back to article HMS Queen Liz will arrive in Portsmouth soon, says MoD

New aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth could arrive at her home port, Portsmouth, within the next fortnight, according to the Ministry of Defence. The 65,000-tonne warship, the first true aircraft carrier in Royal Navy service for almost a decade, is currently undergoing sea trials off the coast of Scotland. While the ship …

Page:

  1. Tronald Dump
    Joke

    egads, Liz has put some weight on

    1. WolfFan Silver badge

      Keep your hands to yourself, laddie, or she'll set the corgis on you.

      1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        "Keep your hands to yourself, laddie, or she'll set the corgis on you."

        A friend of a friend was at a Royal Garden Party (No, I do not move in those circles) and espied some of the corgis. As she approached them the Queen Mother announced "I'd be careful if I were you, they can be a bit boisterous."

        To which a well known voice from behind replied "What you mean, mummy, is that they bite!"

        So...corgis are the equivalents of a carrier's destroyer escorts.

    2. Stuart 22
      Coat

      Shouldn't is be "Betty's Boat" - or when in Balmoral/Faslane "Betty's McBoat ..."

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This looks useful

    http://www.tides4fishing.com/uk/england/portsmouth

    1. Gnomalarta

      Re: This looks useful

      Or this: http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/portsmouth/port-information/tide-tables, shows % of spring tide - so most likely times a white elephant could float into Pompey.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This looks useful

        On the bright side, the government has just tripled the value of Portsmouth.

  3. James O'Shea Silver badge

    wrongo

    There ain't no such thing as a 'USS George W. Bush', and there never will be. There _is_ a USS George H. W. Bush, named for the youngest pilot in the history of the USN. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_George_H.W._Bush

    If this gross error is not corrected most immediately, we shall dispatch the Mango Mussolini to Britain and make you keep him.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: wrongo

      I'll raise you 5 pedant points. As the chap you mentioned was a commissioned officer, he was not a 'pilot' he was a naval aviator.

    2. SkippyBing Silver badge

      Re: wrongo

      'There ain't no such thing as a 'USS George W. Bush', and there never will be.'

      I'm with you on the first part, the second sounds a bit presumptuous, I mean there's a Gerald Ford and a Ronald Reagan floating around...

      1. gormful

        Re: wrongo

        "I'm with you on the first part, the second sounds a bit presumptuous, I mean there's a Gerald Ford and a Ronald Reagan floating around..."

        To be fair, Gerald Ford went through several battles while serving on an aircraft carrier (the USS Monterey, maybe?) during WWII. I can offer no similar excuse for Ronald Reagan.

        1. WolfFan Silver badge

          Re: wrongo

          "I'm with you on the first part, the second sounds a bit presumptuous, I mean there's a Gerald Ford and a Ronald Reagan floating around..."

          To be fair, Gerald Ford went through several battles while serving on an aircraft carrier (the USS Monterey, maybe?) during WWII. I can offer no similar excuse for Ronald Reagan.

          Gerry was in CVL-26, Monterey, until after the damage sustained during Halsey's Hurricane. Ronnie wanted a 600-ship navy and got it. The Navy loved him for that.

        2. IglooDude

          Re: wrongo

          "To be fair, Gerald Ford went through several battles while serving on an aircraft carrier (the USS Monterey, maybe?) during WWII. I can offer no similar excuse for Ronald Reagan."

          Just thinking, it's funny that in a place where the Navy isn't the Senior Service, we've had a high percentage of chief executives out of that service since WW2: JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and George HW Bush, and one more came rather close (McCain). Truman and Eisenhower distinguished themselves (combat and SACEUR respectively) in the Army, and nothing notable since then.

          1. Mark 85 Silver badge

            Re: wrongo

            Just thinking, it's funny that in a place where the Navy isn't the Senior Service,

            Hmm... official order of precedence (there is some question as the Continental Army was decommissioned but this is the way it is currently): The Navy's precedence was set based on being "active".

            United States Army

            United States Marine Corps

            United States Navy

            United States Coast Guard (when part of the Department of the Navy)

            United States Air Force

            United States Coast Guard (when part of Department of the Homeland Security)

            1. DougS Silver badge

              Re: wrongo

              Ford and Reagan served, so while the case for Reagan may be a bit iffy since he wasn't a Navy man, there's at least some loose justification. It becomes still looser with GW Bush Jr., who had daddy pull strings to get him into the Air National Guard during Vietnam.

              It is well known how Clinton had strings pulled and worked the system to dodge the draft during Vietnam. Trump supposedly had "bone spurs", but you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe someone was unfit to serve despite being a multisport athlete during those years, and walking 18 holes for many rounds of golf in the decades after. Those with rich or connected family always seemed to have a far higher incidence of minor ailments that kept them out of the draft pool versus the poor... Obama was born after the draft so he didn't have to dodge it, but never served.

              Seems unlikely we'll ever see a ship named after Bush Jr, and there would be a TON of controversy if there was ever a serious effort to name a ship for someone who never served, like Clinton, Obama or Trump. Maybe they'd name a shipborne UUAV after them or something.

            2. Kernel

              Re: wrongo

              I believe in NZ the order of precedence is:

              airforce

              army

              navy.

      2. WolfFan Silver badge

        Re: wrongo

        'There ain't no such thing as a 'USS George W. Bush', and there never will be.'

        I'm with you on the first part, the second sounds a bit presumptuous, I mean there's a Gerald Ford and a Ronald Reagan floating around...

        Ronnie was Army, but spent time working at an embarkation port in San Fran, so he had contact with the Navy. Besides, he wanted a 600-ship Navy when he was Prez, so all the sins of being a mere Army guy were forgiven. Gerry was Navy. He even served on a carrier, though he didn't fly.

        W was straight Air Farce, and it's been said that Air Farce wings are made of lead. There'll be a USS Franklin Pierce before there's a USS George W., and there'll be a USS Harriet Tubman before there's a Franklin Pierce, and that's just not gonna happen.

        1. collinsl

          Re: wrongo

          How about a USS Donald R Duck?

      3. x 7 Silver badge

        Re: wrongo

        " I mean there's a Gerald Ford and a Ronald Reagan floating around..."

        A bit like Robert Maxwell then....

    3. Roland6 Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: wrongo

      >There ain't no such thing as a 'USS George W. Bush'

      But I'm sure if it facilitates matters with getting funding sign off there will be a "USS Donald Trump"...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: wrongo

        "But I'm sure if it facilitates matters with getting funding sign off there will be a "USS Donald Trump"..."

        The USN probably needs a target ship for practice.

        1. smudge Silver badge

          Re: wrongo

          "But I'm sure if it facilitates matters with getting funding sign off there will be a "USS Donald Trump"..."

          The USN probably needs a target ship for practice.

          That'll be their excuse for painting it orange.

      2. Lotaresco Silver badge

        Re: wrongo

        "there will be a "USS Donald Trump"..."

        Given the US emphasis on eco-friendly fuels for naval propulsion in recent years (as in the Dripping Driven Destroyer) it would make sense for the USS Trump to be powered using LNG so that the vessel can fart its way out to sea.

      3. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: wrongo

        "USS Donald Trump"

        As a loud, visible target with negligable value to attract attention while real work goes on in the background somewhere else?

      4. Chris G Silver badge

        Re: wrongo "USS Donald Trump"

        Which will be a remarkable ship, large, bloated, powered by Tweet engines and having the ability to change direction completely and very suddenly without any significant input to the controls.

        1. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: wrongo "USS Donald Trump"

          And an orange flight deck.

    4. Faux Science Slayer

      Prescott Bush Found Guilty of Trading With the Enemy by Senate

      Big Bush was rushed though flight school, ditched his bomber miles from the target,

      killing his two crewmen and returned to save the family name and become a Yale

      Skull & Bones traitor. "Did Geo H W Bush Coordinate a JFK Hit Team" at VeteransToday

      1. James O'Shea Silver badge

        Re: Prescott Bush Found Guilty of Trading With the Enemy by Senate

        "Big Bush was rushed though flight school, "

        ah... no. He did a nine-month (split into three sections, one of one month, two of four) training course in 10 months. I say again, he did the _nine_ month course in _ten_ months. It is entirely possible that the extra month was just the breaks between sections. I doubt that there was a rush.

        "ditched his bomber miles from the target,"

        after his aircraft was _hit by hostile anti-aircraft fire_ he got as far away as possible from the folks he'd just bombed. Japanese troops weren't well known for their forgiving nature, so I suspect that this was merely prudent.

        "killing his two crewmen"

        One was killed by the anti-aircraft fire, one had his parachute fail.

        "and returned to save the family name and become a Yale

        Skull & Bones traitor."

        O-kay. so who peed in your cornflakes?

  4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Coat

    I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

    My instinct is that a sufficiently large force of subsonic drones, fitted with artillery shells (the dumb kind. No GPS) on their noses should be able to overwhelm the defenses until at least one points straight down at the deck, triggering the shell as a sort of 1 shot zip gun, blowing out the keel of the ship.

    Such a force could cost several 100 £m to deploy, but when you've just trashed an asset costing several £Bn (What was the final cost? I dimly recall £3Bn, but this is BAe we're talking about) you've just put your opponent back to the Victorian era.

    Better hope the fleets AEW is top notch.

    It's a flying jacket with a high visibility lining.

    1. flearider

      Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

      I'm sure your going to get a knock at your door ..lay face down arms spread and no sudden movements ..

      1. hplasm Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

        "I'm sure your going to get a knock at your door ..lay face down arms spread and no sudden movements .."

        Sir, can you put your hands in the yellow circles, please?

        1. SkippyBing Silver badge

          Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

          'QE to a big, expensive, cramped and uncomfortable cruise ship'

          One thing she definitely isn't is cramped, 700 people on a 65,000 tonne ship you can probably go days without seeing anyone else if you want to.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

            "[...] ou can probably go days without seeing anyone else if you want to."

            Especially in the period while she's waiting for the complement of aircraft. Even with folded wings the hangars are probably big enough for all sorts of energetic recreation.

            Reminds me of when the company built a new computer hall. Intended for a large number of mainframes it was enormous with a high ceiling. While waiting for all the mainframes to arrive we made a request to use a vacant area as a basketball court. Refused.

            1. wolfetone Silver badge

              Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

              Well the Royal Navy couldn't sink the Bismark without the help of antique Swordfish biplanes, as the Bismark's guns were so new and powerful they couldn't fire slow enough to hit the biplanes.

              So yes, old technology can really fuck up new machinery if applied correctly.

              1. SkippyBing Silver badge

                Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

                'the Bismark's guns were so new and powerful they couldn't fire slow enough to hit the biplanes.'

                An oddly persistent myth. The actual line is that the predictor gun sights didn't have a setting low enough, but that's completely irrelevant if the target is flying directly at you as they would be during a torpedo run. There are a variety of reasons the Bismarck had issues shooting them down, weather, inexperience, tank like qualities of the aircraft, but the speed of the 'Fish was not one of them.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

              While waiting for all the mainframes to arrive we made a request to use a vacant area as a basketball court

              I have it on good authority that, at a previous employer, night ops staff used to use an empty drive room as a five-a-side football room.

              And, strangely enough, the CCTV in that room used to malfunction regularly.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

                "I have it on good authority that, at a previous employer, night ops staff used to use an empty drive room as a five-a-side football room."

                The tape decks of 2nd generation RCA 501 mainframes were big. The operator console was a large array of illuminated buttons that provided enough light to work with. The public saw that console as their idea of a real computer. Doing long batch runs on the night shift the operators would turn out all the room lights.

                One of the female programmers was something of a femme fatale. It was said that when she was overseeing a run on the night shift then there would be trysts with a handsome shift leader behind the tape decks. No CCTV in those days.

      2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Unhappy

        "I'm sure your going to get a knock at your door ..l"

        And you think that's not happened to be me before?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

      Looks like low tech fishing nets are all that's required to mess up the propulsion, then a sitting duck...

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Thumb Up

        "Looks like low tech fishing nets are all that's required to mess up the propulsion,"

        Good one.

        People are so busy looking out for the Chinese M5 missile they miss the fishing nets.

    3. phuzz Silver badge
      Black Helicopters

      Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

      How does the (sub-sonic) artillery shell get through the flight deck, and every deck in between that and the keel?

      You might make a few holes in the flight deck (which would render it useless for a time), but a killing shot is pretty unlikely.

      Instead, find a way to block the Lockheed Autonomic Logistics Information System, and then none of the F-35s will fly (ALIS is a requirement for the F-35), thus transforming the QE to a big, expensive, cramped and uncomfortable cruise ship. After all, what's the point of an aircraft carrier without aircraft?

      1. Ol' Grumpy

        Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

        " QE to a big, expensive, cramped and uncomfortable cruise ship."

        Isn't that how the Russians described it recently when Michael Fallon was blowing his trumpet about the whole thing?

        1. SkippyBing Silver badge

          Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

          'Isn't that how the Russians described it recently when Michael Fallon was blowing his trumpet about the whole thing?'

          I think they said something along the lines of her not being as well armed as the Kuznetzov, missing the point that arming your carrier with surface to surface missiles implies you don't really trust your aircraft to do the job. And following your carrier around with a tug doesn't display a huge amount of confidence in your carrier.

          1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

            Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

            "And following your carrier around with a tug doesn't display a huge amount of confidence in your carrier."

            As I recall the Kuznetsov is rather overdue for a refit, and with one of those if anything goes wrong you can't just tow it to the nearest Lada - sorry, VAZ - garage. But it happened around the time that the Zumwalt had a highly embarrassing failure in the Panama Canal that resulted in it being towed. Sea water got into the drive shafts. Things happen at sea and it's well to be prepared for them if operating a long way from your base.

            The Wikipedia article on the Kuznetsov is interesting and explains a lot about the background, including its special status. It's worth reading, in my view.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

        "You might make a few holes in the flight deck (which would render it useless for a time), but a killing shot is pretty unlikely."

        Concentrate them into a swarm aimed at a lift. That is the weak spot in a carrier's steel deck. The battles in various sea theatres in WWII were often a war of attrition against aircraft carriers. Many lessons were learned.

        Insufficiently escorted carriers were easy prey. USN wooden decks were too fragile. Lifts were a kamikaze target.

        1. SkippyBing Silver badge

          Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

          'Concentrate them into a swarm aimed at a lift. That is the weak spot in a carrier's steel deck.'

          You'll note that the trend in carriers is now to have deck edge lifts making that tactic somewhat redundant. You'll also note none of the armoured carriers were sunk by Kamikazes. Or even put out of operation for more than 24 hours even if the lifts were hit, I'll grant you a 2000lb bomb on a lift might call for a return to port though...

          1. WolfFan Silver badge

            Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

            HMS Indomitable took hits from 1870 kg bombs on the way to Malta with the Pedestal convoy. She was still able to conduct (limited) flight operations. Her air group claimed 30 kills.

            1. fnj

              Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

              You guys are all going at this the wrong way. Every ship in the water is as vulnerable as an egg shell to torpedoes, and that includes aircraft carriers. Torpedoes are the way to sink ships. They have antiaircraft missiles to deal with airplane attacks, and CIWS to put up at least some semblance of last ditch defense against incoming cruise missiles.

              But they don't have squat to deal with homing torpedoes. If that thing is coming at you and you can't fox the homing guidance, you might as well cross yourself and pray. If it's wire guided, you don't even have the chance to fox it.

              The torpedo can be delivered dirt cheap from even a small sub. Diesel powered works just as good if it can work into position. Nuclear is a slam dunk. There is also no reason I can think of why you couldn't design cruise missiles that carry torpedoes. It would take CIWS out of the picture.

              The biggest battleships with the thickest armor ever built were sunk by ... torpedoes. In comparison, post WW II ships have essentially no armor at all. And those huge crews, vastly important for damage control, are gone.

        2. WolfFan Silver badge

          Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

          Concentrate them into a swarm aimed at a lift. That is the weak spot in a carrier's steel deck. The battles in various sea theatres in WWII were often a war of attrition against aircraft carriers. Many lessons were learned.

          Among the lessons learned: don't put lifts in the middle of the deck. There would be a reason why modern carriers have the lifts on the sides... Go on. Have a look at a carrier, any carrier, in any navy, built since the 1950s. See if you can spot a lift in the middle of the deck.

          And, one more thing: _British_ carriers had steel decks. That was why each and every one of the British Pacific Fleet's carriers continued operations after being hit by kamikazes off Okinawa. _American_ carriers, and _Japanese_ carriers, had wooden decks. This led to unfortunate results at Midway and Okinawa. Starting with the Midway class carriers, American carriers had steel decks and deck-edge lifts. Lessons learned, the hard way.

          1. Adam Trickett

            Re: I've been thinking about cheap ways to kill carriers.

            While it is true that the British carriers were more resistant to kamikaze attacks than American carriers of the same period, they were also a lot heavier and had fewer aeroplanes per tonne so couldn't put up as large aerial combat force.

            Post war analysis did report that they ships were badly damaged by the attacks, so were prematurely scrapped. But in the heat of action the fact they could soldier on was very valuable, even if they were actually a rite-off in the medium term.

            As you say everyone learnt the hard way and post war designs did benefit from wartime experience.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019