HMS Queen Elizabeth

[Cold]

Salty Sea Dog tales of beer aside, she's just left port a mere day later than originally planned. No news yet if any of the crew were denied boarding due to positive Covid-19 tests.

[normalbloke]

Yeah,just watched them turn it around and flee. Half of me thinks they pushed on to get her out due to the current noise complaints, and the other half thinks she’ll be back shortly full of coughs and sneezes. Tin foil hat off...

[Cold]

I thought the noise complaints were aimed at HMSPWLS? Anyway, it's been deathly quiet in the harbour over the past week or so, partly due to the lack of traffic but mainly due to the still weather. It's had the knock-on effect of making the water at the shoreline incredibly clear (which some are attributing to the lockdown and lack of pollution ).
Now the wind has picked up again I expect any excess noise from HMNB Portsmouth will be absorbed.

[FourWheelDrift]

normalbloke said:

Yeah,just watched them turn it around and flee. Half of me thinks they pushed on to get her out due to the current noise complaints, and the other half thinks she’ll be back shortly full of coughs and sneezes. Tin foil hat off...

They'll be fine, the Chlamydia will kill off any other virus.

[Cold]

It appears that two crew members tested positive for Covid-19 before HMS QNLZ departed the other day. They had been on board for around a week beforehand contributing to the preparations for sailing and have now relocated ashore for a two week period of isolation.

This may well be the last specifics we are privy to as the navy states that they won't provide a "running commentary" of any coronavirus conditions on board. Although she will remain at sea to continue testing and trials, she's not going too far from the UK coastline for now and of course, the captain is able to use his discretion to return to port if necessary.

[normalbloke]

Coming back on Thursday. Anchoring off Stokes Bay. Rumours abound as usual. They’ve also just deployed the first escape chute( on the POW alongside). Noisy bugger,apparently testing all the escape systems this week into next.

Edited by normalbloke on Wednesday 6th May 09:26

Edited by normalbloke on Wednesday 6th May 11:36

[ecsrobin]

normalbloke said:

Coming back on Thursday. Anchoring off Stokes Bay. Rumours abound as usual. They’ve also just deployed the first escape chute. Noisy bugger,apparently testing all the escape systems this week into next.

Edited by normalbloke on Wednesday 6th May 09:26

They tweeted that they were going to anchor to finish off a few things prior to FOST going onboard.

[normalbloke]

[FourWheelDrift]

Nice of them to do the hoovering before they go.

[MBBlat]

LSA slides - if I remember correctly they are the longest they produce and that length of slide wasn't even in production when selected.
http://www.lsames.com/mes/defence

[Cold]

Guess who's back?



She popped back home on Thursday morning for not much more than a quick pit stop of replenishing supplies. Basic Sea Training is now complete and next week will see her welcome onboard a few noisy guests from RAF Marham in Norfolk.

She'll be leaving tomorrow (Sunday) at 1:15PM if you want to go and stand 2 metres away from her to wave.

[LotusOmega375D]

What’s the arrival date for the F35s? Will they then be permanent fixtures or is this just a temporary training exercise?

[normalbloke]

She had at least 4 onboard yesterday.

[Cold]

Four visitors from a certain 617 Squadron.

They're onboard for a fairly intensive period of flight training while enjoying the delights of the North Sea, but deployment won't be until next year. The ship is due back in port later this month.











Pictures captured by HMS QNLZ's Tweeto.

[Steve vRS]

Sure this is easily found in this threat so apologies. Are these jets Fleet Air Arm or RAF?

[DMN]

They are from RAF 617 Squadron. However for the first time in its history, the commanding officer is from the Fleet Air Arm.

[andy97]

Steve vRS said:

Sure this is easily found in this threat so apologies. Are these jets Fleet Air Arm or RAF?

An RAF “badged” squadron but a joint asset with both RAF and RN maintainers and aircrew. I believe that the next F35 squadron to be formed will have the RN 809 Squadron “name”, albeit still based at RAF Mariam and jointly manned.

[Penguinracer]

While the Carrier definitely has it’s place in projecting power in a lower level asymmetric conflict, when it comes to conflict with an opponent of comparable power & technology, the 4000km hypersonic missile has perhaps rendered the Carrier as vulnerable as the battleships were to air power.

The US Navy & Air Force have developed cost-effective alternatives to nuclear submarines & manned fighters but the entrenched defence contractors are a power lobby on the hill.

[Evanivitch]

Penguinracer said:

While the Carrier definitely has it’s place in projecting power in a lower level asymmetric conflict, when it comes to conflict with an opponent of comparable power & technology, the 4000km hypersonic missile has perhaps rendered the Carrier as vulnerable as the battleships were to air power.

Firstly a 4000km hypersonic anti-ship missile is a ballistic missile. No one is going to fire one unless they're prepared for everyone to assume it's a nuclear warhead ICBM, and respond accordingly.

People have been saying the same thing about the MBT and ATGM for 50 years, but the tank still runs king of the battlefield. The death of the battleship wasn't so much because of its defence, but it's offence. Planes > shells. We have submarines that can throw stones just as far as any ballistic anti-ship missile.

Penguinracer said:

The US Navy & Air Force have developed cost-effective alternatives to nuclear submarines & manned fighters but the entrenched defence contractors are a power lobby on the hill.

Have they, where? I'm not aware of any persistent unmanned deterrent, nor am I aware of any unmanned air superiority aircraft. Do you have a source?

[MBBlat]

Penguinracer said:

While the Carrier definitely has it’s place in projecting power in a lower level asymmetric conflict, when it comes to conflict with an opponent of comparable power & technology, the 4000km hypersonic missile has perhaps rendered the Carrier as vulnerable as the battleships were to air power.

The US Navy & Air Force have developed cost-effective alternatives to nuclear submarines & manned fighters but the entrenched defence contractors are a power lobby on the hill.

The Russians do like to talk up their hypersonic missiles, however they suffer from the same fundamental flaw as all anti-carrier weapons called "first find the carrier".

Drones in there current state however are only useful in low level asymmetric conflict, how well they would perform against an equal level opponent with a full range of jammers is yet to be demonstrated. The US defence contractors and Politicians love them, the entrenched lobbyists tend to be the Air-force.

I'm also unaware of any cost effective alternative to nuclear submarines. AIP DE boats will give you at max a week of underwater operations, as opposed to the months for a nuclear boat, and still suffer from reduces submerged speed - a nuclear boat can go at max speed almost indefinitely, try that with an AIP sub and your endurance drops from days to hours.