Queen Elizabeth Carrier
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SW
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although to a point having more people is good, there is more to modern damage control than chucking 5 guys in dressed in an all-in-one jumper with loads of foam into a compartment that has a blazing oil fire in it. If you look up things like hi-fog (although I'm not sure if QE has this particular system) you can see that advances in technology really can do a better and more reliable job than people.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with switch on lofty.
Don't see a problem overall, as long as the ships company and their leaders are adaptable and up for the challenge of it all. HMS Ocean was lean manned from the start and after a bit of tweaking seemed to work reasonably well....
T45 have very modern FF systems, although FOST did make them go back to basics and relearn the art of FF and DC without their touch screen DC boards (so I heard).
If only the RN could learn to strip out the utter bull**** they inflict upon themselves, it would work.
Hope they have moved away from massive re-entry teams a-la HMS Invincible..use modern FF systems of which there are many.
In the Telegraph articles there are many mistakes, not least describing and spelling the big gym as a hanger, one of my pet hates.
It already seems a very long time since 800's SHAR left the decks for the last time. Expect most of the old gang are like me, happily far away from it all.
T45 have very modern FF systems, although FOST did make them go back to basics and relearn the art of FF and DC without their touch screen DC boards (so I heard).
If only the RN could learn to strip out the utter bull**** they inflict upon themselves, it would work.
Hope they have moved away from massive re-entry teams a-la HMS Invincible..use modern FF systems of which there are many.
In the Telegraph articles there are many mistakes, not least describing and spelling the big gym as a hanger, one of my pet hates.
It already seems a very long time since 800's SHAR left the decks for the last time. Expect most of the old gang are like me, happily far away from it all.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Still think the ship should have a proper angled deck with cats and traps; along with proper carrier aircraft that can cross deck with other allied navies!
But what do I know?
But what do I know?
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OOT you are so 1960's man....
Its all going to be very different mate, apparently. Anyway, will we even have any allies in the future to x deck with? Chinese Allies you mean?
When you think how long Illustrious has been around (launched December 1978, think Boney M were in the charts its that long ago) and how different things are now...to thinking about when QE is launched to how different things will be when she is old, it just freaks my mind. The ship will be fully broken in with a progression of people who have come through with her in what 2030? Seems distant and in the future in a big way. Its big enough to change with the times, just as Lusty has done.
God almighty Special Brew is strong stuff. Only had one can of it.
When you think how long Illustrious has been around (launched December 1978, think Boney M were in the charts its that long ago) and how different things are now...to thinking about when QE is launched to how different things will be when she is old, it just freaks my mind. The ship will be fully broken in with a progression of people who have come through with her in what 2030? Seems distant and in the future in a big way. Its big enough to change with the times, just as Lusty has done.
God almighty Special Brew is strong stuff. Only had one can of it.
There is a world of difference between the occasional cross decking and actually operating an aircraft squadron from different nations carriers. Just because something can land and take off, doesnt mean it can operate in a truly effective role from a carrier...
Dave
What I meant was -is that I thought that this class of ship was named after the first Queen Elizabeth not that it was the first class of ship so-named. It won't be the first ship called Prince of Wales either.
What I meant was -is that I thought that this class of ship was named after the first Queen Elizabeth not that it was the first class of ship so-named. It won't be the first ship called Prince of Wales either.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Were it named after the battleship, then the designation would be HMS Queen Elizabeth (II).
Were it named after the current Queen, then the designation would be HMS Queen Elizabeth II.
However, HRH has declared it is named after ALL the Queens named Elizabeth in the history of the nation -
Two Queen Regnants: Elizabeth I, Elizabeth II
Three Queen Consorts: Elizabeth Woodville (Edward IV), Elizabeth of York (Henry VII), Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (George VI)
Were it named after the current Queen, then the designation would be HMS Queen Elizabeth II.
However, HRH has declared it is named after ALL the Queens named Elizabeth in the history of the nation -
Two Queen Regnants: Elizabeth I, Elizabeth II
Three Queen Consorts: Elizabeth Woodville (Edward IV), Elizabeth of York (Henry VII), Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (George VI)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Royal Naval tradition, though, doesn't follow the foreign habit of parking succession numbers (in Roman numerals or not) after our warship names (standfast our Kings). The present day HMS ALBION has 8 predecessors.
Originally Posted by GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
Royal Naval tradition, though, doesn't follow the foreign habit of parking succession numbers (in Roman numerals or not) after our warship names (standfast our Kings)...
Also, some commissioned naval establishments (stone frigates) and depot ships, their satellites or successors have been allocated Roman numeral suffixes (e.g. HMS VICTORY I to HMS VICTORY XI) to help tell them apart.
Otherwise, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be interesting to see which other nations may cross deck in the future, with F-35B or Harriers or other rotary things. The RN has good experience of operating with the USMC but also the Italians and Spanish. Other nations who may end up with F-35B on a small deck (economics pending) are Japan and Australia, the Aussies are easy to work with but the Japanese would be novel.
The political benefits of being a deck-for-hire and being able to make it work well, meant CVS had all sorts of guest Squadrons embark. I don't see QEC being any different.
The political benefits of being a deck-for-hire and being able to make it work well, meant CVS had all sorts of guest Squadrons embark. I don't see QEC being any different.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The political benefits of being a deck-for-hire and being able to make it work well, meant CVS had all sorts of guest Squadrons embark. I don't see QEC being any different.
Does anybody else think the QECs are a hoofing big boat for such a small strike capability?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Umm, where did I put the Garmin?
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. The original '98 SDSR was pretty clear that a 'hoofing big boat with a small strike wing' was more useful than a small boat with a small strike wing.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK
Age: 40
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upto 40 aircraft is a hell of a strike capability especially when you consider the size of those craft. The large size also allows a much improved turn around time and therefore sortie rate which is the vital but sadly overlooked stat for carriers. During development back in the 80's(!) a 45/50 kt carrier design was considered but research indicated that for every 25% drop in carrier size the sortie rate halves.
A larger carrier also allows increased fuel and ammo storage reducing the frequency of replenishments at sea, risky manoeuvres that left the whole fleet incredibly vulnerable for hours at a time.
There are also the obvious inherent factors as well, a larger ship is more stable in more sea conditions allowing operations in previously unsuitable environments, especially combined with the ramp and also increased survivability as the relative size of any given impact is lower.
Steel is cheap and air is free, always make the ship as large as possible and worry about filling it when you have the money for equipment. Also a large carrier is a status symbol, one of the old vinces pulled into harbour and johnny foreigner struggled to see it, a Nimitz pulls up blocking out the sunlight and the message is put across.
A larger carrier also allows increased fuel and ammo storage reducing the frequency of replenishments at sea, risky manoeuvres that left the whole fleet incredibly vulnerable for hours at a time.
There are also the obvious inherent factors as well, a larger ship is more stable in more sea conditions allowing operations in previously unsuitable environments, especially combined with the ramp and also increased survivability as the relative size of any given impact is lower.
Steel is cheap and air is free, always make the ship as large as possible and worry about filling it when you have the money for equipment. Also a large carrier is a status symbol, one of the old vinces pulled into harbour and johnny foreigner struggled to see it, a Nimitz pulls up blocking out the sunlight and the message is put across.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upto 40 aircraft is a hell of a strike capability especially when you consider the size of those craft. The large size also allows a much improved turn around time and therefore sortie rate which is the vital but sadly overlooked stat for carriers.
"Really? In terms of FW there are USMC, Japan, Italy possibly Spain. Lots of opportunity for cross decking there."
I'll say it again - there is a VERY big difference between the odd spot of crossdecking, maybe up to an occasional exercise, and actually embarking foreign aircraft to sustain and support on operations.
Bluntly, I cannot think of a single occasion since WW2 where any nation has operated on a foreign nations carrier during operations, rather than done the odd landing and takeoff (but I am happy to be corrected).
I'll say it again - there is a VERY big difference between the odd spot of crossdecking, maybe up to an occasional exercise, and actually embarking foreign aircraft to sustain and support on operations.
Bluntly, I cannot think of a single occasion since WW2 where any nation has operated on a foreign nations carrier during operations, rather than done the odd landing and takeoff (but I am happy to be corrected).
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Down West
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wander00
Every one of the personnel on board will have completed ISSC and or BISSC training and will easily and smoothly fit into any emergency team they are allocated to. This includes the embarked CAG, which will mean that when the RAF boys and girls start coming on board as part of the CAG they will also have to comply. The days of “lily padding” and treating the ship as “just another airfield” while the sailors feed and accommodate you are over. No ISSC or BISSC, no cruise.
There are plenty of people to deal with emergency situations, after all how many matelots can you get round a hole! Don’t answer that. You can put out and contain a pretty big fire with relatively few well trained men.
Also, in answer to Nutloose’s comment about accommodation, the days of huge messdecks are well and truly gone and proper hot bunking went out with the old navy. Have a look online at the specs for the cabins.
Cheers now
Every one of the personnel on board will have completed ISSC and or BISSC training and will easily and smoothly fit into any emergency team they are allocated to. This includes the embarked CAG, which will mean that when the RAF boys and girls start coming on board as part of the CAG they will also have to comply. The days of “lily padding” and treating the ship as “just another airfield” while the sailors feed and accommodate you are over. No ISSC or BISSC, no cruise.
There are plenty of people to deal with emergency situations, after all how many matelots can you get round a hole! Don’t answer that. You can put out and contain a pretty big fire with relatively few well trained men.
Also, in answer to Nutloose’s comment about accommodation, the days of huge messdecks are well and truly gone and proper hot bunking went out with the old navy. Have a look online at the specs for the cabins.
Cheers now