Building Britain's Biggest Warship: On Board HMS Prince Of Wales | Forces TV

How do you make Britain’s biggest warships? HMS Prince Of Wales weighs 65,000 tonnes and is 920 ft in length. Along with her sister ship HMS Queen Elizabeth, this is the largest engineering project ever undertaken by the UK's military, costing over £6 billion.
Watch Forces 360 every Monday at 18:00 (BST) exclusively on Forces TV (Freeview 96, Sky 264, Freesat 165 and Virgin 277).
Watch the full programme here: frces.tv/Ft9zwd
Read more about the carrier: www.forces.net/...
Subscribe to Forces TV: bit.ly/1OraazC
Check out our website: forces.net
Facebook: / forcestv
Twitter: / forcesnews

[@stormrunners8194]

I'm proud to see this, coming from an Englishman I enjoyed the idea that we used to have the greatest navy and think we should try and grow our navy with ships like these to become great again and defend our island whatever the cost may be.

[@benedictadonis8426]

A tip : watch series on Kaldrostream. I've been using them for watching lots of of movies during the lockdown.

[@connorroyce9975]

@Benedict Adonis yea, I've been using kaldrostream for years myself :D

[@niuchajianfa6222]

lol

[@blech71]

Beautiful ships for sure. Greetings from the U.S. We got a our back and you; ours!

[@Whalebarf]

What.

[@cartconrad4426]

Roger that

[@rswahn52]

Well a post that I can agree with 100%. I hope your new carriers are awesome.

[@dylanwaplington]

I live very close to there

[@leaturk11]

thanks, much appreciated comment.

[@iammoose4349]

This sort of thing fascinates me. What beautiful ships.

[@raywhitehead730]

Your beauty is a failure.

[@rossuk123]

never been in the navy or army nor do I have any connection but I fucking love this shit

[@chippledon1]

GB needs to build one more of these carriers about five years down the line. This would enable the RN to put two carrier strike groups to sea at the same time. This would allow a third carrier to be in port at all times for refitting, maintenance, re supply, and crew training. For a constant rotation.

[@niuchajianfa6222]

lol can you afford it?

[@raywhitehead730]

Dim wit, look where the Brit Navy is now.

[@rogerhazen3664]

@4:30 Interesting how that was a myth with the F-35's being harder on aircraft carriers decks from the heat of the engines. This is not as severe as some say but new ships are built to withstand these new temperatures and extremes from the F-35. (Great aircraft)

[@raywhitehead730]

Not so. Your a dim wit. Look where the Brit navy is niow.

[@Elis_LuFc]

U can't say that is not one of the most beautiful things on earth

[@ashleybishton742]

Prince of Wales has been completed. Ready for action now

[@exexpat11]

I seem to remember during one of the UK draw downs that the Brits and the Frogs were going to be time sharing ships. Also the UK was going to have all their ships built in French yards. Glad to see you are coming back again and did away with that nonsense. You are still doing what the Russians still can't do, get a carrier that works.

[@phoebus45]

Just need the planes now.

[@jayseaem]

that was before Brexit happened.

[@shononoyeetus8866]

now there are plans for all RN ships to be built in the UK

[@skylinecams7851]

@@shononoyeetus8866 all RN ships are built in the UK, we haven't had a naval warship built abroad for over 100 years. Only supply ships are allowed to be built overseas.

[@StewartWalker-hy1eo]

Most carrier technology is British so I don’t think we need help from anyone apart from this government that puts a budget on things

[@belfastlad55]

Outstanding

[@ashleygoggs5679]

The QEC's (sorry to say for my american friends out there) are the most beautiful aircraft carriers i have ever seen, so simple and sleek, i just love it.

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

I doubt very much that the design is"simple".

[@frank-ko6de]

Good for you. Americans are just occupied with with with effectiveness and firepower and competence. Yours carries only 46 fighter jets, while the Americans carries at least 96 per each of their 12 active super carriers and 40 per each of their 20 amphibious ships. You can have your beauty and pageantry, which seems to be your specialty, while we deal with actuality and effectiveness and firepower. All the while waiting for our even bigger ford class carriers.👍👍👍👍😁😁😁😁

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

@@frank-ko6de I don't blame u for giving that reply mate,his comment was a bit shallow. However we're in this together my friend 🇬🇧🇺🇸👌

[@frank-ko6de]

@@Anglo_Saxon1 I understand that, Just pointing out the obvious. It is a beautiful ship, While our ships and planes have terrible paint jobs, to say the least. We're just focused on actual performance and effectiveness and domain domination, not ceremony. That's all.👍👍👍👍🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

@@frank-ko6de absolutely.

[@mag1631]

Great job Britain!! Love from the USA.

[@terrybriggs6016]

why thank you dear game boy, and much love to the.. THE U.S.A too.

[@Chris-vu1kh]

Beautiful ships

[@mizutani_]

I've never read more wholesome comments from Americans and Australians

[@nicholaslin1630]

I hope that that the UK remembers that in the South Pacific they have an ally in the form of the Royal Australian Navy of the Commonwealth of Australia.

[@DokktorDeth]

Of course. No-one better.

[@JA19]

One hell of an ally and partner. Nothing but love for Australia and NZ too.

[@craigdorrian7391]

We will never forget our brothers, stay strong down there lads🇬🇧🇦🇺

[@RichMantaray]

u are not an ally u are us :)

[@oscarmuffin4322]

@@DokktorDeth Well actually New Zealand is better. Remember the whole Falklands conflict thing? We asked Australia to lend us some of their ships to take over the usual duties of British warships while they were off fighting the conflict. Australia said "No". We asked New Zealand... New Zealand happily sent some of their ships. Therefore New Zealand > Australia.

[@derekheuring4646]

Good to see the Royal Navy upgrading its fleet and capabilities. Now if we can only get the rest of NATO to follow suit.

[@watchingthehawks355]

Germany not interested,what will you gonna do?Brexit is better you guys can enjoy yourselves.

[@jayseaem]

@Intellectual Ammunition i agree.

[@_tertle3892]

The navy’s always looking to up grade were an island nation we have to

[@frank-ko6de]

You guys only spend 1.79 percent of GDP instead of the agreed upon 2percent.what nonsense are you talking about?

[@IndyPlectrum]

Can launch 4 F-35 PER MINUTE - that is nuts. When you think they are all accounted for and supplied with automated munitions, raised to the flight deck and tested by a fully automated system then launched. It’s hard to think on how incredible it is to be able to launch 4 jets every 60 seconds all loaded with weapons. So literally landing jets, dropping to hanger, reloading/fuelling and at the same time lifting another 4 up to deck to launch every 60 seconds continuously. That is pretty incredible by anyone’s standards.

[@borninjordan7448]

Yep. 36 F-35s in nine minutes.

[@douglastodd1947]

SORRY TO CORRECT YOU HE SAID 4 EVERY 2 MINUTES

[@josephlezano7691]

British Gibraltar, UK Overseas Territory 🇬🇧 .Great Work !

[@nathankaye1577]

We should of kept HMS illustrious and save HMS Ocean and HMS Bulwark, the government thinks that scraping the Albion Class Assault Ship will save us money buy using the Auxiliary Navy Ships like RFA Argus and RFA Fort Victoria and let's not forget RFA Tidespring. As a Royal Marine myself I know how important the Navy and her ships are.

[@greenking333]

Naz Adder I totally agree with you these ships are ultra important and they should preserve them

[@studmalexy]

how about this for a defence solution? pray to YHWH and he will bless us and crush our enemies and those who stand against his children?...alsoim pretty good with a sling and know that the hand of YHWH will supernaturally guide my rock to hit my target

[@henryvagincourt]

Simple, the at sea nuclear deterrent, should be funded by the whole nation and not dumped on the MOD, 41 billion.

[@fisherking1863]

Now this guy knows what he is talking about. The reason they are being scrapped is because in polaticians eyes they are being used as lifeboats to bring muslim men to europe. They were built at barrow shipyard to land a regiment of mariens to form a bridgehead in forien lands

[@deeremeyer1749]

Royal Marines are permitted to criticize their "government" on social media? ROFLMAO.

[@thomasdemay9805]

Great Job by UK building these ships I hope they build more. USA + UK Naval Hegemony is one of biggest guarantors or Peace in the World. Would be nice to get Japan on board too as they are expanding their Navy in big ways.

[@James-dq7oi]

Usually I'm at odds with Americans but if I saw these two carriers in a joint Anglo-American task force I think it would bring a tear to my eye

[@mk_gamíng0609]

The reason why the Japanese wont is because The US do not support the Japanese military/naval re-build up The UK is the only country that supports Japan in that. so if it did happen there would be tense relations between the US and Japan with the UK being in the middle as they agree with the Japanese but are close allies to the US

[@davidputland5506]

mk gaming can you blame us?

[@CrazyNikel]

@@mk_gamíng0609 Actually on the contrary, the US would like Japan to build up more. Japans SDF has drastically increased in size and funding. They know what China will do to get revenge. China is crazy pro nationalistic atm.

[@alexb6821]

Great statement but swap the word “peace” with “conflict”, then it would be correct!!

[@adamsmohammed3780]

Wow, the HMS Prince of Wales looks so amazing ship.

[@lachlanchester8142]

Wait until you see hms queen Elizabeth

[@adamsmohammed3780]

God bless the HMS Prince of Wales and all the crew on bored they are all hard working.

[@dudeonyoutube]

Why you QE hate?

[@henryvagincourt]

Fleet carriers, good old day's.

[@belesariius]

Now we need another two, and stack function with the other services- make the RAF flight deck capable. A movable function ratio according to modern needs- navy air and land shifting priority.

[@ConfusedBlueDragon]

What the UK needs is to design and develop a home-grown 5-gen STOVL-capable plane to fly from the two Aircraft Carriers... ...and I'm not talking about the American F-35B; I'm on about a proper state-of-the-art British-built descendant of the Harrier that's not as overpriced as the F-35...

[@callumcastle5080]

absoutely

[@peterson7082]

+Confused Blue Dragon > *_"...and I'm not talking about the American F-35B; I'm on about a proper state-of-the-art British-built descendant of the Harrier that's not as overpriced as the F-35..."_* Which is?

[@marleycummins1675]

Nathan Peterson he’s saying it would be ideal if we could create a jet like that .

[@Ratty98]

its a bit late as Britain as already put a lot of money into the f35 and im pretty sure they will have licenses to make them at home when they are finished

[@t43562]

That would be a recipe for total disaster so fortunately pride and jingoism isn't what run the Navy. If you think the F-35 is expensive, wait till you try to develop a 5-gen aircraft that you're only going to sell in tiny numbers.

[@ay0vee978]

I think there's a Battleship in world war two that was sunk named "HMS Prince of Wales" that fought with the mighty HMS Hood

[@mk_gamíng0609]

The UK has a tendency to use old ship names, a new HMS victorious is being bult not has a aircraft carrier but as a nuclear submarine

[@amandafranks5108]

This is vital to secure peace in the world.

[@mrkojak-ci1zm]

Looks awesome. Can't wait until yours is complete and ours so we can admire and compare them . Going to be badass ships.

[@marshalmontez6795]

Awesome platform Great Britain awesome good job queen elizabeth and prince of whales job well done👍

[@imadadbestjobintheworld5259]

God bless the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines 🍺

[@Deadeye-sj3qc]

Labor party will scrap them in 5 years if given the chance

[@pineli6752]

Agreed, the same goes for the Vanguard submarines.

[@randombritishguy2686]

I have a big distrust in labor, as all they do is bend the country over and give people money and the next people in office have to waste there term fixing it and the cycle repeats, labor can't handle any tuff situation, as for any economic issue they scrap our navy for the quick pound.

[@Deadeye-sj3qc]

@@randombritishguy2686 we have the same issues with the Democrats hear in the US. The bad part is they have the media so most of the world will only see one point of view point coming out of the US. Every liberal thinks that government can save the people. Weather it's British, American, or now Canada. I just wish that like minded people from all around the world, would step up with one voice and tell the politicians no more.

[@mercymorn4143]

The contract for building these two aircraft carriers was ordered and signed by a Labour government.

[@wsladmiral8739]

Well I did not expect the name prince of Wales to turn battleships to aircraft carrier they should have named her hms ark royal

[@5taunch]

They really down play the capacity of these ships. They can carry 4-5 squadrons of f35 in war. But as we can’t afford that, we just lie and say she’s built for 36 fast jets

[@danielhughes5932]

Must be nice when your biggest ally has 6-9 ready at all times that can carry twice the aircraft compliment. So best scenario an additional 18(to 20 plus) times as many aircraft at the ready best case. Almost a 1000 aircraft conjunction ready to protect the world. USA/UK!!!

