HMS Queen Elizabeth
Discussion
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
As always the requirements were a bit naff, but also those implementing and accepting the requirements need to take some blame for not using their noggin. If you were designing something that you knew needed to tow a 3.5T trailer, you'd be a fool for giving a 1.0 engine, right? Surely people knew that one place these ships are likely to spend a lot of time is the gulf. So when they saw the spec, they probably should have queried it with the customer.....just sayin'.hidetheelephants said:
Nanook said:
TTmonkey said:
Jesus, that article is awful. Jet engine? Come on!The DGs work fine, there's just not enough of them/they're not big enough.
The GT is only used when you're in a hurry, as it guzzles fuel.
The engines are fine. It's the application that's the issue.
In other words situation normal with UK defence procurement.
Nanook said:
TTmonkey said:
Jesus, that article is awful. Jet engine? Come on!The DGs work fine, there's just not enough of them/they're not big enough.
The GT is only used when you're in a hurry, as it guzzles fuel.
The engines are fine. It's the application that's the issue.
mybrainhurts said:
jmorgan said:
mybrainhurts said:
HMS Queen Elizabeth...
Doesn't sound very, you know, fighty, does it..?
Yeah, should be "Prince Phillip"Doesn't sound very, you know, fighty, does it..?
At least then it can sound troublesome.
Although Warspite, Vindictive, Revenge, etc sound much better.
I would have gone for 'Temeraire'
Nanook said:
Ayahuasca said:
Caling the engines 'jets' I think is OK in an article for the layman. After all, the engines are similar to those found on 747s and Airbuses. iirc the Type 23 uses the same engines that were found in Phantoms.
It wasn't the same engine. It was kinda related, but one was a jet engine, a reaction engine, a Brayton cycle engine, that produces thrust for propulsion. That's not what the gas turbines in a ship do. They have an output shaft, and delivery SHP via the shaft, not thrust.
They're vaguely related to the engines found on 747s and Airbuses in the same way that the engine in my car is similar to the engine in a fire engine or a tank.
Actually, some tanks have gas turbines too!!
M1 Abrams for example.
aeropilot said:
I thought it was the MOD/politicians that have not covered themselves in glory, as cutting back on the spec was a money saving exercise, on the basis that 'we're never going to be operating them in those extreme conditions' only by the time they've entered service, the next lot of politicians have decided to operate them in exactly those conditions.
In other words situation normal with UK defence procurement.
Standing patrol in the Persian Gulf is an RN obligation so it cannot be said that 'we're never going to be operating them in those extreme conditions'.In other words situation normal with UK defence procurement.
LotusOmega375D said:
HMS Boaty McBoatface, anyone?
By the way, when are we likely to see any aircraft at all on board and what will they be?
Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
There'll be heaps of rotary testing with assets from all three services - Merlin, Wildcat, Chinook, Apache etc, but first proper fixed wing will be US Marine Corp jets on an east of Suez deployment, to much fanfare and pomp. Allegedly. By the way, when are we likely to see any aircraft at all on board and what will they be?
Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
I'd say it's no coincidence that the two have been named after our current monarch and the monarch desig, regardless of what official blurb might say..
LotusOmega375D said:
By the way, when are we likely to see any aircraft at all on board and what will they be?
Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
No aircraft, just the most expensive and sophisticated deck hockey pitch in the world. Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
To the general public, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will clearly be associated with Liz and Charles - this isn't a coincidence IMHO.http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activi...
Whether Queen Elizabeth represents a nod to QE I or QE II - the namesake reference is loud and clear. It was cute PR from the Admiralty Board.
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
I think you need to chill out - I took your comment about Duncan with good humour rather than pointing you to the direction of 1st Viscount Duncan's Wiki page - there's no need to be ratty.Those in the RN I've spoken to about QE and PoW, including CSG staff, all share the view that the naming of the ships had an element of political motivation - there was a belief that by creating an association with the current monarch and the likely successor, it would in some small way create a blocker to any threat to can the class. You don't share that view, life goes on.
blinkythefish said:
mybrainhurts said:
HMS Queen Elizabeth...
Doesn't sound very, you know, fighty, does it..?
You've clearly never seen her after a few gins........Doesn't sound very, you know, fighty, does it..?
Nanook said:
donutsina911 said:
To the general public, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will clearly be associated with Liz and Charles - this isn't a coincidence IMHO.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activi...
Whether Queen Elizabeth represents a nod to QE I or QE II - the namesake reference is loud and clear. It was cute PR from the Admiralty Board.
Fine, I'm just suggesting your opinion doesn't outweigh fact, and that the ship was not named after our current monarch, she's QE2. Applying that logic, one of the T45's was named after the draughtsman I can see across the office because his name is also Duncan http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activi...
Whether Queen Elizabeth represents a nod to QE I or QE II - the namesake reference is loud and clear. It was cute PR from the Admiralty Board.
LotusOmega375D said:
HMS Boaty McBoatface, anyone?
By the way, when are we likely to see any aircraft at all on board and what will they be?
Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
F-35b flight trials are shceduled to take place in autumn of 2018, this date has been in place for quite a while and is the one date that hasn't changed (most other milestone dates have shifted right). She is due to be fully operational with a complement of jets in 2020, I would expect these to also be UK jets, considering that production of F-35b is pretty much fully flowing now and the UK is taking new delivery's one a pretty regular basis.By the way, when are we likely to see any aircraft at all on board and what will they be?
Surely they must at least be able to borrow the odd F35B when they are performing trials, so that they can see how everything works?
Sounds like 2023 for a full complement of UK jets..
“We are constrained by the F-35 buy rate even though that was accelerated in Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) in 2015, so initial operating capability numbers in 2020 are going to be very modest indeed. We will flesh it out with helicopters, and a lot depends on how many USMC F-35s come on our first deployment in 2021. But by 2023 we are committed to 24 UK jets onboard and after that it’s too far away [to say]," he said.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/british-naval-...
“We are constrained by the F-35 buy rate even though that was accelerated in Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) in 2015, so initial operating capability numbers in 2020 are going to be very modest indeed. We will flesh it out with helicopters, and a lot depends on how many USMC F-35s come on our first deployment in 2021. But by 2023 we are committed to 24 UK jets onboard and after that it’s too far away [to say]," he said.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/british-naval-...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff