|
Odd then that the worlds largest useer of carriers has never adopted twin peaks........................
|
"One large island" was a characteristic of the previous generation of RN carriers. So, in that regard, two islands are an improvement (more useable deck space). With nuclear power, one small (& getting smaller) island is more than sufficient.
|
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 9866534)
Odd then that the worlds largest useer of carriers has never adopted twin peaks........................
"Many have wondered why HMS Queen Elizabeth has two ‘islands’. Here we consider why she is the first aircraft carrier in the world to adopt this unique arrangement and the benefits it brings. Redundancy and separation can be good In a moment of inspiration back in 2001, an RN officer serving with the Thales CVF design team developing initial concepts for what became the Queen Elizabeth Class, hit upon the idea of separate islands. There are several advantages to this design but the most compelling reason for the twin islands is to space out the funnels, allowing greater separation between the engines below. QEC has duplicated main and secondary machinery in two complexes with independent uptakes and downtakes in each of the two islands. The separation provides a measure of redundancy, it increases the chances one propulsion system will remain operational in the event of action damage to the other. Gas turbine engines (situated in the sponsons directly below each island of the QEC) by their nature require larger funnels and downtakes than the diesel engines (in the bottom of the ship). The twin island design helps minimise their impact on the internal layout. In a conventional single-island carrier design, either you have to have a very long island (like the Invincible class) which reduces flight deck space or, the exhaust trunkings have to be channelled up into a smaller space. There are limits to the angles this pipework may take which can affect the space available for the hangar. The uptakes can also create vulnerabilities, the third HMS Ark Royal was lost to a single torpedo hit in 1941, partly due to progressive engine room flooding through funnel uptakes...." |
well I suppose it also helps identify them at a glance....................
|
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 9866534)
Odd then that the worlds largest useer of carriers has never adopted twin peaks........................
|
Nicely put, Bing!
|
How many hidden, lethal and modern submarines [missile or hunter-killer] could I buy instead of two QE carriers fully crewed and equipped with aircraft?
Or, what are the carriers for? |
'langleybaston' is it too much trouble to go back a few pages and read the info and links to info at this URL? http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post9861283 I'm too weary and not that interested meself.
|
Info about the upcoming F-35B/QE trials off East Coast USofA along with more info about Warton sim of CVF/FlyCo/SRVLs and UncleTomCobbley and all....
UK F-35B - on final approach to QEC 18 Aug 2017 Tim Robinson https://www.aerosociety.com/news/uk-...proach-to-qec/ |
"They didn't have angled decks, steam catapults, or deck landing sights until the RN invented them either."
Which of those are installed on the QE's? Seems we now think they're not necessary.............. (gets hat & coat) |
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
(Post 9867112)
'langleybaston' is it too much trouble to go back a few pages and read the info and links to info at this URL? http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post9861283 I'm too weary and not that interested meself.
Not so disinterested as to inhibit comment, seemingly. Never mind, but I have not had an answer to my question. |
But you can't hold a decent cocktail party on a submarine.......
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 9867585)
.
Not so disinterested as to inhibit comment, seemingly. Never mind, but I have not had an answer to my question. |
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
(Post 9867607)
"How many hidden, lethal and modern submarines [missile or hunter-killer] could I buy instead of two QE carriers fully crewed and equipped with aircraft?" inhibits my answer STILL.
You'd get about 5 or 6 ish attack boats depending on where you shop. The Astute costs about £1.5 bn per boat but without a VLS capability is not a great choice for lobbing lumps of explosive long way as one might expect the F-35 to do. If you look to the US Virginia class with VLS they are coming in at about £2.2 bn each ish. Or slightly less than 2 UK Dreadnaught class (projected at £7.75 bn each with planned contingency to rise to £10.25 bn each) Of course good though submarines are (and we should have more) they're not a lot of use at air superiority, overland ISTAR or showing flags or cocktail parties or moving marines or disaster relief or .... |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 9867585)
.
Never mind, but I have not had an answer to my question. There's a fairly good attempt to answer a similar question here. I have a feeling from your tone that even trying to answer it may be p*ssing into the wind, but hey: https://fightingsailor.wordpress.com...he-already-is/ |
Code:
but without a VLS capability is not a great choice for lobbing lumps of explosive long way as one might expect the F-35 to do |
To achieve these ends the Queen Elizabeth Class ships and their task groups will perform a wide variety of tasks: Carrier Strike, Humanitarian Relief, Non-Combatant Evacuation, Maritime Security, Diplomacy, Promotion of Trade and sometimes, just by being in the right place at the right time, they will deliver a clear statement of intent. This is what HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH did on Wednesday. As a statement of intent it says 'We've built it and it floats' - everything else is aspirational and 2023 is a long way off even if everything goes according to plan, on time and as promised. |
On the contrary, I am grateful for all the replies.
Apparently I had better get on with the idea of the carriers! |
"a wide variety of tasks: Carrier Strike, Humanitarian Relief, Non-Combatant Evacuation, Maritime Security, Diplomacy, Promotion of Trade and sometimes, just by being in the right place at the right time,"
Of course the QE's can do all of these things (tho' I'd love to know on what basis we think UK politicians will be able to position them to the right place at the right time ,...) AND they are BIG & VISIBLE - which is important if you'r engaged in gun-boat diplomacy - but maybe not so good in a hot war .... The point is that everything except Carrier Strike could be handled by cheaper vessels and we could order more of them - say a couple more T45's, 4 more T26's and replacements for Ocean etc We're in great danger of skewing the RN into one surface role only - the Carrier Strike Group - which will take most of the £££, most of the crews and most of the other surface assets (and some of the SSN capability) to protect/support it |
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 9868138)
Of course the QE's can do all of these things (tho' I'd love to know on what basis we think UK politicians will be able to position them to the right place at the right time ,...)...
Originally Posted by RN website 13 Dec 2013
...Destroyer Daring – in the second half of her high-profile global deployment – spent around ten days providing support to some 10,000 people in isolated and devastated communities on islands around the Visayan Sea which the typhoon struck head-on.
When she was done and continued on to the Far East on the remainder of her deployment, HMS Illustrious stepped in after a 6,000-mile dash from the Horn of Africa. The Portsmouth-based carrier spent a fortnight moving around Filipino islands, helping an estimated 40,000 souls in the process... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:16. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.