HMS Queen Elizabeth

Author
Discussion

FourWheelDrift

88,375 posts

283 months

Friday 18th August 2017
quotequote all
Probably in refit. Of the 11 carriers currently in service only 3 are deployed, (Reagan, Nimitz and Bush) one is in pre-deployment, one in post deployment and 6 are in maintenance.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/where.h...

gary58

218 posts

130 months

Friday 18th August 2017
quotequote all
When working with materials ie weather ferrous or non ferrous or composite you are given limits to how long you can fire before expansion or contraction ceases to work whichever is the better still remains to be questioned until otherwise there will always be be room for improvement.

hidetheelephants

23,731 posts

192 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
Cobnapint said:
Speculatore said:
That said, I do tend to agree that a more comprehensive protective screen would make more sense remembering that the initial order for the Type 45 was 13 and we ended up with 6. (And that the Type 45 does not have a surface to surface capability as we did with Exocet and Harpoon.
They should also stick with Goalkeeper as a point defense weapon rather than Phalanx as it is a much more capable system.
What advantages does the Goalkeeper CIWS have over Phalanx?
Goalkeeper is 30mm to Phalanx' 20mm, so puts more metal down range and reaches further, but Phalanx is palletised, weighs not very much so it can be bolted more or less anywhere that can be supplied with electrical power and chilled water, Goalkeeper is ~4x as heavy(stability limitations as warship design involves balancing the need to mount stuff up high versus how much it affects the centre of gravity) and needs to be built into the structure of the ship.

Bolting some superannuated Harpoon tubes on deck is typical MoD cheeseparing, bugger the extra radar cross section or any other consideration; over the life of the class paying for one of the various ASMs off the shelf, under development or adapted for VLS from existing air launched missiles seems prudent and unlikely to add much to the total bill.

gregs656

10,816 posts

180 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
Isn't only a couple of them currently with 2 more getting it in refit?

Saw QE yesterday and Thursday. Much interest on the water which is nice to see.

Gandahar

9,600 posts

127 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.

We have two of them ???

Crazy

We should have at least have called them Hermes and Ark Royal to put the wind up the Argies, who can hardly afford a pedalo.


Cobnapint

8,596 posts

150 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
Gandahar said:
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.
We'll find somebody...!

cuprabob

14,414 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
Cobnapint said:
Gandahar said:
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.
We'll find somebody...!
Never has a truer word been spoken.

Gandahar

9,600 posts

127 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
cuprabob said:
Cobnapint said:
Gandahar said:
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.
We'll find somebody...!
Never has a truer word been spoken.
Well we got two.

So that is the Falklands and Gibraltar, so quite good thinking.

My main worry is those hairy people north of the border, is it me or are they once again getting a bit upperty? They built the ships but now one has gone down south I think we might be in trouble.

In hindsight we should have built a 3rd one to cruise up and down Loch Ness.


Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
Cobnapint said:
Gandahar said:
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.
We'll find somebody...!
they will find us, or we will have to help some poor bds who need it

cuprabob

14,414 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th August 2017
quotequote all
Gandahar said:
cuprabob said:
Cobnapint said:
Gandahar said:
So who are we going to fight with this multi billion pound ship post Brexit?

And multi billion aircraft that don't exist.
We'll find somebody...!
Never has a truer word been spoken.
Well we got two.

So that is the Falklands and Gibraltar, so quite good thinking.

My main worry is those hairy people north of the border, is it me or are they once again getting a bit upperty? They built the ships but now one has gone down south I think we might be in trouble.

In hindsight we should have built a 3rd one to cruise up and down Loch Ness.
I can't comment as I'm one of those "hairy people" smile

andym1603

1,798 posts

171 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?

FourWheelDrift

88,375 posts

283 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
Maybe they stuck the hose in the wrong hole and now the hangar is full.

KTF

9,788 posts

149 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
Long queues for the harbour tours at Gunwharf on Sunday. Nice earner for the operator whilst it is in port.

NDA

21,479 posts

224 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
andym1603 said:
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?
Jebus!

What's that going to cost??

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
NDA said:
andym1603 said:
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?
Jebus!

What's that going to cost??
I think about £2,000,000 a time.

Halmyre

11,147 posts

138 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
NDA said:
andym1603 said:
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?
Jebus!

What's that going to cost??
I think about £2,000,000 a time.
I hope the captain's got a loyalty card.

andym1603

1,798 posts

171 months

MartG

20,619 posts

203 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
NDA said:
andym1603 said:
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?
Jebus!

What's that going to cost??
Over the life of the ship - a metric stload more that it would have cost to fit nuclear reactors frown

Sylvaforever

2,212 posts

97 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
Speculatore said:
The question was why I thought that Goalkeeper was a better system than Phalanx. We have retained Phalanx as it is an American system so spares etc are readily available.

From a Warfare perspective I would rather be behind a Goalkeeper system than Phalanx. (Having served on a few ships with both systems)
With the thermal tracker (moa to dream of) optimised and hardened ballistic round and improvements to barrel stability I wouldn't want not to be "behind" Phalanx..

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Monday 21st August 2017
quotequote all
MartG said:
NDA said:
andym1603 said:
Reading on the teletext this morning, She was refuelled twice at Invergordon during sea trials. 4,000,000 litres each time. Would that be brimming the tanks or a splash and dash?
Jebus!

What's that going to cost??
Over the life of the ship - a metric stload more that it would have cost to fit nuclear reactors frown
Ah, but what's the effect on resale value?