Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by topman »

andrew98 wrote:You'd have thought they'd have designed some storage areas other than the aircraft hangar.
Near to the point of need, keep things simple.

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

And some PWLS ones to keep us busy. Loving the 40th anniversary Chinook paint scheme.




inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

They should have built qe a bigger ship ,just like garages you think it's big enough then you always fill it up with crap ,and you can't get the car in ,they never going to get 20 helo and f35 in that hangar too much crap in the way lol

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

Looks like 10 about it with lots of wiggle room for movements and maintenance

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

This article although focussed on R.F.A Tidesprings provides some ideas about deployments with the carrier certainly the pictures of the Merlins in storage instead of in the carrier are different
https://www.navylookout.com/minor-fire- ... ike-group/

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2783
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Caribbean »

inch wrote:They should have built qe a bigger ship ,just like garages you think it's big enough then you always fill it up with crap ,and you can't get the car in ,they never going to get 20 helo and f35 in that hangar too much crap in the way lol
I suspect the large amount of stores in the hangar is a direct consequence of only having a single solid stores replenishment ship. If anything goes wrong with Fort Vic, we can still continue the world tour, albeit with more port visits than before
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »

The aft end of hangar:
Image
(Navy Lookout)

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

Is it a case that spare engines for the f35 have to be kept aboard the carrier rather than Spring tide because the normal ship to ship stores transfer cannot carry that weight of over 1700 hundred kilos

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

Suppose it just means 20+ish aircraft always going to be topside

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

I thought this article of interest due to future deployment in areas where aircraft may find themselves exposed to low-frequency radars obviously this article is focused on C.E.C to which the R.N does not use the article may suggest deployment against a peer capability in the Asian Pacific region
https://amp.en.google-info.in/41509737/ ... ility.html

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

seaspear wrote:Is it a case that spare engines for the f35 have to be kept aboard the carrier rather than Spring tide because the normal ship to ship stores transfer cannot carry that weight of over 1700 hundred kilos
I believe so.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

inch wrote:They should have built qe a bigger ship ,just like garages you think it's big enough then you always fill it up with crap ,and you can't get the car in ,they never going to get 20 helo and f35 in that hangar too much crap in the way lol
The initial CVF designs were larger until the Treasury* got involved :(

*Yes, the same Treasury that imposed a slow down in the build that added a billion or so to the final cost. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

Yes never fails to amaze me how uninspiring and unambiguous the government of the day is ,we could have built a ship Nimitz size of they wanted too but as always it would be a bit unseemly building a ship that large in their eyes lol,like cold war we end up with 3 small thru deck ships but France plowed ahead and kept large carriers , typical of the small minded ,money pinching attitudes of successive governments in this country ,,hey I tell you what I feel bit better now lol :thumbup:

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by inch »

Ambitious not ambiguous

Online
bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by bobp »

Must be a logistics nightmare having US parts and UK parts onboard as well as tools and test equipment, then there is ships supplies for the crew etc etc. Now where did i put the can opener.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

With P.L.A.N destroyers type 52c Luang 11 and type 52d Luang 111 having the type of low-frequency radar that the article above suggests is more effective against low observable aircraft how likely would it be for some of these vessels to be close to the carrier when in operations even at 50 n.m it may get a reading from aircraft,I understood that off Syria the F35 was flown with a device to exaggerate the return so as not to provide too much data to the Russian monitoring forces, would such a device be used by the F35B flying from the carrier as in showing the flag and not the technology

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by serge750 »

inch wrote:Yes never fails to amaze me how uninspiring and unambiguous the government of the day is ,we could have built a ship Nimitz size of they wanted too but as always it would be a bit unseemly building a ship that large in their eyes lol,like cold war we end up with 3 small thru deck ships but France plowed ahead and kept large carriers , typical of the small minded ,money pinching attitudes of successive governments in this country ,,hey I tell you what I feel bit better now lol :thumbup:
Yes i agree about the short termism !!! I know its been said before, but i would of been well chuffed with 3 x 50k carriers like the 70's size ark royal/eagle with 24 x F35b + helo's, but knowing the treasury would of cut 1 of the 3 eventually i'm glad we got 2 QEC

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

HMS Queen Elizabeth and USS Iwo Jima groups meet up...thats quite a group of ships...you could retake the Falklands with that...think the 2 SES off the QE and Iwo Jima are LCAC (I did post originally that I thought they were Norwegian Skjold Class but think I was wrong). Not sure if the Whidbey Island Class LSD USS Carter Hall which is part of the Iwo Jima ARG is with the group, but its not in the pic either way.



Image

US Navy article
https://www.c6f.navy.mil/Press-Room/New ... CbdssYYHo/

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

And a pretty good (and accurate) shot at naming them. USS The Sullivans appears to be the ship in the middle.


User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

so from that photo we seem to be missing the two CSG-21 types 23's and Fort Vic which we know is being repaired

Wrekin1410
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 29 Jul 2015, 07:28

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Wrekin1410 »



For those of you who’ll be lucky enough to go see her!

SDL
Member
Posts: 763
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SDL »

That'll be quite the sight

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Where is HMS POW right now will they get this long awaited for photo

Wrekin1410
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 29 Jul 2015, 07:28

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Wrekin1410 »

Tempest414 wrote:Where is HMS POW right now will they get this long awaited for photo
I’m guessing it’ll take place as the group departs next week down the Channel so as not to disrupt HMPWLS FOST Training too much, or even to be incorporated within it.

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

Tempest414 wrote:Where is HMS POW right now will they get this long awaited for photo
rumour has it PWLS is around the area where a very famous game of bowls was supposed to have taken place. :shh:

Post Reply