December 30, 2008 Britain's new generation of aircraft carriers are beginning to take shape with the first of two planned vessels - the HMS Queen Elizabeth - now expected to enter service around 2016. Though still middleweights when compared to the USA's 100,000t displacement Nimtz class, the new vessels will still be the second biggest carriers afloat, displacing 65,000t, carrying more than 8,600 tons of fuel, 1,200+ personnel, 36 F-35B Joint Strike Fighters and four EH-101 Merlin helicopters, with a 16,000sqm flight deck that, as one of the design team recently put it to the Daily Mail, "would be a par four" if you covered it in grass.

But there are some formidable engineering challenges ahead before the £3.9 billion project becomes a reality. Because the design is too large to be handled by a single shipyard, the plan is to undertake construction of different modules in different locations before transporting them to Rosyth where the pieces - some of which will weigh up to 10,000 tons - will be put together like a set of giant building blocks on a scale never before attempted in Britain. The construction of the lower bow section has already begun and the work on the remaining pieces is slated to begin during the first half of 2009.

Notably, the new vessels will not use nuclear powerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power , instead using giant electrical motors powered by two Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine backed by four dieselhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel generators to drive the massive 30 ft wide five-blade propellers and reach speeds of 25 knots with a range of range of up to 10,000 nautical miles.

Other design innovations include the vessel's twin-island design, which separates control locations for navigation of the ship and management of the aircraft, and the use of a coarse, heat-resistant paint to cover the huge flight deck. By utilizing two 70-ton liftshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/lift the carriers will be able to deploy 24 planeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane into the air in 15 minutes.

Via Gizmodo, via Daily Mail (recommended reading). There's also a detailed run-down available at naval-technology.com.

http://www.gizmag.com/new-british-aircraft-carriers-will-be-second-largest-afloat/10639/




Provost

Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.

Calvin Coolidge, President of the United States 1924-1929

What I think is a shame:
-25 knots top speed
-Conventionally powered
-Two islands = lots of space lost. The second island, management of the aircraft, is really not necessary. Imo, that can all be done inside the ship. There's no need for a second island.
-Ski jump


Mobile airpower

"The enemy dies relaxed," observed a Lockheed Martin manager.

"-25 knots top speed"

So long as the QEs operate STOVL aircraft the 25 knot (25+ in some sources) speed isn't a major issue, although more is always nice.


"-Conventionally powered"

The UK has no history of nuclear powered surface vessels and to create them would be prohibitively expensive. The money could be far better spent elsewhere.


"-Two islands = lots of space lost. The second island, management of the aircraft, is really not necessary. Imo, that can all be done inside the ship. There's no need for a second island."

I don't see that much space is lost compared to jutting the two islands together? The twin island system is designed to improve air flow & reduce buffeting to aircraft landing from the stern, making it safer.

And - just a thought - might it also help limit damage if one island is hit?


"-Ski jump"

Well... the ski jump is a tremendous advantage if you are planning to use STOVL aircraft.

So I suppose your arguement is against STOVL rather than the ski jump itself.

That's an arguement in itself and both systems have their afvantages and champions.

But one additional thing to remember is that the new electric propulsion system being used in the QEs produce no steam for catapults. Therefore the not yet available (And probably expensive at this stage) EMALS system would be needed for CTOL.

-Two islands = lots of space lost. The second island, management of the aircraft, is really not necessary. Imo, that can all be done inside the ship. There's no need for a second island.

You're missing the point that the use of two 'small' islands is just one component of a total solution. For instance, the use of twin islands offers a neat solution to short ducting requirements for each of the two Gas Turbines (which are located directly under the islands) whilst at the same time providing the seperation needed for damage control in the event of a fire or enemy hit.

This arrangement, of course, is only possible thanks to the use of Electric Propulsion which eliminates the need to locate the GTs in (mechanical) line with the propellors low down in the hull of the ship.

Equally, by locating the prime generator sets in the sponsons (directly under the islands) the ducting does not interfere with the ship's hangar deck space which is needed to allow for a large hangar and the various aircraft & ammunition elevators.

Furthermore, by locating the GTs in the sponsons (rather than low down in the hull - below the hangar deck), they can be relatively easily accessed for replacement/removal during major refits, thereby significantly reducing refit time (important if you're only operating a fleet of two carrier).

IMHO, all in all it's an incredibly elegant design that solves a number of problems associated with conventionally powered carrier designs.

So what is the article trying to tell us that we don't already know?


"He lives in a world where concept is reality..."

Kuznetsov is 67,000 ton full load. Non nuclear propulsion hasnt gotten them into trouble, though it hasn't seen any
combat situations like US CBGs.
It will be more dependent on auxilaries. But since all escorting surface ships also need to refuel now and then, it won't be much of a drawback. But again the whole concept of non-nuclear(semi) super carriers isn't battleproven yet.

Due to the defence cuts they wil never make any of these carriers, just nice stories to debate about on forums.

I though they were layed down already?

britains in wallowing in fantasyieds of britsh1t empire stronget navel showings

its drowning in debt credit crunch financial tsunamis its now talkings of aircraft carriers? lol

===========================================
I am old Christiankiller
Sorry for offensive to our good religion christian brothers
I am not hating christians

Quote: I though they were layed down already?

Officially (ceremonially), '1st Steel hasn't been cut' yet.

However, "early steelwork for the bow unit of Queen Elizabeth commenced in Appledore in December".

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/90mContractsForWorkOnCarriers.htm


Go figure!