*heavy cats and traps*shark bait wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 14:18 Probably an unpopular opinion; cats and traps is an unhelpful distraction from developing the carriers
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I do agree, I would love to have two cats and traps carriers but we have been through the mill with these carriers, with defects, possibility of only getting one and other scares, now that we have 2 functional carriers and are on the other side, its time to concentrate on building up capability and making full use of what we have.shark bait wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 14:18 Probably an unpopular opinion; cats and traps is an unhelpful distraction from developing the carriers
That said times might be a changing and who knows what we might have access to in a couple of years. F-35B is a quantum leap over the harrier, V-22's/V-280's exist as platforms to mount things and now we have drones starting to appear. Maybe soon there will be answers that don't require cats and traps to launch them.
- These users liked the author Jdam for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 709
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I think new generation UAV's, especially larger AAR/ AEW and strike drones are going to be a game changer, fitting the ships for operation with them will be a massive leap forward in capability.Jdam wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 17:40I do agree, I would love to have two cats and traps carriers but we have been through the mill with these carriers, with defects, possibility of only getting one and other scares, now that we have 2 functional carriers and are on the other side, its time to concentrate on building up capability and making full use of what we have.shark bait wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 14:18 Probably an unpopular opinion; cats and traps is an unhelpful distraction from developing the carriers
That said times might be a changing and who knows what we might have access to in a couple of years. F-35B is a quantum leap over the harrier, V-22's/V-280's exist as platforms to mount things and now we have drones starting to appear. Maybe soon there will be answers that don't require cats and traps to launch them.
So angled deck, with extension ( plus re ballast) and traps added.
Hopefully we can use the ramp to safely launch them.
A mixed Helo, UAV and F35B air group would be extremely capable.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
This is why Iv often mentioned on here about the V-247 being perfect for us just look at the current options it gives let alone what will progress.mrclark303 wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 18:44I think new generation UAV's, especially larger AAR/ AEW and strike drones are going to be a game changer, fitting the ships for operation with them will be a massive leap forward in capability.Jdam wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 17:40I do agree, I would love to have two cats and traps carriers but we have been through the mill with these carriers, with defects, possibility of only getting one and other scares, now that we have 2 functional carriers and are on the other side, its time to concentrate on building up capability and making full use of what we have.shark bait wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 14:18 Probably an unpopular opinion; cats and traps is an unhelpful distraction from developing the carriers
That said times might be a changing and who knows what we might have access to in a couple of years. F-35B is a quantum leap over the harrier, V-22's/V-280's exist as platforms to mount things and now we have drones starting to appear. Maybe soon there will be answers that don't require cats and traps to launch them.
So angled deck, with extension ( plus re ballast) and traps added.
Hopefully we can use the ramp to safely launch them.
A mixed Helo, UAV and F35B air group would be extremely capable.
https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
I believe the inglegence gathering version also performs AEW so would imo be a better option than Crowsnest from merlin
- These users liked the author Jake1992 for the post (total 3):
- wargame_insomniac • mrclark303 • Little J
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1046
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
It would also release the Merlin Crowsnests back to their primary ASW role which would cetainly be very useful.Jake1992 wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 22:14This is why Iv often mentioned on here about the V-247 being perfect for us just look at the current options it gives let alone what will progress.mrclark303 wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 18:44I think new generation UAV's, especially larger AAR/ AEW and strike drones are going to be a game changer, fitting the ships for operation with them will be a massive leap forward in capability.Jdam wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 17:40I do agree, I would love to have two cats and traps carriers but we have been through the mill with these carriers, with defects, possibility of only getting one and other scares, now that we have 2 functional carriers and are on the other side, its time to concentrate on building up capability and making full use of what we have.shark bait wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 14:18 Probably an unpopular opinion; cats and traps is an unhelpful distraction from developing the carriers
That said times might be a changing and who knows what we might have access to in a couple of years. F-35B is a quantum leap over the harrier, V-22's/V-280's exist as platforms to mount things and now we have drones starting to appear. Maybe soon there will be answers that don't require cats and traps to launch them.
So angled deck, with extension ( plus re ballast) and traps added.
Hopefully we can use the ramp to safely launch them.
A mixed Helo, UAV and F35B air group would be extremely capable.
https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
I believe the inglegence gathering version also performs AEW so would imo be a better option than Crowsnest from merlin
- These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
- serge750
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Agreed.Jake1992 wrote: ↑18 Nov 2023, 22:14 This is why Iv often mentioned on here about the V-247 being perfect for us just look at the current options it gives let alone what will progress.
https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
I believe the inglegence gathering version also performs AEW so would imo be a better option than Crowsnest from merlin
We've made our VTOL bed and should lie in it. Indeed we might be wise to look to take advantage of 50+ years experience at operating VTOL jets and see how to leverage and profit from it.
Bell is developing a second generation of tilt-rotors. I'd rather put my money on them than a half-hearted effort to resurrect CVA-01...
- These users liked the author Jensy for the post:
- shark bait
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
A few titbits from the Daily Mail online.....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... preys.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... preys.html
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
V-247 does look as a nice solution for QE class, it shout also be able to operate from probably any other ship with big enough helipad in the RN and could be very useful for RM too. But as @new guy mentioned, it does not exist and it is still far from certain will it ever. Bell is still slowly developing it using its own money and it still does not have customer for it. Even if they find one it still would require time to fully develop it and than some more if that customer is not requiring naval version. Bell is hopping that USMC would be interested but there is nothing concrete so far. If USMC chose it, it might be a good news for RN and RM, but it would probably not happen any time soon. Till then MQ-9B STOL looks like the best option for the role.
- These users liked the author sol for the post:
- donald_of_tokyo
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 709
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Unfortunately Bob, you lost me at Daily Mail...bobp wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 03:50 A few titbits from the Daily Mail online.....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... preys.html
For that matter Daily anything, newspapers are only good for weekend rattle can car paintwork....
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 709
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
It certainly looks impressive, but in reality it's at least 15/ 20 years away from being an option.sol wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 09:17V-247 does look as a nice solution for QE class, it shout also be able to operate from probably any other ship with big enough helipad in the RN and could be very useful for RM too. But as @new guy mentioned, it does not exist and it is still far from certain will it ever. Bell is still slowly developing it using its own money and it still does not have customer for it. Even if they find one it still would require time to fully develop it and than some more if that customer is not requiring naval version. Bell is hopping that USMC would be interested but there is nothing concrete so far. If USMC chose it, it might be a good news for RN and RM, but it would probably not happen any time soon. Till then MQ-9B STOL looks like the best option for the role.
I think an angled deck and traps are the way to go. A joint RAF/FAA developed carrier capable Ghost Bat is a no brainer.
It's a system already well down the development path and a buy of 100 would give us back mass.
Particularly in a future of 8 Squadrons of Tempest/ Thypoons and 3 Squadrons of F35B.
So 11 fighter squadrons and 100 shared loyal wingmen (also potentially used by AH64E) would give a huge shot in the arm.
From a purely safety angle, anything you have landing back on the carrier with forward momentum and mass, should land on an angled runway. You want a runaway drone going over the side, not straight down the centre line!
So, as we are now clearly moving away from helicopter / VTOL operations, i.e, stop and land, the necessary changes need to be made during the refit cycle.
The cost shouldn't be too horrendous, traps, deck edge extension and angled deck, plus's the required re ballasting.
Providing we stear clear of potentially problematic catapult mods, that's when it gets very expensive...
Such mods open the door to future capable AEW/ AAR drones, that would hugely increase the utility of the Carrier Air group.
An AEW asset that could orbit the carrier at 30,000 ft for 12 hours or more and be reconfigured to refuel an F35B strike package, pushing the F35B range to 600 plus miles would be transformative.
- These users liked the author mrclark303 for the post:
- new guy
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
You say 15 years yet the USMC have restart the V-247 project for their own fleet, with their backing and money I’d guess 2030 is more likely.mrclark303 wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 14:48It certainly looks impressive, but in reality it's at least 15/ 20 years away from being an option.sol wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 09:17V-247 does look as a nice solution for QE class, it shout also be able to operate from probably any other ship with big enough helipad in the RN and could be very useful for RM too. But as @new guy mentioned, it does not exist and it is still far from certain will it ever. Bell is still slowly developing it using its own money and it still does not have customer for it. Even if they find one it still would require time to fully develop it and than some more if that customer is not requiring naval version. Bell is hopping that USMC would be interested but there is nothing concrete so far. If USMC chose it, it might be a good news for RN and RM, but it would probably not happen any time soon. Till then MQ-9B STOL looks like the best option for the role.
I think an angled deck and traps are the way to go. A joint RAF/FAA developed carrier capable Ghost Bat is a no brainer.
It's a system already well down the development path and a buy of 100 would give us back mass.
Particularly in a future of 8 Squadrons of Tempest/ Thypoons and 3 Squadrons of F35B.
So 11 fighter squadrons and 100 shared loyal wingmen (also potentially used by AH64E) would give a huge shot in the arm.
From a purely safety angle, anything you have landing back on the carrier with forward momentum and mass, should land on an angled runway. You want a runaway drone going over the side, not straight down the centre line!
So, as we are now clearly moving away from helicopter / VTOL operations, i.e, stop and land, the necessary changes need to be made during the refit cycle.
The cost shouldn't be too horrendous, traps, deck edge extension and angled deck, plus's the required re ballasting.
Providing we stear clear of potentially problematic catapult mods, that's when it gets very expensive...
Such mods open the door to future capable AEW/ AAR drones, that would hugely increase the utility of the Carrier Air group.
An AEW asset that could orbit the carrier at 30,000 ft for 12 hours or more and be reconfigured to refuel an F35B strike package, pushing the F35B range to 600 plus miles would be transformative.
In regard to the AEW the V-247 can go up to 24,000ft with up to 11 hours on station, with out mead for chance to the carriers and can operate from any ship with a merlin flight deck / hanger it sounds like the better option to me.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Please stop requoting requotes. You typed three lines, yet your post produced a further 22 lines that take up website memory and page space.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
If the moderators have a problem with it, they can say so.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Unless you’ve got something relevant to the descution plesee stop post a whinging comment and taking up space on the thread.
I see this quick a bit moaning over “quoting” others posts, who else are people to really know what someone in referencing in a thread of on going posts with out quoting the post they intend they’re comment to be to.
- These users liked the author Jake1992 for the post (total 2):
- new guy • Tempest414
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 709
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
You won't catch me re-quoting posts, outrageous behaviour.....
- These users liked the author mrclark303 for the post:
- new guy
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 709
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I think it's going to way beyond 3030 Jake, if it was currently flying as a prototype, then 2030, at an absolute squeeze.Jake1992 wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 16:01You say 15 years yet the USMC have restart the V-247 project for their own fleet, with their backing and money I’d guess 2030 is more likely.mrclark303 wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 14:48It certainly looks impressive, but in reality it's at least 15/ 20 years away from being an option.sol wrote: ↑19 Nov 2023, 09:17V-247 does look as a nice solution for QE class, it shout also be able to operate from probably any other ship with big enough helipad in the RN and could be very useful for RM too. But as @new guy mentioned, it does not exist and it is still far from certain will it ever. Bell is still slowly developing it using its own money and it still does not have customer for it. Even if they find one it still would require time to fully develop it and than some more if that customer is not requiring naval version. Bell is hopping that USMC would be interested but there is nothing concrete so far. If USMC chose it, it might be a good news for RN and RM, but it would probably not happen any time soon. Till then MQ-9B STOL looks like the best option for the role.
I think an angled deck and traps are the way to go. A joint RAF/FAA developed carrier capable Ghost Bat is a no brainer.
It's a system already well down the development path and a buy of 100 would give us back mass.
Particularly in a future of 8 Squadrons of Tempest/ Thypoons and 3 Squadrons of F35B.
So 11 fighter squadrons and 100 shared loyal wingmen (also potentially used by AH64E) would give a huge shot in the arm.
From a purely safety angle, anything you have landing back on the carrier with forward momentum and mass, should land on an angled runway. You want a runaway drone going over the side, not straight down the centre line!
So, as we are now clearly moving away from helicopter / VTOL operations, i.e, stop and land, the necessary changes need to be made during the refit cycle.
The cost shouldn't be too horrendous, traps, deck edge extension and angled deck, plus's the required re ballasting.
Providing we stear clear of potentially problematic catapult mods, that's when it gets very expensive...
Such mods open the door to future capable AEW/ AAR drones, that would hugely increase the utility of the Carrier Air group.
An AEW asset that could orbit the carrier at 30,000 ft for 12 hours or more and be reconfigured to refuel an F35B strike package, pushing the F35B range to 600 plus miles would be transformative.
In regard to the AEW the V-247 can go up to 24,000ft with up to 11 hours on station, with out mead for chance to the carriers and can operate from any ship with a merlin flight deck / hanger it sounds like the better option to me.
It doesn't actually exist in the real world, so it's at least 15 years away from potential UK purchase, 20 would be more likely.
- These users liked the author mrclark303 for the post:
- new guy
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I am not sure where did you find that news, as far I can find, V-247 was not even selected by USMC and Bell is currently developing it using their own money so that it could offer it to USMC or some other customer. So guessing a date when V-247 might arrive could not easily be determined. If USMC or USN show interest and invest into it, it could speed development significantly but without that it would take long time if finished at all.
11 hours is probably with minimal payload, statsheet is giving ...
I am big fan of V-247 and IMO it would be a nice option for RN and RM. But it is still far from certain that it would ever arrive or be adopted by anyone and for UK to jump alone into development would be to expensive. Also even if built, if it take long time for it there might be something else on the marked that would be better and/or cheeper option. Developing navy based on some platform that might or might not enter service in the future without clear or even appropriate date of its arrival would not be a wise solution.7 hours Time On Station with 600 lbs of Mission Payload at 300 nm Mission Radius
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5213
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Unless the USMC take on V-247 then the only other way is for us to go in with say Australia , India , maybe Spain but not alone the Perfect outcome would be USMC , UK , Australia , India
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Highly unlikely that any country outside US would invest into developing tiltrotor UAV. If Bell does not succeed to sell it to some of US service with significant order, it would be to expensive for any other country to both invest in development and then procurement in limited numbers.Tempest414 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 09:16 Unless the USMC take on V-247 then the only other way is for us to go in with say Australia , India , maybe Spain but not alone the Perfect outcome would be USMC , UK , Australia , India
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
(Forces News) 18th November 2023
The largest unmanned aircraft ever launched from a Royal Navy aircraft carrier has successfully taken off from HMS Prince of Wales.
The Mojave unmanned aircraft system is a modified version of the General Atomics MQ-1C Gray Eagle.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5213
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I agree if the US don't buy it it is done and also think it would a far outside shot to get 2 or 3 other countries to come together as even if the UK , Aus and India came together the numbers would still be to small 250 topssol wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 13:15Highly unlikely that any country outside US would invest into developing tiltrotor UAV. If Bell does not succeed to sell it to some of US service with significant order, it would be to expensive for any other country to both invest in development and then procurement in limited numbers.Tempest414 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 09:16 Unless the USMC take on V-247 then the only other way is for us to go in with say Australia , India , maybe Spain but not alone the Perfect outcome would be USMC , UK , Australia , India
However if these 3 countries did come together it might make the USMC take a punt
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
250 is waaaaaay more than those three countries need or would procure. Doubt those three countries would need more than 50 to 100 in the best case. Even with US involved it would still not be cheap, just look at Predator prices. RN and RM would probably not go for more than 20 to 30 for their needs, if even that many. Without US, this drone is probably dead.Tempest414 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 14:05 I agree if the US don't buy it it is done and also think it would a far outside shot to get 2 or 3 other countries to come together as even if the UK , Aus and India came together the numbers would still be to small 250 tops
However if these 3 countries did come together it might make the USMC take a punt
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5213
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
That is why I added topssol wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 14:17250 is waaaaaay more than those three countries need or would procure. Doubt those three countries would need more than 50 to 100 in the best case. Even with US involved it would still not be cheap, just look at Predator prices. RN and RM would probably not go for more than 20 to 30 for their needs, if even that many. Without US, this drone is probably dead.Tempest414 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 14:05 I agree if the US don't buy it it is done and also think it would a far outside shot to get 2 or 3 other countries to come together as even if the UK , Aus and India came together the numbers would still be to small 250 tops
However if these 3 countries did come together it might make the USMC take a punt