Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,560 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/tech/387227/HMS-Queen-Elizabeth-Britain-s-biggest-ship-launches-today

HMS Humungous! Brit ship is taller than Niagara Falls and has room for FOUR jumbo jets

NEW mega warship unveiled today and at 65,000 tonnes is the biggest Britain has ever built
By Dave Snelling/Published 4th July 2014


http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/23/photos/541000/620x/queen_elizabeth-387227.jpg

The Queen has officially named Britain's new giant aircraft carrier today.

And having been built in Scotland the usual smashing of Champagne, was replaced with a vintage bottle of Islay single malt whisky.

She's been christened HMS Queen Elizabeth and at over 900ft long, this ship is the biggest ever made in Britain.

With a deck wider than the M25, when fully operational she will carry 36 F-35 lightning fighter jets.

Up to 1,000 troops can live and work on the ship and the whirling engines will power them through the ocean for 500 miles each day.

In fact she'll carry enough fuel to drive a family car to the moon and back 12 times.

Adressing the crowd the Queen said "Innovative and first class" warship, the largest ever to be built in the UK, ushered in an "exciting new era".

"In sponsoring this new aircraft carrier, I believe the Queen Elizabeth will be a source of inspiration and pride for us all."

"May God bless her and all who sail in her."

The construction of HMS Queen Elizabeth has created around 8,000 jobs at more than 100 companies across the UK.

Blocks of the ship were manufactured at six yards in Devon, Fife's Rosyth, Portsmouth and on the Clyde and Tyne before being assembled in Rosyth's dockyards.

Here's everything you need to know about HMS Queen Elizabeth


http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/23/photos/543000/122543.jpg

And Prime Minister, David Cameron, was there to see the event, along with First Minister Alex Salmond and former prime minister Gordon Brown.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said: “HMS Queen Elizabeth is the largest ship that the Royal Navy has ever had and is a true demonstration of the UK at its best, with over 10,000 people across the country working together to deliver her.

“This occasion marks a major milestone in regenerating the UK’s aircraft carrier capability, enhancing our ability to project power anywhere in the world.”

The Red Arrows also performed an ear shattering fly-by in celebration of the event.

Following today’s naming ceremony the dock where HMS Queen Elizabeth is currently sitiing will be flooded to enable her to float for the first time.

Then work will begin to prepare the ship for sea trials in 2017 and flight trials with Lightning II aircraft in 2018.

Work is already underway on the HMS Queen Elizabeth’s sister ship HMS Prince of Wales which will start to be assembled in Rosyth dockyard later this year.


http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/23/photos/542000/122542.jpg

LENGTH: 280m - 90m longer than the existing aircraft carrier.

WIDTH: 70m - twice the width of the existing aircraft carrier.

RANGE: 8,000 to 10,000 nautical miles.

SIZE: 56m from keel to masthead, which is four metres taller than Niagara Falls!

POWER: Two Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines and four diesel generator sets give total installed power of 110MW - that's enough to provide all of Portsea Island with power.

PROPELLERS: Each ship has two propellers which together will output some 80MW of power - enough to run 1,000 family cars or 50 high speed trains. These will weigh 33 tonnes each, nearly two and half times as heavy as a double decker bus and one and half times as high.

PAINT WORK: Each ship requires 1.5 million m2 of paintwork, which is 370 acres or slightly more than acreage of Hyde Park.

FIVE TOP FACTS

1. Each of the two huge aircraft lifts can move two Joint Strike Fighters from the hangar to the flight deck in 60 seconds. They're so powerful that together they could lift the entire ship's crew.

2. Each of the QE Class aircraft carriers can take up to 40 aircraft, both rotary and fixed wing.

3. The anchors will be 3.1m high, each weighing 13 tonnes - almost as much as a double decker bus.

4. Each ship is also designed to receive 30mm guns and mini-guns located to counter asymmetric threats.

5. The ship's on-board water treatment plant will produce more than 500 tonnes of fresh water daily.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
99,430 Posts
Soon to be two - 'Prince of Wales' is next.

All that's needed now are airplanes......:thumbsup:

tac
Fort Worth will take care of that. The plant turned out B-24s, B-32s, B-36s, B-58s, YB-60s, F-102s and (IIRC) F-106s. And Lawn Darts. Will be OK with F-35s, as OK as that (I fear) POS can possibly be.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,340 Posts
Proof of the cube root law. About 2/3 the tonnage of a Nimitz class, and less than half the aircraft complement. And the STOVL F-35Bs further cut the effectiveness of the air wing vs the catapult/arrested landing F-35C the USN will get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
988 Posts
Well, there's this: We fought the Vietnam war with primarily 27000 ton CVAs, the Essex class.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,340 Posts
Well, there's this: We fought the Vietnam war with primarily 27000 ton CVAs, the Essex class.
The strike air wing of the angled deck converted Essex CVS carriers consisted of F-8s and A-4s, later replaced by A-7As. F-4s and A-6s were too heavy to operate from them, so although they operated more aircraft than the Queen Elizabeth there's no real direct comparison. Later the CVS carriers were all relegated to ASW use and replaced off Vietnam by bigger carriers.

The supposed reason for dropping catapults and arresting gear from the Queen Elizabeth was cost, but to me it seems like it'd cost more to get the same capability with the STOVL F-35B - in essence putting the catapult and arresting gear on the airplane!
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
5,580 Posts
Were they not scaling down their surface ships and not building new ones?
Dunno, me, I was in the Army. What the fishheads get/got up to concerns me less than the price of dried cowflop in Venezuela.

Ask me one one trains.

BTW, you DO realise that this pair of grey-painted book-ends is costing the UK tax-payer just a little over $11 Billion? And that does not include any of the natty accessories - y'know, airplanes?

tac
 

·
Diamond Bullet Member and the Revered Sir Jim
Joined
·
46,373 Posts
Dunno, me, I was in the Army. What the fishheads get/got up to concerns me less than the price of dried cowflop in Venezuela.

Ask me one one trains.

BTW, you DO realise that this pair of grey-painted book-ends is costing the UK tax-payer just a little over $11 Billion? And that does not include any of the natty accessories - y'know, airplanes?

tac
No problem. The English can sell the Stone of Scone after the Scots go independant and get the money.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
99,430 Posts
Apparently the F-35s are all grounded (as of 3 July, officially, services had already done it unofficially) after a Chair Farce F-35A had the motor catch fire during take-off. Folks are looking at the P&W F-135 motor to find out why before they fly more. Comments i saw are muttering that GE ought to complain about the F-136 they proposed being cancelled, and that the whole F-35 ought to be cancelled in favor of up-dated F-15Es, more late version F-16s, Advanced F/A-18E/F/G and "Let's get the Harriers back in production with whatever advances anybody can think of".
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
5,580 Posts
Apparently the F-35s are all grounded (as of 3 July, officially, services had already done it unofficially) after a Chair Farce F-35A had the motor catch fire during take-off. Folks are looking at the P&W F-135 motor to find out why before they fly more. Comments i saw are muttering that GE ought to complain about the F-136 they proposed being cancelled, and that the whole F-35 ought to be cancelled in favor of up-dated F-15Es, more late version F-16s, Advanced F/A-18E/F/G and "Let's get the Harriers back in production with whatever advances anybody can think of".
At least we know that the Harrier/AV8-whatever actually works, and well. Pretty cheap too - a company down the road from us makes 'em in hard-wearing waterproof plastic for around $40K.


A flight-deck loaded with them will cost less than one-tenth of an F-35A......................................

tac



tac
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
If it was not for the fact that the previous Labour government wrote the contracts in such a way that it would be more expensive to cancel these Carriers than complete, their construction would have been stopped a long time ago. Our Navy is so small now it makes no sense to build these Carriers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,239 Posts
Having seen the pics I'm wondering why they needed two island structures?. And the midway class carriers weighed close to 100,000 tons each after a ship yard overhaul prior to going to Vietnam '66'67 and held more aircraft. Wouldn't like to foot the bill if they ever decide to revamp the flight deck and install catapults. That is one operation I believe that is done when the ship is being built. Frank
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
5,580 Posts
Sir - there is no intention to EVER convert these two vessels to catapult. They were designed from scratch for VSTOL fighter aircraft of one kind or another. We were up in Edinburgh last week, and whilst having a fine supper in South Queensferry [Three Bridges restaurant - recommended] we could clearly see the ship at her berth over in Rosyth near the custom-built gantry crane. It's very impressive, but twenty years too late and ten times too expensive. As REME245 notes, the present Royal Navy is too small to need such vessels, and putting together even one carrier group of sufficient efficacy may well stretch it beyond the twang limit.

tac
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,340 Posts
Harriers have pretty crappy payload/radius. The Misguided Children like them because they don't have to tote around catapults and arresting gear for unprepared/short field operation, and because they've never had to come up against any serious air opposition.

Since the STOVL F-35B design pretty much drove the whole program, delaying it and running up costs, it was obviously a bad idea. But its all sunk costs and time, so the question now, which they seem to be avoiding, is how bad is the loss rate going to be?

And is anyone ever going to wake up and recognize what the total cost is, including the loss in combat capability?
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
99,430 Posts
Having seen the pics I'm wondering why they needed two island structures?. And the midway class carriers weighed close to 100,000 tons each after a ship yard overhaul prior to going to Vietnam '66'67 and held more aircraft. Wouldn't like to foot the bill if they ever decide to revamp the flight deck and install catapults. That is one operation I believe that is done when the ship is being built. Frank
The Midways were designed to a standard displacement of 45,000 tons per DANFS and apparently came in at just short of 60,00 tons full load. I show (Wiki site, haven't checked the references to figure out where it came from there) a figure of 64K full load displacement - which is certainly incorrect. That would probably be correct or close to correct for standard displacement after the angled-deck conversion, and I would expect full load to be +15K. I don't THINK the Midways ever were close to 100K tons, even at full load - but that is essentially from reading as an amateur student of military history and technology, not from naval service.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,239 Posts
Clyde, I was on a midway class carrier from early 65 to late 67. USS Franklin D Roosevelt CVA 42. Prior to making our westpac cruise 66-67 they added a/c units for all the berthing compartments, offices and even some of the special weapons compartments. That and many more improvements which we were told about. They estimated that close to 40k in extra weight had been added. Since we had to pass our operational readiness inspection prior to being approved for duty (ORI) We did a bunch of full speed runs to make sure we could handle the extra weight. The high speed turbines were rated at 55,000 horse power and there were 4 of them ones for each screw. We hit speeds of 32.5 knts during one full power run, Deckplates were ratteling and you couldn't hear a spoken word. You literally had to yell to the guy standing next to you. The noise in the engineroom was such that some of us had ringing noises in our ears for days. Anyway you had to be there and experience it for yourself. Frank
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top