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.
S M H
Member
Posts: 381
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby S M H » 18 Oct 2019, 19:57

SKB wrote:And a aerial video of Invergordon itself, if you're curious about it.
I would of expected the tank farm that was part of the closed R.N. fuel depot twenty five years ago. Would have been removed along with the pumping house for Inchin down to the side of the church . The Cromlet tanks on the west side of the church (F.F.O. tanks) were removed twenty five years ago. The Anchor shown was recovered from Cromarty firth in 1986 near H.M.S Natal. When radiation free metal was recovered for use in C.T. scanners. It was bent to recover a chain rather than damaged in use. The ex Admiralty jetty is the T shaped jetty were the cruse ships berth. The berth were the carrier is now tied up was the site of the Admiralty floating dock. In the 1950s- 70s R.A.F. marine craft unit.It was redeveloped into a rig repair yard in the late 1980s.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5740
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 18 Oct 2019, 22:12


(Recorded from: Forces TV) 18th October 2019

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3608
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 19 Oct 2019, 00:46

Not seen any smoke from either of the new carriers. I assume they have the latest exhaust cleaners installed to keep down dirty emissions.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5740
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 19 Oct 2019, 12:04

Image
(@HMSQNLZ) 18th October 2017
It's not all about #bigdecksfastjets - rotary wing ops continue on #WESTLANT19 as we welcome onboard @USMC CH-53 Super Stallion. These heavy lift helicopters will allow us to embark USMC personnel ahead of their F-35Bs joining us for trials very soon & deploying with us in 2021.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5740
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 19 Oct 2019, 12:08

Forces TV interview (video) with RN Vice Admiral Jerry Kyd, QE's former CO.
https://www.forces.net/video?videoId=6095829830001

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 1695
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby bobp » 20 Oct 2019, 21:17

Dolphin joins the ship


Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 21 Oct 2019, 14:58

Ron5 wrote:Not seen any smoke from either of the new carriers. I assume they have the latest exhaust cleaners installed to keep down dirty emissions


There's a fair bit on start-up, as with any large diesel generator, but it seems to burn fairly clean after that. But I've never seen anything about a scrubbing system, particularly one which vents into the water, which given the rest of the environmentally conscious decisions in the design (see below link) is either unusual, or more likely one isn't required. I suspect the latter as the diesel gensets will be running a lot cleaner than the large 2 stroke engines that are seen on commercial vessels.

http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.u ... 12-07-2017

djkeos
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: 18 Apr 2016, 10:29
Location: Netherlands

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby djkeos » 21 Oct 2019, 18:45

From the Aircraft Carrier Alliance page:

"28/11/2018
HMS Prince of Wales mighty diesel generator has been powered-up for the first time marking a key milestone on the road to sending the 65,000 tonne warship to sea next year."

See: http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.u ... 28-11-2018

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5740
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 21 Oct 2019, 19:01

PoW has left Invergordon.


Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3608
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 21 Oct 2019, 19:30

djkeos wrote:From the Aircraft Carrier Alliance page:

"28/11/2018
HMS Prince of Wales mighty diesel generator has been powered-up for the first time marking a key milestone on the road to sending the 65,000 tonne warship to sea next year."

See: http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.u ... 28-11-2018


Yikes, somebody must have left a pair of old socks in the funnel.

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 21 Oct 2019, 19:44

Ron5 wrote:Yikes, somebody must have left a pair of old socks in the funnel.


It's only for a few seconds, there was some video of it somewhere. I made the mistake of standing next to a large group of backup diesel generators, each one the size of a 20 foot TEU, once when the power failed and they kicked in...the initial 'cough' as they started left me covered head to toe in soot, I looked like Justin Trudeau at a party, after they were on though the exhaust was fairly clean.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 295
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Jdam » 21 Oct 2019, 21:47

Any reason why the weapon bays of the F-35's are always open when they are on deck?


R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1752
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby R686 » 21 Oct 2019, 23:57

The Armchair Soldier wrote:https://youtu.be/IBsUgKgMzy8




When are they planning a max weight take offs?

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 22 Oct 2019, 09:24

R686 wrote:When are they planning a max weight take offs?


It's a good question, but it might not be one for the UK at present. If we load an F-35B with the maximum number of UK cleared stores (2 x Internal PWIV, 2 x Internal Amraam, 4 x external PWIV and 2 x Asraam and max fuel we're still nowhere near the F-35B's max take off weight. I guess at the moment we'd need the USMC or the ITF to do those tests using US stores to get a feel for the performance. The UK isn't really going to need the full performance envelope on takeoff until (and if) FCASW or heavier bombs are cleared for UK use and thats unlikely until 2026+. We could use the twin racks for PWIV at some point in the future (again after Blk.4 introduced so post 2026) but that would still leave a fair gap to max takeoff weight. It's the same with weapon bringback. For the UK at present, and as far as we know, its just not a problem.

topman
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Location: Tokelau

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby topman » 22 Oct 2019, 09:37

Jdam wrote:Any reason why the weapon bays of the F-35's are always open when they are on deck?


