I don't think the Queen Elizabeth has a particular retention problem, any more than the rest of the Royal Navy. In fact going on those figures it's slightly less that the rest of the fleet.
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
- hovematlot
- Member
- Posts: 268
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 17:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
[
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
That's something completely different than saying that you have Type 45 and so you don't need CAMMs on QE. Or that you have to invest in lasers ( that are still at least 5-10 years from entry in service ).RetroSicotte wrote:What Shark Bait more likely means is that right now the budget allowance on them is a lower priority.
Would we want some Aster or CAMM cells on there? Hell yes, NO-ONE would say no.
But compared to getting more CAMM on say, Type 31's? Or paying for more personnel? It's lower priority.
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
I repeat this question:
Will Rosyth Shipyard be used for maintenance and refits of QE-class carriers during their 40-50 years life?
Will Rosyth Shipyard be used for maintenance and refits of QE-class carriers during their 40-50 years life?
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: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
From what I vaguely remember, a Aster missile silo (and maybe even a Sampson radar) for QE were discussed and traded out to reduce cost more than 10 yrs ago.abc123 wrote:Do you think that QE-class carriers are too weakly armed for anti-air defence? Or, should at least 36 or 48 CAAM missiles be installed? Could that be done, is there enough free space for that?
It would have been much less costly to install CAMM, but that would have been considered a high risk option all those years ago. Obviously, with CAMM now in service on a number of T23s that is no longer the case.
Given CAMMs soft launch nature, and that QE already has Artisan, it would be very possible to fit CAMM at some later date. Such a capability enhancement would be competing for funding against all the other demands, so it depends where it sits on the cost/benefit curve (and future budgets) whether it will funded.
The replacement of Aster 15 missiles on T45s with quad packed CAMM has been discussed on this site. I suspect that you would get more value for money and a bigger capability boost by keeping Aster 15 on T45 and fitting just 24 CAMM on QE.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I don't think this has been decided yet. In addition to Rosyth, there are a number of UK yards with large enough dry docks:abc123 wrote:I repeat this question:
Will Rosyth Shipyard be used for maintenance and refits of QE-class carriers during their 40-50 years life?
Harland and Wolf, Belfast
Able UK, Tyneside
Inchgreen Drydock, Glasgow
And of course it would not be impossible for other yards to expand or build new drydocks. This has been mooted at Cammell Laird in Birkenhead, mainly to support the New Panamax sized commercial ships.
I suspect MOD will wait to call for tenders for QE refits until much closer to the time for the first such refit.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Of course more is better, but is more hard kill the most effective us of limited funds?abc123 wrote:Maybe, but considering that virtually EVERY other aircraft carrier in the world has better AAW capabilities than QE-class, who's right there?
If SAMSON and Aster have failed, I don't see how CAMM and Artisan would do any better, so preferable to try a different method, such as advanced decoys and lasers. So far decoys have been the most effective anti missile countermeasure, not interceptor missiles, so worth advancing our soft kill systems too.
Another candidate that would greatly enhance the protection of the carrier is developing cooperative engagement between the F35, CrowsNest and PAAMS. That sounds like a better place to spend cash than CAMM.
Its spread betting, don't need to go in too hard on one technology only to find the enemy has found a way around your countermeasure.
(So are the carriers)abc123 wrote:Or that you have to invest in lasers ( that are still at least 5-10 years from entry in service ).
@LandSharkUK
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
shark bait wrote:Of course more is better, but is more hard kill the most effective us of limited funds?abc123 wrote:Maybe, but considering that virtually EVERY other aircraft carrier in the world has better AAW capabilities than QE-class, who's right there?
If SAMSON and Aster have failed, I don't see how CAMM and Artisan would do any better, so preferable to try a different method, such as advanced decoys and lasers. So far decoys have been the most effective anti missile countermeasure, not interceptor missiles, so worth advancing our soft kill systems too.
Another candidate that would greatly enhance the protection of the carrier is developing cooperative engagement between the F35, CrowsNest and PAAMS. That sounds like a better place to spend cash than CAMM.
Its spread betting, don't need to go in too hard on one technology only to find the enemy has found a way around your countermeasure.
(So are the carriers)abc123 wrote:Or that you have to invest in lasers ( that are still at least 5-10 years from entry in service ).
I'm not saying that CEC isn't necesarry or that good combination of countermeasures and hard-kill methods isn't the best.
Call me Doubting Thomas, but I'm not sure that the lasers will enter service so soon. Also, who knows will QE be called into action even before that...
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
CEC would be my preferred option for the CVF protection. There are other similar technologies which have potential to work well also. I would have liked to have seen Sampson on the carriers, the extra height and CEC could have worked well, but then UAVs, the AEW/ASW Merlins and the F35 will all add to the battlefield picture. So it probably isn't the best use of month.
In truth the best way we will protect the carriers is with more Astutes, Poseidens and Merlins. Right now all of these platforms lack numbers and weapons.
In truth the best way we will protect the carriers is with more Astutes, Poseidens and Merlins. Right now all of these platforms lack numbers and weapons.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Also the type 45 to have A.B.M capability and if the new sm6 being developed could be added
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
That's not how the theory of the combined effects of multiple defence layers works. If we assume that Sampson/Aster on the T45 is 90% effective, Phalanx on QE is 50% effective, and Artisan/CAMM on QE is 80% effective (not the real figures), then:shark bait wrote:If SAMSON and Aster have failed, I don't see how CAMM and Artisan would do any better...
a. A T45 on its own provides 90% protection.
b. A T45 combined with Phalanx on QE provides a combined 95% protection
c. A T45 combined with Phalanx and Artisan/CAMM on QE provides a combined 99% protection
Agreed.shark bait wrote:Another candidate that would greatly enhance the protection of the carrier is developing cooperative engagement between the F35, CrowsNest and PAAMS. That sounds like a better place to spend cash than CAMM.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Original planned date was 9th January 2017, with Ready For Sea Date (RFSD) originally planned for 10th March 2017.easydiver wrote:It's SSMOB day! See: http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.u ... 06-06-2017
I'm guessing that preparations have been rejigged to reduce the time between the two dates...
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Flight deck displays in place: https://www.flickr.com/photos/qeclassca ... 324294013/
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Good to see that, as of 4th June, the flight deck display boards have been installed on the Aft Island. I'm guessing the Fwd Island displays will be added in short order.easydiver wrote:Flight deck displays in place: https://www.flickr.com/photos/qeclassca ... 324294013/
- imperialman
- Donator
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 17:16
- Contact:
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Ships staff move on board.R686 wrote:What does SSMOB stand for?
- hovematlot
- Member
- Posts: 268
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 17:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Looking good for movie nights. Beats the old sheet method.easydiver wrote:Flight deck displays in place: https://www.flickr.com/photos/qeclassca ... 324294013/
- hovematlot
- Member
- Posts: 268
- Joined: 27 May 2015, 17:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
If the rumour mill is right about the departure at 12:00 on the 21st June, using the 5 + 1 + 5 sea trial programme, that would have her arriving in Portsmouth about the 6th September.. ish.
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1749
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
- cockneyjock1974
- Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
The screens will be great for watching World Cup games lol.
- CR4ZYHOR5E
- Member
- Posts: 76
- Joined: 02 May 2015, 10:57
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Anyone know if the pennant number will be painted onto the aft island?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
imperialman wrote:Ships staff move on board.R686 wrote:What does SSMOB stand for?
I read that article about a dozen times, thinking what the F does that mean
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Maybe they'll put it on the screens!CR4ZYHOR5E wrote:Anyone know if the pennant number will be painted onto the aft island?