Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2294
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

https://www.iiss.org/blogs/analysis/202 ... engagement

An interesting article...some valid points...and this...

"On that front, the experimental deployment of the Royal Navy’s Crowsnest airborne early warning system, on HMS Queen Elizabeth’s Merlin helicopters, appears to have fallen below expectations. That is not surprising given that Crowsnest was rushed into service for the CSG21 deployment. One solution could be simply to buy more F-35Bs. "

Not attributed to anyone, but as I've said before Crowsnest has been utterly absent from any RN media since it flew on...not one image seen of it on deck or in the air, and for a new capability that the RN would want to acknowledge in such a widely reported deployment is, lets be frank, unheard of. Past experience of the way MoD manages issues suggests that Crowsnest has had major problems on CSG21. I wouldn't be surprised if it had been hangar bound the entire time...hence the lack of shots of it even sat on deck...

serge750
Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by serge750 »

Sure i saw one taking of from HMS Queen Elizabeth's deck in a recent Video ? will have to try & find it now....

But i agree it is a bit strange on a well publicized deployment that more hasn't been seen

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2544
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

Forgive my ignorance, but how could the solution be to buy more F35B?

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by KiwiMuzz »

dmereifield wrote:Forgive my ignorance, but how could the solution be to buy more F35B?
I think the inference is that F35 has such significant capabilities in terms of radar, electronic warfare, and data-linking/networking that they could feasibly remove the need for a separate ASaC platform.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 548
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jensy »

serge750 wrote:Sure i saw one taking of from HMS Queen Elizabeth's deck in a recent Video ? will have to try & find it now....

But i agree it is a bit strange on a well publicized deployment that more hasn't been seen
There's a brief reference to Crowsnest "cutting its teeth" against Russian aircraft at 1:07 in the below video posted by RichardIC on the previous page:



Still rather odd that they haven't been showing off the capability. Could the demand for ASW fitted HM2s been found to outweigh the usefulness of IOC Crowsnest for much of deployment?

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6286
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

jonas wrote:Parliamentary answers 22nd Oct 2021 :-

https://questions-statements.parliament ... 0-19/58892
I would think that the national shipbuilding strategy would provide the answer rather than trying to find the lowest bidder ...

... who usually overruns and has to be bailed out with extra cash.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7180
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »


User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ETH »

KiwiMuzz wrote:
dmereifield wrote:Forgive my ignorance, but how could the solution be to buy more F35B?
I think the inference is that F35 has such significant capabilities in terms of radar, electronic warfare, and data-linking/networking that they could feasibly remove the need for a separate ASaC platform.
They can’t. Fighter radars and AEW radars are fundamentally different. An F35 can augment AEW/ASaC but cannot replace it.

User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ETH »

seaspear wrote:I'm afraid you have a few things mixed up. It is the location of the Sampson radar on the T45s that provides an advantage, not that of the S1850. But that advantage is for sea-skimming anti-ship missiles, not ballistic missiles.
I appreciate the correction but my basic question remains can a sensor upgrade that has the ability to track at a very long-range inbound ballistic missiles or hypersonic missiles be a requirement for the carriers which may be the target of such threats
Apologies for the late reply but yes, the ability to track ballistic and hypersonic missiles is a growing requirement for current shipborne radars. However, the ships to receive these upgrades will be the Type 45s, not the carriers (because it is Sampson, the premier Fire Control/Multi-Function Radar which will be upgraded and without the ability to transmit real-time fire control data the carriers would not be able to shoot back should they detect a ballistic missile).

The UK was aware of this 20 years ago and hence begun focusing on ballistic missile defence applications of the Sampson radar (MESAR2 at the time) before it had even been fitted on a ship. Sampson has been tested in a ballistic missile defence role multiple times through the past decade at Formidable Shield exercises and At Sea Demonstrations in conjunction with the US. Sampson is expected to be upgraded for Ballistic Missile Defence in 2024 or shortly after.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1748
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by seaspear »

Thanks for the reply but I was trying to understand if a radar system that could detect a ballistic missile but had no missiles of its own could pass such data to an escorting ship that did via a sensor network
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... her-172512

User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ETH »

seaspear wrote:Thanks for the reply but I was trying to understand if a radar system that could detect a ballistic missile but had no missiles of its own could pass such data to an escorting ship that did via a sensor network
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... her-172512
It depends on the navy and on what ships. For the US, they’re developing Co-operative Engagement Capability (and through that network Naval Integrated Fire Control - Counter Air). This is the ability to network all of the sensors and shooters together like you speak of, so a radar on a carrier could detect a missile and transmit the data to a ship with available interceptors to shoot it down.

Unfortunately, the UK failed to invest in such a capability and so now has essentially no comparative system to CEC. Royal Navy ships are equipped with data links like Link 11/16/22 although these are only good for voice/text communications and basic tracking/location data (not a high enough data rate for real-time raw target data to be transferred).

