Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Old 29th Nov 2019, 19:59
  #5741 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by Mogwi View Post
For the sake of historical accuracy, the first ever SRVL was carried out onboard HMS Hermes.......
Is there a specific reason why SRVL was only used on Sea Harrier in an emergency, rather than as a routine procedure as is planned for F-35B? Was it just unnecessary, or was it thought about but aircraft/ship were unsuitable?
Video Mixdown is online now  
Old 29th Nov 2019, 22:19
  #5742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Here 'n' there!
Posts: 277
Originally Posted by Video Mixdown View Post
Is there a specific reason why SRVL was only used on Sea Harrier in an emergency, rather than as a routine procedure as is planned for F-35B? Was it just unnecessary, or was it thought about but aircraft/ship were unsuitable?
While not involved in formal discussions on the topic (being a simple humble Spanners) I think it was down to deck logistics. The aft end was always full of SHARs ranged round the aft deck, tails over the oggin. To do a SRVL would, from my memories, have involved clearing the deck. The new carriers are much wider, presumably designed with SRVL or even CTOL in mind. Don't forget, IIR, the CVS was originally to support RW only. The fact the SHAR appeared was one of those decisions back in the early '70's when the full impact of the demise of the old Ark Royal with the F4 was realised. Before my time that discussion! Others may/will know more! Once at sea with the SHAR, the practical limitations vis-a-vie returning to Mum with any payload were fully realised and the F35 SRVL requirement was probably derived from that experience. Lesson learned? For once, looks that way! Cheers, H 'n' H
Hot 'n' High is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2019, 23:49
  #5743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,235
Originally Posted by Hot 'n' High View Post
The new carriers are much wider, presumably designed with SRVL or even CTOL in mind.
Definitely, the deskspace was designed to allow for an angled deck if they had pursued the CATOBAR option
Davef68 is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2019, 09:10
  #5744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
Continuing to delve into the latest World Naval Review in their review of the future of the USN CVN 's they point out that it costs as much to refuel a Ford as it would have cost to buy a QE - thus the proposal in Feb 2019 (rescinded) not to extend the life of the Harry S Truman and use the money elsewhere.

A QE could operate a small airwing and if equipped with drones could have a similar reach to a Ford - which has all the bells and whistles but operates aircraft of limited range
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2019, 13:02
  #5745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 350/3 Compton
Age: 71
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by Video Mixdown View Post
Is there a specific reason why SRVL was only used on Sea Harrier in an emergency, rather than as a routine procedure as is planned for F-35B? Was it just unnecessary, or was it thought about but aircraft/ship were unsuitable?
Yes, the manoeuvre was deemed to carry unwarranted risk because of the restricted deck width and poor braking ability of the SHAR on a wet (slippery) deck. It was therefore not cleared for use aboard CVS. However - needs must and yes, the deck was cleared of all aircraft except in the "graveyard" forward of the island for my landing. Actually managed to stop the jet just short of the ramp!

Mog
Mogwi is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2019, 13:42
  #5746 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by Mogwi View Post


Yes, the manoeuvre was deemed to carry unwarranted risk because of the restricted deck width and poor braking ability of the SHAR on a wet (slippery) deck. It was therefore not cleared for use aboard CVS. However - needs must and yes, the deck was cleared of all aircraft except in the "graveyard" forward of the island for my landing. Actually managed to stop the jet just short of the ramp!

Mog
Thanks, and much respect. Certainly the deck of Invincible Class looks tiny compared to QE Class. I guess F-35B has better brakes too!
Video Mixdown is online now  
Old 4th Dec 2019, 22:07
  #5747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Scotland
Age: 50
Posts: 156
Due to the rising price of the F-35, MOD have been studying an alternative aircraft that's substantially more affordable & easily guarantees that a full compliment of aircraft can be carried aboard it's QE class carriers at all times. "Surge" capacity of the aircraft is expected to be around 678 airframes (captain has to stay onboard..) which is considerably better than the F-35's apparent 70. Other benefits over the F-35 are considerably better range, improved engine redundancy, lower surface / paint maintenance costs (plane & deck!), cheaper helmet, zero IP costs or consideration, ability to launch / recover directly from both hanger & head & even an integrated flag post!

It's rumoured that the alternative aircraft is being looked at favourably as it uses a similar adjustable four nozzle propulsion system to RN's proven but now retired SHAR aircraft.

Insiders have suggested that plans are already underway to replace 10 F-35's per carrier with the alternative aircraft & utilise the small change to procure an additional two Daring Class destroyers for additional carrier group protection.

The video is pretty good but I can't get it working..., so;




Last edited by Senior Pilot; 8th Dec 2019 at 08:52. Reason: Fix YouTube link
Thrust Augmentation is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 08:20
  #5748 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,075
ORAC is online now  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 08:39
  #5749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
I suspect that will be quite a common sight in Portsmouth.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 13:14
  #5750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,448
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
I suspect that will be quite a common sight in Portsmouth.
Very good!

ORAC, did you see the caption for that picture in The Times - 'HMS Queen Elizabeth, right, arrives at Portsmouth naval base before docking next to its identical sister ship, HMS Prince of Wales, for the first time. Each carrier can support 70 fighter aircraft'
Background Noise is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 06:56
  #5751 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,075
ORAC is online now  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 08:38
  #5752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
You can see the F-35 special deck coating areas clearly in that shot
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2019, 16:11
  #5753 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,448
Originally Posted by A56
I suspect that will be quite a common sight in Portsmouth.
As their home port, yes from time to time. However both carriers are going to be busy in various roles. Not only did the WESTLANT 19 deployment involve normal RN/RAF Pilots operating F-35B from from the deck (and embarked USMC ones) from the deck of HMS Queen Elizabeth but a range of missions were rehearsed. Three embarked Merlin HM2s did ASW in conjunction with the towed array sonar equipped HMS Northumberland (which also had a Merlin) and proved the ability to do continuous ASW. The embarked Jungly HC4s and the embarked Royal Marines exercised their skills.

Both carriers are now in commission and flying the White Ensign.

Commissioning Day for HMS Prince of Wales

WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2019, 20:27
  #5754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 196
I love those jet exhaust carbon deposits on the deck of Queen Liz.

It brings the ship alive.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2019, 11:16
  #5755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by Background Noise View Post
Very good!

ORAC, did you see the caption for that picture in The Times - 'HMS Queen Elizabeth, right, arrives at Portsmouth naval base before docking next to its identical sister ship, HMS Prince of Wales, for the first time. Each carrier can support 70 fighter aircraft'
I feel sure the Indian Navy will have no problem filling the deck with 70 aircraft.
andrewn is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2019, 12:49
  #5756 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic View Post
As their home port, yes from time to time. However both carriers are going to be busy in various roles. Not only did the WESTLANT 19 deployment involve normal RN/RAF Pilots operating F-35B from from the deck (and embarked USMC ones) from the deck of HMS Queen Elizabeth but a range of missions were rehearsed. Three embarked Merlin HM2s did ASW in conjunction with the towed array sonar equipped HMS Northumberland (which also had a Merlin) and proved the ability to do continuous ASW. The embarked Jungly HC4s and the embarked Royal Marines exercised their skills.
Both carriers are now in commission and flying the White Ensign.
There are stories that a RAF/RN F-35B that stayed aboard QNLZ for repair/maintenance after WESTLANT 19 is to be launched for return to Marham whilst the ship is moored in Portsmouth. I've seen video of F-35's performing ski-jump take-offs from shore-based ramps, so do I take it that lack of wind over the deck is not a limiting factor?
https://www.forces.net/news/why-f-35...ueen-elizabeth
Video Mixdown is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2019, 14:48
  #5757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somerset
Posts: 69
Originally Posted by Video Mixdown View Post
There are stories that a RAF/RN F-35B that stayed aboard QNLZ for repair/maintenance after WESTLANT 19 is to be launched for return to Marham whilst the ship is moored in Portsmouth. I've seen video of F-35's performing ski-jump take-offs from shore-based ramps, so do I take it that lack of wind over the deck is not a limiting factor?
https://www.forces.net/news/why-f-35...ueen-elizabeth
The required wind will be highly dependent on the AUM of the launching aircraft. Wind direction will also have to be in limits. It will all be set out in the ship operating limits which are the principal product of the First-of-Class Flying Trials (done last year I think).

The RN used to have Aircraft Lighters specifically for getting stranded (bent or U/S) aircraft ashore from carriers. One got turned into the Dummy Deck. I wonder where the others went?

N
Bengo is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2019, 15:02
  #5758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 1,537
Picked a bad week for the first in-harbour launch.....doubt it'll get away before Monday, given forecasts.

Lighters only really useful if you have a contiguous RNAY - which we don't anymore. If they wanted to take it by road, it'd be off the deck edge lift onto the quayside. But it won't.

It will be loud. Watched Hermes launch half a dozen SHAR in Portsmouth back in 82 and still remember it to this day.
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2019, 17:31
  #5759 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,235
Is VTO ruled out for the F-35? I've seen video of test aircraft doing it.
Davef68 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2019, 08:10
  #5760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
Not ruled out - justt be avaoided if possible I think.......... it's very inefficient but it might be used to say cross deck to something close
Asturias56 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.