Thread: UK's Biggest Warship HMS Queen Elizabeth Sails into Home Port for First Time

PORTSMOUTH, ENGLAND —
Britain's most advanced and biggest warship, the 65,000-ton aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, berthed for the first time at its home port of Portsmouth on Wednesday.

The 280-meter (920-foot) vessel entered the harbor on England's southern coast at 0610 GMT, greeted by thousands of spectators.

HMS Queen Elizabeth is the largest warship ever built for the Royal Navy, according to the Ministry of Defense.

"Today we welcome our mighty new warship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, to her home for the very first time," said Defense Secretary Michael Fallon. "She is Britain's statement to the world: a demonstration of British military power and our commitment to a bigger global role."

The ship is currently undergoing sea trials. It cannot yet deploy planes, but flying trials from its deck are due to begin in 2018.

It took eight years to build HMS Queen Elizabeth, with construction taking place in six cities and involving 10,000 people.

Along with its sister ship, HMS Prince of Wales, it is part of a defense program worth 6 billion pounds ($7.65 billion).

Commanding officer Captain Jerry Kyd told the BBC that the carrier "sends the right signals to our allies and indeed potentially to our enemies that we mean business."

https://www.voanews.com/a/uk-biggest...e/3988056.html

Pretty Impressive!
A proud moment for the UK.

Well now that it's been officially acknowledged I can reveal top secret information .
It's been tested for months up in Scottish waters with top secret fighter jets taking off and flying down to Essex and returning to land.
It's up and running now and time to forget the fake news of her manufacture and trials.

Twin islands is unique i think, separate engine rooms and less turbulence.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

One single poxy medium-sized aircraft carrier.

It ain't medium-sized. At over 70,000 tons and 280m long it is classed as a super-carrier. The only one in the world, currently, outside the US navy.

So anybody know, is it named Queen Elizabeth after ER-II or ER-I ?

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by DrB0b

One single poxy medium-sized aircraft carrier.

It ain't medium-sized. At over 70,000 tons and 280m long it is classed as a super-carrier. The only one in the world, currently, outside the US navy.

Rule, Britannia!!

you are wasting your time looper.

these brit hating, raghead loving, snide oozing, self loathing socialists are just so predictable in their comments.

Originally Posted by taxexile

you are wasting your time looper.

these brit hating, raghead loving, snide oozing, self loathing socialists are just so predictable in their comments.

Those of us who are British ( I have dual nationality), who have family connections to the Senior Service, who care about the country's position in the world, and who can see the clear decline over the past 30 years feel it is our duty to comment. Do you think that the RN has somehow improved over the last 30 years? How? A proper reply would be appreciated, why do you think this shameful reduction to a single aircraft carrier, after several years of no carrier at all, is anything other than an embarrassment?

we neither need nor can afford a huge navy.

our position in the world is not what it once was, and a navy, or army or airforce, the size of that of china or the usa would be out of all proportion to our population or the influence we now wield on the world stage.

should the military ever be needed to defend the realm, in all probability the threat would come from the east, i.e russia, and we would be working in tandem with other countries under threat, i.e europe, and even after brexit, defending that threat would be a joint effort.

its not 1940, and all out war would be fought in the air, maybe even remotely, and ships would play only a small part.


one ship, well built and kitted out, will suffice. it is nothing to be ashamed about.

however, if the falklands or gibraltar were under threat, i do wonder how we would manage to defend them.

Originally Posted by taxexile

we neither need nor can afford a huge navy.

Correct. The UK is now a small and powerless country. It should work with its natural allies, countries like Botswana and Tuvalu, and stop pretending it's on the same level as more powerful countries like Andorra, Disney World, or Bhutan.

There will be concerns about manpower and experience shortages, especially if the second carrier comes into service.
The support vessels required for two carrier groups appear to be beyond the RN/RFA at the moment.
Fitted for but not with airyplanes right now, just rotary wings.
Let's hope the F35B comes on stream without undue delay.

The QE and the POW are about power projection, along with combat vessels and supply ships to keep them safe and ready at sea. It is an ambitious but appropriate resource for the UK's status on the UN Security Council.
In theory at least, modern technology allows force reduction, balanced by more powerful equipment.

Originally Posted by forreachingme

Britains money spent on war machines and people applaud...
Humans are in a lost cause, enslaved in work days for their rulers to play war, create more debts to enslave better, the circle goes on.

Young men continue enroll in military as it looks like an adventure, a mission of good.. And it rarely is, grown up teached to love each other, then at 18, the rule made by the gov allowed to assasinate millions says; go kill that brown skin the other side of the globo.

Wondering how much Iceland is now investing in it's military, they rejected their government, created new constitution, jailed bankers, they prolly do it more rigth.

Superior assets provide a nation with credibility. The ultimate deterrent. When you speak softly and carry a big stick, people tend to listen.

Not ideal I grant you, but it beats being ignored. Ask Jeremy Corbyn.

Originally Posted by taxexile

its not 1940, and all out war would be fought in the air, maybe even remotely, and ships would play only a small part.

Perhaps it can be moored at Dunkerque?

I note that Britain is getting two of these things for around half the price of the one the US has built...and wont be ready to do anything for 4 years.

deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2<\/title><path d="M10,3.5l3-3,3,3Z" style="fill:%23fff;stroke:%23fff"/><path d="M0,3.5H10l3-3,3,3H26" style="fill:none;stroke:%231b3a4d"/><\/svg>')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

Well they may need them when the US gets round to starting WW3 and then, as Russia says, they will become a floating target and the bigger the target the easier it is to hit.

It won't be fully operational until 2020 and the entire design has been fitted around the capabilities of the F35B Lightning because of its V/STOL characteristics.

The twin 'island' design is a logical development in that the leading island is the command control for the ship's functions and where the captain sits and is nearer the pointy end of the ship for better visibility and the rear island is the flight control centre and positioned near the arse end for a better view of the aircraft taking off and landing.

I think one island looks much prettier.

Originally Posted by Looper

So anybody know, is it named Queen Elizabeth after ER-II or ER-I ?

Couldn't find it on my original google search but she is apparently named after Queen Elizabeth the First who saw off the Spanish Armada in 1588 (and was also thrashed by the Spanish Armada in 1589 although we don't say so much about that!)

Very imposing piece of hardware.

Mucho respeto.



I did not think the Royal Navy still had this much spunk in them

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Perhaps it can be moored at Dunkerque?

or even off the Falklands?

Zum Glück hatte Großbritannien das Spitfire oder die Amerikaner den Krieg nicht gewonnen und könnte das als ihre erste Sprache lesen.

Originally Posted by birding

I note that Britain is getting two of these things for around half the price of the one the US has built...and wont be ready to do anything for 4 years.

deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2<\/title><path d="M10,3.5l3-3,3,3Z" style="fill:%23fff;stroke:%23fff"/><path d="M0,3.5H10l3-3,3,3H26" style="fill:none;stroke:%231b3a4d"/><\/svg>')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

Well they may need them when the US gets round to starting WW3 and then, as Russia says, they will become a floating target and the bigger the target the easier it is to hit.

Russia has just revealed plans to build a bigger carrier copying the twin islands idea, as has Italy...

^It has always gotta be the same but bigger with the Russians. Bigger than Ohio class nuke subs. That didn't work out too well...

Bigger father of all bombs...

Woo hoo.

Some originality please.

I wonder why the double islands...it seems like they take up more deck space than one island would, though with the elevator between them, it gives a protected spot to move planes around.

^wonder no more



The reasons HMS Queen Elizabeth has two islands | Save the Royal Navy

Thanks Looper...I'm old stylee, I think having the two control parties (ship/flight ops)that far apart physically could be a problem.