Future Carrier (Including Costs)

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by chevvron

It was a pretty ropey landing anyway. Became very unstable in the last few feet and after touchdown looked like it was going for the island until the brakes were jammed on hard..

Thinking about it, needs to be landed further up the deck to avoid turbulence caused by the airflow spilling down off the stern (round down).
Lt Cdr John Sproule did some trials in the late '40s using gliders and he found that out; I'm surprised the sponsors of the UAV didn't research that.

[Video Mixdown]

Originally Posted by chevvron

I'll do it in a microlight; even cheaper.

The point is not to waste fuel and payload carrying militarily useless people around.

[rattman]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

The USN haven't actually launched and recovered a UAV yet? t.

XB-47b did arrested landing and catapult take offs in the early 2010's

still waiting for the MQ-35 but they seem to consider it already done thing as deck handling and operations seem to be more important

[SpazSinbad]

More detail & perhaps a better video without bug smashing : https://www.navalnews.com/event-news...ns-capability/

Drone makes history landing on Royal Navy aircraft carrier at sea

You Tube

[SpazSinbad]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Thinking about it, needs to be landed further up the deck to avoid turbulence caused by the airflow spilling down off the stern (round down).
Lt Cdr John Sproule did some trials in the late '40s using gliders and he found that out; I'm surprised the sponsors of the UAV didn't research that.

How do you know the BURBLE was not researched by the 'sponsors of the UAV' [who are?]. In any event as has been suggested the BURBLE is well known by all Naval Air Arms. BAE did research for QE Class for their SIMULATOR. I've read that even knowing about the burble does not mean it can be anticipated well by a carrier pilot due to many variables of WOD. For me in an A4G aboard HMAS Melbourne with a 5.5 degree angle deck it was never talked about. We had enough to contend with at the time.

Flying Without Wings INGENIA Issue 76, Sep 2018
FROM: https://www.ingenia.org.uk/ingenia/i...-without-wings
“A visualisation of vortices being shed from the superstructure as wind flows around the aircraft carrier, modelled using computational fluid dynamics. This is an example of the air-wake models being integrated into the F-35/QEC integration simulator © University of Liverpool”

https://www.ingenia.org.uk/getattach...ebb4d9d/f3.jpg

"...A hugely significant – and world-leading – advance was made in terms of integrating air-wake modelling into the F-35B flight simulator. “If you imagine the air flowing over the sea,” Dr Hodge explains, “it starts to create vortices and turbulence whenever it hits the ship. The angle the wind hits the ship at creates different patterns of airflow over the deck and around the ship. The pilot has to fly through the turbulent air wake behind the carrier in order to land on it, so it’s been really important to model that ship air wake in order to make the simulator as realistic as possible.” ..."

OLDE VaudyVile Joke 'bout a bolt of cheap cloth: "Never Mind the Quality - Feel the Width" of the QE Class from glideslope view.

[chopper2004]

Originally Posted by Lima Juliet

Video Mixdown - I’ll do it for you in a Cessna 172. I’ll carry more, go faster, be less of a risk to those on deck, probably be cheaper and won’t need an airspace reservation…

Its been done before, Op Frequent Wind withdrawal from Vietnam

You Tube

cheers

[SLXOwft]

Never Mind the Quality - Feel the Width" of the QE Class from glideslope view.

Reminds me of the relative wingspans of F-35B 10.7m, MQ-9 (A) 20m (B) 24m (proposed B-STOL with Mojave based wing) ?m, Mojave 16m, MQ-25 22.9m versus the potentially usable (for fixed wing ops) of the total 70m width of the flight deck. For comparison the W-AS HCMC UAS is 10m. It strikes me that given flight deck and hangar deck space limitation, and the question of how many types is it sensible to operate, UCAS COD will be better done in the medium to long term as a secondary role of an RPAS/UCAS with an operational role e.g. AEW or ASW unles they are only used for a quck turn-around two-way tasking.

Although based on the MQ-9 the Mojave is smaller and has a new wing designed for STOL performance, As far as I can tell it has no capacity for internal stores and can carry 225kg on the fusealage station plus a max of 835 kg per wing. One assumes any operational buy of a GA system would be a larger MQ-9B Sea Guardian STOL development. In an ideal world there would be a stubbier winged STOL version of the MQ-25 available for AAR to extend F-35B range.

Mojave showing wing


Source: General Atomics Aeronautical

[Asturias56]

On another thread ORAC posted the link below - the report contains some interesting observations on F-35 purchases and tasking and the continued drift in Crowsnest

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...78/report.html

Aviation Procurement: Winging it?

This is a House of Commons Committee report, with recommendations to government. The Government has two months to respond.
ORAC is online now

[ORAC]

BZ and welcome home.

Vanguard class submarine inbound to Falsane today after a patrol lasting more than 6 months.

​​​​​​​https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...caked-in-algae

[Asturias56]

I LOVE that special camouflage paint...................................

[SLXOwft]

HMS Queen Elizabeth has sailed on the first part of her final deployment before her first refit. 8 (617 Sqn) F35s, 5 (820 NAS) Merlins (roled as 3 ASW / 2 ASAC) and 3 CHF (847 NAS) Wildcats. Call me naive, but how are three ASW and 2 ASAC cabs supposed to maintain an effective continuous screen?
Escorts are Diamond, Kent and one assumes an unannounced SSN, will be joined by a RNorN Frigate and various other non-UK escorts will come and go and another RN FF is due to join possibly Somerset if her current problems are fixed and her MOSS/NSM 'conversion' is signed off.
RFA Tideforce is the support vessel as RFA Fort Victoria is unavailable, another procurement cockup coming home to roost.

[ORAC]

https://x.com/navylookout/status/170...HhlFHGKbTPQr_A

Yesterday Babcock plc announced they have formed a strategic partnership with Saab

Together they will develop a design for an advanced corvette (initially to meet Swedish Navy requirement).

https://www.babcockinternational.com...ent-with-saab/

https://www.babcockinternational.com...ectors/marine/

[Asturias56]

"Corvettes" have become a forgotten species in the UK - in general the need for more space for crew and advanced systems has led to funds being spent at the top end of the range - most modern frigates are bigger than destroyers in the past and a modern destroyer is bigger than a WW2 Cruiser. Freidmanns "British Destroyers" is very illuminating.

Of course the RN have the River Class - which really were originally bought to keep certain yards open rather than to fit any specific requirement but they've proved invaluable for low intensity work.

[SLXOwft]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"Corvettes" have become a forgotten species in the UK - in general the need for more space for crew and advanced systems has led to funds being spent at the top end of the range - most modern frigates are bigger than destroyers in the past and a modern destroyer is bigger than a WW2 Cruiser. Freidmanns "British Destroyers" is very illuminating.

Of course the RN have the River Class - which really were originally bought to keep certain yards open rather than to fit any specific requirement but they've proved invaluable for low intensity work.

More that Corvette and Sloop were considered obsolete terms post-WWII and they were reclassified as frigates (Sloop had gone in theory but not practice in 1937). The River Class displacement is roughly double that of WWII Cs and Ss but unlike the Rivers they had substantial armament e.g. 4-inch guns, modern corvettes tend to have ASM and sometimes SAM fit also the capability (as do the River's) of carrying but not hangaring a helicopter though some have foldable hangars. In respect of sloops, my late father did not have fond memories of the impossibility of staying warm while keeping watch on a sloop's open bridge north of the Arctic Circle and trying to find U-boats to sink.

There was a modern sloop class proposed to fill part of the global combat ship requirement but it was rejected.

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

Of course the RN have the River Class - which really were originally bought to keep certain yards open as part of the ToBA agreed with BVT as part of Labours Maritime Industrial Strategy to maintain a complex warship building capability rather than to fit any specific requirement but they've proved invaluable for low intensity work.

Fixed. FoC

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Originally Posted by SLXOwft

HMS Queen Elizabeth has sailed on the first part of her final deployment before her first refit. 8 (617 Sqn) F35s, 5 (820 NAS) Merlins (roled as 3 ASW / 2 ASAC) and 3 CHF (847 NAS) Wildcats. Call me naive, but how are three ASW and 2 ASAC cabs supposed to maintain an effective continuous screen?
Escorts are Diamond, Kent and one assumes an unannounced SSN, will be joined by a RNorN Frigate and various other non-UK escorts will come and go and another RN FF is due to join possibly Somerset if her current problems are fixed and her MOSS/NSM 'conversion' is signed off.
RFA Tideforce is the support vessel as RFA Fort Victoria is unavailable, another procurement cockup coming home to roost.

Not sure that the Pingers maintain a screen the way they did in the old days. Instead they work hand in glove with the towed array equipped frigates. However, only having one carrier dedicated squadron and two carriers is causing issues - part of 820 NAS is aboard of HMS Prince of Wales.

On both sides of the Atlantic, carrier deployments are now described in terms of maintaining freedom to use the sea:

On Friday 08 September 2023, HMS Queen Elizabeth put to sea on NATO tasking: Royal Navy flagship sails to lead international Carrier Strike Group deployment

Britain’s flagship HMS Queen Elizabeth sailed from Portsmouth to head north and lead a Carrier Strike Group deployment alongside ships from partner nations.

The aircraft carrier, crewed by up to 900 sailors, with her F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters and Merlin and Wildcat helicopters will lead a mixed group of warships from various nations as they head to the Norwegian Sea and waters of northern Europe.

The UK Carrier Strike Group deployment comes just days after HMS Prince of Wales departed Portsmouth for the United States, where she will undergo trials and operate a multitude of aircraft and drones.

First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Ben Key, said: “It is great to see HMS Queen Elizabeth deploying once again to exercise and operate with our allies and partners, demonstrating our commitment to maintaining free and open use of the oceans for all..."

This of course is not the first time that HMS Queen Elizabeth has made a major contribution to NATO maritime activities - the first week of the CSG21 deployment included participation in Exercise Steadfast Defender.

The United States also describes carrier operations in the NATO area in terms of maintaining freedom of the seas.

The Navy Just Sent Its Most Powerful Aircraft Carrier To Russia’s Military Backyard - 1945

The USS Gerald R. Ford deployed with the rest of the strike group in May for its first worldwide deployment. During its month traveling to the Mediterranean, the nuclear-powered supercarrier made a port call in Oslo, Norway. It went under NATO command while sailing in the Arctic Circle. Indeed, Russia was watching closely.

“Our presence at sea throughout the deployment will provide reassurance to our allies and partners that sea lanes will remain open, and our joint operations will demonstrate our commitment to interoperability and maritime stability,” Rear Adm. Greg Huffman, commander of Carrier Strike Group 12, said in a statement in June.

[SLXOwft]

Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic

Not sure that the Pingers maintain a screen the way they did in the old days. Instead they work hand in glove with the towed array equipped frigates. However, only having one carrier dedicated squadron and two carriers is causing issues - part of 820 NAS is aboard of HMS Prince of Wales.

Granted doctrine has changed since my time but on CSG21 QE had 4 pingers and 3 baggers. Even when another asset has reported a POSSUB the Merlin(s) is(are) going to have to conduct a search to find and confirm. Which leads to the assumption of P-8 and SSN support to supplement the 2 FFs. Are we assuming a non-UK asset will be providing the air picture beyond the range of the Sampson and S1850M for close to the sea surface threats some of the time?

I think 820 NAS having reponsiblity for two ships is a red herring, having only 30 Merlin HM2s with up to 10 fitted with Crowsnest more allocated to 814 NAS to provide non-carrier ASW assets and 824 NAS to provide training and those undergoing Crowsnest compatibility conversions and those in deep maintenance those available for ASW tasking on two carriers operating simultaneously are way too few,

“In terms of the number of people we need to operate those aircraft, we will have approximately 60 aircrew and about 130 engineers and other support staff. That will give us the ability to fly aircraft 24 hours a day with between two and three lines, constantly supporting and protecting the carrier and the strike group.”

Cdr Ian Varley RN, CO 820 NAS during CSG 21,

[Asturias56]

"That will give us the ability to fly aircraft 24 hours a day with between two and three lines, "

For how many days? It's all another case of spreading the jam too thinly

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Originally Posted by SLXOwft

Granted doctrine has changed since my time but on CSG21 QE had 4 pingers and 3 baggers. Even when another asset has reported a POSSUB the Merlin(s) is(are) going to have to conduct a search to find and confirm. Which leads to the assumption of P-8 and SSN support to supplement the 2 FFs. Are we assuming a non-UK asset will be providing the air picture beyond the range of the Sampson and S1850M for close to the sea surface threats some of the time?

I think 820 NAS having reponsiblity for two ships is a red herring, having only 30 Merlin HM2s with up to 10 fitted with Crowsnest more allocated to 814 NAS to provide non-carrier ASW assets and 824 NAS to provide training and those undergoing Crowsnest compatibility conversions and those in deep maintenance those available for ASW tasking on two carriers operating simultaneously are way too few,

By dividing 820 between the two carriers I meant having to put aircraft and personnel aboard both at the same time. This is why there are projects to try to develop a UAV to augment them, and to remove the AEW role from the Merlin HM2.

If only all forty odd HM1s had been converted to HM2 standard, but somebody said that history had ended, and the politicians believed it.

[Asturias56]

"If only all forty odd HM1s had been converted to HM2 standard"

We don't always agree - but you're right on this one - it would have been relatively cheap to do the lot -but as usual penny pinching was the order of the day