Jump to content


Photo

Hms Queen Elizabeth


  • Please log in to reply
295 replies to this topic

#281 TonyE

TonyE

    I/Kitsap Militia

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,919 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:Them grate steal beest! and, there history.

Posted 15 August 2017 - 1848 PM

 That said, Its fair to say the RN is the only one that lost warships due to hostile action since the war, and if nothing else that has imprinted a series of lessons.

 

 

Eh....i don`t know Stu..... :ninja: ;) 

https://en.wikipedia...val_War_of_1971



#282 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,974 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 15 August 2017 - 1910 PM

What was the shoot fest at the Falklands? The RN had naval superiority owing to its submarine force, suffered losses from inexperienced land aircraft attack for which it was found ill-prepared. It faced no surface combatants except for CL Belgrano, which never knew what hit her. The Argentines were then overwhelmed ashore.



#283 Jeff

Jeff

    Drum beating laughing boy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,823 posts

Posted 15 August 2017 - 2001 PM

 

 

 

 

Observing both ships at close quarters they are very different workplaces. QE benefits from a 10 year advance in technology and a design philosophy aimed at reducing manning to a minimum. It is slightly unfair to compare a seasoned 8-year-old ship that has been in action for 6 months and inevitably looks battered, with a brand new vessel. QE feels like a more comfortable ship with automation everywhere, while the Bush has a more workman-like interior. A good example is a comparison between the Chief’s mess aboard the Bush and the equivalent Senior Rates dining hall on QE. Both are cafeteria-style eating areas but QE’s is far larger, has carpets and a suspended ceiling. On the Bush the deckhands and pipework are all exposed, whitewashed bulkheads and a lino floor make for a tough, utilitarian atmosphere.

 

I remember the first time I entered a CH-53E and was surprised to see that all the cables, pipes, etc were exposed. I realized that this is actually a plus, as it makes finding damaged stuff and fixing it easier (I guess). I think the same applies to ships.

 

As for the automation, I wonder if there's enough crew to conduct damage control....

 

And all of those drop ceilings and carpets aren't going to be helpful if there's damage, especially fire. It depends on whether it's a warship or a yacht. It's amazing how quickly hard earned lessons can be forgotten. One of the issues with LCS and the US Navy's attempts to dramatically decrease crew size is that even regular maintenance falls by the wayside let alone damage control. Things go TU even in peacetime.



#284 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,873 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 15 August 2017 - 2006 PM

While not at the level of WWII engagements, ships were attacked and defended themselves, too often unsuccessfully.  That's a shoot fest in my book.  It goes without saying that a US task force would not have been badly discomfited  When since WWII has the USN engaged in action that 'exciting'?  The Tonking Gulf Incident is debated, of course.

----

Jeff, hopefully the RN hasn't forgotten the Falklands lesson, that conventional combat can still occur in the Nuclear Age.



#285 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 15 August 2017 - 2121 PM

I'#d be interested to see how the drone pilot managed to keep visual contact with his drone at all times during the landing. And no, looking through an on-board camera doesn't count.

 

The sooner the navy gets point defence lasers the better. (You all know that the USS Ponce has one, and that thus the US has the theoretical capability to back up their military drone exclusion policy and the threat to shoot down any attempts to overfly.

 

Further: this gives more weight to the plans to order licensing for all drones over 250g in the UK and is yet another reason why "we can't have nice things".

Gonna be a lot of dead birds around RN ships in harbors....

If someone is intent on actually causing a problem for a ship, they're not going to license it. 

Did car licenses stop knuckle heads in Iraq driving car bombs? 



#286 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 16 August 2017 - 0155 AM

 

 That said, Its fair to say the RN is the only one that lost warships due to hostile action since the war, and if nothing else that has imprinted a series of lessons.

 

 

Eh....i don`t know Stu..... :ninja: ;)

https://en.wikipedia...val_War_of_1971

 

 

Alright, the only one that matters, dammit! :D

 

I actually read about the submarine sinking a Frigate when I was researching Type 14 class ASW frigates so i really have no excuse I guess.



#287 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 16 August 2017 - 0210 AM

What was the shoot fest at the Falklands? The RN had naval superiority owing to its submarine force, suffered losses from inexperienced land aircraft attack for which it was found ill-prepared. It faced no surface combatants except for CL Belgrano, which never knew what hit her. The Argentines were then overwhelmed ashore.

if you read up on some recent evidence, one Argentinian Submarine (Type 209 San Luis) actually got within torpedo launch distance of HMS Alacrity, and would likely have sunk it if the SST-4 didnt display the same remarkable qualities of not functioning correctly that its German WW2 forebears did. Turns out a few years later they discovered they had all sorts of problems with the Torpdeo's, that the manufacturers at the time denied existed. Just like owning far too few Exocet, not having a functioning submarine torpedo might have cost them the war. Because if we had found there had been an extant submarine threat within range of the task force, we would have gone all in on it. Maybe even pulling back those SSN's from the Argentinian coast to hunt it down, which were proving incredibly useful in raid warning. So no, I dont think we had naval superiority to the degree we needed. Even the SSN fleet at the time were seriously deficient in the matter of armament, which is why Conqueror didnt use Tigerfish to sink the Belgrano, but use straight running Mk8's. Their ability to sink submarines in that period has been questioned, not least by the commanders themselves.

 

As for damage control, we lost 6 warships in the falklands, and might have lost several more if it hadnt been for competent damage control. In fact, I remember seeing a good documentary on the bomb disposal team on HMS Antelope. There is a good case for saying that she would have been saved, if someone on the harbourside  hand not removed the equipment the BD team had put on board the task force for removing fuses. They had to use a .50 cartridge as a squib to rotate the unlocking ring to remove the fuse (it worked kinda like a catherine wheel), and there wasnt any in the task force. They had to use a smaller one and the bomb went off. Expensive lesson.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 16 August 2017 - 0213 AM.


#288 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 16 August 2017 - 0212 AM

 

I'#d be interested to see how the drone pilot managed to keep visual contact with his drone at all times during the landing. And no, looking through an on-board camera doesn't count.

 

The sooner the navy gets point defence lasers the better. (You all know that the USS Ponce has one, and that thus the US has the theoretical capability to back up their military drone exclusion policy and the threat to shoot down any attempts to overfly.

 

Further: this gives more weight to the plans to order licensing for all drones over 250g in the UK and is yet another reason why "we can't have nice things".

Gonna be a lot of dead birds around RN ships in harbors....

If someone is intent on actually causing a problem for a ship, they're not going to license it. 

Did car licenses stop knuckle heads in Iraq driving car bombs? 

 

'You cant use that car bomb here, it doesnt have an MOT!' :D

 

HMS Queen Elizabeth arrives in Portsmouth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...pshire-40936071



#289 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 16 August 2017 - 0227 AM

Incidentally, as far as damage control, this is as viable a lesson as a war.

https://en.wikipedia...cisco_(SSN-711)

 

I was not implying nobody else had these lessons now. Im just saying that for the RN, lowering manpower size on a capital warship I dont believe is a concern over damage control, because if nothing else we had more than enough lessons on the subject from 1982. There are still senior officers whom were there in 82, and I dont think they would take chances on something like that.  If nothing else, the lesson of HMS Nottingham  has just reinforced the idea..

 

As far as moving a taskforce at war over a large area through a submarine force and under air attack, and having to deal with the consequent combat damage at sea without any external support, I dont believe anyone else has done that. The USN came close in Vietnam when doing shore bombardment (and even shot down aircraft via Talos missile) but ive not read of any receiving combat damage as a result.  Neither had the RN since 1953, which makes their pulling it off all the more remarkable.

 

Interestingly, I was reading the other day an article on  one of the lead architects of CV01, the new design to replace HMS Ark Royal in the 1970's, and he said he was glad she was cancelled. Because according to him, they were cutting so many corners in so many areas to make it affordable, it would likely have ended up a dogs breakfast.



#290 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 16 August 2017 - 1118 AM

 

 

Did car licenses stop knuckle heads in Iraq driving car bombs? 

 

'You cant use that car bomb here, it doesnt have an MOT!' :D

 

 

 

Seriously, you can get one shipped to your door in the post. Are we going to require they only be sold by licensed dealers and not at the Sharper Image in the shopping center or out of the Delta Sky Mall magazine? 



#291 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 16 August 2017 - 1140 AM

I know Ryan, ive been flirting with getting one myself. I actually bought a book at Maplins (our replacement for the late lamented Tandys/Radioshack stores) and picked up a book on Drone operation, and it had a chapter on how to make one yourself out of wood, some motors and some speed controllers. Its far easier than building a model aeroplane.

 

I really dont see any realistic way of controlling it. There HAS been a good idea someone had of ensuring that the control system of them can only be unlocked if you input a digit code from having a licence, which means the drone is kind of bound to the owner. I do think that is just going to be a target for hacking by those inclined to do so, or more likely, robbery of those that have them.

 

I mean I can see that something needs to be done about things like this. An few creative placements of mesh screening would probably do the job I would have thought.



#292 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 16 August 2017 - 1235 PM

On topic.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...pshire-40937149



#293 Jeff

Jeff

    Drum beating laughing boy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,823 posts

Posted 17 August 2017 - 1853 PM

Incidentally, as far as damage control, this is as viable a lesson as a war.

https://en.wikipedia...cisco_(SSN-711)

 

I was not implying nobody else had these lessons now. Im just saying that for the RN, lowering manpower size on a capital warship I dont believe is a concern over damage control, because if nothing else we had more than enough lessons on the subject from 1982. There are still senior officers whom were there in 82, and I dont think they would take chances on something like that.  If nothing else, the lesson of HMS Nottingham  has just reinforced the idea..

 

As far as moving a taskforce at war over a large area through a submarine force and under air attack, and having to deal with the consequent combat damage at sea without any external support, I dont believe anyone else has done that. The USN came close in Vietnam when doing shore bombardment (and even shot down aircraft via Talos missile) but ive not read of any receiving combat damage as a result.  Neither had the RN since 1953, which makes their pulling it off all the more remarkable.

 

Interestingly, I was reading the other day an article on  one of the lead architects of CV01, the new design to replace HMS Ark Royal in the 1970's, and he said he was glad she was cancelled. Because according to him, they were cutting so many corners in so many areas to make it affordable, it would likely have ended up a dogs breakfast.

We did have a couple of very serious accidents on carriers during the Vietnam War. We learned that dedicated fire crews can get wiped out in secondary explosions so everyone has to be trained in fighting fires. A few extra bodies can come in handy when secondaries take out a whole chunk of the crew.



#294 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,873 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 17 August 2017 - 1940 PM

It's always been standard procedure that all hands receive and practice damage control training.  


Edited by shep854, 17 August 2017 - 1941 PM.


#295 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,901 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 19 August 2017 - 0608 AM

The government are bringing in some legislation around drones - basically you'll need to pass a theory test to be awarded a licence to own one. The technology is so ubiquitous now (I have a friend locally here in the middle of nowhere who has a successful business making accessories for drones) that I can't see it being excessively legislated here or in the States. The thing is it really lends itself to misuse in a whole variety of ways which terrorists here fortunately have yet to discover. That said, there are far simpler technologies that could cause massive dislocation and death which only require a little imagination - something indoctrinated terrorists fortunately tend to lack.



#296 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,873 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 19 August 2017 - 0748 AM

The Rus are on it:

http://www.popularme...e-ukraine-ammo/

landscape-1501179935-kaboom.png






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users