Aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is set to sail from Rosyth Dockyard this week following a long period of repairs, quelling rumours of the ship being turned into spare parts or being scrapped.
After suffering significant mechanical issues in August 2022, the aircraft carrier had been docked in Rosyth for repairs since October 2022.
The damage to the vessel, including a failed external coupling connecting the outer propeller shaft to the propulsion motors and superficial damage to the rudder, had halted its exercise schedule.
However, the Ministry of Defence confirmed in May that the rumours of the vessel being cannibalised or mothballed were untrue and that the aircraft carrier was set to be back in full service by autumn 2023.
In anticipation of this momentous departure from Rosyth, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has issued restrictions on the airspace above the Firth of Forth. These restrictions, put in place in collaboration with Police Scotland and the Department for Transport, will apply to unmanned aircraft, which will not be allowed to fly below 1000 FT AMSL within certain areas on two key dates: July 19 and July 24, 2023.
HMS Prince of Wales is set to return to sea after a long period of repairs. To ensure a safe departure, the airspace over the Firth of Forth will be restricted for unmanned aircraft/drones on July 19 and July 24 as the vessel exits the dockyard and then the Firth of Forth itself. pic.twitter.com/AUw6T7GbsS
— George Allison (@geoallison) July 17, 2023
- The first restriction will be active on July 19, between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm, within the area adjacent to the dockyard as the vessel leaves the shipyard.
- The second restriction will be put in place on July 24, from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, within the wider First of Forth as the vessel departs the Forth.
These restrictions do not apply to manned aircraft. They also aim to safeguard the public during this high-profile event, which is expected to attract significant media attention.
Good news.
Great to have two carriers again.
Cheers CR
Brilliant! God Bless the Prince of Wales!(great song especially Ulster version 😂)
‘well said’
My late grandfather was Vice Admiral Devonport and in his day we had a proper sized Royal Navy compared to today both in terms of shipping and manpower. This momentous occasion should be noted on a global scale. To meet the current global crisis of saber rattling we as an island nation have to show our naval expertees. Also we need a monumental program of upgring the existing fleet and increasing the numbers. As for the affordability build using totally British people providing a smaller unemployment benefits dependency. There are global security issues too. People like Putin are causing serious… Read more »
Hi Chris. Thank you for the sent message.. My family also has a navy background, my Uncle served on carriers and the Royal yacht, also going way back – Two members of my family ancestors were at the battle of Trafalgar. One served as a ships Master and another served as a gunner. So much interest in my family too, when it comes to naval matters. Agree the Royal navy needs to be given extra ships and capabilities.. Hoping by the 2030’s we will have a few extra escorts with more missiles onboard for air defence and other options of… Read more »
Excellent news. She should be heading state side in the autumn for more F35 work ups, and extensive SRVL trials. 👍
Always good to have more top end kit at the ready.
Although I am sure the usual suspects will be along to decry the ‘fact’ that we only have one inflatable model jet as opposed to the 30+ that we really have and the 36(?) we will have by year end.
Mind you that is better than the fleet of model carriers that Mad Vlad has assembled.
Mmm you beat me too it😂
I will keep on saying it. No cats and traps, no credible aew, not enough F-35s (and from the few, they are shared with the RAF), not enough defensive systems, not nuclear powered, no aar. But yeah, no big issues, still better than mad vlads effort right?
yep our carriers actually work👍 Now if you had bothered to keep up you would know that instead of having a continuous expensive cycle of carrier qualifying for air crew ours are able to do it when needed and quickly too boot! Now sod off back to the North Pole and don’t come out till crimble when Santa needs his little elves or probably in your case orcs.
Exactly the same concept as the thru deck cruisers, like Italy, Spain just bigger.
Even if we had the Westland Sea King AEW, there is no guarantee that those RN ships would not have been sunk
That is possibly true.
However, the longer alert times would have seen ships fully closed up and and on station looking at the advised threat vector.
In this case we are talking about detecting the planes at range and not the missiles.
It all adds up to make a difference.
But I grant you maybe not *the* difference. But it shifts the odds significantly.
The lack of AEW required the escorts to be deployed as radar pickets- implying a willingness to sacrifice them to protect the carriers. That wouldn’t have been necessary if the AEW was there. Although I’ve no idea how effective the Searchwater radar was against sea-skimming missiles.
OK if you take that the AEW radar was taken from the Gannet and stuck in a inflatable bag and slung under a Seaking. that radar system, would struggle to track and trace the missile, maybe the launch aircraft. but track the missile and shoot it down with Sea Cat. 2 hopes and one is Bob
Andy, chill mate. You know he doesn’t have a clue about carrier warfare. Welcome back PrOW. Now for some serious training 👍👍👌
Probably wouldn’t have lost most of them if the HAS2(AEW) had been available from day 1.
Our carriers are from working. POW is unlikely to be cleared for operations much before November. That’s if sea trials which she is about to embark on go to plan. Assuming POW Is cleared for operations and it gains the confidence of all in involved she is of to the states for trials. On return she will then have work up under FOST. Then Glen Mallan to Ammunition up. Hence my estimate of November at best. So briefly you have your two carriers. Don’t hold your breath though, guess where QE is going. Glen Mallan to de ammunition, then Rosyth… Read more »
Good job we have two then isn’t it?
If you accept a 50 percent availability your standards are indeed high.
Be sensible QE has been worked hard so it stands to reason she needs a bit of care! When it’s done then we will have two fit carriers!
I would predict a small window at the end of this year is possible if all goes well with POW. That will mainly be used as photo opportunity not anything meaningful. Certainly not an operational deployment. The main focus will be get QE docked down. The next chance for two operational carriers is likely to be November 24, dependent on QE rejoing the fleet in a timely fashion. It will go through the same process that POW is about to undertake. Even small things like degaussing takes best part of a week. Glen Mallan and back is a week It… Read more »
Again you are just making the point of having two carriers🙄
Yeh, that’s a realistic forecast. F rom memory (getting dusty) of when we had multiple Fltdecks.. 👍
Degaussing??
The RN hasn’t degaussed surface units in 40+ years.
In and out of harbour over a range to look at the signature and offer corrections for the coils does not take a week.
Sea trials a couple of weeks and while that’s happening Fosties will be onboard doing basic sea safety training anyway.
A full work up will follow later.
Yes, the HER ranges?
Radakin wants both at sea with a full airwing for each. He said he wants to be bold. And why not I say?!
I like the ambition of the man.
He can say what he wants but he’ll probably out of job next year with a change in government and someone more sympathetic to the new governments policies installed.
Thought you might state that the Adm.
would be forced to walk the plank, or be marooned on Pitcairn Is. 🤔😉
QE is over two years past her planned dry Dock appointment. Obviously planned Hull maintenance below the water line will be conducted. Flight deck resurfacing, upgrades to landing systems etc all standard stuff. Propulsion will no doubt get a special eye.
It was always envisaged that just one carrier would be deployed or deployable. We have that.
Radakin wants both!!
Radakin I am afraid would not be choice to take charge of a five a side team. To much of a yes man. He is looking at the top job. Not the long term future of the RN.
Face facts, we still don’t have Aircraft for both. that is going to take a few more years. we know the RAF has huge holes in its training. as is well behind its fast jet training. POWs @ NATO lead could take Nato partners aircraft.
It has. It’s called fitting 24 more Sea Captors to the T45’s. And replacing Aster 15 with Aster 30’s. Otherwise know as Sea Viper. And also adding BMD capability. 👍
Afternoon Robert, I wonder if they could ever increase the CAMM to 32, 36, or 48, to make these T45s even more potent? The 4*6 CAMM silos could be made into 4*8 if there’s enough room forward/sides of the Asters and maybe even above the hangar. The AB’s, Hobart’s, Tromp classes all have well over 80 SAM/ESSM shots available so I don’t think this is being too over indulgent and would offer even more protection for a CSG. And considering there’s no capacity yet reload at sea.
“I wonder if they could ever increase the CAMM to 32, 36, or 48, to make these T45s even more potent?” That might just be a very wise idea depending on their area of operation. “Finally bringing the WS-15 to successful operational status is a major milestone for Chinese aerospace. That the PLAAF now have an engine that delivers the range/payload performance that the J-20 was designed for from the beginning makes the fighter jet more of a concern for the US Navy and other US partner nations in the Pacific that could potentially encounter it in combat. The system… Read more »
A model of the Chengdu J-20, produced by China’s AVIC, is seen at the 2023 Paris Air Show. Chinese military firms had a sizeable presence on the show floor. (Aaron Mehta/Breaking Defense)
https://sites.breakingmedia.com/uploads/sites/3/2023/06/IMG_4957-scaled-e1687456444975.jpg
Let’s hope that CAMM-ER and the CAMM-MR can be easily upgraded into either the CAMM farm or make it to the MK41s quad packed. The RN T26s could have gone for 4 MK41s also and maybe a separate 24 CAMM set up but I guess as they’re more in the ASW role that there’s also weight considerations. I like the possibility of the ER/MR in MK41s giving the T26/31/32 an extended AAW coverage beyond just the basic CAMM. Hope it wins some export orders. Looking at the end on end layout of the Aster silos, I think they could go… Read more »
Agreed!
You beat me to it Andy… Lol 😁. Still too “much fitted for fresh air” IMHO. 😆
They can take the forward 40mm off the five T31s, replace that with more 🍄 CAMM or vls as onT32 and put 2-3 each on the Carriers. What do you reckon?
QEC was due a planned dry docking?
Which was pushed back due to POW’s mechanicals?
STOVL still requires carrier qualification training and currency.
There is no getting around the fact that CATOBAR is better than STOVL. The RN wanted and still wants CATOBAR. It’s a money problem.
STOVL does need POWs to get that qualification as the systems are only on POWs, but it is very much like Cruise control. Hit the button and eat your crisp’s. F35s very much programmed to prevent USMC from flying into the sea,
I think the biggest issue is even the F-35 and its lacklustre weapons for sea combat.
There is probably no better armed warplane for sea combat than the F35. It’s situational awareness, target acquisition and kinetic weapon effects are second to none in all air combat domains. What’s your reasoning?
well British weapons aren’t due to be integrated until the early thirties I now hear?? US trying to derail meteor by offering deals on AIM-260 based on better commonality etc
Typical USA dirty tricks from their defence works or senate gives the States a bad name which their servicemen and women could do without. Could see the move against Meteor coming a mile away. Same with EH101, Brimstone, Voyager, etc , etc. Sad.
Yep – I would say the irony is if they opened up the weapons aspects of the software to be more open source and allow countries to plug and play they may have a more saleable commodity. But in the case of the F35B there is no other option so they have a closed shop.
This is the main con I have about us using STOVL – there is a small market availabilty- of 1- we are hampered by the commercial machinations of good ol uncle Sam and LM- never a good thing.
Dirty tricks? How about being realistic. The UK hasn’t footed the bill for UK weapons integration. The US isn’t prioritizing it as currently only one customer with 30 airplanes wants it. Get a grip.
Is that what being a tier 1 partner means??
Pretty irritating if not kind of silly behaviour if the latter is true. Bit of US jealousy perhaps over Anglo-Japanese developments on Meteor and Tempest? Why not find an allied friendly US company for some shared development with the later two? Could be a huge opportunity.
British weapons have already been integrated (Asraam and PWIV). Integration should happen by 2027/28. Integration across all customers, including the US, is delayed. Remember F-35 has 3 AAM’s available (AIM-9X, Asraam and Amraam)…but no other powered weapons are currently cleared for use….all freefall only. So everyone is in the same boat. By 2028 we’ll get Asraam Block VI, Meteor, Spear and PWIV Penetrator. The other powered weapons that ‘should’ arrive then are JSM only. JASSM/LRASM will come a little later. AARGM-ER is in the early stages of integration and the SiAM variant is being re-competed. There is no detail on… Read more »
The timeline I hear is AIM260 will be integrated prior to meteor and mentor integration is being slipped…
If you mean the F35C you may have a reasonable case.
Yes. Better in most areas than the F-18 which was the only other alternative in the CATOBAR alt- universe
Rafale
We have two state of the art aircraft carriers with state of the art stealth fighter jets. You have one old aircraft carrier, that is only worth its weight in scrap metal. Hardly a capital ship to be proud of.. That’s if it ever sails again! And let’s face it, thrs a big IF!
I see you are quite primitive. In your world people that disagree belong to the enemy tribe.
Nuclear powered has pros and cons but only really become an advantage at sizes akin to the US Super carriers simply because replenishment is required far beyond fuel oil so the main advantages of nuclear power are far reduced while reducing upon other user flexibility. It’s why the Americas are not nuclear powered. If power were needed for EMALS the balance might be a little different mind, but then overall equations may be very different again come the thirties when such a fundamental change just might be contemplated. As ‘Mad Vlad’ doesn’t have the capabilities you mention or they are… Read more »
STOVL aircraft don’t need cats and traps
AEW is credible – it works and has nearly the range of fixed wing
Defensive systems – you may have a point if you are talking about point defence systems mounted on the carrier – but carrier does of course have layered defence, including that by airborne F-35s, DD/FF and submarines.
Nuclear power – many disdavantages and only one advantage, which is debatable.
Makes no difference how often you say it. All you ever post is idiotic bullshit.
Tee hee hee 👏🙃
No we did not buy a Ford class carrier with 4th generation planes, a carrier that costs 5 times our carriers and needs vast amounts of crew to run it….
What we got was an affordable powerful platform. It also has potential for growth in the future with new capabilities. The current AEW will be replaced during the life of the carriers.
I wonder what the availability of a fleet of two nuclear carriers is..
using our own arguement – twice as much as one surely ?
You mean only afford ONE like the French can only afford CdG
Aha it’s 01’s mate 🙄
That is harsh but I agree with the defence systems, nuclear powered is very expensive indeed given our parlous defence spending so not realistic, I’m not too worried about the F35B (even if shared with RAF as the numbers will go up eventually).
Cut the cloth to suit comes to mind. They are mighty fighting vessels suitable for the defence of the UK realm. And all carriers are more vulnerable than ever in the age of hypersonic missiles.
Why in particular do you think they should be nuclear powered, given the greatly increased running cost and the marginal benefit in terms of logistical support requirements? ‘Defensive systems’ are what escorts are for. The relative deficiency in AEW is one reason that work is underway to develop an EM launch system for UAVs. In reality the Nimitz/Fords aren’t much more survivable in a high-end conflict, despite the difference in price tag- nor do any of these ships’ aircraft have the range to engage any adversary that possesses IRBMs. These assets are all perfectly adequate for ‘coercive diplomacy’ against smaller… Read more »
On the plus side, no cats and traps saved the huge cost of installing them and of course the F35b does not need them, F 35 numbers rising steadily, RAF/RN sharing improves inter service operations and availability of a bigger crew in an emergency when the jets are needed for carrier operations, avoid the downside of nuclear power, the rapid development of drones will sort many of the AAR and other surveillance probs….
Not being nuclear powered is always a plus for me. Conventional propulsion is much cheaper & if a nuke powered ship goes down it adds lethal radiation into the seas & food chains for 1000’s of years. Also they’re a nightmare & expensive to dismantle. Hopefully a drone or tiltwing will be found to do AEW better. AAR too. Defensive systems should be improved. F-35 numbers are growing. We can’t embark any until the POW is qualified off America, so let’s get that done first!
Great to have her back.
The spare parts or scrapping stories are an insult to ones intelligence. It seems people will believe ANY negative if it feeds their need to put the UK military down.
I agree. Let’s build more I say
We couldn’t afford to run an America class, which needs 1200 crew. A Mistral is half the displacement and has a complement requirement akin to a Type 23. Very different ships.
As much as I’d like a couple of Mistral-sized amphibs, I can’t see the money being made available. Let’s see what the joint initiative with the Dutch brings us. At least we might get something military spec.
But US ARGs do not need to be escorted, they have the ability to defend themselves. Something out next gen Amphibs will probably have to do.
That is a matter of opinion. Yes, they are set up like a battle ship but they are not really specialised anything? Close to VTOL only as there is so much stuff parked topside that a running jump isn’t possible and they don’t believe in ski jumps. This does affect duration as well as fuel/weapons load outs. Then you have the issue of lots of stuff parked topside is a big fire hazard and how does it slow sortie generation. I am not sure that the is such a great idea IRL as in any contested environment they will need… Read more »
Have we lost some posts here? I could have sworn I replied to a comment that suggested we got some Americas or Mistrals as though they were equivalent.
In my view, we should have had three, plus a replacement for HMS Ocean.
I think we raffled Echo and Enterprise and collected enough money to refit Argus.
Hopefully the Trieste, comes with a better coffee machine and a barista….
Now you are talking about getting the basic fit right.
FFFBNW Barista won’t cut it?
I had enough of stewed tea some years ago.
Trieste, Mistral or Juan Carlos, all good, But apparently we’re looking at a Bay class replacement with the Dutch instead, that will also (I guess) replace Bulwark class as well. So they will provide the D in LHD and the CVAs the LH. Not a good solution
Why do we need something with a ski jump on it? Mistral isn’t all that really. I’ve no idea why we would want at Trieste or a Carlos as they are just highly compromised carriers. We have two really good carriers to do the F35B aviation and some of the cab work too. Italy and Spain don’t have one or even two really good carriers. So why not focus on the other bits and do those even better that the all singing all dancing nothing quite right versions? If we need hospital facilities then expand the facilities on the carriers… Read more »
I wouldn’t risk a CVA close to shore acting as a helicopter carrier. Also, the more space taken up by helicopters and vehicles the less available for jets. The Bays and Albions will need replacement at some stage and something like a Mistral to carry equipment, personnel, helicopters and landing craft seems ideal. Also more likely to be risked closer to shore. Bulwark, by the way, is an Albion class
Ummm yes but you said ‘Bulwark Class’ – whilst I appreciate that Bulwark is part of the Albion Class – Bulwark Class is something different.
I think we discussed this before, and didn’t agree then, with the likely outcome being lily padding via the very large flight decks of just about every ship we now have.
Yes I’d go for a LHD rather than a straight Albion replacement. More deck space for troops to be quickly inserted by chopper & still a dock to send heavy equipment ashore.
👏👏
It’s not always about putting our military down; certainly not from me! However, the MOD’s motto should be “anything can happen in the next half hour”! or “Incompetence in abundance”!
See when she comes out with the back island missing, a painted on anchor, a couple of traffic lights instead of navigation lights and broom handles where the machine guns should be.
Then I will give up this military commentary lark, and go and be a monk, somewhere remote…
Ahh, strawberry mead. 🍓😋👌
Now now Andy…
I will find u and make you draw me an orbat diagram every 12 months. Anyway those monks have a lot to answer for. Shipping buck fast by the bucket load to Scotland.
👍😆
ORBAT, Andy. “OOORRRBATTT.”
“Order of Battle” The structure, and composition of a military force. Most often used on UKDJ regards posters talking army unit or sub unit matters.
Isn’t that the new NATO-VDL fit?
Quite agree Daniele, the main stream media will not give much credit to this matter. Nor will they mention how many other nations have the same ability for carriers as the UK.
Cheers,
George
Too true, could not agree more. I do find it very tiring sometimes when people go on about – Not enough jets and so on.. Early day’s, superb capability to have. Will be more aircraft and potentialy drones and other tech in the future.
I agree.
There are not enough jets because not enough F-35B jets have yet been made by the US-led consortium. These were always 2 different programmes (F-35B and UK carriers) originating in 2 different countries at 2 different times. One programme would always lag the other.
Amazing that intelligent people can’t see that.
Yes, agree with you..
Are you saying other countries have issues with defence products sometimes? It’s not just a U.K. problem.😂😂😂
Bravo.
The TCG Anadolu (the Turkish aircraft/drone carrier) has a gun fitted at the front of the ship. I have to ask is this practical ?
https://i.postimg.cc/2SPHzMLw/3ygm2ruhhqt81.jpg
I think the Cavour solution is better. This one if something goes wrong it is easier getting hit by a drone veering out of control.
Can they see where they are going from the bridge or is it just Leslie Philips Turkish equivalent saying left hand down a bit as he inevitably gives the harbour wall a glancing blow upon leaving port as made famous in the Navy Lark. There’s one for the youngsters.
Good ol bfbs, ha. 🤣👍
Probably covered by cctv or a guy with a radio in the dead zone reporting back to the bridge.
The two RAN Canberra LHD’s down here in Sydney could be upgraded similarly to this and launch drones. At the moment they just have 4*25mm CIWS and Anzac/Hobart’s for protection. Could be a good storage space there under the CIWS mount?
Probably transit accommodation for visiting aircraft ground crews, like they did under the ramp for the Invincible class.
I suspect the reason for the big pedestal it to be able to fire to port side from its position in starboard.
Somfing to swerve around, you know, keep flying skills up to scratch. ✈️😊
Buccaneers are retired and so, thankfully, are their mad pilots 😉
Truly a golden age for the RN.
Very true. Excellent a/c, crazy pilots/obs. Aircrew. Hated rescue time, exercise crash on deck evo’s 😂
Hear,hear!
Good news, two is better than one
Did the Russians sabotage the price of Wales seems strange the Queen ELIZABETH Aircraft carrier is working well and they are exactly the same ship ,yet the prince of Wales was supposedly to of hit something under the sea..? eather that or perhaps the captain couldn’t hold his drink and may of got over excited when commissioned to the prince of Wales seems strange as well that he has disappeared you mind boggles?.
Not sure what websites u read but it’s didn’t hit something under water. It’s shaft was a bit wonky, the crew thought it might be ok but it wasn’t.
To sabotage a ship there’s much easier ways than to get right to the bottom of the ship and mess with a multi ton shaft.
Someone else can give the technical descriptions I can’t be arsed looking it up again.
Buster Crab in reverse!
No, thats braC retsuB. 😵
🙄😆
07/14/55: The Royal Navy cruiser HMS Blake suffers a fire
09/11/57: The Royal Navy cruiser HMS Blake suffers an explosion and fire while in Glasgow, Scotland.
01/22/69: The Royal Navy cruiser HMS Blake suffers a fire.
05/27/69: The Royal Navy cruiser HMS Blake suffers another fire
US Style dates
https://uploads.fas.org/2014/05/NavalAccidents1945-1988.pdf
nothing about 1978
Ships of this size are not totally identical.
It’s not unusual to encounter problems on one and not on the other (or different problems).
All the more so as the UK didn’t build ships of this size (20,000+ tons) every day.
Contempt! 😳
What ?
Gibber gibber
Mmm,i think that is a conspiracy theory a tad too far 😚
And what does Intrigue get you??? 😳….. More intrigue…. 🙃.
Didn’t HMS QE also have propshaft misalignment issues rectified during sea trials?
No ☝ HMS QE’s Sea Trials picked up a Propeller problem where the Blades were misaligned ,causing excessive vibration,likely due to picking up some Sea Debris ( a Lobster Pot was mentioned ) on her exit from Rosyth.
‘Lobster pot defeats the Royal Navy’ – I can imagine The Sun’s headline!
Damage on exit from the Dock at Rosyth is a potential risk. There is only 50cm under the keel. One metre either side the beam. Plus entry and exit can only be undertaken on I think it is seven tidal events each year. Each event is between 5 to seven days. Wind speed being the other limitation. Last time QE left the Dock it was a six day window.
The QE blades are removable from the hub and are bolted in place so that they can be removed or adjusted. When they were fitted the bolts are torqued down in a specific order. They use SuperBolt. There was an issue (Bolts didn’t get torqued/installed correctly?) so the divers had to revisit the blades.
It was apparently a laugh a minute for the divers …Long days with a specialist torque wrench doing up and checking bolts. I spoke to one of the guys involved and they certainly got their dive hours in on that job.
Met someone who was engineer on Queen Elizabeth…basically a heap of crap. Also as a country we do not have enough supplies, munitions and aircraft to make 1 carrier fully battle ready carrier, never mind 2
Every RN first of class is assessed as crap. Once they settle in and corporate knowledge grows that attitude disappears.
T23 was known as the Skoda Class when it first came into service. Norfolk didnt have a working command system for years. I haven’t heard the term Skoda Class frigate used in decades.
It’s funny how attitudes change over time. Especially when you consider that Skoda products are generally very reliable these days. My mate had the turbo fastback. Now that was amazing when it was working. Didn’t like going round bends or stopping mind!
All true. The top of the range SKODA cars after being bought out by Audi where comparable with the A4s.
The possession of 2 aircraft carriers is crucial. Boasting is kids stuff. They might be needed…
*spits out tea*
What? Us Brits are actually GOOD at building and fixing ships?
But that’s not what they Daily Moan and Twitter taught me to parrot AT ALL!
Daily Moan and the Tories thought that it was an outrage that we were building them in the first place.
Good news. Hopefully she will finally make her first major operational deployment, “East of Suez”, in 2025 – CSG25.
Do we know who paid for the repairs as the mis-aliened shaft/s were signed off originally by the carrier consortium as being all good but were out of alignment from the out set or is the tax payer yet again bailing out poor workmanship by defence contractors.
The MOD paid for the work.
As I suspected and thanks for the update.
You are such an ungrateful git, arn’t you?
If BAE had built them the drive shafts would have been super glued to the seals – “Our ships don’t leak around the shafts!”
Strike me as the only gits around are the ones making excuses for bad workmanship which the tax payer has ultimately have to pay for via an already overstretched defence budget.
The shafts on the PoW were mis-aliened from day one, yet despite that the ship was passed fit for duty by the contractors. So the Aircraft carrier alliance should be held accountable with the best part of £30 million being spent on a problem that should not have existed.
If the MOD accepted the ship then it is the MOD responsability.
The MoD had to accept the fudge that we call the T45 as it was the government at the time that insisted (an had full knowledge of) the problems with the overheating issues hence we the tax payer have to pay for the PIP upgrades. The problem with the PoW is entirely diffrent, the QE had passed the same checks and test by the same company and has had no problems to date (that have come to light). The PoW developed a vibration on the shaft shortly after her first voyage which got worse over time culminating in her being… Read more »
PoW shafts where within the allowable tolerances for alignment. If they were not, then one of 2 things would have happened.
The RN/Babcock QC team would not have accepted and signed off the work
or
If outside tolerances Design Engineering would have had to look at the figures and decide if the risk of it being outside of the tolerance was acceptable. If it was acceptable they would then instruct the team to accept the alignment.
Either way someone would have signed off and accepted it.
You are right some one did sign it off as being acceptable but as we now now it was not right and should not have been signed off.
If it was within tolerance it was acceptable.
When doing work on ships in build or maintenance try not signing something off because its within tolerance and is deemed as acceptable. You will find yourself looking for another job.
Hindsight is 20/20 and sometimes S41t happens and stuff just breaks.
You are right yet again, and I would agree with you yet again, but for both shafts to be mis-aligned on the one vessel has to raise some eyebrows somewhere, I would have thourght!!. In the big picture it seems we seem have a double standard system in the UK, one for the building in the civilian sector and one for building in the military. We have new build barrack blocks with substandard electrical systems being signed off by the DIO, we have new build kitchens being signed off by the DIO with faulty and in some cases no, extractor… Read more »
I just can not see the problem!
Copy the Russians! Glue the shafts – no more flooding and give them both some ocean going tugs!
Russian ingenuity would have saved us millions.
Simples.
Maybe copying the Russians could take us further. Fit a smoke generators near the funnels to spew out big clouds of black smoke and replace a couple of escorts with ocean-going tugs. That could be really effective protection – if the Russians saw a carrier spewing black smoke and seemingly under tow they might well assume that it was one of theirs and not target it.
Welcome back PoW. Now hopefully we can see if the rolling landing for the F35B works. As far as I am aware the PoW is technically better equipped than the QE.
Thinking of a viable export customer for 1 of the UK carriers. Spain, no as no F-35B, Italy maybe, USMC can’t see it, Japan – could be interesting, South Korea again possible. It’s got to go somewhere when the cuts come.
At a minimum it can always used as a super helicopter and or drone carrier or just carry a smaller contingent of F35Bs. Just to be completely crazy, why not convert it to CATOBAR so it can land conventional aircraft like Rafales, Hornets and Hawkeyes and maybe a naval Tempest in the future?
Would be cheaper and easier to build from fresh rather than trying to convert also the cost of the CAG would kill it too. UK does not have the means even to fit out one full CAG now. Need more F35B’s and Helo’s as if all on the QE the rest of the Fleet suffers. Option to increase Wildcat Numbers is transfer those used by the Army and fit with radar to give more units and also the 10+ Merlin HM1’sairframes sitting in about to get the HM2 update to help out on those numbers as 30 is far to… Read more »
Not true in a war situation we could form a full carrier air group, 1/2 carriers depending, 3/4 type 45, 4 t26 and a couple of t31 plus 2 astute subs. Yes allies would have to cover other taskings but we could do it.
India? And agree at best we’ll loose one, maybe both as not required when we retrench to our patch of the Atlantic and North Sea. Radakin will be gone in under 2 years and some one more focused on European land defence will be installed.
We’ll lose neither. What utterly tripe, Daniele fears a NATO focused RN.
I don’t because the USN pivot to the Pacific means we have to stop the pretentious bravo sierra of Bluffer Johnson and substitute for lost American carrier power in NATO AOR: the US will make clear that means three carriers; fffFrench and British. We’re going to win this one!
Agreed. I suspect that for at least the next 15 to 20 years it would also not be as easy a political decision for some future government to make as some people seem to think. Yes, there will always be the “why do we need any armed forces at all, let’s all just love one another” camp that celebrate every decommissioning of any UK military asset but there would also I suspect be a quite significant school of thought along the lines of “we paid over £6bn to build these assets, a hell of a lot more if you include… Read more »
That was always the plan and will be once they are both settled into sea routines and issues sorted. Only ever planned to have one operational with one set of air assets. RN manning is over stretched trying to keep both at sea unless we get the manpower numbers increased (unlikely) not possible long term. Future units joining the Fleet will all have smaller crews than those presently in service easing that issue but will of course give those reason to trim numbers further. Sad day for all out Armed Forces and I advocate we return to Local Yeomanry to… Read more »
Why do you talk about a sad day? Did i miss something?
The small size of the Services. When I joined the services where far larger and recuts had to wait to get into training as the services were maxed. Now no one wants to join as there is little to look forward too and been glum for years for all the services. They would struggle to cover the fire service again as in the past if they went on strike again. Manpower not just there for war fighting but serving the people of the state.
I see – and agree. If you did a list of pros and cons for a young person joining the army (as opposed to many civvy jobs), I am sure there would be more cons than pros.
Surely everyone wants to drive a train and earn £50k!
“Better behaved creatures from our prison system” ??
Do you mean the guards as folloing privsatisation there’s many of those I wouldn’t trust , never mind the scrotes they puportedly look after.
There’s only a few jails which are private, most are HMPPS mate!
Agree, I think that’s how it will play out. That said I think we will also become more NATO centric in the sense that we will be expected to be the lead European NATO partner in the north Atlantic. In Asia – Pacific I see us with France as playing a support role to the US. China vs the US is super power stuff, I don’t see it as an either /or situation. We will have a bigger navy.
China v USA, Taiwan, Japan, Australia, S Korea & probably others too. PLAN may have a huge navy but it faces stronger opposition.
??You suggest selling off one of our carriers? Why? Two is the minimum fleet size.
He’s baiting, mate. Waiting for someone to bite commenting on an issue that anyone with a UK mil interest cares about and may be sensitive about. Cuts. The 2 Carriers thus the biggest “prizes”
Typical Troll.
You’re daft. We have 2 QEC. They are both staying where they are. British built. RN operated supercarriers. With the best carrier air wing outside of a USN supercarriers.
The refit to put Cats and traps on both will take a while even with them having part of the work already done. I am curious to see how they will configure the deck.
Meaning?
NO work has been done on either ship for fitting such and that came from RN team who was on the build. Any thing will be fitted on top of the flight deck already in place and still be very costly. The ramp launch proved that flying stations can continue when regular flat tops could no longer launch and recover as was proved way back in the early 80’s in the Falklands conflict. Harriers launched at max weight often off the CVS’s with little issue. Lets just get some more F35B’s and some supportive types to make it the big… Read more »
I was on the team that put it together and I can state that there is space/ capacity and deck strengthening already in place for future fitting of electrical driven catapults .
Yes, true but the estimate cost of that was as much as the ship itself when the Gov wanted to change it as well as on top of getting the aeroplanes (F35C’s) which means much more training too that is why it was ditched. I do not see them ever being fitted and we will stick with the B’s but adding CV22’s to the mix for support and tanking would be a plus.
I haven’t read anywhere the intention to buy F35c. I think the intention is to fit Cats and traps to operate unmanned aircraft as loyal wingman but also refuelling and airborne radar pickets so the fleet can run EMCON.
The logic being if you are fitting them anyway, you may as well fit ones big enough to handle fighters . Which is surprisingly logical thinking for the MoD.
Also it future proofs the carriers as the QE class service life far outweighs the service life of the F35B.
Anti ship missiles are driving carriers further off shore. The F35B simply cannot take off with sufficient fuel on board and using a second F35 as a tanker is a very expensive waste .
We need the capacity to fly off dedicated tanker aircraft ( unmanned presumably) and loyal wingman.
The further out the more ocean to hide the more time her escorts have to react to a threat.
I don’t know about that. A QEC battleground operating out off shore by 200-300 miles is presumably operating in a large expanse of ocean. With freedom to maneuver. It makes them difficult to target. Besides which there are these ships called frigates and destroyers that are armed to the teeth and designed to stop said anti ship missiles. An F35Bs radius of operations is circa 450 miles. That’s enough to throw out a strike package of 5th gen stealth aircraft and make most adversaries really regret provoking them. Once the F35B numbers are upto the 76 now budgeted for (by… Read more »
Well the US carrier groups have many more of these frigate and destroyer thingies , they also have these huge things called cruisers protecting their carriers and they are sufficiently concerned therefore I do not think it is unreasonable that despite us Brits legendary stiff upper lip the RN is also. I might also point out that there are these damned unsporting ballistic missiles and maybe soon, these very fast things called hypersonic weapons, neither of which our wonderful armed to the teeth destroyer and frigate are much use against. But we should be able to put up a decent… Read more »
Good luck with the kill chain for hypersonic missiles. Try finding, tracking, and engaging warships that don’t want to be found against the vast expanse of the ocean. Add in stealth and some very nasty EW and ECM, and engaging warships becomes very difficult.
I would not like to hazard a guess at the RCS of a carrier but I would reason it would be pretty big and then again you have those annoying spy satellites.
The RCS is probably pretty big, but radar can’t see over the horizon. And even switching the AIS transponder off makes them difficult to find. Plus we know the satellite orbit tracks. These are just some of the reasons why long-range anti ship missiles haven’t be used for a very long time. But the technology is progressing. The best tool to take out another warship is still a nuclear attack submarine. Or helicopter launched Anti ship missiles for the littoral environment. 👍
Orbits can be changed and I still think fitting cats and traps to launch aerial tankers , loyal wingman etc is the right way to go, now the electromagnetic tech has matured sufficiently.
It looks like they are looking at that type of capability for the QE’s alongside F35B ops. 👍
All sats orbits are known and the 5 eyes “Gold” info that ships receive shows all sorts of information on Red Force assets and their locations…that includes Sat orbits and footprints, elint, visual sightings etc. Its not easy to stay hidden but its possible. Its a big assed sea. Kill chains for weapons are breakable. Break any one link and the chain fails. So if things go south and you start shooting you go after the easy bits. Ocean Surveillance aircraft. Mid course guidance update assets. Missile carrier aircraft. Air refuelling aircraft. The time from detection to long range missile… Read more »
I will repeat satellites orbits can be changed, yes they can quickly be recalculated but it takes time for it to be noticed.
And you pried my point. the F35B relatively short range brings the mother ship potentially into a higher risk environment. Personally I will be surprised if either ship is fitted with cats and traps, this country would rather put a multi billion carrier into danger than spend the money to help make it more versatile and harder to find and kill.
Not forgetting something like the DF21’s re-entry vehicle has to slow down, so that its active radar seeker has an unobstructed view of what’s below. It has a limited maneuver capability. Therefore it will be slowing down from Mach 9+ to something below Mach 6. This is to make sure there is no plasma shielding the radar. By slowing down and maneuvering it losses some of its kinetic energy, thereby limiting how far off its original track it can move. Another question to ask is how good is the radar fitted to the re-entry vehicle. If it’s similar to the… Read more »
Your numbers work, provided the target is near coastal; however, I think it’s assumed Voyagers will be able to reach the theatre of operations from somewhere, or that we’ll rely on US refuelling. I doubt the US Armed Services Committee would be happy with the F-35’s range until it can fly to China from a carrier parked alongside at Yokosuka. The 1000nm “safe” range they were talking about is absurd. Missile ranges will extend faster over the coming years than those of combat aircraft and you can’t expect to park a carrier outside of them. Adding a 4 hour round… Read more »
Missile range is pointless if you don’t gave the kill chain capability to match it. Find, track, engage at those ranges is currently extremely difficult. Even at a fraction on that range.
The F35B can take-off at max all up weight from the carrier using the ramp from half way along the deck. What the main issue is, is that the B variant doesn’t carry as much fuel as the C variant. This is due to the fuel tank area being used for the direct lift fan on the B variant. Which gives it a combat radius of 935km vs 1241km. However, the B’s combat radius is still significantly more than a AV-8B that is carrying two drop tanks. To put that in perspective. During the Falklands War the carriers were about… Read more »
A STOVL carrier generally can operate aircraft in most weather/ sea states. Also they can generate more sorties/ day per aircraft carried as the catapult launches and arrested recovery slow down deck operations. A US Ford Class carrier costing X4 the price of a QEC cannot operate x4 the aircraft. Operational costs for a Ford class are also much much higher. The RN cannot afford to put +5000 personnel on a single ship. For their capabilities the QEC design is without doubt the most efficient carrier ever conceived. Far superior to an America or Mistral class in all respects. The… Read more »
All good points but..that doesn’t change the fact that the sphere of operation of the F35C is far more than the F35B – so it’s somewhat of a moot point how many sorties you can fly if you can’t get to where you want to go & in what weather without exposing the carrier to land based threats. I’m not saying they do not stand up but I also sometimes think some of those reasons were conconcted after the fact to provide rationale for a choice after the choice was made. The arguements for and against Cat & Traps vs.… Read more »
The F35C does indeed carry more fuel then the F35B. But in real world flying operations, it doesn’t have vastly greater range that some people think. It carries more fuel, that’s means it carries more weight. It also has larger wings and horizontal stabiliser, so it has more drag. So overall its fuel burn rate will be higher. Add in bring back fuel for potential missed bolters (Go around fuel) and suddenly its range advantage is minimal over the F35B. VSTOL aircraft land first time, every time. Published range and endurance figures also depend on the mission profiles flown. Most… Read more »
Nicely explained mate, thank you.
Cheers pal. Real world is usual pretty different from Wikipedia stats and figures 😄
Appreciate your detailed response- makes me wonder why they even bothered creating the C Variant.
USN requirements. Simply as that. 👍
Because it’s better is every way.
The B might not even get the next generation upgrades. Its empty weight is too high. The lift fan and gearbox is dead weight in 98% of the flight envelope.
The F-35B has less bring back weight than the F-35C. It lands with less fuel because it has to. The F-35C can return to the ship with more munitions and fuel. It’s a better aircraft, just accept it for what it is.
It isn’t a better aircraft. It’s the same aircraft. It just takes off and lands differently. And for carrier aviation, the F35C needs more support than the F35B in terms of deck time, training, the need for larger deck crews. The carrier’s are more expensive. They need longer and more complex and expensive refits and maintenance periods. The list goes on, just to look bit more TopGun. The F35B and QE class is the best overall bang for the UK’s buck.
Thank goodness. Lets hope no more accidents. She now needs to finally complete that WESTLANT deployment and work-up pending taking over next year as Fleet flagship and UK High Readiness Strike Carrier. Big Lizzie deserves her first proper refit since commissioning back in 2017! She’s no longer a spring chicken – upgrades and deep maintenance badly needed. How significant the upgrades will be is the moot point – cost and time being the obvious constraints.
What’s the status of that extra bit of kit to enable rolling landings? (I forget its name.) The last I heard it was fitted on PoW but not QE. Is that still the case? If yes then it would be great to see PoW now prove and certify that device so that QE can also get it in her first refit.
Its called the Bedford Array 👍 yet to be fitted to HMS QE.
That’s why when the vessels are alongside side in Portsmouth in-between sea time, they carry out maintenance packages. Little and often is the way, and should reduce the time spent in major refits, and maximise availability rates. Which are projected to be far higher than carrier’s of the past.
Absolutely agree, HMNB Portsmouth has been outstanding in keeping QNZL operational over the last 6/7 years. But there still eventually comes a point where you need serious dockyard facilities to maintain the hull, replace over-hour prime movers, reconfigure the flight deck, and overhaul major systems and equipment. Suggestions by BAE and Thales in the early 2000’s that major refits might be somehow be avoidable were always pure fantasy, the RN accepted the story because it helped getting approval to order the carriers.
Now if only it had aircraft!
It does. Do some research.
remind me, what was the actual plan regards number of aircraft to be deployed with these, and how many are actually deployed?
The Queen Elizabeth class are each expected to be capable of carrying over forty aircraft, with a normal maximum load of thirty-six F-35s and four helicopters, but with a theoretical surge capacity of up to 72 aircraft. The 2010 SDSR anticipated the routine peacetime deployment of twelve F-35Bs, but a typical warload will be 24 F-35Bs and some helicopters.-Wiki
Great to see POW back in Portsmouth.
Mate, thats QE back from work up, got in late last night.
Really? I looked carefully from Warrior cam & couldn’t see the green & white Tudor HMS QE badge on the rear island, so concluded it must be POW. That badge is quite distinctive & bright, I just double checked & it’s not there; unless they’ve removed it, but that’s what they’d do in wartime to make exact ID difficult. We’re not at war nor close to another CSG, so I still think it’s POW unless you have better info. Either way it’s great to have both carriers back in service. Hope POW will be ready soon to complete F35 qualification… Read more »
Hi mate, Portsmouth harbour movements had QE arriving at 0140 this morning. Crew will be going on leave before the deploy in a month or so.
Looking at various Twitter feeds. POW was passing through the Firth of Forth a few hours ago, having left the jetty earlier on. She won’t be down here for a few days yet.
Totally agree, it’s good that both are back where they belong.
Hoping the editor has a high-flying drone…
Excellent news!
Hope all the crew get back into the groove soon.
My first thought: DID THEY THOROUGHLY TEST IT THIS TIME???
They kicked the propeller shaft (difficult with flippers on), stroked their chins (difficult with breatihing apparatus on ), gave thumbs up signs – and that was it – job done…
Even if we have the ships and the kit (if only!) will we have the personnel? My friend’s daughter is on her New Entry course at the moment- only 28 of them started the course due to lack of applications. When my nephew was at Raleigh 10 years ago there were almost 50 of them.
I can’t see a future for HMS Prince of Wales. i think being she is second fiddle to QE – Let her have 10 F-35B and assorted helicopters – Along with HMS Albion we would be credible in one area.
Lovely to see our Naval might increased to 2 aircraft carriers once again. Love to see a similar documentary on it like the 2 already out for the HMS Queen Elizabeth. In my own opinion i think we should have a 3rd one because 1 is pretty much mandatory for naval warfare, 2 is necessary and 3 is just competent precautions