[@artiew8718]

1:17 what's wrong with the Captain's eyebrows

[@uptoon8096]

lol

[@brothersg-s8087]

coffee od

[@mickeyklein6008]

They are very beautiful ships of war

[@BaktasMIntrasWala]

2 Carriers means the empire stikes back😂🤣🤣🤣

[@watchingthehawks355]

My thoughts,Brexit means back to tyranny and authoritarianism

[@sausagejockyGaming]

Moses Lochang back to tyranny? We havent had tyranny for hundreds of years and even then EVERY nation had tyranny, we was one of the first democratic nations, especially with the magna carta

[@shononoyeetus8866]

I saw these two in dock at Portsmouth. Truly magnificent.

[@raywhitehead730]

Complete military moron. Look at the Brit navy now

[@NickyKDChaleunphone]

On top of the two carriers, the Royal Navy should look at getting an LHA/LHD

[@cool_cat007smoove3]

Nicky K.D Chaleunphone I served on a LHA ship.

[@oscarmike9613]

What about HMS Albion and Bulwark?

[@Spaceman9090]

Albion and Bulwark are LPDs. Different role. A carrier is no substitute for a proper LHD. Hopefully we can fund one in the future.

[@emmy9345]

Gimme like an hour special on this, best content

[@kevinm3751]

When I first looked at it coming from America and knowing US carriers I thought it was dinky but looking around with the camera man, there really isnt nothing dinky about this ship.

[@davster9853]

Wasnt hms prince of wales a heavy battle cruiser durimg ww2?

[@richardross5928]

It's the 7th British navy ship to be named that

[@davster9853]

@@richardross5928 ahhh ok thx for the info i was a little confused

[@zakvince7425]

Let's go Scotland! Home of the best ship builders in the world. What would you lads do without us? U get all our oil too!

[@zipz8423]

Wonder how straight the keel is :P

[@harleyokeefe5193]

Zak Vince what would u do without England u mean No economy No currency No allies No population No military No nukes

[@Gar99]

It broken down on its first trip like the TITANIC

[@northeastlower]

Let's get this thing afloat and ready 👍🇬🇧

[@deadlylizard1446]

RULE BRITANNIA, BRITANNIA RULES THE WAVES ⚓️🇬🇧⚓️

[@deadlylizard1446]

Atlas what do u mean

[@22aj55]

BRITANNIA WAIVES THE RULES.

[@motey99]

Maybe after another 20 are built Britannia will rule the waves

[@dynaztycrashdiet]

Very impressive ships but can't help thinking they should of gone back to the steam catapults. Maybe we could of had a navalised version of the Typhoon aswell. I think that way the carriers would have more options in the types of aircraft they could carry & not have to rely on the F35B

[@Spaceman9090]

We could not afford to develop a navalised Typhoon. F35 is our best and only bet.

[@NoFaithNoPain]

No, its quite affordable. The problem is that it would need an extra half ton of weight to make it strong enough. That would reduce the amount of ordinance it could carry so the plane would not be cost effective or of decent performance in the modern theatre of war.

[@Spaceman9090]

Afraid not. The F35 is the best bet. And there are far better off the shelf solutions such as the F18 if we had gone down that route.

[@rsdi_art]

Awesome

[@ralphlouismendoza1977]

whats up with the ramp from nitro circus?

[@ralphlouismendoza1977]

Hammer 001 it’s because you guys can’t afford a catapult.

[@socratease1432]

My father worked at Cammell Lairds.

[@elizabetharmada5335]

Huge

[@trinitite4617]

Elizabeth Armada thats what she said

[@valerie80yearsago90]

YUGE

[@Leo-pz5ge]

They should be a HMS Winston Churchill

[@morocconewsstarchannelmdd-7347]

impressive it's very interessting it's great !!!

[@yousskumar]

Why did the captain mention “politician” so many times? I thought this ship would serve the country not the politician

[@ChameleonThe13]

War toys ALWAYS serves only politicians...!

[@paulsteaven]

Their parliament always screw the Royal Navy after WW2.

[@davidbrisbane7206]

The politicans are in charge of the armed forces in the UK, but in theory the head of the armed forces is the Queen, who has delegated this job to Princess Philip. I think in a crisis, if the Queen spoke out and commanded the army to "Stand down", they would obey no matter what the politicians said.

[@DokktorDeth]

Perhaps because politicians take the decisions to build the things.

[@tc9634]

... politicians are the democratically elected representatives of the country who are elected to make those decisions

[@pommiebears]

Beautiful ☺️🇬🇧

[@kconradbh]

Nice video. Between us, the U.S. and U.K. will soon have 13 working carriers. That will make Vlad the Impaler think twice.

[@davidanthony8290]

Russia's navy is a joke. Quite honestly their navy would be wiped out within a week of a war starting. I'm all for these carriers but the money may be better spent on forming a new infantry division or a couple of brigades.

[@conormcmaster1113]

@@davidanthony8290 not really a joke, there submarine force is rather capable

[@socratease1432]

Good stuff.

[@luciusvorenus9445]

And she has that new ship smell, too!😁

[@bjjace1]

Is there a difference between the Queen Elizabeth and Prince a Wales ? or will they be identical ?

[@georgewest3787]

Identical. Both will deploy for the same types of missions, so they'll more than likely get the same air wing, and in every other way than that they are built to be twins.

[@conormcmaster1113]

one is a man and the other is a woman

[@nancyhobson9710]

Very impressed. She's big! ,(But she won't fit ALL of Australia in her, not quite)

[@ciaran_telfer_18]

That naval guy at the start looks like he’s on constant cocaine. But also the carriers are magnificent. Rule Britannia! 🇬🇧

[@lebeaulabuschagne9608]

Very impressive and compact. I wonder what the final cost is ? 🤔😊

[@seemopps]

just over £6 billion

[@seemopps]

but then again you need to think about the ships needed to be built first in order to protect the carrier which consists of 2 air defense destroyers, 2 anti sub frigates and a submarine. all this combined will cost around 15 billion pounds then more for the jets that are stationed on board the AC, not a bad price if you think about it

[@gregpineda8660]

The Royal British Navy Military Hierarchy should also continue to invent,build and develop all---powerful,all---advanced and all---high---tech aircraft carriers also known as "flat tops" just like the awesome,brand---new and highly sophisticated U.S. Navy aircraft carrier named the U.S.S. Gerald Ford which already passed sea trials and now called,mobilized and deployed to its tour of duty/duties all over the world.Semper Fidelis

[@gregpineda8660]

And Yes,The Royal British Navy sailors definitely needs much,much and much bigger British aircraft carriers in the near future like the fleets of U.S. Navy aircraft carrier Strike Groups!!!

[@kameijohnwilson9208]

British should be the no.1 super power again😊 Dont mind americans!

[@mrutunjayadhikari3587]

lol

[@mrutunjayadhikari3587]

@Lann nou British super universe god power lol.

[@mrutunjayadhikari3587]

@Lann nou oh my god,UK will conquer the galaxy.Thanos is shaking with fear.

[@stormrunners8194]

@Lann nou and it will be great 👍💪 🇬🇧

[@waynecalder8615]

I love this man

[@socratease1432]

Cammell Laird 5:44, my Dad worked there.

[@guycrawshaw]

Socratease 1 I worked in Lairds on that carrier, got a video on here of me climbing around it

[@greigsanderson]

You also have a jail on both ships. lol

[@bulletproofkam7931]

So pOW won't have the Marined landing craft onboard then like HMS ocean had?

[@tommybason6057]

No, its a dedicated aircraft carrier as opposed to an assault ship like ocean

[@ALX-mv6eb]

British royal navy best in the world

[@jerbear3915]

Remember the time when Britain had more aircraft carriers than US

[@YARROWS9]

1943 I think.

[@DokktorDeth]

Why?

[@michaelfoulis7438]

@@DokktorDeth Because of the Axis powers, you dont mess with the Royal Navy!

[@theant9821]

Britain loaned a carrier to the United States to use in the Pacific. Lend lease was needed by both sides of the deal, Britain and America needed each other to win.

[@bearsagainstevil]

we also came to America with the original idea for the atomic bomb we had a team working on it prior to Americas entry to the war ,but Churchill felt it would be finished faster if we gave the idea and team to the Americans .what not many people know is because it was our idea we had a veto on Americas use of the bomb . if we hadn't been fighting ww2 we could have developed the bomb on our own in Australia .then after the war they found out one of the "British" scientists was a Russian spy and relations between the USA and uk cooled . so they wouldn't give us a bomb so we set up our own project and developed them on our own .we were the third country to have a nuclear weapon but first with the idea

[@ConstantineJoseph]

Wasn't the previous HMS Prince of Wales sunk by Japanese torpedo bombers in the South China Sea many decades ago

[@paulgibbons2320]

Many ships were. Times move on. How many Japanese ships hit the bottom?

[@ConstantineJoseph]

@@paulgibbons2320 Plenty as well. But the Prince of Wales was sunk in under 2 hours

[@navnig]

What are the white strips on the lower hull?

[@erichall297]

Great work....love it.

[@tommysmith4952]

Can't understand why were going down the f35b when we should have designed our own aircraft from when they started building the carriers. Understand it's 5th generation but I'm sure we could have designed something

[@suddenlytitan739]

do you guys even have the budget though? you would need to fund the research, development, and production of two carriers and its aircrafts from scratch at the same time

[@demanischaffer]

Tommy Smith For the price of the F35 and the capabilities it's not that expensive

[@paulstewart7529]

politics

[@slippingjimmy2325]

you kids don't have a big enough piggybank or like USA, enough printing presses to afford that

[@berathajaya8020]

Funny how POW "Learned from the Mistakes of QE" yet it has more problems than QE

[@ashellerainbarcena4319]

Oh yeah the PoW badge

[@leudwigvonshwartsenhelm3624]

I'm glad England and USA are allies.

[@conormcmaster1113]

whats england

[@yobeatthat85]

I worked on both and be rest assured the problems on the first boat definitely did not get rectified for the second boat......the same problems were happening and the lads on the tools were the ones rectifying these problems without input of management whom might I add are earning 50-150 grand a year. Sorry not sorry

[@gingerbaker4390]

The mighty Queen Elizabeth.

[@richardpoblador9177]

God bless Global Britain :=).

[@studmalexy]

wearing hard hats..good....that's what I like to see.....health and safety at work

[@yobaafett]

My dream is to be a helicopter pilot stationed on this ship

[@terrybriggs6016]

Royal Britania rules the waves..and the U.S Austrailia N.A.T.O

[@Spambmp]

Like the video guys and gals!!

[@neilgriffiths6427]

By G*d, I wish I was young enough to serve on this ship!

[@commonsense31]

are they exactly the same? and if thats the case is the second one cheaper?

[@Alucard-gt1zf]

Common Sense exactly the same as each other just different names

[@chloejenkins1152]

no they are not the same,prince of wales has missle defence Liz will be upgraded

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

Could not bother to rename them after their best carriers from WW2, let me tell you something its a very ill omen to name a carrier or a submarine for that matter after a battleship,

[@geordiebatt]

There will be loads of room on them as we can't afford any planes.

[@geordiebatt]

Without doubt we should've sourced more cost effective aircraft for these beauties.

[@1chish]

Bryan - Any more nonsense you'd care to share with us? Do tell us why we can't afford the aircraft and if we can't why have we ordered 42 (as a starter)?? We have 12 with two more due by Xmas in the USA where maintainers and pilots are being trained. More will be delivered next year as production ramps up at LM (priority was given to US orders).

[@Agent-000-0]

First, the F-35 has over 1000 deficiencies to be fixed, so you are getting overpriced prototypes. Lockheed has no timetable for fixing them all. Some were already shifted from Block 3 to Block 4! Block was planned as an upgrade, not a fix to basic design flaws. Second, the F-35B is already so heavy, that it won't be possible to fit all the planned upgrades in it. Lockheed and some generals in the Pentagon can dance around and tell you stories of unicorns riding along the rainbow, but the Pentagon Watchdogs are extremely pessimistic with the program and judge it like this: “The program is actually not on a path toward success but instead on a path toward failing to deliver the full Block 3F capabilities for which the Department is paying almost $400 billion by the scheduled end of System Development and Demonstration (SDD) in 2018.” If the carriers would have been build with catapults and arresting gear, like a proper CATOBAR carrier, there would have been more options for the fighter acquisition. The carriers would have been more expensive, but the Airwing could have been far cheaper. Also, other assets cannot operate from these STOVL carriers. Like an E-2 Hawkeye early warning plane. No long-range submarine hunters, like the S-3 Viking, no cargo planes like the C-2 Greyhound. The US Navy is axing these assets too because they are too stupid to use their 700 billion dollar budget properly in the Pentagon. But they can bring them back, cause they have proper CATOBAR carriers. The French carrier is also capable of using all the CATOBAR fighters and planes.

[@1chish]

Kack Boon - I guess you completely missed SDSR2010 when the new UK Government had a long hard (and expensive) look at completing both QE carriers as CATOBAR and using fewer F-35C rather than F-35B aircraft. The costs of fitting EMALS was a) unproven, b) un-deliverable in the time frame and c) Horrendously expensive. So we decided against it and completed them as STOVL carriers. Now you used the term "like a proper CATOBAR carrier" as if anything else isn't 'proper'? The UK initiated, developed and brought into use EVERY major carrier development since it built the very first carrier in 1918. We know carriers even if we have not had the finance to build them for a few years. We also know how to use STOVL aircraft as we also invented and developed the Harrier. Who are you to say CATOBAR is better than STOVL? How is the Gerald R Ford doing at $16 Bn while we built two for $10 Bn? OK so we can't land French Rafales? Well they should have not reneged on the contract to build 2 more carriers when we built our two. They wanted CATOBAR but couldn't afford it. We will cross deck USMC F-35Bs but not US Navy F-35Cs. Big deal. And Hawkeye is now old design and we have better air defence with our Type 45 Destroyers and Crowsnest enabled Merlin helicopters. And as for ASW Vikings? We will have Merlin HM2 ASW helicopters, the best ASW ships with our Type 23 Frigates and of course Astute submarines. And yes the French carrier. That does indeed have CATOBAR but is forever in dry dock (as it is now and will be for 18 months). So where are the French Navy Rafales now? In hangars somewhere. The QE Class is a further development of carrier design and each was built for 1/3rd the cost of what you laughingly call a 'proper carrier' like the Ford Class. Lets see which goes IOC first shall we? The first QE is in Portsmouth after very intense builders trials. It is being fitted out with on board weapons and specialist mission kit before heading out for what is called 'FOST' this month. She will be Commissioned in November. In Q1 2018 she sails for heavy weather trials in the North Atlantic and then on to Eastern USA to take on board UK F-35s for flight trials. She will then take on USMC F-35s to gain intense mission capability. And IOC in December 2018. She is as much a 'proper carrier' as anything else given the initial sortie rate is better than a Nimitz even if the 24 hour rate is 10% less. 2 minutes from hangar to launch. Try that on a Nimitz let alone a Ford.

[@Agent-000-0]

The USN and the French Navy are using CATOBAR, look at the other junk sailing the oceans. STOBAR is a joke, STOVL is even worse. So yeah, CATOBAR is the proper way to do it. It is more flexible from the assets which can be used in the airwing and it gets the jets up with proper fuel load and weapons. There was no way to build the QE with CATOBAR, cause it was not designed in. It is way more than just changing the flight deck. It was just a big soap opera and not a proper study. The Harrier was a simple, hard to fly machine. The carrier could be simple. But with the F-35, which is insanely complex to build, operate and maintain, the ships cost are way too high for a STOVL jet. The carriers are so expensive, that the high price, constant need for fixes and high operational and maintenance cost for the F-35 are going to financially kill something. But hey, cross-decking with the plane crasher from the USMC is better anyway. Assets like the E-2 got upgrades for fuck sake, it is just a proven airframe with new radar and computers and the "blackout" class destroyers have their radar where? Speaking about hight, not much above the waterline, where the E-2 can fly MILES above the waterline. Welcome to the concept of radar horizon, it is part of science. And don't come up with the radar range, that is in the open sky, not straight above the waterline. A helicopter is not going to cut it. The range and speed are severely limited compared to proper planes. A ship is very slow compared to all flying assets. Do you even know how stupid it sounds to compare a few submarine hunters and early warning platform to a complete fleet being outstretched around the carrier? The manpower and ships needed is crazy and it won't be anywhere near the covered which can be achieved by air. I also would be careful to make fun of an aircraft carrier in drydock, which is 20 years old and is going to get a REFIT. I didn't mention the Ford Class at all. The Ford is a nice example of a project being build BEFORE the design phase of all components, systems and the ship itself was done. It is like the F-35 of the seas. Also, despite the problems with the Ford, the US Navy will have a working air wing. They want to cut down on F-35C numbers and buy way more F-18 Super Hornets Block 3 (from the Boeing Advanced Super Hornet demonstrator). They are going to work, while the F-35C is unsafe to operate from carriers and the F-35B has the usual F-35 trouble + the overweight problem. The sortie rate of the QE is a dream, cause the F-35 is junk. So the Ford will have some combat value, while the QE class will be cheaper.

[@fisherking1863]

DO YOU THINK THE CRUSADERS SHOULD HAVE HESITATED.

[@slippingjimmy2325]

not sure but they are a hell of a rugby team .. just sayin'

[@TheWheels1965]

These ship are ready for the Politicians! thats a first!

[@tomhermens7698]

Are they ready??? Costs???

[@randycheow5311]

If there's a third carrier then they should named it HMS Repulse

[@toxiicwarfare9698]

HMS Terror Or HMS Erebus is a good choice. Or HMS Victory as sign of respect to Horatio Nelson

[@taffyducks544]

HMS Bevan!!!

[@michaelfoulis7438]

@@taffyducks544 Hms By Jove!! , look it up :)

[@Pwn3dbyth3n00b]

Why did they make it a straight flight deck? That makes landing and launching at the same time impossible.

[@phillipmorrison9607]

AustinMcConnell the F35s are STOVL aren’t they, so they should be able to.

[@Andaer11]

Nafee ?

[@thepunisher5399]

You have 2 America has 11

[@zipz8423]

You had to edit that? :P

[@spitfire4206]

but not nearly enough ships to patrol around the world due to cut backs .

[@GroovesNZ]

Modern Western supercarriers are advancing so quickly. its crazy

[@IrishManJT]

Impressive alright but I wonder if the right decision was made to go with the F35B and Ski Jump deck vs F35C and CAT TRAP configuration ?

[@Andrew-is7rs]

Jacobs_Rifles They were specifically designed around the F35B. The cost of traps etc and poss nuclear would of meant only 1 carrier to be built. Invincible class were superb for the UK.... Now we will have two, far far more capable carriers that can hold 3x each what an Invincible ever could. A far cry from no carrier capability at all.

[@ronclark9724]

Since the British don't use their aircraft carriers in the same manner as the Americans, I say the British did choose correctly. The QE class carriers are just a larger version of USS America, more than a amphibious assault ship without a well dock. Think of them as a larger jack of all trades type carrier which can be configured for many different missions. Not only will they be more powerful than a Invincible class light carrier, they can also be a more powerful than Ocean class helicopter assault carrier. Do MORE than either individually with just one ship... The British have no intentions of operating them like the American Nimitz class super carriers...

[@Agent-000-0]

STOVL means fewer weapons and less range for the airwing. It means higher cost for the AIRwing vs higher cost for the carrier with a CATOBAR design. The USS America is a piece of shit. It was ordered by some idiots, which want to turn the US Marine Corps into another naval air wing. It is the US Navies job to do the air missions and the Marines only got into that playing field, because of the Harrier. The F-35 is not the Harrier, it is overly complex, expensive and 15 to 20 years behind schedule. Also, not having a CATOBAR flight deck means not having all the other Catobar fighters and planes... not even hosting friendly ones. No F-18, Rafale, E-2 Hawkeye or C-2 Greyhound is ever going to land on these flight decks. So far for being a "multi".

[@ronclark9724]

As if the British could afford all of those jets. NOT. One QE class carrier replaces two ships, a Invincible class light carrier and a Ocean class assault ship. With two QE class carriers the British are increasing their military capabilities without increasing their cost. They can carry more fighters, more helicopters, and more troops than they do presently. The British did NOT build the QE class carriers to match US Nimitz class. A QE class carrier cost the British £3 billion, not US$12 billion the Ford class did.

[@Agent-000-0]

The Ford is a Ford class, not a Nimitz class. Focusing on bigger ships is not always smart. Big ships are a big target. And I don't see any improvement here. Helicopters are kinda short ranged, so the amphibious ships need to be closer to a shore, while a carrier could stay further back. Some real anti-air capabilities would free up an air defense destroyer from guarding the QE class. All these carriers have is the shitty old Phalanx CIWS.

[@eamesaerospace2805]

I’ve been on that boat

[@zeburules]

Very nice but it doesn't have a Holodeck😏