Military Review

In Britain, they called the condition under which the aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth could turn "into an easy target for the enemy"

51

Recently it became known that the British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08) begins training with fifth-generation fighters F-35B. A British Navy aircraft carrier left Portsmouth.


The British aircraft carrier will conduct training with fighters assigned to the 211st Squadron of the US Marine Corps. The squadron is based in Arizona, at Yuma Airfield. They will be used for training, which are called GroupEx.

Squadron spokesman Lieutenant Zaicheri Bodner:

GroupEx will allow you to establish the compatibility of aircraft with an aircraft carrier at this stage. In turn, this will help eliminate possible risks in the interaction between the British Navy and the fighters of the US Marine Corps.

Bodner said the long flight required "tremendous skill from both the pilots and the technical staff."

Meanwhile, in Britain, experts note that the British aircraft carrier fleet is actually becoming more dependent on the American fighter aviation... Any training for the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth must be coordinated with the Pentagon for the use of modern US ILC fighters.

It was noted that this could lead to "increased risks when performing a task at sea." It is stated, for example, that "the enemy is capable of interfering with the flight of fighters from the United States, which will force them either to change course, or" even put their joint training with the British aircraft carrier at risk. " In addition, it is indicated that if an aircraft carrier moves to the shores of the United States without a fighter wing (for training using American F-35Bs off the coast of the United States), then it will need several cover ships at once. This is an important condition, otherwise it will turn into an “easy target for the enemy”.

Exit of the British Navy aircraft carrier from Portsmouth:

51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 11 September 2020 15: 43
    +5
    My only question is why this queen is still in England. She was supposed to hang out 12 miles against Hong Kong a couple of months ago. What to call them after that balabolas. So the old shabby toothless Anglican lion also suffers from sclerosis. lol
  2. Borik
    Borik 11 September 2020 15: 44
    +4
    There is an aircraft carrier, but there is no aviation for it yet. And in order to train your pilots you have to bow to Uncle Sam and you will train a lot with such Makar, because your uncle can kick up.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 11 September 2020 16: 05
      +2
      Aircraft purchased and already trained on Queen Elizabeth

      An F-35B fighter jet aboard the British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, October 15, 2019
      1. Borik
        Borik 11 September 2020 16: 52
        +1
        voyaka uh (Alexey)
        Aircraft purchased and already trained on Queen Elizabeth


        Yes, the planes have been purchased, and they are still being mastered by the flight crew, but how many of them arrived in England? Somewhere 16-18 pieces,. And for each aircraft carrier you need 24, well, yes, this number is planned for each AB for the duration of hostilities. In peacetime, only 12. This means that one AV group will be in full force. The same amount should be received by 2022. So I say that while the aircraft carrier has not been manned to a regular state with aviation.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 12 September 2020 01: 39
          0
          You're right. The F-35B is in high demand. Orders for all types of F-35 are scheduled for 7 years
          forward. And with the popular vertical bars "B" they complete or assemble
          completing their light aircraft carriers in Japan, South Korea, England, Italy, Spain.
          Thinks Singapore and others.
          There are not enough planes. Given that Italy and Japan will add from their own
          factories, plus the main American.
      2. Old Michael
        Old Michael 12 September 2020 00: 03
        +1
        Aircraft purchased and already trained on Queen Elizabeth


        "Technology for the Youth" 1974-08, page 63
    2. Sergey39
      Sergey39 11 September 2020 16: 08
      +1
      Quote: Borik
      There is an aircraft carrier, but there is no aviation for it yet.

      There is aviation. From the USA. The aircraft carrier actually came under the control of the Pentagon.
    3. NEXUS
      NEXUS 11 September 2020 20: 21
      +2
      Quote: Borik
      There is an aircraft carrier, but there is no aviation for it yet. And in order to train your pilots you have to bow to Uncle Sam and you will train a lot with such Makar, because your uncle can kick up.

      It will not kick up, since London and Washington are the capitals of the same principality, relatively speaking. That is why the British do not particularly worry about tanks, navy, etc. ... after all, there is a watchdog in the form of the United States.
    4. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 September 2020 05: 21
      0
      Uncle Sam and you will train a lot with such Makar, because Uncle can kick up.

      There are examples when the uncle kicked up ??

