What's new

Britain's biggest warship uncovered

jha

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
10,962
Reaction score
-8
Country
India
Location
India
Britain's biggest warship uncovered​


aircraft-carrier_1681260c.jpg




It almost needs a second look to understand the scale. This remarkable picture is one of the first from inside the shipyard that is building Britain's biggest ever naval ship – the aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth. And, yes, that tiny figure at the bottom is one of the workers.

The carrier's stern section is nearing the roof of BAE Systems' Glasgow shipyard just a year after work started – part of the wall will have to be removed before it can be taken by barge to the Rosyth dockyard in Fife. The sounds of cutting, welding and grinding steel can be heard around the clock.

At a cost of £5.2bn, displacing 65,000 tonnes each, taller than Niagara Falls at 56m from keel to masthead, and built from three times as much steel as Wembley Stadium, the two new aircraft carriers are a pair of floating superlatives.

But while workers get on with the job of building the huge vessel at different sites in Glasgow, Portsmouth, Devon, Newcastle and Merseyside, the carrier programme faces an uncertain future as the Ministry of Defence (MoD) undertakes a strategic review expected to result in cuts of at least 15pc in the £37bn defence budget over the next four years.

BAE's own chief executive, Ian King, said last week both carriers may not go into active service with the Navy, although he believes that both will be completed.

BAE is leading the consortium building the two Queen Elizabeth class ships, along with Thales and Babcock, which will oversee assembly at Rosyth once the parts are floated in by barge from the various UK yards.

Geoff Searle, the programme director of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, which also includes the MoD, is keen to stress the carrier's utility as a "defence asset, not just a Royal Navy ship".

"Half of the air support missions in Afghanistan have been flown from US carriers in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf," he said. "They provide enormous flexibility and scope."

Providing four acres of sovereign UK territory wherever it sails, the carrier will have a naval crew of 679, roughly the same as on the carriers in service now, although the ship is three times larger than HMS Illustrious and Ark Royal. With crews to operate the 36 F35 Joint Strike Fighters on board too, there will be close to 1,600 personnel.

Helicopters used by all three services can operate from the ship, and the carrier could also be used to carry up to 500 troops, Mr Searle said. The ships, the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales, are due to go into service in 2016 and 2018 – funding permitting.

On a visit to the shipyard in Govan on the south bank of the Clyde in Glasgow, where the largest sections of the carriers are being built, Mr Searle was also at pains to point out the economic benefits associated with the programme.

Some £1.2bn of sub-contracts for work on the ship have been awarded to companies throughout the UK, and more than 14,000 jobs will be supported by the programme at the peak of production. The 80,000 tonnes of steel needed has already been ordered, mainly from Corus in the UK. A £100m transport contract has been agreed for moving the parts of the ship from around the UK to Rosyth, where a glide crane which can lift 1,000 tonnes has recently been installed.

BAE will take on double the number of graduates this year to work on the programme, 42, up from 21 last year, and will add around another 28 apprentices to its pool of 207.

Around 3,500 people are employed at the two BAE yards on the Clyde, and several hundred are still working on the final Daring class Type 45 destroyers. The last of the six, the Duncan, is on the berth at Govan and is due to be launched in October. The carriers will provide work for all those people when the destroyers are finished, BAE said.


carrier1_20090227101747.jpg
 
BAE's own chief executive, Ian King, said last week both carriers may not go into active service with the Navy, although he believes that both will be completed.

Koi bat nahi. Hum hai na.:cheers: Bhai log IAC II ka kam rok do.:toast_sign:
 
Nice post

but clearly there can be no comparison between these and the US carriers, those are truly giants.
 
This was the ship that was being speculated that India would buy out right? Good ship, but I guess it's better we stick to plans of building our own. It'll be painful & messy but we would have cracked all the learnings.
 
Is britain trying to colonize the seas now?

I think, due to all these latest budget cuts, for the British, it is pretty hard to just maintain the numbers of principle surface combatants, let alone expanding the fleet to go back to the former "glory".
 
Nice post

but clearly there can be no comparison between these and the US carriers, those are truly giants.

Frankly there is no need for those giants now a days..they are useless even for US..with other countries like china getting closer in technological aspects, It does not make sense to go on producing such costly war ships. But with their budget they can manage this easily.
 
Frankly there is no need for those giants now a days..they are useless even for US..with other countries like china getting closer in technological aspects, It does not make sense to go on producing such costly war ships. But with their budget they can manage this easily.

I beg to differ. Nothing could be farther from the truth here.
US carriers have been an indispensable tool for projection of power and the most versatile tool in the US arsenal.

Each Nimitz class carrier can carry up to 90 or so state of the art war planes, with an enormous strike range.
Remember that if the next generation of UCAVs was available, one of those Nimitz class carriers could deploy about 200 of them.

200 x 10 carriers that is an aerial strike force of 2000 drones available to strike at any moment around the world.

I think the carriers are one of the smartest things the US has ever done ..
 
I beg to differ. Nothing could be farther from the truth here.
US carriers have been an indispensable tool for projection of power and the most versatile tool in the US arsenal.

Each Nimitz class carrier can carry up to 90 or so state of the art war planes, with an enormous strike range.
Remember that if the next generation of UCAVs was available, one of those Nimitz class carriers could deploy about 200 of them.

200 x 10 carriers that is an aerial strike force of 2000 drones available to strike at any moment around the world.

I think the carriers are one of the smartest things the US has ever done ..

Consider a situation in which a country as capable as china is going to face those 200 drones . In that situation if it fires a salvo of 30 Supersonic cruise missiles at a time . Do you think what will happen.
200 Planes and a carrier with at least thousand persons at a time...

Having said that, this is the one of the least probable situation.
 
Well the drones are not yes available, but the Nimitz class carriers will be with us for a long time still, making sure the will be equipped with drones sometime in the future.

Second! I think you are a bit uninformed on the issue.

A carrier is never alone. It has a battle group. A battle group is made up by escorting destroyers, A/A cruisers (AEGIS) and at least two nuclear submarines protecting it making a very tight radius of firepower around it.

If a carrier was ever to take action against a country such as Chine say,

the operation would be clearly thought out and planed by far more capable people than we are.

but I doubt China will even manage to engage most of the planes involved in the strike with the F18s as it is now, much less if the drones come on line.

I don't think there is an Air-Force right now available (including the US) that can deal with a 200 drone (stealthy too by nature and size) attack. I don't think there are many air forces around that could effectively deal with a strike force of F18s from any carrier right now, perhaps with the exception of some European Air-forces and Israel.

Russia would have a massive problem dealing with a carrier strike too, but at least Russia can in earnest threaten (and quite possibly succeed too) in sinking a US carrier with conventional weapons no other country can claim that.

I don't think India and China or even Japan could deal with a carrier battle group. Well maybe Japan would have a better chance but still.
 
^^I dont think you got my point. I was talking of a situation when there is a question of survival of a country with the capabilities similar to china or, russia. Dont you think they will target each and every ship out there in the battle group.
I was just talking about a hypothetical situation.
BTW i do know little bit about battle group..My family members were closely involved with Viraat..
 
Frankly , The Royal Navy needs these carriers , both of them infact
Coz there present carriers cannot actually be classsified as carriers , the Invincible class is more like a glorified Amphibius Warfare ship than a carrier

Though the present defence cuts might force them to sell one of them , since they will have to build them coz lots of jobs are depended on them .

Secondly ,I dont see india acquiring one of them , Russia maybe , coz they are already negotiating with the french for 4 Minstral class LPD , and the Russian Navy chief recently said about the need to acquire 4 carriers in the future .

India Wont acquire one of them coz
Firstly it will cost 4 Billion USD , which is more than the the combine cost of Vikramaditya and Vikrant , Secondly these carriers are designed to operate F35 Which believe it or not will cost 100 Million USD each
Equiping the carrier with 36 F35 + 10 Helicopters + 4 HAWKEYE 2D
Will cost in excess of 4.5 Billion USD
Combined cost of airgroup of vikrant and vikramaditya
Comprising of 45Mig29k , 2O Helicopters, 3 AWACS , Will not be more than 3 billion USD
Finally the running cost of this carrier is likely to be quite high since it is a conventional diesal powered carrier
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom