HMS Queen Elizabeth is set to leave Rosyth between 19 and 24 July 2024 after undergoing critical repairs to her starboard propeller shaft coupling.

This technical issue had previously forced the ship to withdraw from the NATO exercise Steadfast Defender, resulting in HMS Prince of Wales taking her place.

However, this early docking has allowed work scheduled for her upcoming redif to be completed earlier than planned.

A Royal Navy spokesperson told me :

“HMS Queen Elizabeth has completed her defect repair work and capability upgrades at Rosyth and will now undergo a period of sea trials to prepare for future tasking.”

HMS Queen Elizabeth to leave Rosyth in a few days

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has also announced a temporary ban on unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) over the Firth of Forth, Edinburgh, from 19 July to 24 July 2024.

These measures are being implemented to ensure the security and safety of the event, according to a briefing sheet published on 15 July 2024.

Drones banned over part of Scotland due to carrier departure

The restrictions, which apply specifically to drones, come at the request of Police Scotland and are deemed necessary for national defence and security.

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

188 COMMENTS

    • Wait to the 2025 defence review, and russian bots are in the British defence policy scrapping the armed forces, not here. Don,t forget.

      • ‘ British defence policy scrapping the armed forces, not here. Don,t forget.’ Read that three times and it still makes no sense to me so gave up, sorry.

        • UKDF? all in one bag. like the USMC? today’s model is outdated and inefficient not that many tier 1 nations can afford the three separate branches especially in terms of equipment. I’ve oft wondered how the RAF and fleet air arm has remained separate.

          • I worked with Canadians in NATO HQ South. They consolidated the 3 services uniforms and hated it.
            Imagine the furore of trying to combine branches!

          • the British army has suffered forced amalgamation of regiments for decades. why should anyone else be spared;?

        • Hopefully the new government will realise PDQ we cannot cut any further & as it is we’re of little concern for our enemies apart from our nuclear deterrent.
          This is the worse time in history to be so apallingly weak.

          • the new government will do f all and we’ll see no difference for at least a decade labour defence manifesto was limp.

        • It was the 1998 Defence Review, after Labour came to power, which started the process of building the carriers in the first place.

        • Yep always does. I can’t remember a time when reviews resulted in overall increases to all our armed forces capabilities in terms of personnel and equipment numbers.

          • the rot in the u.k armed forces was the result of complacency. just because we won the Falklands conflict the MOD,TREASURY, GOVERNMENTS thought all was Rosey in the defence garden it was when the actual cost of the conflict was realised that people thought we can’t afford another war, so, they looked at the ages of the roths
            ays and other classes like the Leander frigates,
            ders, fearless and hermes they said let’s get rid of all this old junk.

          • I think your narrative is faulty Andy. The 1982 Falklands war(triggered by proposed cuts to the RN & FO indicating little concern for the FI) actually provided a short term boost to the navy. Ships slated for sale/scrapping were reprieved/retained & better short range AA was installed. Obsolete SAMs were phased out & the result of the lessons learned resulted in the T23 FFG.

            Cuts to the forces were mild until the end of the cold war c1990 when savage cutting proceeded, spurred by financial crisis hitting, but we had several interventions(e.g Yugoslavia civil wars) & wars(Gulf war 1 & 2, Afghanistan), yet cuts continued apace driven by a foolish, unpatriotic Tory(/New Labour to a lesser extent) dogma to reduce the state & expenses to fund tax cuts, mainly for the super rich.

            We’ve seen the rise of China & the aggresion of both whilst we’ve fawned after both Russian & Chinese investment, plus the mass exporting of much of the western manufactering base to China, enriching the dragon that poses the greatest threat to western democracy & freedom. Rather than “complacency, I’d call it criminal collusion.

            I’ll give Starmers Labour govenment a little time & see what the conclusion/fruit is of this review is. Funds are certainly tight after the disasterous Tory rule, but if further cuts are made I’ll be at their throats as we can’t afford to be as weak as we are, let alone making further cuts, in the face of Russia in neo-colonial war mode & Chinese aggression. NK & Iran also to be considered.

