OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 2:17:16 AM

patrickl

Posts: 1530
Joined: 6/20/2002
From: Singapore
Status: offline

UK has a new aircraft carrier. HMS Queen Elizabeth named after Queen Elizabeth I.

Link : http://news.sky.com/story/royal-navys-largest-ever-warship-hms-queen-elizabeth-sets-sail-10927338

_____________________________

Banner designed by rogueusmc

Post #: 1

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 4:08:04 AM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

Yes, nice dingy. Just kidding, wouldn't want to upset our British friends.

Double island looks interesting. Maybe yet one more British carrier invention us colonials will steal.

Alas, she has no aircraft. For she was to be populated with the F-35 and we haven't delivered.

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to patrickl)

Post #: 2

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 5:49:50 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: patrickl

UK has a new aircraft carrier. HMS Queen Elizabeth named after Queen Elizabeth I.

Link : http://news.sky.com/story/royal-navys-largest-ever-warship-hms-queen-elizabeth-sets-sail-10927338

Really like the reddish wood bowling alley/shuffleboard flight deck.
Have to wonder at the funny angles on the superstructures but not on the hull. Do they want an enemy radar to show a flat deck with no superstructures so they think HMS Argus was resurrected?

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to patrickl)

Post #: 3

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 7:31:42 AM

Chris21wen

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: patrickl

UK has a new aircraft carrier. HMS Queen Elizabeth named after Queen Elizabeth I.

Link : http://news.sky.com/story/royal-navys-largest-ever-warship-hms-queen-elizabeth-sets-sail-10927338

< Message edited by Chris H -- 6/26/2017 7:35:15 AM >

(in reply to patrickl)

Post #: 4

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 8:21:01 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

That's a beautiful ship!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Chris21wen)

Post #: 5

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 8:25:02 AM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

Let's hope she makes it safely out of port...

Fred

_____________________________

River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book on Operation Sea Lion - www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - a book series on how The Philippines were saved - in 1942! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D34QCWQ/?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref=series_rw_dp_labf

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 6

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 11:09:24 AM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Yes, nice dingy. Just kidding, wouldn't want to upset our British friends. Double island looks interesting. Maybe yet one more British carrier invention us colonials will steal. Alas, she has no aircraft. For she was to be populated with the F-35 and we haven't delivered.

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

The USMC will provide her a F-35B air group for at least her 1st year.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 7

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 12:57:06 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

Hear hear.

I'm also struck with the reversion to the historical mean of the RNAF borrowing American airframes as they suit for their carriers. It makes good financial sense to yield to the best option out there rather than having to research / build your own VSTOL aircraft.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 8

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 12:57:29 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Yes, nice dingy. Just kidding, wouldn't want to upset our British friends. Double island looks interesting. Maybe yet one more British carrier invention us colonials will steal. Alas, she has no aircraft. For she was to be populated with the F-35 and we haven't delivered.

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

The USMC will provide her a F-35B air group for at least her 1st year.

Didn't know this. Do you have a link for further information?

_____________________________

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 9

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 1:11:15 PM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

BBC website on it mentioning an USMC air group, but not when its due to be stationed on her, and that its not been agreed yet.

_____________________________

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 10

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 2:19:52 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Once upon a time (at least 2 years ago) I remember hearing some talk about carrier 'sharing' with the French. The ship would literally be re-flagged every so often and used by the two navies (UK and France). I remember thinking that was a 'novel' way of sharing costs, but I didn't know how seriously anyone was thinking along these lines.

Am I completely misremembering or was that considered at one point?

_____________________________

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 11

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 2:24:48 PM

Jorge_Stanbury

Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline

Yes there were talks about it.. in 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394185/Britain-France-share-aircraft-carrier-combat-defence-cuts-says-admiral.html

Probably a bridge too far...

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 12

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 2:26:19 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Once upon a time (at least 2 years ago) I remember hearing some talk about carrier 'sharing' with the French. The ship would literally be re-flagged every so often and used by the two navies (UK and France). I remember thinking that was a 'novel' way of sharing costs, but I didn't know how seriously anyone was thinking along these lines.

Am I completely misremembering or was that considered at one point?

I remember it. Don't recall hearing the actual reason the idea waned, but it has a lot of obvious problems in addition to benefits like sharing costs.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 13

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 2:53:23 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Yes there were talks about it.. in 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394185/Britain-France-share-aircraft-carrier-combat-defence-cuts-says-admiral.html

Probably a bridge too far...

Thanks for the find, Jorge_Stanbury.

Admiral Pierre-Francois Forissier was quoted in the article. Dutch-Irish?

_____________________________

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 14

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 4:36:00 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Yes, nice dingy. Just kidding, wouldn't want to upset our British friends. Double island looks interesting. Maybe yet one more British carrier invention us colonials will steal. Alas, she has no aircraft. For she was to be populated with the F-35 and we haven't delivered.

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

The USMC will provide her a F-35B air group for at least her 1st year.

Didn't know this. Do you have a link for further information?

There are a plethora of links , from major news papers to the US Defense department. Just try that "google fu" magic.

_____________________________

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 15

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 9:55:26 PM

Gregg

Posts: 143
Joined: 7/26/2004
Status: offline

Nice looking class of ship.
But too small to be of much use in anything beyond conflicts with low technology countries.
Either attack or defend, too few aircraft onboard to do both at the same time.
Could be used as an anti sub platform.

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 16

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 9:56:02 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Yes, nice dingy. Just kidding, wouldn't want to upset our British friends. Double island looks interesting. Maybe yet one more British carrier invention us colonials will steal. Alas, she has no aircraft. For she was to be populated with the F-35 and we haven't delivered.

All kidding aside, she looks to be a fine addition to the British fleet. I wish her and her crew nothing but the best.

The USMC will provide her a F-35B air group for at least her 1st year.

Didn't know this. Do you have a link for further information?

There are a plethora of links , from major news papers to the US Defense department. Just try that "google fu" magic.

Sounds like a win-win-win. The USMC gets a carrier to train on without tying up a USN CV, the British get some planes to start their training on, and Putin gets a bit more nervous about getting frisky in Syria/Turkey.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 17

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 10:41:46 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Beautiful ship. Do I understand it correctly that the entire crew adds up to only 700? What's her capacity? Will that Marine air group be her entire complement?

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 18

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 10:50:01 PM

Mobeer

Posts: 662
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
The USMC will provide her a F-35B air group for at least her 1st year.

In essence, though that's probably her second year, the first being spent on trials:
http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/timeline-delivering-carrier-strike/

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 19

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/26/2017 10:50:58 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

I'm looking at the Wiki, I bet that Marine air wing will be well over 500. A lot of fraternization there.

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 20

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 6:23:02 AM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

...the British get some planes to start their training on, and Putin gets a bit more nervous
about getting frisky in Syria/Turkey.

I'm sure he would....

That said, didn't Britain reject the idea of involving themselves in Syria?

Fred

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 21

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 7:21:25 AM

Chris21wen

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Yes there were talks about it.. in 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394185/Britain-France-share-aircraft-carrier-combat-defence-cuts-says-admiral.html

Probably a bridge too far...

Tunnel in our case.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 22

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 9:55:25 AM

LeeChard

Posts: 1099
Joined: 9/12/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline

I need more info! I notice it has a 'ski jump' for Harrier-like aircraft but seems to have a flight deck
large enough to handle conventional naval air.

(in reply to Chris21wen)

Post #: 23

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 12:40:03 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355

I need more info! I notice it has a 'ski jump' for Harrier-like aircraft but seems to have a flight deck
large enough to handle conventional naval air.

The British government was in absolute full "squirrel mode" in the design and building of these ships. Part of the reason that the aircraft is not available is that the constantly changing debate between the F-35B (VTOL) versus the F-35C (carrier conventional aircraft tailhooks and catapult bridle) went back and forth for so long. While the F-35C is much cheaper and more capable than the F-35B , the catapults and "traps" are far more expensive and much higher maintenance than the ski jump. And the SKI jump takes up potential aircraft deck parking spots (the reason USN "helicopter carriers" - LHP's, LHA's and LHD's don't have ski ramps).

As usual , the Queen Elizabeth's are ships designed by political committees, for the purpose of satisficing political needs , followed by defensive needs. Politics always come first.

Still , they are a vast improvement over the Invincibles , and perhaps future British governments will find the money and will to add "cat's and trap's" , aircraft and maybe even some escorts for them. They already plan on having one in service while the other is in refit or moth balls.

_____________________________

(in reply to LeeChard)

Post #: 24

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 1:50:16 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

I fully appreciate the Political verses Military debate aspect.

Canada has indeed had such problems for all too many years in our acquisition programs.

-

Additionally what I think I find it interesting that the debate about 'the carrier' is in someways reflective of the 'debate' the USN undertook during WW2 and shortly thereafter (as Carriers were retired and 'mission planning analysis of the future' was undertaken).

That is the cost benefit analysis and the role of a Carrier vis a vis CV or CVL/CVE.

Not necessarily in terms of expend-ability and cost (although that may play a part) - but in terms of 'how much to bring to the operation' ; the jump ramp / catapult and VTOL are all apart of this debate.

Further National "Mission" psychology of the government seems evident as well. This - I believe is very informative.

We debated earlier (another thread) the emergent World powers seem intent on developing CV capability.

This British design and its capability vis a vis say the Charles de Gaulle.

India apparently has chosen the small (CVL CVE) route - more in line with the capability of this British and French designs.

China apparently is choosing the larger mission capable design despite advertising they have ICBMs capable of Carrier kills.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 25

RE: OT : New HMS Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier - 6/27/2017 9:06:51 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I fully appreciate the Political verses Military debate aspect.

Canada has indeed had such problems for all too many years in our acquisition programs.

-

Additionally what I think I find it interesting that the debate about 'the carrier' is in someways reflective of the 'debate' the USN undertook during WW2 and shortly thereafter (as Carriers were retired and 'mission planning analysis of the future' was undertaken).

That is the cost benefit analysis and the role of a Carrier vis a vis CV or CVL/CVE.

Not necessarily in terms of expend-ability and cost (although that may play a part) - but in terms of 'how much to bring to the operation' ; the jump ramp / catapult and VTOL are all apart of this debate.

Further National "Mission" psychology of the government seems evident as well. This - I believe is very informative.

We debated earlier (another thread) the emergent World powers seem intent on developing CV capability.

This British design and its capability vis a vis say the Charles de Gaulle.

India apparently has chosen the small (CVL CVE) route - more in line with the capability of this British and French designs.

China apparently is choosing the larger mission capable design despite advertising they have ICBMs capable of Carrier kills.

China's claims of being able to take out a CV with a ICBM might be possible (although I truly doubt it). If that were the case , they wouldn't be advertising it , as it would be very easy for the USA to adapt one of our ICBM's to do the same thing to the CV's that there are all on fire to build. In short , I find it unlikely that people who can't get a SLBM system to work (1950's tech) and yet they can take out our CVN's easily with state of the art 1960's tech. And of course , do you want to launch an ICBM, when 3 hostile powers might consider it to be a preemptive strike and retaliate with a massive nuke strike? Seriously , you'd trade the Nimitz for mainland China? I'd take that exchange. (Except for the planet wide environmental damage). China's not stupid. The only reason for making that claim is to get the USN to back off a bit the next time they go after Taiwan.

_____________________________

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 26