Under the "Leaky Nightmare", the British new aircraft carrier still has great combat power
Military Commentary on the World
Recently, according to a British news website, the Royal Navy’s "Prince of Wales" aircraft carrier had a serious water leakage accident, resulting in 0.9-meter-deep water in the engine room. This is the second water leakage accident this year.
The water leakage seems to be the lingering "nightmare" of the new British aircraft carrier.
As the predecessor of the "Prince of Wales" aircraft carrier, the "Queen Elizabeth", the first aircraft carrier of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier, has had many water leaks. In July last year, it was even forced to interrupt sea trials and return to Hong Kong due to excessive water leakage. Maintenance, let the British Royal Navy face scandal.
The British Navy is still investigating the cause of the specific water leakage of the aircraft carrier and has not yet given a final survey conclusion, but it is preliminarily believed to be due to a leak in the internal pipeline.
Based on this, some media believe that the new British aircraft carrier is not very reliable and is a flashy "paper tiger."
Is it really the truth?
I'm afraid not.
In reality, any new type of equipment will inevitably have various problems in the early stage of its use. This is a normal phenomenon.
In particular, large-scale equipment such as aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines has extremely complex structures and numerous pipelines, involving hundreds of thousands or even millions of parts and components. Failures are not new.
The nuclear-powered aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" of the French Navy even experienced major accidents such as the falling off of the propeller.
But this accident did not affect this type of aircraft carrier that later became the most deterrent maritime fortress of the French Navy.
Therefore, although the water leakage accident of the new British aircraft carrier exposed some problems such as pipeline design, pipe materials, fire protection facilities, and sealing structure, and also produced some negative effects, on the whole, technical loopholes in water leakage are not loopholes in core technology. , It can be completely solved through maintenance and repair, and it will not have a "damaging effect" on the combat effectiveness of this type of aircraft carrier.
Therefore, the argument to deny the combat effectiveness of the new British aircraft carrier with water leakage or some minor failures is obviously untenable.
In reality, as the "flag" equipment of the Royal Navy's pursuit of revival, the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier not only consumes huge amounts of money in the United Kingdom, but also concentrates the most advanced technology in the United Kingdom and Western countries, with avant-garde design and balanced performance.
It has a full load displacement of more than 65,000 tons, which belongs to the specifications of a large aircraft carrier.
In Western countries, its tonnage is second only to the Ford-class and Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carriers of the United States, and can carry more than 30 carrier-based aircraft.
Like many British weapons, the design of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier is somewhat unique, using a skid-jump flight deck + stealth dual-ship island design.
Compared with common single-ship islands, dual-ship islands are not only convenient for the layout of engine flue, can stabilize the air flow of carrier-based aircraft, but also help to improve the command efficiency of aviation and navigation departments.
This type of aircraft carrier uses the MT-30 high-power gas turbine developed by the United Kingdom to achieve comprehensive all-electric propulsion, which can effectively improve the energy efficiency of the aircraft carrier, and greatly simplifies the power system design. In the aircraft carrier propelled by conventional power systems, The technology is already at the world-class level.
In particular, this type of aircraft carrier is equipped with the F-35B stealth carrier-based aircraft, which will enable the aircraft carrier’s aviation combat capability to reach the world's leading level.
In addition, the United Kingdom is also exploring the mode of carrying carrier-based drones for "swarm" operations and coordinated operations between UAVs and conventional carrier-based aircraft.
Once mature, it will also effectively increase the number and strike capabilities of British aircraft carrier-based aircraft.
Therefore, in the world, the future combat effectiveness of the new British aircraft carrier is still relatively prominent. As a whole, it ranks ahead of the French "Charles de Gaulle" nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. It is not only a "paper tiger", but a powerful "real tiger".
The design performance of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier is remarkable, making the United Kingdom the only national navy in Europe with a large aircraft carrier, reviving the reputation of the Royal Navy, but the United Kingdom wants to rely on it to ramp up the world’s oceans and restore the glory of the former maritime hegemon. I am afraid it is not practical.
Because maintaining the operation of the two aircraft carrier battle groups requires a lot of money, it is a huge burden for the British government, which is increasingly financially constrained and the military is struggling.
In reality, the Royal Navy has to sell old ships and reduce the number of aircraft carrier battle groups to reduce financial pressure. As for whether Britain can maintain two aircraft carrier battle groups at the same time in the future, or how to maintain two aircraft carrier battle groups , Currently still an unknown.
At the same time, the British local shipbuilding industry is declining. Some shipyards that have undertaken the construction of new aircraft carrier modular components have closed down. In the future, whether British aircraft carriers can find suitable shipyards for upgrading, maintenance and repair is also a problem.
Therefore, although the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier is indeed powerful and is more than enough to threaten some small and medium-sized countries, whether it can attack remotely and intervene in high-intensity naval warfare may still have to be tested by actual combat.
(Author unit: Joint Service College of National Defense University)