CVF and Carrier Strike thread

It would appear that the shakedown period on a new carrier is a pretty lengthy and intensive procedure.
Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford Enters Year-Long Post-Shakedown Maintenance and Upgrade Period - USNI News
Not news to those with any experience of these things, but a significant number of media commentators (a a few on here and other social media) seem to think a carrier should have a fully worked up air group on deck as soon as she leaves the wall for the first time. I wonder how much of this is due to not understanding the technology etc, and how much is down to our national habit of doing ourselves down?
 
QEC ship-air certification

It has been widely publicised that HMS Queen Elizabeth has recently completed her First of Class, Rotary Wing Flying Trials, the first major milestone in the integration of the Ship and the Aircraft that will operate from her. She is now in the process of preparing to embark the first Lightning II (F-35) for Fixed Wing Trials in the staged progression towards achieving her full operating capability. This article aims to explain the certification process of Ship-Air System Integration and how it has applied to the UK’s newest Aircraft Carrier.
 
Not news to those with any experience of these things, but a significant number of media commentators (a a few on here and other social media) seem to think a carrier should have a fully worked up air group on deck as soon as she leaves the wall for the first time. I wonder how much of this is due to not understanding the technology etc, and how much is down to our national habit of doing ourselves down?
Probably a bit of everything. And the culture of instant gratification. They think it's as simple as setting up your new phone for the first time and off you go...
 
It would appear that the shakedown period on a new carrier is a pretty lengthy and intensive procedure.
Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford Enters Year-Long Post-Shakedown Maintenance and Upgrade Period - USNI News
An edit has been added to that post for the express enlightenment of @redshift and @Yokel

It would appear that the shakedown period on a new carrier is a pretty lengthy and intensive procedure.

For those who may not have known what this could involve, myself included, an example below.
Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford Enters Year-Long Post-Shakedown Maintenance and Upgrade Period - USNI News
Meanwhile on QE ongoing capability expansion.
QEC ship-air certification
 
Last edited:
An edit has been added to that post for the express enlightenment of @redshift and @Yokel



Meanwhile on QE ongoing capability expansion.
QEC ship-air certification
Sorry pal - I was not criticising you, more the media pundits and others who seem to believe the modern mantra of "if you do not know about it - it must be easy." Time and time again we see this as both organisations and individuals get slated for perceived failings.
 
Last edited:
More quality programmes from Chris Terill coming up:


It will great to see jets on deck again. Many things can be simulated, but a moving deck subject to the motion of the sea, with live jets moving in accordance with the three Newtonian Laws of Mechanics and producing jet blast and noise, cannot.


At the risk of being predictable - it is good to see the Sea Harrier contributing to training for future capability.

Also did anyone else know that there is a specialist recruitment team for the FAA?

RN Specialist Aviation Recruitment Team (@BecomeRNAircrew) | Twitter
 
Not sure if this should go here or in the F35b thread so mods feel free to move / delete as appropriate.

First vertical landing at RAF Marham; bodes well for the next step of moving to HMS Queen Elizabeth.

 
Not sure if this should go here or in the F35b thread so mods feel free to move / delete as appropriate.

First vertical landing at RAF Marham; bodes well for the next step of moving to HMS Queen Elizabeth.

I suppose you could make a case for both threads - as it is the UK's background in V/STOL aviation that was the reason for out inclusion in the F-35 programme, and the Rolls Royce LiftSystem is the enabling technology for the F-35B, along with other things developed or built in Britain.

However, there is particular reason for it to be on this thread. Since the first shipborne landing of a P1127 by Bill Bedford (@Archimedes will correct me if I am wrong), V/STOL aircraft have not only kept the Royal Navy in the carrier business, but have also allowed the US Marine Corps and some smaller Navies to operate combat aircraft from ships.

Vertical Landing is already allowing the USMC to deploy the F-35B at sea. We are not far behind, and will take it further with the SRVL technique.
 
I suppose you could make a case for both threads - as it is the UK's background in V/STOL aviation that was the reason for out inclusion in the F-35 programme, and the Rolls Royce LiftSystem is the enabling technology for the F-35B, along with other things developed or built in Britain.

However, there is particular reason for it to be on this thread. Since the first shipborne landing of a P1127 by Bill Bedford (@Archimedes will correct me if I am wrong), V/STOL aircraft have not only kept the Royal Navy in the carrier business, but have also allowed the US Marine Corps and some smaller Navies to operate combat aircraft from ships.

Vertical Landing is already allowing the USMC to deploy the F-35B at sea. We are not far behind, and will take it further with the SRVL technique.
The QEs and F35Bs go hand in hand for sure, are part of a tightly integrated weapon system. Take one of them out, you effectively downgrade the effectiveness, usefulness of the other one.
 
The latest PPRuNe silliness is to suggest the carriers are the cause of T31e programme trouble, and to suggest that a nuclear torpedo which could be launched into a naval port makes the carrier vulnerable in a new way.
 
Last edited:
Anyway - look what I found on the internet:

Innovation in Carrier Aviation (Naval War College Newport Papers, 37)

Abstract : This study is about innovations in carrier aviation and the spread of those innovations from one navy to the navy of a close ally. The innovations are the angled flight deck; the steam catapult; and the mirror and lighted landing aid that enabled pilots to land jet aircraft on a carrier s short and narrow flight deck. This study is different from our previous study of innovation in the development and use of aircraft carriers, U.S. & British Aircraft Carrier Development, 1919-1941, which compared innovation in carrier aviation in the U.S. Navy and the Royal Navy in the years before WorldWar II. At the time, the U.S. Navy and the Royal Navy were competitors. The two navies did not share technical information and in fact worked to hide their advances from one another, despite the fact that they had cooperated closely during World War I. Only in the winter of 1940 41 was there a renewal of the close professional contact between the naval aviators of the two nations that had first blossomed in 1918. Those initial cooperative relations grew into a very strong relationship during World War II, when British carriers were often equipped with mostly U.S.-made aircraft and many British pilots trained in the United States.

I wonder what a study of innovations and shared technologies in the V/STOL age would conclude?

When I was at school, I remember an English class where we were looking at news articles from the local paper. I distinctly remember one stating that a local company had been awarded a contract to supply 'lighting equipment' for the US Marine Corps for shipboard use. I thought nothing of it, but on reflection that would have been optical landing aids - either for helicopters or for Harrier. Later I spent a short time working for the same company (after take over, management buy out, renaming, etc) and we did sub contract work on landing aids for helicopters.
 
The latest PPRuNe silliness is to suggest the carriers are the cause of T31e programme trouble, and to suggest that a nuclear torpedo which could be launched into a naval port makes the carrier vulnerable in a new way.
What's new? Most knowledgeable (and thus interesting) contributors seem to have surrendered the Military Aviation forum of PPRuNe to a small but aggressive group of ill-informed Jeremiahs who persist in promoting their tediously clouded views whatever factual evidence is presented to the contrary.
 
Last edited:
What's new? Most knowledgeable (and thus interesting) contributors seem to have surrendered the Military Aviation forum of PPRuNe to a small but aggressive group of ill-informed Jeremiahs who persistently post their clouded views whatever factual evidence is provided to the contrary.
You mean like ORAC, Heathrow Harry and glad_rag?

A 'mature student' who I presume likes to tell medical students not to study cases of patients they did not treat, or history students not to study periods they did not live through.

In July 2002 he said: Did 25 years and left with no medals at all. Tell a Yank and he'd never believe it.

More recently, on the topic of carriers and the Falklands she claims to have been with the task group: Having been present with the task task force during the Falklands War and interviewed all the major commanders both naval and army who were present.....

So why no south Atlantic medal? Obviously I was feeling to chivalrous to ask this on the thread, but.....

Or a genuine know it all like Heathrow Harry. He admits he does not, but he knows the RN/RAF/MOD/NATO/etc have got everything completely wrong.

Or an embittered ex RAF type who cannot accept other aircraft types/trades/etc exist. I seem to remember him having a spat with an ex (RAF) Phantom driver.
 
You mean like ORAC, Heathrow Harry and glad_rag?

A 'mature student' who I presume likes to tell medical students not to study cases of patients they did not treat, or history students not to study periods they did not live through.

In July 2002 he said: Did 25 years and left with no medals at all. Tell a Yank and he'd never believe it.

More recently, on the topic of carriers and the Falklands she claims to have been with the task group: Having been present with the task task force during the Falklands War and interviewed all the major commanders both naval and army who were present.....

So why no south Atlantic medal? Obviously I was feeling to chivalrous to ask this on the thread, but.....

Or a genuine know it all like Heathrow Harry. He admits he does not, but he knows the RN/RAF/MOD/NATO/etc have got everything completely wrong.

Or an embittered ex RAF type who cannot accept other aircraft types/trades/etc exist. I seem to remember him having a spat with an ex (RAF) Phantom driver.
So stop reading PPRUNE then.

Regards,
MM
 
I was hoping @Dunservin would note my reply and challenge the miscreant when the opportunity arose. However, I would note PPRuNe and the like are quoted by the media, and do influence politicians and public. How much did the Phoenix Thi(n)ck Tank and the 'F-35 and STOVL are bad' ideas influence Cameron's decision making in 2010? Ask @jrwlynch for his views.

Likewise the idea was common that submarines no longer were something to worry about, and we did not need to worry about MPA et al. The same numbskull thinking led to the AWACS capability being left to wither on the vine.

To quote Edmund Burke: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

In the age of easy access to information, but without any guarantee of critical analysis, the loud mouthed half wit poses a societal menance.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top