HMS Queen Elizabeth left Portsmouth today bound for operations in northern European waters with F-35 Lightning jets, say the Royal Navy.

The aircraft carrier recently returned from the United States where she hosted a high-profile security conference between the UK and US in New York, in place of her currently out-of-action sister ship.

HMS Queen Elizabeth has now sailed for the next phase of her autumn programme, which will see her lead a powerful Carrier Striker Group of warships, helicopters and F35B stealth jets on Operation Achillean.

According to a Royal Navy statement:

“The Carrier Strike Group will work closely with NATO and Joint Expeditionary Force allies as the UK underscores its commitment to safeguarding European security. The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) is a coalition of ten like-minded nations, which are dedicated to maintaining the security of northern Europe. This latest deployment builds on a range of operations and exercises with JEF allies this year for the Royal Navy, including maritime patrols in the Baltic Sea. 

HMS Queen Elizabeth will be at the centre of the Carrier Strike Group, with the Commander UK Carrier Strike Group, Commodore Angus Essenhigh, and his staff commanding from the aircraft carrier. F-35B Lightning jets from 617 Squadron will carry out flying operations, while helicopters from 820, 845, 815 and 825 Naval Air Squadrons will be undertaking sorties from a bustling flight deck.”

Commodore John Voyce, Portsmouth’s Naval Base Commander, was quoted as saying:

“We wish HMS Queen Elizabeth and all the Carrier Strike Group the best of luck on their upcoming deployment. All at Portsmouth’s Naval Base are proud to support the Royal Navy’s flagship and prepare her for Operation Achillean. We look forward to welcoming her home when it is complete.”

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

83 COMMENTS

  2. CSG22 was originally intended to include Queen Elizabeth, Defender, Diamond, Kent and an RFA tanker (Tideforce?). That may have changed.

    Air group wise – obviously QE has already embarked the Merlin MH.2’s of 820 NAS (8 helos?) for ASW, ASaC and SAR duties, plus Merlin Mk.4’s of 845 NAS (3 helos?) for transport and COD.

    How many of the twelve F-35B’s of 617 Squadron will embark is the big unknown, but 6-8 aircraft seems a reasonable guess. Any less wouldn’t constitute a viable number (e.g. for CAP duties), whilst any more would be an unnecessary maximum effort by the UK’s only strike squadron – which may be needed urgently in Eastern Europe at any time.

    • Just one T-23 frigate w/ tail? Thought SOP was to include two during every deployment. Would any JEF navy contribution include a frigate w/ tail? Realize it may result in underwhelming performance, but something is generally better than nothing.

      • Several multi-role allied JEF frigates have ASW facilities including towed arrays, such as the Karel Doorman and Fridtjof Nansen classes. AAW too. I think the Danish navy are planning on increasing their Absalon class ASW capabilities to include that, but I don’t know how far they’ve got.

        ISweden’s Gotland class attack subs provide pretty good ASW and there’s a good chance one of those will be in the mix.

        • If a Gotland class is taking part, she will more than likely be part of the ‘Opfor’ units. They are far too slow other than short bursts to keep up with a Surface task force of any description Jon.

        • Has 2087 been adopted universally across NATO? Apparently designated the gold standard, against which any other system is compared.

          • I don’t think so. I’ve also read that it’s regarded as a gold standard and it’s pretty widespread, but not only don’t all NATO navies have towed array sonars, even those who do won’t necessarily have 2087. Within JEF, the Norwegians and Brits have them; the Dutch Karel Doormans use a passive one, also from Thales. I haven’t heard what the Absalons will be getting although there’s reports that the Danes have been eying up various towed arrays. Finland will be getting a Norwegian dipping sonar for the Pohjanmaas rather than towed array.

            Outside JEF, France and Italy have it on the FREMMs. I think Spain will have Compact Captas-4 on the 110s, and I’m not sure if that uses the same 2087 sonar, but it’s claimed by Thales to be the same performance. US is taking it for Constellation, but nothing has been said about upgrading the Arleigh Burkes or LCS that I’ve read. The UK is also experimenting with KraitArray towed sonar for XLUUVs.

      • That would largely depend on what the plot for the N Norwegian Sea looked like I imagine. If its relatively quiet then perhaps only one is required, if not then 2 and an Astute, if one isn’t already slated to be part of the exercise at some point in time.

        • Thanks, makes sense, forgot SSN deployments are not telegraphed. Would not consider a potential sucker punch from Mad Vlad’s slobbering Orcs entirely beyond the realm of possibility.

    • I know I will make myself unpopular with some here but the reason we cannot embark more F35’s is because there aren’t any.

          • We would only deploy a similar number for this type of exercise even if we had 70 or more available. We only deployed 8 Sea Harriers back in the day, did everyone complain about numbers then. Nope.

          • Your right of course. That’s why the U.S. and France and China and even Italy only deploy eight aircraft at a time because they don’t to wear them out. Back in the day as you call it we only deployed eight Harriers because that was the number the Invincible’s were designed to take.

          • China cannot deploy any 5th gen fighters in any number, or anything to the far side of the world and sustain it. We once deployed 17 Harriers on-board Illustrious back in 2002, we did that once. 8 was the norm. As you well know, we will have 48 F35s by 2025, the gov has committed to 74. A decision will be made in 2025 about numbers beyond 74. So that is the plan. The slow pace is frustrating, but regeneration carrier strike is incredibly complicated. A huge pot of cash isn’t going to appear overnight to speed things up. Carrier operations of any kind, of any number is a huge undertaking. And even just 8 F35’s brings a huge capability to any exercise or real operation. So instead of the constant criticism, look at what we can do, with the full knowledge more is coming further down the line.

  4. Considering there are only 26 F35bs at Marham and not enough pilots to fly them, my guess would be six at a push.
    I argued sometime ago with few on here when these carriers put to sea over the last 12 months why no fix air wing? I was told ‘its such and such an excersise and F35s aren’t needed’ or they can be rapidly deployed if needed’

    Poppycock. The whole programme is an expensive mess as it stands.

    I’m not anti carrier, neither am I anti F35s. It’s like buying the car of your dreams but not having enough fuel to put In it, looks nice on your drive but that’s all.

    • There has got to be a training or exercise purpose to deploying jets?

      Otherwise it is a pure waste of resources.

      Look at it another way the main issue is generating pilots ATM. That is slowed down by over deploying frames.

      Question is: what is more important?

      • No it is not,
        Most of the training for carrier ops is carried out in the sim, flying training has been a mess for years,
        The airframes we currently have are not being over deployed. The UK government has said we plan to buy 138 over the lifetime of the programme. What that means is by the time the last jet is delivered the first tranches will have left the fleet. How long is the lifetime of the programme? When the line shuts.
        It was decided by Blair and then Brown that the Navy would have 2 big carriers, the Navy bent over backwards to ensure these entered service by cutting the fleet to meet costs.
        We are now left with a defence budget that has for years a black hole. Capabilities sacrificed, dithering on delivery programmes ie slowing the rate ships and aircraft are procured. The Army? Its procurement is a disaster.

        We were told blithely the UK would have the best carriers with a full airwing. This was needed in the interests of this countries security needs because of the threats posed across the globe.

        I fear that POW will enter a state of high readiness, but really she will sit in Portsmouth rusting and have bits robbed off her to keep QE going.

    • 26 F35s still means the U.K. has five times as many stealth fighters as Russia has – assuming Ukraine hasn’t shot any down yet…

      It terms of carrier programme costs the U.K.‘s is a bargain.

      • There bigger picture is not just Russia, that is not what the carrier’s where procured for. Its fine if our defence posture becomes North Atlantic centric but we have and will continue to have wider and bigger threats around the globe. The carrier’s are only a bargin if these flat tops are equipped and used for what they are intended for.

  5. Have the 30mm guns yet been fitted ? Given experience with drones recently in Ukraine the carriers must have something capable of last minute defence against swarm attackes surely ? And phalanx isnt designed to operate against sea-borne targets.

    • That is why we have layered air defence. If drones are attacking the carrier, then somthing has gone badly wrong. The carrier simply wouldn’t be in the range or area that similar drones used off Ukraine could be of any use.

  8. There are multiple reasons as to why we do not have anywhere near enough F35Bs, including Low Rate Production by Lockheed Martin and our desire to procure Block 4 models, in addition to which our pilot training programme is so screwed up we simply don’t have enough pilots to fly those we actually have……. I suspect the number deployed on this occasion is embarrassingly low so its being kept quiet to avoid attracting adverse publicity

    • The decision to hold out for block4 makes sense, given LM haven’t confirmed whether current production will be upgradable. Training is in a mess but don’t believe all the doom and gloom. The biggest hurdle by grapevine is carrier work up, obviously 95% is sim based but the last 5% requires a ship and being carrier down isn’t helping with that.

    • 8 F35’s have been deployed. And not one single nation thinks that is embarrassing. Because it’s 8 more than any other nation could dream of putting to sea except the US.

      • 8 is better than nothing, but bear in mind we only embarked 8 for CSG21 and have received 6 additional airframes since then….hence I would expect a greater number. However, the F35B has the same problem as joint force harrier with the RAF also having its own use for them in land based scenarios like Estonia…7 more are due for delivery in 2023, with all initial order airframes due for delivery by the end of 2025, so a bit of a wait yet before we can put a decent size airwing on a carrier.

        • We have now fully equipped the OCU with those 6 additional airframes since CSG21. It’s a good thing they are used for land based operations. They are not gaining experience sat around at Marham waitingto go to sea. And not every operational deployment requires the carrier, certainly when its around the EU.

  9. Could not the F35B become an RN asset, pilot training done through the US Marines? That would speed up pilot training and increase number on the carrier.

    • The RN doesn’t have the budget to be sole operator. For the RAF apart from the RAF Regt it has it’s entire budget devoted to aircraft purchase, manning and operation. The RN has the fleet the RM, RFA and Naval air to fund from it’s share of the budget.

  10. Scarce and very expensive Merlin’s are being grossly misused used for duties such as a plane guard and admiral’s barge. The RN needs to buy a few low cost, easy to maintain, medium-weight, multi-purpose helos as ship flights for the QEC. Maybe some second-hand Dauphin II’s at a few £million each – including refurbishment, essential upgrades and a paint job? The RN already uses two civilian owned Dauphin’s (ZJ164 and ZJ165) to support FOST, and the British Army has at least five. 
    https://www.key.aero/article/dauphin-iis-supporting-royal-navys-fost-mission

    • But then I suppose you are then adding a whole new logistics and skill set pipeline to the carrier, which costs money. We do have plenty of Wild cat fights that can operate at the lower end.

  11. Well I think being able to put to sea more fifth generation aircraft than any nation other than this US, is not a bad plan. A squadron of 8-12 f35S is more air power than anyone other than the US can put to sea.

  12. Gosh lots of gripping about the air wing on here again and the fact we can only put one squadron on our carrier.

    so of missing the point that:

    1) we are still regenerating our navel fixed wing aviation, so it’s still a bit of a journey and you cannot just get to the end stage of having 3 squadrons in a few years.

    1) commentators are not really considering what any of our adversaries are able to generate as navel air wings, Or considering what a threat one squadron of 5 generation fighters actually is to 99% of nations.

    3) what everyone else is able to put to sea compared to the RN. The fact we have had one carrier available and able to take a squadron of 5 generation fighters at any times….is way beyond other nations ambitions.

    • Well said pal. We would all like greater numbers more quickly, but in the real world, it isn’t that simple. And I get sick of people saying everything is ‘Embarrassing’, laughing stock’ and many other equally stupid comments. Pilot training is a frustration, but it will get sorted. And what we have today still has a long way to go, but it eclipses what we could do in the Harrier/Invincible days. And on another level of capability compared to the French with one 42k tonne carrier and 48 Rafale M’s.

      • Training was supposed to have been sorted out over 2 years ago, and wasn’t, it is in crisis at the moment. The French carrier with her Hawkeyes and Rafales has already demonstrated its ability to operate as a strike carrier and should not be underestimated.

        • It’s not being underestimated, but ours will soon surpass it. But if we only had one carrier, and 48 4.5 gen fighters, it would be cries of embarrassment and crisis and boom and gloom. Some are only happy when we are doing ourselves down.

    • Griping Jonathans. What concerns me is operating one of our carriers in the Baltic. Fine in peacetime for exercises but with many allies around the Baltic there’s no need to use a carrier there & in wartime it would be a needless risk.

      • Hi frank, I think that’s completely valid, having a carrier whatever it’s airwing, in easy range of land based strike aircraft in enclosed waters could be a very very bad place In case of general unrestricted warfare. But in reality sinking a carrier is a very long way up the escalation scale and you have effectively declared general warfare and Russia knows that only ends two ways ( total destruction of Russia’s armed forces and military industrial complex or total destruction of human civilisation from MAD), the force differential between NATO and Russian is just far to great for anything else.

        But also the Baltic is effectively under the air umbrella of a number of very effective first rate western airforces, the Russian airforce would be gutted trying to push a strike at a navel task force in the middle of the Baltic. It cannot even operate against what is a third rate power and airforce ( not taking from Ukraine, it’s airforce and air defence systems were 30-40 years out of date).

    • Except for China, the Japanese, India. Japan is in the process of adopting 5th generation jets, Chinese are well on the way to at sea fast jet operations. India is also on the way.

      • No we have a better navel aviation capability than all three of Those nations…not a one has a 70k ton carrier supporting Fifth generation Fighters at squadron level deployment….

        China does not have a functional air wing of 5th generation fighters, it’s got a few soviet hand me downs….

        japan has no fixed wing aircraft carriers ( some on their helicopters carriers, potentially in the future could take a very small air wing ( possibly)

        India has the same as China just built what is effectively an old Soviet design.

        not one of these nations are anywhere close to what an Elisabeth brings to the table…China may reach parity in regards to navel fixed wing aviation in around a decade, but at that point the Elizabeth’s will be fully matured with potential air wings of 3-4 squadrons of a mature fifth generation fighter, it’s unlikely China will be matching the for a very long time India simply will not and neither with japan ( both Japan and India and not ever likely to be geopolitical opponent’s anyway so only China and Russia matter and Russia are never catching up, China may do but not for a decade).

        Both China and Russia have had a good education in how completely outclassed Russian based military technology is compared to the west’s, with China fundamentally still based around the same tec base as Russia ( just a bit more invested, and will be for a while yet).

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here