HMS Queen Elizabeth is now embarking on a month-long training cruise.
The aircraft carrier was recently at Glenmallan in Scotland, where it restocked its ammunition supply.
During the cruise, the crew will have the opportunity to work with highly advanced F-35 fighter jets, an experience that will further enhance their skills and knowledge.
Farewell beautiful Scotland! So many wonderful sights and memories. Thank you to the wonderful Royal Company of Merchants who helped us recognise members of our talented ship’s company. pic.twitter.com/bFMN7DuqcN
— HMS Queen Elizabeth (@HMSQNLZ) February 13, 2023
Glenmallan
This was the second time the vessel has visited the Northern Ammunition Jetty at Glen Mallan near Faslane since it was upgraded.
According to a news release on the upgrade work:
“We awarded a £67m contract to VolkerStevin in 2019. Alongside them, we worked with managing agent Jacobs, which provided engineering and professional services, as well as designer Arch Henderson. In completing this major project, £20m was spent with local suppliers and small and medium enterprises in Scotland. The jetty was last upgraded in the 1970s and had reached the end of its economic life. The upgrade work has not only extended the life of the jetty by an estimated fifty years, but has also made the site accessible for the Royal Navy’s aircraft carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.
In fact, HMS Queen Elizabeth visited part way through the work, back in March 2021, in preparation for her first operational deployment. This was not originally planned but became necessary when the scale of the ship’s deployment increased, presenting the team with a challenge to make the jetty operational in time for her arrival. Everyone involved, from DIO, VolkerStevin, Jacobs and the various subcontractors worked closely together to enable HMS Queen Elizabeth to berth at the unfinished jetty, which she did successfully.”
Is there any update on the delivery schedule of the F-35Bs? All seems to be a bit quiet on the information front.
From what I’ve seen 30 delivered , another 18 due by end of 2025, funding for a further 26 approved for delivery through to 2033
Is the one we lost getting replaced?
Not directly as such unless it’s included in that 2nd batch
That is a steady drumbeat, albeit very slow.
I’m assuming they want that 2nd batch of 26 to be block 4 off the shelf (or near as makes no difference) which would mean deliveries not starting to 2028 ish
I read that two more UK pilots has graduated to fly the F35 last week, with another seven pilots graduating around August time.
As John has pointed out, I would say the pilot training is more critical than the airframes at the moment.
Yes agree, they need to be a bit more proactive in this area. But planes also need to be ordered in a timely manner too. I’d even say equipment first, then pilots, pending time frames for both. Hopefully the pilot shortage will be sorted out soonish.
Possibly due to deliveries currently suspended for all models following the recent crash! Article on defensenews.com on possible fix dated 10 Feb.
Another 7 will be delivered this year.
Thanks Robert, everyone. Seven is quite a chunky number for within one year.
Its all going in the right direction. And those that continue to slate this aircraft at any opportunity will have major egg on their face’s in the years to come. It’s an incredible capability, that few understand, mainly because they don’t want to. This is the best capability can buy for our carriers, and yet there are those that just want to bemoan when they don’t understand the capability and potential. And don’t even want to hear the overwhelming positive news from the people who operate the jet about just what this aircraft can do, and why so many nations… Read more »
And the pilots?
They’ll need be more proactive in sourcing pilots. Surely out of the whole population they can fill what’s required and improve pay, conditions to retain who they have for longer?
Aircrew pay in the RAF is not to be sneezed at. I doubt many youngsters in their late teens/early 20s are put off embarking on an RAF career because of the money.
Might be different for those in mid-late career.
What, there socks in your laundry as well?
Anyone know where CSG 23 is going? Is it another round the world trip?
Watching the BBC documentary, I couldn’t help thinking about the huge cost incurred just to get a handful of as yet not very well armed jets to sea. Not just the capital cost of the ship and its aircraft, but the need to devote so much of the available fleet to protect it. There isn’t going to be funding to deliver the original ambition- 2 carriers each with up to 36 F35s out of a fleet of 138. So what can be done to make full use of these expensive assets at a price we can afford?
well they make jolly good helicopter carriers!
Even then we don’t have enough helicopters….. sad but true.
Going off on a slight tangent… could Typhoon Jets be upgraded to be used on carriers?
Don’t even go there.
Morning Daniele 🙂
Ah! Look what the cat dragged in!
You’re back. Been on hols mate?
No Daniele just busy at work. We have had a very humid and hot 2023 thus far with humiture index in the late 30’s. Even the Zululanders who get temperatures up in the 40’s rate Durban as the most uncomfortable in the 1st Quarter- we constantly sweat between aircons! The QE and her complement looking formidable!
Cheers Mon Ami
What the hell has Zululand got to do with the QE 2
Ah Sha-nothing to do with the QE (and btw note not QE2 but just QE) Zululand has to do with the cat dragging stuff in!
Cheers from a wet Durban
No.
Hell no!
Typhoons would need Cats and Traps plus extensive mods to be launched from the QE’s. The conventional launch option was briefly considered at time of construction but quickly discarded as it was hugely expensive and would have delayed in-service dates by up to two years
YES, But like Tempest, it won’t be happening. The cost now is a huge factor to upgrade Typhoon. Yet another opportunity missed in my opinion! According to Paul Hopkins, Vice President of Business Development (Air) at BAE Systems, simulation tests of a ‘navalized Typhoon’ show the aircraft can take off and land with full mission payload, including two ‘Storm Shadow’ cruise missiles, four BVR missiles, two short-range missiles, a centerline fuel tank and two conformal fuel tanks – something no other navalized aircraft can perform. A navalized Typhoon will be a newly built aircraft, fitted with a strengthened airframe and… Read more »
Have to convert the carriers to hybrid conventional-vstol. I mentioned in another trail the idea of converting one of QE Carriers if being utilised to a hybrid. It could make it more interoperable with allies in Europe, Asia and the US. Sorry if this is indeed a very silly idea… Lol 😁
*I meant… under-utilised…
no, too heavy. massive rebuild of carriers too, not viable
Yes, if you’ve got the money.
Put drones in the mix too. Interoperability with other F-35B operators. At least the carriers are built!
Or, maybe convert one, or both, to an angled – deck hybrid so it can land all types.
They are going to have to find the money! And more. Putin and his mob only pick on the weak.
Never going to happen Chris. Sunak is tone deaf on all things defence and when he’s kicked out and Labour get in, they’ll be just as bad. Read on Skynews yesterday that Ben Wallace is requesting at least 10Bn/yr increase for defence. I love that guy – he truly is passionate and is the best Defence Secretary we’ve had in decades. Still, his plea will be fed lip-service but will go unanswered. IMO the best the MoD can expect from the Treasury this go around is an inflationary match – that’s it. No new money. That said, I do truly… Read more »
Even inflation match if that to GDP then if GDP shrinks it doesn’t look good. Next government will do the expected an blame the last as usual. Sadly its so predictable.
Yep, sadly entirely predictable.
There is also exchange rate problem when buying in US goods.
Agreed they are going to have to find it somehow if we value our security and if we seriously want to deter Putin. Otherwise we may face the unthinkable. Ukraine is the warning that we must find the money before it is too late!
It took us 5 years to rearm before WW2 – the political will and the money was found. Both seem lacking today – and I expect we would need 10 years as the kit is far more complex.
Best bet is a loyal-wingman drone to be paired up with the F-35s.
Any news on the RN request for proposals for an EMAL system? It’s gone very quiet.
I think a catapult launch system should be fitted to HMS Prince of wales as soon posable and funded by NATO.
I wonder if they would consider a catapult launch for a naval Arealis if that ever gets up? There’s an Unmanned version in the mix too. If there’s ever spare money why not make the POW a hybrid carrier? More inter operability with allies and with a great mix of aircraft.
Loyal wingman have gone out of fashion. I assume because the RAF has worked out that they would be much more expensive than originally hoped and much less capable with the current state of AI.
Cheap and cheerful Aldi drones are the current flavour of the month.
US seems to be doing OK ref AI.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a42868467/ai-flies-fighter-jet-first-time/
The UK has canceled its loyal wingman program. The US will not be far behind. Flying an aircraft with AI has been done before. Fighting an aircraft with AI is decades away.
For the NATO area I think we should be pushing a couple of the Northern European members and current operators of F35A (Norway and Netherlands) to invest in a dozen F35Bs. They provide escorts to both US and U.K. CSG’s so why not get some aircraft on board.
This is where the two U.K. carriers can come into their own by genuinely taking the pressure off the USN carrier fleet in Europe.
Good idea. Wasn’t Israel considering the B at one point in order to give flexibility to operate from austere bases? I know that’s a totally different bit of the world but if the sh*t really did hit the fan in Northern Europe I can see that flexibility also being potentially useful so possibly some additional justification for Norway, Netherlands etc to consider some Bs. It would also have a small added side benefit for the UK economy since I think our work share in the B is higher than the A or C due to the lift fan being a… Read more »
WTF should any other European country pay for UK’s defence?
We pay for Norway’s (RM Brigade tasked to reinforce them) and NATO’s under our Nuc umbrella so why not
Yeah that’s exactly the same as Norway paying for the UK’s carrier aircraft (eyes roll).
You do actually understand the principles behind the NATO alliance and mutual defence?
It is likely our carriers will spend most of their operational lives in Europe supporting NATO so just like the deployment of USMC aircraft on QE why for example couldn’t Dutch owned and operated F35B’s do the same.
Yeah, let’s buy Norway some tanks and artillery.
Its a shame you can’t discuss things in a grown up manner because you make some valid contributions and then detract from those with juvenile sarcasm and name calling.
Norway is pretty well punching way above its weight per capita. . the Dutch are AWOL.
On the other hand the USMC are available and are pretty keen to prove that the Lightning carrier is a viable combat option.
And lets face it, their stint on CSG21 went pretty well. I met one of their ground crew on Holiday and they were very happy Bunnies. He mentioned, the Food and the accomodation standards, Oh and we all swear the same.
What he didn’t like was the lack of Defensive Armament and COVID.
Whilst I agree about the USMC and they are welcome it does sort of fit with the Anglo Dutch U.K./NL landing force, which deploys to Norway and our arrangement regarding P8’s with Norway. Indeed the USMC are also working with us in the same theatre so it would make sense.
The Dutch are great allies and have excellent Marines but no way will they pay for F35B when both they and Norway have F35A.
Ahah. .. “lack of defensive” armament on the Carriers. Yes, seriously, when are they going fix this. Just 3 CIWS is just nuts. They’re upgrading the T45s, how about a bit more for the carriers? RAM, CAMM, VSHORAD RWS, SeaStreak, Dragonfire, SEA Decoy launchers. Is it just money or do the powers that be really don’t think it’s necessary? How many billions of pounds is a fully laden, including all the personnel, carrier worth to them?
Just 16/32 CAMMS will do nicely.
Yes and 2x 40 mm bofors with P3 ammo. Gives you proper layering then. But as a minimum sea ceptor yes.
Perhaps they really are waiting for Dragonfire. The carriers would be a great platform for them. Oodles of power and a high, stable mount.
Do we know the Dragonfires likely effective range, maybe 5-10km max? As part of a layered system with maybe missiles for 10-20km+. We live hope.
I think fully laden you are looking at ~£10bn in cost. I think adding 2x 40mm bofors + 2x sea ceptor batteries (see above response) potentially costing around 50million mark all together is a great insurance policy and gives much better defence. T45 can’t be in several places at once.
Hopefully some improvements and additional armaments/countermeasures are in the works for the carriers.
Lack of defensive options. Amen as has been discussed here and on naval lookout forever. Below my view of what we should have use the 30mm mounts that are empty with 2×40 mm and 2 sea ceptor. Gives you far longer theoretical range out for interception and engagement and standardising on kit that is used elsewhere in the navy.
Does anyone know why the original 30mm gun mounts were never fitted to the carriers? Seemed to be a last second decision before QE sailed on CSG21.
I don’t foresee the QEs ever getting a point defence missile system. I think there is broad agreement that they should but there just isn’t the money. Too many other demands that are more pressing on what little funds are available.
Short of an all out war, just not going to happen I’m afraid.
Norway and the Netherlands already deploy far more F-35s than the UK does. The B models do not fit their needs. If they did they would have bought them.
And? Ah are we playing little iddy biddy numbers game? Oh dear is that the best you can come up with as a debate point! Do get back to your more direct anti-UK abuse, as being subtle isn’t working due to your limited intelligence! Good lad now dry the eyes and move on!
The 138 number was the original life-time buy with a planned fleet of around 60 aircraft in 4 frontline squadrons and the OCU. This has now changed in the short term although the government is not ruling out future procurement beyond the current 74. May depend on how Tempest turns out. Don’t hold your breath on either.
Tempest will be scrapped after hundreds of millions/billions invested as once the RAF start to gold plate it & the other partners want their own tech integrated, it will be realised as too expensive for so few airframes. At best if it isn’t scrapped they’ll negotiate a good work share % based on a promise of hundreds of airframes & then cut the number back once the infrastructure is in place building them. Sound familiar? F35B will never reach 138 air frames… Life-time buy or not. It will be life-extended in service to cover that fact. So will Typhoon. Neither… Read more »
Looking at UKs recent history it’s very hard to argue against.
Well said.
You may well be right but we all hope that you’re wrong. Sure hope we do not sit on our “defence backsides” and that those in charge do their job and do it well and fast. Why choose to be weak!?
Excellent commentary sir and I wholeheartedly agree!
Thank you for your service too.
That level of detail was never stated. Wherever you got that from made it up.
Aviation Week magazine reported these comments in May 2016: “The U.K. will build a front-line fleet of 48 aircraft, 12 per squadron. A fifth unit, also with 12 aircraft, will be formed as an operational conversion unit (OCU), Air Cmdr. Harvey Smyth, the commander of the U.K.’s Lightning Force, told reporters on the sidelines of an F-35 training conference here May 19.”
Havey Smyth is now an Air Marshall and Deputy Commander Operations, RAF. Ring him up and ask if that;s what he really meant.
That conversation was a very long time after the 138 number was determined.
If we get 74, we have enough to surge to 36 on one of the carriers. Perhaps not too bad?
The 138 over the lifetime notion is just political spin. The whole point of having carriers this big was to achieve a sortie rate of 112, originally more. This led directly to the 36 per carrier, to deliver which needed a total fleet of 138. High costs of both acquisition and support have meant others too have reduced their planned numbers.
On the UK F-35B Currently, Paveway IV, the Advanced Medium Air to Air Missile Range: 20+ miles (17.38+ nautical miles), Advanced Short Range Air to Air Missile with Meteor and Spear 3/EW late 2020s if all goes to plan. Wingtip AIM-9X Sidewinder short-range air-to-air missiles. “The UK MoD has revealed that the first firing test of MBDA’s Selective Precision Effects At Range Capability 3 (SPEAR 3) air-to-surface weapon from an RAF Eurofighter Typhoon will not take place as planned this year, but instead go ahead in 2023. ‘The first guided firing is now scheduled for 2023 due to technical considerations and… Read more »
Typhoon has PW IV, Meteor, ASRAAM, Storm Shadow, and Brimstone.
UK F-35B will have PW IV, Meteor, ASRAAM, FCASM, and SPEAR 3. In the interim it has PW IV, AMRAAM and ASRAAM.
What exactly is your issue?
Hi fella, I think that the issue being raised is the current lack of ‘strike’ capabilities across the board, given that the F35 has been in production since 2010 ish. Other than 3 x AAM and JASSM the only other weapons the aircraft can carry are an assortment of bombs (SDM, JDAM, PW, JSOW etc) not all of which we have, then the options for ‘strike’ are currently limited. Yes, we are getting more options, but basically not until Blk 4 comes along in all its glory (2027 ish). Not an entirely satisfactory situation given the time the aircraft has… Read more »
So you want FCASM and Spear 3 quicker?
I guess you could reasonably criticise not fitting Brimstone at the same time as ASRAAM.
One of the problems caused by the UK switching to the F-35C and then back again by the idiot Cameron, was that the UK lost its place in line for B weapon integration which kinda screwd things. Well that and the Treasury not wanting to stump up the cash.
No, FCASM will be the last to be integrated on account it’s not even flying yet. You are mistaken ref our place with integration after the F35B/C fiasco. Spear 3/Meteor integration has always been dependent on BLK 4., initially slated for 2024. Spear 3 development and ISD was slated as 2024 to coincide with the arrival of Blk4 , but was purposely delayed due to Blk4 issues. Blk 4 for various reason has been pushed back to 2027/28. Hence Spear3/Meteor integration has been delayed until then. This is not the RNs/MOD/HMGs fault, that rests entirely with LM and to some… Read more »
A interesting rewrite of history. Putin has a job waiting for you 😀 UK weapon integration was determined well in advance of block iv being a thing. The UK doesn’t pay for f-35 development so using that as an excuse for the cancellation of storm shadow integration is nonsense. Truth is that Cameron’s dithering plus Osbornes defence cuts pushed all UK weapon integration well to the right. Sure the F-35 program is a real mess. A dozen or so countries operating or about to operate thousands of them. Complete disaster. But hey let’s blame the US for the UK’s penny… Read more »
Nothing to do with a rewrite of anything, bit inconvenient my post not aligning with yours I presume! Not sure what the £2+ billion the UK put into the programme was for then?? Obviously not the development according to yo, perhaps to buy the coffees at lunch or something? If not it’s development, perhaps you could suggest what the money was for? All Cameron and Osborne’ s dithering did was delay and increase the cost of the carriers. Whether you like it or not, spiraling development costs early in it’s life cost us SS integration, Meteor/S3 were always linked with… Read more »
Changed your tune i see. First it was the spiraling cost of F-35 development that put paid to SS integration, now it’s the one time fixed payment of 2 billion that caused it. Make up your mind. The real answer was that the MoD didn’t want to pay for it’s integration with only a limited service life left. Given Typhoon can carry the missile, that sounds very sensible to me. Weapons integration was and is scheduled a long time in advance. Meteors dates ended up aligned with blk iv so blk iv became the meteor base release. Unfortunately blk iv… Read more »
Hi Deep 32, Block 4 completion has now been pushed back to 2029
10 Jan 2023
“In fact, delays and technical problems with the TR-3 account for a $330 million increase in the F-35’s development costs, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office. Development of Block 4 is now three years late and will continue until 2029, the GAO said in April 2022.”
See my posts further down this thread re numbers and upgrades to US 4th gen aircraft.
Cheers Nigel,
I do wonder if UK PLC will try and get both Meteor and S3 integrated before then, a bit like NSM/LRASM are slated to be available either later this year or early 2024?
In answer to PeerS re UK F-35B Ron 5 you ——- idiot. Jesus, how thick are you? A bit more news for you to try to get your head around if that’s possible. 10 Jan 2023 “In fact, delays and technical problems with the TR-3 account for a $330 million increase in the F-35’s development costs, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office. Development of Block 4 is now three years late and will continue until 2029, the GAO said in April 2022.” And counting, AGAIN. How about this? Jan 2023 DoD delays key F-35 tests, lowering chance of… Read more »
Yeah I get it, you piss on the F-35 at every opportunity yet the world’s air forces keep buying the aircraft because its the best available at the best price. But you keep pissing away, I’m sure Putin is very appreciative of your efforts.
Do your homework Ron 5, I see you’ve been let out of school early today, or have you been suspended again? 😂
It doesn’t need me to piss on it, It’s doing a very good job of that all by itself!
3 Jan 2023
“The unit cost of F-35 fighters will creep up in a $30 billion, three-lot deal announced Dec. 30, driven by a more sophisticated product, inflation, and lower U.S. sales volume, while annual deliveries will slip.
Meanwhile, some F-35s remain grounded and others undelivered following the crash of an F-35B on Dec. 15.
Ah, the duty moron is still at it. Maybe you should send all these links to Canada or Switzerland or Germany, see if you can get them to change their mind about purchasing F35. 😆 Because I’m sure they are missing some of these vital facts you will have spent all day searching for. 👍
Nice one Robert.
Any news on full-rate production yet? Slipped to 2024 and counting again. Canada expects the first F-35s to be delivered in 2026 and for the fleet to be fully operational between 2032 and 2034, Defense Minister Anita Anand told a news conference. The F-35 “is the most advanced fighter on the market and it is the right aircraft for our country,” Anand told reporters, adding the purchase and maintenance could contribute over C$425 million annually to the Canadian economy and close to 3,300 jobs annually. Anand said it was the largest investment in the Royal Canadian Air Force in 30… Read more »
A nice bedtime story for Blay& Ron 5! Once upon a time….. Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (LD) My Lords, with other members of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I visited the Lockheed Martin factory in Dallas where the F35 is built. In the course of that visit, I was subject to a large number of questions as to precisely how many further aircraft the United Kingdom proposed to buy. Once upon a time, the figure was 138—I doubt that is still current. Will the Minister take the opportunity, as of today’s date, to give a definitive answer on the number of… Read more »
A nice bedtime story for Mr Blay & Ron 5! Once upon a time….. 😂 “Lord Campbell Pittemweem (Lab) My Lords, with other members of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I visited the Lockheed Martin factory in Dallas where the F35 is built. In the course of that visit, I was subject to a large number of questions as to precisely how many further aircraft the United Kingdom proposed to buy. Once upon a time, the figure was 138—I doubt that is still current. Will the Minister take the opportunity, as of today’s date, to give a definitive answer on the number of… Read more »
huh? What’s your point numbnuts? That the UK is renaging on its commitment to buy 138?
So it seems dickhead. what’s happening with the F-16 I see they’re upgrading them instead of purchasing the F-35. Expect 74 at best, not 138 Why are we slowing down the orders? Anything to do with the countless problems and cost overruns? Same 💩 another day. Just like the last five years explaining it to you and your mate +100 and still, it continues. “Those financial pressures have for some time led to analysts questioning if an original commitment to procure 138 of the fifth-generation fighters will be honoured. In his testimony, Livingston referred to the first batch of 48… Read more »
17 nations. 890 aircraft delivered to date, USAF still committed to purchase 1,763 F35A’s. Those are the only facts that need to bounce around your empty head. Maybe you would like to explain to us all why we didn’t buy 250 or 232 Typhoons?? And you still don’t even get my post about Tempest. After you got so excited that 6th gen would be in service for 2025 after that USAF 6th gen story. Yes Nigel, you clearly thought 6th gen would be available to be in service from 2025. Not a demonstrator, not a prototype, a production standard aircraft… Read more »
So thick, he cannot see the wood for the trees. But keep buying them to support the US workforce while they design their next-generation fighter! Mr Blay, Too busy telling lies I guess. “Air Force Confirms It Plans To Slash F-35 Buy In 2023—But Can’t Explain Why Why buy more outdated combat aircraft while buying fewer new ones? “The Air Force plans to spend many hundreds of millions of dollars in its 2023 budget upgrading 60-year-old B-52 bombers and buying new F-15 fighters based on an airframe that commenced design in 1969. The service says it has sound reasons for… Read more »
Nothing quite like the facts Mr Blay 😂Have you heard of reading between the lines? Let me help you. How do you practice reading between the lines? Make sure to look at the big picture when reading between the lines. “On 6 April 2009, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates proposed speeding up production for the U.S. to buy 2,443 F-35s.” Now 1,763 F35A’s down 680 from the original figure and counting. “The service is currently evaluating its options through a tactical aircraft study to inform the fiscal 2023 budget, which could result in cuts to the Air Force’s program of… Read more »
Even your insults are boring. Try Google searching a personality.
The government has never retrenched on the 138 total. It would be foolish to do so as the 138 did not come with a timeframe, is linked to maintaining the UK work share and the F35 will be in production for many decade, in-fact it is still likely to be in production when the first few tranches of airframes hit the hour limit and are retired and replaced. This a a plane that will still be flying in 2070 we are going to have worn out and replaces a lot of airframes in that time.
It hasn’t confirmed it either. 48 with the possibility of increasing to 74.
“Livingston also revealed that the MoD and Lockheed Martin UK have already made a “handshake agreement” on the follow on F-35 order, with the two parties specifically discussing production lots 15, 16 and 17 so far.”
It has actually maintained its intention. Will it maintain that in the future who knows…but what it orders for this decade is not indication On final numbers. I would suggest that very much depends on what a future 6 Generation fighter will look like ( cost and timing) if tempest is to late and to expensive we will almost definitely see the 138 though the life of the programme if tempest ends up cheap and on time I would say we would not see 138 F35Bs purchased.
Well said!
I’ve been arguing this point fortwo or three years and getting into a certain amount of trouble doing it. Very few people, if any, seem to think there is any urgency. As things stand we are going to have 25/30 operational aircraft by something like 2027/2028 to share between the RAF and two carriers. It is never going to work, particularly as the aircraft are owned by the RAF. Depending what happens in the new review we are in real danger of ending up with only one carrier available with a handful of aircraft; the RAF with 70/80 combat aircraft;… Read more »
How much would you like your taxes increased?
So your in favour of no increase in defence spending and no better procurement for any of the services. You sure your not grinchikov?🤔
No, he’s RON 5 the idiot who has been laughed off Navy Lookout and here but decided to change his name instead hoping nobody would notice while posting the exact same type of replies.
Straight off the bat, he included his famous +100 in a comment 😂 Rodders would be a better name for him but I doubt he’s that bright!
Not at all, just saying that it will cost more and the UK electorate will not tolerate cuts to health or education spending.
The alternative option of growing the economy doesn’t seem to have many supporters either. Too scared of pissing off the EU.
That number of aircraft should be ok given how few trained pilots we have but why should that worry the top man in the RAF when he has far more important things to do such as increasing the diversity of his workforce!
Sadly very true. Did you see the LGBT+ pride day on the QE on her 2021 tour? I’m thinking of organising a white Celt event! Any takers?😂
😂
There was never a plan for 2 carriers with full air wings at the same time.The two carriers were always to ensure availability of one. Two carriers and air wings, would require at least 6 front line F35 squadrons as well as a couple more Elizabeth’s built, which was never happening and never a plan. Also most people forget the 130+ F35 buy is over the life of the programme..not an instant purchase and it’s likely that the F35 product line will be running for many decades and we will probably be running F35 out into 2070…with the jets flying… Read more »
You’re just wrong on this point. Whatever the plan morphed into as costs spiralled, the size of the ships was determined to deliver a sortie rate not too much smaller than a US carrier. Alan West briefed the defence select committee on this in Nov 2004.36 aircraft per carrier were needed to achieve this. The overall number to be ordered was also determined by the numbers in JF Harrier that would need to be replaced, both RN Sea Harriers and RAF GR7/9. In theory, this looked a sensible and low risk plan. One carrier would always be available with both… Read more »
Peter, the 138 aircraft number also included the fact that the RAF were retiring their Tornado force (62 airframes).
This was however later changed to 138 airframes over the lifetime of the programme, so in real terms a cut in numbers.
This is currently 74ish by 2033 with the aspiration of 138 over the aircraft’s lifetime – still a cut!!!
It is important to remember that UK was heavily involved as the only tier 1 partner in the JSF programme from the early 2000s. We contributed $2.5 billion to the development programme. At the same time, the design of 2 new carriers to replace 3 Invincible class was being decided. Initially, a fleet of 150 was indicated but later reduced to 138 to reflect a slightly lower ambition for sortie rates. The JSF was to replace the RAF and RN Harriers, around 150 aircraft in total. And just as in Joint Force Harrier, RAF aircraft would be able to surge… Read more »
It’s not a reserve, you actually need more ships that you plan to deploy, the US only deploys 2-3 carriers but has 11. It’s just how ships operate…they are generally not available a good 50-60% of the time…infact a U.S. carrier only spends around 19% of its time deployed.
sorry what you have there is a bit of political spinning what aboutary. there is no navy on earth that has ever had an assumption being able to deploy two hulls when it only has two hulls ( the actual rule that most navy’s run by is one deployable for every three hulls) you would have to achieve 100% availability of hulls, that is what you would need to achieve to have a confirmed ability to deploy 2 carriers at need and that is literally impossible. It was utter BS spin, not actual planning, in reality even 2 carriers is… Read more »
Well explained, mate.
It was never to be 2 full CAG’s as only one carrier will be available at any one time anyway and the balance of jets were for land ops. The ships moves around and so can deliver more than a fixed base which is a far easier target and never will be so well defended as the RAF have no SAM’s or guns to do so. The F35B will get its big bangs in due course. No other versions have them either. NSM will be ready as Norway has gone for it its about hitting smartly not heavily. One thing… Read more »
To have 2 operational carriers you need 3 or 4 of them. It was never the plan to have both in use at the same time other than in an emergency Falklands-type scenario. 2 carriers means you have 1 available at all times and that was the understanding when the QEs were ordered.
The original ambition has not existed since around 2008. SDSR 2010 had planned to keep one in reserve.
So we are ahead of that with both crewed.
I think the MoD is hoping drones will augment the 3 F35 front line Squadrons.
For me, the Merlin shortage is of greater concern and I’d prioritise a second Merlin carrier Sqn so one can be permanently assigned to each carrier and drones and F35 added to suit.
The requirement was never to be able to put 36 jets on both carriers at the same time. That requirement has never existed
Probably could be generated in extremis, w/ USMC F-35B supplementation, if the balloon ever went up, and USMC could spare the aircraft, pilots and maintainers. May be assigned to Atlantic troopship /supply convoy duty in order to allow release of some Norfolk based carriers to support/reinforce ops. in Indo-Pacific theater.
Every option would be on the table if it came to it. And the QE class does give options to US force commanders.
It’s interesting that at present the RN is the key to pushing more fifth generation navel aviation than even the USN can manage at present in its own, clearly this will change when the USN gets its F35cs properly integrated into all its air wings up but even the a U.S. carrier air wing will only contain 14 f35s vs I likely standard Elizabeth airwing of 24-36. I suspect if a region got truly hot you may see an Elizabeth and a USN carrier deployed together as they very much complement each other and cover some weakness …Elizabeth lesser utility… Read more »
Huh…didn’t realize only one F-35C squadron scheduled/CVN. Hell, the Gator Navy may turn out to be better equipped. 🤔😳
Yes USNI news did a piece about it in 2021, The original plan was to 2 squadrons of 10 F35c in each air wing, but unfortunately they are not going to be able to do it for the foreseeable future and have changed it around to 1 squadron of 14. it seems they have a crisis in strike aircraft numbers, so they have reactivated 28 super hornets and had them undergo a rebuild to extend their airframe hoursthat had been retired and even borrowed a load of f16s that they will use in the training so they can pinch a… Read more »
Although one of the very good things about the Elizabeth’s and the F35B is that if we wanted to sacrifice normal training and operational conversion we could in theory surge every pilot and available air frame. Which is a unique feature or the Elizabeth’s, the air-wing it has deployed is not the limit of air wing it could turn up with…where as every other carrier on the planet has a fixed air wing with little surge potential. I don’t think many people actually realise how clever the RN were in going with the F35B, it’s the very best option for… Read more »
Hi Jonathan, totally in agreement. The QE with F35B is by far the best bang for our buck when you don’t have the budget available like the Americans. Even a small number of F35s brings game changing capability beyond the number or type of munitions available currently. 24 F35B’s is a daunting capability against any potential foe. And you would have to go back as far as 2003 Op Telic when we last deployed a great number of a single fast jet type (Tornado GR4) We also greatly underplay the aircrafts air defence capability, something we didn’t have with Tornado… Read more »
Andrew Deacon says that funding has been and is in place for the first 74 aircraft out of 138. I am not sure why people don’t realise that the UK aircraft carrier project is a different one to the international/US-led F-35B project – so timelines are not in synch – one was always going to be behind the other. We have deployed these carriers already – its not as if they have been stuck in port since they were built. They don’t just sail with RN escorts – we use other nation’s escorts too. Generally only one sails at a… Read more »
Did they ever confirm whether Super Hornets could fly off a ski deck with a useful load?If so a mix of them plus F35b would be cheaper.I believe there are a fair few RAF/FAA pilots with experience on F18.
F18 needs a catapult launch.
Plus arresting gear to land!
No it doesn’t the US trialled it on Ski Jumps so they could bid the the Indian Navy Contract.It worked just fine.
Correct!
Mega Indian Navy deal: Boeing says Super Hornet ski-jump tests successful
LINK
One thing that always puzzled me was Australia’s choice of the F-35A over the Boeing F15EX when you consider range, speed, airframe hours, and weapons loadout.
Or, at the very least a mix, or even the F22 and then I found what appears to be the answer!
I think there’s a Typhoon photo somewhere with a “beast” 12+2 missile load too. But might be just CGI… Lol 😁
Quite a package!
2x Laser guided bombs
4x BVRAAM
4x SRAAM
2x Stand-off weapons
1x Mauser Cannon
1x 1000 Litre Fuel Tank
“The U.S. Navy began taking delivery on the first Block III F/A-18 Super Hornets for testing last year, and while the jet may look strikingly similar to its predecessor on the outside, a peek inside the cockpit shows just how much this fighter has changed. The new Block III Super Hornet promises to be as significant a jump in capability as the earlier transition from the Block I Hornet to Block II Super Hornet in the early 2000s. As a result, the new F/A-18 Super Hornet (called the Super “Duper” Hornet by some) will join the Air Force’s new F-15EX Eagle II… Read more »
I am aware of this but also that Congress and the Navy are concentrating future funding on the next generation fighter. They are getting nervous about funding further developments of what will be by end of service life be a 70+ year old 4th Generation design in a 6/7 gen world. It doesn’t help the FA-18 case when the newer Super Hornets are aging faster than their predecessors. Which is having a knock on effect with availability. https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2023-02-09/navy-super-hornet-aging-cbo-9093230.html The US Navy was effectively shot in the foot with long range Interdiction, air superiority and CAP 20 years ago by Dick… Read more »
If it works for India why can’t the UK do something similar? Expand, broaden the QE ski ramp if possible?
No it doesn’t. FA-18s were offered to India for use as ski ramp launched. But it does need arrestors to land on a carrier.
Apologies. Just saw ABC had said this. This forum needs a delete.
It’s called STOBAR, the really stupid thing is it would also have worked with the Sea Typhoon. Just like it does with the French Rafael.
Overall the cost would be greater as you’d be supporting two aircraft types not one. You’d need to train ground crew to maintain two different types of aircraft, and keep spares for two airframes. Then you have the weapons issue, some may be common, but some might need development work to be certified to work on both. Then there’s the cost to modify the carriers to fit traps to stop these and training deck crew to handle the traps. Plus you have additional training costs as cat and trap pilots require far more training to both gain and then maintain… Read more »
It wouldn’t be cheaper. Bringing into service another fast jet type with all the training, manning, engineering support, new infrastructure/basing ect would cost a fortune. With that money, you could buy a lot of F35’s.
The UK carrier concept was deeply flawed from the start. All down to cost. The lessons from the Falklands war were never learned. One of the main threats to naval assets is stand of launched weapons. In the Falklands it was the Exocet. The much vaunted Harrier was in effect the mainline of defence. A task it was never capable of fulfilling. Lack of range ment it could not carry out interdiction at range where the Super Entandards could not launch an attack. Poor full load also resulted in poor loiter time. This was further exasperated by a lack of… Read more »
We would not need to take the Falklands back from Argentina because we wouldn’t lose them in the first place. If we did I personally am confident that the Argentinians would not make the mistake of thinking we wore not going to take them back and looking at a CSG I would expect that is exactly what would happen. I think many lessons have been learned although it might be fair to say we could do with more assets – I don’t think quality is really the problem nowadays. For most of our warfighting issues we are part of NATO… Read more »
Agree with your analysis of the Falklands. However your last sentence is odd. The way i see it if USMC are primarily using F35B for CAS then they are the ones who are losing out on its unique full abilities. Its no dogfighter but its A2A BVR and Deep Strike abilities should be the best that money can buy.
you’ve nailed the concerns, its the COST of emals, AEW and pilot cat and trap continued training. really only the americans can do this and wish the french well with PANG. hoping there will be some tilt rotor AEW available some time in the future. the advantages of F35b navies is the flexibility land and sea ops, much cheaper but if resulting in loss of life agree crap. as drones develop they will get deployed on uk carriers.
EMALS still doesn’t work to the required level of reliability so USS Ford is still not ready. They are still working through the problems so we dodged a bullet.
In the perfect world it would have been a mature system for our carriers but the facts are far less appealing.
Yes if we had gone for CATOBAR we would have had two busted carriers that could not be deployed.
Interestingly enough, the Etendard carrying Exocet has significantly less range than the F-35B carrying a full set of missiles.
the argies were running scared of the harriers equipped with effective air to air missiles, but we had no airborne early warning and few harriers.
Thumbs up
Only Argentina currently operate the Etendard. They bought I think 5 more from France to cannibalise for parts. The belief that none are airworthy on a daily basis is probably credible.
I think you will also find that the Etendard only carried one Excocet on a pylon. In order to trim the aircraft a drop tank was compulsory on the opposite wing. A side effect of which made the Etendard range quite impressive and in excess of the F35B.
What was that range?
I believe it pushed it to 1130 NM. Apparently the original 14 supplied by France were all equipped with buddy refuelling pods. How forward thinking was that for an aircraft from 1974.
F-35b has a range of 900 nm without drop tanks or in flight refueling and carrying a full weapons load.
Carrying Exocet and a drop tank, an Etendard would struggle to match that.
I can see I will never sell you an Etendard. However please look at this mid seventies aircraft objectively. Planning weights and ranges are just that. Some are works of fantasy like MPG for cars published by manufacturers. So take the Etendard 1130 without drop tank. F35 900. Etendard with one Exocet and one drop tank combat radius 530. This in a high low profile. You should note the drop tank had a neglible effect on range. Around 130 mile increase.It was carried for aircraft trim. At the point of missile release external fuel was brought inboard. The sinking of… Read more »
You should check your sources because a lot of this is bullshit.
I only mentioned Etendard because you said F-35B is short ranged. It is not.
F-35 B can take off at max take off weight. Thats what it means. With max fuel and max uk weapons load, it is well under that.
It can also vertically land with a full uk weapons load.
August last year their was an article on this site about the postponement of the SVRL caused by the issue with POW. Clearly states the intention of the trial is to reduce the deck damage and increase the landing weight of the aircraft.
It’s all open source bullshit.
And you may notice that the QE is managing quite nicely without it.
SVRL is for the future when future weapons may need to be carried back to the carrier. Think FCASM.
Even the F18 has less range than the F35B…it’s actually got a perfectly resonance combat range that compares with most Navel strike aircraft.
Exactly.
For AEW and COD just buy the Boeing V-22 Osprey the RN has already looked at an AEW version and it already does COD, i the abilty to carry an F35 engine was part of the spec. As for inflight refueling well a V-22 has an internal load capacity of 9000 KG so it shoudn;t be that hard to adapt it. As for not providing CAP who do you think supplies it to the USMC and LHA’s when they don’t have a carrier around ? They have even operated the USS America as a 20 F35B standalone carrier. USMC Pilots… Read more »
Why would we need to air freight an extra engine? There’s plenty of room on QE-class carriers for spare engines. Or we could just ship one inside a working F-35 and leave the dead plane off to one side. There’s more than enough deckspace. V-22 for COD is an expensive luxury.
The MV-22 is already adapted as a tanker for the USMC, using the pallet loaded VARS system.
The minute you say you don’t need a spare is exactly one minute before you find out you do. And it was a spec by the USN/USMC not the RN. And as they have a lot more experience of operating modern carriers I would assume they do not see them as an expensive luxury, I do not see COD, Aerial refuelling or a decent AEW capability as being anything other than force multipliers. It is interesting to note that the USMC used them to carry out several CODs of equipment and personnel during CSG21. As for flying a perfectly serviceable… Read more »
The US Navy have no intention and never have had intention to deploy an amphibious task force without carrier cover. By that I mean a full blown carrier with catapults. Some doctrines in the US Navy like the big blue blanket come from WW2. One of those is that any amphibious operation will have full carrier cover. When I was with the MEU out of Lejune we frequently exercised the amphibious aspect with all assets minus the carrier. Often two LPD one LPH and various other transports. Protection being provided by several frigates a DDG and an SSN. It was… Read more »
But the Falklands war also showed the flexibility of STOVL aircraft able to be transported on container ships and launched in weather where CATOBAR aircraft couldn’t be launched. It also allowed RAF pilots to operate off Navy ships at short notice which is useful for a small mixed fleet. F35B can also be based off airstrips CTOL aircraft can’t use and we couldn’t have a split fleet and if we need STOVL aircraft anyway… Edit: AEW has also changed since the Falklands with the advent of drones, same with air to air refuelling. Hopefully SPEAR EW will come about to… Read more »
to add to your points, the Sea Harrier also had no BVR missile capability in1982. I’d argue the Sea Harrier 2 addressed most of the points you raised however.
Well the F35B has a better combat range that an f18 the default US navy strike/multi role aircraft, so I would hardly call that crippled. As for EW one of the points of the F35 is that it’s its own EW capacity, it does not need separate EW support. The crippled UK carriers will carrier more 5 generation fighters that. Any other carrier on the plant ( a U.S. carrier air wing will be 14 F35c) and I don’t know what you call a handful but I would say 30 aircraft is not a handful with 37 this year. So… Read more »
I think you maybe basing your F35B range on its maximum published range. Around 900 miles from memory. With that amount fuel on I am not sure it could launch from a carrier, if so the weapon load would be derisory. The 900 figure is taking of from a conventional runway. Even given the ideal weather conditions headwind say 10 knots, carrier speed 25 knots, then factor in aircraft speed of around 60 knots of the ramp. Just short of 100 knots will give some lift but the engine will be doing a lot of the lifting. Short take of… Read more »
Well the RN publish that an F35b can launch of an Elizabeth with 22,000lbs of stores and fuel. Max fuel load for the F35b is 13,500lbs for the 900nm combat range, that leaves 8500lbs for weapons which is greater than a Standard load out anyway. With a return load of 5000lb….which is better than a standard f18 at 4000 ans the USN was happy with that for a couple of decades…the f18E has a return weight of 8000lbs so essentially the F35B is not a lame duck its range is better than the f18 it’s loadout is comparable and it’s… Read more »
No mention of how many F-35s embarked??
Does anyone know if QE has a Bedford Landing system fitted yet ? I know POW had one fitted before her misdemeaner and was on her way out to trial it.
she does not.
It has JPALS though. I’m not sure in what way one is preferred over the other. Any ideas?
Bedford enables safer rolling landings.
Is it official or just another leak.
Re stocked its ammunition supply the statement says How come I wasnt aware that she had been in any live fire exercises at least of any significance
Ah well words and words
Thank goodness we have Big Lizzie. Although POW commissioned in December 2019, she has since spent the majority of the time under repair. I calculate that she has managed just 20 days of tasked operational duties in her entire career so far. Rather embarrassing for the 2022 NATO Flagship! In hindsight (a wonderful thing!), many of her 800 strong crew would have been better utilised plugging gaps elsewhere. Hopefully when she returns to active duty in the Autumn, she will make amends and the RN will finally have a two carrier fleet.
At the end of the day that’s why we have two carriers,