Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[cyrilranch]

What is that fitted to the back of the ship, is a stairway or something?

[QEC Eye in the SKY]

Magnificent amazing pics there thanks for posting, I particularly like the 2nd pic for two reasons, you can see your trainers in the reflection lol and secondly I look at the model and it screams angled deck to me, don't get me wrong i'm happy we're getting the 2 beasts they are an extremely effective capability and every nation bar the US would give their eye teeth for this ship including the Indians/Chinese. Its just this picture struck a cord to me and emphasised the easier option that we've taken. I guess i'm still smarting at the u turn still and I know it means 2 boats probably guaranteed now but the design/size offers so much more.

@ Pymes glad to be of service mate

I like you CJ, think we've missed a trick by not going angled deck, but hey who know's maybe one day ( we can dream )


@ Magnificent, those pics look great but I've noticed only 1 Phalanx Starboard side and two port side, is that right? Surely all four arc's should be covered??

[CarrierFan2006]

What is that fitted to the back of the ship, is a stairway or something?

Probably gives you the flexibility to load Marine shore detatchments and such like, and for the crew to go "over the side' for a swim. Either that, or they are bringing back keel hauling?!

[Geoff_B]

Yeap its a set of stairs leading from the hanger deck level down to the stern platform, quite why its there and why they need external access is a mistery. On the US carriers and on CVA-01 the area was to be used for running aircraft engines to test them out side of the hanger and the workshops but not sure if this is the case with QEC.

Pymes75, as LB01 has been fitted to LB02 and the first CB02 unit has been fitted i suppose we should call it Super Block 02 or even 01 ?. Yes your right the CB02 decks are taller as LB02 was only built to the hanger deck level, so yes the CB02 units will require a much greater level of welding as all the walls will need fixing to the floor.

Nice pictures Magnificent, those would have been handy when i built my model in 2010 as it does represent the actual features of the QEC class being built. Most of the earlier models wehere either simplified of showed the earlier version with the wedges on the Islands and the different sponsons. You can see from the model the deck edge areas where the on-flightdeck refuel and rearm stations are located at regular intervals.

[Geoff_B]

Yeap 3 Phalanx, one on either end of the port sponson with the aft one covering the stern as well plus the one on the fwd starboard sponson. There are 4 LS-30 guns on each quarter

[cockneyjock1974]

I like you CJ, think we've missed a trick by not going angled deck, but hey who know's maybe one day ( we can dream )

I know mate maybe in 25-30 years, I still think they'll be an emkit UAV launcher added at some stage though.

[Pymes75]

Pymes75, as LB01 has been fitted to LB02 and the first CB02 unit has been fitted i suppose we should call it Super Block 02 or even 01 ?. Yes your right the CB02 decks are taller as LB02 was only built to the hanger deck level, so yes the CB02 units will require a much greater level of welding as all the walls will need fixing to the floor.

I've not seen anything from the ACA referring to an Super Block 01 or 02. My guess is that as it won't be completed before SB03 is skidded up and joined to LB02, then there is little point giving it a 'Super Block' name. Realistically, the next fully completed 'Super Block' will include: LB01, UB01, LB02, CB02, SP01, SP02 and SB03!

[QEC Eye in the SKY]

I know mate maybe in 25-30 years, I still think they'll be an emkit UAV launcher added at some stage though.

Looking at the skills being shown by the workforce across this entire project, IF the Gov of the day had the inclination to go angled deck and er em, catapults and arrestor gear, then who's to say that they couldn't do it at a major refit ? Or is that just wishful thinking.


I know the americans are having as much 'fun' with the new Ford Class Carriers especially in terms of money spent. The argument given, It's a new class of ship with new technology which will last some 90+ years. Next !


Maybe we should have said similar things - Are you listening Mr Hammond ???? (we know that this thread is being watched )

[Naval Oldie]

Looking at the skills being shown by the workforce across this entire project, IF the Gov of the day had the inclination to go angled deck and er em, catapults and arrestor gear, then who's to say that they couldn't do it at a major refit ? Or is that just wishful thinking.


I know the americans are having as much 'fun' with the new Ford Class Carriers especially in terms of money spent. The argument given, It's a new class of ship with new technology which will last some 90+ years. Next !


Maybe we should have said similar things - Are you listening Mr Hammond ???? (we know that this thread is being watched )

Once the ships are in naval service and clear of BAe Systems' clutches, it may be that converting the ships to cats and traps would be cheaper than doing it through a change to the construction contract. Therefore should problems with the F35B emerge then this option remains available. Watch this space.

[Liger30]

My analysis of the Portsmouth situation and of the "delay Prince of Wales" idea. The big, unspoken issue with the Portsmouth problem is that it very likely means that Type 26 got delayed by stealth and we have not yet been told of it.
BAE is worrying about work on Type 26 not being available prior to 2020... clearly incompatible assumption with the 2021 expected in-service date for the first of class.

http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogs...d-closing.html

[Liger30]

Yeap its a set of stairs leading from the hanger deck level down to the stern platform, quite why its there and why they need external access is a mistery. On the US carriers and on CVA-01 the area was to be used for running aircraft engines to test them out side of the hanger and the workshops but not sure if this is the case with QEC.

Might have to do with the intended secondary role of CVF as LPH. It was part of the requirement all along, to a degree. HMS Ocean has a ramp for vehicles, CVF's got stairs for Marines...?
Might be, if the platform at the bottom of the stairs is designed in a way that lets Marines board onto LCUs and LCVPs coming in from other vessels in the task force.

[suricata]

Some time back, someone asked about the mock-up of the F-35. I recalled the other day that I had in fact seen it during a visit to Navy Days at Portsmouth in 2008. It was on display at the forward end of the flight deck aboard HMS ILLUSTRIOUS. I recall this day well because it was the highlight of my 2008 vacation, it was my first glimpse of the F-35, the new Jaguar cars were on display quayside, and there was a tent with models and display boards staffed by ACA officials. I spent quite a bit of time there chatting with them and viewing the model. All of this was four years ago now, and the ship depicted by the model is now quickly coming together. Anyway, here are a few pictures (my first images posted to this thread):

What bizarre timing, I was just going though all my pictures from Navy days 2008 of the F35 mockup and the model of the CVN, lol



From the bow (No shoes CJ )



Port Bow



F35 Mockup on Lusty, you can't see him in this picture, but Timothy Spall (the actor from Harry Potter amongst other things) was right beside me when walking around Illustrious, didn't realise it was him until we were on the gangway leaving Lusty, I thought he was an old ship mate or something cause I recognised him but could recall where, lol

[QEC Eye in the SKY]

Once the ships are in naval service and clear of BAe Systems' clutches, it may be that converting the ships to cats and traps would be cheaper than doing it through a change to the construction contract. Therefore should problems with the F35B emerge then this option remains available. Watch this space.

That thought had crossed my mind more than once before Naval Oldie, so who know's. I can remember the Nimitz from a few years back, and boy was she a sight ! How good would it be if we could at least convert the ships - although they will never be the same as a Nimitz Class or Ford Class carrier.


I wonder when the QE is free from BAE's initial build contract as that could be a teller.


Thanks

[Geoff_B]

I could be the Type 26 is different to the Type 45 and designed to be assembled in situ like the Type 23, so whilst the lead ship is assembled on the Clyde it may mean the 3rd or 4th vessel being built and assembled at Portsmouth, which would explain the timeline discrepancy.

I suspect its an attempt to get initial orders for the MHPC in the 2015 SDSR as those ships would be better suited for Portsmouth as a gap filler and give BAE another potential export design.

G

[cyrilranch]

"@ Magnificent, those pics look great but I've noticed only 1 Phalanx Starboard side and two port side, is that right? Surely all four arc's should be covered??"

Mod cost cuting again!
have you seen what CIWS the Chinese have fitted to there casino carrier