HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales have met each other at sea for the very first time.
Commodore Steve Moorhouse, Commander UK Carrier Strike Group said:
“Having previously commanded both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, it was hugely exciting to be present as the two met at sea for the first time.
I know that sense of pride and accomplishment is shared by thousands of others, military and civilian, who have contributed to the Royal Navy’s carrier renaissance over the past decade or more.
The strategic significance is profound. Building one aircraft carrier is a sign of national ambition. But building two – and operating them simultaneously – is a sign of serious national intent. It means Britain has a continuous carrier strike capability, with one vessel always ready to respond to global events at short notice.
Few other navies can do that. Britain is back in the front rank of maritime powers.”
The pictures you’ve all been waiting for have arrived…
Building one aircraft carrier is a sign of national ambition.But building TWO – and operating them simultaneously – is a sign of serious national intent. #CarrierStrike pic.twitter.com/xBfUYtXPwk
— Rear Admiral Steve Moorhouse (@smrmoorhouse) May 20, 2021
Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:
“The UK Carrier Strike Group is a great symbol of collaboration, both across the Armed Forces and our industry partners. Sailing together through a number of different environments, the partnership will uphold British values and international order.
Wednesday 19 May 2021 saw a historic moment in Britain’s carrier renaissance as HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales met at sea for the first time. With two 65,000 tonne carriers in operational service, Britain has a continuous carrier strike capability, with one vessel always ready to respond to global events at short notice.
By leading a large international exercise, practicing its wide range of capabilities, and demonstrating its formidable size, Strike Warrior 21 has proved that years of hard work, training and planning have paid off. The UK Carrier Strike Group is ready to promote Global Britain and confront future security threats of the twenty-first century.”
HMS Queen Elizabeth and her Carrier Strike Group have recently completed Exercise Strike Warrior, an exercise designed to push the Carrier Strike Group to the limits and ensure its readiness for any situation during this year’s seven-month global deployment.
HMS Prince of Wales is in the midst of sea trials and other tests.
How does it demonstrate its formidable size: just asking?
BY getting stuck in a harbour entrance somewhere?
Space for 18 fast jets on the flight deck with space to spare
How about taking two Type 23s side by side and put them in the hanger and still have space to walk around, or an airfield that can go anywhere in the world via water, does not need international permission to get there and with the two carriers enough airpower to give any nation including China/Russia a headache. All we now need is something I call a fleet escort carrier, not one to carry out strike missions but one to carry say 12 aircraft on CAP. The big carriers carry out land and fleet strike, the escort carrier which could be something like HMAS Canberra carries out CAP missions. By the way HMAS Canberra type vessels could and would be used by the army to land a battle group each, so if we had three of these ships we could land three battlegroups or one working as an amphib, one as an escort carrier and one on ASW patrol with sat two ASW frigates.
A good example of myy thinking is the battle of Midway, if the Imperial Japanese carrier group had a purly dedicated escort fighter carrier working CAP the result would have been much diffrent.
I was being somewhat tongue in cheek in my comment!
DF’s comment was an open invitation to be TiC (tongue in cheek)
No problem, It did get me thinking on why what for and how. Anyway I hope you have fun.
We need an escort carrier to trial the lightweight cats and traps on and to work up Vixen. Using one of the main carriers to do that takes it out of serious operations for 5 or 6 years.
Only fit them to the QE class once when trialled on something cheaper.
And how long would it take to design, fund, build a class of ships? More than 5 years!
Better off using what we have to hand there is impetus to get things done which is great to see.
Hi Jon, you mean trial on something like the US Wasp or French Mistral or Italian Cavour classes?
The potential of escort carriers is a concept I think too easily overlooked. As long as there is no attempt to make it ‘all singing and all dancing’ a platform of ever increasing costs, one that could carry a mix of fixed wing, rotary and U.A.V’s as required without exposing a critical asset is one I would like to see explored.
Depends on what you are thinking of escorting. If you are thinking about escorting the carrier with an escort carrier you might as well just put both of QE class in a combined strike group and give whoever is rattling your cage a good hard slapping…
To me an escort carrier is all about convoys. If we need an escort carrier you are talking about the potential for the 3rd Battle of the Atlantic. We won the 1st and 2nd Battles of the Atlantic, but we would not even be able to get started in round 3. For us to be able to maintain a CSG and a number of escort groups would require a significant up lift in the number of escorts, well beyond the current envisaged 20 plus vessels. Even with 50 frigates and destroyers as per the late ’70s and ’80s we would be dependent on allies for our national survival.
Escort carriers are a great idea and get my vote, but they would need to be considered as part of a larger escort group, with air defence and smaller ASW / ASuW platforms capable of providing defence in depth around a convoy spread over a very large area of ocean.
