HMS Prince of Wales - hosts flight trials off the US coast (Part 1) 

Defo Scouse ⚓🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

Sea*

how do you push your full operating abilities when you have no planes of your own? inquiring minds want to know?

@@frank-ko6de I don't think it's that enquiring when a Google search would tell you we have over 30 operational planes with many more to come.

@@Belisarius1967 30 planes? For whom, for your navy or air force and how are these assets projected? It certainly isn't at sea, hence the imbalance in force projection. But, anyway, let me mind my business. Broke Britain, it is.

Yep. Idea is to test max take off and landing weights of the F35s. They'll be trialling a new method called SVRL soon, videos of Qnlz trying it as well.

It is nice to see the F-35 in beast mode. It is a very useful trick since most missions will be in that threat regime (it is not like 4-gen aircraft are obsolete or useless in any shape or form for the next few decades). Thus strapping on more fury and anger to the F-35 is handy more often than not (NATO doctrine is still an air dominance doctrine).

@@admiralmallard7500 We won't come close to max weights with our current loadouts. Max UK weapons load at present is 6 Paveway IV, 2 Amraam and 2 Asraam. With the pylons included thats c4,500lb's total. Even with the arrival of Meteor and Spear in 2027/28 that only goes up by about 1,000lb's. With max internal fuel we're around 10,000lb's shy of max takeoff weight. The only things that could change this in the future is if FCASW is integrated, we purchase heavier weight freefall munitions like 1,000lb JDAM or external fuel tanks arrive.

@dogsnads5634 Well that's good. Though in terms of landing this is very much to ensure we don't have to dump any munitions.

@@admiralmallard7500 Thats the thing...without Storm Shadow being integrated or external tanks....there's no real need for it...vertical landing bringback covers UK maximum weapons load at present and in the future...

"Hassle" lol.

617 Sqn have the lightning flash from their Squadron Crest.

Eh, not really. It's the US coast. Nothing gonna happen to it there.

@@admiralmallard7500fair point. Plenty of submarines in the North Atlantic?

@user-du8kd3sn8n Could well be. In an ideal situation, yeh, could've attached an escort frigate to it. But our current frigates are rapidly aging/in maintenance etc. So it's not too big a deal to sail it over alone.

@@admiralmallard7500 Sure that the Russians + maybe one other were tracking it and seeing how close they can get

“HMS Queen Elizabeth is the biggest ship ever constructed for the Royal Navy, Westlant puts this formidable warship and her embarked F-35 fighter jets through their paces on the USA Eastern Seaboard. Along with HMS Dragon and HMS Northumberland, these ships form the Carrier Strike Group. Supported by RFA Tideforce they will also be joined by units from the United States Navy, US Air Force and US Marine Corps”.

Despite our military not being funded nearly well enough, the lack of planes is a supply issue, not a cost one. We can afford them, they’re just not being produced as quickly as they’re supposed to be, and Lockheed Martin (despite about 20% of the components of the F-35 being British-made) is primarily only delivering what aircraft they are managing to produce to the US military (despite it already having over half the F-35s in the world).

The US is always looking to lighten its burden. Even if we have no aircraft in dia situation the us f35s can have 2 extra platforms to operate with.

The government cancelled half of the original order then passed on delivery schedules pending "technical updates". When a customer behaves like that they can't expect premium service.

@@photoisca7386 That’ll be what our weak government was instructed to do by the US government in order to cover for American incompetence. As I said, we - exclusively - make key components of those aircraft, we should be reducing our output at the same rate Lockheed Martin are, forcing them to pull their finger out, rather than continuing to take a “so long as we’re filling all the orders for our own military, that’s quick enough” attitude. A “You’ll get your rent when you fix this damn door!” situation.

@@omegacrow4597 NATO interoperability is a good thing, but the US just seeing its “allies’” militaries as extra divisions of its own military is the height of narcissistic arrogance.

That's why we're building the new type 26 And 31e frigates plus on Carrier strike groups. We will have US and SCANDINAVIAN frigates and destroyers along side Royal Navy escorts to create 2 Carrier strike groups In the event of WAR OR CONFLICT.... there will be 42 operational F35B'S for both Carriers with in 2 years ...24 for each carrier and the plan is to have 1 carrier available and the second with in 48-72 hours

you have no power togenerate the energy for those assets. stop it.

@@frank-ko6deyou are correct that I personally don’t but the ship does 😅

@@woolyimage Great, keep believing in your delusions about your impotent ships that keep breaking down.

@@frank-ko6deoh dear do you sound a bit miffed. It’s ok to be jealous when others have nice things 😂

No nuclear power, no steam for cats and traps. They're certainly not going to refit one.

There are F35s free in the UK. But none of the dedicated F35B testing squadron established in the US. Italian carriers have gone through the exact same process.

It’s because the uk only has 30 f35s which is the only plane that can operate and it can carry 36 of them so they’ve got more then twice the carrying capacity then they’ve actually got jets

@omarbaba9892 No that's not why. UK is purchasing upto 70+ However there is only one active squadron rn, and that's on HMS Qnlz. These US F35s are part of the group dedicated to training and certifying F35 carriers, same as Italian cavour and HMS Queen elizabeth.

@@admiralmallard7500 ah alright

@@admiralmallard7500 You are correct. Elizabeth is currently leading a Hangar Group up in the Norwegian Sea, supported by Norwegian, Dutch, French (etc) surface and subsurface fleet (the safest way to be inside the Baltic Sea without being in the Baltic Sea, I suppose). They train with Norwegian friends (we still fly the RAF squadron numbers that were designated to us when we flew Spitfires for the RAF during WW2 - a wonderful legacy. Currently, we fly the 332 with F-35A (their size is now 1.5 normal squadron size) while the 331 squad is still at rest, awaiting to be filled up with new aircraft) while the Group is getting air cover by us and our old friends but new member nations of Finland and Sweden (yes I count Sweden as a fully-fledged member). I think this is Qnlz's second or third visit to us here in Norway, and as far as I can see, she and her sister have both shaken down the early issues with more comfort than the average keyboard warrior is giving them credit for. They are an awesome asset for the UK, but also for NATO in current days where Russia is trying to mend internal problems by pissing everyone off (again).

They embarked when it arrived off the US.

Why? For photo ops? Our jets aren't required for this deployment, because they aren't kitted out for test and evaluation purposes like the aircraft that embarked when she got to the US. It would be pointless to embark RAF jets when they aren't needed to meet the aim of the deployment.

It doesn't need them for this deployment, so there's no point embarking them.

Shared test aircraft. That's why. Aircraft fitted with all sorts of sensors. No point duplicating that cost.

@@timmurphy5541 Not shared. Aircraft are owned by the Marine Corps and augmented to VX-23. Some British personnel serve with the ITF.

​@@AA-xo9uwShared in the sense we use them for our trials too, not in terms of actual ownership of the airframes

Personnel*

*Give. It. A. Rest. You. Repetitive. Troll.* You’ve been posting that same inane comment for years now. How many times do you need it explained to you that the Queen Elizabeth class is conventionally powered because that’s a better fit for how the Royal Navy intends to use it, not because Britain lacks the maritime reactor technology to make them nuclear powered & that they were also originally designed with no ramp / an angled deck / electromagnetic catapults, but the tech simply wasn’t mature enough to instil confidence in the RN leadership while the ships were being built (let the US Navy throw buckets of money at working the kinks out, the new tech can be installed via a refit that’ll basically replace the entire flight deck with an extended/expanded one once it’s actually proven)?

@CtrlOptDel And here we have the anti-US troll at it again. I will never get this person. They follow me around on multiple videos trolling me. They also apparently cant read since I didnt say I want the QE class to be nuclear, but alas trolls and all. Shame youtube got rid of the block button now.

@@ThatCarGuy I don’t “follow you around” you absolute narcissist 😂 you copy & paste the exact same comment on any video about the Queen Elizabeth class - a topic which I am interested in, hence why I watch said videos & look at the comments - and then make-out like you’re being “attacked” whenever anyone, not just myself, explains why your “Anyone who doesn’t do aircraft carriers exactly how America does them is wrong” rhetoric is absurdly arrogant & uninformed. You can project as much as you like, but anyone reading these comments can see I’m not the one trolling, you just don’t like getting called-out on your bizarre bad behaviour. I don’t know if you’re some kind of Russian or Chinese or the like agent trying to undermine NATO, or if you’re just a very insecure jingoistic American who feels the need to be passive-aggressive about other countries whenever they do anything well; either way, anyone who’s seen you comments on many videos on this topic will clearly see you’re the troll, at worst I’m wasting my own time & effort by responding to your repetitive nonsense. Your point of “I don’t want the QE class to be nuclear” is utterly irrelevant, you’re saying Britain should aspire to nuclear carriers at some point, I’m explaining that as things stand that would never be worth doing, as it would only make the carriers more expensive with the only effect of preventing them operating in some areas where the Royal Navy wishes to deploy such vessels. We didn’t not make the Queen Elizabeth class nuclear because we couldn’t afford it / didn’t have the technology, we did so because it would’ve been worse than useless to do so; the same will apply to future carriers. The conventional power plant of the Queen Elizabeth class is enough to power EM catapults, and they will be installed when the ships are refit (all the ducting for the cables from the generators to the deck is already in place), by which time the technology will be mature enough to be reliable. And there’s nothing “anti-American” about the factual observation that the US military has absolutely huge amounts of funding, given that it receives the largest percentage of GDP in the world in the country with the highest GDP in the world, meaning it can afford to lose a fair bit of money rushing technologies to the point of general usability.

@CtrlOptDel And the troll continues. You 100 percent follow me around. "“Anyone who doesn’t do aircraft carriers exactly how America" Where did I say this? Unless you once again follow me around(like you do) and can prove this. Caught in your own lie. "getting called-out on your bizarre bad behaviour. I don’t know if you’re some kind of Russian or Chinese or the like agent trying to undermine NATO" Ah bad behavior is giving the UK props and saying good work. I wonder what its like to live in La-la land. And now im apparently a Chinese or Russian agent. LOL Trolls are hilarious. "at worst I’m wasting my own time " Then stop following me around and trolling me. "Your point of “I don’t want the QE class to be nuclear” is utterly irrelevant," And yet you said I was saying that. You are all over the place, but alas you dont care since you are trolling. " as it would only make the carriers more expensive with the only effect of preventing them operating in some areas where the Royal Navy wishes to deploy such vessels." Ah who knew nuclear carriers don't carry more food hence leading to longer deployments and less resupply ships being put in harms way at war time, can literally refuel the carrier strike group, have more MW for future laser weapons or to power longer range radars and so on. But hey you show your true colors here, you just dont like nuclear, have no idea what you are talking about and just enjoy trolling me. "The conventional power plant of the Queen Elizabeth class is enough to power EM catapults" No it doesnt. The QE class makes around 200mw of power, with around 120MW going to it's engines alone. You then have lights, radars, etc. EMALS uses around 60MW alone. "The challenge is scaling a relatively new technology to handle the required weights and power. EMALS motor generator weighs over 80,000 pounds, and is 13.5 feet long, almost 11 feet wide and almost 7 feet tall. It’s designed to deliver up to 60 megajoules of electricity, and 60 megawatts at its peak." Enjoy trolling someone else now, muted.

One correction to my post above, EMALs takes a max MW usage of up to almost 82MW. "Each disk alternator is a six phase machine with phase resistance and reactance of 8.6 mW and 10.4 mH, respectively. At max speed, the output of one of the disk alternators would be 81.6 MW into a matched load. The frequency of this output is 2133 Hz and drops to 1735 Hz at the end of the pulse, for a max launch."

design of the hull shape and it was also likely moving at a faster speed to catch up to the carrier prior, but that is just speculation.

The QE Carriers have been credited with a very efficient Hull Form which explains the small Wake - the result of good design.

@@paultanton4307 it refuel from tanker. At end .target be tanker .?

The Japanese carriers were located by a PBY Catalina - Strawberry 5 - operating out of Midway.

10,000 nautical miles in 4 days that gives HMS Prince of Wales a cruise speed of 109.1666..... Nautical miles an hour. That my friend is some cruise speed. LOL

@@thetruthhurts7675 Glad I am not paying the fuel bill plus delivery....Figures are exaggerated. We have Nuclear power carriers these days for countries that can afford it.

Yea but you could say that about the America class amphibious ship or any other gas tubine ship. Nuclear costs money to design and decommission so it evens its self out.

@@Steven-sy7lr Flagships should have the best.

@@grahamthebaronhesketh. Then why not make the ford class 150000 tonnes. Nuclears no good when its at the bottem of the ocean leaking radiation and poisoning the food supply

You'd be surprised, her flight deck area is about 90% of the size of USS Fords flight deck.

@@Benjd0 the Ford has an extra 30,000 tones on the wales,lol blows my mind

​@@fish9893it is also far more crew-intensive

Not really.

Wouldn't have a 2nd carrier if we used those.

They are looking at Installing them, they where built to be addedly later if needed,

No jets were embarked from the UK for these trials. A couple of test jets embarked from NAS Pax River when it arrived off the US coast

Zero chance we ever would've bought "supplemental f18s'. And cats and traps would've meant 1 carrier.

They are in the factory, Well some of them at any rate..

Your F-35Bs are currently onboard Queen Elisabeth leading a Hangar Battle group off the coast of Norway (the closest space to the Baltic Sea without sailing an entire Hangar Group into the Baltic Sea (where one can get hit by shore-based anti-ship missiles from Russia however close to the Swedish/Finnish coast-line you sail). They are training with Norwegian F-35As, Finnish F-18s, Swedish Gripens, American B-1s and B2s while doing the overwatch job up North together with the Group including at least one French nuclear sub (probably a British too) plus surface ship from Norway, Netherlands, Denmark and more. Just a week ago, your pilots of the F35B model got the chance to intercept a Russian marine patrol aircraft (Ilyushin-38). Having lived in Britain for about 2 years, I know you Brits are world-class regarding self-degrading comments. Yet I, as every Norwegian, adore you, your culture and humour. We also adore how Brits spin into action when things get real. As I wrote in another comment, your aircraft is now training with the Royal Norwegian Airforce Squadron 332. It is named 332 because it was the RAF squadron number that you gave to one of the squadrons Norwegian pilots flew the Spitfire during WW2. The other "Norwegian" Spitfire squadron under RAF (331) is still at rest as we wait for the production line to spit them out to reactivate it after we pensioned our F-16s (some that now will go to Ukraine, the rest have gone to our NATO friends in Romania already). I am happy to have your flagship over here. Allowing us to train with you (alongside our old friends yet new members of Sweden and Finland, Remember, Norway has only received ca 30 F-35As. You have now doubled that number, while Finland has not started to receive their F-35s on order, and the Swedish will make their first Gripen E/D model operational next year (they are flying the competent C/D model though. Poland is also waiting for their F-35, and our buddies in the Netherlands and Denmark must also wait until at least next year before their first operational squadrons are ready to go. To have a couple of airports filled up with 3 dozen 5th-generation fighters and sail those airports to where they are needed is not a small thing. As a Norwegian, I have been lucky enough to interact with your RM Commandos since they had the FN-FAL as their primary weapon. I interacted with them when they got the frustrating early version of the SA80A1 and brought it to wintery Norway. The UK is not a superpower (Commandos are counted around 5000, and your legendary units starting with 3-letter abbreviations starting and ending with an "S" counted in the hundreds) went straight to work after WW2, setting up your sister companies in Norway. Back in the 1970s you went to work again, helping to set up Delta in the US while also levelling up competence all around NATO. I like that you do not make a lot of fuss about it (ha). You do pack a punch when the going goes tough. Pat yourself on the shoulder as you watch the game against Italy now. You are not half-bad, Brits. We all share the experience of Europe going into a military coma after the Kremlin self-destructed the Soviets back in the late 80s. But more importantly, we pack a bigger punch together. I am really happy to have you around.

@glacieractivity What all 70+ we have ordered so far, must be a bit of a squeeze 🤔 Lol..

@Markus117d We've ordered 48 of the Block 3 iirc. And once Block 4 is ready well be ordering near 30 of those

Living in the past, the UK has over 30 F-35 right now. Prince of Wales is on flight trials at the moment and HMS Queen Elizabeth is deployed with a squadron of them.

So tell me sir which third world shithole do you call home?

The US aircraft and helicopters in the video were either from the Navy or Marines. I don’t think there was any US Army involvement. And there was no “renting” going on. The training works both ways with the US personnel getting training in joint operations and the UK crew maintaining operational proficiency.

"being rented for US army training op"(sic) Incorrect. Don't opine on that which you know not.

Hahahahah come on that's a way of saying its not renting in fact its more like criticism for not having enough helicopters and fighter jets etc etc..

You meant USMC….oooh rah.

The UK has over 30 F-35Bs and are waiting on the rest of their aircraft delivery. These are flight trials though so they aren't going to pack the flight deck in any case.

@@Benjd0 Lots of trolls in their mothers basements with time on their hands. Don't waste your time on them.

PW needed to be certified for F35 usage. The US has the only F35s wired for testing in the world. It would be too expensive for the UK to do this with the money they have. So, they pay for us to help them out. Cost effective for everyone. Italy sent theirs over as well to cert theirs for F35 operations. The one draw back to the UK is that they are slow in their orders for F35s. They are a tier one partner in the program, which meant that they had a lot of input in on it design and they have a BAE test pilot assigned to the test squadron from the beginning. But UK is not ordering them in the numbers to bring up new squadrons in a short time. The first one was order at the beginning of the start of production and they still have something around 40 at this time. In the mean time, the US Marines , I think, have replaced the west coast Harrier squadrons with F35s and are starting on the east coast squadrons in the same amount of time.