Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
If I strain my memory, I can still vaguely remember as far back to distant past when UK F35b's landed on Queen Elizabeth!!
Hopefully not TOO long before we see that again.....
Hopefully not TOO long before we see that again.....
- These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
- PhillyJ
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I guess this is why they didn't want to fly nipper out! PWLS on Pompey revs for return tomorrow.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- These users liked the author PhillyJ for the post (total 2):
- serge750 • Scimitar54
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
PoW is alongside Victory Jetty now, bows north, between QE (PRJ bows south) and JS Shimakaze (SRJ bows south)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
JS Shimakaze leaves at 1500 today so good to get them both together.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 219
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:06
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I was disappointed when my Corgi scale model arrived with only eight F35s on deck but now I must accept that was for added realism.wargame_insomniac wrote: ↑22 Jun 2022, 18:05 If I strain my memory, I can still vaguely remember as far back to distant past when UK F35b's landed on Queen Elizabeth!!
Hopefully not TOO long before we see that again.....
If I peer inside the hangar I expect I will see two more undergoing maintenance making up the full squadron.
Perhaps I should buy some model drones to make the deck look less empty.
- These users liked the author Bring Deeps for the post (total 3):
- wargame_insomniac • PhillyJ • serge750
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Wasn`t a smallish (50k?lb) cat n trap being considered ? which may give better options....if the usa build something
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Especially if it is a de-rated version of the 70k lb one!
- These users liked the author Scimitar54 for the post:
- serge750
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I’d be willing to bet that at some point I’m their lives the QEC will end up with an angled flight deck, cars and traps.
It’s a shame this was not practicable during construction and in particular when ordering F35s but that cannot be helped.
Key thing is to make the best use of them as an asset in terms of aircraft that can use it, weapons that can be operated from it, and ships and boats that can protect it. Hopefully the government get behind and fund this.
It’s a shame this was not practicable during construction and in particular when ordering F35s but that cannot be helped.
Key thing is to make the best use of them as an asset in terms of aircraft that can use it, weapons that can be operated from it, and ships and boats that can protect it. Hopefully the government get behind and fund this.
- These users liked the author Dobbo for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Bit of a shame then that they have not insisted that Tempest be capable of carrier operation! IMHO due to the relatively small numbers of combat aircraft in the UK inventory (either current or planned), ALL UK Combat Aircraft should be “carrier capable”. In a similar fashion, the Carriers should also be made capable of operating ALL future “Combat Air”.
- These users liked the author Scimitar54 for the post (total 2):
- PhillyJ • serge750
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
QE was wound Bows North at PRJ just before noon today.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 219
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:06
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Any thoughts on what the war in Ukraine means for the future use of the QNLZ class, what lessons have been learnt/relearnt and what assumptions need to change?
For me perhaps:
1) The benefit of having a carrier jet that can be easily deployed elsewhere when airframe numbers are limited (F35 to Finland/Sweden etc). The UK made the right choice.
2) The reminder about the threat of anti-ship (anti-carrier) missiles. The foolishness of the RN in thinking that they weren't needed or available 24/7 on/for every escort vessel. Ditto defences against them.
3) War means attrition of assets and starting numbers matter. For the RN that means more carrier escorts are needed to cover the inevitable losses. The QNLZ class can't operate unescorted.
4) The arming, range, and detection of drones. The RN needs to pick up the pace on their deployment on the carriers. Time, tide and technology wait for no man.
For me perhaps:
1) The benefit of having a carrier jet that can be easily deployed elsewhere when airframe numbers are limited (F35 to Finland/Sweden etc). The UK made the right choice.
2) The reminder about the threat of anti-ship (anti-carrier) missiles. The foolishness of the RN in thinking that they weren't needed or available 24/7 on/for every escort vessel. Ditto defences against them.
3) War means attrition of assets and starting numbers matter. For the RN that means more carrier escorts are needed to cover the inevitable losses. The QNLZ class can't operate unescorted.
4) The arming, range, and detection of drones. The RN needs to pick up the pace on their deployment on the carriers. Time, tide and technology wait for no man.
- These users liked the author Bring Deeps for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Lesson 1 for the primary and principle defence and security concern of the UK, aircraft carriers in the size and shape of which we purchased are simple not required they are a luxury item.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Maybe. But we have two of them already, and presuming you are not proposing to scrap them now, then the important thing now is what we can do in the short-medium term to maximise their use.
From a defensive point of view I would like to see the addition of the 30mm DS30M Mk2 guns (currently Fitted For But Not With), together with the addition of some VLS tubes for sea ceptor (I have seen some non-deck penetrating canisters from I think MBDA). Any RN ship should have at least a basic ability to defend itself - look at Nimitz class or Charles de Gaulle as comparison.
From an offensive point of view I think we pretty much almost all agree that we need more F35B's in active service, sooner rather than later, and that we need a wider variety of missiles integrated and cleared for use on F35B's.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Is there now a an identified need for guns firing ammunition for use against missiles rather than just u.a.v,s and surface targets
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
So what do you think that the installation of 3 x “Phalanx” was for then?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
But why, when it couldn't fly from either curent carriers ( that will remain in service for a long time ) or from presumably future STOVL carriers? And if future carriers aren't STOVL, then the US will surely have something to launch from them...Scimitar54 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2022, 01:50 Bit of a shame then that they have not insisted that Tempest be capable of carrier operation! IMHO due to the relatively small numbers of combat aircraft in the UK inventory (either current or planned), ALL UK Combat Aircraft should be “carrier capable”. In a similar fashion, the Carriers should also be made capable of operating ALL future “Combat Air”.
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: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Waste of investment for small number of (limited operational capability) aircraft. If it was carrier capable then potentially a larger number of aircraft would be ordered, with far greater operational capability. Who knows what the future may hold? But if you design and make something incompatible, then that is how it will remain. You really should not need to be told you know!
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Here are some photos of paint drying...
(Navy Lookout/Steve A Wenham) 12th July 2022
(Navy Lookout/Steve A Wenham) 12th July 2022
HMS QNLZ ballasted with a slight list to starboard so port side boot topping can be repainted.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
not for a while yet, but soon. Team Portsmouth Open Day this Saturday, nipper has got me and the family some tickets. Should be fun.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 219
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:06
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Articles like this are a reminder that sometimes the only difference between the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph is that the DM article will have more pictures and the DT version more words.
As Navy Lookout says the story rehashes arguments debated at length on this forum. Also assumes that had the catobar conversion gone ahead funds would have been available to buy more of the 'cheaper' cats and traps planes than the number of F35Bs we have/have on order.
It is a pity the DT couldn't commission someone to write something original.
- These users liked the author Bring Deeps for the post:
- Repulse
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Lewis Page..Grade A arsehole with a (very) long standing agenda against the F-35.
'nuff said
'nuff said
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Oh he’s not limited to F35 there’s also a vendetta against frigates, the RN don’t need t26 apparently - I remember that one from the early noughties