There was an investigation into purchasing the US’ CEC system in the early 2000s and installing it on the Type 23s/Type 45s. In fact, it was the justification given for reducing the number of Type 45s from 8 to 6. They even went as far as installing a test system on HMS Duncan (the 4 flat panels just below the Sampson radome on her foremast), however that is now non-functional and the CEC upgrade was cancelled.

I believe CEC is still an aspiration for the Royal Navy in the future (and an absolute must-have if you ask me). In fact, if you look at the cutouts on the first Type 26’s mast, some do look similar in size and proportion to the CEC antennas used by the US and seen on HMS Duncan.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6286
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

ETH wrote:
KiwiMuzz wrote:
dmereifield wrote:Forgive my ignorance, but how could the solution be to buy more F35B?
I think the inference is that F35 has such significant capabilities in terms of radar, electronic warfare, and data-linking/networking that they could feasibly remove the need for a separate ASaC platform.
They can’t. Fighter radars and AEW radars are fundamentally different. An F35 can augment AEW/ASaC but cannot replace it.
Plus where does the fighter controller sit in the F-35?

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6286
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

Type 26 masts ..

Image

Image

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2294
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Timmymagic »

seaspear wrote:Thanks for the reply but I was trying to understand if a radar system that could detect a ballistic missile but had no missiles of its own could pass such data to an escorting ship that did via a sensor network
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... her-172512
In essense thats exactly what Aegis does. Handoff of tracking ballistic targets has been done by T45's and De Zeven Provincien Class ships to US vessels off the Hebrides and an age ago in the Pacific.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7180
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »

Image

User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ETH »

Timmymagic wrote:
seaspear wrote:Thanks for the reply but I was trying to understand if a radar system that could detect a ballistic missile but had no missiles of its own could pass such data to an escorting ship that did via a sensor network
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... her-172512
In essense thats exactly what Aegis does. Handoff of tracking ballistic targets has been done by T45's and De Zeven Provincien Class ships to US vessels off the Hebrides and an age ago in the Pacific.
AFAIK a Type 45 has never conducted any sort of Engage On Remote exercise because of a lack of real-time datalink capability (beyond the extremely restrictive Link 16), rather has been a participant for radar tracks only.

User avatar
ETH
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 23:28
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by ETH »

Ron5 wrote:Type 26 masts ..

Image

Image
Obviously neither model represents the final design. I’m intrigued by the square cutouts on the actual mast. CEC maybe? If so, there’s been no word of it.

The rectangular ones are for the same UAT Mod 2 RESM receivers that are in service now, that much is clear.

Online
donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4173
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

We can see Crowsnest on QNLZ deck at the photo named as "HMS Queen Elizabeth arrives in Changi Naval Base on 11th October (Photo: Sgt. Petronilla).", in the middle of the article.

https://www.navylookout.com/photo-essay ... abian-sea/

Image

rbeedall
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 01 Nov 2021, 16:17
Ireland

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by rbeedall »

Comparing the high profile embarkation of the 3 Crowsnest Merlin's on 27 April with the subsequent official near silence certainly tells a tale. In all the hundreds of photos of CSG21, I've spotted Merlin ASaCs in only a handful - and none flying. It seems to safe to predict that the pre-IOC deployment has not been a success - although no doubt a lot of lessons have been learnt! Assuming that the Crowsnest FOC is still reached in 2023, the out of service date of 2029 (if still correct) indicates that the Crowsnest problems/limitations are now considered to serious and fundamental to be satisfactory resolved. The 2015 procurement decision now looks increasingly penny-wise but pound foolish.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1230
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

Not actually “Parked on Deck”, but “On the Aft Lift (Elevator)”, so on the move from or to the Hangar Deck. :mrgreen:

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7180
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »

Image

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1527
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by xav »

ICYMI (from the Japanese thread)


BAE Systems Eager To Share Aircraft Carrier Know-How With Japan
Image
On October 12, 2021, BAE Systems held a press conference for the Japanese media, where they announced the establishment of a local corporation in Japan. The establishment of this corporation is expected to take place by the end of this year or early next year. The press conference focused for the most part on the company's role in the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers program and the integration of F-35 on the aircraft carriers...
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -carriers/

3/4 of the media briefing (and its presentation) was about QEC and F-35 integration on the carriers...

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6286
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

Better not tell them the RAF cancelled the SRVL testing :(

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 598
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Dahedd »

Ron5 wrote:Better not tell them the RAF cancelled the SRVL testing :(
Really? Is there actual proof of that ? Pretty shit if they did.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6286
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

Dahedd wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Better not tell them the RAF cancelled the SRVL testing :(
Really? Is there actual proof of that ? Pretty shit if they did.
Have you seen any?

Post Reply