HMS Queen Elizabeth: Leak found on new aircraft carrier

[FMESParticipant @fmes]

Sam, Q1 Why no steam catapults?

A1 No steam

Q2 Why no electro magnetic launch system

A2 Experimental system and VERY expensive, I'm not sure if even the USN have got it working yet, but I'm happy to be corrected.

unasked question but relevant to Q1. Catapult launched aircraft require not only a catapult system (steam, electro magnetic, magic whatever) but a recovery system, that is arrestor wires strung across the blunt end of the deck. These are not simply random bits of steel cable, strung across the deck, but bits of steel cable with a gobsmackingly complex and expensive set of hydraulic dampers to absorb the loads imposed by a (say) 20 tonne aircraft at 150mph.stopping in (say) 20 metres.

Merry Christmas

cheers

Bill

Also answers another question as to why we are buying the US Army version of the F35 and not the Navy Version – no need for sophisticated take off and landing systems.

Oh, and the use of an Electro magnetic arrestor system when modern detections systems rely on Magnetic Anomaly Detection rather than just RADAR.

That would be MAD wouldn't it?

[Sam Longley 1Participant @samlongley1]

Just googled it & the Chinese claim to have an electro launch system working.

 

So expect Bangood to be selling soon. However, Daily Mail latest is that the bill from Royal mail for collecting import tax may run into £B's & put it out of reach of RN . BBC is blaming Brexit.

Well it is Christmas !!

best wishes

Edited By Sam Longley 1 on 22/12/2017 08:10:00

[Danny M2ZParticipant @dannym2z]

All that money yet something cheap and nasty like this, skillfully used, can cause a lot of damage as it did to HMS Sheffield. **LINK**

I was actually on a military exercise as the events unfolded so followed developments closely. At least you had a PM with the guts to act decisively!

If anything maritime is said to be 'survivable' in a full-on war scenario then maybe the modern nuclear powered submarine has a fighting chance.

Aircraft carrier's may be handy in limited conflicts where the opposition does not possess the technology to take them out, such as in the Persian Gulf but if the s**t hits the fan it's just another big fat juicy target!

I wonder what threat contingency to the U.K. this ship is actually designed to counter?

* Danny M *

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

If you think electromagnetic launch is unrealistic, google 'electromagnetic rail gun'

[Sam Longley 1Participant @samlongley1]

Posted by Danny M2Z on 22/12/2017 08:12:43:

I wonder what threat contingency to the U.K. this ship is actually designed to counter?

I do not think it is meant to act in that way. It is meant to be used as a mobile air base around the world. It's actual presence is as much a deterent as is its use. It is meant for limited military activity in skirmishes where the gov.t feels that we should be involved.

[MWParticipant @mw27036]

Posted by Danny M2Z on 22/12/2017 08:12:43:

I wonder what threat contingency to the U.K. this ship is actually designed to counter?

* Danny M *

 

In terms of "threat" to the country, probably nothing, many a year ago, they used to call the ministry of defence; "The ministry for war", the term at that time, would've been more accurate to call it the M.O.D, given the threat of invasion was actually legitimate,

Now it's probably more accurate to call it the ministry of war, because that's all this is, just another war toy to be used around the globe and bombing the citizenry of failed states and poor countries.  

Michael W

Edited By Michael-w on 22/12/2017 12:08:29

[Sam Longley 1Participant @samlongley1]

Now it's probably more accurate to call it the ministry of war, because that's all this is, just another war toy to be used around the globe and bombing the citizenry of failed states and poor countries.

Have you considered that perhaps it the willingness of our governments in the long & distant past to follow that policy that means you have the sort of life you have now. Now, whether you agree with it is another argument but it could be suggested to be historic fact

 

Edited By Sam Longley 1 on 22/12/2017 13:13:49

[SamsarandaParticipant @samsaranda]

Why do we need to spend billions on very expensive equipment and systems to police anywhere in the world that the politicians fancy takes them. I would have thought that we have had our fingers burnt enough, I speak as a veteran of 22 years service, there are needs that should be addressed at home, we are heading for bankruptcy as a nation unless we curb our extravagant spending, that is government spending and the ever rising personal debt mountain, we should be focus sing on real important issues such as welfare and poverty which afflicts our elderly population.

Dave W

[vintagengineerParticipant @vintagengineer]

50% of all taxes raised are spent on the welfare system ( This includes state pensions) How much more should be spent?

Posted by Samsaranda on 22/12/2017 15:05:03:

Why do we need to spend billions on very expensive equipment and systems to police anywhere in the world that the politicians fancy takes them. I would have thought that we have had our fingers burnt enough, I speak as a veteran of 22 years service, there are needs that should be addressed at home, we are heading for bankruptcy as a nation unless we curb our extravagant spending, that is government spending and the ever rising personal debt mountain, we should be focus sing on real important issues such as welfare and poverty which afflicts our elderly population.

Dave W

[Nigel McBurney 1Participant @nigelmcburney1]

Perhaps we shouldn't have built such a large vessel,our history has lots of instance where biggest is not best,Great Brittain, Titanic,hms Hood, mary rose etc.We all know that the skills required to design build ,maintain such large ships has been lost in this country,we could not even build a foot bridge over the thames without wobbling. and when at sea how will the vessel survive without a protective fleet of smaller warships,the argies did ok with exocets strung onto their planes,it only takes a couple of torpedoes to put a carrier out of action,the US built two super carriers prewarLexington went down in the coral sea because they thought the Japs were inferior. And is the loss of skills and experience that has caused the seals to leak,poor quality assembly or something more serious like shaft misalignment due to flexibility in the hull or the hull moving when launched i.e. from suspended ashore to afloat in the water, ?

[Sam Longley 1Participant @samlongley1]

Posted by Nigel McBurney 1 on 22/12/2017 20:00:08:

We all know that the skills required to design build ,maintain such large ships has been lost in this country,

we could not even build a foot bridge over the thames without wobbling.

. And is the loss of skills and experience that has caused the seals to leak,poor quality assembly or something more serious like shaft misalignment due to flexibility in the hull or the hull moving when launched i.e. from suspended ashore to afloat in the water, ?

1) if design & ability to build has been lost how come we built that one?

2) Our engineers are world renowned for designing buildings , including bridges, all over the world. If the design brief had been – stick a foot bridge up- you could have had one. In this case the brief was for something different. It takes an engineer to design something that " just stays up" & it does now, does it not?

3) This country designs & supplies propellers for warships & merchant navies all over the world. A friend of mine is the MD of such a manufacturer & designed & supplied a prop for the Belgian navy only this year. Stern glands are not such difficult technology they are being fitted to supper carriers every month & the UK manufactures some of them. It may be that this one is of a special design as part of the noise reduction or has some system for maintenance at sea. Certainly if 200litres per hour is really the extent of the leak then that is miniscule in the grand scheme of things. I know 30 ft yachts that leak 5 litres an hour when the engine is running & no one give a d..m

This comment is not directed at the poster in particular but please will people stop putting the UK down. We are actually a lot better than you think. Just because you possibly saw your old job changed as you approached retirement & could not cope with the change you think it is all bad. well it is not. Just get over it & go play in your shed

Edited By Sam Longley 1 on 22/12/2017 20:46:26

[MikeParticipant @mike89748]

Well said, Sam. Let's restore a little national pride.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Lets not wander too deeply into politics. We don't want fallings out in the season of goodwill

Neil

[peak4Participant @peak4]

Posted by Nigel McBurney 1 on 22/12/2017 20:00:08:

……….And is the loss of skills and experience that has caused the seals to leak,poor quality assembly or something more serious like shaft misalignment due to flexibility in the hull or the hull moving when launched i.e. from suspended ashore to afloat in the water, ?

I would suggest not, as was pointed out in a link at the head of Page 2 on this very thread.

More likely a bit abandoned fishing gear, or some other such flotsam/jetsam, at a guess.

Quote

" Aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth has picked up an item of debris around one of her propeller shafts officials have confirmed, quashing earlier rumours of a major malfunction."

[Clive HartlandParticipant @clivehartland94829]

Japanes aircraft sank the Lexington, as it's own aircraft sank a Japanese carrier the day before.

Re. why have a BFO aircraft carrier, the intimidation by the Soviets flying their bombers in simulated attacks on the NATO countries is a good enough reason. I sat in Germany for nearly 7 years acting as a deterrant (Not alone) to Soviet attack and did all exercises backwards in case of an attack. I doubt we would have lasted 48 hours but we did have two 8" Howitzers and nuclear ammo for them.

[ChrisHParticipant @chrish]

Gees, everyone seems to be getting all hot under the collar about this story but in reality, no-one here really knows anything. All we have is a flimsy press report and we all know how dodgy they can be, in fact, generally are. The only people who know are the Navy boys and they are saying nothing. Six pages we have here, all on about something we all know nothing about. We must all be mad. Have we not got sheds to go and play in? Why don't we just leave leaks in warship to those who know a bit about them to sort out quietly and properly; we have better things to occupy our time do we not? Not as though we are blessed with unlimited time, most of us.

Chris

[Paul KempParticipant @paulkemp46892]

Posted by ChrisH on 22/12/2017 23:50:07:

Gees, everyone seems to be getting all hot under the collar about this story but in reality, no-one here really knows anything. All we have is a flimsy press report and we all know how dodgy they can be, in fact, generally are. The only people who know are the Navy boys and they are saying nothing. Six pages we have here, all on about something we all know nothing about. We must all be mad. Have we not got sheds to go and play in? Why don't we just leave leaks in warship to those who know a bit about them to sort out quietly and properly; we have better things to occupy our time do we not? Not as though we are blessed with unlimited time, most of us.

Chris

Absolutely well said Sir. As someone said earlier it's nothing on a big ship. Six pages of opinion and speculation with some qualifying comments "I imagine". "I don't know anything about ships" etc. An issue talked up by the press because there was nothing more important or interesting to report at the time and if that wasn't bad enough then speculated to death on here! Being a cynic I would say the journalists have done an excellent job with a small and pretty insignificant piece of information in being able to generate this much interest! Before anyone else comments I suggest they first research ceramic faced marine seals and speak to someone with shipyard or marine engineering experience.

Paul.

[Bill PudneyParticipant @billpudney37759]

Posted by Nigel McBurney 1 on 22/12/2017 20:00:08:

Perhaps we shouldn't have built such a large vessel,our history has lots of instance where biggest is not best,Great Brittain, Titanic,hms Hood, mary rose etc.We all know that the skills required to design build ,maintain such large ships has been lost in this country,we could not even build a foot bridge over the thames without wobbling. and when at sea how will the vessel survive without a protective fleet of smaller warships,the argies did ok with exocets strung onto their planes,it only takes a couple of torpedoes to put a carrier out of action,the US built two super carriers prewarLexington went down in the coral sea because they thought the Japs were inferior. And is the loss of skills and experience that has caused the seals to leak,poor quality assembly or something more serious like shaft misalignment due to flexibility in the hull or the hull moving when launched i.e. from suspended ashore to afloat in the water, ?

SS Great Britain ….not a failure, maybe because it only had one "t"; Titanic, the failure was to increase speed when there were icebergs about: HMS Hood a failure of politics, it was known that her armour was not right for likely engagements, but the politicians between 1918 and 1939 considered her a most important mobile flagpole which could not be out of service for the time required to update: Mary Rose was something like 33 years old when she sank.

The hull of a ship, especially a warship, can be considered as a box, very stiff and very strong. When being built they are not "suspended", they are built/assembled on very carefully placed blocks. When the ship is being assembled/built, considerable care is taken to ensure that everything is where it should be, to the extent of using lasers to ensure alignment before and after "launching"

For Petes sake, lets just huddle up in our cave and hope that the great big bogeyman goes somewhere else.

Oh and by the way in the mid 60s the War Office, not the Ministry for War changed to the Ministry of Defence

Merry Christmas

cheers

Bill

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Posted by duncan webster on 21/12/2017 11:37:22:

Posted by Hopper on 21/12/2017 03:12:58:

The thing about being a newspaper journalist is you have to be an expert on submarines in the morning for one story and then an expert on horse breeding or some such in the afternoon for the next story. It's a tough job. (And no, you can't just ask an expert, you have to know what to ask and what their answer means in plain English.

So if you don't know what questions to ask, and wouldn't understand the answer anyway why not shut up rather than plastering rubbish across the front page

Nothing would ever get published if that were the case. Journalists have to do the best they can, with the resources and time available. Nature of the beast in a free democracy. It seems in this case they have got the facts right: A very expensive new RN ship is leaking water in through the stern-tube seal, possibly caused by foreign material found wrapped around the external prop shaft. That's an interesting story, as six pages of this thread demonstrates.

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

as six pages of this thread demonstrates.

You think so? I don't. I think its is a thread mostly demonstrating the ineptitude of journalism these days, along with a smattering of petty claims of poor engineering and a few posting about something they have no knowledge of (like the non-existent catapult system).

A non-story, really. Simply inflated by a biased press with nothing better to report and trying to hype something from nothing (and backed up by a minority of ill informed posters, too!).

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Posted by not done it yet on 23/12/2017 07:32:01:

as six pages of this thread demonstrates.

You think so? I don't. I think its is a thread mostly demonstrating the ineptitude of journalism these days,…

…A non-story, really. Simply inflated by a biased press with nothing better to report and trying to hype something from nothing (and backed up by a minority of ill informed posters, too!).

What ineptitude? The linked-to story in about the third post, to the BBC report, seems to stick with the facts: An expensive new RN ship is leaking water through a faulty stern-tube seal. The linked-to story goes on to say the problem occurred during sea trials and that such problems do commonly occur during sea trials and that it is an "embarrassment" to the navy but not a disaster. Seems fair enough.

Nothing better to report? What better to report than how taxpayers' money is being spent? And the state of the nation's defences? Would you rather they stick with Kim Kardashian's latest boyfriend's hairstyle?

A biased press? Are you saying the BBC and The Sun share a common anti-navy agenda? Have you any factual basis for this assertion, or any reason why two so disparate news organizations would have the same bias, or are you simply inserting your own anti-media bias into the statement here?

Edited By Hopper on 23/12/2017 08:10:30

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Theres no problem with the Sun reporting the leak, but giving it banner headlines and making out it is a disaster and a humiliation shows that they don't know what they are talking about. Surely a simple phone call to the Navy's press office would have sorted it out. It should have merited a small paragraph on an inside page, but no they had to mock what they don't understand. Same as when the press finished off the tilting train, but they had some help from that other well respected band of experts, politicians

Edited By duncan webster on 23/12/2017 15:51:42

[MikeParticipant @mike89748]

Duncan is right. As far as the BBC is concerned………….well, don't get me wound up in this festive season of good will to all men.

[pgk pgkParticipant @pgkpgk17461]

My experiences with the press are that they have far less interest in reporting fact than in selling circulation hence sensationalism, drama and sex.all of which may be modified to reflect the politcal leanings of the owner.

I once removed a pellet from the spine of a small patient which then recovered the use of it's legs. Grateful owners informed the press of the success of the difficult procedure. Reported came down asking to see xrays and promptly pulled a ruler from his pocket and gleefully noted that another 2 inches and the pellet would have hit the heart. He was less impressed with my comment that an inch higher and it would have missed the pet!

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by duncan webster on 23/12/2017 12:05:05:

Theres no problem with the Sun reporting the leak, but giving it banner headlines and making out it is a disaster and a humiliation shows that they don't know what they are talking about. Surely a simple phone call to the Navy's press office would have sorted it out. It should have merited a small paragraph on an inside page, but no they had to mock what they don't understand. Same as when the press finished off the tilting trai

Fair enough. Kim Kardashian's latest boyfriend's hairstyle was probably so yesterday at the time the QE story came up…

[Author]

Posts