How to make the Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers the best in the world.

JmartinG1226

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2
Reaction score
2
Much has been said about the drawbacks of the stovl design for the Queen Elizabeth Class carriers. While some of it may be valid. We are now entering the golden age of vtol, electronics, radar, engine, stealth and weapon technology. With the right funding these ships can be future-proofed for the next 60 years. And what was once seen as a compromise solution of stovl can be finally seen as the most efficient/effective way to go about carrier strike.
 

Attachments

  • E096D623-4F27-44E6-BD89-2D43580DC15E.jpeg
    E096D623-4F27-44E6-BD89-2D43580DC15E.jpeg
    251.1 KB · Views: 16

JmartinG1226

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2
Reaction score
2
the first glaring capability gap between the QE class and the ford class is the over dependance on helicopters. Aircraft such as Merlin and wildcat have too short a range, too low a service ceiling, too slow, and too short a loiter time. A modern aircraft carrier needs state of the art AEW&C aircraft like the E-2D. COD aircraft like the C-2. Electronic warfare aircraft like the E/A-18. Tanker aircraft like the KA-6. As well as ASW/CSAR that are more commonly filled by helicopters today.
 

Attachments

  • E1CB996F-F472-4A3C-9A59-A8FF2B4B0709.jpeg
    E1CB996F-F472-4A3C-9A59-A8FF2B4B0709.jpeg
    2.7 MB · Views: 12
  • E52DCAA8-FD5A-40BD-8658-99EF7B997F8F.jpeg
    E52DCAA8-FD5A-40BD-8658-99EF7B997F8F.jpeg
    1.7 MB · Views: 6
  • 1222EA25-7341-47D6-83E9-8A8EF0E8F3E4.jpeg
    1222EA25-7341-47D6-83E9-8A8EF0E8F3E4.jpeg
    132.8 KB · Views: 6
  • E5BFB3AB-38DB-4F0D-A8A1-A3825F5DB60C.jpeg
    E5BFB3AB-38DB-4F0D-A8A1-A3825F5DB60C.jpeg
    671.5 KB · Views: 5
  • 39AB0C04-9E64-44BF-8E08-97D71B24C2FB.jpeg
    39AB0C04-9E64-44BF-8E08-97D71B24C2FB.jpeg
    330.4 KB · Views: 6
  • 9085E2E0-DABE-4CC1-B889-6EF0F5E58BB9.jpeg
    9085E2E0-DABE-4CC1-B889-6EF0F5E58BB9.jpeg
    171.1 KB · Views: 12

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
2,926
Reaction score
1,786
There have been several discussions from the Navy that they could fit smaller cats but that would be for UAV. Having said that there is no reason a UAV cannot perform the overwatch of the CBG
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
8,710
Reaction score
8,235
65000-75000 tons seems to be a soft spot and good tonnage for carriers: Forrestal, Kitty Hawk, Kennedy, Kuznetsov, Liaoning, Q.E, CVF, CVV, PANG...

I often think the French take at the Q.E (CVF or PA2) was the right way to go - by this I mean a CATOBAT Q.E.
While USN staunchly refused CVV as a less capable, and not-much-cheaper alternative to the supercarriers; the Chinese, Anglo-French and Russians had / have no such qualms.
In the end the Chinese are doing it, post Liaoning...
 

Similar threads

Top