HMS Queen Elizabeth, the aircraft carrier leading the Carrier Strike Group 21 deployment, has said farewell to the 10 American jets stationed on board as the vessel returns home to the UK.

After six months and sailing over 40,000 nautical miles to the Pacific and back, the Carrier Strike Group and its large number of people, ships (and a submarine) and aircraft are now in the Mediterranean Sea heading back to Britain.

Commodore Steve Moorhouse, Commander UK Carrier Strike Group, tweeted:

The 10 American jets were flying alongside the 8 (and then 7) British jets for the duration of the deployment which left British shores earlier this month.

Ships and aircraft from the group have operated and exercised with over 40 countries.

Earlier in the deployment Russian jets were being intercepted almost every day and now that the Strike Group is back in the Mediterranean Sea it’s happening again.

In fact, it was reported that F-35 jets from HMS Queen Elizabeth intercepted Russian jets in the eastern Mediterranean more than 30 times as part of the Carrier Strike Group. Now that the vessels have returned to the region after sailing to the Pacific and back it appears Russian interest has been renewed. You can read more about this here.

Russian jets continue to ‘buzz’ British Carrier Strike Group

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

130 COMMENTS

  1. If rumours are true about a jet intake cover causing an F35 to crash, then I’m not surprised the USMC want to get their assets off the ship, pronto!

    That mess-up would make the Russian’s shenanigans with Kuznetzov’s arrestor wires seem professional by comparison.

  2. And the USMC experience on HMS Queen Elizabeth will likely not get the USA to retrofit a ski-jump to the 2 America Class Flight 0 Helicopter Carriers or more accurately America Class Flight 0 Light Aircraft Carriers

    The USN needs more America Class Flight 0 Light Aircraft Carriers as the Nimitz Class are getting worn out and the Gerald Ford Class is basically a lost cause

    • But their experience might feed back to the USMC producing something similar to a QEC in the future, or dare I say it, a licensed build of half dozen.

      I would have thought it would be very attractive in terms of capability, cost and crewing.

        • I know that.

          I meant that they might take what they’ve learnt from this deployment back and it might result in in QEC type carrier for the USMC.

          They could probably get 3 of them for the price of a Ford.

    • One of the things they apparently really loved was QE ability to have aircraft land and takeoff at the same time. On the America class they have to clear the deck of other aircraft and helicopters unless they are taking off vertically.

      • Oh really

        It’s late, way over budget, most of its major innovations don’t work reliably

        The Gerald.R.Ford Class Aircraft Carrier will go down in history as how not to build or procure an Aircraft Carrier and everything wrong with America’s military procurement

        the Gerald.R.Ford Class Aircraft Carrier and F-35 Lightning II are victims of the classic mistake of trying to do too much with 1 thing

        The Royal Navy dodged a bullet by going with STVOL, a proven and reliable unlike EMALS which is a decade or more away from working properly

        • The Gerald R Ford is the first of her ultra modern class and suffered a number of setbacks with revolutionary new kit. The problems have been ironed out and she will deploy on her IOC in the coming months.
          She is a triumph in technology, and the most modern and capable carrier of her kind in existence…….the F35 is likewise the most capable 5th gen warplane in existence, and the sheer weight of numbers entering service with so many differing airforce is truly tipping the balance of world airpower

          • Like i said earlier this is not how you procure an aircraft carrier

            Do the American military need to learn from the Royal Navy again

          • The QE class are great ships, but lack the capability of the Ford class. The Fords presented far greater technical challenges than the QEs which are limited to STOVL. No E3D Hawkeyes or EA18G Growlers, or the F35C. Different ships built by different countries based on what each could afford and had the ability to create.

          • I have no idea whether the Fords will be a succes or failure but your spot on. You can’t compare the QE with the Ford. The RN built the QE because that’s what they could man and afford. Ditto the USN with the Ford.

          • Ithink the one advantage the RN had with QE was that it was almost a blank sheet. The RN has never operated a carrier this size so they thought radically about things like automation particularly in weapons handling but elsewhere too. The USN has a long history with CVNs so took a more conservative route on automation which when you look at the risks they took in other areas EMALS as a prime example seems reasonable. I think whatever happens with the Ford class the USN will be studying closely the effectiveness of a lean manned highly automated QE.

          • On paper the EMALS are a big jump for onboard planes.
            I can understand why they take the risk.

