remember reading, it’s just a demonstration of what we could do if push came to shove, nothing regular.dmereifield wrote:Nice, shame.about the airwing, though. Are both the T23 ASW? I'm somewhat doubtful if we could muster 4 escorts regularly for each deployment thoughThe Armchair Soldier wrote:The four escorts selected to accompany the CSG 2021 deployment are HMS Daring, HMS Defender, HMS Kent and HMS Richmond.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5629
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
going forward will be more like the French carrier group they seem to send 2 escorts and then 3 allied escorts the last French group had a Type 45 and IH class attached
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
HMS Daring ready by May 2021? No chance.
EDIT: It definitely did say Daring, seems to have been changed now.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Out of interest (if there's been any indication), which way round the world is the task group going to be going:
Picking up the Yanks from home and sailing Westbound, or a grand tour of the Med, M.E, Indian Ocean etc?
Picking up the Yanks from home and sailing Westbound, or a grand tour of the Med, M.E, Indian Ocean etc?
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Wasn't it said ages ago that the first deployment would take in the South China Seas?