Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[ArmChairCivvy]

36 Battalions to support, it really isn't that unlikely.

What is that metric in MEUs... easier to use as a load factor... not that they would all be on ships at the same time (e.g. Norway would be a fjord hopping campaign: youll need the amph. capacity, regardless of how you got to the theatre, but only for short and sharpish. You wont have ships sitting around a la San Carlos).

[ArmChairCivvy]

the next warship to build?

SSS? A warship - whether complex or not

[Timmymagic]

So any repairs in future will mean a lengthy time in dock. Good job we are getting two ships then.

By all accounts it should last for decades so it must be tough. I did read that Thermion coating would last 20+ years, which meant in reality it was cheaper than the traditional coatings. The QE's coating is different, it isn't Thermion. But we should probably expect a similar, or longer, lifespan.

[bobp]

You are correct in the long run the coating will pay for itself. However it hasn't been tested for 20 years yet but I have heard its very tough.

[seaspear]

To be able to stand temperatures of 1500 degrees centigrade plus the jet backwash is pretty tough , I am curious that if there is expected to be any heat build up in the deck from high tempo operations and would operating in the Atlantic be different to the Middle East in this.

[Gabriele]

Pretty sure that the downwash is nowhere near 1500 degrees, despite what has been repeatedly written in multiple sites and papers. The Lift Fan uses cold air and the F135 does not employ afterburner in VTOL mode. The actual temperature was measured at 500 to 700 degrees right beneath the F135 exhaust, if i recall correctly. It is one of the reasons why the Lift Fan solution was chosen even if it means hauling extra weight and having to sacrifice space. An all-hot solution truly would have pumped out some seriously hard to manage heat.

Moreover, the heat difficulties upon the anti-skid are a problem that first emerged with the MV-22, not with the F-35. The heat under the engine nacelles is comparable.

[Spinflight]

I wonder what the noise is like in the hangar.

I'm sure it isn't quiet on deck but 1 floor down under a huge bass drum...

[Ron5]

a few proposals doing the rounds for the MEUs to go for 4 ships rather than 3. Some arguing for the USMC to operate carriers of it's own.

The Americas are overcrowded with their specced airwing.

Of course this is not publicised too much... might lead to fewer F-35Bs!

Aviation Week has an article on the current sea trials of the F-35B. Try and read it if you get the chance. They're investigating V-22's operating in concert with F-35B's for long distance Marine insertions with full air cover. The Marine in charge thinks an America can easily handle 20-22 F-35B's plus supporting V-22's.

The trials are being conducted with a relatively empty ship: 12 F-35B's, 2 V-22's & a couple other helos.

[Ron5]

Pretty sure that the downwash is nowhere near 1500 degrees, despite what has been repeatedly written in multiple sites and papers. The Lift Fan uses cold air and the F135 does not employ afterburner in VTOL mode. The actual temperature was measured at 500 to 700 degrees right beneath the F135 exhaust, if i recall correctly. It is one of the reasons why the Lift Fan solution was chosen even if it means hauling extra weight and having to sacrifice space. An all-hot solution truly would have pumped out some seriously hard to manage heat.

Moreover, the heat difficulties upon the anti-skid are a problem that first emerged with the MV-22, not with the F-35. The heat under the engine nacelles is comparable.

The heat signature of an F-35B is significantly more severe than any V-22. The later aircraft has landed on many ships of many nations (HMS Ocean to name one), those ships would not be able to handle an F-36B. There is a reason no vertical landings were attempted on unprepared surfaces during the F-35's recent visit to the UK.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Aviation Week has an article on the current sea trials of the F-35B. Try and read it if you get the chance. They're investigating V-22's operating in concert with F-35B's for long distance Marine insertions with full air cover. The Marine in charge thinks an America can easily handle 20-22 F-35B's plus supporting V-22's.

Thx, that would be an ideal role for the dockless first few of the class.

[Ron5]

Aviation Week has an article on the current sea trials of the F-35B. Try and read it if you get the chance. They're investigating V-22's operating in concert with F-35B's for long distance Marine insertions with full air cover. The Marine in charge thinks an America can easily handle 20-22 F-35B's plus supporting V-22's.

Thx, that would be an ideal role for the dockless first few of the class.

Apparently the buzz words of the day are "Lightening Carrier"!

Better than in a bottle I guess

[seaspear]

Pretty sure that the downwash is nowhere near 1500 degrees, despite what has been repeatedly written in multiple sites and papers. The Lift Fan uses cold air and the F135 does not employ afterburner in VTOL mode. The actual temperature was measured at 500 to 700 degrees right beneath the F135 exhaust, if i recall correctly. It is one of the reasons why the Lift Fan solution was chosen even if it means hauling extra weight and having to sacrifice space. An all-hot solution truly would have pumped out some seriously hard to manage heat.

Moreover, the heat difficulties upon the anti-skid are a problem that first emerged with the MV-22, not with the F-35. The heat under the engine nacelles is comparable.

The heat signature of an F-35B is significantly more severe than any V-22. The later aircraft has landed on many ships of many nations (HMS Ocean to name one), those ships would not be able to handle an F-36B. There is a reason no vertical landings were attempted on unprepared surfaces during the F-35's recent visit to the UK.

There are of course several reports as to the damage to ship structure from the F35b which have led to modifications to prevent this ,if there are definite qualified sources stating what the tested temperatures are it would be interesting to read , I dont know if there are intended modifications for the Cavour when she embarks the F35b and what they are .

[Dahedd]

Thx, that would be an ideal role for the dockless first few of the class.

Apparently the buzz words of the day are "Lightening Carrier"!

Oh boy. I can hear Solomon over at SNAFU having a rage fit from here

[Gabriele]

The (potential) damage to ship structures is due to a combination of factors, not just to heat. The F-35B also happens to be quite heavy, for example, and when it comes down it can put quite some stress on the structure. And that's why US LHDs are getting the flight deck reinforced with extra structural strength. The rest was mostly related to deck "furniture" / antennas and other relatively vulnerable elements which were in the way of the thrust and were either protected or relocated where necessary.
The "melting" of stuff was always a journalist drama case.

Relating to heat, this is instructive:



Also, an interesting mention back at the time of the X-32 and X-35 prototypes:

As far as the Boeing team was concerned, the pop stall had been a nonevent, but the members knew it hadn’t looked good. Perception is everything, and the episode was a reminder of other inherent drawbacks that direct lift had and Lockheed’s fan didn’t. As with the Harrier, the 1,350-degree heat of the Boeing airplane’s exhaust gases would pose a threat to the surface of carrier decks, if not to the life and limb of Navy crews (the downdraft from Lockheed’s lift fan was some 1,000 degrees cooler). Since Lockheed’s fan boosted engine thrust, its powerplant could run at lower temperature and with less strain, and these differences would translate into longer life. Most significant, assuming its reliability could be ensured, the lift fan would offer an extra margin of power and safety in a hover. In the end, that ensured Lockheed’s victory.

Read more: http://www.airspacemag.com/military-avi ... 0QIOkEc.99

[Ron5]

Yup, weight is the reason why the UK is spending umpty millions coating the QE's deck with specially developed heat resistant coating and fitting heat shields to such items as life rafts (heavy sarcasm).

[dmereifield]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/will-qu ... ers-carry/

For the second time in the last week or so UKDJ are claiming that the carriers will be routinely deployed with 20 F35b in peace time, do they know something we (or I) don't? Or is this just speculation?

[WhitestElephant]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/will-qu ... ers-carry/

For the second time in the last week or so UKDJ are claiming that the carriers will be routinely deployed with 20 F35b in peace time, do they know something we (or I) don't? Or is this just speculation?

I have found in many UKDJ articles, they outright copy and paste parts of Wikipedia word for word. That is both lazy and amateurish, and I do not take them serious at all.

[imperialman]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/will-qu ... ers-carry/

For the second time in the last week or so UKDJ are claiming that the carriers will be routinely deployed with 20 F35b in peace time, do they know something we (or I) don't? Or is this just speculation?

I spoke to someone involved, at quite a high level, about the plans for what they're now calling the CVW. The expectation that the vessels will sail with around 20 F-35Bs is, in his words, because "It is not that they can't do land based operations, just that there is a need to get the return on investment for the well found forward deployed bases that these aircraft carriers that form the centre of the CSG are" and that "the capacity of the F-35B force in the near years in particular is very limited and it is unwise to do other deployments".

The impression was that they're going all out to get as many on the deck as possible and that the earlier figure of 12 was "RAF ambition to maintain flexibility to conduct land based operations" and not the policy position that is developing.

I have found in many UKDJ articles, they outright copy and paste parts of Wikipedia word for word. That is both lazy and amateurish, and I do not take them serious at all.

Feel free not to but none of our writers use anything inappropriately and adhere to the Creative Commons usage license. We're a group of volunteers and in articles focusing on specifics of a system or more on the technical side, the usage of freely licensed text to elaborate upon a point is very common.

[R686]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/will-qu ... ers-carry/

For the second time in the last week or so UKDJ are claiming that the carriers will be routinely deployed with 20 F35b in peace time, do they know something we (or I) don't? Or is this just speculation?

He could be right! He just fails to mention who's aircraft they will be, look what he actually said in regards to aircraft number what might be avalible at the time and draw your own conclusions

The carriers, in peacetime, will usually deploy with around 20 F-35Bs as a minimum and a number of various helicopters as their CVW. When the carrier first deploys operationally, the UK will have 42 F-35 aircraft, with 24 being front-line fighters and 18 used as training aircraft.

He also mentions the term Tailored Air Group has gone out of use, what's the new terminolgy and why do the have to continually change it.

[WhitestElephant]

Feel free not to but none of our writers use anything inappropriately and adhere to the Creative Commons usage license. We're a group of volunteers and in articles focusing on specifics of a system or more on the technical side, the usage of freely licensed text to elaborate upon a point is very common.

If you're publishing material which contains content you didn't write, at least attribute it.

[ArmChairCivvy]

the term Tailored Air Group has gone out of use

"V" for variable in CVW?

I would not be at all surprised as the three flavours specified may have just been the basis for Operational Analysis (both for effects and for their constraints like deck and lift ops).
- btw, when Adm Z mentioned that ten helo spot ops are being analysed (before painting the spots!)... the outcome wasnt made public? If positive, one would expect a little bit of propaganda around it "look how much you get for the money" type of thing.

[imperialman]

If you're publishing material which contains content you didn't write, at least attribute it.

The writers all do when it's required. When citing or reproducing content from a third party, the usage license is followed to the letter. None of us are writers, we're all from different backgrounds and do this in our spare time so learning what we can and can't do when it comes to publishing online has been an experience on its own.

Now, with respect, this thread isn't about the UK Defence Journal.

He also mentions the term Tailored Air Group has gone out of use, what's the new terminolgy and why do the have to continually change it.

CVW, I'm unsure of the origins but we've been corrected more than once when using TAG. What we were told was exactly this "the term now used for embarked squadrons is Carrier Air Wing (CVW)."

[Ron5]

UK Defence Journal is a horrible source of information.

I've tried to correct some of their more egregious errors by posting comments and their response has been to delete my comments and ban me from posting any more.

Unnamed sources for the story about 20 F-35B's is a large red flag that the story should be treated with great care. Reputable journalists name names and provide direct quotes.

[dmereifield]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/will-qu ... ers-carry/

For the second time in the last week or so UKDJ are claiming that the carriers will be routinely deployed with 20 F35b in peace time, do they know something we (or I) don't? Or is this just speculation?

I spoke to someone involved, at quite a high level, about the plans for what they're now calling the CVW. The expectation that the vessels will sail with around 20 F-35Bs is, in his words, because "It is not that they can't do land based operations, just that there is a need to get the return on investment for the well found forward deployed bases that these aircraft carriers that form the centre of the CSG are" and that "the capacity of the F-35B force in the near years in particular is very limited and it is unwise to do other deployments".

The impression was that they're going all out to get as many on the deck as possible and that the earlier figure of 12 was "RAF ambition to maintain flexibility to conduct land based operations" and not the policy position that is developing.

I have found in many UKDJ articles, they outright copy and paste parts of Wikipedia word for word. That is both lazy and amateurish, and I do not take them serious at all.

Feel free not to but none of our writers use anything inappropriately and adhere to the Creative Commons usage license. We're a group of volunteers and in articles focusing on specifics of a system or more on the technical side, the usage of freely licensed text to elaborate upon a point is very common.

Thanks for the info

[imperialman]

I've tried to correct some of their more egregious errors by posting comments and their response has been to delete my comments and ban me from posting any more.

There are hundreds of comments that go into moderation per day Ron, they go into auto-moderation until they're approved. From a quick glance I can see that you have 29 'auto-approved' comments on the website and the only ones of yours in the queue are still there because you're using different e-mail addresses. New details no longer have the previously approved posts associated with them, so they go into a moderation queue instead of appearing instantly.

Searching through the comments also brings up "Ron5 is aggressive and unnecessarily unpleasant" type remarks from most of the people you were replying to but that being said, I don't look after the comments so I can't say why anything would have been deleted. As stressed above, this is not the place for this, I'll e-mail you.

Unnamed sources for the story about 20 F-35B's is a large red flag that the story should be treated with great care. Reputable journalists name names and provide direct quotes.

Journalists also don't name sources at high levels who have specifically asked that they not be named, for obvious reasons.