Forum menu
I gather she is just leaving dock as I type this. Anyone around the area able to confirm? We are planning to head out to South Queensferry later to hopefully catch her going under the bridges. Though I think low tide isn't till about ten this evening.
Yep just left Rosyth according to MarineTraffic.
Don't know where she'll be anchoring before going under the bridges.
Might just be held by the tugs instead of anchoring
Isn't it going through at low tide, which is around 10:30 tonight?
I hope they have the calculations right, I see the margins are tiny and it would b very embarrassing to get it wrong!
2330 according to FRB's twitter
[url= https://twitter.com/forthroadbridge ]tweet[/url]
hope they have done their sums right - anyone remember the oil rig/Erskine bridge incident?
It's BAE.
Of course they ha...............
What is it going to be used for, White elephant surely? the empire is long gone.
It'll be used for sailing around the world keeping people employed obvs
hope they have done their sums right - anyone remember the oil rig/Erskine bridge incident?
We were talking about that this morning in work I think it was the Dunbar and it was a total rig (one of the guys here was an operator on it). Came from UIE in Clydebank
Rather expensive vanity project... oh yeah projecting Bitish power and influence, what a farce.
What is it going to be used for, White elephant surely? the empire is long gone.
Well, Putin has one.
Rather expensive vanity project... oh yeah projecting Bitish power and influence, what a farce.
Perhaps you'd like to have a word with other countries with larger navies than we have and make that point, see just exactly how far you get... 🙄
Do we have any planes to put on it?
It's an aircraft carrier, not a plane carrier - noob 🙄
Plain?
So what if Putin has one? it's a floating wreck and could be taken out with a single missile, the states has dozens, the Nimitz is a great bit of kit i'm sure, the fan boys will be creaming thier pants, having this capability only leads to more conflict.
This isn't Brittania rules the waves anymore, big ships are obsolete anyway.
Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
USA - 19
France - 4
Japan - 4
India - 3
Spain - 2
Italy - 2
Australia - 2
Egypt - 2
Thailand - 1
South Korea - 1
China - 1
Russia - 1
Rather expensive vanity project... oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.
🙄
http://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-aircraft-carriers.asp
She's a big new girl...
[img] 
[/img]
She's still a baby in comparison to the US ones.
Ones we could've bought for a lot, lot, lot less money too.....
the picture avove shows it has a huuuuuuge red penis, that should scare the russians
The USA and France are still the only countries with proper carriers with the aircraft to project their power from distance.
So what is it you are trying to say, our nearest neighbours are european and friendly, that list of Navies with carriers is pointless, are you saying they are hostile.
The fact that the establishment creats a hypothesis for the need of these warships doesn't mean they are needed.
It's pretty obvious the political descision to build these two carriers was based on job creation, it doesn't change the fact that they are White elephants.
We saw the damage a few exocet missiles could do to the British navy during the Falklands war.
She's still a baby in comparison to the US ones.
Ones we could've bought for a lot, lot, lot less money too.....
Wiki says the latest US show pony the USS Gerald R. Ford which gets commissioned next month is 100,000 tonnes and cost $12.7bn + $4.7bn R&D whilst the Queen Elizabeth is 70,000 and cost £3.1BN (£6.2bn for the pair).
It's a bit smaller (US craft 50m longer but pretty much identical beam) but a lot, lot cheaper. I'd be amazed if the yanks would have sold us a cast off for less than we spent once you took a refit into account. We'd also have struggled to park/service it in a UK port.
Whilst I'm first in the queue to bin trident I can still see the point in an aircraft carrier even for a tinpot nation such as the UK.
😆project - Member
the picture avove shows it has a huuuuuuge red penis, that should scare the russians
CountZero - Member
Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
USA - 19
France - 4
Japan - 4
India - 3
Spain - 2
Italy - 2
Australia - 2
Egypt - 2
Thailand - 1
South Korea - 1
China - 1
Russia - 1
Rather expensive vanity project... oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.
When's the war starting against, any of them? 😆
When's the war starting against, any of them?
30th March 2019
Convert - it was open knowledge in the port where they are going to live - BAE were laughing all the way to the bank.
The MoD refused to go with the financial cleverness and demanded their own design instead of an existing barebones one that would then be fitted to our spec here - by BAE strangely enough....
Oh - those figures for the QE class are somewhat short of the true amount by the time she gets handed over.
😆ninfan - Member
When's the war starting against, any of them?
30th March 2019
Oh - those figures for the QE class are somewhat short of the true amount by the time she gets handed over.
Really? got a source for that? I thought the £6.2bn was the new inflated cost of a project that started at £3bn. Not saying it could not have been cheaper had different decisions been made, just pointing out the US variant was not cheap by comparison.
The Navy wonk on the BBC even said that the big advantage of an aircraft carrier is it's big and everyone can see it unlike a submarine.
It's the perfect bauble for an all-fur-coat-and-no-knickers country.
No aircraft carrier then you get hammered.
There is nothing you can do about that ... 😛
What are you going to do? Argue? 😆
How does an aircraft carrier defend my house?
You are aware of torpedoes chewkw?
& the reason one hasn't been sunk is that nobody (the US) haven't picked a fight with anyone who has a credible submarine threat.
It's a bit bloody obvious..
They are great if you want to go & wallop the fuzzy wuzzies, but a bit sh1t if the other side has umpteen Akula class subs....
CountZero - Member
Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
USA - 19
France - 4
Japan - 4
India - 3
Spain - 2
Italy - 2
Australia - 2
Egypt - 2
Thailand - 1
South Korea - 1
China - 1
Russia - 1
Rather expensive vanity project... oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.
I dont know how residents of the other 190 countries can sleep at night.
Maybe we should form some kind of consortium with other nearby countries and share the cost of defending our values? Just a thought.
There's carriers and there's carriers. Catapult and wire (CATOBAR) carriers are only fielded by the US, France and bizarrely Brazil, everyone else uses some sort of Short Take Off arrangement with a ramp and arrestir wires or vertical landing,
Our carriers, are basically big helicopter carriers and can't field mini-AWACS aircraft, so will have to make do with altitude limited Merlin choppers with a bolt on radar. We can't launch Hawkeye type aircraft which severely limits the range that our ships can detect incoming missiles or hostile aircraft.
The F35B is very expensive, can't carry much and isn't a dog fighter. We should have bought off the shelf catapults, traps, Hawkeyes and Rafales/F-18Es.
They're a typical British lash-up, an expensive one at that.
We're going to need something for the coming cod wars.
I'm glad we've got it, we've always been a naval power and have had our asses saved by that fact on a fair few occasions.
It's all very well being high minded lefty liberal intelligentsia, but the rest of the world aint, there are still all manner of threats and although we may walk softly we still need to carry a big stick.
Walloping fuzzy wuzzies* is pretty much the only kind of old school warfare we are ever going to get involved in if we have any sense.
*assuming walloping fuzzy wuzzies includes the 21st century equivalent of the Argentinians nabbing their Malvinas isles back or getting involved in conflicts such as the Bosnian war.
wilburt - Member
How does an aircraft carrier defend my house?
If there was a successful invading force what is the use of your house when you no longer live there? See ... see ... 😆 You could be put to hard labour.
mrlebowski - Member
You are aware of torpedoes chewkw?
Before you launch your torpedoes you need to get closer first ... 😆
If you can get close enough to launch your torpedoes then you deserve the kill, otherwise play with the hunter killer first.
& the reason one hasn't been sunk is that nobody (the US) haven't picked a fight with anyone who has a credible submarine threat.
There you go the reality set in. They simply do not have the technology nor the ability to fight hence they are losers. Simple.
Hence, the more aircraft carriers you have the more you can hammer everyone around.It's a bit bloody obvious..
I am sure you can afford subs too if you have aircraft carrier(s). 😛They are great if you want to go & wallop the fuzzy wuzzies, but a bit sh1t if the other side has umpteen Akula class subs....
Can we not just rebuild a few Sea Harriers? We could lob a couple of Android tablets in the front to update them. They seem to work well...
The F35B is very expensive, can't carry much and isn't a dog fighter.
The UK has the typhoon to do that.
F35 was never designed for that roll.
So what's the F35 supposed to do when the carriers miles from land beyond the Typhoons umbrella of protection. Piss poor aircraft, woefully under armed, short on range, single engined, still not working properly yet(latest grounding is for the oxygen system causing hypoxia). Stupid maintenance software that the Israelis insisted was removed from their versions. Oh and we have to depend on Turkey for the heavy maintenance.
It, and the carriers will be toast if they come up against anybody with half an idea.
We would've been better off with F-18XT's with conformal tanks and maybe even F-14 SuperTomcats for proper CAP capability. IMO stealth will be pretty much knocked for 6 with the next gen of radar. AWACS can already see F-22's when vectoring fighters in to stop them during exercises, even when the defending F-18's and 16's cannot see them with their radar.
Well I might be unpopular... But I worked on the programme some years back, and I'm proud I've got a link to it.
In fact, you can see one of equipment in almost every photo, so I'm looking forward to seeing some better footage tomorrow onwards
I want to see F35 in proper dog fight action ... 😛
I want to see them dog fight with proper MIGs.