Finally got my Queen Elizabeth carrier. It's not quite the right scale. A little too big, but it works, and I believe with all of the 1/350 aircraft, helos, deck equipment, and all of those details including the numerous doors, equipment, guns, etc, that it works fine and that the CSG video (next) ill work out fine
Ohh wow amazing A 3d printed model ship that amazing I am planing to get a Australia version of Queen Elizabeth class super carrier to be equip a new aim120 And harpoon missile I gonna get toy art of it
Tanks. I wish one of the major enjected molded companies Airfix, Trumpeter, Merit, Revell, etc. would come out with a true 1/350 version of the vessel.
The carriers should absolutely incorporate Sea Ceptor missiles into their defence. I have no doubt that if a major conflict erupted, the Royal Navy would refit the carriers to include a vast array of defensive systems, but as of now, in peace-time, I expect it's a cost issue. The British military budget cannot compare to that of the U.S, yet the British carriers are comparable in size to the American Nimitz-class. Britain is punching slightly above its weight with these carriers, meaning unfortunately, the defensive systems have taken a cut.
Lack of a missile defence is indeed probably due to cost . But there is a counter argument that you have to be very careful about mounting missile defences on a carrier due to the FOD (foreign object debris) they leave scattered all over the ship when fired. The lift fans on the F35 being particularly vulnerable to FOD. Can you halt carrier operations in the middle of an engagement to clear debris from the deck ?? I think the RN take the operational view that if the carrier asset has to fire its missiles in self defence then things have already majorly to shit, to the point of it being the only asset left with any warfighting capability . If that's the case its curtains for the carrier sooner rather than anyway.
It's been confirmed each Elizabeth class carrier will form a strike group made up of two Destroyers, two Type 26 Frigates, one nuclear submarine, and two supply ships. This should provide enough cover for the carrier.
Beautiful model and some very shrewd observations too, both re enhanced CIWS/point defence (including Sea Ceptor and RAM block2) and the need for a more capable primary AEW/C platform than the Merlin/Crowsnest combo, and for which the projected V22 Osprey variant the USMC have made possible, is ideal. PS; wrt some of the data quoted, the QE herself is currently approx 70,600 (metric) tonnes full load displacement and PoW slightly more. As both are 'budgeted' to get 5000te heavier over their design service lives of 50yrs, I expect they'll actually end up as approx 76000 tonners (83800 US tons) Wrt the airwing, much confusing drivel has been spoken based on arbitrary numbers that reflect cost considerations rather than the ships' real capacity. You, however, have just about got it right. The QEs are able to each accommodate up to 72 x F-35B but that's more a rough metric framed in terms of the intended primary strike aircraft and if they did ship that many, F-35B would be the only type on board. A balanced 'max' wing would therefore likely be 58 to 60 platforms all types, including up to 48 x F-35B, 1 x V22 Osprey AEW/C variant, 2 x V22 Osprey air-to-air refuelling variants (with the proposed modular inserts) and up to 9 Merlin rotary wing (I'd suggest 2 x AEW, 6 x ASW, 1 x ferry/logistics) IF, of course, our politicians will EVER spend the money Further to which, your remarks re the escort requirements are appreciated even more. However, we only have 6 x T45 'Daring' Class destroyers in total, for the usual reason that the politicos butchered the original projected number to save money. We'll have to build 2, and preferably 4 additional 'modified' (stretched) T26 frigates mounting the Sampson/Sea Viper combo to provide 3 advanced AAW escorts per carrier. In fact this solution has been proposed but I'd bet a ton of gold to a pound of something far less attractive that it'll only be 2, if it happens at all. Tbh (and explaining why many in the RN would be hard to convince even now, would take up too much space) even assuming 2 'stretched' T26 AAW variants do materialise, we've reached the point where there's probably just one remaining, realisable solution to ensure they, and top-end ASW escorts, and combat capable GPFs will be available to do the jobs they alone can undertake. Namely, to up-gun/upgrade our 5 Batch2 River Class OPVs to well protected, combat capable light corvette status, building another 5 'on top' and trying to secure a further 5 T31s too At least we would not then have to deploy billion-quid-plus 'Darings' or/and 'Glasgows' (T26) to hunt Somali pirates or play tag with Iranian gunboats in the Straits of Hormuz
Ram doesn't really fit in the royal navy and sea ceptor is every bit as good and better than ram in the 1-10km range with more range, its good at short range because of its soft lauunch and small size, with a short to medium range that is more than the industry reported 25km according to the royal navy, so a slight trade off in range and speed from essm for being more competitive in the ciws role and being more suitable to refrofit to vessels not designed with it or corvettes, opv's etc, would have designed qe with 48 sylver a50 vls from the ground up (de gaulle, cavour 32 a43) for 32 aster 30, 64 sea ceptor in quadpacks, would also like a more modern gun based ciws, would go 3 76mm strales sovraponte with dart for the phalanx due to their range and footprint with the option for vulcano, 4 millenium gun for ds30 with better ciws performance than phalanx, small footprint, effective against small boats and cost effective. The best way with tinkering with what we have ordered and layed down in my thinking is the following: Build the type 31 to iver huitfeldt aaw specs and only substitute when the british version is better, with APAR(Sampson or keep), Smart-L(S1850m or keep), 2 superfiring legacy 76mm fore, 1 millenium gun aft( either two fore superfiring 76mm or 57mm depending on the availibility of madfires for 57mm or a an extra fore millenium gun superfiring over the 76 or 57mm with a millenium gun aft), 32 amidships mk 41 vls (keep), 4 stanflex for up to 48 essm or 32 harpoon or 24 essm and 16 harpoon (either 48 sea ceptor or 24 sea ceptor, 16 naval strike missile, can go 48 sea ceptor as this has an anti surface function Build 13 instead of 8 type 26, procure asroc as well as 16 fc/asw and try for a 32 cell vls instead of 24 cell, change base caam to caam mr, change mk 45 to oto 127mm/64 vulcano, change phalanx to millenium gun, ds30 space for a laser in future Add either 57 or 76mm to river class, asw torps, sonars, 12 sea ceptor, artisan or ns110, 4-8 nsms off type 23 or cannister fc/asw, two amidships ds30m2 with martlet for anti swarm Long term suggestions- 8 16,000 ton type 83 (zummwalt displacement), or more if smaller down to minimum 13,000 tons (type 055 displacement), continue to invest in aster, sylver throughout the type 45 lifecyle so we have a good choice between european and american made, with 128- 160 full length cells, perhaps a sylver "a-90" to match the size of the chinese vls, looking something like the tim davies type 83 model with lots of smaller, less invasive caam-er or hypothetcal caam-mr cells spread around as missile based ciw,76mm and 35mm, no ram like the model, a new british on the market 4.5 inch gun, perhaps a 4.5/70 with 60 rpm plus, a long range projectile, a dart and decent rotation speed 5-8 Type 32 arrowhead 140 hull with similar specs to my type 31 but with enchanced asw and anti-surface abilites as well as the autonomous systems mission (all achievable within the current hull)- As its not been ordered yet, can take up the option for raft mounted machinery for asw quietness, type 26's hull mounted and towed array sonars, and pack the mk 41 with fc/asw and asroc instead of air defence weapons so no need for cannisters and thus can have 48 amidships sea ceptor too. Doesn't neccesarily need a full aaw radar suite either Diesel electric subs with aip- Handy in the north sea and home environments, more affordable and will have the range to be used in the south china sea from australia, south china sea is immensely difficult to operate stealty subs and you don''t want to lose a nuclear one Aukus submarine with a vls rather than tube launced tomahawk
Fantastic model, But your ramp is wrong. The ramp is meant to be flush with the deck, if a plane were to mount it, it's front wheel etc most likely get torn away.
The type 26 will have 48 sea scepter and another 24 VLS cells for anything up to a tomahawk and they can also hold 4 sea sparrow per cell. The aster 30/15's on the 45's are better than the sea septer. It's all about saving money. Along with the 3 phalanx it'll also have 3 30 mm cannons. Once the type 23's are pulled from service, they'll have a few sea septer silos to spare, in about 2 tears. It will be fully loaded in another 2 years, or sooner, if China becomes an eminent threat. They wouldint send it in to any real harm as it is now.
