Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[serge 750]

i suspect the worst case would be brazil with argentina,sao paulo with argentine super etendards etc + escourts, but i suspose it depends on how much oil there is down there? but would they being willing to risk it if we had a few astute class subs and type 45s down there + if we had enough time to reinforce with more typhoons,interesting senario.

[jonas]

"Well jonas they said that adding nuclear power to the carriers would cost an extra billion and considering that steel is the cheapest part of these carriers I don’t think the extra tonnage would be that much more expensive, I still think we are getting a very good deal on these carriers"

Yes the steel is the cheap part,but it's what you put into that extra tonnage that pushes up the costs.
Completely agree with you in that we are getting an excellent deal on CVF,if we get both.Another item on todays news,stating that Typhoon has exceeded its costs by 75%.

[jonodavies12]

If say, the QE did visit the Falklands, where would she berth? Surely she wouldn't be able to get anywhere near the shore, and that'd be the only reason she'd be sent there, so the government could get a few publicity pics of the scene.

[SDL]

They'd probably anchor her off shore, but in clear view of an important location.

Out of interest, is the QE going to be equipped with any boats (By that i mean the rigid inflatable things (i think that's what they are)) or will it be carrying new boats entirely?

[jonodavies12]

Got it,
http://en.mercopress.com/2011/08/22/falklands-government-readies-for-a-decision-on-a-new-deep-sea-port
A few months old I suppose. They're talking about it!

On a similar note, with oil extraction starting in the Falklands and the QE being finished around the same time, 2016 ish, plus relations with what appears to be all of South America going sour, surely the case for both carriers being brought into service is getting stronger by the day?

[Arfah]

Merry Christmas everyone !

Argentina has not enough military capability to try another invasion & 'El Presidente' is full of hot air.

Politically, there is not enough of a threat to the Falklands to warrant 2x Carriers. Howerever when you compare their cost with the Olympics budget they are a bargain ! Although it's difficult to find an exact figure, 9.35 bi££ion pounds is most quoted for a total of 4 weeks of sporting events. 6 Bi££ion pounds for 50years plus of defence diplomacy - what a steal !

How many conflicts has the UK been involved in since 1982 ? How many have required an Invincible class carrier or HMS Ocean and when not required, was a carrier provided by an allied nation instead ? Do we need them ?
I think so.

Arfah

[serge 750]

hope everybody is haveing a good tme

Perhaps the powers that be should tell all the doubters of the 40-50 service lives of these ships,its a long time compared to most smaller ships, i think the argentines are just hopeing that if they get lots of surport maybe the UN will tell us to give the islands back,which wont happen as dc said earlier.

[jonas]

"Politically, there is not enough of a threat to the Falklands to warrant 2x Carriers. Howerever when you compare their cost with the Olympics budget they are a bargain ! Although it's difficult to find an exact figure, 9.35 bi££ion pounds is most quoted for a total of 4 weeks of sporting events. 6 Bi££ion pounds for 50years plus of defence diplomacy - what a steal !"

That is not really a logical arguement.The money for the Olympics is not just for 4 weeks as the infrastructure left behind,stadium,housing ,parkland etc will benefit the area long into the future.
Better to compare it with other defence programmes which are bottomless pits. Typhoon in which the cost per aircraft has risen by 75%. Another report on the Army's requirement for armoured vehicles states 1.5bn pounds already spent on various projects and not one vehicle has been procurred.
When you put things into context,then CVF which at the moment is on budget will be a bargain. It,s the F35 costs that are going to need negotiating as per unit costs seem different to whichever authority you listen to.

[Conqueror]

On a serious note, let's not allow this thread to turn into some vitriolic bile site about immigrants and racial bigotry. The country is actually built from immigrants, and we get good overseas friends by sending aid overseas. I have good friends and family who work hard and pay good taxes, and are immigrants. This thread is about 2 Aircraft Carriers, not hatred of everyone else.

I am perfectly happy to stick with the subject of the carriers. Except for some considerations. If we don't start getting our priorities right, e.g. by the measures I suggested, 2016 or 2020 will come around and we will be into construction delays, cost overruns and all the other things that bedevil British industry. I point to a single comparison, and I welcome anyone who can update my timescales. Following the WW2 defeat on Crete, Admiral of the Fleet Andrew Cunningham mentioned that it took the Royal Navy three years to build a new ship. But now it seems that the first of these carriers will take eight years to build. Is that supposed to be progress? And, from what I gather, will have nothing but choppers for the first two years. I haven't found anything that suggests an adequate number of F-35Cs will be available before 2018. A second consideration is that Argentina appears to be ramping up its belligerency over the Falklands yet again. These may be scare stories, but can anyone tell me where we are going to base our Typhoons and Tornados if the Argies manage to take over Mount Pleasant? I wouldn't mind so much if the RAF already had its full complement of Airbus Voyager MRTTs. But it doesn't. And given that it apparently takes 9 months to convert each A330 to the MRTT configuration, would anyone like to suggest when the RAF will have all 14?

I don't want to get into a question about specific immigrants. Suffice it to say that I have little against immigrants provided that they work, pay their taxes, buy their own accommodation and adopt British values. But if you think that this country is actually built from immigrants, you either need to do some research or get your head tested. I can think of no easier way to demonstrate this than by pointing you at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom. Ethnically, as of 2001, 92.1% of the population is white. And that, by definition, 7.9% aren't. Even assuming that part of the 92.1% are Americans, Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders or whatever, to suggest that this country is built from around 8% of its population is risible.

I doubt anyone can disagree that, when the carriers become available, they will need escorts. Destroyers, frigates, submarines. A U.S. carrier strike group is typically composed of a minimum of 4 warships in additionn to the carrier. A U.S. carrier strike group includes a cruiser. The Royal Navy has no cruisers. And it has a grand total of 19 escorts. Once you've assigned the escorts for HMS Albion, Bulwark and Ocean, what's left?

Finally, there was nothing about my comment involving vitriolic bile or racial bigotry. If you think there was, I'm sorry for you. You are obviously incapable of understanding English. My comment was to the point of getting the Royal Navy rebuilt to a proper strength and capability and what budgets could be re-targeted. I'd like to think that I might get an apology for your misinterpretation and your hate-filled PC abuse. But I doubt that is likely. Don't bother to continue to address effluvial remarks to me. They will be ignored.

[Briani]

Just a few words of support for Conqueror.

We should all know that anybody who doesn't tow the pc line gets called the usual hate-filled names.I for one just want this country to to have a decent military and for us to stop wasting Billions in foreign aid.If we had the money spare to give away then fair enough,but the fact we're having to borrow it to then give it away is plane crazy.It isn't racist or bigoted to want to put yourself first no matter how much the lefty idiots say it is.

SO carrierfan2006 or anybody else please don't bother replying because like Conquerer i'm not interested in your pc drivel.

I was going to apologize for going off topic but thinking about it i just could not give a s**t.

[happyslapper]

Gents, this thread is about the QE Class. Nothing else.
If you want to debate your respective political persuasions I'm sure you can find a more appropriate forum.

[SDL]

They'd probably anchor her off shore, but in clear view of an important location.

Out of interest, is the QE going to be equipped with any boats (By that i mean the rigid inflatable things (i think that's what they are)) or will it be carrying new boats entirely?

in that case Happy, allow me to ask this Q again...

[happyslapper]

in that case Happy, allow me to ask this Q again...

They'll definitely have rhib's. I seem to remember CGI's from way back when showing them stowed in the sponsons. I think every surface unit is required by the MoD's health and safety queens to have seaboats available for man-overboard emergencies. Even the little Archers have rhibs (crappy ones though, the QEC will proabably have Pacific 22/24).

[suricata]

They'll definitely have rhib's. I seem to remember CGI's from way back when showing them stowed in the sponsons. I think every surface unit is required by the MoD's health and safety queens to have seaboats available for man-overboard emergencies. Even the little Archers have rhibs (crappy ones though, the QEC will proabably have Pacific 22/24).

I can certainly confirm that there is a requirement to have atleast 1 seaboat availablefor MoD ships going to sea, I was responable for maintaining them at one point on my ship and remember we had an issue with the Port boat and an issue with the Starboard davet which almost prevented us going to sea.

If you look at the high resolution 3d renders, you can see concealed bays under the sponsoons (similar to the Type 45) where we can only assume the seaboats are stored (and where the gangways will lead too). I'll have to dig out the photos I took of the model I took a couple of years back.

[Lawndart]

The commercial vessel I've just left, MV Tortugas by virtue of being UK flagged not only had to carry a freefall lifeboat, but also a rescue boat, that we had to test weekly. With a crew of 27, Tortugas had to have one. I can see the QE class with their substantially larger crews carrying far more than that.