            But yes, the EMALS was not ready and the US like a bit too much to pick a lot of new tech at the same time in their assets, that explain all the problems the Ford is actually working on.

            But the day where the Ford can be fully under service, of even if some of its systems are not ready, with just the EMALS its enough to give a real special status.

            I really hope to the see the EMALS ready for fight, since the next french carrier is likely to have them too.

          • Thats what I thought but the thing is NOT to have to go nuclear. Nukes keep a balance of TERROR. Everyone should know that a first nuclear strike signals armageddon. The wearysome and expensive thing is to keep warfare NON nuclear. Better still just NON…period. Sadly homo sapiens is a brutal boneheaded species. Needs slapping hard but contained..short of triggering the holocaust which is nuclear war.

          • You are comparing apples and pears. Both are delicious but do slightly different things. We have bought the carriers that we could afford, and have no great problem that they are ‘limited to STOVL’ – as were the Invincible class.

          • A lot of differencies with the Invincible class.
            But the main difference is the big proliferation of long range antiship missile, any country in the world can afford AS missile with 200Km range.

            It was not the case in the era of the Invincible…

            The lack of real air refuel capability of the STOVL/STOBAR is the biggest issue when you compare with CATOBAR counterpart.

            Meaning you cannot really use your F35 for deep strike without external support.
            So, the QE for example is mostly an escort/support ship, not a striker.

            If the project of add small catapult for UCAV comes true for the QE, I hope they plan to make an UCAV tanker (like the Stingray concept of the USN).

          • Grey hound is now being replaced by Osprey so we could have a COD, but as per usual…..we can’t afford it…..

          • I think we have selective amnesia – while QE is undoubtedly a fine ship it was still hugely over budget and years behind schedule.

          • Adding £1.56 Billion to the Programme cost by stretching out the Build by two years probably didn’t help, either.

          • That is because government officials are corrupt and only care about themselves

            They’d be more than happy to sell them if they think we don’t need them

          • Like 95% of the military programs over the world, but especially in western countries.

            Bigger is the project, newer is the project… Its not like the UK build a carrier every year so… normal

          • And THAT was down to the politicians.
            The Labour Government ordered them and then promptly stretched out the Build by two years adding £1.56 Billion to the cost. The Coalition then went through the Double U-Turn over equipping them as CATOBAR Carriers and also stretched the Build even further adding more cost.
            You can trust politicians to cock it up.

          • The QE were massively delayed and over budget, not sure they are a good learning point. Same with the astutes which also had massive initial problems. The t45 are still not reliable and again late/over budget. Just seems a consistent problems with government contracts.

          • The only reason they were delayed was because the Government messsed about reviewing whether they wanted them, going to CATOBAR and back and then slowing production for cash flow.

            Despite all that these ships were incredibly good value. Cheaper then Ajax – a vehicle which is useless, has sod all strategic or industrial value to the UK.

            Overall the carriers are one of the few things the Government got right. Shame they are gonna now dick around fitting them with EMALS when they should just be buying more f35s and merlins

          • The catapult – not necessarily EMALS – they are considering is for drones. Try and get the facts right before commenting 🤦‍♂️

          • Yeah I know. EMALS is a product name, but whatever they chose would have to be a similar thing (electromagnetic). I question the wisdom of – just as we get these ships operational and proving their worth – spending lots of money to fit a catapult technology which is unproven in order to launch drones which as it stand dont even exist. In my humble opinion it would be better to spend on the great capabilities we already have started putting in place….

          • True drones don’t yet exist, but they’re inevitable so why not plan for the future, or better shape it by requiring drones to work with the navy’s catapult system. That way manufacturers will design them from the start to be compatible rather than the Navy having to pay manufacturers to adapt their drones to work.

          • It wouldn’t be steam, that’d be like reintroducing steam trains!

            It will be electrical but there’s several ways in which in could work, it won’t necessarily be a copy of the EMALS on the new Ford class carriers. Won’t cost billions either, a few hundred million should be enough to develop and install one for drone launches – depends on the drone size of course, I’m thinking up to a third size of an F35.

            The most important thing is that it shouldn’t restrict take-offs/ landings of F35Bs so positioning will be crucial.

            As for the French. They’ll never by American, and I doubt they have the ability and depth of pockets to develop their own VSTOL jets, so they are stuck with cats and traps, and the inevitable single-point-of-failure these represent.

          • Its not about being stuck.

