HMS Queen Elizabeth left Portsmouth today bound for the United States – taking over from her out of action sister-ship HMS Prince of Wales.
The Royal Navy say that in the coming months, HMS Queen Elizabeth will be at the heart of a powerful task group made up of thousands of sailors, up to ten ships, F-35B Lightning jets, helicopter squadrons and Royal Marines Commandos, which will operate across Europe this autumn.
But, the Royal Navy say, the aircraft carrier will first deploy to the east coast of the United States to undertake parts of HMS Prince of Wales’ deployment – as her sister ship undergoes repairs.
HMS Queen Elizabeth’s Commanding Officer, Captain Ian Feasey, said:
“After a period of maintenance it is fantastic for the Fleet Flagship to be underway again to conduct operational activity with allies and partners.”
The Royal Navy task force will work closely with allies and partners across Europe – from the Baltic all the way south to the Balkans and Black Sea region – over the coming months.
“The operations are part of galvanised NATO efforts in the face of Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine to safeguard security, stability and prosperity across Europe. HMS Queen Elizabeth will primarily be focused on operations in the Baltic and work closely with forces from Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.
Together, these nations form the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force, which is designed to react to crises whenever and wherever they unfold. Before the operational phase of the deployment, HMS Queen Elizabeth will be in New York to host the Atlantic Future Forum – a conference that brings together the brightest minds and most influential thinkers from defence and beyond to strengthen UK and US bonds.”
Submarine hunting frigate HMS Richmond will accompany the aircraft carrier across the Atlantic.
Wee done the navy. We can do things if there is a will
…Or even WELL done the navy.😚
I thought that was your inner Scot coming out, then realised just sausage fingers…😋
Och, yee k🙃en the meaning then.
The real story is not POW being broken but the navy able to replace her in less than a week. I don’t think even the US could do this as CVN take an incredible amount of time to work up. Well done.
Oh come on already. Comparing the QE to a Nimitz or Ford carrier is absurd. How about an America class LHA capable of carrying 20 F-35Bs, which the US has in inventory.
Any carrier of 65,000 tonnes is classed as a super carrier, The US came up with the definition not me. The CVF concept is superior in many ways to CVN especially in its flexibility. It really is a giant floating flexible airfield which this proves. America class is worthy of respect however we studied ships of that size and found a 65,000 t ship was optimal.
You’re right, the QE doesn’t compare to the Ford class… the QE works 😀
It doesnt compare to the PoW either than as neither does that…
Not sure what PoW is. You can’t be talking about PWLS because that spent the last year working as the NATO flagship in the Arctic while the Fords did nothing.
You know that Ford has been operating real aircraft for several years now.? And will very soon be deploying very soon on the other side of the world with a real actual air group. It seems to be able to steam wherever the hell it wants to under nuclear propulsion whereas the mighty Prince of Wales can’t seem to clear Portsmouth without hurting itself. And it has no air group… Ever.
“Soon”
Meanwhile Prince of Wales has already been deployed operationally. Oh dear.
Chip still sizzling away nicely I see? Why the comparisons with the USN, is it the “whose best” competition again? Only 1 winner there.
Team America, f**k yeah!!! 😀
Pretty much. No one aspires to match the US military save the Chinese. Some whom we think are US posters love to put down other nations efforts non the less.
There are always exceptions to that of course, we’ve had a few decent yanks here over the years and Former USAF now seems one.
Thanks Danielle, some of us practice refraining from being the Ugly Americans. 😁 Never understood the value of critical critiques of true allies exerting best effort. Totally counter productive.
Absolutely Daniele – it’s getting really old. Both classes – Ford and QE – are awesome ships in their own right and let everyone just leave it at that!
Your right Ford can steam right around the world on her nuclear propulsion. Pity she doesn’t have nuclear meals for the crew and nuclear jet fuel. Even a nuclear aircraft carrier can only carry enough jet fuel for a week of busy flying.
Firstly, I want to be clear. I am in no way knocking the USN. Ford has had teething problems and it is hardly surprising when you think of the sea change in capabilities it represents and all the new technologies it introduces. As I understand it the main problem has been with the EMALS. Which incidentally we wanted for the QE and PoW and would have happily installed if it had been ready in time and no serious observer would suggest that both the British Carriers would not be even better with EMALS. It was actually one of the reasons… Read more »
Believe the RN has pursued an entirely rational course in deferring decision re EMALS until a stable system design (i e., reliable, maintainable, etc.) has been demonstrated by USN. The RN simply does not have the budget available for numerous and diverse large scale R&D efforts. Reality dictates selectivity. “Value for money.” Simples! There will come an appropriate time in the future to consider retrofitting QE class w/ EMALS. Believe the US expends significant amounts on R&D principally out of concern over ChiCom rate of development.
The engineering spaces for EMALS are all still reserved within both HMS PoW and HMS QE. It has been a hard time for the UK with BREXIT and the pandemic all at the same time and we have had to make some very hard decisions. Perhaps the most galling was retiring Tornado without a replacement. It was always intended to replace Tornado with a smaller number of F-35’s. Instead we have been forced to employ the increasing capabilities of the later tranche Eurofighter Typhoons as the single fast jet platform in the RAF for both the ground support/strike and air… Read more »
SD, Thanks for the extended, obviously thought-provoking reply. Did not immediately recognize the referenced article from September, appreciate the UKDJ cueing provided w/in their email alert of your response. There have been at least two very sporting, near-run, potentially apocalyptic episodes post WW II: 1.) Cuban Missile Crisis, and 2.) Soviet interpretation of a NATO nuclear exercise (believe to have occurred in ’83). Fortunately, rational minds prevailed. No longer convinced all the players/leaders share that trait. The best course that can probably be hoped for is that a majority of the publics in the principal democracies are beginning to apprehend… Read more »
You know what I meant PoW PWLS, PMSL all the same thing.
I was merely being facetious-not tetchy, we need to accept when kit fails – not try and spin it or deflect it.
Im all for a bit of yank bashing but come on the Ford class will be an awsome carrier one that I for one wish we could afford.
I find it interesting that you’re having a go at me for Yank Bashing when the yank bashing was a reply to some pretty egregious RN bashing, instead of targeting the instigator.
Prince of Wales, the carrier with the broken propeller
Please see:
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-aircraft-carrier-heads-to-the-united-states/#comment-670050
Not a great introduction Mike.
Ask the A. Erica’s if they would rather have a QE class carrier or another America LHA and I tell you exactly what they will say. Large numbers of Marine Corp and USN naval avaiators have operated from the QE and PoW and they are absolutely full of praise. You can’t play Top Trumps with modern military assets a statistic here or a statistic there is far too simplistic these vessels are a combination of a thousand capabilities and systems that come together as a whole. In short the America class are LHA’s and the QE and PoW are aircraft… Read more »
Commentary raises an interesting question. What would be an appropriate grouping of capital ships in a combined taskforce? USN CVN w/ RN CV(F?)? RN CVF see w/ one (or more) US LHAs? Obviously, threat level would be a significant criterion.
…delete “see”…🙄
BTW, HMS Richmond is the escort for the residual operation, whatever currently titled. Believe HMS Richmond has completed LIFEX and has received Sea Ceptor mod and PGMU. Has the Sea Ceptor mod to enable ASuW (presumably software?) been implemented? Probably a very useful feature to have at this point.
The issue is US Marines have deployed on one UK aircraft carrier. And that’s because the UK can’t deploy their own aircraft on their wonderful carrier. The capability does not exist. Ask yourself why the Prince of Wales was supposed to go to the US to operate American aircraft. These are not difficult questions to answer.. The appear to be fantastic ships when they work. The problem is they don’t have anywhere near a deployable air group. F-35s or helicopters. And then there’s that teensy little AEW issue. There is a reason you spend billions of whatever the hell sort… Read more »
*Operate the British Trials Aircraft that are still in the US.
If you want to be taken seriously please at least get your facts right.
Don’t you mean… yet? You pompous… The UK was out of the carrier game for 20 years. We are just rebuilding the capability and I agree we need more jets but we are getting more jets. there will be over 50 by Xmas this year (there is a limit to how fast we can train pilots) and another 36 next year. The reason we have invited USMC pilots and aircraft aboard is because we are relying on them to help us train our guys. Most F-35 customers from wherever do their initial training in the States are they all incompetent… Read more »
Bravo.
He’s a Troll. You’ll notice there are a few on this site. But well said anyway.
RN carrier task force/strike group (CSG) operational capability will mature over the remainder of this decade, and most deficiencies will be addressed/resolved. Remember, it would be a formidable task to reconstitute carrier capability after allowing it to lapse for a number of years, for any navy, including our own. “Rome was not built in a day.”* Quote or approximation thereof.*
Does anyone know yet what actually has happened to POW? Bad workmanship or bad luck?
Seems to be a shaft coupling, it’s not that uncommon.
Yes, we all do it.
Coupling on the prop shaft failed… human error… shaft not greased adequately… inside information 😉
NavyLookout has an article – the comments give an excellent insight into the issue.
Jim, Lee, Paul.
Thank you Gentlemen. I’ll have a read.
Think the propeller grounded out & did further damage as a result.. shit driving 🤣
Except under wartime conditions; war is a powerful motivator and red tape magically disappears!
Demonstrates the fruits of a rare wise decision, retaining both carriers against the wishes of many to ditch one of them.
Couldn’t agree more.
Totally and what a quick turnaround in getting the QE ready and outbound. Well done the RN! And, if I can quote Liz Truss already.. a demonstration of a “brilliant Britain” and more to come. 🇦🇺 🇳🇿 🇬🇧
Will some of the POW crew be travelling out to continue there training regarding aircraft handlers and navy F35 maintainers?
On another note aren’t we glad the navy stuck to there guns and got 2 carriers instead of 1 like the French model, in a shtf situation that could of just lost us a war.
As it happens, it’s nice to see the speed with which QE stepped in. Benefit of 2 x Carriers clear. Still doesn’t excuse the evident faux pas that led to PoW’s crippling, but a positive nonetheless. Looking forward, in a manner of speaking, to the investigation and outcome over PoW. Nationally, we’re entitled to sufficient of that.
ATM it is looks like a component failure that could have been managed in time of war but in peace time it was better to get on and fix it promtly.
I am not sure how that is a faux pas? Things break: they need fixing.
It would be a faux pas if it could not be fixed or there was no dry dock to fix it in….
Absolutely should embrace the luxury of peacetime achedule pace while available. Unfortunately unable to guarantee that pace in the future; we sometimes referred to the “assholes and elbows* drill! 😁
Hi, SB. Your above flashed up on my email a couple of days back, but then disappeared from trace 😕 Anyway, this morning it’s back. Well, a faux pas isn’t a heinous crime! it’s, broadly speaking, an embarrassing mistake, generally in full view. Not sure that the the RN don’t view it similarly.
Allegorically, Queen Elizabeth stepped up just as she always has, right to the very end. Rgs
Hi Gavin, There is an article on Navy Lookout that goes into more detail of the problem. Apparently the PWLS sailed with a known problem and sailed with contractors on board under a special permit to sail – contractors on board kind of history repeating itself. The thoughts were that it could be sorted but it turned out that it was not what was first thought (something to do with the motor I think). If I remember rightly suspision has turned to a shaft coupling, where I am not sure, but I think she will need to be dry docked… Read more »
Additionally, possibly/probably moving forward the Lloyd”s 5 yr. survey/inspection, and any scheduled upgrades (currently undefined in the open press). Emminiently sensible to make lemonade from lemons.
…Lloyd’s Register (per Wiki)…
Thanks for that, CR. Might have known NL would be in the mix by now. Unfortunately, I get a privacy warning when linking on this tablet, so have to await access to my PC, which has more layers of security, but is a faff for quick reference.
Still intrigued for any further updates due to the extent that things turned T-U. But your mentioned NL article does explain why PoW images show her apparently passing the Round Tower on the port screw only.
Cheers
Good work.
We need a bigger navy.
Ben Wallace: “Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy’s future”.
Certainly for the more offensive missions subs are the future, the replacement for astute needs to be bought in greater numbers.
Subs can’t provide AA defence, shore bombardment or boarding ops though. Surface anti sub ships are still cheaper to use as escorts as well.
Think of the costs of building and sustaining and crewing a submarine fleet of 25 SSN’s @ £1.5Bn each……I am not sure that the defence budget would cover that and I am not really sure that we would really need that.
I can see 12 SSN being used well.
Compare that to 10 x T31/2 @ £250M each + trimmings.
Yes, we need more subs but not at the expense of the surface fleet?
Also for SSN’s there’s the cost of decommissioning which is fairly eye watering. That always seems to be left as a problem for the next generation to deal with.
MOD projected costs to dismantle 27 boats is £3 billion or £111 each. That’s not that bad and much of the costs won’t increase with unit numbers. 1 tonne of nuclear waste is basically just as big a problem as ten tonnes of nuclear waste to store.
There is no real reason why the UK can’t have a much larger SSN fleet it just has to choose to do it.
£111 each to decomission reactors. That’s a good deal! Shame edit button goes after 30 mins Jim.
The defence budget is £50 billion which over a 30 year build cycle is £1.5 Trillion. Why don’t you think we can buy one submarine a year for at £1.5 billion each? Astutely don’t need refuelled ever and the total manning for 24 SSN’s is 2352 out of a total armed forces of 158,000. People like Wallace are starting to wake up to the fact that SSN’s are incredibly cheap to operate relative to the capability they produce. With modern A2AD capability it’s unlikely that any surface ship would survive for more than a few hours in a real conflict.… Read more »
I think there is a bit more to the cost cycle than that. Balance is always the key. Otherwise we are back to another Duncan Sandys moment. Subs are important but a balanced fleet is even more important. – How do you carry out littoral conflict with a sub? – How do you deliver FIRES without giving away you location? – How do you launch aircraft from a sub – I appreciate the Russian have tried this with their carrier….. You could go on and on. Yes, you can deny oceans to other powers with a few subs BUT if… Read more »
Warships generally launch missiles, it’s the missiles that do the work. You don’t need a CAP to protect a fleet from an enemy airbase if you take the enemy airbase out with missiles from a sub.
I’m not arguing for an unbalanced fleet, my position is that a fleet of 19 Frigates and destroyers 2 Carriers, 6 amphibs, 8 OPV’s and 12 MCM but just 5 SSN is unbalanced.
We will have 7 SSN’s
Actually mate we will should have 8 for a few years depending on when Triumph comes out of refit and how long they keep her in commission for!
Would be nice to stay at 8. But I guess 7 Astutes is a big chunk of capability. Very pleased Ben Wallace is staying on as defense secretary.
Yes, ditto BW staying on.
No
Triumph is completely clapped out. And it will never go to sea again….. It will hang close to the dock and that’s about it. This is what history shows.
I don’t think 5 is enough and neither does MOD which is why they ordered 7. I don’t think 7 is enough and would suggest that 12 was closer to the needed number as subs can carry out a wide range of discreet tasks. That assumes that T32 is ordered and the surface fleet is 6 x T45 8 x T26 5 x T31 5 x T32 So back to 24 warships and ignoring OPV’s which are not warships. Currently I think we are down to 17 or 18 surface combatants given the early paying off of T23’s? I don’t… Read more »
I think 12 ssn would be spot on a realistic increase of 5. Add some small cheap hydrogen subs like the type 212 because they can be virtually untraceable at slow speeds ideal for sitting in the giuk gap.
Yes, and as our current adversaries already have large sub numbers maybe it’s the right time for a few more P-8s, and helos, Merlin and upgraded Wildcats and why can’t the surface fleet also be increased further, closer to 30 instead of this “24”? 1-2 more each of T26/31/32 and all the “bells and missiles” to go with all this? Not asking for too much are we?
We mustn’t forget the very deserving airforce and Army in all this too.
We need more subs, no question about that, but do they all have to be SSNs? Should we be looking at a few SSKs, possibly utilising proven off the shelf designs from countries like Germany etc built in the UK with RN specific kit?
I don’t think we need 12, Russia hasn’t the numbers it used to have and with Australia joining the club you don’t really need to deploy to the Pacific. So 8 or 10 SSN but add 4 AIPSSK, but not the U212. I think they are just a little too tailored for the Baltic and Med, the true ocean going AIPs are French, Japanese and Swedish. If it was me I’d talk to the Swedes about us building 4 Blekinge and also see if the RAN would like to add some interim SSKs as well to tied them over till… Read more »
A modern SSK comes in at around £500 million a pop, depending on whats fitted. Not really what you might call cheap if you consider the base price for a T31 at £250ish million?
