According to the posted image, the HMS Prince of Wales was overflowed with water. The water was so much that most of the compartments were submerged to more than 50 cm. Fortunately, this incident has been contained but the cause of the problem is not revealed.
“The trial work of HMS Prince of Wales has been postponed. This decision has nothing to do with the last spill incident,” the Royal Navy statement said. Especially, the same error has happened many times with the first HMS Queen Elizabeth but so far the second one appears.
Judgment made by the Russian Military Commentary, the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales pair will be the largest ships in the history of the Royal British Navy, but its combat role is not really. clearly.Evaluation of the latest British aircraft carriers in Europe, Russian experts said that these aircraft carriers have small air clusters, aircraft with limited range and number of bombs carried.
What is most unusual for the British supercarrier is the use of fighter jets that take off on short runways and vertical landing (STOVL). Of course, this type of aircraft offers certain advantages. The first advantage is that it simplifies and saves costs when building ships.
Instead of complex and energy intensive launchers, British carriers needed only a jumper-style runway; instead of the brake, the British carrier only needed a deck space with moderate area and a heat-resistant surface.
Historically, these advantages have helped to build light aircraft carriers like the British Invincible-class aircraft carrier with a displacement of only 22,000 tons and the Thai Chakri Naruebet carrier with displacement. even half by 11,500 tons.
Experts say that building a large aircraft carrier but still following the structure of the above small aircraft carriers is completely confusing. The first downside is the significant limitation on the number of ship’s fighters.
In addition to STOVLs (which are considered inferior in takeoff weight, carrying less ammunition and fuel compared to aircraft of the same class but taking off by catapults), This can only carry more helicopters.
The lack of a strong fighter force makes Britain’s Queen Elizabeth the full-size aircraft carrier comparable only to light carriers operating in a cluster of other surface ships, or equivalent. with general landing craft.
It is very likely that the British decision to build the large aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth was related to the same experience using STOVLs as the Harrier during the 1982 Falkland / Malvinas War with Argentina.
In 2002, twenty years after this war, the British decided to choose the F-35B (the STOVL version of the F-35) for their aircraft carriers. But also surprisingly, in September 2010, after failures in the F-35B tests, Britain announced a return to the traditional carrier model using catapults and brakes and opted for an F version. -35C.
With this option, Britain was forced to redesign the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier the Prince of Wales. The change continues to drive costs and the delay even longer.
It was during this period that the first ship Queen Elizabeth was on the plan after several years of operation as a training helicopter would be available for sale. In the event that a customer cannot be found, the British will cut it into scrap metal.
However, the research on the design of the catapults and the brakes as well as the change in ship design cost twice as much as expected (157 million USD). Therefore, in May 2012, he decided to return to the original design.
After abandoning late efforts to return to traditional design (with catapults and brakes), the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier has what it is today with the title of the largest aircraft carrier in maritime history. The British had a displacement of 70,000 tons, three times the size of the Invincible-class carrier, and twice the size of the French aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle.
The new British aircraft carriers were only inferior in size to America’s Nimitz-class and Gerald Ford-class nuclear carriers.
Despite being nearly twice the size, Queen Elizabeth also has an air cluster with the same number as the French carrier Charles De Gaulle (displacement of 42,000 tons) and the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (59,000). ton). Meanwhile, the French aircraft carrier has a far superior number of long-range radar detection aircraft than the British ones.
The F-35B version that the British chose to equip the aircraft carrier did not create confidence. In addition to the fatal weaknesses such as being easily attacked by hackers, unable to withstand lightning … The F-35B is also limited in the number of weapons carried and range compared to other aircraft carriers.
Due to the stealth feature, the F-35B must hide its weapons in the body and cannot carry an auxiliary oil tank. It can carry only 2 AIM-120 air-to-air missiles (main purpose is to defend against other fighters), 2 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs weighing 250 kg each or 2 GBU-32 bombs. JDAM weighs 500kg each.
In addition to the F-35B, the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier can use helicopters such as the CH-47 Chinook (judged as unreasonable) or the Merlin. There will be about 250 marines on the carrier. Thus, to land the number of soldiers equivalent to these two companies, the British needed 6 Chinooks or 10 Merlins. This landing capacity is equivalent to that of a medium sized amphibious ship!
The Russian military judged that, although it was very expensive with the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier project, the British had not been able to significantly increase the power of the navy. The two new aircraft carriers also only kept the British Navy ready for regional battles, a mission that the old-generation Invincible could do well.
It is argued that instead of building these two aircraft carriers, it would make more sense to build new amphibious assault ships with the ability to carry STOVL aircraft, as they could also undertake duties. similar to Queen Elizabeth but has better landing capacity.