Inside Britain's biggest-ever aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth

[mike2000 is back]

Telegraph Business
Inside Britain's biggest-ever aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth

CGI shows the huge scale of Britain's newest aircraft carriers.

Alan Tovey, industry editor
28 MAY 2016 • 5:00PM updated 04 june 2016

The scale of the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carriers has been highlighted by a series of videos showing computer generated versions of the ships entering Portsmouth.

The 70,600 tonnes (69,500 long tons; 77,800 short tons) Queen Elizabeth class carriers will be the largest ships ever in the navy and at the forefront of Britain’s ability to project military power.

BAE Systems, which is part of Carrier Alliance consortium building HMS Queen Elizabeth and sister ship HMS Prince of Wales in a £6.2bn defence deal, is also close to completing a £100m contract to build the facilities at Portsmouth needed to support the vessels.



F-35B: Fifth-generation fighter-bomber with stealth characteristics that is also capable of short take-offs and vertical landings. It can fly at Mach 1.6 and carry 15,000lb of weapons 900 nautical miles

Forward island bridge: The Queen Elizabeth is unusual in having two "islands" on the flight deck - the forward one from which the ship is commanded and the aft one which controls aircraft movements. Having two islands means airflow over the flight deck is more stable, making flight operations safer. The aft island is also better positioned to command aircraft landings.

Long-range radar: Claimed to be able to automatically detect and track up to 1,000 air targets at a range of around 250 nautical miles
Aircraft lifts: The Queen Elizabeth class has two of these lifts to move aircraft between the hangar and flight deck. Each one can move two F35s from the hangar to the flight deck in 60 seconds.

AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin: Medium-lift helicopter designed to replace ageing Sea King, this three-engine aircraft can carry a crew of three and 26 troops up to 450 nautical miles. It also conducts anti-submarine warfare and is due to take on airborne early warning duties using the new Crowsnest radar

Medium-range radar: Artisan radar able to beat the most complex jammers and said to be able to track a target the size of a snooker ball 12 miles away

Small calibre gun: The carriers are designed to receive the latest generation of the Phalanx close-in weapon system to defend against aircraft and missiles, firing 3,000 20mm shells a minute. Each ship will also have 30mm guns and mini-guns to tackle threats such as small boats

Aircraft hangar: The hangar can accommodate any helicopter in the British military arsenal, including the twin-rotor Chinook

Commanding officer's suite: When not on the bridge, the ship's commader works out of this group of cabins. The Queen Elizabeth's first seagoing captain has been named as Commodore Jerry Kyd, the former Captain of HMS Ark Royal and HMS Illustrious.

Bulbous bow: Protrudes just below the waterline and alters the water's flow around the hull, which reduces drag and improves efficiency, as well as improving buoyancy at the front of the ship.

Forward engine room: The ship is powered by two Rolls-Royce Marine Trent MT30 48,000 horsepower gas turbine generator units, the largest ever supplied to the Royal Navy. They can drive the ship along at more than 25 knots and it carries enough fuel to sail 10,000 nautical miles

Propeller: Each of the ship’s two propellers weighs 33 tonnes - nearly two and half times as much as a double-decker bus

Covering an area the size of 10 football pitches, the depot will be capable of holding 15,000 pallets of medical, mail and naval stores, as well as accommodating the sailors and civilians who will look after the ships.

“These are exciting times for the base and the wider Portsmouth area as we prepare for these huge ships which have secured the future of the base for the rest of the century.

“BAE is working in partnership with the Royal Navy to improve the Queen Elizabeth class ships’ company experience that the carrier’s crew will receive at the waterfront and provide the resources, information, material and facilities they will need in Portsmouth and on operations around the world.”

The creation of a dedicated area for the carriers forms part of the overall update of Portsmouth Naval Base – with four areas to support different types of vessels. The first of these was opened in 2015 as the Centre of Specialisation for Frigates and Destroyers, while work began on minehunter HMS Brocklesby in the new Small Ships Centre of Specialisation in early May.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...shows-scale-of-britains-new-aircraft-carrier/

 

[waz]

Wonderful videos, which makes any true Brit very proud.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Wonderful videos, which makes any true Brit very proud.

True.
Sure it also makes the Queen even more proud as its in her honor the ship was named.

Anyway, when both of our supercarriers enters service about 5-6 years or so from now, it would put the UK second only to the US in carrier aircraft capability.

Eventhough I must say the 24(out of 138 ordered) F-35 aircrafts we are to induct by 2023 is too small. Think we need at least 35-40 for these two carriers by that time frame the remaining 98 can come by the 2025 time frame I dont mind. Dont see why its taking so long for Lockheed Martin, BAE, Northrop Grumman and Rolls Royce as the only tier 1 companies involved so long to deliver these aircrafts earlier given their vast knowledge/experience/skills/capabilities.

 

[Penguin]

The Invincible class carrier is simply dwarfed.

 

[airmarshal]

Is it just two of this class or Britain intends to build more?

 

[Providence]

Guys I have been to Rosyth Dockyard where this beauty is undergoing construction !

 

[SvenSvensonov]

when both of our supercarriers enters service about 5-6 years or so from now, it would put the UK second only to the US in carrier aircraft capability.