They are also not really that suitable for patrolling the GIUK gap, its to large an area for a SSK to patrol by itself, you would need 5 or 6 of them to cover the entire gap, which could be covered by 2 SSN’s, 1 at a push.
Off topic, slightly, but there’s an informative piece here about the AUKUS deal and where both UK and Australia see themselves going in near future.
https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/rmarles/transcripts/joint-press-conference-uk-secretary-state-defence-ben-wallace
Did a television series entitled “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea” ever make it across the Pond in syndication? Sci-fi adventures of specially equipped USN sub sub (circa late ’60’s early “70’s) equipped w/ an independent manned aerial vehicle. Total fantasy at the time, but life may approximate art in terms of future tech (50+ yrs. on). 🤔
Oh, yeh I remember that. The sub had really cool horizontal fins on the bow and windows… I can’t really remember the storylines any more but I always thought the sub looked awsome.
Cheers CR
Yes, for storylines think Jules Verne’s “Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Sea,” but the thought occurred to me to send a DVD to the concept design teams for SSN(X) and SSN(R) w/ a note requesting a similar design. 😁
Oh yes, Was on Chanel 4 Saturday mornings when I was a kid. Maybe it’s time to fit the windows to SSN (R) 😀
If the future yields a common design, especially mission equipment, wonder whether a system for creating multinational crews could be implemented as necessary (trade you two sonar techs for a reactor operator and a draft choice to be named later 😁). NATO has some multinational aircrews.
We had to do that a few years ago getting engineers from US coast guard on our frigates.
Maybe ask Elon Musk to solve the propulsion problem and cost of subs and surface ships he’s done it with rockets and shown NASA how to get thing done more efficiently and cheaper. Just a thought.
Maybe not, if my Tesla is anything to go by.
3 front suspensions and a front motor in 14k miles. PWLS is better than that….
I don’t disagree for the most part, but subs certainly can and do practice shore bombardment with TLAMs
Sure but a limited number of shots and gives away the position of the sub.
Not such an issue when firing from 1000 miles away. In modern warfare I don’t think anyone will be taking a surface combatant with in gun range of any enemy coats line. Russians have found that out.
The Russian discovered that if you don’t have weapons system that work you can’t defend yourself.
As well as discovering that if you have the whole of the topside covered in missiles they start to cook off when they are hit.
They also discovered that if you have poor damage control ships sink.
Basically they discovered that if they are so stupid as to try to use knackered Cold War ships with knackered systems that don’t work they are sitting ducks to any semi decent weapons.
Poor damage control can be an issue with lean manned ships. One thing that really helps with controlling fires for instance is lots of well trained sailors.
Sure lean manning could be an issue where well trained muscle is required.
But well trained is the key for all eventualities.
TLAMs, deadly but expensive.
Not really the same mission I was referring to, I meant gunfire support as seen in the Falklands or supporting any potential future landing. Tomahawk would be an horrifically expensive way of carrying that out. Sometimes cheaper and less complex is the way to go.
Before anyone says we won’t be carrying out any landings needing gunfire support, I’d argue that for as long as we have the Royal Marines there remains the potential they will need the support.
Quite
Multiple calibers of Vulcano rounds? Potentially MadFires?
We need 5 additional Astutes preferably a ‘flight2’ with additional VLS, like was done with Los Angeles SSN’s taking off torps for TLAM reduces them too much from hunter killer role
We got the wrong Tory for PM
Thing is, when MPs change hat they change priorities. More so, when you’re PM and everything becomes the priority. Wallace is best where he is on that basis, * and likely knew it. Personaly, I’d have preferred Rishi for reasons already discussed, but we will see where we go with Liz, who got the job by quoting back at the electorate the issues they wanted answers to from her, it seems. New Cabinet looks very * night of the long knives. I’m mostly conservative but not Conservative Party. So not interested in these narrow minded Clans, just the UK like… Read more »
Liz Truss did an interview on Radio 4 on 30th Jun: https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1633308/Liz-Truss-BBC-Radio-4-Today-UK-defence-cuts-Russia-NATO-threat-Ukraine-war-latest-vn and said that she supported reduction of the army to 73,000 and then made a fool of herself for suggesting that the army should expect reductions from 100 or 200 years ago – what was that about? Specifically: “Sounds to me like there is some internal discussions taking place about the precise deployment of forces but I think we all need to recognise that warfare now is different to warfare as it was 100 years ago, or, or 200 years ago,” She now, as PM, says that cuts… Read more »
TBH Graham, she just seem to be saying anything that would go down well with the conservative party membership to get there vote. Lets see what happens in the emergency budget.
I saw that as well, and have wondered why it hasn’t caught more attention. Fair play to Wallace for considering the issue…for what its worth I suspect it could well be the case that submarines are where our superior technology and skills can really make the decisive difference (should it ever be necessary of course)
Can we change that a bit to… a good mix of “subs And ships”… 😆
And Army and RAF ,sorry started me off again 🤐
Did a band play in which to see her off, if so did they play this
Very good.
And that is why we have 2. Splendid.
I read in the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales, in that the crew considered the battleship PoW a bit of a Jonah, I wonder do/would the modern crew think the same?
Alright, since no one else has broached the subject, presume a Westlant 23 w/ HMS PWLS will be added to the schedule? If dor no other reason the SVRL?/SRVL? trials? Someone has to inform the Admiralty to include a port call to NYC during Fleet Week. If you’re in uniform, virtually anything less than arson/rape/murder is tolerated and typically expected. Sorry the police in FL hassled the HMS Queen Elizabeth crew during a previous Westlant port call (Mayport?), but they probably had different marching orders. City fathers (and Chamber of Commerce members) throughout FL are tired of loud, obnoxious, drunken… Read more »
…for…🙄
I hope there is a Westlant 23 with the bold prince. I can’t wait to see a carrier loaded up to full with jets and choppers. Even if it’s just for a photo shoot. Once Enough F35 have been bought and pilots are trained.
I’m not up to date with the short landing on the carriers. Is it going to be a simple as pushing a button and the aircraft does the work? I’d heard the vertical landing is really easy now. The jet does all the hard work.
Great time for carrier development with drones etc coming along.
What to me seems like a lifetime ago I worked on Broadway and Wall Street when Gulf 1 Tickertape parade was held. My memory may be faded but I think that no one in uniform from any country bought a drink and 95% got “lucky”. The NYPD seemed to be in cracking form. But that is a memory from a different lifetime!
Tolerance for disorder/partying has been dialed back since 9-11 even during Fleet Week, for obvious reasons; don’t know specific ROEs post COVID. NYC denizens, need ground truth.
God Save The Queen.🤞
Yes indeed. It doesn’t look good I’m afraid to say. Charles and William on their way to Balmoral.
Yes, I fear the worst. As a 50 year old man, she has always been there, like for most of us, and especially us patriotic types who believe in our country, the monarchy, and believe in her.
The shock will be grave. It’s an event I hoped would be way into the future, like the Queen Mother.
My thoughts exactly.
🇬🇧
Second that thoughts and prayers with her 👑🙏💂🇬🇧
Wonder wich crew going ? The original crew from HMS Prince of Wales on HMS Queen Elizabeth ? because the crew from HMS Queen Elizabeth time of is affected.
His Majesty’s Ship Queen Elizabeth as of yesterday 08/9/22 God Save the King
So as of Friday evening there was still one of the QEs alongside in Portsmouth according to the webcam. Can’t tell which it is from the angle/distance viewed. Is that the POW or did the QE not sail when the article said? I thought the POW was destined immediately for either the Netherlands or Scotland for the work to remedy the fault.
I see Maritime books website lewsletter shows HMS QE sailing past HMS POW plus departing Portsmouth, so it must be HMS POW currently in harbour, presumably awaiting departing for dock work to remedy the fault.
Well done the Navy for rapid re tasking of the QE.
I will not be surprised if/ when the report comes out it states the PoW hit a submerged obstacle . Either a uncharted bottom feature of their is a Russian dub with a very bent box limping home.
Does anyone know when she will arrive in the US of A? Must be a third of the way there by now.
It would be interesting to see how quick a high speed run to America could be done.
I was wondering – Will HMS QE have any aircraft on her on this trip to the US?