HMS Queen Elizabeth
Discussion
98elise said:
Agreed, they are in no way small. QE along side Illustrious...
Has anyone done a mock-up of QE alongside the older Ark Royal, R09?Edited by 98elise on Wednesday 14th October 17:11
According to wikipedia, R09 was not that much smaller;
Length: QE, 932ft; AR, 804ft
Beam: QE, 240ft; AR, 171ft
A bit more heft though...
Displacement: QE, 65,000 tonnes; AR, 53,950 tonnes (fully loaded)
My Father served on AR when it was part of the Far Flung Fleet in the early 1960's and remembered Buccaneers, Sea Vixens and Gannets coming and going as well as watching the P1127 do its first deck landing in 1963. I remember going on board with him during a Plymouth Navy Days sometime in the early 1970's and he still had friends serving on there then.
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Piginapoke said:
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Search for ‘crows nest’. Big radar strapped to Merlin helicopters. For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Apparently a bit flakey.
TTmonkey said:
Piginapoke said:
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Search for ‘crows nest’. Big radar strapped to Merlin helicopters. For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Apparently a bit flakey.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/06/royal...
ecsrobin said:
TTmonkey said:
Piginapoke said:
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Search for ‘crows nest’. Big radar strapped to Merlin helicopters. For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Apparently a bit flakey.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/06/royal...
Piginapoke said:
ecsrobin said:
TTmonkey said:
Piginapoke said:
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Search for ‘crows nest’. Big radar strapped to Merlin helicopters. For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Apparently a bit flakey.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/06/royal...
I’m not sure it matters. What conflict are we likely to see where we put these carriers into the harms way of an opponent that has the capacity to launch a significant threat against them? It’s probably only Iran that would be of a mindset to attack such a target, and we wouldn’t be out there alone in any conflict.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
Piginapoke said:
ecsrobin said:
TTmonkey said:
Piginapoke said:
Just reading Harrier 509 by Rowland White, and it's clear how much the lack of AEW capability hamstrung the RN in the Falklands, causing it to use the Sheffield and other ships as radar pickets, and we all know how that ended.
For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Search for ‘crows nest’. Big radar strapped to Merlin helicopters. For all the money spent on these new carriers, is it still the same deal and they lack any AEW aircraft? If so, seems a very major oversight....
Apparently a bit flakey.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/06/royal...
https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
Might be a better option than the merlin?
El stovey said:
The USMC are planning to use Bell V247s with a new radar for AEW on their smaller amphibious assault ships.
https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
Might be a better option than the merlin?
It might be the best thing since sliced bread but as there's no money for another airframe it's moot.https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-v-247
Might be a better option than the merlin?
TTmonkey said:
I’m not sure it matters. What conflict are we likely to see where we put these carriers into the harms way of an opponent that has the capacity to launch a significant threat against them? It’s probably only Iran that would be of a mindset to attack such a target, and we wouldn’t be out there alone in any conflict.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
The main idea is UK aircraft carriers demonstrate the ability to force project around the world as part of UK PLC's global influence strategy. To most nations that holds up well as you quite rightly pointed out, there are not many nations who cold pose a credible threat to such vessels. It all falls down when you consider the UK's geopolitical competitors know it would be an absolute miracle if the UK could force project any meaningful force on the surface of the sea and therefore just a folly if not done correctly.Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
Force projecting maritime based air power is not about on ship and a handful of aircraft. If the Gov wanted the capability to do such a thing, they needed to look at what that really meant.
TTmonkey said:
I’m not sure it matters. What conflict are we likely to see where we put these carriers into the harms way of an opponent that has the capacity to launch a significant threat against them? It’s probably only Iran that would be of a mindset to attack such a target, and we wouldn’t be out there alone in any conflict.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
Wasn’t that the thinking back in the late Seventies/early Eighties ... just before the Falklands Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
TTmonkey said:
I’m not sure it matters. What conflict are we likely to see where we put these carriers into the harms way of an opponent that has the capacity to launch a significant threat against them? It’s probably only Iran that would be of a mindset to attack such a target, and we wouldn’t be out there alone in any conflict.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
I've said before that I think the carriers are a solution to a problem that no longer exists for the UK, but having made the decision to go ahead I'm surprised that key lessons from our last major deployment haven't been taken on board.Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
stevesingo said:
TTmonkey said:
I’m not sure it matters. What conflict are we likely to see where we put these carriers into the harms way of an opponent that has the capacity to launch a significant threat against them? It’s probably only Iran that would be of a mindset to attack such a target, and we wouldn’t be out there alone in any conflict.
Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
The main idea is UK aircraft carriers demonstrate the ability to force project around the world as part of UK PLC's global influence strategy. To most nations that holds up well as you quite rightly pointed out, there are not many nations who cold pose a credible threat to such vessels. It all falls down when you consider the UK's geopolitical competitors know it would be an absolute miracle if the UK could force project any meaningful force on the surface of the sea and therefore just a folly if not done correctly.Can anyone see a conflict where the U.K. stands alone against a player serious enough to attack the carriers with technology advanced enough to be a threat? We will always be under US EAW cover because we will always be part of a coalition.
Force projecting maritime based air power is not about on ship and a handful of aircraft. If the Gov wanted the capability to do such a thing, they needed to look at what that really meant.
98elise said:
To project force anywhere in the world you need air cover. The only way to guarantee that is to have aircraft carriers and a global reach blue water navy. Very few countries in the world have that capability (USA, UK and France).
Isn't the French one a bit unreliable and dodgy? The Russian one nearly sank the other year and is out of service.
The Indians and Chinese have carriers though, and are continuing to invest and build up their capabilities.
98elise said:
To project force anywhere in the world you need air cover. The only way to guarantee that is to have aircraft carriers and a global reach blue water navy. Very few countries in the world have that capability (USA, UK and France).
China, India, Italy, Russia (although broken) I’m sure there’s a few more. ecsrobin said:
98elise said:
To project force anywhere in the world you need air cover. The only way to guarantee that is to have aircraft carriers and a global reach blue water navy. Very few countries in the world have that capability (USA, UK and France).
China, India, Italy, Russia (although broken) I’m sure there’s a few more. I can’t help but feel that weapons that could destroy them are now commonplace but then in a Third World War that’s probably the case for everything.
The use for these must be in situations where the bad guys aren’t that capable or that capability has been neutralised.
Still though having a carrier without decent AEW seems a bit dodgy.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff