UK's New 3rd Aircraft carrier: Does the Royal Navy need more Supercarrier? 

Yes - no credibility left after they made that ridiculous claim. Totally different eras and planes.

HMS Argus should get a mention...

Was just about to say the same!! Couldnt believe they could be so wrong , A 1924 ship in a 1982 conflict !?😂😂😂😂

If they can’t get something as straight forward as that, a mistake that is so obvious, how can we take their other assertions that would be new knowledge to us seriously?

Yes the Hermes of 1923 was sunk in the Indian Ocean in 1942. The Hermes that served in the Falklands was a Centaur Class Aircraft Carrier launched in 1953, it was to be decommissioned prior to the Falklands but was kept on until after the Falklands due to the war. The first aircraft carrier was the Furious, which along with its two sisters were converted from battle cruisers to aircraft carriers. The Hermes was the first purpose built aircraft carrier in the world. Argus was similarly a conversion.

03:06 Absolutely zero credibility for this video. What a waste. Turning it off now.

JAPAN ACTUALLY LAUNCHED THE FIRST PURP0SE BUILT CARRIER A SH0RT TIME, WEEKS, BEF0RE BUT WITH0UT A BRIDGE. H0WEVER THE FIRST 3 JAPANESE CARRIERS THAT HAD A BRIDGE HAD IT 0N THE P0RT SIDE AND ALL LATER CARRIERS C0PIED THE R0YAL NAVY WITH A STARB0ARD BRIDGE. ANGLE FLIGHT DECK, STEAM CATAPULT, HK & WIRE LANDING, EMERGENCY NET, MIRR0R LANDING SYSTEM, STARB0ARD BRIDGE ETC ALL BRITISH. NUCLEAR P0WERED CARRIER WAS USA. VIDE0 IS H0RREND0US.

There is no money .....

@@grahamthebaronhesketh.if there is not enough money to build Logistic & Repair ships for the first two carriers then they should NOT build a third.

@@williampaz2092 The third might be to keep the other 2 ready. 1 on service , 1 on stand by and one in refit/repairs.

There should be any. otherwise the Third carrier needs to be 'Battlecarrier'. with offensive weapon battery like a big VLS that fitted onto Destroyers and Frigates and few medium calibre naval guns.

@@grahamthebaronhesketh....and no crew.

Aren’t we a green eyed jealous wee Australian monster, and don’t worry you’ll get your submarine’s, but your going to pay us tens of billions, and that’s £’s not Australian Monopoly money.😅😂🤣🇬🇧🇺🇸🤝🇦🇺

The point is that if you only have 2 and one is in refit you then only have one. If you then have an accident on that ONE what aircraft are in the air...... My feeling is a third SMALLER carrier mainly for helicopter ops. Would be useful, particularly when one of the QE carriers is in refit. Remember the UK only ever have 50 or so sea harriers. But we still had 4 carriers: invincible , illustrious, arc Royal and ocean. Do remember they don't just carry fast jets, they also carry helicopters for airborne early warning , anti submarine warfare, transport , search and rescue maybe even Apache for ground attack

I believe the main problem we have is lack of escort ships we need more frigates and maybe some destroys before thinking of getting another carrier, and even so I doubt we could even afford to operate three carriers.

@@bluestorm3628 well be operated 4 carriers (all be it smaller ones ) when we had 50 or so sea harriers. But yes I think that 2 more type 45s would help, and maybe 2 more astute subs. But it's a bit like the new wedge tail AWACs we canceled the last 2 thus only having 3, and when one of those is out of service you don't have enough. And by canceling 40% of the fleet did we save 40% of the cost? No less than 20%. When you buy more the unit cost goes down.

Building the infrastructure for a carrier fleet. If they smart they'd have put catapults on them that way when required they could operate the F35C or the F18 Superhornet.

HMS Hermes was 1st purpose built carrier in world ( not Falklands war version) she was only commissioned 1959 .

Your punctuation leaves something to be desired.

Interesting subject you raise, but we should define what really constitutes “firsts” regarding aircraft carriers. The first recorded landing of an aircraft on a (moving) ship was achieved in August 1917 by Edwin Dunning on HMS Furious. It was over a year later that HMS Argus enjoyed this experience. Hermes was indeed the first purpose built AC, commissioned February 19th 1924, but only after lessons were learned from the aforementioned ships. HMS Eagle followed Hermes a week later.

​@@dreadnought5518iirc that was before her full conversion so it was a flight deck fore and aft with a sort of track thing to get round the superstructer. She'd possibly still have at least one of her 18" mounts. Furious was an odd ball. She was a test bed hull for a lot of things going on. Arguably more of what was learned from her went into Ark Royal and the Illustrious class than Hermes and Argus too.

Hermes was the first Purpose-built Aircraft carrier to be laid down(to start being built). But she was not the Purpose-built aircraft carrier. That was the IJN Hōshō(Japan) HMS Hermies spent years on hold while testing was done on existing converted CVs Like Argus and Furious on design features like the Ships Island to name just one. Hermies was not commissioned till 1924 Hōshō was commissioned in 1922. incidentally My Grandfather served as a Air mechanic and Swordfish Gunner on both HMS Hermies and HMS Furious

The Royal Navy is very small and wouldn’t take long to destroy. You can apply this to the army and RAF as well.

@@Dingdangdoo compared to who, our ally America? The EU? Our only enemies right now would be Russia or China and neither of them would stand a chance.

We should ask our French Allies for more help eh? 😂

They especially need more women.... and blacks

Why?

@@michealrcnicholson9342 search me! Diversity replacement.

@@DaveSCameron The French looks to be in better shape :)

The recruitment it part of the problem! University graduates and completely literate people, instead of moulding and training people to be who they really need. Some of the best navigators technicians metal workers, simply can’t spell or work out mathematical formulas! However the recruiters want you to be able to do these…

​@michaelcoles6140 recruitment numbers isn't the problem it's Capita the private recruitment agency that does the recruitment is the problem ever since they got the contract after the government stopped the military from doing their own recruitment they have extended the process by months and that puts people off. Another thing is due cuts the MOD is getting rid of more military personnel and set the recruiting on a set number due too budget. If the military was allowed to continue it's own recruitment process which speeds up time and our government puts at least 4% GDP into defence we will have a good sizable and professional volunteer military personally I think we should boost it up to at least 5.5 - 6% GDP to bring back the home service style of reservists we had back in the Cold War they probably trained once a month lightly armed and older equipment but it will be handy to have to boost defence and be useful for national emergencies at home to free up regular and actual reservists. All in all numbers isn't an issue it's boils down to government creating flaws. I can speak on experience I joined the army reserves in 2020 it taken nearly 3-4 months just to jus get into my physical and get sworn in before phase 1 training I had to leave due to work but since I got a new job with less hours I'd love to rejoin but after going through the mess of a recruitment process before I'm put off from going back

Yep UK and Japan needs 2-3 super carriers and about 4-5 wasp or america style amphibious assault ships!!

Why don't they buy an American Nimitz class carrier from America and do it up@@Legion-xq8eo

Vulnerable Island ? Not any more ! The Islamic Navy strengthens its position daily ! The Islands were lost years ago !

Britanistan LOL. Yes won't be long now. France will go first but there will be a lot of blood involved

Stan is a persian Word meaning “land” so when you say Britainstan you are bascially saying “land of the brits”

The US's 7th fleet is bigger than the whole of the RN. Its definitely not in the No.2 spot . We're behind France and many other countries.

Not sure that is right. I think UK rank 9. Probably less if you exclude the Nuke Deterrent.

@peteroliver536 how do you come to that conclusion? 2nd best carriers in the world, Nuclear hunter killer subs - only France and the US have anything on par + the Nuclear deterrent fleet, best Air defence destroyers in the world in the type 45...New frigates coming on line etc etc

On the air defence the Arleigh Burke is better although China new 052D is on par. both ships also have excellent anti ship abilities. Until recently the only anti ship ability the Type 45 had was its gun. India Kolkata class of which India has 3 is also better as part of its 11 strong fleet. Japan has 36 modern destroyers many of which are modern with some the best. Having new ships coming down the line does not make something best. The type 45 was meant to be a fleet of 12 and soon became 6. Who knows how many type 26 will end up being bult. whilst the carriers maybe good for helicopters but are useless for air operations as the F35B is short range. Uk has very few,. The carrier would need to operate within range of powerful anti ship weapons fired from land unlike those of India, France and the US who can operate far from land. Now if we were just talking about subs, then fair play the Astute is the best and a shame we will only have 7 and not the needed 12 to 18. @@mrfrisky6501

6 destroyers, 8 frigates, and 5 hunter killer submarines. That’s all we have. How do you make that the second most powerful. 14 surface ships to protect the U.K. to defend the nuclear deterrent. To provide two carrier strike groups and to police the med, the Indian Ocean, the Black Sea, the South China Sea and chase the Russians around the North Atlantic and sabre rattle in the south Atlantic. Japan alone as an example has a naval fleet of 42 destroyers. The U.K. has 6 and only 3 of those are available. No we are not the second most powerful anything. We are a laughing stock. We couldn’t defend the Thames, let alone the channel, much less the worlds oceans. This is a sad fact. And base reality my friend

Never let the facts get in the way of a good sound clip

Actually 4. Think the nuclear deterrent submarines.

@@brianwillson9567 In was going to post that. You beat me to it. 👍👍

yeah they are expensive and we don't work alone typically anyway

@@DarkShroom Are you in the Navy? Good for you.

​@@Demun1649no he isn't.

There has been at least two HMS Ark Royals. Reusing ships names is a common practice, going back to pre Nelson days, as with HMS Prince of Wales, the first a Battle Cruiser that fought in WWII . They must be sunk or scrapped before reused. No new HMS Victory any time soon or ever.

​@@tonys1636Actually I can think of 3 Ark Royal aircraft carriers One sunk in WW2, One that was the subject of a TV series (decommissioned in 1978?) The last Invincible class "Through deck Cruiser"

@@tonys1636 there have been 5 ships named HMS Ark Royal ! No 1 was flagship of fleet which saw off the spanish Armada in 1588 . Thats why the name is so famous . Probably only flew seagulls then (+flags) . Ark no2 converted merchant ship 1914 . Ark 3 new when ww2 started . Ark4 1955to1979 famous for "sailor" documentary filmed 1976 . Ark 5 was upgraded version of Falklands war Invincible . Fascinating history . Google Ark Royal _ the legend & history .

@@tonys1636 Reusing ships names is from WAAAAYYYY before Nelson. The first Ark Royal was Launched in 1587(Nelson was born in 1758). and there have been 5 Ark Royals. This is a VERY lazy video. There was indeed a Converted Aircraft carrier called Ark Royal served in WW1. A SEA PLANE carrier. A ship that launched its planes by craning them onto the water.

This is a VERY lazy video. There was indeed a Converted Aircraft carrier called Ark Royal served in WW1. A SEA PLANE carrier. A ship that launched its planes by craning them onto the water.

We currently have 1 carrier more than the French have !

You people need not one, but two new aircraft carriers. But bigger than the current ones; 310 meters in length, at least. P.D. And twice the current number of the other combatants.

The uk has a nuclear policy the prohibits that i think so only astutes and dreadnaught class subs are it

@@jorgeestrada5713the uk carriers are big enough they can carry 72 aircraft at max load

@@rogueshadow4960 . France is making a bigger Aircraft Carrier, 300 meters in length. Therefore, the Union Jack must be flown on aircraft carriers of at least 310 meters in length.

Why don't they buy an American Nimitz class carrier from America and do it up

And the cost comes from???

1 at sea, 1/2 defending our water, if not 2 then 1, and the 3rd can do other things

Dont make any They are a waste

Not really that surprising is it tho if it works it works lol just technology that but most this stuff to bed

Would rather build 10 Type 32 that only require 50 people to crew.

The priority has to be more escorts and especially ones that have anti-ship missiles as well as anti-air. The current 2 carriers have NO independent air defence and precious few aircraft

The UK's operational policy was/is to work in tandem with a US carrier strike group. The UK could use one more carrier. That way they could always be sure to have at least two on duty and rotate one in and out of maintenance, much in the way we do our carriers and submarines.

I disagree... the UK cannot afford not to....

if our government stopped wasting money on illegals at £10 million per day we might have the money to do better, they are currently committing financial suicide, and stop all aid to Ukraine too

The Brits invented carriers and just about all the tech the Yanks use on theirs

The Royal Navy should have reevaluated their force design, reconsidering the construction of aircraft carriers, amphibious transport docks, destroyers, and frigates. Instead, they should have focused on anti-access/area denial capabilities, such as sea mines, anti-ship missiles, submerged threats, drones, light surface-attack vehicles, coastal defense submarines, and anti-naval aviation assets. One example of an effective anti-ship missile system is the anti-ship missile equipped patrolling coastal combatant. These vessels, resembling scaled-up speed boats, would be equipped with large anti-ship missile launchers. The Iranian Peykaap class or the old Soviet Osa class are examples of such vessels. To create a formidable defense, the country would stockpile a significant number of anti-ship guided missiles and deploy them in concealed locations along the coast or slightly inland. To protect these missiles from cruise missile attacks, decoys would be extensively used. By concealing launchers inside shipping containers, for instance, it would be possible to create multiple decoy launching sites in forested or mountainous areas for every legitimate launcher. The range of the anti-ship missile systems could potentially extend several hundred kilometers from the coast, depending on the specific system used. Different systems with varying ranges could be intermixed to make invading particularly challenging. For instance, shorter-ranged and more affordable anti-ship missiles could be combined with longer-ranged and deadlier systems like the Russian Bastion coastal defense system.

Correct, but nevertheless they are insufficient. They should at least double that stock.

@@jorgeestrada5713 Doubling that Number is stupid better off spending the money on surface vessels.

@@jammiedodger7040 . It's stupid to think that doubling that number is stupid.

@@jorgeestrada5713 Surface vessels are so much more useful as they are a lot more versatile also way better value for money.

This is the era of Drone warfare. The aircraft carriers that the UK has, is perfect to be Drone carriers. Drones are far cheaper than fighter jets, they are unmanned and each year Drone technology is getting better and better. Maintaining and fueling drones is far cheaper than trying to maintain an F35.

They had one but sold it to the Brazilians HMS Ocean I think was its name .