Queen to name new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth


Blackleaf
#1
The MoD has confirmed that the Queen will officially name one of the Royal Navy's new 65,000-tonne Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers HMS Queen Elizabeth at a ceremony on Friday 4th July.

The event will be held at Rosyth dockyard in Fife where work to assemble the vessel is being completed.

Defence ministry officials say the 65,000-tonne ship is "the most complex warship ever built in the UK".

The estimated cost of the aircraft carrier and its sister ship is 6.2bn. The initial projected cost was 3.65bn.

Building HMS Queen Elizabeth and the second carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, has been one of the biggest defence projects ever undertaken in the UK. Work on them has taken place in shipyards in Clyde, Rosyth (these two Scottish shipyards will have to wave goodbye to building RN ships if Scotland becomes independent), Portsmouth, Birkenhead, Tyne and Devon

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said: "This occasion will mark a major milestone in regenerating the UK's aircraft carrier fleet and its power projection capability."

Admiral Sir George Zambellas, First Sea Lord, said the ship would be the "first of a class that will return fast jet carrier operations to our nation's war-fighting credibility".

HMS Queen Elizabeth will start her sea trials in 2017 with flight trials of Lightning II aircraft starting the following year.


Queen to name new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth


BBC News
22 February 2014


This computer-generated image shows how HMS Queen Elizabeth and her sister ship HMS Prince of Wales will look

The Queen will officially name the Royal Navy's new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth at a ceremony on 4 July, the Ministry of Defence has said.

The event will be held at Rosyth dockyard in Fife where work to assemble the vessel is being completed.

Defence ministry officials say the 65,000-tonne ship is "the most complex warship ever built in the UK".

The estimated cost of the aircraft carrier and its sister ship is 6.2bn. The initial projected cost was 3.65bn.

Building HMS Queen Elizabeth and the second carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, has been one of the biggest defence projects ever undertaken in the UK.

It has been beset by construction and design delays however.

During the course of the project, an order for carrier jump jets - capable of short take-offs and vertical landings - was switched to jets with a longer range that could carry more weapons.

But the MoD later decided to revert to the original STOVL jets (Lightning II) for logistical and financial reasons.

Labour's Margaret Hodge, the chairwoman of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, said last year that the "U-turn" involved 74m of taxpayers' money going "down the drain".

However, under the previous plans, the Royal Navy would operate only one aircraft carrier, routinely equipped with 12 fast jets. However, the Chief of the Defence Staff has subsequently said that the STOVL design "gives us the ability to operate two carriers if we choose."


The aircraft carrier has been built in shipyards in Clyde, Rosyth, Portsmouth, Birkenhead, Tyne and Devon


The 65,000-tonne ship will become Britain's biggest-ever carrier


The ship will be named by Her Majesty in a traditional champagne ceremony

Members of HMS Queen Elizabeth's crew, and workers who have helped to build the ship, will be among thousands of people expected to attend.

The construction of the aircraft carrier has sustained about 7,000 jobs at more than 100 companies across the country, the MoD said, describing it as "Britain's biggest-ever carrier".

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said: "This will be a proud and historic day, not just for the Royal Navy but for the entire nation.

"It is great news that Her Majesty will officially name the first aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth."

War fighting credibility


With the Liverpool skyline in the background, huge flight deck modules leave the famous Birkenhead yard of Cammell Laird bound for Rosyth in May 2012. Segments of the carriers are being built in shipyards around the UK, before they are all taken to Rosyth where they are assembled together


Sea trials for HMS Queen Elizabeth will begin in 2017

He added: "This occasion will mark a major milestone in regenerating the UK's aircraft carrier fleet and its power projection capability."

Later in July, the dock at Rosyth will be flooded to allow HMS Queen Elizabeth to float for the first time. Sea trials will then begin in 2017 with flight trials of Lightning II aircraft starting the following year.

Admiral Sir George Zambellas, First Sea Lord, said the ship would be the "first of a class that will return fast jet carrier operations to our nation's war-fighting credibility".

He said: "We have a great journey ahead, in close partnership with the Royal Air Force, to create and sustain the best that our shipbuilding, engineering, technology and people can deliver.

"And we are proud to have the chance to show what we can do."

Contracts 'renegotiated'


The new carriers will operate Lightning II fighter jets

Work is already under way on HMS Queen Elizabeth's sister ship, the Prince of Wales, which will start to be assembled in Rosyth dockyard later this year.

The MoD said the defence secretary last year renegotiated contracts to ensure the costs of the "biggest ever ships in the history of the Royal Navy" did not spiral.

"The defence secretary announced a successful renegotiation of contracts between the MoD and industry last year, to prevent further cost increases and save the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds," a spokesperson said.

"This ensures any further cost increase is shared equally with industry and provides an incentive to manage this vast project efficiently and effectively."

BBC News - Queen to name new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth (external - login to view)
Last edited by Blackleaf; Feb 23rd, 2014 at 07:21 AM..
 
Locutus
#2
Unlikely she'd name it anything else, now isn't it.
 
captain morgan
+5
#3  Top Rated Post
Awwww, isn't that sweet.. Another computer generated 'vessel' that Blackie can add to his pretend navy
 
Blackleaf
#4




The RN of the future.

A video of the new carriers in action, with the video showing a Queen Elizabeth Class carrier group with the new Daring Class Type 45 destroyers, new Astute Class hunter killer subs and new Tide Class tankers (which are also being built and will enter service in 2016):

Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers in Action - YouTube




British Military Power The British Are Coming 2013 HD - YouTube




UK biggest aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth closer to completion - YouTube




Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier-TimeLapsemp4 - YouTube

Last edited by Blackleaf; Feb 23rd, 2014 at 12:33 PM..
 
Locutus
+2
#5
I hear this thread with these stupid voices now:

 
Machjo
+3
#6
"The estimated cost of the aircraft carrier and its sister ship is 6.2bn. The initial projected cost was 3.65bn."

Just think of what the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education could have done with that money! Wow!
 
taxslave
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

"The estimated cost of the aircraft carrier and its sister ship is 6.2bn. The initial projected cost was 3.65bn."

Just think of what the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education could have done with that money! Wow!

Most probably squander it with nothing to show. At least this way they got a floating airport.
 
Machjo
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Most probably squander it with nothing to show. At least this way they got a floating airport.

The Ministry of Finance could have put it towards the UK debt; the Ministry of Education is more of a bread and butter issue when it comes to providing universal compulsory education to children.

And what kind of commerce will this floating airport provide? Could British Airways and Air Canada Flights make any use of it?
 
Cannuck
+2
#9
I find it ironic that she is going to name it on the Fourth of July, the anniversary of the beginning of the end of British relevance on the world stage
 
taxslave
+3
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I find it ironic that she is going to name it on the Fourth of July, the anniversary of the beginning of the end of British relevance on the world stage

Comeback tour?
 
Machjo
#11
Now both its military might and national debt have become that more important on the world stage. Truly a day to be proud of.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#12
I'd be pretty disgusted if someone wanted to name a war machine after me. Wifey said she'd be right pissed. But then we think war is a waste of life and stuff.
 
BaalsTears
#13
The problem with aircraft carriers is that they can't be used effectively against peer opponents in the new era. They can be overwhelmed by non-stop barrages of cruise and ballistic missiles. Fire control can't be expected to handle that level of damage....unless the carriers stay out of range and serve primarily as offshore drone bases.
 
Locutus
#14
Queen should play at this event.
 
Blackleaf
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Just think of what the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education could have done with that money! Wow!

Yeah. Just think. However, the British defence budget is not theirs to spend. They have their own budgets. Thankfully it went on two vital aircraft carriers.

Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

I'd be pretty disgusted if someone wanted to name a war machine after me.

I'd love it. They should name one of the 13 new Type 26 frigates which will soon start to be built after me. They will come into service after 2020. HMS Blackleaf is a great name for a Royal Navy ship.

httpwwwyoutubecomwatchv10NEdyerdetailpage



Unlike the Yanks, however, the British are less inclined to name their warships after people. We usually give our ships scarier names.

The Yanks have USS Dwight D Eisenhower for an aircraft carrier and we had HMS Invincible.

The Yanks have USS George Washington. The British have the Type 23 frigate HMS Iron Duke.

Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I find it ironic that she is going to name it on the Fourth of July, the anniversary of the beginning of the end of British relevance on the world stage


I think you'll find that American independence from Britain was near the BEGINNING of Britain's global hegemony. The British Empire wouldn't reach its peak until 150 years later. For a century from 1815 until WWI, Britain enjoyed unrivalled global supremacy. The loss of a minor colonies like those in America did nothing to curtail British global power.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Feb 24th, 2014 at 06:18 AM..
 
Cannuck
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post


I think you'll find that American independence from Britain was near the BEGINNING of Britain's global hegemony. The British Empire wouldn't reach its peak until 150 years later. For a century from 1815 until WWI, Britain enjoyed unrivalled global supremacy. The loss of a minor colonies like those in America did nothing to curtail British global power.

You just keep telling yourself that and one day you just might start believing it
 
Blackleaf
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You just keep telling yourself that and one day you just might start believing it


I do believe it. Because it's a historical fact. To say that American Independence way back in 1776 spelt the "beginning of the end" of the British Empire, when the Empire would last well into the 20th century and wouldn't reach its peak size until the 1920s, and Britain was the foremost, unchallenged, military, political and economic power from the end of the Napoleonic Wars (although some people would say the 1750s after we trounced Froggy in the Seven Years' War) to the early 20th Century, is nothing short of nonsensical.

To you, the great age of Victorian Britain's global hegemony just didn't happen, did it?

I've had issues on here before with people prattling silly historical myths and believing that they're true.
 
Cannuck
-1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

I do believe it. Because it's a historical fact.

See, I was right. You folks couldn't even handle a bunch of American rebels. We all know you were past your expiration date. Hell, we needed to go over there 100 years ago and teach you how to fight or you'd still be speaking German. But hey, you keep dreaming. It's all the UK really has left.
 
Blackleaf
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You folks couldn't even handle a bunch of American rebels. We all know you were past your expiration date.

Yeah. Alright then. We were "past our expiration date" in 1776 and the British global hegemony which lasted until the early 20th century is all just historical myth. Okay then.

Quote:

Hell, we needed to go over there 100 years ago and teach you how to fight or you'd still be speaking German

Canada mobilised a total of 620,000 men and had 67,000 casualties.

Mighty Britain, meanwhile, had an army, never mind the RAF (which would become the largest airforce in the world in 1918 ) and the RN (the largest navy in the world), of 2 MILLION men which it sent to the war - the largest all-volunteer army in history. 995,939 British were killed. Within the UK, Scotland alone, with a population of just 4.8 million (which was half that of Canada), sent more men (690,000) to the war than the Canadians did. 74,000 Scots lost their lives, 7,000 more than Canada, whose population was then twice that of Scotland's.

To put this into persepective, the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland lost FIFTEEN times as many people in WWI as Canada did, despite the UK then having a population just 5 times that of Canada.

So, again, you are not being exactly historically accurate by saving that Canada saved the mighty Britain during WWI. In actual fact Canada's presence in that was was comparitively negligible.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Feb 24th, 2014 at 09:14 AM..
 
Cannuck
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

Yeah. Alright then. We were "past our expiration date" in 1776 and the British global hegemony which lasted until the early 20th century is all just historical myth. Okay then.



Canada mobilised a total of 620,000 men and had 67,000 casualties.

Britain, meanwhile, had an army, never mind the RAF and the RN, of 2 million men which it sent to the war - the largest all-volunteer army in history. 995,939 British were killed. Within the UK, Scotland alone, with a population of just 4.8 million (which was half that of Canada), sent more men (690,000) than the Caandians did. 74,000 Scots lost their lives.

So, again, you are not being exactly historically accurate by saving that Canada saved the mighty Britain during WWI. In actual fact Canada's presence in that was was comparitively negligible.

I know the truth hurts. In the words of Bono, "people glorify the past when the future dries up".
 
Blackleaf
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I know the truth hurts.

I know it does. Try some Nurofen.
 
captain morgan
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post


To put this into persepective, the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland lost FIFTEEN times as many people in WWI as Canada did, despite the UK then having a population just 5 times that of Canada.


Looks like the real take-away here is that Canadians are far superior fighters. I think that the recent example of the GBR men's curling match against Canada would have really driven that point home
 
Blackleaf
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Looks like the real take-away here is that Canadians are far superior fighters. I think that the recent example of the GBR men's curling match against Canada would have really driven that point home


So you are comparing a game which involves chucking rocks over some ice to fighting in a major war?
 
captain morgan
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

So you are comparing a game which involves chucking rocks over some ice to fighting in a major war?


Curling is all about strategy and execution. Clearly the GBR team was outclassed in every possible regard.

Even the BBC commented that it was a world class shaming delivered to the UK by the Canadian experts.

I'm sure that you watched the match - it was, after all one of the only hopes you mistakenly thought you had at an Olympic gold
 
Blackleaf
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Curling is all about strategy and execution. Clearly the GBR team was outclassed in every possible regard.

Even the BBC commented that it was a world class shaming delivered to the UK by the Canadian experts.

But you're focusing on one sport. I'd love to see the Canadians play England in football, rugby or cricket. You'll be even more "outclassed" than our curling lads were. In fact, we'd probably outclass you in any sport not played on ice.

Quote:

it was, after all one of the only hopes you mistakenly thought you had at an Olympic gold


It wasn't an Olympic gold. It was a Winter Olympic gold. The Winter Olympics is a second rate Olympics held to benefit those countries which are no good at sports that aren't played on ice and snow, like Canada and Norway.

In the last REAL Olympics, in 2012, Great Britain won 29 times as many gold medals as Canada did.
 
EagleSmack
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post


Unlike the Yanks, however, the British are less inclined to name their warships after people. We usually give our ships scarier names.

The Yanks have USS Dwight D Eisenhower for an aircraft carrier and we had HMS Invincible.

The Yanks have USS George Washington. The British have the Type 23 frigate HMS Iron Duke.

Wait a moment... you're going to name one ship Queen Elizabeth and the other Prince of Wales... scary how? Based on ugliness? If so... you got us there.

And how can we forget the HMS. Antelope!

 
captain morgan
-1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Wait a moment... you're going to name one ship Queen Elizabeth and the other Prince of Wales... scary how? Based on ugliness? If so... you got us there.

And how can we forget the HMS. Antelope!

Bad teeth and inbreeding are purdy scary ES
 
Walter
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

"The estimated cost of the aircraft carrier and its sister ship is 6.2bn. The initial projected cost was 3.65bn."

Just think of what the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education could have done with that money! Wow!

Flushed it.
 
Locutus
#29
The Red Rover finals would look well played on a large-assed scale out on the prairies.

The Canadian Rough Bastards or some such assemblage could call Rupert over.
 
Blackleaf
#30
Cool names.

HMS Zebra
HMS Tuna
HMS Sturgeon
HMS Banshee
HMS Mohawk
HMS Cossack
HMS Amazon
HMS Saracen

List of destroyer classes of the Royal Navy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (external - login to view)
 
no new posts