          • my narrative is not wrong I was there and I knew why. I was . unlike ninety percent of those on here make u.k defence a hobby out of the internet and use it prove on here that all of the people on here have NEVER SERVED a day. I the service of the nation. i cant be bothered to come on here anymore and read the utter tripe many regula internet admirals post love to see Frank why you feel that it your condescending rubbish to talk utter bollocks to people who HAVE BEEN THERE AND DONE IT. how many on here REALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT? USERS OF THE site should be vetted in some way but I would like to know why some on here think anything they dribble about is simply to show that they know good websites where they can learn the shyte that they think people will be impressed by frank you are obviously one of them.

          • Sorry it’s offended you Andy. Every respect for your service. I’ve never served, no. Never claimed to. I stand by my comment. Certainly respond if you think I’m talking tripe & report anything you believe worthy of it & I’ll have a mature conversation with the moderators about it.

          • thanks for the reply Frank. I apologise if my personal response was offensive to you. we all need to accept that we are even me, not up to the technologies knowledge that anyone here make out to. be. frank no offense.start again? best wishes.

          • Andy, Mate -please continue posting. Your content is both informative and interesting. No one should expect you to have to reply to the “drible posters”, ignore ’em.

          • thanks klonkie, your words are much appreciated. I’m no expert, I’m a bitter old sailor who wishes that our precious navy was still as large and well run as it was in the 70’s when I joined my first ship. if everyone on here was to look at the fleet tha was reviewed bin1977’fleet review will cringe and be even more angry as what has happened to it.

  2. It really is time for these carriers to start earning their pay. The amount of time spent in port and/or repairs has, so far, made them a pretty poor return on the investment.

    These 2 ships have spent less than (a combined 2yrs) at sea, actually doing anything they were designed for.

    • They were designed to fight a war, in the absence of an actual war they will be training, refitting, practicing. They can hardly just keep stooging around the briny.

      • the current houthi mess in the east would be the Ideal training and proving ground to hone their full abilities in Pompey people see them as big, flashy, ornaments.

        • A Navy cannot win such a battle. The only way to bring the Houtis to their senses is to send in the Paras and Marines to isolate Hodidah Port and hand it over to Saudi/Egyptian/Yemeni/UAE.

          • The combined GCC nations struggled to batter the Houthis so I cannot see anyone doing anything to them. They are to ephemeral and fleeting on the ground.

          • wr know the folly of putting boots no the ground and the inevitable results body bags. these organisations seem beaten but they simply disappear for a while then come back under a different name and round and round we go. that whole area of the planet will never resolve it’s issues. were better off leaving the beast to eat itself once and for all.

      • it’s the government of the time that didn’t have the melons to deploy. the Americans must laugh at our pathetic efforts to make other nations believe that we have any relevance for issues on the waters around the world it is true WE AREE A PATHETIC RELIC that is stuck in the past telling tales of long gone battles in a time when our military was not inferior to Japan, India, South Korea or Taiwan, lives were laid down for this nation and what we have now is an insult to their sacrifices.

    • That is a truly bizarre metric for assessing the value of a ship. They were commissioned in 2017 and 2019 respectively. 2 ships is barely enough to ensure the operational availability of 1 ship at any given time, even assuming no unexpected mechanical issues, and having them ‘at sea’ in the absence of a specific operational requirement would be a pointless waste of fuel.

      • Apart from a warships complexity, compared to a Merchant vessel, they actually have it easy. Much less seatime and a larger crew for starters.
        Look at the Schedules for most merchant ships and they probably spend 90% of their time between refits at sea.
        It would of course be ridiculous to have a warship clock up those hours in peacetime but I suspect the USN CVN’s come fairly close, likewise RN River OPV’s.

        • Different eggs, different baskets. And as far as the US CVNs are concerned I wouldn’t be so certain. Generally only about 1 in 3 are actually on deployment. Try googling for carrier cruise books. It’s sort of like a high school yearbook for a deployment. There are a lot less than I expected to be sure.

          • I see, so no intelligent comeback or counter argument.

            Did you even bother to check out the cruise books, these are produced by the crew of the carrier and as such can be seen as a reasonable reference for what a carrier was doing at that particular time.

            As it happens I wasn’t googling about defence issues. I was actually looking into historical deployments for the US CSGs and was actually surprised to find them let alone the treasure trove of information about life aboard ship.

            They do however give very clear dates for those historical cruises and it is that upon which I base the statement that they aren’t deployed as often as I expected.

            I will be fascinated to see your research into the subject

          • armchair internet experts with fuck all else to do but to show that do not have a clue what they are saying sad really. i get the impression that90 percent of the posters on here have never actually seen a warship unless there’s a picture in the webpage they’re looking at.

        • yet when we don’t use them it just proves that we didn’t really need them in the first place and all that money could have been spent on the need for more than our laughable coastguard navy.

      • and still needing to beg the yanks for aircraft that they are yet to get to us.its embarrassing. and underlines the decades of inept.amateurish management the service has suffered at the hands of accountants and the fools that are swayed by the outdated rubbish spouted by retired admiral who still thinks war at sea is done sailing in a line opposite the enemy fleet! missiles? confounded things will never work. damn English. harumph. pass the port brigadier or has that air marshal drunk it all agai?🙏🙏😭

    • They’ve has their issues but I’d argue we’ve always had at least 1 available for tastings, it’s the supporting assets to deploy them that mean we can’t, unless we deploy a CSG light, which we may have to if we want to deploy on a regular basis e.g. 1 or 2 escorts and probably just a tanker. The CSGs we like to deploy take up most of our available destroyers if not all, we have 2, soon 1 that isnt preoccupied, and Frigate wise we have 1 that’s not deployed with 2 more in short teem maintenance, so it takes quite a chunk of the fleet to deploy a CSG, hence the amount of pre planning which goes into them rather than a say spontaneous deployment to the Red sea to cover the lack of a US CSG.
      And the available F35s is a whole other situation

      • our mighty CSG. a dozen F35, a few tomahawk missiles, and that’s about it we’re refusing as we always do, the FACT that we are are not a tier 1 military nation, we just think we are.truth is, we are a joke.

    • There are always going to be more snags at the start. It would be fairer to make that assessment in 50 years time or whenever they decommission.

      • the flaws in the design were clear even before they were laid down. as the naval scene appears these days, the fact that other navy’s can still find a place for the harrier and the total preoccupation with drones proves that the harrier, for all it’s drawbacks was proven in several conflicts from the Falklands, the Balkans Libya,Iraq operated from carriers which only carried a dozen or so were a better er cheaper and more flexible option. the invincible class were excellent at what they did the current coastguard sized royal navy did not, or does not need two supercarriers. a folding wing option for the F35 would have upped the capacity by ten more aircraft. figures based on hanger and aircraft dimensions.

        • wasp class ships of the u s navy would have been far better.but that’s just me and what do I know about anything!? anymore.

          • Only in the context of now. Carrier programs take decades to actually bring a ship into service and alot of the supporting elements change in that time. Need to make best use of what we have now

          • carrier programmes are a bloated exercise in beuro racy an excuse for the usual I ter service arguing and complaints of bias towards one service and sod the rest. carriers are a exercise in vanity, to make it look like WWE are a nation that is not to be messed about wit, when in reality we’re not much more powerful than Holland and Belgium’s forces.

          • I just did 22 years in the navy everyone else on here wouldn’t total 22 Day internet heroes one and all.

          • my favourite one from a choice of the Blake,echo,Antrim,Amazon. id say Antrim she took me to ear, and brought me home again

          • apart from v having actually been in the navy, not like 90 percent of the laptop surfers on here

        • You’re not seriously suggesting the harrier, which is now rapidly being retired by for example the USMC by 2026 is a better option than the F35B. Also there would’ve never been a folding wing option because any new carrier would’ve been built to fit F35s even if it was a smaller design.
          And yes the invincible were good at what they were built for but were far too small for any impactful operations or having the option to be upgraded and accepting new types of aircraft or drones, you wouldn’t even be discussing a program like (Ark Royal) with an invincible sized ship.

          • project ark royal is another pathetic effort to divert attention away from the fact that we do not have a real navy with real warships. the next goofy idea to come out of the brain stained broom cupboard at the MOD will be a totally radio controlled ships. but it will take 10 years to build and hope that Walmart have all the bits we’ll need for them. ark royal programme, Stirling castle, Proteus? does anyone know what a navy is?

          • And yet your suggestions are building essentially LPHs that you can stick a couple jets on or bringing back the Echos because we need more patrol boats desperately?

          • read it again and you’d see that your sarcasm is based on your internet hobby if reading about ships and stuff. the LPH issue is still relevant. the gaps caused by the sale of ocean still exist and two big shiny ornament prices that what we have are the wrong numbers of the wrong ships you know it, I know it, our navy is no better than India,Japan, South Korea and Taiwan it a joke that wouldn’t be able to perform as a coast guard service

          • Also retaining the Harrier Fleet would have meant the early retirement of Tornado, and given the amount of ordenance dropping Tornado did between 2010 and 2019 for the RAF that would really have been the wrong called.

          • it is not rapidly being retired by the USMC the secretary for defence has started at the time of their stealing of them, that they were expected to operate into the w030’s

          • They are leaving the USMC by 2026, and Italy is on a similar time frame. The manufacturing for their spares and repair parts etc. Is winding down as well as the training for them.

      • they’ll be long obsolete and scrapped by then and we’ll STILL BE WAITING FOR GLASGOW. TO JOIN THE FLEET

    • You mean they should start fighting a war? The QE did do a rather hectic and intense World tour and then across the Atlantic for trials et al. She has been worked hard, PofW has been something of a disappointment I agree esp when you expect the second ship to be more reliable not less but as big complex ships problems are inevitable, it’s why the US persists in predominantly just upgrading rather ancient designs and the moment they do anything new they have horrendous problems with reliability. Why they wanted a mature base design for their new frigate too, that decision speaks a million words for their faith in serious new designs, fingers been burnt too often..

      • Mature design for their frigate….
        At least 3 years late and only 15% commonality to the original design.

        NAVSEA has an issue with design …it cannot do it! Even when given a working design it manages to mess that up as well.

      • did you get that from the internet? you need a better hobby. one where you know what you’re talking about. been in the forces have you? no, I thought not. nor has anybody else on this site

    • Every vessel has issues at times plus planned maintenance, upgrades and re-fits. Take a look at the T45’s and in particular, HMS Daring, She has been undergoing re-fit and upgrades for the best part of 7 years now and in that time the carriers have both been on epic deployments.
      It’s not so bad really. 🛳

      • the draw acks I the design was clear even before the last geek pressed the save button on his laptop. noe were getting all this drone shit to hide the fact that the program was a balls up.

    • Our carriers have actually spent 2% more of their life out at sea than the average US carrier.

      This is in spite of the misaligned propellor shaft, which needed replacing from day 1.

      QE class availability rates will probably end up bring best in class of any supercarrier.

      The irony is that foreign jealousy and propaganda gave QE class a reputation of never sailing, despite higher than average availability.

        • Nimitz Class – 120 sorties per day
          QE Class – 110 sorties per day

          The only argument to say that they aren’t supercarriers is because they’re British.

          I’d argue that our carriers are our best system across our forces to the hilt.

          • Pongos was our term for them . Where ever the infantry goes, the pong goes. Technically the polite term was “Brown jobs” We referred to paras as “meat bombs”- no disrespect intended.

          • that what the bloke in the bunk a over me must have been.mind you when you share your bedroom with another 60 smelly stokers,rs it all makes sense

          • We don’t know how many sorties a day the QE class can manage. It’s not the sort of thing that can be tested until we have three squadrons available. Last I heard it was going to be 70+ sustained and 110 surged, but those are only estimates. Nimitz sustained was historically 120 per day whereas claimed surge figures are over 200, so you aren’t comparing like with like.

            Sortie rates will probably be limited by the availability of maintenance crews rather than planes, so maybe a surge test of 24 planes with extra pilots and maintenance teams will give a far higher rate than 2/3 of these figures. I’d love to see the RN try that in 2026 and 2027 to see how much improvement they can get.

          • Hi Jon

            l imagine Desert Storm would be a useful indicator of US Carrie ops be interesting to see.

          • The 72 sustained figures are based on surge with 36 F-35s.

            During the Falklands war, we had 26 + 10 Sea Kings harriers on 28,700 tonne HMS Invincible at one point DURING sustained operations.

            This was more aircraft than what the MOD had previously quoted, so US and UK figures are hard to compare. UK figures are conservative and the US have a penchant for quoting the absolute MAX scenario.

            Remember that the bigger carrier get, the more efficient they become at carrying/launching aircraft per unit of space. HMS Hermes 28,700 tonnes vs QE 70,000 tonnes.

            Assuming we’re fighting a war, with no other constraints WRT maintenance, aircraft etc, Queen Lizzie as a platform is generating sorties with far more than 36 F-35.

          • good to see that someone else on here doesn’t just write what they’ve read on the internet you’ll be aware by now that this sites contributers are internet heroes with no idea whatsoever they’re talking about.

          • our carriers are a pathetic vanity project to lead the world into thinking that we have a navy at all the QE class sortie rate in reality is unknown. the ships have not even had a 24 hour full surge exercise so claims are estimates, not fact

          • It’s true that there hasn’t been a 24 hour surge, though we are as experienced as anyone in the designing and construction of carriers, so I have no reason to disbelieve. QE class was built specifically to roughly match Nimitz class in sortie generation, hence its size. It was designed to be the biggest ship that Portsmouth can handle.

            The QE class is supposed to be in service for another 45 years. During austerity, building the carriers was a long-term decision and cutting other areas was designed to preserve long-term capital spend.

            By the end of this year, we will have 48 F-35s and we’re getting at least 74 (final number isn’t decided yet so may get more).

            There are 13 new hulls in the water over the next 9 years, then Type 32 will get us to 24 escorts in the 2030s. If there’s any time to bemoan the carriers, then this is the worst possible time.

            Besides that, we had 3 mini carriers before. This isn’t particularly abnormal at all. It’s

          • in the design sta there no mention of fitted for but not with which is what we have everywhere funny how projects like Proteus and Stirling castle can be funded but our fleet goes without.

          • roughly match?LOL! as if. the QEand POW will be a i distant memory by then they’ll have been defence for reviewed to the scrapyard before then.

    • How long they were at sea is the less relevant metric..what is important is the mix of sea days and readiness.

      US carriers spend a lot less time than they used to so that they have more carriers at readiness..

      presently a U.S. carrier only spends 19% of its time at sea
      Against the wall at 30 day readiness 46% of the time
      Maintenance and 30-90 days notice 11% of the time
      Refit and out of commission 24% of the time.

      so two years of sea days for the two carriers is actually good and around the same as US carrier sea time and readiness is 40-60% which again is comparable.

      I would suggest reading the RAND paper “aircraft carrier maintenance cycles and their affects.

    • when they actually do get past the mouth of Pompey harbour we’ve nobody to hold their hands a deploying American carrier fleet are fully assembled within 6 hours of leaving port the escort group assembles some 30 miles off the coast and takes up it’s positions when the carrier turns up..

      • Why are you comparing us to a US carrier group when they have the most powerful navy in the world and we don’t.

    • we are constrained by craft, should have kept the harriers and not be on a promise of f35 tomorrow, but hey ho.

    • wrong design, wrong size, too expensive just a show of vanity to con everyone that the U K did still have a substantial navy.even though it had no ships.

  3. Glad to see they’re done and she’s ready to sail.
    Anyone got a list on the upgrades (publicly issued) that were included in this refit? Did she get the special land aids that HMS PWLS has in the end?

  4. Perhaps they should have asked the Chinese for advice on fitting electromagnetic catapults when it was in the dock, again.

  6. Sorry, rant switch on, no mention of upgrades to the carriers defensive armaments suite here. Nothing on 30mm RWS , Ancilia or Dragonfire. Maybe it’s still too early for these? Rant over.
    Also on Janes today, an article on the Italian F35Bs getting JSM and Spear 3. Will the UK F35Bs (and P-8s?) be getting the JSM or some other equivalent?

    • Don’t be daft, we don’t want to integrate missiles. We may have to actually fire some then which costs money!

      Much better to just stick with radars only. At least we can tell the bigger boys what to shoot at.

      • Happy to be “daft” and I wasn’t even mentioning any missile systems to keep the “FOD” types at bay! This might be ridiculous too, but 2-3 of the 40mm might be handy and complement the 3 Phalanx’s and give a greater all round depth of self defence. I suppose no great rush on any of this until they’ll need to go into harms way somewhere.

        • to be honest I would move to the 57mm Mk 3 as it can have a none deck penetrating mount and most importantly it can use MAD-FIRES..which are essentially guided missiles anyway.

          • Do you think they’d be actually enough room for the 57mm mounts? They’d be quite a bit bulkier than the 40mm but yes even punchier.

          • Imagine that!
            The carrier with 4x 57mm firing guided ammo.
            Isn’t MAD-FIRES semi-active radar?
            There have been a lot of questions about guidance for those sorts of shells; some use IR, some use beam riding and others use SAR.
            If it is SAR then Artisan might be enough for guidance, but only for a limited number of targets and with limited firing angles given the front island

          • I still think the RN is holding off fitting the 30mm until the 40mms have been in service for a while on the T-31. If it performs in reality as they expect, then I think the 40mms will be fitted to the QE class carriers.

          • Yes, I think the most realistic outcome is 4x 40mm replacing the current CIWS and 30mm and guided with E/O turrets and Artisan, a perfectly capable setup.

          • So they are gapping the capability for 10 years? If they want the 40mm, they should fit them and try them out. Then they will know how they perform in reality.

          • Yes, even trial the 40mm now. Why keep waiting? If it’s not what they want they can be put on other ships or even on the back of a truck, like the recent Bofors Tridon!

          • 57mm on a river would be a good move for the RN. big enough AND small enough for the rivers and the echoes could accommodate them perfectly.

          • To be honest I do think the rivers need a little more self defence, you never know when a none state actor will launch a drone at you..

    • There’s clearly more to the 30mm situation, Dragonfire is not deployable yet.
      JSM would be nice but integration is a pain

      • Yes, we’ll have to wait to see what happens with those four empty 30mm spaces. We could share integration costs with Italy on the NSM and isn’t Spear 3 of British origin?

        • We’re getting spear 3, I think other aircraft, possibly the US are getting JSM but I assume there are country specific upgrades required. Another factor may be that they’re externally carried and in turn reduce stealth.
          End of the day hard to know why they aren’t looking at a long range strike missile but the F35 certainly hasn’t leant itself to equipping a wide range of weaponry.

          • You’ve got to reckon everyone checks out what everyone else has got and ask why not us too?! Hope the UKs F35Bs get a decent spread of weapons. If I can be a bit mischievous for as moment, I’d like to see LM with the UK take on further development work on the F35B and give it a bit of a stretch a bit more zip and payload and range. Maybe in exchange for some Tempest work with LM US? You can tell me I’m “stupid” … Lol. 😆

          • A bit of a stretch as in size? Then no chance, we’d be paying for that all ourselves. And obviously wouldn’t be applied to most the F35s we already have. Pretty sure Tempest will aim to be as independent as possible in order to avoid all the issues we’ve had with the F35 program

          • Yes, a bit longer, for a longer bomb bay, more fuel, and more powerful engine. It’s a real shame nothing came of any post Harrier development…unless it’s still going on secretly in a back shed in the UK somewhere… Lol 😁.

          • the shed is behind fountain lake jetty in Pompey with it are the mushroom systems from Monmouth and Montrose Nd the torpedo launches and the Ds30 cannon. all insensitive spares for those T23’S in service.

          • They’ll get a better engine in a few years from P&W, including some range, speed and payload boosts. Extra range is also perfectly possible as a LM UK initiative: develop some “stealthy” drop tanks.

          • possibly the US are getting JSM

            Hi Hugo, AFAIK the only US service to order the JSM so far is the USAF, for the internal bays of their F-35As. Marine Corps F-35Bs are eventually slated to get the LRASM (whenever integrated), it’s just accepted that they will be for external carry only. I wonder if a “Goldie Locks” internal bay strike missile will be developed for the F-35B?

        • Speaking of integration costs
          Are the weapon integrations/updates universal?
          In other words, if when blk4 comes through the Italians will be able to fire JSM because of code upgrades, will ours be able to as well?
          In that case, there is no reason at all not to buy JSM for the same purpose unless FC/ASW is planned further down the road.

      • JSM’s integration with Lockheed Martin has been paid for by Australia, Japan and Sweden. So the expensive bit is being done. The UK would be doing a clearance integration. Which covers work from the firing trials and operational development. So wouldn’t take as long or cost as much.

        At some point our F35s will also be getting FCASW. Which is in a different class admittedly, though JSM would be a very good middle ground weapon.

        • Already getting an interim naval weapon with NSM so I’m not sure how many more interrims they’re looking at. Plus JSM on F35 won’t reach full capability till nearer 2030, at least far as I’ve heard.

          • Agreed, yet another interim. However, the MoD has recognized there’s a range capability gap between the Spear-3 and FCASW. From what I have heard there has been some moves around JSM filling this gap. There is currently no MBDA weapon that matches JSM, or the range requirement.

            I have also heard that the development of FCASW is being sped up. So that may get to IOR earlier rather than later, around 2030ish as well.

          • FCASW will be both surface and air launched. The sub-launched variant I’ve not heard about. Though I’d bet this is more of a requirement from France. For the RN, it would depend upon whether the FCASW (the sub sonic version) also replaces TLAM.

          • I also thought Italy has joined France and the UK on the FCASW? It’s interesting they’re going with the JSM for the F35B. Maybe an interim too. Would the JSM be a lot more capable than the Spear 3?

          • Correct, Italy are now participating on the FCASW program. I’m not sure if they are part of the manufacturing work share, which is currently just France and the UK. I’m sure we will find out in due course.

            JSM is significantly bigger than Spear-3. JSM weighs 416kg, whereas Spear-3 is 100kg. It therefore contains more fuel and a bigger warhead. So can go further and deliver a bigger bang.

            FCASW will be similar ballpark to the weight of Storm Shadow. Where Storm Shadow weighs 1300kg. Though the rumours are it will be bigger, as the customers want a further reach.

            The average electronic surveillance equipment used for detecting RF, may not detect the Spear-3 radar. As it uses a very high frequency above the Ka-band (26.5 to 40GHz). JSM uses entirely passive sensors to detect the target. Specifically imaging infrared, but it also being trialled with the LRASM Passive RF sensor as made by BAe. Both Spear-3 and JSM use target recognition software to confirm the detected target meets the mission planning parameters. But also allows the missiles to target specific points on a ship.

            Spear-3 also comes in an electronic attack version (Spear-EW). This marries up the Leonardo Britecloud RF jammer with Spear. Allowing it to target enemy radar with jamming and spoofing. There is not a JSM version.

            For our F35Bs. The B’s smaller volume weapons bays, means JSM can only be carried externally compared to the F35A and C versions. Therefore only 4 JSMs can be carried. Not sure if they will clear it for the under-fuselage centre hardpoint?

            However, the Spear-3 is designed to be carried internally in the F35B. Where each of the two weapons bays can hold 4 Spear-3s. Externally, the weapon would be carried on the triple launcher. So it would be technically possible to carry 12 externally. Making a total of 20 Spear-3s. Which could be a mix of normal Spear-3 and Spear-EWs. Thereby allowing the missiles a better chance of penetrating a peers air defences and reaching the target.

