Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[inch]

The Cameron government’s manpower (and capability) reductions are continuing to adversely and severely affect the RN, just as they are the other two armed services. Ironic that the QEC carriers had already been committed to and that the cuts that his government made went way too deep.
Now he bestrides the world as Foreign Secretary wearing our “emperors new clothes” that were the result of that legacy.

That's Lord Cameron to you

[SKB]

Italian aircraft carrier Giusppei Garibaldi is currently berthed at Victory Jetty in Portsmouth.

Italian Carrier Giusppei Garibaldi.jpg

[inch]

You got to admit it really is embarrassing David Cameron saying anything about UK forces at all ,the main reason for swaging cuts to manpower and equipment ,17k if memory serves me right and 40% tank forces cut , carriers, harriers cut ,etc etc , just crazy , think everyone is going to throw that in his face every time he mentions anything about helping Ukraine with equipment we could have helped with , simple shocking tbh I'm my view

[abc123]

Any info on how many F-35s are aboard PoW?

Hopefully this year’s work ups and next year’s CSG25 will help turn things around and put an end to all this bad press. A few solid deployments can do wonders - see Ford and Charles de Gaulle, which also faced PR nightmares in their early years.

Leaving you with a few pics of CdG working up in the Med and waiting for the UK strike group to come back to life (carrier, fighters, stores replenishment ship and all)

Sorry, it isn't bad press when the 70000+ t carrier has, year after year, 8 British fighters and needs USMC aid to make a squadron, when you don't have 3 Phalanxes extra to put on a second carrier, you need allies to help you to assemble a normal escort group...
No, if anything, they have way too good press hype.
If anything is bad there- it's the country, government, armed forces and navy.

[abc123]

You got to admit it really is embarrassing David Cameron saying anything about UK forces at all ,the main reason for swaging cuts to manpower and equipment ,17k if memory serves me right and 40% tank forces cut , carriers, harriers cut ,etc etc , just crazy , think everyone is going to throw that in his face every time he mentions anything about helping Ukraine with equipment we could have helped with , simple shocking tbh I'm my view

They won't, because they are all the same...

[new guy]

for this exercise, the carrier air group will be 8 UK F-35Bs, 9 Merlin Mk2 helicopters (7 ASW plus 2 Crowsnest ASaC-equipped aircraft) and 3 Wildcat helicopters from 847 NAS. 24 British F-35Bs will be onboard HMS Prince of Wales for the Indo-Pacific deployment in 2025. 617 Sqn and 809 NAS will provide 12 jets each.

[2HeadsBetter]

What odds Labour will kick their long-awaited defence review down the road (again) until no one is shooting at us?

[bobp]

Safety drills onboard PWLS...

[tomuk]

But that isn't appropriate is it. Inspections carried out weeks ago that find ship isn't fit to sail. Work up carries on regardless until eve of deployment when ship declared unfit. Can't you see that is a problem.

If she wasn't fit she wasn't fit. Either the approval\decision process shouldn't take weeks or if it does need that time, lab tests ?, then the inspections are needed sooner.

That's not what was reported.

What was reported was that the defect was found and repaired according to standard practice. A risk review just prior to sailing, determined that the small amount of risk with the standard procedure (undetectable subsurface corrosion causing bacteria) was not justified and the ship was "grounded".

It happens all the time, I've just had a new house built. Passed all inspections until the last one before handing over to me. So closing was delayed by a few weeks to fix the couple of problems the earlier inspections thought were OK.

If the end result was the last minute cancellation of the deployment and the crash deployment of POW at great waste and disruption of crew and resources then the 'risk review' was too late. The decision making process is faulty.

[new guy]

But that isn't appropriate is it. Inspections carried out weeks ago that find ship isn't fit to sail. Work up carries on regardless until eve of deployment when ship declared unfit. Can't you see that is a problem.

