ONLY the non birdie fish head crew here:

That seems wildly over officered at the OF-4 Commander (Lt Col equivalent) level for 672 all ranks setup. Especially, as on top of this will be the flag officer and all his hangers on.

EG

1 x SO1 head of each area plus XO and a couple of other roles. Doesn't seem over manned to me, seems about right to recognise senior ship needing senior experience - also helpful to provide career path for officers going through system too.

With the exception of The Commander (which is his title as well as his rank), the other SO1s will be double-hatted as part of the CSG staff, and expected to have CSG/TG roles as well.

The Commander runs the ship internally, allowing The Captain (again, position as well as rank) to look "up and out".

WEBF,

I'm sorry but ultimately a carrier is a floating airfield, but with more complication than a land-based airfield. Cdre Jerry Kyd has even said so himself, on the record, and he's skipper of QNLZ.

Other than the Ship being on DFC, ostensibly assuring that recoveries are "into wind" and maximise WOD to reduce relative speed over the deck on landing, all the other things you list are just as applicable to an airfield.

You can squinny all you want about my point of view, but I've plenty of experience flying from land and carriers. Bottom line: the carrier is a floating airfield and has all the departments and procedures required to make it an effective one. They are slightly modified to land-based, but that's only to achieve a safe launch and recovery.

A longtime poster to this forum (not me) would disagree 'MSOCS'. Sadly the 10 page PDF article attached MAY be on the internet somewhere but for the moment it is here. Page 2 with sub heading "The Airfield and the Aircraft Carrier Compared" is particularly relevant.

Stop baiting @MSOCS. You'll only make him squinny that a destroyer or frigate is no more than a floating missile/gun battery. ;)

His parochial point of view amply demonstrates why FAA aircrew have such a better understanding of maritime power and the versatility of warships, especially aircraft carriers.

Some HOO and then some HAA about JPALS for CVFs and then some Helioplickers? Come on. USN wouldn't have a bar of it - not even maybe Super Hornets (but may change).

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/0...ince_of_wales/
&
'No decision' on Raytheon GPS landing system aboard Brit aircraft carriers ? The Register

Indeed, and not just aircrew. MSOCS and his like forget that an aircraft carrier is a WARSHIP. Satisfactory operation of the weapon system requires very close coordination of all the ship's departments. As an example see this:
http://www.pprune.org/members/193850...ands-on002.jpg
Judging by the position fot the splash target, which is about half a mile (1.5mins at 20kt) astern, and has yet to complete the turn, the ship has been steady on the flying course for less than a minute; and the first aircraft is crossing the round-down, with the next turning onto finals. Meanwhile, on the horizon, whilst the main body steams blithely on and the anti-submarine screen has been adjusted to cover the carrier. I'd like to see any shore-based ATCO pull off that feat of timing.

No landing but overflight QE - hells bells.

Is it actually illegal?

It should be but it would be an interesting charge to frame......

Yes.

S-D

What's the charge? What laws broken? Not a drone flyer. Its not an RN dockyard or MOD base...its Invergordon.
Is it proximity to a maritime vessel that's the law breaker?
I've been listening to the commentary posted on you tube. The operator of the drone actually went up to explain himself to the RN but couldn't get past the MOD police at the gate.
Surprised the RN haven't got an armed upper deck sentry or two about for this sort of thing. But realistically what could they do anyway? Outside ROE that's for sure!
You can clearly see the MOD craft in the background.
The beauty and ability of a semi skilled drone operation very plain to see (and we are going to see a lot more).

Warship? You believe the Carrier is the same sort of warship as an FFDD?! Cdre Kyd has himself stated that the carrier "is a floating airfield", so he (I presume) is also of "my ilk". Seriously, the floating airfield requires defending - not like many land-based airfields sure, but FOBs require defences of a different nature - but ultimately the weapon system on a carrier are the organic assets that take off and land on it. A couple of CIWS and .50 cals does not make the carrier the same "ilk" of warship as an FFDD. Not by a long stretch, yet the fundamentals of fire and flood control, manoeuvres and air C2 endure.

Stop deluding yourselves - the Captain of HMS Queen Elizabeth hath said so from his very mouth and he knows better than you!

Oh, and ref your elitist point about land-based AFCO successfully carrying out the timing, i've personally witnessed absolute carnage at sea when I flew Harriers from CVS's....at one stage we were invited to conduct Case 3 approaches and join the "cake stand", only to have to point out to the sea-based ATCO that the cake stand at that time was in a mountain. The ship was too close to land and pointing the wrong way. Oh, and not to mention the numerous times "mother" wasn't where she promised she'd be at the end of a mission when fuel was low... Don't be too smug about crabs vs fish heads; both have stunned and embarrassed themselves in equal measure and neither can claim superiority over the other.

Air Navigation Order 2016

Small unmanned surveillance aircraft

95.—(1) The person in charge of a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not fly the aircraft in any of the circumstances described in paragraph (2) except in accordance with a permission issued by the CAA.

(2) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (1) are—

(a)over or within 150 metres of any congested area;

(b)over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons;

(c)within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft; or

(d)subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), within 50 metres of any person.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), during take-off or landing, a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not be flown within 30 metres of any person.

(4) Paragraphs (2)(d) and (3) do not apply to the person in charge of the small unmanned surveillance aircraft or a person under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft.

(5) In this article, “a small unmanned surveillance aircraft” means a small unmanned aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data acquisition.

Two UK papers state the drone landed on deck to take a photo - here is one of 'em - pics on facefook apparently (I'm not on it though).

HMS Queen Elizabeth is outmanoeuvred by a £300 drone | Daily Mail Online
&
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/0...=1502485602065

CDRE Kyd is a fish head [p'raps has caught some crabspeak dis ease about 'hotels afloat with golf courses'] seems to me - albeit former captain of HMS Ark Royal - thusly he speaks 'oddly' of birdie issues whilst birdies will (whenever motivated) speak oddly of fish head issues. I personally would not trust a fish head to speak precisely of birdie dogma. :} JACKspeak is a wonderful thing, one of the nicest inventions of the RN transferred for example to the RAN and of course modified and modified again in the RAN FAA etc.

The yank birdies 'brown shoes' like to gee up the 'black shoe' fish heads by 'landing on the boat' (aircraft carrier). Youse know the drill. I like to 'suck back in the hold back' but do I need to explain? Anyhoo I'll look out the winda (porthole) or maybe go up on the roof (fright deck).

AND... just to DRONE ON.... https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/comm...-unchallenged/

Source for Jerry Kyd quote?
 

FFs and DDs are warships that incorporate helos among their weapons systems. Likewise, carriers are warships that incorporate aircraft among their weapons systems although they are able to carry a greater number and wider variety depending on their mission.

I'd be very interested in seeing any source in which Jerry Kyd concedes that an aircraft carrier is no more than a floating airfield, particularly in view of this:To my mind, he seems to view carriers as somewhat more than floating airfields.

HMS Queen Elizabeth Takes To The Seas

"She's a mobile, four and a half acre AIRFIELD...." 0:35

Which is exactly what she is. "She isn't just a ship" by any means...far from it. QEC will project AIR POWER from the sea for decades to come. However, if you wish to promote her bite, please remember that her teeth are the embarked air and RM assets. The ship's raison d'être is to get the embarked "teeth" arms where they need to be to achieve the broader mission. It isn't a Dreadnought. It's a mobile, four and a half acre AIRFIELD, as the good Cdre clearly states.