/r/QueenElizabethClass
Rules:
Related Subreddits:
/r/QueenElizabethClass
Anyone have any tips on best viewing places/parking for videoing and photography of this ship when it returns and departs Portmouth. Also HMS QE has returned to portsmouth due to bad weather and resupply, anyone know when she is due to depart?
I hope this doesn't offend anyone. I am half-british myself, and I really want the RN to reclaim its former glory, but these issues keep gnawing at me.
I am aware of the financial constraints behind the decision to scrap the CATOBAR setup. My question is strictly about loss of capability vs a CATOBAR carrier.
How much does the STOVL version of the F35 lose in terms of payload capacity, range and loitering time compared to its contemporaries on the Gerald Ford class? Or the Rafales on the CDG?
How is sortie rate affected? Can a QE-class recover and launch at the same time? This is one of the principal advantages of an angled CATOBAR setup.
Adding to this, won't the increased fuel consumption associated with STOVL operations make for higher long term operational costs? Wouldn't catapults help reduce operational costs and cost per air hours?
I've heard people refer to the QE class as "glorified helicopter carriers", as they are unable to operate fixed wing aircraft. The entire air wing consists of helicopters aside from the F35. This seems particularly limiting when it comes to AEW. Helicopters seem woefully inadequate as AEW platforms, as the much lower altitude, speed, range and payload capacity mean that the radar systems themselves will be much less capable in addition to being mounted on a very limited platform. This also applies to electronic warfare, which is going to be carried out from a Merlin.
It just doesn't seem to have anything near the capabilites of a CATOBAR carrier. The tiny air wing of 40 aircraft seems very strange as well, given the size of the ship. Is is becuase the sortie rate is too low, which would make a larger air wing pointless? The CDG weighs a full twenty thousand tonnes less and carries about the same amount of aircraft, most of them fixed wing.
Surely if cost is such a concern, one wouldn't build a pair of carriers to begin with? Because they are still expensive. British taxpayers seem to have gotten the worst of both worlds, having paid billions for two carriers seriously lacking in capability compared to their CATOBAR contemporaries.
I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable than me can shed some light on these issues. Perhaps I have it wrong.
There are a some other areas I'm concerned about but I'll leave them out for now.