      If only to say something.
  3. prior
    prior 11 September 2020 15: 46
    +3
    An expensive high-tech "toy".
    But alas, neither London nor Portsmouth will save from destruction in case of war.
    And without "land" and it is worth nothing.
    1. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 11 September 2020 15: 56
      +2
      Rosacharuyu, Portsmouth is almost always empty. The nuclear submarine base, wow. 4 boats and airfields for the jump of US strategists and there is nothing more to equalize in England. The French are even more problematic. hi
  4. Doccor18
    Doccor18 11 September 2020 15: 51
    +5
    Empires come and go. This one is on the verge of extinction ...
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 11 September 2020 16: 00
      +4
      The British Empire disappeared 50 years ago.
      And he does not care about this. Has turned into an ordinary country - Britain.
      The British stopped calling themselves "Great Britain" for a long time.
      Adequate perception of reality. fellow
      1. lucul
        lucul 11 September 2020 16: 04
        +3
        The British Empire disappeared 50 years ago.
        And he does not care about this. Has turned into an ordinary country - Britain.
        The British stopped calling themselves "Great Britain" for a long time.
        Adequate perception of reality.

        You can argue in some form, but in content, I would rather agree with you.
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 11 September 2020 16: 05
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Adequate perception of reality.

        There is no adequate perception of reality there to this day ..... Continuous phantom pains ...
      3. d4rkmesa
        d4rkmesa 11 September 2020 16: 21
        +4
        Not certainly in that way. Former dominions, Canada and Australia are quite toothy countries with military budgets of over $ 20 billion a year. Although nothing threatens them, tk. do not border either China or Russia, but they have very large ambitions, for example, in controlling waters far from their territorial waters. Several "ordinary countries" are already a force that can be demonstrated at the Russian borders. It is better not to experience illusions about funny Canadians from TV shows.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 11 September 2020 16: 35
          +1
          You mean the Commonwealth of Nations (or British Commonwealth). It's really
          serious military and economic strength.
          But this support for Britain by former colonies
          or dominions - voluntary. Britain can ask for help
          but cannot claim it.
          But in fact, in the event of a crisis, Britain can quickly mobilize large
          military, economic, raw materials, financial resources from
          Canada, Australia, New Zealand. And even India, which,
          oddly enough, it also includes.
          It is even more interesting that the British Commonwealth is asking
          new countries. belay Rwanda was admitted in 2009.
          But a number of African countries have left the Commonwealth.
      4. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 11 September 2020 17: 17
        0
        She has not disappeared anywhere, look who is the ruler of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and others like them. What powers does this ruler have (hint) And at the same time, keep an eye on the money. For example, for the Rothschilds and others like them. And at the same time, look at the rolls of almost all amerskih presidents, whose descendants they are. We, in the NKVD, have no coincidences. The Empire did not disappear anywhere, it just disguised itself.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 11 September 2020 17: 47
          -1
          "We, in the NKVD, there are no coincidences" ////
          ------
          I know because you wear aluminum pans on your heads,
          to escape the harmful radiation of the Rothschilds. laughing
          Keep watching bully
          Here is an American president - a typical descendant of British kings:
          1. Baron pardus
            Baron pardus 11 September 2020 18: 40
            -3
            You are an ignoramus and a slvbak, sir. No aluminum for weaklings. Only hardcore, only cast iron and lead. And not only on the head, thyroid gland and adrenal glands must be protected. Only a complete weakling and dunce will protect only the brain and only aluminum. And the real clarified ones make a Faraday cage out of the bedroom so that they are not commanded in a dream by the Illuminati, and the NWO adherents. They even showed it in the film, but for some reason they stopped showing the film. As well as the movie "They live" which clearly rips the veil from the conspiracy of the Illuminati, like them, who work for the reptilians from Nibiru. This film also disappeared from the screens. And not a creep. The ram, by the way, is a distant relative of both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. And the only American prezik who is not a distant descendant of the British royal house is Van Buren. Baran Huseynovich, by the way, is a mulatto, and is also a distant descendant of the British royal house.
            1. Revolver
              Revolver 12 September 2020 03: 22
              +1
              He is Kenyan. Kenya, by the way, is part of the British Commonwealth.
            2. Crash
              Crash 12 September 2020 13: 28
              0
              which clearly rips the veils off the conspiracy of the Illuminati, like them, who work for the reptilians from Nibiru

              The dude is flattening wassat dump laughing
          2. Volder
            Volder 11 September 2020 18: 42
            -1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            I know, because you wear aluminum pans on your heads to protect yourself from the harmful radiation of the Rothschilds.
            Pans on their heads make it difficult to understand the harmfulness of the Rothschilds, who love to crush everything they can reach for themselves. Remind you of who are called potheads?
          3. cost
            cost 11 September 2020 21: 45
            0
            Alexey hi
            Well, Obama has a mother by birth. belongs to the American aristocracy - Dunham, but Clinton from the very, that is not the common people of the so-called. middle class
      5. Volder
        Volder 11 September 2020 18: 33
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        The British stopped calling themselves "Great Britain" for a long time. Adequate perception of reality.
        But the "exceptional" Americans do not even think of throwing off the status of hegemon and world gendarme from their country. Does this mean that they are inadequate, according to your logic? :)
  5. paul3390
    paul3390 11 September 2020 15: 54
    -3
    I don’t understand at all why Small Britain is still considered a great power .. So they also brazenly violate the non-proliferation treaty - missiles with warheads on British SSBNs are American! They have long forgotten how to make their own. How is it that not a nuclear power - can be considered a type of great in the nonesh world?
    1. Avior
      Avior 11 September 2020 17: 19
      +1
      No, they do not violate the nonproliferation treaty, they have the right to receive from the States, since both countries have the required technologies and participants in the nonproliferation regime
      1. paul3390
        paul3390 11 September 2020 17: 21
        -2
        Let them prove they have technology. When was the last time they made their missile or warhead?
        Although yes - the treaty has long been outdated, because it treats the nuclear powers as those that were produced by the broads before 01.01.1967/XNUMX/XNUMX ... Well, what if the country has lost its production capacity since that time?
        1. Avior
          Avior 11 September 2020 23: 04
          0
          it has nothing to do with production capabilities in the NPT.
          There are at least half a dozen countries that are technically capable of creating nuclear weapons in a short time.
      2. Sanichsan
        Sanichsan 12 September 2020 20: 24
        0
        Quote: Avior
        since both countries have the required technologies and participants in the nonproliferation regime

        no, not both. USA only. quite recently there was a scandal when the Britons came to the United States that they should develop new nuclear warheads for them, naturally at the expense of the United States laughing so they seem to have lost technology and specialists too. request
    2. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 11 September 2020 18: 45
      0
      Money and connections of the British financial and not only the elite. Empires disintegrate from within. And there were no revolutions and coups in Britain for a very long time, probably because there is no British Embassy in Britain. Have you ever wondered why all the "non-regime fighters against the regimes" from all countries flee not so much to the United States as to Britain?
  6. Igor Borisov_2
    Igor Borisov_2 11 September 2020 16: 09
    +1
    It was necessary to leave the old proven "Sea Harriers". Still would have served ...
    1. spech
      spech 11 September 2020 16: 22
      +1
      So "Uncle Sam" needed the harriers for spare parts, so I had to agree on the 35th.
    2. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 11 September 2020 18: 56
      0
      The Harrier is a great car and our Marines loved it. It seems to me that it was necessary to make Harrier 2. With a new engine, supercruise ability, and a hrhshim radar, something like PS05A, Raven, it is only 160kg or AN / APG-83, it stands at ph16.
      1. Avior
        Avior 11 September 2020 23: 01
        0
        You will not believe smile
        BAE Harrier II
        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Harrier_II
  7. 1536
    1536 11 September 2020 16: 26
    0
    I read the title and involuntarily thought: "Is it really a" beginner "? There was no point in reading further.
  8. mvg
    mvg 11 September 2020 17: 42
    -1
    We would have a couple of them at the Pacific Fleet. A beautiful piece of glass. With them, you can ensure the exit of SSBNs from the base. MIG-29K can be based on them
    1. Volder
      Volder 11 September 2020 18: 51
      0
      Quote: mvg
      We would have a couple of them at the Pacific Fleet. A beautiful piece of glass. With them, you can ensure the exit of SSBNs from the base. MIG-29K can be based on them

      Ensuring the exit of SSBNs from the base is not the task of aircraft carriers. Aircraft carriers have a different purpose ...
      1. mvg
        mvg 11 September 2020 19: 20
        0
        is not the mission of aircraft carriers

        Just. Covering SSBNs from above, scare off Poseidons, as well as NK escorts. No wonder in Soviet times there was a grouping of ships in the Mediterranean Sea. Its task is to hold out for 40-50 minutes, but ICBMs must be fired. It includes aircraft-carrying cruisers pr 1123 of the Kiev type. It was believed that they live for about 40 minutes.
        1. Volder
          Volder 11 September 2020 20: 50
          -1
          Quote: mvg
          Covering SSBNs from above, scare off Poseidons, as well as NK escorts.
          They are frightened off by other means from the shore: interceptor fighters, which fly into the deployment area in advance, and the S-400 air defense system, the range of which is 400 km. In order to destroy the submarine from above with an anti-submarine aircraft, this aircraft must enter the air defense zone. These measures are enough for a strategic submarine missile carrier to leave the base.
          No wonder in Soviet times there was a grouping of ships in the Mediterranean Sea. It includes aircraft-carrying cruisers pr 1123 of the Kiev type.
          The tactics have changed: the Khmeimim airbase is a land-based aircraft carrier.
          1. mvg
            mvg 11 September 2020 21: 34
            0
            SAM S-400, the range of which is 400 km

            Escho one. See the aviation and naval strengths of Japan, Korea and plus Okinawa. And our parts. It is US that will have to scare away Virginia and SeaWolf from Our bases, while leaving the bases so that Boreas and Squids can leave. This is no longer possible without the use of SNF.
            The S-400 has never shot down anyone, except for targets. Especially for 400 km. He hasn't hit anyone yet.
            Khmeimim airbase is a land based aircraft carrier

            Look at the composition of the airbase wing. It is several times smaller than Nzhirling alone. And in Mediterranean there are 6 fleets of the USA, France, Italy, Spain, etc. Too loud for Tartus and Hmeimim.
            1. Volder
              Volder 11 September 2020 22: 25
              -1
              Quote: mvg
              See the aviation and naval strengths of Japan, Korea and plus Okinawa.
              You are talking about air cover for our SSBNs, so I am looking ONLY at anti-submarine aircraft.
              It will be us who will have to scare Virginia and SeaWolf away from Our bases, while leaving the bases so that Boreas and Squids can leave.
              How famously you changed the subject. To scare off enemy submarines, we have multipurpose nuclear submarines, diesel-electric submarines, MPK, BOD 1155, corvettes 20380/85 are under construction, and of course anti-submarine aircraft.
              This is no longer possible without the use of strategic nuclear forces.
              Of course, if torpedoes, then certainly nuclear. You yourself are not funny from your words?
              Look at the composition of the airbase wing. It is several times smaller than Nzhirling alone.
              The composition of the wing at the base can be increased, if necessary, by transferring aircraft from Russia there.
              And in Mediterranean there are 6 fleets of the USA, France, Italy, Spain, etc.
              Their entire fleet will be sunk by Russian missiles that cannot be shot down.
              1. mvg
                mvg 11 September 2020 23: 38
                -1
                Their entire fleet will be sunk by Russian missiles that cannot be shot down.

                I will screen this phrase. If I may. Maybe even a patent ... if not against it. winked
                Khmeimim is not rubber. Even when there were 50 boards, she was already suffocating. And around KSA, KUWAIT, Oman, UAE, Turkey, i.e. dozens of bases and allies. Turkey has 200+ aircraft, KSA has more than 70 Typhoons and the same number of F-15 SAs, in the most modern configuration. Israel has 300+ aircraft and the most trained Air Force in the world. Question for connoisseurs: How long will Khmeimim last?
                Of course, if torpedoes, then necessarily nuclear

                We have just begun to receive torpedoes comparable to the Mk48 arr 80gg. The United States builds more Virginias per year than our old diesel-electric submarines 636,6.
                All routes of our 955A and 667 BRDM access to the DB (today there are about 5 aircraft in the Pacific Fleet) are known. They will be opposed by 20+ diesel-electric submarines of the MSS Japan, and the Korean Navy, plus 30-40 submarines of the US Navy. This is optimistic. Really more.
                Therefore, first, release the DB route, then cover it from the Orions and Poseidons (which are exactly covered by the aviation of Japan and Korea, together with the US Air Force) and withdraw the SSBN. If they are not destroyed at the bases.
                PS: And so everything is not bad.
                1. Volder
                  Volder 22 September 2020 07: 56
                  0
                  Quote: mvg
                  And around KSA, KUWAIT, Oman, UAE, Turkey, i.e. dozens of bases and allies.
                  And this whole armada, of course, will simultaneously attack the Russian bases in Syria, having previously reconciled and agreed with each other. Losing several dozen aircraft due to the S-400 and Russian interceptors is worth it and is acceptable damage. For what? Probably in order to take over Syria by driving out the Russians. But how to divide it among themselves? It will equally fail because of the United States. In general, the further I develop your thought, the funnier it becomes to me.
                  Turkey has 200+ aircraft, KSA has more than 70 Typhoons and the same number of F-15 SAs, in the most modern configuration. Israel has 300+ aircraft and the most trained Air Force in the world. Question for connoisseurs: How long will Khmeimim last?
                  Khmeimim may not hold out, but enemy airfields will be destroyed along with our base. It is foolish to expect that such an attack will not remain without a counter-strike. Russia will pull up bombers with long-range missiles ...
                  All routes of our 955A and 667 BRDM access to the database are known.
                  Stop making me laugh! To withdraw the strategists from the bases, appropriate anti-submarine monitoring activities are being carried out, and far from the coast, the submarines disappear. Finding them is like finding a needle in a haystack.
                  They will be opposed by 20+ diesel-electric submarines of the MSS Japan, and the Korean Navy, plus 30-40 submarines of the US Navy.
                  The enemy will not let all his submarine forces in one direction, exposing others. And the combat readiness of enemy submarines is clearly not 100%. I will once again hint to you: Japan and / or Korea will not go to war against Russia alone. Only together with the USA. And if the United States attacks, it will receive a nuclear strike in return. In all other cases, the Russian Federation can cope without nuclear weapons.
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 12 September 2020 09: 17
                0
                Quote: Volder
                To scare off enemy submarines, we have multipurpose nuclear submarines

                In theory - 12 pieces. In practice - 8-9 (taking into account repairs), which, in addition to providing SSBNs, will have to deal with the enemy's NK.
                Now we have one SSNS for the entire Pacific Fleet.
                Quote: Volder
                IPC

                Albatrosses? So they have been crying for a long time - they have been out for 30-35 years.
                And yet there are no new IPCs even in the draft.
                Quote: Volder
                BOD 1155

                7 pieces for two fleets. With the same problem - "Kulakov" can soon be awarded the medal "40 years in the ranks".
                Quote: Volder
                and of course anti-submarine aircraft.

                What kind? Upgraded IL-38 with gliders from the time of "dear Leonid Ilyich" and development equipment of the late 90s? Or ... or everything. The Russian Federation has no other basic machines for the PLO aircraft.
                1. Volder
                  Volder 22 September 2020 08: 25
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  In practice - 8-9 (including repair), which, in addition to providing SSBNs, will have to deal with the enemy's NK. Now we have one SSNS for the entire Pacific Fleet.
                  This is enough to scare away enemy submarines from SSBNs along the route from the base. And then the strategist will disappear, finding him in the sea / ocean is like finding a needle in a haystack.
                  Albatrosses? So they have been crying for a long time - they have been out for 30-35 years.
                  Nevertheless, they are in the ranks and carry out combat missions. They will definitely serve for another 10 years.
                  And yet there are no new IPCs even in the draft.
                  With the advent of Project 22380 in the fleet, new IPCs will not be needed.
                  BOD 1155 7 units for two fleets. With the same problem - "Kulakov" can soon be awarded the medal "40 years in the ranks".
                  Nevertheless, they are in the ranks and effectively carry out combat missions. 10 years will serve for sure. And in the future they will be replaced by frigates 22350 and corvettes 22385. By the way, the oldest US destroyers are also 35-40 years old.
                  Upgraded IL-38 with gliders from the time of "dear Leonid Ilyich" and development equipment of the late 90s? The Russian Federation has no other basic machines for the PLO aircraft.
                  There are enough of them to carry out search activities off the coast of the Russian Federation and withdraw strategic nuclear submarines from bases.
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 12 September 2020 09: 08
            0
            Quote: Volder
            They are scared off by other means from the shore: interceptor fighters, which fly into the deployment area in advance.

            Uugu ... on duty. To which, in which case, reinforcements from the shore come. Or it is not suitable - if the time of approach of the detected enemy forces at the launch range is shorter, this is the time for the approach of reinforcements. That is, the patrol line cannot be moved further than 350-400 km.
            Quote: Volder
            and the S-400 air defense system, the range of which is 400 km.

            You just forgot to add: "for targets at altitudes of 8 km or more." Because the Earth is round, and nobody canceled the radio horizon.
  9. Volder
    Volder 11 September 2020 18: 27
    -2
    The aircraft carrier will turn into an "easy target for the enemy" if it decides to approach the shores of Russia or China. In all other cases, almost nothing threatens him.
  10. veritas
    veritas 11 September 2020 21: 10
    +1
    Britain and the United States are essentially one state, what kind of dependence is it not clear? This is the same as Ukraine in the USSR was dependent on Russia.
  11. Zomanus
    Zomanus 12 September 2020 23: 40
    0
    Fighting such aircraft carriers and other uber-killers is simple
    the presence of a guaranteed possibility of erasing their points of registration and deployment from the map.
    That is, the aircraft carrier went out to sea, fought ... but there is simply nowhere to return and there is no need.
  12. Ax Matt
    Ax Matt 14 September 2020 16: 44
    0
    Extremely ugly ship negative
    How is it necessary to be so dependent on the United States as to humiliate oneself and in fact place the command of one's own Navy in the hands of a foreign state ?! I am sure the English sailors disgust it.