Hms Queen Elizabeth

[DougRichards]

She'd say 'off to the bally tower with the filthy degenerates'. And of course Id have to agree.

 

and probably so would they......

[TonyE]

She'd say 'off to the bally tower with the filthy degenerates'. And of course Id have to agree.

 

Bah! Let`s just damn the fellows eyes, strip the britches of their backside and warm their heels to Putney Bridge, HURRAH!

[Jeff]

 

Or because it was potentially a threat to the task force and being dead made it not so?

 

Just sayin'.

Yes, that thought might have just crossed someone's mind...

 

 

It certainly had a profound effect on the rest of the Argie navy.

[mnm]

... therefore promoting it to Good Thing status on the spot What surprised me was that the Marina de los Argies (official title) did not run up to Montevideo to provide proper escort to El Grafo Spee.

 

By the way, did they have any submarine assets of any consequence at the time?

[DB]

They did indeed, and claims of sinking major surface ships were made, I think.

 

On the other hand, the RN claimed to have sunk several submarines more than the Argentinians possessed and it is believed that they may have effectively other large, grey-ish sub-surface objects - aka whales - instead.

 

One submarine (Santa Fe, ex USS Catfish) was disabled in South Georgia.

 

This one was the dangerous one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_San_Luis_(S-32)

 

The explanation for the failure of the torpedoes to work properly mentioned on that wiki page is news to me.

[mnm]

Thank you DB, quite interesting.

[DougRichards]

They did indeed, and claims of sinking major surface ships were made, I think.

 

On the other hand, the RN claimed to have sunk several submarines more than the Argentinians possessed and it is believed that they may have effectively other large, grey-ish sub-surface objects - aka whales - instead.

 

One submarine (Santa Fe, ex USS Catfish) was disabled in South Georgia.

 

This one was the dangerous one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_San_Luis_(S-32)

 

The explanation for the failure of the torpedoes to work properly mentioned on that wiki page is news to me.

 

Don't say that too loudly, the 'Greens' will jump on you. (for killing whales with torpedoes { how are torpedoes meant to target whales anyway?})?

 

But may be worthwhile to raise the spitit of Capt Ahab (Gregory Peck at least) to this conversation. He may also be able to contribute a few thoughts from Horatio Hornblower http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043379/ and dealing with those of South America as well. At least he was never a Viking!

 

Spam spam spam spam spam spam!!

[sunday]

I have read (less than a week ago, but do not remember if that was here or in some FB group) that Admiral Ernest King was the one that forbade using whales for target practice in the USN.

[irregularmedic]

If you have ever heard someone speaking Newfie you would wonder if it was English

 

 

+1 (We get a few of them here in the great state of Washington, including nurses)

 

Although, in my experience, some Cajun is at least as bad. I pride myself on being able to interpret odd accents, speech impediments, and all sorts of things and I've had Canjuns speak "English" to me that I couldn't understand a word of.

 

Aren't the Aussies flying F-18's...? Put them aboard the British carrier and deploy it to the Far East, problem solved.

[Lieste]

The F18 requires catapults and arrestor wires. Don't think our 'super sized toy carrier' has either system, because it was intended to use only Helicopters and F35B.

[Chris Werb]

 

They did indeed, and claims of sinking major surface ships were made, I think.

 

On the other hand, the RN claimed to have sunk several submarines more than the Argentinians possessed and it is believed that they may have effectively other large, grey-ish sub-surface objects - aka whales - instead.

 

One submarine (Santa Fe, ex USS Catfish) was disabled in South Georgia.

 

This one was the dangerous one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_San_Luis_(S-32)

 

The explanation for the failure of the torpedoes to work properly mentioned on that wiki page is news to me.

 

Don't say that too loudly, the 'Greens' will jump on you. (for killing whales with torpedoes { how are torpedoes meant to target whales anyway?})?

 

 

We still had DCs in service on helos and Limbo ASW mortars on some frigates. I believe DCs are still in our helos arsenal. Mk 11 Mod 3 being the latest version.

[DougRichards]

The F18 requires catapults and arrestor wires. Don't think our 'super sized toy carrier' has either system, because it was intended to use only Helicopters and F35B.

 

And Australian FA-18 are not carrier equipped, and our pilots are not usually carrier trained.

[Garth]

 

The F18 requires catapults and arrestor wires. Don't think our 'super sized toy carrier' has either system, because it was intended to use only Helicopters and F35B.

 

And Australian FA-18 are not carrier equipped, and our pilots are not usually carrier trained.

 

 

Aussie Bugs and Superbugs are right off the same assembly line as every other F/A-18, have all the required bits/pieces and are still very much carrier-capable. Even if not used in that way.

 

There was a proposal at one point for an F/A-18L (for Land-based) that had landing gear similar to the F-17's, as well as weight-reduction measures that would increase performance by stripping out some of the strength/robustness required for planting the bird firmly onto a carrier deck, but it was determined to be more cost effective for non-carrier operators to just buy "off the rack" rather than have the expense of a reengineering exercise.

 

The neat and interesting thing, tho, about your F-model Superbugs is that they're wired for conversion to EA-18Gs when the F-35s hit the RAAF.

[rmgill]

Fitted for but not with carrier capability?

[shep854]

Fitted for but not with carrier capability?

[Garth]

 

Fitted for but not with carrier capability?

 

 

Eggzactly ...

[DougRichards]

Rather points to us really should have put a cat on the QEs. Be nice to see the commonwealth provide an air wing for it.

 

Empire my dear boy. Empire.

 

Pity those Kiwis got rid of their air force,it would have been nice to have a few Skyhawks from the antipodes.....

 

Meanwhile, we need a HMS Prince Phillip to be the main lady's consort, so to speak.

 

Does anyone know if the HMS Prince Albert (1865 or so) had a ram with a Prince Albert? I understand Queen Vicky was quite fond of the ship... and did the HMS Prince Albert ever go anywhere with the HMS Victoria (before she sunk of course - and that would have upset the reigning monarch as well).

 

(just looking at a reference to the HMS Victoria, I used to have as a neighbour - I helped her break into her appartment once - Zoe Tryon - something like the great great great great grandaughter of the admiral who sank Queen Vicky's namesake).

Edited April 9, 2015 by DougRichards

[Panzermann]

I thought the carrier was named after the "virgin queen"? No need for a husband then.

 

---

 

Is the class designed for a catapult and arrestor wires? Considering the ship's size and projected service length it may become useful, because I strongly doubt a new VSTOL plane is going to be made after the F-35 and all its problems. And future drones may find catapult and wires useful, too.

[DB]

The original design was supposed to be left open enough for a late decision as to whether the carriers were to be Cat equipped, and in fact we switched from STOVL to CATOBAR and back due to a crisis of confidence in the future of the F-35.

 

Now, however, it would be quite difficult to do. There is certainly enough electrical power generated on board for an EMALS catapult launch system, but I imagine that it would not be so much a "refit" as a "rebuild" to change our minds again.

 

On the other hand, of course, it's possible that "they" didn't burn all the design work that was done in the middle of the changed plans. (bwahahahaha)

[rmgill]

HMS Drake then.


Or Dlake if you please. No idea what the Spanish would make of that though...

Edited April 9, 2015 by rmgill

[sunday]

HMS Drake then.

 

 

Or Dlake if you please. No idea what the Spanish would make of that though...

 

I think we would prefer HMS Vernon

[mnm]

Rather points to us really should have put a cat on the QEs. Be nice to see the commonwealth provide an air wing for it.

 

Couldn't be more appropriate.

 

 

 

Feline mascot of the Royal Navy ship Queen Elizabeth walks the big barrels with assurance.

[Simon Tan]

Buy loads of Reapers.

[Mr King]

[swerve]

The original design was supposed to be left open enough for a late decision as to whether the carriers were to be Cat equipped, and in fact we switched from STOVL to CATOBAR and back due to a crisis of confidence in the future of the F-35.

 

Now, however, it would be quite difficult to do. There is certainly enough electrical power generated on board for an EMALS catapult launch system, but I imagine that it would not be so much a "refit" as a "rebuild" to change our minds again.

 

On the other hand, of course, it's possible that "they" didn't burn all the design work that was done in the middle of the changed plans. (bwahahahaha)

It was pretty much a rebuild by 2010, when the then minister of defence made a rather hasty decision to switch - reversed by his successor. It turned out that the 'flexibility' in the design had never been taken into account when doing detailed design, & even at the stage of construction QE had reached then, it would have had to have a lot of the work already done ripped out, & some other ripping out done to accommodate things which would have to be moved to make way for the catapults. There was no space reserved, or even set aside to be used only for low priority purposes, for the fitting of catapults.

 

It seems that after announcing that the design would be flexible, nothing was done to put that intention into effect in the structure of the ship. It wasn't written into the design criteria. The cost was estimated to be huge. Vast amount of work, & extra costs caused by disruption to the build schedule. Oh, & it turned out that the USA wanted a lot more for the catapults than we expected, much more than the price paid by the USN. So much so that upgrading the EMKIT small EM catapult we already had working looked to be cheaper, despite the development work needed - but higher risk, because less developed.