The 26 is slated to have the fc/asw in its mark 41, so no need for tomahawk or a cannister anti ship weapon either, suspect it will be 16 of them, and that asroc will end up being procured for the remaining 8 cells with it being an asw ship. Sea ceptor is a very fine short to medium range weapon- officially 25km range+ but the royal navy has claimed its far superior, as well as being immensely capable in the 1-10 km range, as much as a ram and more so than essm because of its small size and soft launch. 24 sea ceptor on the type 45 refit, taking out the aster 15 from the 48 cell sylver vls and filling t with aster 30 is a great move, though i would hav preferred to see 16 sylver a70 where the 24 single sea ceptors are going so the type 45 could quad pack sea ceptor or add fc/asw which will be both mk41 and sylver compatible. The type 23's sea ceptor would be perfect to retrofit to QE with their small footprint, and their is still time to procure caam-er for the 26 and 31. I'd like to see phalanx which is a bit outdated and ds30 replaced with millenium gun on the type 26 (kill two birds with one stone, more room for a laser later on in the ds30 place), and with either the 57mm (simplifies the supply chain ) on the the qe and type 31 if an effective guided dart like on the 76mm strales (madfires) becomes available or the 76mm oto itself. If not 4 phalanx/ millenium gun instead of 3 is a neccesity
Finally got my Queen Elizabeth carrier. It's not quite the right scale. A little too big, but it works, and I believe with all of the 1/350 aircraft, helos, deck equipment, and all of those details including the numerous doors, equipment, guns, etc, that it works fine and that the CSG video (next) ill work out fine
Ohh wow amazing
A 3d printed model ship that amazing
I am planing to get a
Australia version of
Queen Elizabeth class super carrier to be equip a new aim120 And harpoon missile
I gonna get toy art of it
I have a humors of a
South Korea LHD will be equip of a f35 coming soon
Absolutely fantastic Jeff, thanks for the video!
Great model !
Fantastic information along with another great outstanding model.
Jeff your videos are always wonderful as well as highly highly informative too.
Thanks Travis. Make sure you take a look at the other two videos I amde about this new model. Especially the one about the entire carrier group.
Good video full of information fella thanks,lovely looking ship 👍
Thank you. As I state in the description, it has some issues, but it is a good model and I was able to fix many of the issues.
Beautiful !
Tanks. I wish one of the major enjected molded companies Airfix, Trumpeter, Merit, Revell, etc. would come out with a true 1/350 version of the vessel.
A very interesting model
What a model. Love this ship. Prefer the HMS Prince of Wales to the HMS Queen Elizabeth but love them both.
nice one Jeff!
The carriers should absolutely incorporate Sea Ceptor missiles into their defence. I have no doubt that if a major conflict erupted, the Royal Navy would refit the carriers to include a vast array of defensive systems, but as of now, in peace-time, I expect it's a cost issue. The British military budget cannot compare to that of the U.S, yet the British carriers are comparable in size to the American Nimitz-class. Britain is punching slightly above its weight with these carriers, meaning unfortunately, the defensive systems have taken a cut.
Lack of a missile defence is indeed probably due to cost . But there is a counter argument that you have to be very careful about mounting missile defences on a carrier due to the FOD (foreign object debris) they leave scattered all over the ship when fired. The lift fans on the F35 being particularly vulnerable to FOD. Can you halt carrier operations in the middle of an engagement to clear debris from the deck ?? I think the RN take the operational view that if the carrier asset has to fire its missiles in self defence then things have already majorly to shit, to the point of it being the only asset left with any warfighting capability . If that's the case its curtains for the carrier sooner rather than anyway.
It's been confirmed each Elizabeth class carrier will form a strike group made up of two Destroyers, two Type 26 Frigates, one nuclear submarine, and two supply ships. This should provide enough cover for the carrier.
Nice
They could rally do with a couple of dedicated missile carrier as escorts, like the ponderosa class cruisers.
This is amanzing
Beautiful model and some very shrewd observations too, both re enhanced CIWS/point defence (including Sea Ceptor and RAM block2) and the need for a more capable primary AEW/C platform than the Merlin/Crowsnest combo, and for which the projected V22 Osprey variant the USMC have made possible, is ideal.
PS; wrt some of the data quoted, the QE herself is currently approx 70,600 (metric) tonnes full load displacement and PoW slightly more. As both are 'budgeted' to get 5000te heavier over their design service lives of 50yrs, I expect they'll actually end up as approx 76000 tonners (83800 US tons)
Wrt the airwing, much confusing drivel has been spoken based on arbitrary numbers that reflect cost considerations rather than the ships' real capacity. You, however, have just about got it right. The QEs are able to each accommodate up to 72 x F-35B but that's more a rough metric framed in terms of the intended primary strike aircraft and if they did ship that many, F-35B would be the only type on board.
A balanced 'max' wing would therefore likely be 58 to 60 platforms all types, including up to 48 x F-35B, 1 x V22 Osprey AEW/C variant, 2 x V22 Osprey air-to-air refuelling variants (with the proposed modular inserts) and up to 9 Merlin rotary wing (I'd suggest 2 x AEW, 6 x ASW, 1 x ferry/logistics)
IF, of course, our politicians will EVER spend the money
Further to which, your remarks re the escort requirements are appreciated even more. However, we only have 6 x T45 'Daring' Class destroyers in total, for the usual reason that the politicos butchered the original projected number to save money. We'll have to build 2, and preferably 4 additional 'modified' (stretched) T26 frigates mounting the Sampson/Sea Viper combo to provide 3 advanced AAW escorts per carrier. In fact this solution has been proposed but I'd bet a ton of gold to a pound of something far less attractive that it'll only be 2, if it happens at all.
Tbh (and explaining why many in the RN would be hard to convince even now, would take up too much space) even assuming 2 'stretched' T26 AAW variants do materialise, we've reached the point where there's probably just one remaining, realisable solution to ensure they, and top-end ASW escorts, and combat capable GPFs will be available to do the jobs they alone can undertake. Namely, to up-gun/upgrade our 5 Batch2 River Class OPVs to well protected, combat capable light corvette status, building another 5 'on top' and trying to secure a further 5 T31s too
At least we would not then have to deploy billion-quid-plus 'Darings' or/and 'Glasgows' (T26) to hunt Somali pirates or play tag with Iranian gunboats in the Straits of Hormuz
Ram doesn't really fit in the royal navy and sea ceptor is every bit as good and better than ram in the 1-10km range with more range, its good at short range because of its soft lauunch and small size, with a short to medium range that is more than the industry reported 25km according to the royal navy, so a slight trade off in range and speed from essm for being more competitive in the ciws role and being more suitable to refrofit to vessels not designed with it or corvettes, opv's etc, would have designed qe with 48 sylver a50 vls from the ground up (de gaulle, cavour 32 a43) for 32 aster 30, 64 sea ceptor in quadpacks, would also like a more modern gun based ciws, would go 3 76mm strales sovraponte with dart for the phalanx due to their range and footprint with the option for vulcano, 4 millenium gun for ds30 with better ciws performance than phalanx, small footprint, effective against small boats and cost effective.
The best way with tinkering with what we have ordered and layed down in my thinking is the following:
Build the type 31 to iver huitfeldt aaw specs and only substitute when the british version is better, with APAR(Sampson or keep), Smart-L(S1850m or keep), 2 superfiring legacy 76mm fore, 1 millenium gun aft( either two fore superfiring 76mm or 57mm depending on the availibility of madfires for 57mm or a an extra fore millenium gun superfiring over the 76 or 57mm with a millenium gun aft), 32 amidships mk 41 vls (keep), 4 stanflex for up to 48 essm or 32 harpoon or 24 essm and 16 harpoon (either 48 sea ceptor or 24 sea ceptor, 16 naval strike missile, can go 48 sea ceptor as this has an anti surface function
Build 13 instead of 8 type 26, procure asroc as well as 16 fc/asw and try for a 32 cell vls instead of 24 cell, change base caam to caam mr, change mk 45 to oto 127mm/64 vulcano, change phalanx to millenium gun, ds30 space for a laser in future
Add either 57 or 76mm to river class, asw torps, sonars, 12 sea ceptor, artisan or ns110, 4-8 nsms off type 23 or cannister fc/asw, two amidships ds30m2 with martlet for anti swarm
Long term suggestions-
8 16,000 ton type 83 (zummwalt displacement), or more if smaller down to minimum 13,000 tons (type 055 displacement), continue to invest in aster, sylver throughout the type 45 lifecyle so we have a good choice between european and american made, with 128- 160 full length cells, perhaps a sylver "a-90" to match the size of the chinese vls, looking something like the tim davies type 83 model with lots of smaller, less invasive caam-er or hypothetcal caam-mr cells spread around as missile based ciw,76mm and 35mm, no ram like the model, a new british on the market 4.5 inch gun, perhaps a 4.5/70 with 60 rpm plus, a long range projectile, a dart and decent rotation speed
5-8 Type 32 arrowhead 140 hull with similar specs to my type 31 but with enchanced asw and anti-surface abilites as well as the autonomous systems mission (all achievable within the current hull)- As its not been ordered yet, can take up the option for raft mounted machinery for asw quietness, type 26's hull mounted and towed array sonars, and pack the mk 41 with fc/asw and asroc instead of air defence weapons so no need for cannisters and thus can have 48 amidships sea ceptor too. Doesn't neccesarily need a full aaw radar suite either
Diesel electric subs with aip- Handy in the north sea and home environments, more affordable
and will have the range to be used in the south china sea from australia, south china sea is immensely difficult to operate stealty subs and you don''t want to lose a nuclear one
Aukus submarine with a vls rather than tube launced tomahawk
Fantastic model, But your ramp is wrong. The ramp is meant to be flush with the deck, if a plane were to mount it, it's front wheel etc most likely get torn away.
The type 26 will have 48 sea scepter and another 24 VLS cells for anything up to a tomahawk and they can also hold 4 sea sparrow per cell. The aster 30/15's on the 45's are better than the sea septer. It's all about saving money. Along with the 3 phalanx it'll also have 3 30 mm cannons. Once the type 23's are pulled from service, they'll have a few sea septer silos to spare, in about 2 tears. It will be fully loaded in another 2 years, or sooner, if China becomes an eminent threat. They wouldint send it in to any real harm as it is now.
The 26 is slated to have the fc/asw in its mark 41, so no need for tomahawk or a cannister anti ship weapon either, suspect it will be 16 of them, and that asroc will end up being procured for the remaining 8 cells with it being an asw ship. Sea ceptor is a very fine short to medium range weapon- officially 25km range+ but the royal navy has claimed its far superior, as well as being immensely capable in the 1-10 km range, as much as a ram and more so than essm because of its small size and soft launch. 24 sea ceptor on the type 45 refit, taking out the aster 15 from the 48 cell sylver vls and filling t with aster 30 is a great move, though i would hav preferred to see 16 sylver a70 where the 24 single sea ceptors are going so the type 45 could quad pack sea ceptor or add fc/asw which will be both mk41 and sylver compatible. The type 23's sea ceptor would be perfect to retrofit to QE with their small footprint, and their is still time to procure caam-er for the 26 and 31. I'd like to see phalanx which is a bit outdated and ds30 replaced with millenium gun on the type 26 (kill two birds with one stone, more room for a laser later on in the ds30 place), and with either the 57mm (simplifies the supply chain ) on the the qe and type 31 if an effective guided dart like on the 76mm strales (madfires) becomes available or the 76mm oto itself. If not 4 phalanx/ millenium gun instead of 3 is a neccesity
the windows on the bridges seem to look a bit off?
They are. Because it is about 1/300 they are too large. And they do not conform with how they are set up on the ship either, I informed them of this.
@@JeffHead-IdahoUSA i see, btw can't wait for your update on the new PLAN carrier group with CV17
อันนี้มีหลายเเบบเเล้วตัดออก
The two islands are wrong aswell
Why the UK has learned from have ships at war like with what went on in the Falklands war a lot was learned from that and other.
Yes, I mentioned this to them as well.