If she wasn't fit she wasn't fit. Either the approval\decision process shouldn't take weeks or if it does need that time, lab tests ?, then the inspections are needed sooner.

That's not what was reported.

What was reported was that the defect was found and repaired according to standard practice. A risk review just prior to sailing, determined that the small amount of risk with the standard procedure (undetectable subsurface corrosion causing bacteria) was not justified and the ship was "grounded".

It happens all the time, I've just had a new house built. Passed all inspections until the last one before handing over to me. So closing was delayed by a few weeks to fix the couple of problems the earlier inspections thought were OK.

If the end result was the last minute cancellation of the deployment and the crash deployment of POW at great waste and disruption of crew and resources then the 'risk review' was too late. The decision making process is faulty.

well that's not what you initially were arguing.

The crash deployment of POW wouldn't have been needed or at least would have been less of a crash if the maintenance\inspection regime on QNLZ had been handled properly.

[tomuk]

But that isn't appropriate is it. Inspections carried out weeks ago that find ship isn't fit to sail. Work up carries on regardless until eve of deployment when ship declared unfit. Can't you see that is a problem.

If she wasn't fit she wasn't fit. Either the approval\decision process shouldn't take weeks or if it does need that time, lab tests ?, then the inspections are needed sooner.

That's not what was reported.

What was reported was that the defect was found and repaired according to standard practice. A risk review just prior to sailing, determined that the small amount of risk with the standard procedure (undetectable subsurface corrosion causing bacteria) was not justified and the ship was "grounded".

It happens all the time, I've just had a new house built. Passed all inspections until the last one before handing over to me. So closing was delayed by a few weeks to fix the couple of problems the earlier inspections thought were OK.

If the end result was the last minute cancellation of the deployment and the crash deployment of POW at great waste and disruption of crew and resources then the 'risk review' was too late. The decision making process is faulty.

well that's not what you initially were arguing.

The crash deployment of POW wouldn't have been needed or at least would have been less of a crash if the maintenance\inspection regime on QNLZ had been handled properly.

Yes it is. It is just a facet of the same argument. If the readiness of QNLZ had been managed properly then all this mess could have been avoided.

What effect will the rushed deployment of POW have on the exercise? Does POW have all the same capabilities as QNLZ? What effect will the deployment have on future operations? POW will need both the work that was stopped completed and further post deployment maintenance that wasn't planned. As has been reported cash is tight and MOD have been pausing programmes. What will go on hold to pay for the QNLZ fix and the extra costs around the POW deployment?

[new guy]

But that isn't appropriate is it. Inspections carried out weeks ago that find ship isn't fit to sail. Work up carries on regardless until eve of deployment when ship declared unfit. Can't you see that is a problem.

If she wasn't fit she wasn't fit. Either the approval\decision process shouldn't take weeks or if it does need that time, lab tests ?, then the inspections are needed sooner.

That's not what was reported.

What was reported was that the defect was found and repaired according to standard practice. A risk review just prior to sailing, determined that the small amount of risk with the standard procedure (undetectable subsurface corrosion causing bacteria) was not justified and the ship was "grounded".

It happens all the time, I've just had a new house built. Passed all inspections until the last one before handing over to me. So closing was delayed by a few weeks to fix the couple of problems the earlier inspections thought were OK.

If the end result was the last minute cancellation of the deployment and the crash deployment of POW at great waste and disruption of crew and resources then the 'risk review' was too late. The decision making process is faulty.

There will always be last minute GO/NOGO reviews. To think otherwise is rather silly.

Don't aircraft pilots do a last minute inspection and take off checklist? According to you, they should do them weeks in advance.

Don't space rockets do checkups until the last second that potentially could hold launch? Well they do here at Cape Canaveral. It's very common to have launches postponed at the last few seconds.

[topman]

Sometimes it takes time to get all the information to make a decision, that doesn't always align with deployment dates as much as we would like it to.

