PhotEx
LE

Exactly. No major wars.
last major war, their carrier sat it out sunning itself in Martinique in the Caribbean.
Exactly. No major wars.
Yes, never launched aircraft in combat in it's career.last major war, their carrier sat it out sunning itself in Martinique in the Caribbean.
Out of interest the Frogs were building another carrier late 1930's, not complete by the time the Boxheads pitched up and broken by them for scrap. Note, said Boxheads did not seem all that interested in carriers, theirs almost complete never in service and captured by Russians, who in the end sank it.Yes, never launched aircraft in combat in it's career.
French aircraft carrier Béarn - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
If the cousins, with their many years of experience with large CV ops, are still having issues, what's the chance that BAES hasn't delivered a world-beating design with the QEs?
'The military’s priciest aircraft carrier — worth $13.2 billion — is still suffering technological malfunctions three years after it was delivered to the U.S. Navy, according to a report.
'The issues on the USS Gerald R. Ford “remain consistent” with those from previous years, according to a Pentagon assessment obtained by Bloomberg News.
'The carriers’ issues include problems getting jets off the deck and issues with the landing systems.
“Poor or unknown reliability of new technology systems critical for flight operations,” including the carriers’ electromagnetic launch system worth $3.5 billion could affect its ability to generate sorties, Bloomberg reported, citing the assessment.
'The so-called supercarrier was delivered late and at way over the initial cost estimates, The Post reported back in 2016.'
![]()
Navy’s $13.2 billion aircraft carrier still experiencing problems
The military’s priciest aircraft carrier — worth $13.2 billion — is still suffering technological malfunctions three years after it was delivered to the U.S. Navy, according to a …nypost.com
Without jets, the Ford can still act as a flagship, conduct ASW operations with the MH-60R, and possibly embark either F-35B or AV-8B. You do have to expect problems with so many new systems being fitted at the same time,
Yes, but that's not what all that money was spent for. If you want a C2/ASW platform, it's available for a far lower cost.
As long as said 'warships' are FIACS and such like. It's only got the warhead out of Brimstone.
You could argue that the QEs are less technically risky than the Fords - we’ve been operating GT-powered STOVL carriers for a while, whereas they’ve not had a an EMALS one before, for example. Other than the handling systems, how much of the kit on a QE is of completely new design?If the cousins, with their many years of experience with large CV ops, are still having issues, what's the chance that BAES hasn't delivered a world-beating design with the QEs?
'The military’s priciest aircraft carrier — worth $13.2 billion — is still suffering technological malfunctions three years after it was delivered to the U.S. Navy, according to a report.
'The issues on the USS Gerald R. Ford “remain consistent” with those from previous years, according to a Pentagon assessment obtained by Bloomberg News.
'The carriers’ issues include problems getting jets off the deck and issues with the landing systems.
“Poor or unknown reliability of new technology systems critical for flight operations,” including the carriers’ electromagnetic launch system worth $3.5 billion could affect its ability to generate sorties, Bloomberg reported, citing the assessment.
'The so-called supercarrier was delivered late and at way over the initial cost estimates, The Post reported back in 2016.'
![]()
Navy’s $13.2 billion aircraft carrier still experiencing problems
The military’s priciest aircraft carrier — worth $13.2 billion — is still suffering technological malfunctions three years after it was delivered to the U.S. Navy, according to a …nypost.com
True - but a lightweight missile can be fired in numbers, and multiple hits will degrade the enemy vessels ability to fight.
Can’t be carried 8 at a time internally though.
As, very sadly, poor Sam Salt discovered on Sheffield.Lightweight, going to be cleared for F-35 carriage by major users, can properly bite a medium sized surface ship, not annoy it.
I assume you mean their first new design in 40 years? The actual DOT&E report due this week will probably identify that specific issues of reliability remain with the EMALS, EAR and Munition lifts. All of which are new systems and necessarily so. There are some elements of those systems designs that will need refinement as they are used. While far from perfect now, they'll get there and in five years, people will wonder what the fuss is about.If the cousins, with their many years of experience with large CV ops, are still having issues, what's the chance that BAES hasn't delivered a world-beating design with the QEs?
As, very sadly, poor Sam Salt discovered on Sheffield.
A tragedy that carried many lessons.
QEC’s efficient design still takes the cousins breath away, the weapons handling in particular.
The end point for both systems is still a trolley with built up weapons on a lift going up to the flightdeck.Hrmmmm, the Ford Class weapons handling looks pretty awesome:
A lift and trolley:
one issue the RN has and really needs to get a grip on, is its lack of a modern ASM carried in quantity.