We forget the lessons of history at our peril. The two most important battles this country has ever fought (in modern times) were the 1st Battle of the Atlantic in WW1 which saw the country on the bring of starvation in 1917 and, of course, the longest ever battle fought (I think by any nation), the 2nd Battle of the Atlantic in WW2.
Cheers CR
Well I do hear there are plans afoot to take apart and then rebuild the houses of Parliament brick by brick on the flight deck of Queen Elizabeth. The whole Renaming of the clock tower to Elizabeth tower and now the refurbishment/building work is all a cover for it…… mark my words next refit will see a Parliament with the ability to deploy anywhere in the world and legislate according to any risk to national interest.
That really would give a new meaning to Pax Britannica, provided we had enough Victorian era gunboats to back it up!
Personally, I’d just load the whole lot on a “Bovril Boat” and dump it in the “Black Deep”….. 😶
Ha Ha I’m pretty sure the EU sunk the Bovril boats…some such nonsense about polluting the seas I believe.
Even so I’m not sure about the concept of send Parliament to the black deep it would destroy the North Sea fishing industry….. after all who would want to eat a fish that may have nibbled on a politician eeeck.
A magnificent sight.
Totally agree!
Agree.
Truly magnificent….. 4 F35’s parked on POW for the photo would have been very impressive
We have the ships , We have crews, But we don’t have the aircraft to make them operational at the same time.
If we ever needed to have both in play at the same time one would be loaded with F35 and CrowsNest.
The other probably as a helo carrier with maybe a few F35 for self defence.
Bear in mind the plan is to have one available at any given time.
This was setup as a photo op……to send a message….
I suppose they would use UAVs as well to support the Carriers if it came to it
Yes 80 with plans for four squadrons.
Chief of the Air Staff talked about 48 F35Bs aircraft in 4 Sqns for the carriers and attrition buys. I doubt we can afford more. He made no mention of RAF F35s for long range strike attack (replace Tornado) and close air support ( replace Harrier) to the Army. If the RAF get any F35 B or A models the numbers will be very small because MOD cannot afford it – for the RAF everything now depends on Tempest in undefined numbers – watch this space..
They are being built. There are some issues, one being that Lockheed have not yet reached full production rate.
Thank you for pointing out that at the end of the day we are reliant on US production. Yes we could have ordered more sooner. It that would have meant an early technology fit that would have either meant accepting a lower overall capability or accepting the extra cost of updating them later. It’s not our fault that the carriers were completed earlier than the aircraft they will support onboard and this situation could hardly have been accommodated during design and build period could it. If build had been delayed costs would have increased as much as the derision from critics.
It’s more to do with the very very low UK order rate.
Here in Oz the RAAF had 15 F-35A delivered last year, 2020 (to bring the fleet to 33), there will be another 15 this year 2021, another 15 in 2022 And 9 in 2023, to make a total of 72.
Whilst not ‘technically’ at full rate production, LM is due to deliver ‘more’ than 150 F-35 this year.
These are points worth considering. But F35Bs are a minority in the overall make up of the production rate
As I always point out when someone mentions low order rate. Look at the issues with block IV software. Its proven quite savvy to have had such a low order rate IMHO.
Yes. On this occasion, jam tomorrow seems to have been prudent.
We don’t want them all yet, they are early block with less capabilities, better to build up 15/20 a year like we are. After all we buy 80 in one go they are knackered all at same time. Every fast jet program ever starts and gets bigger as capabilities are added and issues solved
Block 4 software is awaited to allow adoption of uk IP weapons fit which is key to standoff capability Spear 3, meteor etc. #20m per plane to subsequently upgrade current production versions to block 4. Over a couple of squadrons that’s equivalent to another T31.
True, it’s everything to do with the order rate- that and that we gave some of our early slots to the USMC so they could build up their IOC quicker.
But (this is not a criticism) the Australian F-35s that are on order are not Block IV software, and likely don’t have some of the hardware upgrades to the EOTS that will be coming with that. That isn’t due for another year or two on the current schedule if memory serves. Australia will have to either pay for those aircraft to have the upgrade, or leave them as less capable models. Block IV brings most of the full combat integration with all the weapons, so I can’t imagine that they’d want to leave that. At the moment, I think it’s block 3F or something- gives AMRAAM, some JDAM, maybe a couple of other systems, but not the full armoury.
The UK is waiting so they don’t have to pay for the upgrades.
Yes I do understand that Blk 4 is important for the UK and the RAF, it’s important for all user nations including Australia, for the RAAF it will add JSM, SDB II, JSOW-C1 (already in service on the F/A-18F fleet).
There are valid reasons for various air forces to procure early or late, RAF later because of ‘non standard’ USAF/USN weapons fit, the RAAF earlier, able to retire the 30+ yr old Hornet fleet (as airframes age, sustainment and operating costs steadily grow).
There appears to be a lot of assumptions as to the cost of upgrading airframes from Blk 3F to Blk 4, and equally assumptions that new build Blk 4 airframes are ‘free’ of additional costs, one would assume the respective air forces are well aware of those costs.
But it doesn’t stop there, after Blk 4 there will be Blk 5, and so on, for rest of their service lives.
Anyway, the UK is fortunate that the USMC will provide a Sqn of F-35B for the up coming QE deployment otherwise the flight deck would look rather bare.
Cheers,
Yes but the As are rather more mature/simple than the Bs so you can ramp up sooner
Julian,
Actually the B reached IOC with the USMC in July 2015 and the A with the USAF in August 2016.
The only reason there are more A than B in global service is simply that there is a larger pool of A operators, therefore a higher production rate.
Cheers,
Why is Lockheed not in full rate production for F-35B after all this time?
The article explains why. 2 vessels so one is always available 365
Not yet, if I remember correctly Carrier Strike ability is to be fully operational by 2023. By then we will have 48 F35Bs in front line units. That could or would mean 24 aircraft per carrier plus some for training etc. I am possibly wrong in this but I do weem to remember it somewhere. Combine the 24 F35Bs with 3 Crowsnest, 4 ASW Merlins, 2-4 Royal Marine Merlins and if I had my way 2-4 Apaches that is a combined airwing of 40 aircraft. Its not a QE max load but a very flexible air group able to do deep strike, land Royal Marines with air support, help the frigates with anti sub helicopters and carry its own AEW to see what is going on.
The planned world cruise by the CSG is a full scale training ex, to test logistics, repair, land, launch basicallyu a full scale exercise to see how all the bits work together for a long period of time far from home.
In my humble (very) opinion, the FAA should have squadrons of 8 with a ‘wing’ of 3 squadrons. With say 4 planes additional to fill in with availability. So a full wing embarked would be 28. With a routine typical standard serious load of 2 squadrons allowing for rotation, so say between 16 and 20 planes embarked.
Hi TrevorH first no opinion is humble everyones opinion is as vailid or improtant as the next person. Ok your figures makes sense and for peacetime operations is completly logical. 16-24 F35Bs for normal ops with a surge capacity of 36 per carrier plus helicopters. That is a fairly powerful air wing
I’m sorry Ron but you are wrong. The aircraft won’t be available and unless we put in an order soon we won’t be ready even in 2030. This don’t need them yet/ block 4 argument (not yours) drives me nuts. There is absolutely nothing to stop us ordering now and specifying what mark we want.We can have a hugely capable operation with 60 to 70 F35’s.
What’s stopping us ordering now is the unaffordability of the equipment plan. We have even had to delay delivery of all 48 by 2 years to 2025. The further reference by the FSL to unmanned platforms seems to confirm that F35 numbers will never be sufficient to use the full capacity of both carriers.
They are an impressive sight though.
If anything Peter the UAV discussion supports the argument. Two squadrons of 10/12 F35’s with a squadron of Mosquito drones would provide the kit for two ships.
If we can get an EMAL system installed without breaking the bank, then I agree that 10/12 F35 plus UCAVs would give a decent air group. I know it’s early days in the ucav project, but I wonder if the aim is to have a cats and traps system on both carriers?
Given how much is expected of UCAVs, would a STOVL variant be possible? The F35 is totally reliant on software for landing (the F18 has also had updated software to automate more of the landing operation). So in theory, a STOVL landing should be no more complex than a conventional one.
I’ve not been able to work this story out since it broke. A suitable ship by 2023? If it’s a carrier where is it going to be fitted. Low degree angled deck? Ideas anybody?
Hi Geoffrey, I’m a bit with you on this. If it’s just software we’re waiting on then can’t they get building some more planes
started now and update the software when they are finally built? Maybe it’s not as easy as this, but if the F35 is a flying computer can’t the software be added in later or progressively.?
Correct. 2 Air groups of F35 and Merlin has never been the plan and now, hopefully, UAV can come to HMG aid and a second airgroup can be built around Vixen.
The 1SL has said as such recently, an air group for both carriers being a priority.
Interesting that the three Merlin HC.4’s and most of the RM’s have ended up embarked on Fort Vic rather than QE- that didn’t seem to be the original plan. I’m wondering whether for CSG21 is QE is close the limits of her standard accommodation (1600 berths) and hotel services. Her core ships crew (complement) has been increased in size to 800, and the Yanks seem to have embarked in large numbers – not just VMFA-211 but sailors from USS John Stennis and even US Coast Guard engineers. The bane every RN aircraft carrier ever built has been a shortage of accommodation, and the QEC seem likely to be no exception. Being in accommodation overload mode for her first deployment, despite having a CAG far below capacity, wouldn’t make for positive press reports. “100’s of sailors will have to sleep on camp beds for 7 months during the first deployment of the RN’s new £3 billion flagship”.
I’ve just watched a CNBC news report of the Queen’s visit to QE, which claims she has a crew of 1700, including 250 US Marines. So much for 4-berth cabins for all Junior Rates! It may have been better if the designers had included some old fashioned messes. Replace 4 cabins (16 berths) with a mess for 24. Because one watch is always on duty and the berths are triple rather than double, you actually can fit in a useful communal area with seating for uckers and tinny.
There is a way of achieving two carrier operation. Have a look at East of Suez and the Royal Navy. Click on analysis Opinion. I’m not trying to blow my trumpet but it saves me retyping every time this comes up.
Sorry Geoff, I always thought that from day one, the plan is only for one carrier group to be available? There just isn’t the F35’s/helicopters/escorts to do two carrier groups…. and if we did two carrier groups then any future adversary just needs to wait till they are both out of service at the same time for maintenance before acting…
Hi Andrew..did you read my article>. I think it shows that we can operate two carriers given the will to it. We can obviously crew them other wise they wouldn’t be out together.
To be fair, the POW, isn’t really fully operational, it’s just a photo op….
…but it would be operational if it had the aircrew. That’s the point.
Stunning…a sight for sore eyes. Does PoW have a plan for air trials later this summer? As long as one ship is available with a decent air group at all times, I’m relaxed. Hardly any nations will have this capability and even fewer the ability to continuously provide it.
Yes, I agree.
I think that she is due to go over to the States in the late summer/autumn to do her fixed wing qualifications, presumably with the test squadron aircraft that are being kept in the US for training. She can work up her helo capabilities over here.
No, from my understanding the F35B qualification is to be carried out in UK waters with UK aircraft. One of the reasons for the limited QE F35B deployment.
Ok, thanks. Does anyone know if the three aircraft currently being retained in the US are going to come over to be added to the UK inventory?
Do you mean the orange wired ones?
If so they might come to Boscombe Down but they may well stay where they are.
They are early production units so very hard to bring to latest spec.
So I suspect they will serve out their lives as T&E workhorses.
Yes, they will never American shores. The oldest is about 10 years old and will probably be retired soon. Apparently the UK was pressurised by the USA in to buying these 3 aircraft as a contribution towards all the cost-runs. They were an unplanned addition to the $2 bn that the UK paid to be a Tier 1 partner – a status which formally expires when Block 3F is finally certified as complete, and which has already become increasingly meaningless as the USA progresses the Block 4 standard.
No, they are staying State side to carry out intergration tesing for weapons, software etc.
Sorry testing.
Here’s a quote from the 1SL’s message at the Sea Power Conference:
“We are devouring novel technologies and innovation. We will begin to launch drones from HMS Prince of Wales in September and accelerate the transition to a hybrid crewed/uncrewed airwing. My ambition is that we challenge ourselves to create an air wing for each carrier.”
I count 17 F35s. where is the last one – perhaps it was the photo ship?
Maybe in the hangar on in the air?
It’s funny you saying that. When I watched a YouTube video of the US F35’s taking off from their UK base to join the carrier – only counted 9 at the time. But presumed the 10 aircraft would be joining at some point. Hope it’s there..
Still very impressive to see. Wow ! Clap to all involved..
18 is to my reckoning the largest number of 5th generation jets ever taken to sea by anyone in the world on any one carrier, so far. Someone needs to check that but I think it’s right. If the F35B is nearly as capable as stated it should nullify most enemies likely numerical advantage.
Yes, for sure including the Brit’s.. Figure of 18. Just noticed originally 9 USA F35’s taking off from their base. But, all looks darn impressive to me.
One of the ten VMFA-211 aircraft went unserviceable. Hopefully it will catch up with the ship at some point as it represents 6% of the fixed wing strength. Just last year it was still widely expected that QE would embark 24 F-35B’s for CSG-21.
The picture second from the bottom has the vessel on the right appearing smaller, an iPhone viewing issue perhaps (currently using)?
Perspective, Prince of Wales is further from the camera, thus appears smaller.
A Father Ted Reply might explain.
No Dougal…..the sheep on the hill are a long way away!
An “Expert” in Father Ted quotes I see….. 😎
HMS Massive?
Haha the Massive already commented on this!
https://twitter.com/HMS_Massive/status/1394963835493232641
Great to see just need more aircraft and more Escorts ,oops gone back to the 80s again 😷
No aircraft to speak off. Really buying the F-35B was a monumental mistake IMO. Cheaper and more would have been much better. A fast jet capable of delivering much more would have been more effective…US marines have more jets than the RN when they deploy later this month. That’s sad…
Could you explain why the F35B was a mistake and which Aircraft should we have purchased and exactly how would we have qualified the mass of pilots needed to sustain carrier opps for cats and traps vs the very easy qualification of a pilot for carrier ops on F35b. Also was there a plan for all the capital and ongoing costs associated with supporting CATOBAR carriers.
its the little differences like ability to surge all available aircraft in a short time ( you can’t do that with a CATOBAR carrier) that really make the F35B a better choice for the U.K.
Total agree F35b ability to take off in higher sea states that the F45c makes it a much better aircraft considered our carriers will be used to defend the north Atlantic in rough seas much like the Falklands. If we had not had harrier we would have had little air cover over the Falklands as you just can’t wait for rough seas to clam. The F35b abilities make it a much more cost effective aircraft than the F35c.
Sorry late answer.
The short answer is the F-35 is not as good as the F-35C – The F-35 is fatter/slower and carries less munitions. A Super Hornet would have IMO been better, or if stealth is a must, F-35-C
OK I agree in part over swarm but for that to be effective, lote of jets need to be available not just a dozen or so.
As for piolets was not a problem for our last CATOBAR carrier, was it?
Last the RAF have to share the F-35B – Really not good, they need better jets with more range and more punch.
Are you an ex Racal employee?
no!
I wondered as Ernest Harrison was CEO of Racal for many, many years!
Global Britain, it makes me feel very proud of the Royal Navy.
FFS man be careful with that kind of positive talk you’ll be causing outrage and spilled soy latte’s,, upsetting the usual suspects who will require an even bigger supply of new untwisted panties😂
out %&££@€& standing, RN # numero uno 👍🏻👏🏻
🏴🇬🇧
Change the record!
😂👋🏻 it’s all digital now H records are from the 1960’s get with the times man 👍🏻
🏴🇬🇧
Change the 8 track
Question I have noticed in the fourth photo that the PoW has an extra dark area, which I think is a heat resistant area aft, port side. Anyone know why?
All in all a good set of naval power photos, only a pity the shot could not take in the support group. When I see the deck layout of QE and her hanger it shows that they can take much more than the 24-36 F36Bs, I do remember reading somewhere that at surge they are capable of 70 aircraft. Oh and by the way they are not 65,000 tons but came out at somewhere around the 70,000+ tons. Not sure but some of the biggest or at least heaviest convential powered warships in the world
65,000 tons unloaded and with nothing onboard. 72-74,000 tons full load
Fantastic photo. I started my working life at a shipyard tendering for the CVA01 contract in the 60s, only to see that cancelled by the Wilson government. That strategic mistake has finally been rectified.
Spot on.
Hear, hear.
Hey Trevor-that means you must be older than me-just maybe. I thought I was the father of the house!😉 May 22 1949. To think that the bedroom antics of a couple of fairly typical examples of the male of the species, changed history and the shape of the British Defence inustry!. The Tories would no doubt have been re-elected and Carriers,TSR2,Supersonic Harrier et al would have forged onward!
..been elected but for the Profumo affair.
Just need the couple of Thousand Aircraft now …… 😅
Just think the CVA01/2/3 would be be probably be going out of service now if they had been built….
Blinking marvellous. What a beautiful sight.
Over 20 years of hard work, good job!
See, I said it would happen, Geoff!
What a fantastic set of photographs!
Great snaps but folks don’t go over excited, they will never operate together. We can only operate one air wing at a time no matter how available the flat tops are. If we were forced to operate both together, in extremis, one would have the fleet carrier air wing and the other Commandos and the junglies + maybe some F35s from (6 to 8) from OCU etc for direct support of the Marines – highly unlikely.
The 1SL seems keen to prove you wrong:
“We are devouring novel technologies and innovation. We will begin to launch drones from HMS Prince of Wales in September and accelerate the transition to a hybrid crewed/uncrewed airwing. My ambition is that we challenge ourselves to create an air wing for each carrier.”
It does seem that we are in a state of transition and manned aircraft may well be soon as thing of the past. An interesting couple of decades ahead and it would be a brave man to guess what an air-group might look like 20 years from now.
My ambition is to win the lottery…..don’t think it’ll happen though….
I don’t know, I won a tenner the other week, it’s not that unlikely.
Hope we won’t have to re-run Op CORPORATE then. We needed two carriers for that.
Does look impressive, great to see them sailing together. Looking forward to seeing pictures from PoW starting F35 trials, hopefully soon.
A long time in the making but oh what a sight. Yes there’s obvious issues going forward in the short term but celebrate the moment ….and as part of a longer term plan recognise the achievement. You’d have to go way back to Ark Royal & Eagle with Phantoms and Buccs to get anywhere close to this.
Point being, forget a decade without carriers….this is more a forty year catch up.
Just a small point, but Eagle had sea vixen in its air wing not phantoms, it’s why it got the chop before Ark Royal ( even though it was in better shape and bigger).
Thanks Jonathan, it was simply an example to illustrate relative air groups. You’re not strictly correct though. All the FAA Phantom trials were actually completed on board Eagle but correct in operational terms.
Serious national intent is going to war with two carriers not just having two going for an afternoon cruise and photo-op…
Where to begin?
The aircraft for them have not been built yet.
Should HMS QE remain alongside til 2023 when the initial 48 F35 are available? Or can the RN carry out much needed training, procedures, gain experience, operate with allies, and show the world just what the UK and RN is capable of?
No, thought not.
Then we’d have people saying what is the point of the ship being built only to remain alongside.
HMS QE is about to deploy for the 1st time, that is no photo op and the ability to deploy a carrier group to the far side of the world is not to be laughed at.
With carriers it is traditional that when 2 meet such “photo ops” take place.
To complete your snipe why not add the lack of Merlin and FSS?
Both are crewed and in extremis both would be used, even if the airgroup was split between them, more helicopters embarked, or UAV as the 1SL is saying.
Meanwhile, us unfashionable proud types who can see the wood for the trees and just what progress has been made from NOTHING to this will continue to see the positives.
Good reply Daniele
Well said. 😆
I apologise. I have to go and change my underwear.
Welcome back to the big leagues!
Hopefully they can take some of the pressure off the US CVBGs that are stretched thin and overworked.
They are great photos. I think I know what the British Ambassador in Moscow would like to give Putin as a Xmas present. Would look good in a gold leaf frame.
“I see no Ships”, sorry Planes….. well actually I do see Planes, just a shame I can’t see the other 64 UK ones they are designed for (but not with), yet, if at all, oh I know I’m only being silly……. Funny reading all the FB and Twitter comments yesterday, one chap said something about French Planes had gone then ? that was a new one. Anyway, what a fantastic sight, onwards and upwards.😀
As a demonstration of size, you should have been in Portland this last few weeks, RFA Fort Victoria was alongside the Norwegian Bliss on Saturday, looked like a Tug Boat……
I have to say I’m never quite sure how the stability of these really big cruise ships works. It does, but it just does not look right to the eye ( sort of like when a jumbo jet takes off….just not natural).
It’s all about Metacentric Height mate…. But I’m no “Expert” 😎
Has anyone spotted the extra bits fitted to HMS Prince Of Wales, Starboard side at the Bow just above the Waterline, I can’t see close enough but they look like “Drain Plugs” !!!!😎
A genuine question for the Naval types on here. If we actually went into a shooting war, does the size of the QEC negate the necessity for two carriers operating together? I completely get the requirement that says two to enable continuous availability. But that does mean that we normally on have one available.
The only thing is, I was watching a documentary about the Falklands where Sandy Woodward said – you have to have two in case you lose one. All you need is a mechanical failure or an accident on deck and you’ve potentially got other aircraft low on fuel and nowhere to land. He also wasn’t willing to do the amphibious landing without both LPDs available for the same reason. Now as a former infantryman, that makes inherent sense to me.
But then I thought; QEC is comparatively much larger than Hermes / Invincible, even taking into account the fact that F35B is twice the size of a SHAR. So does the same rule apply? Could you continue air ops even with a mechanical failure or an accident on deck? I’m assuming that the CSG defences are sufficient not to actually lose the carrier entirely…
Thanks in advance.
The answer is not necessarily, because a bigger ship gives you more capability in a given hull, as always with ship construction size is useful and not too expensive, it’s the electronics and the other kit ( the air group) that drives up the overall cost. Woodward was right in that a crash on deck on Invincible or Hermes could be catastrophic because they had small decks relative to QE, and as we were all taught burning Avcat can spread very quickly. QE’s deck is so large that it ought to be possible to bring in a VTOL aircraft to land on a piece of deck not covered with hoses and fire. However the flight deck crew would be working like one armed paper hangars and it is not a job I would want to volunteer for.
If you want to have a sobering half hour look up the reports of the fires on some carriers after a Kamikase attack, or the big fires in USS Enterprise and I think Forrestal, both of which were accidents but very serious.
However any Commander will always want more in the event of having to go to war, and as you will have read about the Falklands having to go to war with just 20 Sea Harriers was nail biting stuff, and a major mechanical failure or accidental fire in a ship can take it out of action just as effectively as enemy action. Which is why we spent a lot of time always practicing fire fighting.
Going off on a tangent a very good recently published book is Harrier 809, by Rowland White. Very well written and fast paced it shows what can be done when stuff has to happen very quickly and red tape can be ruthlessly cut. It’s a very good read, and soon out in paperback.
As I understand it’s one of those advantages a Queen Elizabeth will have over a CATOBAR carrier, in that an F35B only needs a bit of clear flight deck to be able to be recovered. Where as a Recovery on a CATOBAR needs the whole deck ready.
It would really depend on what the situation is and what equipment is required in order to prosecute it.
If the situation was (for example) airstrikes on a nation state or terrorist organisation, one carrier would suffice. I won’t name any names here, but just imagine the Middle East. You could provide the jets, AEW, ASW, SAR and perhaps even a small amount of ground attack helicopters, without the need to fully equip both carriers. This would be advantageous, as you would have one carrier and a group in reserve to take over duties and releive the other during a prolonged intervention. This might not be necessary due to UK land bases in the region, but it MIGHT be due to ground threats. Carriers can move, whereas HMS Akrotiri can’t (yes, I’m JOKING about it being HMS Akrotiri!).
It’s important to remeber that the carrier group will operate with a lot of ‘big deck’ ships. If there was an accident on deck or an incident with an aircraft in-flight, they could be directed to land on an RFA, for example. Yes, they don’t have the heat shielding offered on the carrier, but in an emergency you need to work with what you have at times. This is one of the main advantages of the F35B: its landing options are far greater than many of its contemporaries. The F35B does offer the chance to operate even with a compromised flight deck, but I would be worried about FOD and the potential to make a bad situation even worse.
In all likelyhood, air operations would cease due to safety concerns. It would be better to lose one airfcraft (and maybe its pilot) as oppsed to two, three, or maybe even the whole ship. In a conflict such as this (likely involving allied nations with a minimal threat to the carrier itself), I would imagine the carrier would retire briefly, to allow for the damage to be cleared, investigated and repaired accordingly.
However, in the typical ‘Falklands’ Style’ conflict, I could well see both ships working together. I can imagine one would be fitted with a large ‘strike’ package, whilst the other would operate in a LPH-hybrid role, with a small number of jets. The jets would act as self-defence, as well as providing some cover if accidents/incidents occured on the other. This would also offer an additional deck in cases of emergency, as well as the facilities to refuel/repair/hangar the aircraft if necessary.
If it was in this role, it wouldn’t get close to the action. Moreso, the carrier would likely use its deck and hangar as a means of transporting additional helicopters to support the fleet and ground campaign (Merlin, Chinook, Apache, maybe the future medium-lift chopper), using RFA ships (Bays and Supply Ships) and the Albions as lilypads. The Falklands proved the need for helicopters in this role (the lack of Chinook was a problem after the loss of the Conveyor), but the Bays, Albions and Escorts cannot provide this, with the Bays and Escorts only offering Wildcat or Merlin for dedicated tasks. I would imagine even a single QE class would struggle to provide Carrier Strike WITH ground support helicopters in any number at the same time.
At the moment, the only RFAs capable of taking a decent number of Helos are Argus and Fort Vic, and this will only be rectified if the Ellida ships come to fruition (they can carry up to four merlin each, without modifications to the structure).
The go to answer for naysayers moaning about only 1 airwing.
But realistically you can also put some of the helos onto other ships in a task group. All the RFA have big helo decks some of them have a decent hangar. T45 have and T31 will have good aviation facilities. The Albions and Bays have good big decks but no permanent hangars.
OK they are not Ocean but they do all actually exist and are functional.
The other way of looking at it is that QEC is huge and 24 5th gen jets would be a huge force and there is plenty of space of cabs on top of that.
You could. It’s exactly what’s happening with CSG21 and something I should have noted. I haven’t even factored in STUFT or some of the future additions to the fleet and what they’ll being to the table.
It’s true to say that a single QEC is a vast improvement over Vince and Hermes in 1982 in terms of aircraft carried, but the similarities remain.
But the only RFA vessels with large hangar facilities are Fort Vic and Argus. The older Forts aren’t certified to operate Merlin (and likely wouldn’t even in a combat situation), and the tankers only offer space for one merlin. Such vessels are likely to be used to help with AEW or ASW, or offer Vert Rep capacity to the wider fleet. The Bays/Albions might be used to ferry some aditional airframes (likely Merlin and Wildcat), but experience has shown me that it’s less than ideal. None of them offer the dedicated hangar facilities for Chinook, which would be critical to an operation of that scale. Hangar facilities are crucial, not least due to the weather conditions likely to be faced within a combat zone of that nature. A carrier operating in that role could be used as a ‘hub’ for a decent number of chinooks, leaving the other to worry about fixed-wing operations.
Do the carriers have a lot of space? Absolutely. But having two provides the options to chop and change, to mix things up. Operating strike and large-scale rotary wing operations from a siingle hull in unison might cancel each other out, effectively lowering the potency of each package. We need to see more work in the years ahead about how this can be achieved, and how greater varieties of aircraft can operate from the decks in unison.
It’s important to not let my answer go over anyone’s head like a harrier leaping off a ski-jump. I’m assuming the worst-case senario in both cases. The good thing about the carrier, the esorts and support ships is the flexibility that they offer in terms of air wing, support, and the promotion of power.
I will still stand by previous statement, however. If we found ourselves in the situation (a true national emergency), I can see both operating together, along with every available vessel. There would likely be the political will to as well, as the power projection and statement of intent would be nothing to sneeze at. Speaking from experience, my only concern with this would be the lack of depth to relieve a carrier as and when required. Lusty acted as the relief carrier for Vince and Hermes down South, and if we operated two together now, we’d lose that luxury.
Something else that I didn’t consider was the fact that we might see both operational during times of need. While this falls outside of the remit of a shooting war, it’s entirely possible that one might be deployed on operations (including during combat), while the other is employed for disaster relief operations. Size doesn’t negate the fact that one carrier can’t be in two places at once. The potential for one to be deployed in the Indian Ocean and one to be sent to the Caribbean is high (again, as a worst-case scenario), but it could happen.
In all likelihood, we’d likely see an Albion or RFA deployed, but two carriers offers that flexibility of choice.
Very interesting and considered response.
Hello, does anyone know how the rotation of planes and helos between deck and hanger works? I understand that it’s better to keep in hanger than on deck, but only space in hanger for 20, so I envisioned some kind if rotation occurring. Also, anyone know max number of planes and helps that can be on the deck at one time with it still being usable? I would guess 24 and 14, but don’t have a clue. Cheers
Ask CPW, he seems to be the expert on such matters!
It’s simple really…. We just planned not to buy enough for this question to need answering. 😉
Cheers for the replies, any ideas where I could source this info? Should be easy enough to find but am struggling a bit.
Well if you just go by historical events from the past 70 years, you might find an ease to your struggling. But heck, what do I know, I’m no “Expert” 😎
👍
Excellent wit CPW. It all makes sense now!
Serious answer.
Maintenance is the hangar first priority.
Second priority is anything not being used that needs to be kept out of salt spay.
Anything needed in a hurry is left on deck. CAP, QR, ASW, AEW rotations etc.
FSS order progress.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fleet-solid-support-ships-competition-launched
Foreign companies may compete but significant portion of the build must be in the UK. Navantia in the H&W yards is an option.
Some great pics on Royal Navy website now. Air Forces Monthly said one US F35 failed to fly out to ship at beginning of May due to a technical fault. Perhaps has still not joined, hence only 17 on deck for photo op.
The CDG looks even smaller here UKDJ !
Lol.😂
U no funn DGUK 😂
RAF Luton no wellcum ony eer ven 😆
I see, via HMS Warrior webcam, that QE & USS Sullivans are alongside in Pompey riding out the storm. No sign of the ARG or POW. Poor beggars must be at sea getting tossed around a bit. I doubt they would even need the ramp to launch an F35 with 70 gusting up to 90 mph winds over the flight deck!
Off Portland Race, Inbound to Pompey mate.
In Exmouth Bay to avoid the rollers. Makes sense.
A bit further East mate, Weymouth Bay ….. Would love to see her in Portland or just off Weymouth tomorrow as We are off there again this Weekend.
Sorry Capt’in, got me Portlands mixed up.
lol…. are you Spanish mate ? 😂 They missed it by miles a few centuries back too !!!!!
Que?
It will be a long time before we see both carriers operating F-35B’s. A lack of aircraft is only part of the problem – the UK has only purchased enough F-35 support equipment for one ship. So when POW takes over from QE as the UK’s strike carrier, it will be “moving day” at Portsmouth for several ISO containers and lorry loads of very expensive equipment, tools and spares.
Why are the decks different in the aft?
Must say I tend to agree. I don’t see China’s human rights record is any worse than India’s and they actually make things we want to buy.
The Chinese have offered fighter jets to Argentina and have negotiated a harbour for their fishing fleet in Sierra Leone. They have learned from the British how to build an empire and create a network of foreign bases. For East India company read Chinese Fishing fleet…bringing jobs and making a few local politicians rich. They are self confident and outgoing, western qualities we normally admire.
Waiting for the comments about PoW having no planes 🙂
SHE HAS NO PLANES!
Seriously, I don’t see a carpenter’s planes embarked. 😉
She needs to get over to the U.S. east coast for qualifying for F35 air operations, just like the QE had to. This was delayed by the October 2020 flooding incident & repair work. Repairing that was only completed earlier this month/late April & her current cruise is working-up after that. I expect sailing for the USA will be next, unless she’s still to qualify for helicopter operations first. Lots of time planned to be at sea, working up the ship has been lost while tied up at Portsmouth doing these repairs.
China will seek to make a world favourable to authoratarian despots & undermine democracy. The CCP has no plans to reform but entrench its control over all within the borders of the PRC. It is seeking to control its neighbours as well. The wests over-reliance on Chinese manufacturing is an own-goal delivered by greedy western capitalists who prefered more riches for themselves over providing decent jobs to their own people. If I was Chinese I’d be imprisoned for saying this.