Jump to content

Hms Queen Elizabeth


John_Ford

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

http://news.sky.com/story/royal-navys-largest-ever-warship-hms-queen-elizabeth-sets-sail-10927338

 

THE largest and most powerful ship ever built for the Royal Navy is expected to leave her home port for the first time today.

HMS Queen Elizabeth, a 280-metre, 65,000-tonne aircraft carrier is due to set out from Rosyth on the Firth of Forth – subject to final checks, tides and the Scottish weather.

The behemoth, which is set to be the nation’s future flagship, and her 700-strong ship’s company are ready to undertake her maiden sea trials over the summer.

If all goes weill she is expected to arrive in Portsmouth sometime this autumn.

However the vast vessel must first get out to sea - a major operation where timing is key.

After waiting until high tide to leave the naval dockyard, the carrier must then wait for the tide to lower to pass under the Firth’s famous bridges.

Weather conditions must also be favourable as the four-acre military operating base sets sail.

During her estimated 50-year working life, HMS Queen Elizabeth could be pressed into action for various work such as high intensity war fighting or providing humanitarian aid and disaster relief anywhere in the world.

 

 

 

 

Alright, im delighted to eat my words. I said they would never get it into service, and they have. I hope she present many happy years of service to the Royal navy, and congrats on their meeting their recruitment targets to man her out.

 

 

There is much discussion in the other dailys about how the Russian are going to try to spy the hell out of her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4636950/Russia-start-spying-mission-Navy-s-aircraft-carrier.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Doug, Id not heard that one before.

 

My family were in deep into shipbuilding for a couple of generations. Deeply sad how much capability we have lost in that area.

 

Stuart

 

The Broadway musical flopped, but the preview is well and truly worthwhile.

 

 

Sting's father was a ship builder, he didn't enter the trade, but commemorates it with great fondness.

 

(my grandfather was an ironworker at the Garden Iron Dockyard in Sydney from around 1935 to 1965. We have just a little in common).

Edited by DougRichards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Steamers

 

"OH, where are you going to, all you Big Steamers,
With England's own coal, up and down the salt seas? "
"We are going to fetch you your bread and your butter,
Your beef, pork, and mutton, eggs, apples, and cheese."

 

"And where will you fetch it from, all you Big Steamers,
And where shall I write you when you are away? "
"We fetch it from Melbourne, Quebec, and Vancouver.
Address us at Hobart, Hong-kong, and Bombay."

 

"But if anything happened to all you Big Steamers,
And suppose you were wrecked up and down the salt sea?"
"Why, you'd have no coffee or bacon for breakfast,
And you'd have no muffins or toast for your tea."

 

"Then I'll pray for fine weather for all you Big Steamers
For little blue billows and breezes so soft."
"Oh, billows and breezes don't bother Big Steamers:
We're iron below and steel-rigging aloft."

 

"Then I'll build a new lighthouse for all you Big Steamers,
With plenty wise pilots to pilot you through."
"Oh, the Channel's as bright as a ball-room already,
And pilots are thicker than pilchards at Looe."

 

"Then what can I do for you, all you Big Steamers,
Oh, what can I do for your comfort and good?"
"Send out your big warships to watch your big waters,
That no one may stop us from bringing you food."

 

For the bread that you eat and the biscuits you nibble,
The sweets that you suck and the joints that you carve,
They are brought to you daily by All Us Big Steamers
And if any one hinders our coming you'll starve!"

 

Rudyard Kipling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunday, try bribery. It seems to work for everyone else. :)

 

QE2 putting to see also seems to have started a bit of a spat with the Russian navy...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40442058

 

Russia has dismissed the Royal Navy's new aircraft carrier as "just a convenient, large maritime target".

Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Maj Gen Igor Konashenkov was hitting back at the UK for criticism of Russia's ageing carrier Admiral Kuznetsov.

HMS Queen Elizabeth set sail on Monday from Rosyth dockyard in Scotland.

Later UK Defence Secretary Michael Fallon called the Admiral Kuznetsov "old, dilapidated". The ship sailed through the English Channel last year.

The 26-year-old Kuznetsov rarely goes anywhere without a naval tug, in case it breaks down.

Last October it was part of a Russian flotilla that sailed to Syrian coastal waters via the North Sea, English Channel and Mediterranean.

The thick, black smoke belching from the giant Soviet-era ship attracted some mockery on social media.

 

Planes flew bombing raids over Syria from the Admiral Kuznetsov - making it in Mr Fallon's words "a ship of shame". It is the only carrier in the Russian navy.

Russian airpower has given Syrian President Bashar al-Assad considerable muscle in his offensive against rebel groups, some of which are backed by the West.

Russians 'will admire'

Maj Gen Konashenkov said Mr Fallon's "exalted statements" about HMS Queen Elizabeth "demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge of naval science".

"Unlike the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, fitted with air-defence, anti-submarine and, most importantly, Granit anti-ship missile systems, the British aircraft carrier is just a convenient, large maritime target," he said.

At a cost of £3bn (€3.4bn; $3.8 billion) HMS Queen Elizabeth is the most powerful ship ever built for the Royal Navy. Its sister ship, HMS Prince of Wales, is also being built at Rosyth.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Fallon said "when you saw that old, dilapidated Kuznetsov sailing through the Channel, a few months ago, I think the Russians will look at this ship [HMS Queen Elizabeth] with a little bit of envy."

"We will take every precaution to make sure that they don't get too close, but I think they will be admiring her," he added.

 

 

Oh, ive a feeling this one is going to run and run....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they finally get some aircraft to fly off it, the Royal Navy is going to be able to put a pretty decent carrier battle group together. Have some T45's along for escort, T23 for ASW, maybe an Astute or two...

 

OK so that's basically the entire navy but it's still pretty respectable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK should release a statement saying that the Kuznetsov is just 'large convenient barge for tugging'. :P

Now thats just mean. Funny. But mean. :D

 

Really they should have built her with a nuclear power-plant. The Kievs always seem to have been good ships after all. And in fairness to her builders, the Chinese dont seem to have nearly so many problems with Varyag. Maybe the Russians just got the wrong one....

 

 

When they finally get some aircraft to fly off it, the Royal Navy is going to be able to put a pretty decent carrier battle group together. Have some T45's along for escort, T23 for ASW, maybe an Astute or two...

 

OK so that's basically the entire navy but it's still pretty respectable.

And that is the problem. Supposedly the rest of the Royal Navy's surface capability amounts to 19 ships, of which we have only 17 in service at one time. Which means that if we have some off gallivanting around the world on various roles, glad handing what have you, its going to be somewhat difficult to form a decent SAG to build around it. Worse, the RN is not going to have a complete replacement for the Type23. The current plan is supposedly a two tier approach, with 2 different frigates, one of which is going to replace the maritime patrol vessels. It sounds mightily a corvette.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_31_frigate

Of course we WILL have 8 Astutes at full strength, so like as not we will be able to commit at least one to a carrier battlegroup. And QE2 can of course carry Merlin, which are still among the best ASW Helo's in the world. So its a mixed picture, but not exactly a hopeless one. Presumably on most occasions (Falklands II excepted) we will have a few allies along to make up numbers.

 

 

Remember reading somewhere that USMC F-35B's might come aboard for periodic deployments. Anything to that?

I gather that is the current plan. In fact a documentary on one of the Invincible class carriers in the Med about 4 years back (I think it must have been Illustrious) showed USMC Harriers coming on board even back then for deck familiarization trials.

 

Supposedly they have been doing this since the old HMS Ark Royal. There are photos of RN Phantoms flying off the USS Independence IIRC, and though im told that it was not feasable the other way around, I vaguely recall someone mentioning an A6 flying off the Ark (or was it a Phantom?). So there is quite a history of cross decking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The UK should release a statement saying that the Kuznetsov is just 'large convenient barge for tugging'. :P

Now thats just mean. Funny. But mean. :D

 

Really they should have built her with a nuclear power-plant. The Kievs always seem to have been good ships after all. And in fairness to her builders, the Chinese dont seem to have nearly so many problems with Varyag. Maybe the Russians just got the wrong one....

 

Kievs had same problematic plant as Kuznetsov. Do you mean Kirov?

We don't know if Liaoning has propulsion issues, Chinese haven't revealed anything. Any way, the ships engines have seen 30 years less use than Kuz.

Propulsion issues in warships are commonplace. How many T45's were towed home this week? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's going to be a huge temptation to swap Type 31's for Type 26's if funds get tight (heaven forbid!).

 

There are quite a few frigates coming into service around Europe with quite decent anti-air capability that would make good escorts for a carrier. I'm sure the EU would be happy to lend a couple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The UK should release a statement saying that the Kuznetsov is just 'large convenient barge for tugging'. :P

Now thats just mean. Funny. But mean. :D

 

Really they should have built her with a nuclear power-plant. The Kievs always seem to have been good ships after all. And in fairness to her builders, the Chinese dont seem to have nearly so many problems with Varyag. Maybe the Russians just got the wrong one....

 

Kievs had same problematic plant as Kuznetsov. Do you mean Kirov?

We don't know if Liaoning has propulsion issues, Chinese haven't revealed anything. Any way, the ships engines have seen 30 years less use than Kuz.

Propulsion issues in warships are commonplace. How many T45's were towed home this week? :)

 

I thought the Kievs were nuclear powered?

 

Hmm, you are quite right, my bad. Wonder where I picked that up from. I thought they were nuclear powered with a steam plant backup like the Kirov's.

 

Perhaps, but one thing is notable how much lighter the smoke plume is. Maybe they just did a better job setting her up than the Russian navy did, or there was some improvements in construction we are not aware of.

 

 

Now thats just mean. Just because they cant afford all the PP-9s to keep the Type 45s operational. Dont you know there is an austerity on? :D

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The UK should release a statement saying that the Kuznetsov is just 'large convenient barge for tugging'. :P

Now thats just mean. Funny. But mean. :D

 

Really they should have built her with a nuclear power-plant. The Kievs always seem to have been good ships after all. And in fairness to her builders, the Chinese dont seem to have nearly so many problems with Varyag. Maybe the Russians just got the wrong one....

 

 

When they finally get some aircraft to fly off it, the Royal Navy is going to be able to put a pretty decent carrier battle group together. Have some T45's along for escort, T23 for ASW, maybe an Astute or two...

 

OK so that's basically the entire navy but it's still pretty respectable.

And that is the problem. Supposedly the rest of the Royal Navy's surface capability amounts to 19 ships, of which we have only 17 in service at one time. Which means that if we have some off gallivanting around the world on various roles, glad handing what have you, its going to be somewhat difficult to form a decent SAG to build around it. Worse, the RN is not going to have a complete replacement for the Type23. The current plan is supposedly a two tier approach, with 2 different frigates, one of which is going to replace the maritime patrol vessels. It sounds mightily a corvette.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_31_frigate

Of course we WILL have 8 Astutes at full strength, so like as not we will be able to commit at least one to a carrier battlegroup. And QE2 can of course carry Merlin, which are still among the best ASW Helo's in the world. So its a mixed picture, but not exactly a hopeless one. Presumably on most occasions (Falklands II excepted) we will have a few allies along to make up numbers.

 

 

Remember reading somewhere that USMC F-35B's might come aboard for periodic deployments. Anything to that?

I gather that is the current plan. In fact a documentary on one of the Invincible class carriers in the Med about 4 years back (I think it must have been Illustrious) showed USMC Harriers coming on board even back then for deck familiarization trials.

 

Supposedly they have been doing this since the old HMS Ark Royal. There are photos of RN Phantoms flying off the USS Independence IIRC, and though im told that it was not feasable the other way around, I vaguely recall someone mentioning an A6 flying off the Ark (or was it a Phantom?). So there is quite a history of cross decking.

 

 

19 and 17 in service?

 

I just did a quick count and the Royal Australian Navy has 14 surface combatants available, not including patrol boats.

 

I take it that Britannia not only no longer rules the waves but does not have the power projection to waive the rules..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it that Britannia not only no longer rules the waves but does not have the power projection to waive the rules..........

Latter is always the cheaper option, really.

Edited by Yama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The UK should release a statement saying that the Kuznetsov is just 'large convenient barge for tugging'. :P

Now thats just mean. Funny. But mean. :D

 

Really they should have built her with a nuclear power-plant. The Kievs always seem to have been good ships after all. And in fairness to her builders, the Chinese dont seem to have nearly so many problems with Varyag. Maybe the Russians just got the wrong one....

 

 

When they finally get some aircraft to fly off it, the Royal Navy is going to be able to put a pretty decent carrier battle group together. Have some T45's along for escort, T23 for ASW, maybe an Astute or two...

 

OK so that's basically the entire navy but it's still pretty respectable.

And that is the problem. Supposedly the rest of the Royal Navy's surface capability amounts to 19 ships, of which we have only 17 in service at one time. Which means that if we have some off gallivanting around the world on various roles, glad handing what have you, its going to be somewhat difficult to form a decent SAG to build around it. Worse, the RN is not going to have a complete replacement for the Type23. The current plan is supposedly a two tier approach, with 2 different frigates, one of which is going to replace the maritime patrol vessels. It sounds mightily a corvette.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_31_frigate

Of course we WILL have 8 Astutes at full strength, so like as not we will be able to commit at least one to a carrier battlegroup. And QE2 can of course carry Merlin, which are still among the best ASW Helo's in the world. So its a mixed picture, but not exactly a hopeless one. Presumably on most occasions (Falklands II excepted) we will have a few allies along to make up numbers.

 

 

Remember reading somewhere that USMC F-35B's might come aboard for periodic deployments. Anything to that?

I gather that is the current plan. In fact a documentary on one of the Invincible class carriers in the Med about 4 years back (I think it must have been Illustrious) showed USMC Harriers coming on board even back then for deck familiarization trials.

 

Supposedly they have been doing this since the old HMS Ark Royal. There are photos of RN Phantoms flying off the USS Independence IIRC, and though im told that it was not feasable the other way around, I vaguely recall someone mentioning an A6 flying off the Ark (or was it a Phantom?). So there is quite a history of cross decking.

 

 

19 and 17 in service?

 

I just did a quick count and the Royal Australian Navy has 14 surface combatants available, not including patrol boats.

 

I take it that Britannia not only no longer rules the waves but does not have the power projection to waive the rules..........

 

Well, you fellas are commonwealth, so if it all goes Pete Tong, we shall just have to have you Imperial Eastern Franchise owners come to our aid. Again. :)

 

Besides, that is not counting the RN's SSN capablity. Which whilst we still have Trafalgars in service, we are making good progress on replacing them with Astutes.

 

You could argue its a fallout of what we did in the 1980s, when we cut the RN to build up the Army in Europe. We had you could argue for the first time in years, a balanced military, a distinct departure for us because we prefered to always have the navy heavy on resources. The problem is with all the draw downs in defence spending, its rather left the RN poorly off, particularly post austerity. Doubly so because they are always expected to carry the can for developing the Trident capability, rather than would make sense, having all the services chip in for what is a national deterrent after all.

 

I think this is the most balanced commentary that ive seen. Its perfectly true that (remarkably) Corbyn was the only one who actually brought up the lack of RN ASW capablity in the election, though whether he would do anything about it is another matter.

https://www.warshipsifr.com/features/no-party-defence/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's going to be a huge temptation to swap Type 31's for Type 26's if funds get tight (heaven forbid!).

 

You mean apart from the original swap of half of one for the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not clear that Liaoning uses the original propulsion plant. I've never been able to establish what her plant is in open source.

The guy who fronted the purchase claims that the original propulsion was in place. Previously it was claimed that the hulk had no engines, but it was apparently all maskirovka, so other countries wouldn't fret over the sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those two separate islands just might make for interesting optical illusions in poor visibility...

This gives an idea of what I was referring to...trying to determine relative bearing and speed in fog/rain/darkness might be a bit confusing. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 and 17 in service?

 

I just did a quick count and the Royal Australian Navy has 14 surface combatants available, not including patrol boats.

11 RAN FF/DD vs 19 RN.

 

Did you include amphibious warfare units in your RAN tally?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they finally get some aircraft to fly off it, the Royal Navy is going to be able to put a pretty decent carrier battle group together. Have some T45's along for escort, T23 for ASW, maybe an Astute or two...

 

OK so that's basically the entire navy but it's still pretty respectable.

 

Don't forget HMS Victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...