Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Possibly this complexity is the Achilles heel of the entire concept.
Weapons that take a generation to bring into service are not practical for warfare, as they cannot be replaced if lost.
The Falklands effort saw a lot of creative and immediate improvisation. It might be useful for the RN to try to build on that achievement, even if only in studies, to stay abreast of what might usefully be done using such non standard methods.
Weapons that take a generation to bring into service are not practical for warfare, as they cannot be replaced if lost.
The Falklands effort saw a lot of creative and immediate improvisation. It might be useful for the RN to try to build on that achievement, even if only in studies, to stay abreast of what might usefully be done using such non standard methods.
I'm enjoying the TV series so far - they seem to be featuring an interesting spread of officers and ratings. I particularly liked the cheerful Muslim chef who got the ok from his imam to prepare pork as long as he wears gloves. Did I detect a note of regret when he explained that it's all right as long as he doesn't eat any!
So now she's holed up in sunny Portsmouth having new ballistic windows fitted to the bridge wings, a completely new anti slip decking surface fitted because the original wasn't prepared properly and is lifting.
NCO mess rebuilt cosmetically.
"Why should Britain tremble"
I can only assume (considering the size of our sodding navy) that a meeting was held all those years ago and NATO urged GB to take the lead on this to fill an ever increasing gap in the front line of the future. Are they contributing towards it? or are others doing their bit to hold NATO together?
So we have one of the biggest carriers in the world (without any aircraft of course - but they could always practice croquet or something) and 4 mickey mouse destroyers to protect it (half of which break down in the heat) and one nuke sub in trail.
So £6000million for the carrier, £1000 million each D class and £2000 million for the sub .
12 billion pounds and each piece of hardware keeps breaking down.
Be afraid world - be very afraid.
NCO mess rebuilt cosmetically.
"Why should Britain tremble"
I can only assume (considering the size of our sodding navy) that a meeting was held all those years ago and NATO urged GB to take the lead on this to fill an ever increasing gap in the front line of the future. Are they contributing towards it? or are others doing their bit to hold NATO together?
So we have one of the biggest carriers in the world (without any aircraft of course - but they could always practice croquet or something) and 4 mickey mouse destroyers to protect it (half of which break down in the heat) and one nuke sub in trail.
So £6000million for the carrier, £1000 million each D class and £2000 million for the sub .
12 billion pounds and each piece of hardware keeps breaking down.
Be afraid world - be very afraid.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,809
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
I detect a touch of negativity in that post. 
Should we all not be proud that it’s BRITISH? And built the British way, with errors such as the propellor shaft thrust bearing being incorrectly specified? At least the radar works (apparently) without a concrete insertion in lieu.
Should we all not be proud that it’s BRITISH? And built the British way, with errors such as the propellor shaft thrust bearing being incorrectly specified? At least the radar works (apparently) without a concrete insertion in lieu.
Thomas coupling,
So, you managed to watch the two programmes so far but seemingly didn't listen to any of the words? All your myths and inaccuracies were addressed if you'd cared to have listened.
But then I guess that wouldn't fit your whinging agenda would it?
So, you managed to watch the two programmes so far but seemingly didn't listen to any of the words? All your myths and inaccuracies were addressed if you'd cared to have listened.
But then I guess that wouldn't fit your whinging agenda would it?
It was designed by the French - Thales.
It has Phalanx I suppose so a 40yr old close defence gun which could deter drones?
Noticeably the Phalanx discharges its 4500 rounds within 1 minute. Each magazine of 3 (1500 in each) costs $135,000 once discharged, averaging $30/round of depleted uranium shells.
On three previous occasions, the gun has engaged drones @ sea (killing two sailors) and taken out an Intruder A6. It also locked onto the Missouri launching chaff at a range of 3 miles, hitting the ship with atleast 4 rounds.
Overall I believe the ship was built to take the gun to sea - because the gun seems to have a better war time record than the ship
At £650,000/day, shes' going to milk the budget dry before firing one shot in anger.
It has Phalanx I suppose so a 40yr old close defence gun which could deter drones?
Noticeably the Phalanx discharges its 4500 rounds within 1 minute. Each magazine of 3 (1500 in each) costs $135,000 once discharged, averaging $30/round of depleted uranium shells.
On three previous occasions, the gun has engaged drones @ sea (killing two sailors) and taken out an Intruder A6. It also locked onto the Missouri launching chaff at a range of 3 miles, hitting the ship with atleast 4 rounds.
Overall I believe the ship was built to take the gun to sea - because the gun seems to have a better war time record than the ship
At £650,000/day, shes' going to milk the budget dry before firing one shot in anger.
Thomas coupling,
NO it wasn't! You are years out of date. That was the initial design, THIS is an Aircraft carrier Alliance design.
The UK's last big carrier, HMS Ark Royal was, as the RN's most powerful warship, only armed with three saluting cannon...
NO it wasn't! You are years out of date. That was the initial design, THIS is an Aircraft carrier Alliance design.
The UK's last big carrier, HMS Ark Royal was, as the RN's most powerful warship, only armed with three saluting cannon...
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was designed by the French - Thales.
It has Phalanx I suppose so a 40yr old close defence gun which could deter drones?
Noticeably the Phalanx discharges its 4500 rounds within 1 minute. Each magazine of 3 (1500 in each) costs $135,000 once discharged, averaging $30/round of depleted uranium shells.
On three previous occasions, the gun has engaged drones @ sea (killing two sailors) and taken out an Intruder A6. It also locked onto the Missouri launching chaff at a range of 3 miles, hitting the ship with atleast 4 rounds.
Overall I believe the ship was built to take the gun to sea - because the gun seems to have a better war time record than the ship
At £650,000/day, shes' going to milk the budget dry before firing one shot in anger.
It has Phalanx I suppose so a 40yr old close defence gun which could deter drones?
Noticeably the Phalanx discharges its 4500 rounds within 1 minute. Each magazine of 3 (1500 in each) costs $135,000 once discharged, averaging $30/round of depleted uranium shells.
On three previous occasions, the gun has engaged drones @ sea (killing two sailors) and taken out an Intruder A6. It also locked onto the Missouri launching chaff at a range of 3 miles, hitting the ship with atleast 4 rounds.
Overall I believe the ship was built to take the gun to sea - because the gun seems to have a better war time record than the ship
At £650,000/day, shes' going to milk the budget dry before firing one shot in anger.
A very insightful post. But since you got it all wrong, your post provides insight into the author, and none at all into the ship or the weapons it employs.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thales has no naval architects. None. Zero. Nada. Bupkis.
And when you were there in 2007, it was already a five year old design.
If you really were there in 2007, you should be aware that the original design (that won the competition) predates that date by around 5 years. That design was subsequently matured as a joint effort as part of the ACA.
You're also being a little shy as to which British design company provided all that design expertise under contract. You know the one - it begins with B and ends in MT. Strangely none of their NArchs were based over the channel IIRC.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm. The Aircraft Carrier Alliance is a partnership of BAE Systems, Babcock International, Thales Group and the UK Ministry of Defence. LINK
Thales has no naval architects. None. Zero. Nada. Bupkis.
And when you were there in 2007, it was already a five year old design.
Thales has no naval architects. None. Zero. Nada. Bupkis.
And when you were there in 2007, it was already a five year old design.
I was there....
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/aircr...craft-carriers
"Thales is providing the communications systems on-board both carriers. The systems, from wireless on-board to satellite connectivity,.."
"Thales leads the Power and Propulsion element of the QEC programme..."
"...the long-range S1850M radar, which has been supplied by Thales ..."
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/unite...-success-story
"One of these is the leadership of the platform design and aviation teams..."
"... Thales has been deeply involved in the provision of the radar, communications, power and propulsion systems right from the start. ..."
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/unite...-years-service
Thales - A French MultiNational Company.
I was there..............................
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/aircr...craft-carriers
"Thales is providing the communications systems on-board both carriers. The systems, from wireless on-board to satellite connectivity,.."
"Thales leads the Power and Propulsion element of the QEC programme..."
"...the long-range S1850M radar, which has been supplied by Thales ..."
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/unite...-success-story
"One of these is the leadership of the platform design and aviation teams..."
"... Thales has been deeply involved in the provision of the radar, communications, power and propulsion systems right from the start. ..."
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/unite...-years-service
Thales - A French MultiNational Company.
I was there..............................
Last edited by Thomas coupling; 25th Apr 2018 at 08:03.
While the company website may put those stories out - as well they might - others who were there in 2002 and earlier also remember whose badges the people actually doing the design wore.....
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does looks as if they're having to re-do the deck coating. It seems odd that the need for a heat-tolerant anti-skid surface seems to have been recognized so late in the game. The NAVFAC spec sheet for land-based VL pads was issued in early 2010, I believe. Anyone know why this wasn't sorted out earlier for the QE?
Seeing a carrier alongside in Portsmouth for an upkeep period usually involves seeing that same carrier with some BFO tenting on deck for flightdeck coating prep and application. Happened frequently with CVS and will happen for QEC as required. I'd suspect that it's less to do with late recognition, more to do with the last instance of preparation and application. It's a newly developed coating system and applying it at large scale will be a learning exercise to start with. Even mature coating systems like camrex (which btw forms a fair amount of QEC FD coating) are not immune from application defects.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does looks as if they're having to re-do the deck coating. It seems odd that the need for a heat-tolerant anti-skid surface seems to have been recognized so late in the game. The NAVFAC spec sheet for land-based VL pads was issued in early 2010, I believe. Anyone know why this wasn't sorted out earlier for the QE?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/pict...st-ready-sail/
"Over the next few months we will finish compartment handovers, and complete work to coat the flight deck.
And almost a year later re coat it again, after intensive deck operations with F35b aircraft. [sic]
Or were they just accidentally obtuse? [not for the first time with this project]
Last edited by glad rag; 25th Apr 2018 at 18:52.
The flight deck coating should have been laid in dry, warm conditions....where was it originally laid, one asks?.......speaks volumes about QA for the QE.
This ship is dogged with problems which will take years to iron out. Let's hope she's not called up for action in that period.
Did you know that there are now problems with the exhaust speed of the F35 in VTOL configuration? Can the flt deck surface material cope?
The F35 also operates at 4 x the Db noise signature of the Harrier in the hover. How will flt deck crews cope with this?
This ship is dogged with problems which will take years to iron out. Let's hope she's not called up for action in that period.
Did you know that there are now problems with the exhaust speed of the F35 in VTOL configuration? Can the flt deck surface material cope?
The F35 also operates at 4 x the Db noise signature of the Harrier in the hover. How will flt deck crews cope with this?