Aircraft Carriers III

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Those two RAF 'kills' were the aforementioned Harrier GR3 and Jaguar GR1, both I believe from RAF Germany which were involved in separate incidents leading the pilots to eject but the planes carried on flying. They were both shot down by F-4M Phantom FGR2s to prevent them crashing in civilian areas.

Hardly surprising the crabs would try to add them to their total, seeing as it would otherwise be zero!
Unusual but the QE is the first since Ark Royal to have big fighters, Ark Royal had about 20 - 30 F-4, Buccaneer ; Sea Harrier on others CVs do good job but in a other category.

The Queen Elizabeth is the more big British warship never build with after i think Ark Royal, Vanguard more "small" 50000 t about o_O
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Seems the thermal coating in light grey is expensive we feel that each covered part is " selected, limited " ?
It is a problem with the F-35B don't have Harriers/Sea Harriers

Curious the spaces between the parts, in more for a new ship can different for a modernised , have we a plan with spots ? seems 6 landindg spot but possible surely 8 coz 45 m between each of the 6 !

GB QE - 2.jpg
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Unusual but the QE is the first since Ark Royal to have big fighters, Ark Royal had about 20 - 30 F-4, Buccaneer ; Sea Harrier on others CVs do good job but in a other category.

The Queen Elizabeth is the more big British warship never build with after i think Ark Royal, Vanguard more "small" 50000 t about o_O
Prior to Big Liz, the largest British Aircraft Carrier was HMS Eagle, Ark Royal's older sister, as she had a slightly larger displacement (54,100 tons full load compared to Ark's 53,950 tons). The largest British Battleship was of course HMS Vanguard weighing in at 51,420 tons, so Eagle was the title holder until this year with our new 'Battlestar' (well she looks so damned futuristic!) breaking the scales at a whopping 65-70,000 tonnes. Not quite a Nimitz, but as my Dad would say, "I wouldn't want to drop it on my foot!" ZvOpb.png 20140326ax-2.jpg
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Seems the thermal coating in light grey is expensive we feel that each covered part is " selected, limited " ?
It is a problem with the F-35B don't have Harriers/Sea Harriers

Curious the spaces between the parts, in more for a new ship can different for a modernised , have we a plan with spots ? seems 6 landindg spot but possible surely 8 coz 45 m between each of the 6 !

View attachment 40100

Correct Forbin they only painted 3 spots used in aviation operations

I rememberd reading it in this article from last year

It's expensive very slow and labour intensive to do the whole carrier even these parts took over 1 year

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Second last paragraph

"According to the engineers it will protect decks throughout the carriers’ 50-year lives. Rather than coat the complete deck, the team has protected three landing spots. “The high standards of the aviation sector have required lots of independent testing,” says Mr Thomson. “Bringing the technology from the factory to the ship has been demanding.”"
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Deck crew training at RNAS Culdrose with 'plastic' F-35Bs (note the Royal Navy titles on the tails!) will soon be posted to Big Liz:
Also worth noting, the 'Island' (control hut!) of the Dummy Deck, known unofficially has HMS Siskin, carries the pennant number 'R01', as it is the first carrier deck these crew will ever work on.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Correct Forbin they only painted 3 spots used in aviation operations

I rememberd reading it in this article from last year

It's expensive very slow and labour intensive to do the whole carrier even these parts took over 1 year

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Second last paragraph

"According to the engineers it will protect decks throughout the carriers’ 50-year lives. Rather than coat the complete deck, the team has protected three landing spots. “The high standards of the aviation sector have required lots of independent testing,” says Mr Thomson. “Bringing the technology from the factory to the ship has been demanding.”"

Ok confirm my feeling and also long for USS America an inconvenience
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Prior to Big Liz, the largest British Aircraft Carrier was HMS Eagle, Ark Royal's older sister, as she had a slightly larger displacement (54,100 tons full load compared to Ark's 53,950 tons). The largest British Battleship was of course HMS Vanguard weighing in at 51,420 tons, so Eagle was the title holder until this year with our new 'Battlestar' (well she looks so damned futuristic!) breaking the scales at a whopping 65-70,000 tonnes. Not quite a Nimitz, but as my Dad would say, "I wouldn't want to drop it on my foot!" View attachment 40102 View attachment 40103
Thank you nice !
And yes QE is very almost also width than Nimitz but less long.

 
Last edited:
Tuesday at 9:16 PM
Russia ‘jealous’ of HMS Queen Elizabeth
June 27, 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...
... and now
Russia claims HMS Queen Elizabeth is ‘a convenient target’
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

After Defence Secretary Michael Fallon mocked Russia over fears it will attempt to spy on HMS Queen Elizabeth during sea trials, Russia has hit back.

Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Major-General Konashenkov said:
“The British aircraft carrier is nothing more than just a huge easy naval target. The ecstatic statements of Michael Fallon about the exterior supremacy of the new aircraft carrier over Russia’s Admiral Kuztensov warship demonstrate his absolute ignorance of the naval science.”

The Russian embassy tweeted: “Kuznetsov helped to defeat terrorists in Syria, it’s a real asset. What is the British record and who has to envy whom?”

It is understood however that the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsoz returned home from Syria due to the vessels inability to safely operate aircraft.

Writing in the Telegraph, Fallon said:

“It’s really routine for the Russians to collect intelligence on our ships. We will take every precaution to make sure that they don’t get too close, but I think they will be admiring her.”

He added: “When you saw that old, dilapidated Kuznetsov sailing through the Channel, a few months ago, I think the Russians will look at this ship with a little bit of envy.”

The smaller Russian Kutnetsov has been plagued by technical problems and is accompanied by a tug when she sails.

The Russian carrier is designed to lead a flotilla of vessels or operate solo while keeping enemy fleet at bay using its anti-ship missiles and using its aircraft to deter enemy aircraft.

The Queen Elizabeth class are designed to operate with a battle group to maintain air superiority, strike a variety of strategic and tactical targets using aircraft in addition to providing an air assault platform.

Despite recent sensationalist tabloid headlines, describing the Admiral Kuznetsov as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
while decrying the UK’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the Queen Elizabeth class are of a significantly higher tonnage than the Russian vessel, each sitting at 70,600 tonnes compared to its 55,000.

That being said, size is a poor indicator of carrier capability so let’s look beyond tabloid headlines.

The Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers will be the largest surface warships ever constructed for the Royal Navy.

The vessels will be utilised by all three branches of the UK Armed Forces and will provide eight acres of sovereign territory. Both ships will be versatile enough to be used for operations ranging from high intensity conflict to providing humanitarian aid and disaster relief.

Surprisingly for their sheer scale each ship will only have a total crew of 679, only increasing to the full complement of 1,600 when the air elements are embarked. This is made possible by extensive automation of many systems.

HMS Queen Elizabeth, the first in a fleet of two, is currently in the final stages of completion, the vessel is due to go sea for trials after the New Year.

The Admiral Kuznetsov serves as the flagship of the Russian Navy and is their only aircraft carrier. The initial name of the ship was Riga; she was launched as Leonid Brezhnev in 1985.

She was originally commissioned in the Soviet Navy and was intended to be the lead ship of her class but the only other ship of her class, Varyag, was never completed or commissioned by the Soviet, Russian or Ukrainian navy. This second hull was eventually sold to the People’s Republic of China by Ukraine, completed in Dalian and launched as Liaoning.

The Russian vessel carries a number of offensive weapons typically associated with guided missile cruisers and the carrier itself is capable of engaging surface, subsurface and airborne targets.

The Queen Elizabeth class carriers, in peacetime, will usually deploy with around 24 F-35Bs and typically around 14 helicopters. The exact types and numbers of aircraft embarked being adjusted to meet current requirements and threats.

In addition to the joint force of Royal Air Force and Royal Navy F-35Bs, the air wing is expected to be composed of a ‘Maritime Force Protection’ package of 9 anti-submarine Merlin HM2 and four or five Merlin for airborne early warning; alternatively a ‘Littoral Manoeuvre’ package could include a mix of RAF Chinooks, Army Apaches, Merlin HC4 and Wildcat.

The vessels are capable of deploying a variety of aircraft in large numbers, up to a maximum in the upper fifties in surge conditions.

The Queen Elizabeth class mark a change from expressing carrier power in terms of number of aircraft carried, to the number of sortie’s that can be generated from the deck. The class is estimated to be able to sustain a maximum sortie generation rate in surge conditions of up to 110 sorties per day.

The Admiral Kuznetsov can hold up to about 40 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, including Su-33 fighters and various versions of Ka-27 helicopter, however it rarely sails with more than half of that number.

While designated an aircraft carrier by the West, the design of Admiral Kuznetsov implies a mission different from that of either the United States Navy carriers or those of the Royal Navy.

The Admiral Kuznetsov is a heavy aviation cruiser rather than just an aircraft carrier. The vessel carries a number of offensive weapons typically associated with missile cruisers. The carrier itself is capable of engaging surface, subsurface and airborne targets, independently of its air wing.

According to War is Boring
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
:

“Admiral Kuznetsov has never seen combat, nor would she be of much practical military use. The 55,000-ton carrier has a bow ramp, not steam catapults, requiring her aircraft to shed weight before taking off.

This means her planes will go into combat with less fuel or bombs than the ground-based fighters Russia has already deployed to Syria.”

During the voyage the Admiral Kuznetsov reportedly “will have about 15 fighters Su-33 and MiG-29K/KUB and more than ten helicopters Ka-52K, Ka-27 and Ka-31”.

STOBAR (Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery), the system used for the launch and recovery of aircraft from the Admiral Kuznetsov, does not allow for the same frequency of launches/recoveries and tempo of operations afforded by American carriers or even the Queen Elizabeth class.

With Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery, the aircraft take off using the ramp and are arrested by a cable when landing back on the deck. This means that the Admiral Kuznetsov’s aircraft will only be able to fly a relatively limited number of sorties daily.

Other relevant factors include the process and capacities for transporting ordnance to assembly areas and from there to the flight deck, refuelling and arming stations layout, number and capacities of aircraft elevators, etc.

These vessels clearly cannot do some of what the other can, while the Admiral Kuznetsov can venture alone at times, the Queen Elizabeth would be unable due to a lack of offensive capabilities.

These vessels although similar in overall form are designed for different roles and with different ideologies in mind. The topic of which ideology is more practical today however is an entirely different topic.

As an aviation platform however, the Queen Elizabeth class will certainly be more capable and in the role of a cruiser, the Admiral Kuznetsov clearly comes out on top.

Is the press right to portray the Kuznetsov as something akin to the Bismarck however? No, clearly not.

The Russian flagship while a potent symbol is heavily outdated and its mix of roles, cruiser and carrier, severely restricts its capabilities in the mission has been deployed for off Syria.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the more modern Queen Elizabeth class vessels will be far more capable aviation platforms.
 
LOL! a guy in the pub this afternoon told me the QE ran on XP (he likely heard in one of the articles like Monday at 7:46 PM
now she's like everywhere for example in a major Czech server where I check my emails:
621168-original1-uyah5.jpg

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(a vid is linked inside)
EDIT in response I've told him about what I think could be worse: Mar 13, 2016
now I read some news about the Queen Elisabeth class being built (I can't get that article "Status update: UK carrier progress" by Rupert Pengelley, directly from Jane's though as the link doesn't work for me; the translation, at the site of a Russian blogger
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

contains pictures), and what's hard to believe is 8 Mb/s Ethernet on board (an internal fiber-optic network with transmission rate of eight Megabits per second)
if confirmed ... is it? I mean 8 Mb/s it's what goes to a cell phone these days LOL or not even that); now I read
HMS Queen Elizabeth doesn’t run on Windows XP, system only used for test and installation purposes
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Numerous media reports have claimed HMS Queen Elizabeth is vulnerable to cyber attack because she uses Windows XP, that is not the case.

Confusion seems to come from the fact Defence Secretary Michael Fallon didn’t deny the suggestion the vessels used Windows XP, the only trouble with is, he doesn’t actually seem to know any better.

While many on board systems used by contractors for various tasks use Windows XP, Windows 7 and various other operating systems, none of these are directly involved in running the vessel and will not be present when the ship enters operation service according to the Ministry of Defence. It should be noted that none of these systems that use XP in this manner are vulnerable to outside attack in the same way the NHS and other organisations were hit.

Speculation was rife on this very topic two years ago an image of Windows XP was seen on a technicians laptop during a documentary, let’s dig a little deeper shall we (again)?

Some of the belief that the Queen Elizabeth class use Windows XP could come from the fact that much of the fleet use a specialised version of Microsoft Windows 2000 (“Windows for Warships”) for the fleet.

While some versions of Windows have long been criticised for unreliability, it’s generally not the case with Windows 2000 and it’s successor XP. These operating systems are widely used in commercial operations (including manufacturing plants, labs and commercial ships). The Royal Navy has already installed similar systems in other ships and submarines.

It is understood that the most significant expense in using “Windows for Warships” is writing the software that will connect the networked devices to ship sensors and communications. The navy has found large flat displays excellent ways to view sensor data and information.

The earlier rumours seem to have stemmed from a comedy wallpaper on the laptop owned by an engineer that was visible on a recent documentary while the later rumours again seen to have stemmed from a background on a laptop coupled the Defence Secretary not being particularly knowledgeable on naval operating systems.

“The MoD can confirm that Windows XP will not be used by any onboard system when the ship becomes operational, this also applies to HMS Prince of Wales.”

This would appear to agree with us, that XP is being used to test and calibrate the systems prior to operational service.

So what do the Queen Elizabeth class use?
The new carriers are the first ships to be built with a BAE Systems designed operating system called Shared Infrastructure, which will be rolled out across the rest of the Royal Navy’s surface fleet over the next 10 years. Shared Infrastructure is a state-of-the-art system that will revolutionise the way ships operate by using virtual technologies to host and integrate the sensors, weapons and management systems that complex warships require. Replacing multiple large consoles dedicated to specific tasks with a single hardware solution, reduces the amount of spares required to be carried onboard and will significantly decrease through-life costs.

Developed by engineers at BAE Systems in collaboration with the Ministry of Defence’s Maritime Combat Systems team, Shared Infrastructure is an innovative hardware solution that can host software from multiple technology providers on a single system. This means, for the first time ever, the ship’s crew has the capability to access all software, such as navigation, communications and sonar, needed to operate the ship’s combat systems through a single console. This provides significant savings to the MOD, including a reduction in the space and power needed for computing equipment, makes it simpler for crew to operate, as well as reducing the amount of spares which are required to be carried on board and therefore significantly decreasing through-life costs.

According to BAE last year:

“They [the Queen Elizabeth class] will also be the first ships to be built with a BAE Systems designed, new state-of-the-art operating system called Shared Infrastructure, which will be rolled out across the Royal Navy’s surface fleet over the next ten years. Shared Infrastructure revolutionises the way ships operate by using virtual technologies to host and integrate the sensors, weapons and management systems that complex warships require. By replacing multiple large consoles dedicated to specific tasks with a single hardware solution, the amount of spares which are required to be carried onboard is reduced, significantly decreasing through-life costs.”

Jennifer Osbaldestin, Combat Systems Director at BAE Systems Naval Ships, said:

“Installing the Shared Infrastructure equipment on board HMS OCEAN introduces a more efficient way of housing the ship’s systems. By operating on a single interface, systems can be upgraded as and when required, and capabilities deployed efficiently, ensuring the Royal Navy is best placed to respond to evolving threats. This is a fantastic achievement for the teams involved and there is a real sense of excitement as we move into the next phase of installing the technology on board one of the Royal Navy’s Landing Platform Dock ships, HMS ALBION, next year.”

The deployment of Shared Infrastructure on HMS Ocean marks an important step towards the Ministry of Defence’s vision to establish a common shared architecture across all Royal Navy warships.

Shared Infrastructure is also being deployed on all 13 Type 23 frigates, the Royal Navy’s Offshore Patrol Vessels and the second Landing Platform Dock, system deployment is scheduled to be completed over the next 10 years. The installation of the hardware on the Type 23 frigate fleet will also pave the way for creating a coherent shared infrastructure across current and future warships, including the Type 26 Global Combat Ship.
 
Last edited:
Top