            JSM based on the NSM, which is shaped to be RF stealthy and is built using an embedded RAM skin. It doesn’t announce it arrival by using an active search and tracking radar to the target. It approaches the target stealthily.

            Both missiles use different methods to achieve the same goal of hitting the target. One will use swarming and EW to overwhelm an air defence, whilst the other is more ninja like.

          • Nah, I think the original comment was aimed at Sweden doing a NATO air exercise from Iceland.

        • Has that been stated? That we will eventually get F35 FC/ASW?
          I haven’t heard anything and was resigned to our F35 never having a heavy standoff weapon, so was really pleased when I found out that the Italians had done the work for us with JSM.

          • Yes. The MoD shelved fitting Storm Shadow to the F35B and instead put the funds towards FCASW.

            For us the “Sovereign” weapons being integrated are:

            1. ASRAAM
            2. Meteor
            3. Spear-3
            4. Paveway
            5. FCASW

          • Do you have an article that shows that?
            I’ve just never heard anything and wondering if there’s another defence site I’m missing.
            We already have ASRAAM, don’t we?
            Have a nice day DB

          • Try LM’s F35 site. It did have a number of items showing what TR3 and Block 4 would give the aircraft, including a list of weapons. There is also some info with MBDA and on the DE&S website.

            ASRAAM is cleared on F35, the newer Block 6 is undergoing integration as we speak. Paveway is an ongoing program. Meteor was earmarked for the F35 Block 4 integration. Though TR3 is enough to get it doing what it needs. FCASW will require both TR3 and the Block 4 upgrades.

          • I’ve trawled through the F35 website and the closest I got was the statement that 17 new weapons would be integrated.
            I’m just interested in what weapons other countries are getting because if there’s anything else like JSM hidden away I want to know about it.
            Just had a look at DE&S as well, nothing there.
            Do you have a list or link?

          • Sadly, nothing I can share. DE&S had a piece on the upgrade to Block 4 and what it meant for the MoD, which included a list of current and proposed weapons, which included FCASW. They do take pieces down though.

            LM had some links which included pieces from the joint projects office. Admittedly they were bigging up the US weapons, especially Stormbreaker (SDB). With just a couple of sentences about the MBDA weapons and Paveway.

          • I believe there’s a “MBDA US” branch too so good luck to them getting some market share over there in their own back yard!

          • It’s going to be interesting to see what AShM missiles the P-8 will get and if even ASRAAM for protection.

      • Shouldn’t be an issue the Norwegians developed it and have stumped up for LM to integrate it, just like us and Meteor.

      • Dragonfire is amyth. a budget sapping fairy story. we get murmurs now and again but I’m sceptical about the whole thing.

  7. Seems to have been repaired a fair bit quicker than POW, I guess lessons were learned. Well done to all involved, these are magnificent ships the likes of which the RN has never known.
    Anyone know what “capability upgrades” were added ?

    • New prop shaft design was implemented, repair was quicker as Qnlz didn’t suffer any failure to the coupling while the props were spinning, Pwls had a whole lot of damage from that as it was underway

      • Thanks for that, I guess those pre-deployment inspection dives were worth every penny. It’s very impressive either way you look at it.
        Hopefully things will start to get better from now on.

    • 2025 still happening as hull certification is extensive, they’ll also be installing Bedford array.
      But they completed the prop shaft replacement now rather than opening that area again in 2025

        • No? We can’t afford the regular idea of an arsenal ship, let alone one the size of a carrier using drones that are yet to be made.
          A 3rd carrier would’ve been useful for availability but we don’t have the manpower or aircraft to make it worthwhile

  11. Welcome back Lizzy! The wisdom of two carriers demonstrated once again. All we need now is more escorts & supply ships.

    • Shouldn’t be too critical of the current fleet. Thanks to Governmental lack of action to protect our steelworks, to build more new warships, we will have to ask the Chinese nicely to sell us some of the right qualty of steel.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here