HMS Queen Elizabeth
Discussion
Sarkmeister said:
Yep, thats pretty much right. However, I wouldnt expect her to leave Rosyth until late 2017 at the earliest.
Given the great noise made about modular construction shortening the time required for fitting out, why so long? I'd have thought propulsion trials would be on the cards well before that, particularly given their novelty and the need for extended fiddling.hidetheelephants said:
Sarkmeister said:
Yep, thats pretty much right. However, I wouldnt expect her to leave Rosyth until late 2017 at the earliest.
Given the great noise made about modular construction shortening the time required for fitting out, why so long? I'd have thought propulsion trials would be on the cards well before that, particularly given their novelty and the need for extended fiddling.She's due to go to sea for Builder's Trials in October 2016 with a possible visit to Portsmouth late 2016/early 2017. Commissioning takes place in 2017, sea trials with F-35B in 2018 and full operational service in 2020.
TTmonkey said:
BBC reporter trying to diss the new aircraft carrier repeatedly said the aircraft carrier had no 'warships' to carry.
Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
Yeah, heard that, but he is not the first and will not be the last to mess up. I would like to see many Joe public do better in front of the camera, some do, many do not.Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
TTmonkey said:
BBC reporter trying to diss the new aircraft carrier repeatedly said the aircraft carrier had no 'warships' to carry.
Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
I would expect nothing less from inept BBC journo's (or any journo for that matter) when it comes to 'defense' matters.Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
Clueless is being generous to them.
An expensive 'aircraft carrier'.
Built to carry one type of 'aircraft' that doesn't need catapults to launch them which cost more than twice as much as they should with half the amount of engines they need.
Meanwhile back to the future when we had at least one 'proper' one.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv8prm4mGEQ
Built to carry one type of 'aircraft' that doesn't need catapults to launch them which cost more than twice as much as they should with half the amount of engines they need.
Meanwhile back to the future when we had at least one 'proper' one.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv8prm4mGEQ
XJ Flyer said:
An expensive 'aircraft carrier'.
Built to carry one type of 'aircraft' that doesn't need catapults to launch them which cost more than twice as much as they should with half the amount of engines they need.
Meanwhile back to the future when we had at least one 'proper' one.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv8prm4mGEQ
Should read "Built to carry one type of "obsolete" aircraft"... Built to carry one type of 'aircraft' that doesn't need catapults to launch them which cost more than twice as much as they should with half the amount of engines they need.
Meanwhile back to the future when we had at least one 'proper' one.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv8prm4mGEQ
As has already been shown, stealth pilotless drones are the future in weapons platforms deployed from aircraft carriers.
jmorgan said:
TTmonkey said:
BBC reporter trying to diss the new aircraft carrier repeatedly said the aircraft carrier had no 'warships' to carry.
Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
Yeah, heard that, but he is not the first and will not be the last to mess up. I would like to see many Joe public do better in front of the camera, some do, many do not.Even said HMS Illustrious, parked alongside, no longer carried 'warships'.
What a tard.
mrloudly said:
Should read "Built to carry one type of "obsolete" aircraft"...
As has already been shown, stealth pilotless drones are the future in weapons platforms deployed from aircraft carriers.
Their assurance that this vessel will rule the waves for the next 50 years is laughable.As has already been shown, stealth pilotless drones are the future in weapons platforms deployed from aircraft carriers.
The rate of change for technology in warfare will make this thing obsolete, unusable and vulnerable within 20 years in my opinion. Stealth technology, drone attack, even cyber vulnerability will mean it won't ever be used as loss of such a capital asset would be unthinkable.
Pretty pointless in my view.
TTmonkey said:
Um, it's his job. Of he can't do it, he shouldn't.
You will be hard pushed to find people to report on particular stories then. Reporters are more a jack of all trades, some are more knowledgable than others in some fields but they cannot keep them all in a cupboard and let them out for their particular area. They will have the science report or the business reporter but many cover all sorts of stories.And people make mistakes in front of the camera, its life, get used to it. People get so wound up over this, maybe they have taken the wrong calling in life and need to do the reporters job....... seen many an expert called to comment fall at the first hurdle but on the flip side, seen a good few that are good at it.
TTmonkey said:
Their assurance that this vessel will rule the waves for the next 50 years is laughable.
The rate of change for technology in warfare will make this thing obsolete, unusable and vulnerable within 20 years in my opinion. Stealth technology, drone attack, even cyber vulnerability will mean it won't ever be used as loss of such a capital asset would be unthinkable.
Pretty pointless in my view.
Nobody is saying it will 'rule the waves' for the next 50 years. Just that it is expected to stay in service that long.The rate of change for technology in warfare will make this thing obsolete, unusable and vulnerable within 20 years in my opinion. Stealth technology, drone attack, even cyber vulnerability will mean it won't ever be used as loss of such a capital asset would be unthinkable.
Pretty pointless in my view.
Look at Hermes. Laid down during WW2, launched in 1953, still in service with the Indian navy for a few years yet. There's been some pretty big changes in technology in that period.
aeropilot said:
I would expect nothing less from inept BBC journo's (or any journo for that matter) when it comes to 'defense' matters.
Clueless is being generous to them.
Looks like the "top brass" took issue with the good old Politicly correct Beeb for calling it a Boat Clueless is being generous to them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/109...
T66ORA said:
aeropilot said:
I would expect nothing less from inept BBC journo's (or any journo for that matter) when it comes to 'defense' matters.
Clueless is being generous to them.
Looks like the "top brass" took issue with the good old Politicly correct Beeb for calling it a Boat Clueless is being generous to them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/109...
Probably been answered many times before but why to the RN insist on using the ski ramp rather than the catapult system that everyone else refers. Doesn't that limit the type of aircraft that can use it, so for example the french couldn't fly their planes from it?
Seems a bit silly from a simpleton like me!!
Seems a bit silly from a simpleton like me!!
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff