Proposed Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier design
United Kingdom
Builders:	BAE Systems Thales Group KBR VT Group Babcock International Group
Preceding class:	Invincible class
Following class:	N/A
In service:	2014[]
Ships in Class
Ships in class:	2
Ships planned:	Queen Elizabeth[] Prince of Wales[0]
General Characteristics
Displacement:	65,000 tonnes[0]
Length:	284 metres (931 ft)[0]
Beam:	39 metres (waterline) c.73 metres overall[0]
Draught:	11 metres[0]
Range:	10,000 nautical miles (18,520 km)
Capacity:	1,450
Complement:	600
Aircraft complement:	40 aircraft, including: 36 F-35 Lightning II
Aircraft facilities:	|

The Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers (formerly CVF)^[2] are a new generation of aircraft carrier being developed for the Royal Navy. The two vessels, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales^[0] are expected to enter service in 2014 and 2016 respectively.^[0] The vessels will displace approximately 65,000 tonnes each.

The need to replace the ageing Invincible class aircraft carriers was confirmed by the 1998 Strategic Defence Review. From six contractors the Ministry of Defence (MoD) selected Thales and BAE Systems in late 1999 to compete for the final contract. In September 2002 the MoD announced that the Royal Navy and RAF will operate the STOVL F-35B Lightning II variant and further that the carriers would take the form of large, conventional carriers, which will initially be adapted for STOVL operations. On January 30 2003 the MoD announced that the Thales design had won the competition but that BAE Systems would operate as prime contractor. The two companies are now part of a "carrier alliance" with the MoD and other companies.

The contract for the vessels was announced on 25 July 2007 by the Secretary of State for Defence Des Browne, ending several years of delay over cost issues and British naval shipbuilding restructuring.^[0] The cost is estimated to be £3.9 billion.^[0]

History

Requirement

The 22,000 tonne Invincible class aircraft carriers, Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Royal, were designed for Cold War anti-submarine warfare in the North Atlantic as part of a combined NATO fleet and have limited space for offensive aircraft (nine Harrier GR7s or Sea Harriers).

In 1982 Invincible joined the task force dispatched to recover the Falkland Islands (together with the older and larger HMS Hermes). This conflict demonstrated the need to maintain aircraft carriers to support the United Kingdom's foreign policy. Since the end of the Cold War the Invincible class ships have operated in a more traditional aircraft carrier mission, that of power projection. As a result the Royal Air Force's Harrier GR7 have been routinely deployed on them and the ships have been modified to carry more aircraft and ammunition (notably with the removal of the Sea Dart defensive weapon system).

However, the capability of the Invincible class has been limited by the size of the vessels. The lack of dedicated Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft such as the E-2C Hawkeye was a significant liability during the Falklands War. As the Invincible class could not deploy such aircraft, the Royal Navy deployed inadequate solutions such as the Sea King AEW.2, which suffered from the range and sensor payload capabilities of helicopters versus fixed-wing aircraft. Despite this, formal studies did not begin until 1994 regarding the replacement of the ships, when it became more clear that larger carriers with larger air groups are necessary.

Strategic Defence Review

In May 1997 the election of the new Labour government saw the launch of the Strategic Defence Review (SDR). This review re-evaluated every weapon system (active or in procurement) with the exception of the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Vanguard class ballistic missile submarines.The report in December 1998 concluded that aircraft carriers offered the following:

• Ability to operate offensive aircraft abroad when foreign basing may be denied.
• All required space and infrastructure; where foreign bases are available they are not always available early in a conflict and infrastructure is often lacking.
• A coercive and deterrent effect when deployed to a trouble spot.

The report concluded "The emphasis is now on increased offensive air power, and an ability to operate the largest possible range of aircraft in the widest possible range of roles. When the current carrier force reaches the end of its planned life, we plan to replace it with two larger vessels. Work will now begin to refine our requirements but present thinking suggests that they might be of the order of 30,000–40,000 tonnes and capable of deploying up to 50 aircraft, including helicopters." While it has been suggested that reducing the carrier force by one vessel will lead to a reduction in the ability of the Royal Navy to project carrier air power, it is planned that advanced design and maintenance techniques will eliminate the present requirement for major refits. In addition, HMS Ocean, a specialised helicopter landing platform, fills a role previously undertaken by the Invincible class carriers.

Design studies

On 25 January 1999 six companies were invited to tender for the assessment phase of the project; Boeing, British Aerospace, Lockheed Martin, Marconi Electronic Systems, Raytheon and Thomson-CSF.^[5] On 23 November 1999 the MoD awarded detailed assessment studies to two consortia, one led by BAe (renamed BAE Systems on 30 November) and one led by Thomson-CSF (renamed Thales Group in 2000). The brief required up to six designs from each consortium with airgroups of 30 to 40 Future Joint Combat Aircraft (FJCA). The contracts were split into phases; The first GB£5.9 million phase was for design assessment which would form part of the aircraft selection, the second GB£23.5 million phase involved "risk reduction on the preferred carrier design option."^[6]

Possible configurations of the vessels were varied:

• STOVL - F-35B Lightning II

Short Take-Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL), the current choice for UK carrier air power. A STOVL CVF would remove the need for costly steam catapults and arrestor gear (CATOBAR), and would also take advantage of the UK lead in STOVL technology. This is at the expense of aircraft range and payload capability (for an equal size CATOBAR carrier). However the difference in capability between an F-35B and F-35C is slight compared to the gulf in capability between the Harrier and, for example, the F/A-18. As RN and RAF Harrier forces have been merged it will have to be defined in the future how this F-35 will be managed. More important is that currently there are no STOVL aircraft for AWACS role or ASW. One option is using an AWACS version of V-22 Osprey, to be developed from scratch.

• STOBAR - Eurofighter Typhoon (Navalised)

Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery (STOBAR) again removes the requirement for the expense of catapults but uses arrestor gear. In this way conventional aircraft (with modification) can be used. Any STOBAR design would most likely have used a navalised version of the Eurofighter Typhoon; i.e. strengthened landing gear, improved flight control system and inclusion of an arrestor hook. The advantages of this would be increased range, manoeuvrability and payload compared to a STOVL design and higher operating efficiency than a CATOBAR design. Disadvantages include lower stealth characteristics than the F-35, as well as the very high cost of navalising the Typhoon (with little or no export potential). The option of buying the French Rafale-M and adapting to this solution was not analyzed, even when France showed interest in the project.

• CATOBAR - F-35C Lightning II - F/A-18E/F Super Hornet - Rafale M

A Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery CVF would have used catapults and arrestor cables and an angled flight deck with existing naval aircraft, most likely the F/A-18 or Rafale-M. This has the advantage of reducing technical risk for development of both the aircraft and carriers and offering maximum payload and range capabilities. There are disadvantages however, including higher operating costs and the minimal British involvement in development of the aircraft due to the "off-the-shelf" purchase.

• "Hybrid"

A late BAE submission was a hybrid carrier, featuring a STOVL ski-jump with angled flight deck, catapults and arrestor cables. Advantages of this design include the ability to operate STOVL offensive aircraft and CATOBAR AEW aircraft (e.g. E-2 Hawkeye).

Aircraft and carrier format selection

On January 17, 2001 the UK signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) for full participation in the Joint Strike Fighter Programme, confirming the JSF as the FJCA. This gave the UK significant input into aircraft design and the choice between the Lockheed X-35 and Boeing X-32. On 26 October 2001 the DoD announced that Lockheed Martin had won the JSF contract.

On 30 September 2002 the MoD announced that the Royal Navy and RAF will operate the STOVL F-35B variant. At the same time it was announced that the carriers would take the form of large, conventional carriers, which will be adapted for STOVL operations. The carriers, expected to remain in service for 50 years, will be convertible to CATOBAR operations for the generation of aircraft after the F-35.

Carrier Alliance

On 30 January 2003 the Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon announced that the Thales Group design had won the competition but that BAE Systems would operate as prime contractor.^[7] These two companies, with the MoD, formed the "Carrier Alliance".

During a speech on 21 July 2004 Geoff Hoon announced a one year delay to allow contractual and cost issues to be resolved. In February 2005 the MoD announced that Kellog Brown & Root UK Ltd had been selected as "Physical Integrator" for the project, overseeing the finalisation of the design and the construction process. This was due to concerns that neither BAE nor Thales had the capacity to oversee the construction on their own.

The building of the carriers was confirmed in December 2005. A statement said "the Alliance team of MoD, BAE Systems, Thales and KBR, is to be joined by VT Group and Babcock. The building is to be across four shipyards with final assembly at Rosyth.

MOPA2

Main article: Future French aircraft carrier

MOPA2 is the DCN/Thales company charged with the design of the second French aircraft-carrier (CVF-Fr) from the CVF design. This company is also to be used to advise the carrier alliance on how best to facilitate the adaptation of the common design to the needs of the French Navy. The Carrier Alliance recently modified the size of the flight deck to allow a better adaptation for the CATOBAR design, a solution adopted for France and that the United Kingdom want to keep in possibility for the future (future proof).

Design

The vessels will displace approximately 65,000 tonnes each, almost three times the displacement of the current Invincible class. The vessels will be the largest and most powerful surface warships ever built in the UK and the most capable aircraft carriers outside of the U.S. Navy. ^[8] Giving evidence to the House of Commons Defence Committee, the First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Alan West explained that interoperability with the United States Navy was as much a deciding factor of the size of the carriers as the firepower of the carrier's airwing:

[for a] deep strike package, we have done …quite detailed calculations and we have come out with the figure of 36 joint strike fighters …that is the thing that has made us arrive at that size of deck and that size of ship, to enable that to happen. I have talked with the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) in America. He is very keen for us to get these because he sees us slotting in with his carrier groups. He really wants us to have these, but he wants us to have the same sort of clout as one of their carriers.

The design features two small island structures, as opposed to the large single island of the Nimitz-class, and two deck lifts. The carrier's aircraft will operate in the Short Take-Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) role. The carrier will initially be fitted with a ski-jump but will be fully convertible to the Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery (CATOBAR) role. This will allow a second generation of aircraft to operate from the vessels after the expected 20 year service life of the F-35.

Carrier Air Group

The vessels are expected to be capable of carrying 40 fixed wing and rotary aircraft.

Each carrier will field an air wing of around 36 F-35 Lightning II strike fighters as well as helicopters.^[9] In context, one carrier's air wing is almost three times the size of the Tornado GR.1 force deployed in Operation Desert Fox and the same number as the Tornado GR.4/Harrier GR.7 offensive fleet which participated in Operation Telic. Both of these land based deployments required the agreement of a local friendly nation.

The Airborne Surveillance and Control (ASaC) component began as "Future Organic Airborne Early Warning" (FOAEW), with contracts being placed with BAE/Northrop Grumman and Thales in April 2001.^[10] In April 2002 BAE and Northrop Grumman received a follow-on study contract for Phase II of the project by then renamed Maritime Airborne Surveillance & Control (MASC).^[11]

The crew will be about 600, only 15 more than Invincible, indicating the high level of automation being integrated into the ships' systems. Accommodation for 1,450 will be available.

Powerplant

The MoD decided not to use nuclear propulsion due to its high costs.^[12] The carrier's propulsion system will be Integrated Full Electric Propulsion (IFEP) with Rolls-Royce Marine Trent MT30 36 MW gas turbine generator units.

The optimum location for the position of the main propulsion system is being examined, with maximising the hangar space below decks a major consideration. The current design places one gas turbine generator unit under each island in the starboard sponson, on 4 deck. The unrefuelled range of the carrier will be 10,000 nautical miles (18 520 km).

Future proof

The UK has opted to build a larger carrier than strictly necessary for operation of the STOVL F-35B version. This allows the carrier to be designed for, but not with, catapults and arrestor wires for conventional aircraft launch and recovery (CATOBAR). The carrier is thus said to be future proof, allowing it to operate a generation of aircraft beyond the F-35, or perhaps the more conventional F-35C. It should be noted that reduction in size, particularly flight deck and hangar area, has a proportionally far greater effect on sortie generation capabilities than on costs, and the current design size represents better value for the RN than many smaller designs.

Systems

Many of the systems remain unspecified, but most of the designs that have been released so far show a BAE Systems Insyte/Thales S1850M long range radar on the forward island structure. Some have also shown a BAE Systems Insyte SAMPSON radar on the rear island.

Size issues

With the proposed specification of 65,000 tonnes displacement and a length of 284 m (931 ft) there is currently no suitable dry dock for a Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier at either of the RN's two main naval bases, Portsmouth Naval Base or Devonport Naval Base. The No.10 Dock at Devonport is restricted to ships of about 40,000 tonnes and 259 m (850 ft) length, while the biggest two docks at Portsmouth are slightly smaller (259 m long with a 33 m beam, 256 m long respectively).

Construction

In preparation for the construction phase of the project, long-lead items were ordered in Autumn 2007, including key parts of the main and emergency propulsion systems for the new aircraft carriers from Wärtsilä.^[13]

See also

• Supercarrier
• Future of the Royal Navy
• European defence procurement
• United States Navy Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carrier and LHA-6

References

External links

• Queen Elizabeth class factsheet (Ministry of Defence)
• Naval-Technology
• Navy Matters
• Computer-generated Imagery of the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier

•  • [ e] Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier
Queen Elizabeth | Prince of Wales
List of aircraft carriers of the Royal Navy