Two Queen Elizabeths

[hansol1966]

Reading the paper today i noticed there will be a second Queen Elizabeth launching May 2016 for the Royal Navy. Two new aircraft carriers to replace the older stock, the other carrier being the Prince of Wales.

Ill never forget the huge American aircraft carriers moored off Valletta Grand Harbour. Even managed to go onboard on a school trip (John F Kennedy i think...1969-70).

Fred.

[Druke I]

The Royal Navy's two new aircraft carriers will be considerably smaller than the American fleet carriers.

[pepperrn]

Reading the paper today i noticed there will be a second Queen Elizabeth launching May 2016 for the Royal Navy. Two new aircraft carriers to replace the older stock, the other carrier being the Prince of Wales.

 

Indeed, baring any drastic defence cuts, the two largest Royal Navy ships ever commisioned will enter service in the next ten years. As you say, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

These aircraft carriers will replace the the current trio of HMS Invincible, HMS Illustrious and HMS Ark Royal, aircraft carriers planned in the 60s and which entered service in the 80s.

In the 60s the government of the day decided that the Royal Navy didn't need, and the government couldn't afford, aircraft carriers (this was after one of the planned escort ships for the new carriers, HMS Bristol, had entered service).

So the RN said "OK, no Aircraft carriers, but can we afford/have three cruisers instead?".

"Yes", came the reply.

"What if they were through deck cruisers?" asked the RN.

"No problem" came the answer from the land locked civil servants.

So the RN built three ships... not aircraft carriers, but "through deck cruisers"... HMS Invincible, HMS Illustrious and HMS Ark Royal.

It's all in the name!

[safarigal]

Reading the paper today i noticed there will be a second Queen Elizabeth launching May 2016 for the Royal Navy. Two new aircraft carriers to replace the older stock, the other carrier being the Prince of Wales.

Ill never forget the huge American aircraft carriers moored off Valletta Grand Harbour. Even managed to go onboard on a school trip (John F Kennedy i think...1969-70).

Fred.

 

I must confess I don't know much about RN ships, but have they named one after a reigning monarch before? Or maybe they had the first Queen Elizabeth in mind. I remember the Ark Royal anchored in Malta in the 60s. A group of us from school went on the Saratoga in '69 when she was in Malta.

[Druke I]

Yes, the Royal Navy has named ships after reigning monarchs before: King George V was a WW2 battleship.

[Cruachan]

Yes, the Royal Navy has named ships after reigning monarchs before: King George V was a WW2 battleship.

 

But KG5 wasn't named after the reigning monarch. If she had been she would have been King George VI. In fact it had been intended to call her that, but the King asked for the name to be changed in honour of his father, King George V.

 

J

[Druke I]

Checking wikipedia, there was a ship of the Royal Navy named King George V prior to the one I referenced above.

 

The earlier ship, also a battleship, was laid down or launched in 1911, the latter ship in 1939.

[hansol1966]

Safarigal a very impressive sight and experience to enjoy.. great school trips. Also going to Luqa airport and watching Electric lightnings taking off with a tremendous roar was memorable. We were allowed to go onboard a Shackleton which i think was superceded by the Nimrod.

Fred.

Malta....St Andrews junior school 1969...Tal Handaq senior school 1970.

[Tigerking]

Yes, the Royal Navy has named ships after reigning monarchs before: King George V was a WW2 battleship.

 

But not this ship: Following the tradition of naming the first battleship constructed in the reign of a new monarch after the current monarch, she was planned to be named King George VI. However the King instructed the Admiralty to name the ship in honour of his father, Georg V. King George V was laid down on 1 January 1937, launched on 21 February 1939, and commissioned on 11 December 1940.

[Cruachan]

Checking wikipedia, there was a ship of the Royal Navy named King George V prior to the one I referenced above.

 

The earlier ship, also a battleship, was laid down or launched in 1911, the latter ship in 1939.

 

Hee hee - well, let that be a lesson to me. Before being a smart-ass, it pays to do the research carefully :D

 

In my defence m'lud, I would simply say that I am waaaaaaay too young to remember the 1911 version! But sadly not to young too remember the other one :eek:

 

J

[Beyondships]

These carriers have been talked about for quite some time (several years) and it is good to hear that they are going ahead with the plan to build them.

 

As to the names, the more cynical view was that they were given these names somewhat early in the planning process in order to make it more difficult for the politicans and civil servants to cut out the funding for them.

[KenC]

......As to the names, the more cynical view was that they were given these names somewhat early in the planning process in order to make it more difficult for the politicans and civil servants to cut out the funding for them.

 

Gordon Brown took delight in taking away a well beloved yacht called Britannia from HM - don't think he would be bothered about saving a few pennies by cancelling an aircraft carrier named after her!!! :eek:

 

Ken

[Transatlanticfan]

There was a previous Queen Elizabeth a battleship that saw action in the first world war at Jutland and also saw a great deal of action in the second world war.

She was one of a class which I think were called Queen Elizabeth class

I believe on encountering the RMS Queen Elizabeth in mid atlantic during the second world war she signalled "Snap"