And those two combined will have the same operational capabilities as one of these beasts:

Look at all that sweet *ss!!

We have ten.

Soon to be replaced by 11 of these:

And our Gator navy to go along with them:

It's a really distant second.

...

This post was put into perspective by 'Merica, f*ck yeah!!

 

[mike2000 is back]

And those two combined will have the same operational capabilities as one of these beasts:

Look at all that sweet *ss!!

We have ten.

Soon to be replaced by 11 of these:

And our Gator navy to go along with them:

It's a really distant second.

...

This post was put into perspective by 'Merica, f*ck yeah!!

Ahahahahah......Well, yes the U.S navy's firepower simply dwarfs the world's next top 5 military powers combined. Lol Everybody acknowledges that. However, bare in mind that the Royal navy was once as powerful if not far more dominant for over 2 centuries at its peak as the U.S is today.
So everything has its time. Enjoy while it lasts.

 

[mike2000 is back]

And those two combined will have the same operational capabilities as one of these beasts:

Look at all that sweet *ss!!

We have ten.

Soon to be replaced by 11 of these:

And our Gator navy to go along with them:

It's a really distant second.

...

This post was put into perspective by 'Merica, f*ck yeah!!

Which engines does U.S hyper carriers use? Is it Westinghouse nuclear reactors?

because at over 100,000tons, the size of the nimitz is just mind blowing, plus despite their size they can cruise at over 30+knots meanwhile the QE carriers despite being smaller and running on Rolls Royce trent engines can only manage over 25knots.

I want to know how that's possible, considering the fact that our RR trent MT30 marine engines are the most powerful in service marine engines in the world .

Other world powers will need decades to even have the capabilities/technology/resources to build one.

Even though European powers like France and Britain certainly can(only funding will be the main issue).

 

[Taygibay]

Two small corrections :

The QE class was named for Elizabeth I.

There will not be 11 carriers in the Ford-class.
At present the number aimed for is 10 and even
that is not yet definitive. Chances are good that
a new design may compete for that total number.

Nice vids in any case and great day to all, Tay.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Which engines does U.S hyper carriers use? Is it Westinghouse nuclear reactors?

Nimitz uses two A4W Westinghouse nuclear reactors (A = Naval, 4 = 4th generation, W = Westinghouse) each putting out 100 Mw of power.

because at over 100,000tons, the size of the Nimitz is just mind blowing, plus despite their size they can cruise at over 30+knots.

And can sprint at 50+ knots. En-route to the Red Sea to partake in the Gulf War, CVN-71 hit 55 knots:

It could go faster, but the shaft can't handle the power output.

Ford has two A1B reactors (A = Naval, 1 = 1st generation, B = Bechtel Maritime) that put out 300 Mw each.

I want to know how that's possible, considering the fact that our RR trent MT30 marine engines are the most powerful in service marine engines in the world .

The MT30 has a max power output of 40 Mw. Less then half of the A4W - a Nimitz has two. Compared to the A1B of Ford, which also has two, putting out 300 Mw each... it's not worth comparing.

 

[Blue Marlin]

And those two combined will have the same operational capabilities as one of these beasts:

Look at all that sweet *ss!!

We have ten.

Soon to be replaced by 11 of these:

And our Gator navy to go along with them:

It's a really distant second.

...

This post was put into perspective by 'Merica, f*ck yeah!!

i thought you were getting 10 gerald r ford aircraft carriers,for a like for like replacement

 

[mike2000 is back]

Nimitz uses two A4W Westinghouse nuclear reactors (A = Naval, 4 = 4th generation, W = Westinghouse) each putting out 100 Mw of power.



And can sprint at 50+ knots. En-route to the Red Sea to partake in the Gulf War, CVN-71 hit 55 knots:

It could go faster, but the shaft can't handle the power output.

Ford has two A1B reactors (A = Naval, 1 = 1st generation, B = Bechtel Maritime) that put out 300 Mw each.



The MT30 has a max power output of 40 Mw. Less then half of the A4W - a Nimitz has two. Compared to the A1B of Ford, which also has two, putting out 300 Mw each... it's not worth comparing.

Huh.....that's because its nuclear powered compared to ours which runs on MT30 gas turbines. So its normal it should be more powerful I guess, as they don't fall under the same category.

Think maybe we should have gone nuclear(eventhough it has its own minor disadvantages).@bluemarlin, @waz, @Steve781 ,

 

[waz]

Huh.....that's because its nuclear powered compared to ours which runs on MT30 gas turbines. So its normal it should be more powerful I guess, as they don't fall under the same category.

Think maybe we should have gone nuclear(eventhough it has its own minor disadvantages).@bluemarlin, @waz, @Steve781 ,

I think they went nuclear due to the sheer size differences. With the timeline, a nuclear propulsion system would have taken longer.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Is it just two of this class or Britain intends to build more?

Just these two anymore will cost us too much in maintenance, servicing etc. and our public will start crying about how its a waste of money as 'we face no real threat', or the usuual cries of : we could have spent that money on welfare or helping refugees in Syria. Etc.

I agree that we should have built at least one more, since having three carriers is the minimum amount required to have at least one in active service/action at all times.
Think we should have at least built a third smaller carrier in the class of our former invincible carriers. However, our leaders seem to have decided otherwise.