            CATOBAR are just superior to STOVL or even STOBAR.
            For the EMALS its just a question of time.

            Luckily the USN will do the testbed for us.

          • It’s not, it’s a single point of failure.
            High sea states (cf Falklands), break-down, or enemy action all means that if the catapult is unavailable, your CSG has zero air-cover.

          • if “the catapult”, its not a single machine, even the small CDG has 2 cats (4 Nimitz/Ford, 3 PANG).

            If you have a hole on the deck able to completely destruct the whole cats system, the same damage on a QE will make it unusable too…

            Dont even talk about the vertical take off with the F35… Close to no fuel and weapons, nothing to expect.

            So, your single point of failure is the same for any carrier => they need a flat deck.

            While you try to look at the advantages of the STOVL.

            A CATOBAR can deploy heavy planes, including fighters, but also hawkeye, cargo, soon UCAV, but also Buddy Refueler..

            So, yeah CATOBAR are dependant on the CAT and Traps, but since their fighters have a bigger range and payload, they are also more powerful, but also less exposed.

            Not tomorrow to see 2 F35B doing this, and thats why the MN and USN love so much the CATOBAR:
            https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_6x8JoW8AA442C.jpg
            https://www.ravico.com/ST/models/Rafale/062_final_mod.jpg
            https://forums.eagle.ru/uploads/monthly_2018_04/F-18F_refueling_F-18E-e1505286062650.jpg.4c9595e2e31cf8266352144a963dcbfb.jpg

          • SDSR2010 and the switch away/back to STOVL isn’t the only reason they were delayed. Along with lots more less significant prevarication and procrastination prior to 2010, there was a decision initiated by Brown to deliberately slow their assembly to preserve jobs in his constituency backyard and align better with the F-35B.

            If I recall, that put something like £1.5bn on the programme cost for little other than political convenience.

            Also, Sean is spot on re. the catapult evaluation, and if successful will eventually lead to a solution that will reduce the need for, and increase capability beyond, more F-35’s and Merlins.

            And with pedantic mode turned full up, bear in mind that the acronym EMALS specifically refers to the General Atomics product – it isn’t a general term for electromagnetic aircraft catapults

          • “there was a decision initiated by Brown to deliberately slow their assembly to preserve jobs in his constituency backyard “

            Correct. Def Sec Hutton was at the helm if I recall and it added 1 billion to their cost.

          • The Royal Navy is non-existent in real terms and will remain so until a usable air arm is deployed on both light carriers now in it’s possession. There is a very long way to go before they can be declared self sufficient modern force multipliers. This is at least a decade away.

            The US on the other hand does not need to be shown how to do it by anyone. They have kwad the way for decadse and continue to do so by pushing the limits all the time. Reserved piecemeal steps count for nothing tomorrow

          • Not quite Martin

            The Queen Elizabeth Class displace as much as your Kitty-Hawk Class which makes them supercarriers

            The US hasn’t led the way all the time as the British were

            The first to get a jet flying on an aircraft carrier

            The first to get a turboprop flying on an aircraft carrier

            The only ones to get a turboprop carrier-based Attack aircraft in the Westland Wyvern

            The first to have a turbofan carrier-based fighter in the F-4K Phantom II

            The first to have a turbofan carrier-based strike aircraft in the Blackburn Buccaneer S.2

            Several times throughout history has the US been caught out by ‘what have the Brits done now that we’ll be copying in a few years time once they perfect it’

          • The Royal Navy are the only other navy besides the US Navy that can project power around the globe so that pretty much makes them self-sufficient

            The Royal Navy were the ones who basically wrote the rulebook on power projection

          • That you refer to “non-existent” and “light carriers” betrays how little you know on this subject 😂🤣😂🤣

          • I would beg to differ Sean. The bare bones for a return to a truly blue-water navy are beginning to materialize to be fair but humility must have a place at the table here. Gone are the days of ignorance regarding the true capability of a completely underfunded military over a number of decades.

            How many fixed wing aircraft are available to operate of the deck of the latest carriers? 21 based in the UK with a maximum of 11/13 available for operations at any one time, between 2 carriers?????

            Doesn’t sound very formidable to me. Like I said, a long way to go

          • You can beg all you like, you’re still wrong 🤷‍♂️
            The RN is in a vastly improved position to where it was just 10 years ago, and getting better all the time.
            So you’d advocate buying lots of pre Block IV F35Bs and then have to spend money to upgrade them to the capabilities the U.K. most wants? Glad you’re not in charge of the defence budget.
            Yes it does mean numbers for F35Bs are low at the moment, but greater than any other military that fields a stealth, VSTOL jet. Not forgetting that the punch each F35 carriers is far greater than than the several Swordfish you probably hanker for.

