The Queen Elizabeth Class, and the Spitfire of the seas!

[MartinW 0]

We've had plenty of discussion in the past regarding the Queen Elizabeth Class vessels, the F35b, and the UK governments monumental cockup. However, I feel our previous discussions may have overshadowed what an impressive set up this will be.

I was watching a TV documentary the other day, and I have to admit, I was unaware of how large the Queen Elizabeth Class is. In fact two type 21 frigates would fit just inside the vessels hangar deck!

This will be the biggest and most powerful warship ever constructed for the Royal navy.

As for the F35b, I was unaware that the ships are large enough for "Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landings". SRVL will be common place, enabling the F35b to land with more fuel and stores. Essentially a short landing on the carrier rather than vertical landings.

http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.uk/the-ships/the-queen-elizabeth-class.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRVL

[Christopher Low 63]

Wasn't the original aircraft capacity of these carriers supposed to be 50? I would have thought that would have been possible, considering that the large American carriers can take 90.

[Andrew Godden 934]

Wasn't the original aircraft capacity of these carriers supposed to be 50? I would have thought that would have been possible, considering that the large American carriers can take 90.

 

All the data still suggests their capacity is in the 40 to 50 aircraft range (fixed and rotary wing).  This is roughly consistent with their size, based on displacement, being approximately 66% of the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers.

 

However, what they will routinely operate with versus their total capacity are two different things.  Even the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers only routinely operate with a total complement of approximately 64 aircraft (fixed and rotary wing).

 

Now, given that your Government has currently only ordered about 48 aircraft (the numbers are a bit unclear because you appear to keep changing your mind), to be split between an RN Naval Air Sqn, an RAF Sqn, and, no doubt, some training elements, there isn't much left to go around.  If, in fact, they can decide to order the total proposed order (I think it's around the 138 mark), these aircraft carriers might actually operate with a complement of aircraft closer to their capacity.

 

I'm sure someone, somewhere, has already done the calculations in an attempt to support an argument that the ships and the aircraft are a total waste of the taxpayers money.

[Captain Coffee 2,030]

...of course it is a waste of Taxpayer money, at least from an "Investment" standpoint.

It doesn't even require any calculations.

Tax payers don't benefit from wars and war machines...they die, survive, sufferer losses, and pay almost the entire cost of wars and their tools...only the wealthy earn income from war investments, and they generally don't suffer many losses as their kids are rarely on the front lines.

 

/2 cents (and possibly a locked post due to political commentary Took care of that for you MartinV !     )

[MartinW 0]

/2 cents (and possibly a locked post due to political commentary Took care of that for you MartinV ! )

 

Tax payers don't benefit from wars and war machines...they die, survive, sufferer losses, and pay almost the entire cost of wars and their tools...only the wealthy earn income from war investments, and they generally don't suffer many losses as their kids are rarely on the front lines.

 

 

I agree with you. We are certainly glad of it though when scary people invade our land, or try to steal our archipelagos. 

 

Moving swiftly on...

 

70,600 tonnes the displacement apparently, but the design accommodates growth over it's lifetime. A tailored air group of up to 40 aircraft, but I guess given the political will the full compliment of 50 may transpire eventually.

 

 The BAE/Thales S1850M has a fully automatic detection and track initiation that can track up to 1,000 air targets at a range of around 400 kilometres. While BAE's Artisan can track a target the size of a snooker ball over 20 kilometres with a maximum range of 200 km.

 

In addition to the F35b, there will be Merlin's, the Augusta Westland 159 [an improved Super Lynx], and the airborne early warning Sea King AEW2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_AW159_Wildcat

 

 

Image below gives you some idea how big the ship is...

 

 

[dodgy-alan 1,587]

Image below gives you some idea how big the ship is...

 

 

 

 

Now whilst that ship is moored there, get all the aircraft to turn and face parliament whilst it's in session..........and then open fire with everything!

 

[dodgy-alan 1,587]

Short rolling landings are all very well, but in a war situation, the aircraft need to be able to take-off with a full weapons and fuel load to do their job! Since it is somewhat common knowledge that the aircraft cannot carry all it's supposed to be able to in its STOVL configuration, then it still seems  a complete waste of money. The minister that ordered the ship with a ramp deck and not cats and traps should be shot!  At least we could have got a lot more aircraft onto the ship. FA-18 and Rafale M  for starters. Not to mention long range CoD aircraft. As it is they are still restricted to just one fixed wing aircraft type. It just seems that this countries government cannot get their heads around what is actually needed! Lovely impressive ships they may be, but I cannot help feel that they will become a big white elephant if they cannot get the aircraft to work correctly and into service.

[allardjd 1,853]

Agree entirely, Alan. Thirty years from now, these carriers will still only be able to operate F-35Bs, unless someone comes up with another STOVL Naval aircraft, which I wouldn't think likely. With cats and traps, any naval aircraft, current or future can be accomodated - without them you can operate F-35Bs and helicopters, forever. It's a bad decision.

It should be noted that the F-35B is the least capable of the F-35s because of the STOVL capability. It pays a heavy price in range, payload and g-load limits for that one trick. The F-35B makes good sense for the USMC for a number of reasons but not so much as a sovereign country's only combat capable naval aircraft.

John

[Andrew Godden 934]

Just like the Majestic-class aircraft carriers of the 1940's, a major redesign with heavy modification and refit is the future for these.....or just being sold for scrapping because it will be assessed as too expensive.

[MartinW 0]

Short rolling landings are all very well, but in a war situation, the aircraft need to be able to take-off with a full weapons and fuel load to do their job! Since it is somewhat common knowledge that the aircraft cannot carry all it's supposed to be able to in its STOVL configuration, then it still seems  a complete waste of money. The minister that ordered the ship with a ramp deck and not cats and traps should be shot!  At least we could have got a lot more aircraft onto the ship. FA-18 and Rafale M  for starters. Not to mention long range CoD aircraft. As it is they are still restricted to just one fixed wing aircraft type. It just seems that this countries government cannot get their heads around what is actually needed! Lovely impressive ships they may be, but I cannot help feel that they will become a big white elephant if they cannot get the aircraft to work correctly and into service.

 

I'd kind of hoped the discussion wouldn't drift in the direction of our governments cock up, given we've debated it and pretty much agreed previously, but no problem, so be it.

 

I wouldn't say it's a "complete" waste of money to be honest, as we do have "a" capability. Yes, cats and traps would have been optimal, but do we really need maximum payload and range for our purposes? We seemed to get on fine with the Harrier, and the F35b will certainly exceed the Harriers capabilities by a long way. I can't really envisage a realistic war scenario where we find ourselves desperate for greater F35 range and payload to be honest. But of course, one can never predict what a future requirement will be with any accuracy.

 

So not the best way to spend tax payers money for sure, but I suspect what we will get will be adequate.

 

Might also be worth remembering that the Queen Elizabeth class is designed to accommodate growth over it's lifetime. I'm not quite sure what is meant by that, but it sounds like a future enhanced capability is an option if required.