Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Poiuytrewq »

The blame game has begun.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... t-carrier/

Anglo-French row erupts over breakdown of Britain’s £3bn aircraft carrier
Attention turns to Paris-based Thales as carrier remains docked and needing essential repairs

When the first Royal Navy F-35 warplane touched down on the deck of the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier two years ago, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace hailed it as a “momentous milestone” for the fleet.

Billions of pounds of investment and years of work to restore a functioning carrier fleet to the British Navy were finally coming together.

Yet the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier, which cost taxpayers £3bn, spent most of last year docked after problems were discovered with the vessel. A long-planned visit to the US was cancelled because of propeller issues, leaving its sister ship the HMS Queen Elizabeth II as Britain's operational carrier.

The consortium of the British and European companies that built the 65,000 tonne HMS Prince of Wales are now nervously awaiting a government report into the problem, amid calls for whoever is to blame to foot the bill for the damage.

“There's going to be quite a large amount of finger pointing,” says one industry insider. “It's a little bit embarrassing, let’s be honest.”

The attention of investigators has turned to Thales, according to reports. The €25bn French electronics giant works across aerospace, defence and transport.

The Paris-based company was one of three main members of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, the consortium that delivered the ship. According to the now-defunct Aircraft Carrier Alliance website, Thales UK “led the design of the QE Class programme and is currently involved in the Power and Propulsion sub-alliance, which the company leads.”

The Prince of Wales broke down last summer as a result of technical issues centred on the starboard side propeller, prompting specialist divers to inspect the vessel. They discovered that the coupling that connects the propeller and drive shafts failed, reportedly leading to rudder damage.


The Telegraph revealed last week that the ship was further delayed by the alignment of the propeller shafts, a problem that could be related to the original issue that sent it back to the dock. Misalignments can cause the shaft to vibrate beyond its design tolerance, wearing down the bearings and potentially breaking a coupling on the shaft itself.

The cluster of problems around the propeller have led to speculation that Thales could be at fault, given its role in the project.

The company said it was a proud member of the alliance but declined to comment further.

Thales itself is not a shipbuilder, more a systems integrator famous for radars and radios. It was chosen to put together the complex components needed to drive the ship and was the prime contractor responsible for the job, with work subcontracted out.

Experts suggested blame is likely to be shared between a number of companies involved in the design, fitting and perhaps maintenance of the parts in question.

The other members of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance were BAE Systems, Britain's biggest defence firm, and shipbuilder Babcock.

Rolls-Royce was also involved to a lesser extent, supplying the gas turbines that help power the massive vessel. Smaller shipyards around the country assembled sections of the hull, part of a team of more than 30 companies.

Complicating matters further is the fact that the Ministry of Defence itself was part of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, meaning the taxpayer may also be on the hook for the cost of correcting any faults.

The HMS Prince of Wales passed sea trials before problems were discovered and contractors are hoping this means that whatever went wrong is either nothing to do with them or down to an accident or event that occured after the ship was handed over.

However, the Government report, which according to Navy sources is due “very soon”, is understood to focus on a component on the propeller shaft that may have failed because of design or fitting failures, dashing these hopes.

If it does prove to be a design flaw or construction problem, the companies should be on the hook for the cost of repairing it, says former defence minister and member of commons defence committee Mark Francois.

He said: “It seems clear that if there is an inherent design or construction flaw, it should be down to the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, or their subcontractors, who actually built the ship, to pay to fix it, not the taxpayer. We cannot afford a £3 billion plus aircraft carrier with a limp.”’

The contract covering the building of the carrier is understood to make the contractors jointly liable. Given this, the companies involved are likely to want to get to the bottom of what happened as well

Repairs will be undertaken at Babcock’s shipyard in Rosyth under a maintenance deal with the MoD, although that deal is understood to not cover costs beyond routine maintenance.

Shipbuilding bosses are keen that the problem does not derail the joint venture structure used to build the ships, which helps spread work over a number of shipyards and therefore helps maintain skills should more work come their way.

Industry sources are at a loss as to how the ship passed sea trials and has now developed this problem.

However, the propeller shaft problems are the latest setback to the troubled project. Flooding issues in 2020 meant that the vessel spent less than 90 days at sea in two years and led to £3.3m of repair work.

Last week, MPs questioned Vice Admiral Paul Marshall about problems with the HMS Prince of Wales. He said that the broken starboard shaft should be fixed by the Spring, but revealed that investigators had found “issues” with the port shaft of the vessel as well.

He declined to say whether a build defect or damage at sea was the problem, but allayed MPs’ fears that its sister ship could have the same defect.

“We are confident that [...] it is not a class issue with the carriers,” he said.

A Babcock spokesman said: “One of the most complex maritime engineering programmes in the UK, the Alliance was supported by a supply chain of hundreds of organisations across the country. We remain focused on completing the repair, working with the MOD and other industry partners.”

A Royal Navy spokesman said: “We remain committed to ensuring HMS Prince of Wales commences her operational programme, as planned, in autumn 2023.

“An investigation has been commissioned to establish the cause of the starboard shaft failure on HMS Prince of Wales. This is nearing completion and it would be inappropriate to comment any further at this time.”

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by tomuk »

Rolls Royce built the props in Sweden I believe this has now been sold onto Kongsberg not sure what it has to do with Thales.

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

'The HMS Prince Of Wales'...petty, I know, but that really irritates me!
These users liked the author PhillyJ for the post (total 2):
serge750Scimitar54

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

HMS Queen Elizabeth II annoys me equally. :crazy:
These users liked the author Scimitar54 for the post:
PhillyJ

TheLoneRanger
Member
Posts: 331
Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by TheLoneRanger »

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/17 ... ews-latest

Investigators are questioning the actions of Thales, a Paris-based firm, one of three that delivered the vessel.

According to the now-defunct Aircraft Carrier Alliance website, Thales UK “led the design of the QE Class programme and is currently involved in the Power and Propulsion sub-alliance, which the company leads.”
>> Looks like it was the French who gond and broke our Prince of Wales Aircraft carrier ?!?!

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »


(Rolf Jonsen) 13th February 2023
HMS Queen Elizabeth leaving Glen Mallan after her second visit there.
These users liked the author SKB for the post:
djkeos

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

TheLoneRanger wrote: 14 Feb 2023, 12:34 https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/17 ... ews-latest

Investigators are questioning the actions of Thales, a Paris-based firm, one of three that delivered the vessel.

According to the now-defunct Aircraft Carrier Alliance website, Thales UK “led the design of the QE Class programme and is currently involved in the Power and Propulsion sub-alliance, which the company leads.”
>> Looks like it was the French who gond and broke our Prince of Wales Aircraft carrier ?!?!
The article does not match the lurid headline. Welcome to the world of modern journalism.

RR & Bae designed the power train, Babcocks and Bae fitted it. But the ACA agreed to split any warrenty costs such as this between all parties (also included the MoD and Thales). Although I expect they will try to shift blame to the RN for not performing correct maintenance. Should keep the lawyers busy for a while.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jdam »



Always nice to see F-35s on the QE's :D
These users liked the author Jdam for the post (total 6):
wargame_insomniacPhillyJserge750Scimitar54bobpRon5

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

It will be even better when we are seeing 2 x (full) squadrons of F-35B on 1 x QEC. :arrow:
Or better still 2 squadrons on each! :mrgreen:
These users liked the author Scimitar54 for the post (total 2):
Ron5wargame_insomniac

Dobbo
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 07:41
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Dobbo »

I’d be surprised if we don’t see greater numbers of F35B - enough for at least a complete full load on one QEC and two “regular” loads on each.

Key issues remain above numbers that require positive resolutions.

The AEW and AAR issues still seems very open, the ability to perform the rolling landing to return with larger munitions must be critical to working up the capability, and the integration of very long range AAW missiles and stand off anti shipping and anti surface missiles are also going to become increasingly important.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

Scimitar54 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 21:30 It will be even better when we are seeing 2 x (full) squadrons of F-35B on 1 x QEC. :arrow:
Or better still 2 squadrons on each! :mrgreen:
24 in '24. Some of us have a bet on that - looking at you Mr drmefield :D

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

Ron5 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 15:15
Scimitar54 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 21:30 It will be even better when we are seeing 2 x (full) squadrons of F-35B on 1 x QEC. :arrow:
Or better still 2 squadrons on each! :mrgreen:
24 in '24. Some of us have a bet on that - looking at you Mr drmefield :D
I'll be happy to lose that bet!

* terms and conditions apply - all 24 to be UK owned. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see 24 total (with a 12:12 or 16:8 UK:US split)
These users liked the author dmereifield for the post:
Ron5

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

QNLZ coming back in tomorrow afternoon.
Screenshot_20230223-155324.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »

Yes, she's off the Isle of Wight right now.


Zeno
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 12 Jun 2022, 02:24
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Zeno »

I don't believe this has been suggested for the F-35 aboard the carriers but it sounded feasible and my query is on the use of the f-35b in an asw role for quick response to a distant contact ,this article states that the Harrier had been also used in this role
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/r ... ne-hunters

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SKB »

QE is home!

(ships, planes and gaming) 24th February 2023


(Swifty) 24th February 2023


(MrTripAdvisor) 24th February 2023
These users liked the author SKB for the post:
serge750

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

These users liked the author Ron5 for the post (total 2):
serge750SKB

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 813
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by mrclark303 »

Zeno wrote: 24 Feb 2023, 03:50 I don't believe this has been suggested for the F-35 aboard the carriers but it sounded feasible and my query is on the use of the f-35b in an asw role for quick response to a distant contact ,this article states that the Harrier had been also used in this role
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/r ... ne-hunters
I don't believe the Harrier was ever used for ASW.

I do recall a pitch by British Aerospace in the 1980's to potentially use 2 seat harriers as dedicated fast ASW aircraft from Invincible class carriers, they would carry 2 stingray torpedo's (I think) and be vectored onto the target by Sea Kings or frigate sonar.

This was probably at the height of the cold war in the early 1980's. I think one of the issues was the Harrier T2's were too long for the Invincible class Deck lifts.

It would have been a cheap, minimum change conversion, with the back seater being the weapons system operator and providing a second pair of eyes.

An interesting idea that wasn't taken up.

Zeno
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 12 Jun 2022, 02:24
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Zeno »

The article did state it was the U.S.M.C who did this , I believe that a f35-b operating some distance from the ships carrying a mixture of sonar buoys and light torpedoes could be directed for a quick response to any detection ,and the absence of a snap long range rocket assisted torpedo system from the ships could be addressed , a f35-b in flight could be vectored in to a sub surfaced launched missiles very quickly ,still perhaps there may be reasons why this is not practical after all I'm not an expert it just sounded interesting

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by jimthelad »

Weapons release envelope is all wrong, the torpedo would need a high drag drogue and different release system.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Jdam »

God only knows how long that would take to add to the F-35's software.

Wouldn't some sort of POD that you could put in the back of the V-22 be better for that? Not to sure how you could launch torpedoes but it could drop Sonobuoy and have MAD on it and such?

Zeno
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 12 Jun 2022, 02:24
Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by Zeno »

This article states that the U.K and France are going to alternate carrier deployments to the Pacific as part of a European plan this European plan might include other N.A.T.O countries like Italy and Germany? who have large escorts being built or planned that would make such a fleet very capable
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prim ... nce-summit
https://www.defensenews.com/global/euro ... -delivery/
https://swzmaritime.nl/news/2021/07/08/ ... ch-design/
These users liked the author Zeno for the post:
serge750

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by serge750 »

Wow, I think that's a good idea, to show NATO is not just about America in that region & that NATO is a combined force
These users liked the author serge750 for the post:
Ron5

SiVisPacemParaBellum
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: 16 Dec 2022, 15:58
Germany

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by SiVisPacemParaBellum »

Already expected sth comparable to happen since 2020. Germany is about to build 6 "Frigates" displacing up to 15.000 Tonnes designed as carrier escorts. It's been planned to use them for CSG-protection.
Apart from that: I somehow doubt Italy's ability to spare their DDs.

PhillyJ
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:27
England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Post by PhillyJ »

Ok, not from nipper so feel ok to post here.

'Rumours' from the boatyard is that a step was missed on the alignment algorithms/formula for the prop shafts on PWLS prior to build, due to leave of a worker and when picked up it was missed.

When the enter keyed was pressed, it didn't recognise a step had been missed and calculations were decided on that, due to my IT background I hope this is just BS, software should have built in checks for this. Regardless, many areas probably signed this off.

Nipper definitely leaving beginning/mid August, if he stays any longer on one ship, it'll red flag with the RN apparently.
These users liked the author PhillyJ for the post:
Scimitar54

Post Reply