          • That’s a strange way to criticize the Ford class when comparing it to the QE. The QE as far was I’m aware was supposed to enter service in 2015. It. like the Ford Class has been delayed and over budget as is the norm with programs of this scale and complexity.

          • lol, that’s sort of the point I was making. I bet the USN would say the same thing about the Ford Class. Like I said it’s a very strange criticism of the the Ford when the QE Class has been delayed and over budget as well. You also mentioned that the delays and cost overruns have hurt the reputation of the Ford. Does the same apply to the QE?

          • No, because unlike the Fords trying to do too much with untested, unproven tech

            The QEs uses a proven and arguably more reliable system than the CATOBAR which doesn’t have the same limitations

            I direct you to the Falklands War, May 25th 1982 the Colossus Class Light Aircraft Carrier the ARA Veintinco De Mayo was preparing to launch an airstrike with her A-4Q Skyhawks on the British Task Force only to scrub due to lack of wind over the flight deck

            The British Aerospace Sea Harriers and British Aerospace Harriers never had this problem as it took the South Atlantics worst to stop flight ops

          • If I’m understanding you correctly,

            Ford Class, delayed and over budget: lost cause.
            QE Class, delayed and over budget: no issue.

            Seems like a little home team bias going on there.

            I think it’s a fair comment about the Ford introducing too much new tech (which have mostly been resolved by the way) all at one time which contributed to the aforementioned delays. Regarding your example about the ARA carrier, maybe I’m missing your point but surely you are not using that lone example to claim that the ski jump is a more effective way to launch aircrafts from a carrier.

        • Every major carrier the US has fielded have gone through the same. When people talk about the F35 issues well the F15 and every other high end platform goes through the same.

          • As does every first of class ship.

            Whilst there’s no question over the power one of these will be able to deliver, they’re far beyond our reach in everything, especially the price and huge crewing required.

            The UK has played a blinder with the QEC’s in my opinion, they’re a perfect fit for us and will only get better when we get a fixed wing drone solution to AEW and AAR.

          • I agree if we can get a loyal wingman drone will be great multiplier. I don’t think however just cos the fords have teething issues means anything

    • I thought they were on the way to sorting out the problems with the Gerald R Ford? Was it intended for USMC F-35Bs to serve on the big carriers?

    • >Gerald Ford Class is basically a lost cause

      I dispute this. Clearly the lead ship has had a lot of expensive problems due to all the new technology. But by spending bucket loads of money the USN will soon have in service a new fleet carrier that has no remotely close competitor. The Chinese 003 design is the closest, but I find it impossible to believe that China has miraculously short cut the USN‘s century of experience and will have 2 or 3 near peer carriers in service this decade. 

      Incidentally, if the UK had decided in 2013 to stick with the conversion of Prince of Wales to a cat and trap carrier with EMALS, then we would still be years away from the first CAG-21 type deployment.

  4. That leaves 7 Brit F35Bs for intercepts. I guess we may be depending on NATO ground based assets as she goes through the western med and then home to blighty.

    • Mike, granted it is not current, but way back 5 Sea Harriers was the proposed compliment on the Invincible class carriers.

    • 2 aircraft are held at readiness when required. Sailing through the straits Gib and up past Portugal and the bay of biscay doesn’t require QRA aircraft. Unless France fancies a pop at us 😄

    • I don’t know – the Spanish Navy only have 13 Harriers (rumour was that they were looking at ordering 8 F-35Bs) to go on the Juan Carlos & I doubt that they all go aboard at once.

    • Using the benefit of your wide ranging and extensive military knowledge, how many F35’s would be the minimum required for a passage through the Gibraltar straits and up through the Bay of Biscay?

      • Which the QE will embark in a few years time.
        But that wouldn’t do would it, you need to get the digs in now. 👍

        • The thing is we’re British and that means foxtrotting oscar most tossers that come our way because we usually don’t have the kit, don’t have the manpower but when it comes to invading an Island against an entrenched enemy numbering multiple times our own force where they have ground based air and we don’t, the outcome was?

