Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
There's no need to sail back with them. What's the point? They would have to fly off before QE reached Portsmouth anyway.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Would it not save a fair amount of expensive fuel?SKB wrote:There's no need to sail back with them. What's the point? They would have to fly off before QE reached Portsmouth anyway.
-
- Member
- Posts: 89
- Joined: 13 Aug 2019, 05:00
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Well, it depends what you do with the time. If they're just loaded on and shipped across like cargo, that's saving fuel but it's also a lot of lost training. If you ship them across but do a bunch of flight ops along the way to train the crew, you're still burning that fuel. Seems like the RAF would rather have the refueling practice and get where they're going swiftly than ride along for these crossings.dmereifield wrote:Would it not save a fair amount of expensive fuel?SKB wrote:There's no need to sail back with them. What's the point? They would have to fly off before QE reached Portsmouth anyway.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Doesn't make sense to fly them if you have the carrier to do it!
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
After watching Top Gun on ITV last night, they need the practice. It looks to my untrained eye something you need to keep on top of.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I think (and I know that you will say I'm wrong) that we might allready see some first cracks between RAF and FAA, about way of use of F-35B...
An argument for a split buy IMHO.
An argument for a split buy IMHO.
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…
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
There’s wide talk now of a split buy, with the B model at around 70-90 airframes and the rest made up of the A model.abc123 wrote:I think (and I know that you will say I'm wrong) that we might allready see some first cracks between RAF and FAA, about way of use of F-35B...
An argument for a split buy IMHO.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I mean, can you imagine that QE would sail on Westlant 19 without F-35B on deck in case of separate F-35B fleet?cockneyjock1974 wrote:There’s wide talk now of a split buy, with the B model at around 70-90 airframes and the rest made up of the A model.abc123 wrote:I think (and I know that you will say I'm wrong) that we might allready see some first cracks between RAF and FAA, about way of use of F-35B...
An argument for a split buy IMHO.
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…
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Nice to hear from you CJ! After watching that show it does seem like the F35B's they are using need a FBH to help with the login process!cockneyjock1974 wrote:After watching Top Gun on ITV last night, they need the practice. It looks to my untrained eye something you need to keep on top of.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I will lend my welcome to CJ as well. Welcome back old chap.
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Yes, welcome back CJ ! thinking about it if the Lightning program is going down the small but incremental steps it does make sense to do initial training of the carrier in the best of conditions, then as said before get lots of AAR training in, looking forward to get some cool F35 pictures mid October onwards...
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Yes good to see you back CJ. I was thinking what a PR stunt as well as training it would be if the F35B took off from Marham and landed on the QE flight deck after several refuelling sessions.
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I’ve had another post removed, because I’ve criticised somebody’s post.
1. I’m putting it on here because this is the thread we all flock to.
2. Mods if you’re going to remove posts, at least have the courtesy to explain why, even by PM.
3. It is now blatantly obvious we need more moderators, I propose we start an election as soon as possible.
Again I propose the former and existing armed forces members.
1. I’m putting it on here because this is the thread we all flock to.
2. Mods if you’re going to remove posts, at least have the courtesy to explain why, even by PM.
3. It is now blatantly obvious we need more moderators, I propose we start an election as soon as possible.
Again I propose the former and existing armed forces members.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Sorry to hear that. There are certain behaviour patterns that annoy me at times, too much fantasy fleet stuff, and endless re tweeting from other sites with no commentary added or links to original stories. Shame that certain individuals can annoy more than others. I believe you can block certain members so you don't read their posts.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Amazed this post is still here.cockneyjock1974 wrote:I’ve had another post removed, because I’ve criticised somebody’s post.
1. I’m putting it on here because this is the thread we all flock to.
2. Mods if you’re going to remove posts, at least have the courtesy to explain why, even by PM.
3. It is now blatantly obvious we need more moderators, I propose we start an election as soon as possible.
Again I propose the former and existing armed forces members.
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Agree:bobp wrote:certain behaviour patterns that annoy me at times, too much fantasy fleet stuff, and endless re tweeting from other sites with no commentary added or links to original stories.
- the first one is difficult (as everything is relative)
- the latter is illegal... why does the site expose itself (by allowing such screen scraping go unchallenged)?
The worst is what CJ is alluding to: cencorship with no trace, explanation (, nor a published Editorial Policy)
- is this site a 77 Op, or a Putinista place (as one former DefSec put it: those shady publishing houses that we cannot get our hands on)?
Just for the record: this was post 10237... so if it disappears without a trace? There will not be a gap, but another post, no doubt v insightful (again)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I'm sure the Joint Strike force practice AAR anyway. The Top Gun documentary was showing a New F35 pilots first AAR attempt. So no shame there.
To fly them to the U.S. Instead of taking them on QE seems a bit of a waste to me, both environmentally and in flying hours. While I see the need to carry out a lot of this early flying off the U.S. Coast, that advantage is surely reducing as F35 numbers increase in the UK. If your pilot lands on first time, what does it matter if first time is in UK waters or US? As the whole reason for the B is carrier ops, the fact we have not carried out any carrier trials over here with the jet, seems very odd.
And if we're to have a two type F35 fleet, surely the C would be the way to go, to keep all future options open? But I know we don't do that kind of thing.
To fly them to the U.S. Instead of taking them on QE seems a bit of a waste to me, both environmentally and in flying hours. While I see the need to carry out a lot of this early flying off the U.S. Coast, that advantage is surely reducing as F35 numbers increase in the UK. If your pilot lands on first time, what does it matter if first time is in UK waters or US? As the whole reason for the B is carrier ops, the fact we have not carried out any carrier trials over here with the jet, seems very odd.
And if we're to have a two type F35 fleet, surely the C would be the way to go, to keep all future options open? But I know we don't do that kind of thing.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
By trailing them out there its a good way to keep up some training. Putting in a long distance trail isn't something that you want put together by people that have no experience or haven't done so in some time. That goes for the voyager crews as well.
This way you get more training out of one exercise, makes sense.
This way you get more training out of one exercise, makes sense.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I've warned you before about bringing facts and knowledge to the party here.topman wrote:By trailing them out there its a good way to keep up some training. Putting in a long distance trail isn't something that you want put together by people that have no experience or haven't done so in some time. That goes for the voyager crews as well.
This way you get more training out of one exercise, makes sense.
Now if it was a conspiracy theory....
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
(MoD/DIO) 5th September 2019
ML (UK) Ltd are a Portsmouth based company and have done:The finishing touches are being put to Portsmouth’s Naval Base to prepare for the arrival of the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier.
The Defence Infrastructure Organisation is working with its contractor Volker Stevin to deliver crucial infrastructure worth £30m to ensure the base’s second operational berth is ready in time for the carrier, which is due to arrive by the end of this year.
One of the final pieces of the project is the installation of two huge Fendered Spacer Units (FSU). The FSUs are identical to those which were installed on the Princess Royal Jetty for HMS Queen Elizabeth, however this time they are being constructed by local company ML (UK) Ltd, rather than being brought in from overseas.
* The restoration on Gosport's HMS Alliance submarine.
* Restoration of HMS M33 in Portsmouth.
* Building the spire top of Portsmouth's Spinnaker Tower.
* Dredging of Portsmouth Harbour and Spithead for the QEC carriers.
https://www.mluk.co.uk/
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
It's a nice touch they used a local firm to make these spacer units, as a local to the area it made me smile.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
360 degree video. Click and drag to rotate view:
(Royal Navy) 6th September 2019
(Royal Navy) 6th September 2019
Ever wanted to land a helicopter on HMS Queen Elizabeth?
Experience a pilot's view from 820 Naval Air Squadron's Merlin in this 360 video.