If I had to take a stab, I'd say to allow a post flight inspection.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10871
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 22 Oct 2019, 09:42

Timmymagic wrote:post 2026 [)] but that would still leave a fair gap to max takeoff weight


If we were to intro AShMs, say in the guise of JSMs, woud that still be the case?

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 22 Oct 2019, 16:26

ArmChairCivvy wrote:If we were to intro AShMs, say in the guise of JSMs, woud that still be the case?


JSM's would only be external, but even then they're not a very heavy store. They're only 900lb's per missile and they're not going to have a dual mount for them.

LRASM is a different beast though...

Basically, as soon as we abandoned external carry of Storm Shadow the max weight question for the UK became moot. The one thing that could change that anytime soon is if the F-35 gets external tanks cleared for use (and/or a buddy tank, not planned at present) as I'm pretty sure they would be rapidly adopted by the RAF/RN.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3608
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 22 Oct 2019, 16:56

Timmymagic wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:If we were to intro AShMs, say in the guise of JSMs, woud that still be the case?


JSM's would only be external, but even then they're not a very heavy store. They're only 900lb's per missile and they're not going to have a dual mount for them.

LRASM is a different beast though...

Basically, as soon as we abandoned external carry of Storm Shadow the max weight question for the UK became moot. The one thing that could change that anytime soon is if the F-35 gets external tanks cleared for use (and/or a buddy tank, not planned at present) as I'm pretty sure they would be rapidly adopted by the RAF/RN.


I believe the current favorite is a 600 gallon tank. How much would two of those weigh?

SW1
Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SW1 » 22 Oct 2019, 17:10

There’s a couple of Max’s they maybe able to test but surely the max weight from a stores point of view will be max weight for mode 4 recovery unless your planning to dump them. You ain’t doing that with 600 gallon fuel tanks. There may also be more modifications required than you may realise to allow f35b to receive external tanks should ones ever appear.

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 23 Oct 2019, 01:40

Ron5 wrote:I believe the current favorite is a 600 gallon tank. How much would two of those weigh?


A 600 gallon tank would weigh c3,500lbs each....but that was the size that IAI was talking about developing for the F-35A. The LM tank was to be 460 gallons, which all up, including the tank itself will weigh c3,000lbs.

Whats not clear at present is how far along anyone is on this, and if the external tanks would be suitable for all versions of F-35. I don't think it would be surprising to find that only the 460 would work for an F-35B, especially on a shortened takeoff.

The advantage of a fuel tank, in comparison to a weapon, is that you could if necessary dump the fuel at comparatively low cost compared to a PGM, to get back onboard. The tank itself would only be ditched in extremis as they're no longer considered expendable.

The lack of proposed 'options' for the F-35 like this is a little perplexing. Lots have been proposed, no doubt the lack of aircraft for testing and the software development has slowed it down, but you would have thought that whomever gets a compatible tank to market first will make a bundle of sales to every operator going. If they can add in some other features, like a luggage pod section, or a recon or EW pod in the same qualified shape they could stand to make some serious money. I'm not so sure on the conformals that the Israeli's were proposing, or the stealth weapons pods for that matter, they seem an order of magnitude more complex, but its gone very quiet on those.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3488
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 23 Oct 2019, 02:21

Maybe this could be an opening for a British company to develop a low viz fuel tank for the F-35, using composite materials that is affordable and expendable so that the F-35s could operate like some WWII aircraft, carrying the tanks and jettisoning them one empty on the way to the target, increasing the range of any given strike mission, or extending the duration of CAP, without affecting the manoeuvrability of the aircraft in combat. If one was developed and adopted by the UK, I am pretty sure they could sell them to other F-35 operators.

90inFIRST
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:00
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby 90inFIRST » 23 Oct 2019, 09:37

topman wrote:
Jdam wrote:Any reason why the weapon bays of the F-35's are always open when they are on deck?


If I had to take a stab, I'd say to allow a post flight inspection.


The doors are part of the aerodynamics of the landing the help duct the jet blast

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1964
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Gabriele » 23 Oct 2019, 10:28

But once on deck it is probably because of safety considerations. I remember reading that one of the considerations for putting an F-35, with internal weapon bays, on a carrier / LHD / what-have-you was how to effectively fight a fire into the aircraft, and having a way to spray up into the bays was one of the concerns.
Figure it might have something to do with that.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

topman
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Location: Tokelau

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby topman » 23 Oct 2019, 11:49

Lord Jim wrote:Maybe this could be an opening for a British company to develop a low viz fuel tank for the F-35, using composite materials that is affordable and expendable so that the F-35s could operate like some WWII aircraft, carrying the tanks and jettisoning them one empty on the way to the target, increasing the range of any given strike mission, or extending the duration of CAP, without affecting the manoeuvrability of the aircraft in combat. If one was developed and adopted by the UK, I am pretty sure they could sell them to other F-35 operators.


Do you mean routinely jettisoned? Not sure there's much of a market for that.


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests