England's New Super-Carriers

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
well you can almost certainly guarantee that whatever happens, it will be a shambles


We'll end up with one carrier operational, and one most likely mothballed rusting away somewhere in a state of semi readiness.

With probably 10-15 F-35B's on board, a few chinooks, couple of puma's, some marines and if they can afford it maybe a few CIWS turrets with 10 rounds each, and maybe some boxes of rocks at key locations around the ship for crew members to throw at anything that gets in too close.



And thats if the UK remains whole, if we go independant, and the UK pulls its work from Scottish shipyards, your guess is as good as mine as to what happens to them.

BTW does anyone know anymore about the rumours that there were gonna be US only areas on these ships with their own communications etc? or is that totally debunked or dead in the water now they don't have cats




posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Geemor
all right, it is always so discouraging to see people drooling over these monstrous killing machines. yay to the aircraft fleets that can takeoff and land to these carriers after they have bombed some terrorists and civilians. does britain (or any other country) need these kinds of stuff? who is going to attack them? or are they perhaps build for attack purposes?

i gonna lol when i see one of these or other carriers that have costs millions of people's money to sink just because they collide with the tanker when docking. or one of those planes accidentally explode under deck sinking the whole crap. why do you people support building these things? honestly?


Britain needs to defend it's oil interests in South America. And should the American people wise up to how the Europeans(British included) have been raping America these last few years(the rampant inflation in America is because of the illegal loans the Federal Reserve as been giving the EU) and how European and UK based energy companies are intentionally trying to keep energy costs high in America so there is more oil to export to the UK and Europe.....

Let's just say if America wanted to, it has just cause to go to war against the UK and EU.

Plus the UK has committed more acts of genocide then any other nation or people on the face of the Earth. Many of those nations who where victimized by the British people are now becoming semi powers in their own right and one day might come knocking for justice..
edit on 17-3-2013 by korathin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 12:39 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 01:22 AM
link   
From the roadway I went by the shipyard and saw the new Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford mostly completed as far as hull construction. I know alot of outfitting remains yet to be done.


The Island House looks very different from the Nimitz class and also different from the USS Enterprise.

But she is definitely coming up out of the dry dock. I am not sure if all the hull is yet together but most of the flight deck is on as well as the island house.

Also not sure as to when she is scheduled to be put in the water but all that will come soon enough.


Those are the first photos I have seen of the British Carrier. My thanks to the individual who posted them.

Orangetom



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Apologies for not updating the photos sooner, we have had a bereavement in the family & I had to return to France for a few weeks.

Anyway ... some more photos for you all !

The forward island (which wil control ship navigation etc) has been attached to the deck. The following photo is a very slight mock up, the ship itself is still in her red undercoat but someone has photoshopped the ship to give her Royal Navy grey colors.



The aft island (controlling flight operations) is still in construction at the BAe Scotstoun yard in Glasgow Scotland.



The stern of the ship and upper decks are stil being assembled, This is the rudder section being put into position.



The two rudders have been attached to the section above,



The internal sections are finished to a high standard.



A better shot of the bulbous nose at the ship's bow. I'm reliably told the ER stands for "Elizabeth Regina" or "Queen Elizabeth" and that will be the ship's pennant/coat of arms.



This is a mock of flight deck operations with the new F35 airplane.



This is a comparison of size of the new Queen Elizabeth class ship with the older Invincible class aircraft carriers, which the English Navy used during the war at the Falkland Islands / Guerre des Malouines / Malvinas.
Two of the three Invincible carriers (HMS Invincible & HMS Ark Royal) have been/are being cut up for scrap. Only HMS Illustrious survives now as a helicopter carrier/Command Ship.

The two new English carriers will dwarf the ships they replace.



Finally a comparison with the last "largest ship" in the English Navy, the old HMS Ark Royal which was scrapped in the late 1970's.



All these photos & mock ups are of HMS Queen Elizabeth. Manufacture is underway of the sections which will make up the other aircraft carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, although I don't think assembly of that ship will begin until HMS Queen Elizabeth has cleared the dock.

I hope these pictures are good for you. I will post more as I find them.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


Well, got to say you've cheered me up no end this morning reading this drivel.



Britain needs to defend it's oil interests in South America


From who?



. And should the American people wise up


'American' and 'wise' seems to becoming an increasingly common contradiction.



to how the Europeans(British included) have been raping America these last few years(the rampant inflation in America is because of the illegal loans the Federal Reserve as been giving the EU)


If that's true, and it's a very big IF, then whose fault is that?
Instead of blaming other's I suggest you look closer to home.
However, I've got to say there would be a sense of karma about it if indeed it's true - the USA milked Europe for every penny it could before, during and after WWII and has asset stripped almost every nation on earth



and how European and UK based energy companies are intentionally trying to keep energy costs high in America so there is more oil to export to the UK and Europe.....


Your energy costs are high because your economy is almost as screwed and messed up as our's, because your politicians are as equally inept and corrupt as our's and your bankers / industrialists are just as greedy as our's!



Let's just say if America wanted to, it has just cause to go to war against the UK and EU.


Words fail me.



Plus the UK has committed more acts of genocide then any other nation or people on the face of the Earth.


No they haven't.
Quite a few countries have exceeded the UK.
A certain young country hasn't exactly covered itself in glory in it's short existence - and is still adding to it's total at a quite alarming rate - nothing to be proud of there.



Many of those nations who where victimized by the British people are now becoming semi powers in their own right and one day might come knocking for justice..


Karma is indeed a bitch - perhaps you should take heed.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Following is a graphic showing construction of HMS Queen Elisabeth up until the end of last week.




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by LeBombDiggity
 


Thanks for the updates - please keep them up.

UK engineering at it's best - let's hope there's many more to come.

Back in the 80's I worked for a couple of years on the Tees building oil modules.
I was fortunate to witness the launching of one of the last ships to be built on that great river, it was a truly remarkable sight. All the yards stopped work to watch the launch and it was a great atmosphere in the pubs afterwards.

When we were building the Gyda platform for BP Norway I got talking to one of their senior managers when we were doing some bombing and onshore test drills.
I asked him why they had given the contract to a UK company, he replied that whilst expensive UK heavy engineering was simply the best in the world.
Shame it's almost non-existant nowadays - everything possible must be done to ensure that what little we have is safe-guarded.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Maybe I missed it in the OP, but why on Earth are these not being made nuclear?



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


It's probably down to cost & politics. Some British Commonwealth countries don't permit nuclear powered ships in their harbors, I think New Zealand has a current ban on such ships and Australia did at one point too. I don't think England has ever had a nuclear powered ship before, just submarines, I don't know if that comes into the decision, the lack of technical expertise.

Here is a great new picture of the HMS Queen Elizabeth. You can see that much work still needs done on the stern, the aft island has still to be fitted as does the ski jump.




posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by LeBombDiggity
 


Yep, after some further research, over the life of the vessel, nuclear is actually more expensive than fuel, but the counter argument is cruising speed, range, and the ability to power more and more weapons systems.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Make a great houseboat. It would work great on Lake Superior. Could build a couple of greenhouses on it and park it out by Isle Royal and fish. I suppose I'd need a big snowblower for the winter. I suppose I'd need a ton of coffee and a couple of hundred cases of beer for when company came around.



posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Some more content for ATS to see. First another mock up image of how the ships will looked in operation.



And now some video of how the ships are being assembled.

This first video is a bit dry & long but those of you technical minded will be interested.


Much snappier presentation next, showing how the blocks fit together.


And the ships / flotilla in operation.


And just for fun, a comparison between the new English carriers and the USS Gerald R. Ford, a ship mentioned earlier in the thread which is under construction too.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:13 AM
link   
With all the budget cuts affecting the MOD at this time, the two carriers might just get launched and then go stright to the mothball fleet. With the delays in the F35 programme there may not even be the aircraft to fly from it, although there have been suggestions that the harriers that were sold to the US ( for less than it cost to overhaul them before they were sold) may be leased back until the F35 can get into full production.

Could people also stop refering to the ships as belonging to the English Navy, it's the Royal Navy or the British Navy.

Many thanks



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Didn't the MOD make a report saying it only needs One Carrier. And HMS prince of Wales will in 2020 after her sea trial may be sold or be mothballed.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
The aft island has been placed on a barge, ready for the tow around the Scottish coast from Glasgow to Rosyth.




posted on May, 7 2013 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Here are some great photos of Upper Block 14 (aft island) of HMS Queen Elisabeth as it is hauled from the Scotstoun assembly building and made ready for it's journey to Rosyth.










posted on May, 7 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by orangetom1999
I have not ,however, seen any specifications on what is to be in this ship as far as what kind of power plant, speeds, aircraft compliment, crew compliment etc .etc.

Nuclear or conventional. boiler fired...or gas turbine. Jump ramp or catapult?


Tom from what I can find the new Queen Elizabeth class of aircraft carriers will have the following specifications and characteristics. But first let me answer one of your questions; the carriers will feature an Integrated Full Electric Propulsion system and NOT nuclear reactors. Each ship will have two RR gas turbines each putting out 36MW of power, two auxiliary diesel generators rated at 7MW each, two emergency diesel generators each producing 2MW of power and it will also have two electric motors each rated for 30MW. The design features two shafts driving two power fixed bronze propellers which will be almost 22 feet in diameter and weighing approximately 36.4 tons each.

Basic Design - Information



Currently two aircraft carriers are planned, the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, the service entrance dates are 2014 and 2016 respectfully. The Queen Elizabeth class is projected to displace around 70,000 tons fully loaded and will have full compliment of 40 aircraft. Current carrier air wing structure features up to 36 F-35B fighters and several AEW/ASuW/SAR multi purpose helicopters. The layout features two main island decks on the starboard side of the ship. The forward island will primarily be utilized for ship control while the aft island will be utilized for aircraft (flight control) approach and landings, both islands will cross manage the flight deck area. Each island is slightly smaller than the one found on a Nimitz class carrier. The explanation for this design choice is increased flight deck area, reduced turbulence on the flight deck and increased flexibility. Survivability might also have played a role in the process. However one wonders if splitting up the command and control nerve center into two groups (miscounting, confusion, time delay etc…) will prove to be a wise move.


(The version of the Queen Elizabeth class used for comparison in the above image is the proposed CATOBAR design. This will not be the initial deck layout of the ships when they enter service)

Anyway, the forward island will house (cost permitting) a multi-function radar while the aft will host a air search and surveillance radar. Starboard of the forward island will be a deck crane and aft of each island will be an elevator, only two per ship, each rated at 77 tons. The elevators will be large enough to simultaneously accommodate two F-35B fighters.

Specifications



Length (Overall) - 931.7 Feet (284m)
Beam (Waterline) - 128 Feet (39m)
Beam (Overall) - 239.5 Feet (73m)
Draught (Keel to Waterline) - 36 Feet (11m)
Height (Keel to Masthead) - 183.7 Feet (56m)
Draft - 29.5 Feet (9m)

Endurance and Maintenance

The carrier will have a top speed near 25 knots while its combat range at 15 knots cruise speed is estimated at 10,000 nautical miles. The ship will carry roughly 8,818 tons of fuel for the ship and aircraft. Each carrier will stock enough food, fuel and stores/supplies for an endurance of seven days between replenishments. Each ship will have a complement of typically 1,200, including 600 aircrew, although it can have a ship crew of up to 900.

Combined the two ships are planned to have an availability of 584 ship days a year (292 per ship), a 6 day interval between docking and a refit interval of 6 months.

Flight Deck



The flight deck is planned to initially be configured for ski jump operations (ski jump is angled at 13 degrees), with a design ability to later back fit the ship for CATOBAR functions. Current plans call to convert the carriers for CTOL aircraft sometime near the expected 20 year service life of the F-35B. Depending on the level of progress and maturity of the US electromagnetic catapult system (being designed for the Ford class) it is one of the options being considered when it’s time for the CATOBAR retrofit along with traditional steam catapults.


The deck has a total of three runways: two shorter runways of approximately 160m (525 Feet) for the STOVL Joint Strike Fighter and a long runway, approximately 260m (853 Feet) over the full length of the carrier, for launching heavily loaded aircraft – an area of nearly 13,000m² (139,880 ft²). The deck will have one or two vertical landing pads for the F-35 aircraft towards the stern of the ship.

Jet Blast Deflectors will be fitted on each runway 160m (525 Feet) back from the bow ski jump and probably in line with the rear wall of the first island. The deflectors protect the deck from the blast of the F-35 joint strike fighter aircraft engines operating at maximum thrust for take-off.

Source



The carrier will support Joint Combat Aircraft carrying out up to 420 sorties over five days and be able to conduct day and night time operations. The maximum sortie rate is 110 Joint Combat Aircraft sorties per 24-hour period.

The standard airgroup of 40 aircraft includes the Lockheed Martin F-35B Joint Strike Fighter, the EH-101 Merlin helicopter and the Maritime Surveillance and Control aircraft (MASC).

The maximum launch rate is 24 aircraft in 15 minutes and the maximum recovery rate is 24 aircraft in 24 minutes.

The hanger deck, 155m (508.5 Feet) L x 33.5m (110 Feet) W x 6.7m to 10m (22-32.8 Feet) high, accommodates up to 20 fixed and rotary wing aircraft.

Source


Weaponry

Besides the aircraft the carrier will be designed to incorporate a close in system (no specification as to which or what type of system) and it could also (if funds were allocated) feature two 16 cell vertical launch systems for Aster (and presumably other) air defense missiles.

Hull Design

The carrier hull is being designed as having a life service around 50 years. As such the hull is being built around an open architecture model (not unlike the Ford class). This module based concept will ensure that the ships is "future proof" when it comes to being converted in order to accommodate catapult systems. With the flight deck included the hull will be nine decks deep. Due to budget restraints a number of key armor features have been dropped form the design. These include side armor plates and armored bulkheads.

Some Video For Our Visual Learners



Other Source
MoD Carrier Order
CVF
QE Class

[edit on 11-2-2008 by WestPoint23]



Makes me proud to be BRITISH ....( even if we can't afford them ;-))

Good looking capable ships....

PDUK
edit on 7-5-2013 by PurpleDog UK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Not to ruins everybody's fun but...
a) how smart is it to put such a large slow object into enemy fire ? |This type of carrier or a Nimitz carrier wuld be a sitting duck for any low flying kamikaze jet flighter. Or about any decent missile. not to mention that armies arund the world are making rail guns and terra watt lasers that could puncture straight into a carrier's fuel tanks and blow the whole ship in one move.
b) 1 carrier ( what's that 1 billion bucks ? ) + 40 jets X 60 mil. (2.4 bil ) ..omg.a very attractive target for a night strike composed of 3-5 kamikaze jets flying 7 m above sea level.

c) for all the flipping welding that goes into it, you'd think they could at least make it flipping submerge at least 20-30 m to give it a bit of stealth in case it needs it.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Choice777
Not to ruins everybody's fun but...
a) how smart is it to put such a large slow object into enemy fire ? |This type of carrier or a Nimitz carrier wuld be a sitting duck for any low flying kamikaze jet flighter. Or about any decent missile. not to mention that armies arund the world are making rail guns and terra watt lasers that could puncture straight into a carrier's fuel tanks and blow the whole ship in one move.
b) 1 carrier ( what's that 1 billion bucks ? ) + 40 jets X 60 mil. (2.4 bil ) ..omg.a very attractive target for a night strike composed of 3-5 kamikaze jets flying 7 m above sea level.

c) for all the flipping welding that goes into it, you'd think they could at least make it flipping submerge at least 20-30 m to give it a bit of stealth in case it needs it.


Thats why it will sail in formation with the worlds most capable air defence destroyer (type 45).

As for rail guns they are some way off and the range of the projectile is likely to be less than the range of an F-35s weapons anyway.

Lasers are line of sight weapons. Good luck getting close enough and surviving long enough to burn your way through a carriers hull without being sunk.

The biggest threat right now is still the attack submarine. Fortunately we also have some of the best of those.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join