Planned shipping movements released via the Queen’s Harbour Master Portsmouth have listed the intended time of departure of HMS Queen Elizabeth.

The supercarrier will leave Portsmouth around 15:00 tomorrow if the sailing goes ahead.

The primary purpose of the Queen’s Harbour Master (QHM) is to protect the port, the Royal Navy and its vessels and other government assets. QHM is part of the Ministry of Defence.

Queen Elizabeth sailed on the 26th of June 2017 for the first stage of her sea trials to monitor speed, manoeuvrability, power and propulsion as well as undertaking additional tests on her levels of readiness.

Once this was accomplished, the ship took to the open sea off the east coast of Scotland to undertake the first set of trials, including handling and speed tests. During this period, Queen Elizabeth was accompanied by a pair of Type 23 frigates, HMS Sutherland and HMS Iron Duke, acting as escorts.

The first aircraft to land on the ship was a Merlin HM.2 of 820 Naval Air Squadron on the 3rd July. Following initial runs in and around the Firth of Forth, the carrier was taken further north to the Moray Firth, during which period the ship encountered the Cunard cruise liner Queen Elizabeth.

HMS Queen Elizabeth is now heading back to sea for the second stage which aims to test her Mission Systems.

43 COMMENTS

    • Was there 30min ago nothing (1pm ish) mounted yet, assuming they are gonna mount them either after these sea trails or after flight trials

  1. Would love to see containerised Sea Ceptor fitted in addition. Three Phalanx just isn’t enough. We will have the only aircraft care afloat without its own point defence missile. If every other carrier operating Navy seems it necessary – including the US – why do we think we are any different? Can only be that’s there’s no money. What’s new….

    Does anyone know if Sea Ceptor is planned to be fitted later and if so, where on the ship?

    • I have read nothing to indicate that there is any fittings for a future upgrade in weaponary, which i always found odd, but i guess it is to avoid the whole fitted for but not with stories, better to not fit and say that there was never a plan for it.

      • David,Steve,
        I,m pretty sure I did read something about a version of the army “Cepter” in a container being suitable for deployment on ships . I’ll see if I can find it.

    • The assumption has to be that QE will never deploy alone, without a Type 26 Sea Ceptor local AD layer out to 25km and a Type 45 Aster 30 layer out to 70+ km, the outermost layer being the F-35s. So logically QE only needs the inner layer, Phalanx, which will also server as defence in confined waters against FAC. I guess other navies like the insurance of self sufficiency.

    • I agree. Trouble is in war you may find your ship lacking escorts(very inconvenient if they’re sunk &/or your strike aircraft are lost in action). Only having the last-ditch CIWS is way too little for such a massive asset & the crew. Most Carriers have 3 tier anti-air, we should have the same to give our boys a fair chance. I was disappointed we didn’t fit Aster 15 as standard, but Sea Ceptor would be acceptable, if they get on with it. A couple of 76mm, or similar, would be good too for longer AAA reach.
      Are the 30mm bushmasters unsuitable for AA defense due to their low rate of fire, anyone?

  2. @ Harold – the days of marines playing over priced sand castles on distant beaches is over. Ocean, Bulwark, Albion are going. That should save taxpayers a fortune. Without them, marines become irrelevant and can go as well.

    This article reveals some realities the kids on this forum find hard to believe:
    http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/15279/royal-navy-may-sacrifice-its-last-amphibious-ships-to-pay-for-its-new-carriers

    They may mock me but for sure, I shall have the last laugh as all the cuts I have forecast come to be,

    The UK must face financial reality across the board. The military budget is inflated, bloated indeed, and huge cuts must happen.

    I suggest that the UK govt. looks to the SNPs very well costed plans for defence in an independent Scotland and take a leaf from their book.

    For the UK/rump UK, navy of 8 to 12 frigates and and dozen patrol boats would be more than adequate. Four SSKs 10 minesweepers and four auxiliaries, possibly privatised. Disband the marines. Cut the army to 50,000, dispense with MBTs and equip the airforce to four fighter squadrons using leased support aircraft. That would be more than adequate for home defence.

    Dispense with nuclear weapons which cannot be used.

    • So you are a pacifist, we get it. The SNP can not manage a raffle let a a country. This is why Scotland is going down the drain and would of long ago if it was not for the money being poured into it from the rest of the UK. Your analogy of what is required may work in a Utopian world but in the real world you are well off of the mark. The welfare budget is the one that needs to be taken care of first as it is growing exponentially each year.

      • No. I am not a pacifist. But I see no need to spend on nuclear weapons which will never be used, We’ll soon see if what I forecast comes true. It’s called being a realist Dan, aware of tapayers’ money and the reality of living in a medium sized, European country with a reducing military presence, one which has steadily declined since 1945. I seek stability in the defence budget over the foreseeable future.

        Meanwhile, many of the cuts I forecast will occur. This forum is not concerned with welfare budgets, Let’s start by bidding farewell to Ocean, Albion and Bulwark and some minesweepers.

    • TH . Even if your right about the ships it most certainly does not make the Royal Marines irrelevant. They are one of the top units in the world and to reduce or disband them would be crazy. The carriers will still be undertaking seaborne assaults, albeit in a different way; there use as special forces and interception units will be invaluable; and post Brexit there is the matter of the Nordic Alliance. What better troops to commit to NATO’s northern flank, particularly as winter warfare is already part of their training.

    • TH – I got to “I suggest that the UK govt. looks to the SNPs very well costed plans for defence” and fell off my perch laughing. Now I thought you were some Troll messing us about but you’re just taking the piss aren’t you? Having a smile ?
      You seriously want the rUK to adopt the ‘costings’ of the SNP that creates a £15 Bn a year deficit while enjoying the second largest Barnett Formula settlement in the UK? And they don’t actually pay for their defence costs in full today, let alone after Indy38, despite having a disproportionately larger amount of defence spending IN Scotland!

      But thanks for the laughs ….

  3. Good grief. All I read and see since I joined the Andrew in 1975 is cut backs, streamlining, closures etc etc. Recommision Britannia. Run the Royal Tournament. Reclaim the Raj. The only thing wrong with the British Empire is that I bloody well missed it.

  4. TH
    I posted my reply about your 21.23 blog but by 22.35 we had all become a bunch of kids. Now,me, I can take a certain amount of nonsense but I wonder if when you say these things you take into account how insulting it is to the brave men and women who serve
    . Not three miles from me is a unit that helps people to cope with all sorts of service dis abilities which I am proud to support in my own small way.
    I may be stepping out of line here but what do you support exactly? You rabbit on about how daft or pointless we all are but you never seem to SAY anything.

  5. TH is just a bloody leftie. If all you are concerned about is tax payers money then don’t come crying if and when it all goes wrong. We all have a right to be defended. It comes at a cost to you, me and everybody. That means raising revenue to pay for it. Guess What! That’s you too.

  6. My proposals for a sensible defence strategy has already been sent to my MP and to the Secretary of State and I am not alone in calls for reductions. As for injured ex military personnel, the way they have been treated is a disgrace and homeless ex military people beg on the streets round here. This is why the government must stop engaging in unwinnable wars and to withdraw from expeditionary wars which have no good results and which cost taxpayers billions. I fail to see what posters on a forum excitedly outlining plans for armed forces which will never exist achieve. Their behaviour is as that of children.
    I support sustainable and affordable defence suited to a a medium sized, European country.
    I do not support a global British military presence. Much to your regret, the marines will be diminished severely. There simply is no need for this country to maintain beach landing facilities and naval planners knew this when embarking on the carrier programme. If those planners really thought that this country could retain all these vessels, they really did underestimate the effects of financial constraints and a falling GBP v USD exchange rate.
    Reality has to be faced and will be. Better to face that reality now than face years of piecemeal cuts as has been the case since 1945. Britain must finally come to terms with its place in the world.

  7. Incidentally, I wish all ex service personnel who are seeking financial redress from the MoD the very best in their fight. They are substantial in number. Further, having attended a packed Veterans for Peace UK event, I highly recommend some of the posters on this forum listen to what those who have taken up arms have to say, including members of the special forces you allude to. It will leave them and their imaginary military ponderings thoroughly sobered up!

    Veterans for Peace UK here: http://vfpuk.org/

    • Veterans for peace. This is a joke right? They are anti NATO,anti US and UK; pro CND and pro Russia Iran,Iraq,Syria and just about every other nut case regime on the planet!
      You have now taken umpteen lines to say nothing. WHAT is your STRATEGY?

      • My proposals for a sensible defence strategy has already been sent to my MP and to the Secretary of State and I am not alone in calls for reductions. As for injured ex military personnel, the way they have been treated is a disgrace and homeless ex military people beg on the streets round here. This is why the government must stop engaging in unwinnable wars and to withdraw from expeditionary wars which have no good results and which cost taxpayers billions. I fail to see what posters on a forum excitedly outlining plans for armed forces which will never exist achieve. Their behaviour is as that of children.
        I support sustainable and affordable defence suited to a a medium sized, European country.
        I do not support a global British military presence. Much to your regret, the marines will be diminished severely. There simply is no need for this country to maintain beach landing facilities and naval planners knew this when embarking on the carrier programme. If those planners really thought that this country could retain all these vessels, they really did underestimate the effects of financial constraints and a falling GBP v USD exchange rate.
        Reality has to be faced and will be. Better to face that reality now than face years of piecemeal cuts as has been the case since 1945. Britain must finally come to terms with its place in the world.

        • Your very fond of saying that your proposals for a defence strategy have been sent to your MP and the S of S. So stop avoiding my question and post this famous letter HERE for all of us kids to read.

  8. Yep. TH bloody leftie. What is so wrong with showing our military prowess to the world? If all you seek is recompense and compensation then we have all lost. What is the last post about?Quote “It will leave them and their imaginary military ponderings sobered up” Unquote. Thats the sort of garbage we used to get from the Soviet Union newsreels. Seems to me. You want to stay warm but you won’t pay for the heating!

  9. TH you must be in Putin’s payroll.
    There is no other way anyone who is a UK citizens and knows anything about military matters would advocate scrapping our best military arm and our most succesfull military unit. The Royal marines are respected and feared the world over and if they were scrapped then NATO’s northern flank would be substantially weakened at a time when Russia (your boss i suspect) is expanding its claims on territory and seas and wants to utterly control any artic sea routes that are now opening up (due to global warming)
    There is an easy way to fund defence properly, welfare cuts for losers that have never done a days work in their lives, cut the foreign aid budget, stop the pensions escalator- why should the pensioners get a taxpayer funded above inflation rise when everyone else in the uk is feeling the pinch and suffering due to below inflation payrises?
    It is all about choices you see and I do not subscribe to a yellow bellied, weak defence posture advocated by Russian 3rd columnist like you TH.

  10. QE does need sea ceptor
    The RN needs increasing in size and power NOT cutting back as per THs comments
    We need to purchase mk41 vl system for type 45s
    10-15 type 31s. Norwegian anti ship missile for type 31s or a small strike length mk41 cell for these vessels and the type 26.
    Ocean needs replacing and we need to build a 4 strong batch 2 astute class to take the RN back upto 11 SSNs in active service.
    Unlike TH i refute we have no money. It is just that we whittle our resources away on foreign aid, welfare, etc etc

    • Totally agree with you and I am all for a strong military in terms of all three forces. We have gone way beyond the minimum numbers of each that we need in my view and none can carry out the tasks that are expected of them without problems due to the cuts already made being too severe!!

    • The military is a crucial asset to Britain. I’m assuming you are blind to the fact that Russia is constantly sizing us up, with its probing of our area of interest? Patrol boats aren’t going to stop Russia if they really want this island. The foreign aid budget could be reduced to £8 billion p.a. That’s another £5 billion to play with! Give half to the NHS, and half to the military, while still giving a healthy chunk of money to other countries in need of help. That’s enough for a further 8 Type 31s in just one year with overrun money to spare. Keep this strategy until 2030, and we’re sorted. It’s not that we don’t have enough money to support both the armed forces and other countries, we (by we I mean the government) just cut the budget up into disproportionate slices. There is a middle ground, and that is what we should head for.

    • Like a child ignoring others debunking your crap stuck g fingers in ears and shouting blah blah blah veterans for peace. Evan P easily debunked your nonsense and you ignore it. Sad sad little man…

    • Don’t tell me that you are their PR mouthpiece. If not your childish repetitive meanderings are even more concerning. Do calm down and apply some logic to your argument it might actually help your cause rather than undermine it. Most people do see through simplistic sloganising

  11. Can I just say to all you guys like myself , who want to see our country and its overseas dependants properly defended . TH is off the ilk of people who are well meaning but unable to see that we need to keep our sea lanes open in order to bring food and goods to the UK . This as we know is what keeps our country prosperous , educated , fed and warm in winter. Above all it keeps us all safe and free . We need to keep our services well armed and trained to achieve this. As we all know at the moment our forces are far too small and under armed . So I say to TH take a wider view than just cost to the tax payer and think about our freedom and well being .

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here