Thread: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

  1. #3331

    Default

    That 1.8 billion figure is still suspect. The PoW should cost less than the QE to convert, since most of her blocks haven't even been fabricated yet. Considering the early promotional material showing both options, it would seem prudent on BAE's part to already have some early design work done on the cats and traps build.

  2. #3332
    Senior Member CarrierFan2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The far side of the moon...
    Posts
    1,319

    Default

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw4dZ...e_gdata_player

    Helmetcam video from flyarounds in a T45. Relevant, but also just an excellent vid!

  3. #3333

    Default

    Still it would appear that most have been left wondering, will they or wont they fit the 'Cats and Traps' to QE and PoW. The US Congress approved the sale of GENERAL ATomics EMALS to the UK last year and we have the second set on delivery, thats right 4 Cats and 4 Traps, and if we are only fitting two per QEC carrier, then one could assume that both are being fitted. Another thing to note is that part of the main gate agreement was that all designs had to include angled flight decks so BAE saying that would have to go back to the drawing board is complete BS ! All of the above was on C-Span last year and the cost is $573m, so where does this £1.8bn keep coming from?

    One other thing, does anyone know of any truth to the rumours that roughly 12 FAA pilots are currently flying F18's from US Carriers?

    Honoured to be able to add to this forum!

  4. #3334
    Faulty Charisma Chip
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by QEC Eye in the SKY View Post
    Still it would appear that most have been left wondering, will they or wont they fit the 'Cats and Traps' to QE and PoW. The US Congress approved the sale of GENERAL ATomics EMALS to the UK last year and we have the second set on delivery, thats right 4 Cats and 4 Traps, and if we are only fitting two per QEC carrier, then one could assume that both are being fitted. Another thing to note is that part of the main gate agreement was that all designs had to include angled flight decks so BAE saying that would have to go back to the drawing board is complete BS ! All of the above was on C-Span last year and the cost is $573m, so where does this £1.8bn keep coming from?

    One other thing, does anyone know of any truth to the rumours that roughly 12 FAA pilots are currently flying F18's from US Carriers?

    Honoured to be able to add to this forum!

    Sorry but you seem to have misread the situation re the cats and traps,when they said the second set on delivery what they meant was set number two,that is after set number one which is on delivery for the first Ford class carrier.So in fact we have ordered one set,and sorry to say also that at the moment that is in principle only. No actual contract has yet been signed for this set.

    As for the angled deck,yes it was designed for future upgrade to this whenever we needed it for CATOBAR ops,but as we were originaly buying STOVL aircraft it was not included in the current build of the QE. Now everything is up in the air again until we decided whether we buy the B or C model of F35.

    In recent answers in the house of commons it was stated that we have currently 7 FAA pilots embedded within the USN flying Hornets.

    Hope that clears up some things for you,and welcome.

  5. #3335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonas View Post
    Sorry but you seem to have misread the situation re the cats and traps,when they said the second set on delivery what they meant was set number two,that is after set number one which is on delivery for the first Ford class carrier.So in fact we have ordered one set,and sorry to say also that at the moment that is in principle only. No actual contract has yet been signed for this set.

    As for the angled deck,yes it was designed for future upgrade to this whenever we needed it for CATOBAR ops,but as we were originaly buying STOVL aircraft it was not included in the current build of the QE. Now everything is up in the air again until we decided whether we buy the B or C model of F35.

    In recent answers in the house of commons it was stated that we have currently 7 FAA pilots embedded within the USN flying Hornets.

    Hope that clears up some things for you,and welcome.
    Thanks for the welcome!

    Only putting forward an honest assessment of what i heard, and as we had already by then reverted to the C model of the F35, thought the STOVL option was pretty much a dead duck.

    For what its worth, i think we should CATOBAR both QEC carriers and put super Hornets on them and replace with C variant of the F35 as and when.

    Cant wait to hear what comes out this week now that purdah is finished and see what SofS for Defence says re this program.

  6. #3336
    Faulty Charisma Chip
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,519

    Default

    Following from 'defencemanagement.com'

    F-35 'facts have changed' since SDSR

    08 May 2012


    Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has recommended the National Security Council revert to choosing the F-35B joint strike fighter for the UK's Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers, it has been reported.

    In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Hammond said that "the facts have changed" since 2010's Strategic Defence and Security Review chose to operate the F-35C 'cat and trap' carrier variant, citing affordability and performance reasons.

    The F-35B, which is capable of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) was the original choice of aircraft when the Queen Elizabeth class carriers were ordered.

    Hammond told The Daily telegraph that the choice of aircraft "depends on what you want to do".

    "Different aircraft do different things," he said. "It's about thinking about the military effect we want to deliver then working out the most cost-effective way to deliver it."

    The F-35C was considered to be the cheaper option at the time of the SDSR, but the cost of fitting the electromagnetic aircraft launch system to just one carrier has been estimated as high as £1.8bn since.

    The MoD, which has had to re-absorb the costs of the strategic nuclear deterrent as well as making cuts, would be unlikely to be able afford that cost before carrier strike is set to be restored in 2020.

  7. #3337

    Default

    What has 'changed' is that the defecit/growth plan for the UK may take until 2017 rather than 2015 and nothing 'military' has changed at all.
    I'd rather we went the F35C route, but its obvious we'll revert to STOVL. Only upside of that decision is that it would be easier to see the 2nd CVF entering RN service.

  8. #3338
    Senior Member Jdam1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]Exactly [/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]Captain[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Verdana], I said on the last page itís about the need to spend the money now (before 2015) upgrading both carriers, the reason it taking so long to switch back is that everyone on this earth is telling them to stick with the C.

    Right now if they switch we are going to be spending more money on a less capable carrier and aircraft you couldnít make this **** up.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT][/COLOR]

  9. #3339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdam1 View Post
    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana][/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]you couldnít make this **** up.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    Well you could, because when was the last time a UK government bit the bullet,sucked up the cost and did something right for the long term interest? The NHS?

  10. #3340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdam1 View Post
    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]Exactly [/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]Captain[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#222222][FONT=Verdana], I said on the last page itís about the need to spend the money now (before 2015) upgrading both carriers, the reason it taking so long to switch back is that everyone on this earth is telling them to stick with the C.

    Right now if they switch we are going to be spending more money on a less capable carrier and aircraft you couldnít make this **** up.[/FONT][/COLOR]

    Which is what I said yesterday, we've already allocated some £400m + on the second set of Cats and Traps after the USS Gerald Ford, with a further £200m in conversation/design work, so why let all be wasted and go down a drain? Oh wait, its a Gov Minister thats deciding this and not a Military Chief!

    Todays piece by the anti QEC carrier Telegraph hasn't brought anything up for my mind, only a reworking of a previous quote.

  11. #3341
    Senior Member Jdam1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]We have allocated/budgeted for it but not spent it, if we go back to the B we don’t need to spend this money until after 2020 when they have to start spending more on the B, once again as captain said this is the UK government being very short sighted and with the way this government is going it will be someone else’s problem.

    [/FONT][/COLOR]

  12. #3342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdam1 View Post
    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]We have allocated/budgeted for it but not spent it, if we go back to the B we donít need to spend this money until after 2020 when they have to start spending more on the B, once again as captain said this is the UK government being very short sighted and with the way this government is going it will be someone elseís problem.

    [/FONT][/COLOR]
    sometimes I think they know this to well and that why they will do it .


    afterall it not there money they are wasting and they will not be made accountable for.

  13. #3343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdam1 View Post
    [*******#222222][FONT=Verdana]We have allocated/budgeted for it but not spent it, if we go back to the B we donít need to spend this money until after 2020 when they have to start spending more on the B, once again as captain said this is the UK government being very short sighted and with the way this government is going it will be someone elseís problem.

    [/FONT][/COLOR]
    I agree with you, it is very short sighted of them. Winston Churchill used to bang the drum about having a fully capable navy and the need for Aircraft carriers, so why cant this lot stop the bickering and just plow ahead with CATOBAR for both QEC carriers. Not only will it save money in the longer term, but it will bring a more capable strike force to the RN/FAA.

    One question, what happens if the Americans draw back on the development of the B, where would that leave us? Go F18 Super Hornet and then F35C as and when, makes perfect sense!

  14. #3344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by QEC Eye in the SKY View Post
    One question, what happens if the Americans draw back on the development of the B, where would that leave us? Go F18 Super Hornet and then F35C as and when, makes perfect sense!
    Although this is merely guessing, as a level 1 partner I'd suggest that if the government did want to u-turn to the B, they will have got pretty high up assurances as to the state of play regarding the B version.

    Because the U-turn will be embarrasing enough, heavens knows what a treble U-turn will do for them.

  15. #3345
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    south east england
    Posts
    408

    Default

    Hi guys

    Because the U-turn will be embarrasing enough, heavens knows what a treble U-turn will do for them.[/QUOTE]

    You can say that again!!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •