UK Defence Forum

Ron5 wrote:PoW needs CIWS to visit Liverpool?

Tough city.

If they park the ship up for too long, the wheels will go missing from underneath...

Do you think that the RM Band will Beat “Le Retreat”?

Can't be exactly certain, but it seems as if PoW is being visited alongside on Monday 17th February by a vessel listed as "PWLS FUEL CAT". A possible fuelling up before a departure?
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/portsm ... 17/02/2020

SKB wrote:Can't be exactly certain, but it seems as if PoW is being visited alongside on Monday 17th February by a vessel listed as "PWLS FUEL CAT". A possible fuelling up before a departure?
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/portsm ... 17/02/2020

I can be exaclty certain but do not wish to for obv reasons, no times but I can say that early next week the departure of said ship is expected...probably not Monday but very close. Depends on Storm Edith, Edna, Elijah, Edmund, Edrwad, Elizabeth etcetc (not sure if there is an E on the way but who knows!)

Nothing to with the QE class so I do apologise for that, however the third shot warrants it alone. I do not know how old that particular dock is, but it is probably ancient, but bugger me it's a nice size!

PhillyJ wrote:I do not know how old that particular dock is

The new crane's legs will be positioned over 14 dock. The main truss will actually span across both 14 and 15 docks, allowing the winch to cross over both docks.
Docks 14 and 15 were originally built in 1896 - 124 years ago.

Sorry not qe class but shouldn't France new aircraft carrier design study be nearly done by now or soonish then they know which way it's going even if not building straight away?.they not doing qe class design now ,shame really . probably larger than qe class but by how much ? and nuclear I'm guessing

Imagine if they went for something smaller...... i do admit I do like the CdeG

why did they need a new crane?

Goliath was built and payed for, did anyone buy goliath in the end?

R686 wrote:why did they need a new crane?

Goliath was built and payed for, did anyone buy goliath in the end?

Babcock bought it I believe. They will use it for refits and the he T31 construction

HMS Prince of Wales to leave Portsmouth for the first time as a commissioned Royal Navy warship.

(Photo: @stevenbeech2)


QHM Portsmouth: https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/portsm ... 19/02/2020

Then QE will wind bows south after lunchtime, staying at Princess Royal Jetty.

They had talked about it being this morning about 0600, thank god that got put off!

1:12 - ''Ears on deck!" then horn!

09:15 - PoW left Portsmouth Harbour, passing the Round Tower and Fort Blockhouse.

Even with all the manning issues, there seems to be enough crew to have both carriers active. An event we were promised by the pessimists, we would never see.

A lovely album of PoW departure photos by Portsmouth photographer Shaun Roster.
https://www.shaunroster.com/MILITARY/Qu ... s/HMSPOW1/

So now its official (according to this RN infographic just released)

The POW is bigger than QE:



Link to full release:

How is that possible?

abc123 wrote:How is that possible?

Little bit extra here, little bit extra there and bigger on-board pub for the officers...it all adds up

Work required as a result of the decision for PoW to be built for Catobar operation, which was in the end not needed with the reversion to STOVL operation, but with the work already having been carried out. (The only explanation I can think of that would explain an increase in the beam of 3 Metres).

abc123 wrote:How is that possible?

PWLS has the Bedford Array already fitted, but this will be retro fitted to QNLZ so doubt this would make much difference in the sizes. I can only assume they have increased the size and weight to accomodate the individual mess fridges for the crew on PWLS, having seen the stock take of 'grog' that my nippers mess has for their short trip up the West coast of the UK that would explain it!

I like the RN's QEC graphic (on previous page). But needs more red.

A bit surprising to read from it that PoW is supposedly 3 metres wider and 4 metres longer. I've previously measured them both from photos and they're identical.

The weight/displacement is given in US/Short tons on that graphic btw.

Conversion
US/Short ton = 2000 lbs (907 kg)
British/Imperial/Long tonne = 2240 lbs (1016 kg)
Metric tonne = 2204 lbs (1000 kg)

British/Imperial weight units:
16 ounces (16 oz) = 1 pound (1 lb).
14 pounds (14 lbs) = 1 stone (1 st).
8 stones (8 st) = 1 hundredweight (1 cwt) - equal to 112 lbs.
20 hundredweight (20 cwt) = 1 tonne (1 t) - equal to 2240 lbs.

US weight units
16 ounces (16 oz) = 1 pound (1 lb).
14 pounds (14 lbs) = 14 pounds (14 lbs) - they don't have stones?!
100 pounds (100 lbs) = 1 US/Short hundredweight (1 US/short cwt) - because counting in 112's is too hard.
112 pounds (112 lbs) = 1 US Long hundredweight (1 long cwt) - same as British/Imperial 1 cwt.
20 US/Short hundredweight (20 US/Short cwt) = 1 US ton (1 t short ton)
20 US Long hundredweight (20 US Long cwt) = 1 US Long ton (1 t long ton) - same as British/Imperial 1 t.

Think I mentioned this before as to being 4 MTRS longer and couple wider as their has always been mention of 284 MTRS and 73 MTR going in graphics from years back on different web sites ie some saying 280 others giving 284 etc ,so now we know they were both right I quess

If you look at that poster you will see that the dimensions for QNLZ have been rounded to the nearest 10 metres, whereas most other vessels have dimensions to tenths of a metre. What this means is that the poster is not a reliable source of information.

easydiver wrote:If you look at that poster you will see that the dimensions for QNLZ have been rounded to the nearest 10 metres, whereas most other vessels have dimensions to tenths of a metre. What this means is that the poster is not a reliable source of information.

I agree, the general records of displacement are inconsistent as a whole. Some are in metric tonnes, some in short tonnes - some displacements are either the full load, standard load, or something else altogether. Type 26 is 6,900t, Type 31 is 5,700t and Type 45 is 7,350t - none of which are the official full load displacements of each vessel (8,000t, 6,600t and 8,500t-9,400t depending on sources)