[tomuk]

But that isn't appropriate is it. Inspections carried out weeks ago that find ship isn't fit to sail. Work up carries on regardless until eve of deployment when ship declared unfit. Can't you see that is a problem.

If she wasn't fit she wasn't fit. Either the approval\decision process shouldn't take weeks or if it does need that time, lab tests ?, then the inspections are needed sooner.

That's not what was reported.

What was reported was that the defect was found and repaired according to standard practice. A risk review just prior to sailing, determined that the small amount of risk with the standard procedure (undetectable subsurface corrosion causing bacteria) was not justified and the ship was "grounded".

It happens all the time, I've just had a new house built. Passed all inspections until the last one before handing over to me. So closing was delayed by a few weeks to fix the couple of problems the earlier inspections thought were OK.

If the end result was the last minute cancellation of the deployment and the crash deployment of POW at great waste and disruption of crew and resources then the 'risk review' was too late. The decision making process is faulty.

There will always be last minute GO/NOGO reviews. To think otherwise is rather silly.

Don't aircraft pilots do a last minute inspection and take off checklist? According to you, they should do them weeks in advance.

Don't space rockets do checkups until the last second that potentially could hold launch? Well they do here at Cape Canaveral. It's very common to have launches postponed at the last few seconds.

Yes of course there are last minute checks for unforeseen problems.

There are all sorts of problems that can occur in a rocket, it is the on the edge of technology. An aircraft carrier not so much, it is proven technology there have been steel ships powered by diesel\GTs for decades. They aren't powered by cryogenic LOX and can explode at any moment. A rusty prop coupling should not be an unforeseen problem.

[tomuk]

Sometimes it takes time to get all the information to make a decision, that doesn't always align with deployment dates as much as we would like it to.

With the costs at stake with the carriers it should.

[downsizer]

All the armchair quarterbacks seem to be on this forum. Wonder how much actual operational experience they all have......

[Bring Deeps]

Lots of valid points made but it's still an exercise and lessons will have been learnt. That's why you practice.

[bobp]

More people join PWLS...

[new guy]

All the armchair quarterbacks seem to be on this forum. Wonder how much actual operational experience they all have......

It's almost as if this forum was for Armchair Admirals and Generals to have a (mostly) peaceful chat about military stuff.

While other forums, such as AARSE, are for those that have served or are serving.

Makes me wonder why you bother coming here?

[topman]

Sometimes it takes time to get all the information to make a decision, that doesn't always align with deployment dates as much as we would like it to.

With the costs at stake with the carriers it should.

Should, well I should win the lottery this week. But probably won't.

[topman]

Do people feel it would be better if there were only people who hadn't served/worked for the MoD on here or not?

[Caribbean]

No - and likewise it wouldn't be better if only people who HAD served/worked for the MoD were on here.

On group has experience of how things really work and the other is not caught "in the silo"

[Tempest414]

The USN have had problems with there new carriers as well these thing take time to bed in I think given the scale of the task the Carriers are on track also given the gap of 10 years we need to find our feet again

[Tempest414]

No - and likewise it wouldn't be better if only people who HAD served/worked for the MoD were on here.

On group has experience of how things really work and the other is not caught "in the silo"

I agree we need all groups but what we need is those who are serving now to feed in more of the day to day problems in a clear and helpful way rather than rather than making narky commits. I understand it is hard sometimes when they think people don't want to hear about the hard work and facts they face right now

[tomuk]

Sometimes it takes time to get all the information to make a decision, that doesn't always align with deployment dates as much as we would like it to.

With the costs at stake with the carriers it should.

Should, well I should win the lottery this week. But probably won't.

So was it foreseen or unforeseen issue with QNLZ? The story appears to be not a unknown failure like POW but a normal maintenance issue found under routine inspection but it took a month to work out that it meant that the ship wasn't fit to sail. Do Maearsk or Carnival cruises work like that? It isn't good enough and that is no slight on those on the coalface rather those senior officer\civil servants responsible for the processes\decisions.