        • Mike, you need to stop with this nonsense. Your commentary is unhelpful and just nasty. This constant berating of the UK is at best childish and at worst belligerent. .
          I don’t care either for your personal attacks on other members of this forum. If you have constructive input or criticism , than I’d like to hear what you have to say

          Alternatively, please withdraw from this forum.

        • Right, now. Projects get cancelled because times change, nothing wrong with that. The British army is, even by manpower, one of the largest in Europe and, by firepower, only the French can compete. Our army isn’t a defence force, it’s an expeditionary force since we’re an island. Oh, and, unlike practically every other country we have the capability to transport enormous amounts of it, and an RFA that displaces over half a million tonnes to support it. (The RFA is larger by displacement than every European auxiliary combined). This alone means that we can deploy completely independently, unlike other countries which rely on the MSC (US) or RFA for supplies. Saying that we have less heavy armour isn’t really relevant, our Spike missiles cost thousands and will get rid of tanks and AFVs that cost millions. Challenger 2 is already a tank better than anything except Leo or Armata, and once the upgrade to 3 is completed it will be on par with both of those. Unlike you I live in the States and I can assure you Britain is respecte here (in California) and even more so in the South. Saying that the US depends on China financially is ridiculous, everyone depends on US-U.K. financial systems, see NYSE, NASDAQ and LSE, along with things like Deloitte, PWC, and McKinsey. Scottish independence will harm Scotland more than us. And, even if only England is left (let’s say this happens by 2035) our position as the fifth largest economy will be unchanged, with us overtaking Germany by over half a trillion (sufficient to account for the loss of Scottish and N. Irish gdp) but being overtaken by India, per current IMF and World Bank predictions.

      • Why that number? Have Spain, Portugal and France declared war on the UK ? Morocco maybe? Can the carrier group expect high tempo swarm attacks as it makes its way up the Atlantic?? What information do you have Harold? Please share, we’re on the edge of our seats here.

      • Ha ha ha those pesky Spanish and Portuguese may launch air attacks at the QE. Good job you post on here to ensure we are all up to date on current CONOPS for the RN.

    • Mike, they are still building the Brit F-35Bs – it is a new aircraft. You must know the standard final complement is at least 24 per carrier – just got to wait till they are built.

    • It’s actually just six as one of the 617 squadron aircraft has quietly returned to Marham. But enough to keep an aircraft on a 5 min alert for the next Russian intruder. It’s the end of a long deployment with far fewer decent runs ashore than anticipated, everyone is tired and just wants to get home – ETA Portsmouth 4/5 Dec? They deserve some slack, but hopefully no more very expensive and very dangerous errors in the SOP’s.

    • Actually nope! But yes deploying home! Not sure how many contacts they will have in he Med and English Channel.When we are flying/prepping to come back from op tours we dont have ammunition on our weapons! But that’s something you have never experienced.

    • Only 1 (of 6) has flown to RAF Marham by Donaldson’s account.

      Contrary to Mike’s belief you don’t need 24 aircraft onboard at all times – or even 6 or 7.

      The deployment is effectively over – just a simple and quick transit back to Blighty from the Med. Might as well start to get the F-35s back to their base and get on with post-deployment checks and servicing.

      • A sensible reply at last. Re the Ford carriers, go for it if you can afford it, but when the drones are up and working providing AEW , refuelling, loyal wingman amongst other things…having two fully equipped QEs for the price of one Ford…?
        The manning requirement alone on a Ford is eye watering, let alone the constant presence on board due to the reactor.
        AA

        • Hi Mr. AA, Wiki says that there are 2 reactors on each Ford class (or there will be) generating steam for turbines. Manning is approx 2600 crew plus aircrew. Apparently a major flaw with the ships design is with the septic (haha) waste system which clogs up regularly and needs acidic flushing through.

          cheers

  8. Good, while it is to have the USMC F35Bs, we do need more UK Merlin HM2s, and F35Bs. This is too much like the period before WW2, where we had some good Aircraft Carriers, but the RAF was in control of naval aviation. Consequently aircraft numbers were too few and the types were obsolete. Whereas both F35b and Merlin are good, we have too few. I would rather see a smaller FAA F35B force that was totally dedicated to the carriers. If this meant the RAF having F35As so be it. Even if this meant four front line FAA squadrons of just 9 aircraft plus an OCU.

  9. Did anybody notice the defensive suite that equips the Iralian carrier ‘CAVOUR’?
    Mightily impressive! Fitted ‘with’ throughout.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here