Bad luck for HSM Queen Elizabeth, but being able to cross-deck prep and send out HMS PoW within a week as her replacement is nothing short of an amazing accomplishment for the RN, so credit where it's due well done for pulling out all the stops.
Amazing work yes but lets not forget - the Royal Navy is a tier one blue water force and they are more than capable of this sort of thing. I hate when I read news about sudden mission changes etc and people are all "oh well, they only just managed to scrape it together huh" - its profoundly ignorant of the effort and expertise that goes into this sort of work. The Royal Navy has a history of problem solving, thinking on the go and coming up with alternative strategies. From the smallest boat to the largest carrier, the Royal Navy is right up there with anyone else. Anyone who thinks this work is a fluke - just take a look at the Falklands campaign :D
@@dynamo1796 good grief, you must work in MOD Main Building and in the press office to come out with that fluff. We havent been a true blue water navy for thirty years or more, not with the resources we've got. And the Falklands campaign was a bloody close run thing and certainly something that we couldnt do today.
@@stevem-h3562 The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency of the United States has defined the blue-water navy as "a maritime force capable of sustained operation across the deep waters of open oceans. A blue-water navy allows a country to project power far from the home country and usually includes one or more aircraft carriers. Smaller blue-water navies are able to dispatch fewer vessels abroad for shorter periods of time." If you can show me any evidence that the RN does not meet that criteria, I will be shocked. As an example, prior to decommissioning HMS Enterprise in 2023 the ship was deployed for 3 years straight (can't find the exact number, could be just shy of or just over). As well, CSG21 & CSG25 see a fleet of some of the most advanced warships in the world deployed for more than half a year visting dozens of countries. Bear in mind as well that the CSGs aren't the only forward deployed force at the time they're out, there are also individual ships on different assignments dotted around the globe. If the UK Royal Navy doesn't constitute a true blue water navy, then neither does the United States Navy.
@@stevem-h3562 I'm not MOD, just someone who believes in our forces. I'd love to see things done better - more ships, more crews and more spending. What we've got isn't perfect. People like you however who only focus on the negatives only see problems - I'll never convince you to change your perspective even if I cared enough to try (which I definitely don't). As for the Falklands - the history is clear, it was a difficult operation to mount and everyone expected it to fail. Imagine their suprise when it didn't. My point is to the negative nannies like yourself - maybe go touch some grass.
Maybe, maybe not. It depends on your service. I once talked to a retired US Navy dentist. Much of his career was spent removed perfectly fine wisdom teeth from Marine recruits. The USMC's policy was to remove those teeth during boot camp, so they wouldn't become an issue during later combat.
Well done to you all! Only the BRITISH ROYAL NAVY could have turned round such a hugely complex ship from a sustained maintenance period to being fully operational in such a short time. I am very proud to have served in the RN as a Royal Marine. Clearly it was achieved by good leadership and pride in their ship at all levels and by all who were involved - civilian as well as RN personnel.
@1chish difficult to move on when QE has also broken down with the same problem. If the problem was known it should give been sorted out before it broke down. Bad contingency planning by RN and MoD.
@@ds1868 Well as with all armchair Admirals you made an assumption to fit your narrative of dissing the RN and MoD to look clever. But not ONE fact! . None of us know exactly what the issue was with QE. Rumours and gossip are not facts. However it had not 'broken down' as you suggest (twice!) as it was still serviceable. The FSL made a very clear statement the day it happened to dispel the usual nonsense from people like you. He confirmed that if it was an emergency or pressing situation she would have sailed and been safe. But we have a second carrier and so that was pressed into service. And it sailed in very quick order. So yes people like you should move on and stop a) making assumptions, b) turning assumptions into false facts and c) using false facts to criticise people who know far more about it than you do.
@@zakelwe What 'gremlins' are those then? Please tell us... She did not HAVE to be replaced at all. She could have sailed but they CHOSE to use PoW. The First Sea Lord confirmed last week QE COULD have sailed if it was urgent but it wasn't. This was a normal operational decision that happens in every Navy in every week of the year. No gremlins were involved ... 🤣🤣
@@Irisishunter I was watching the webcam on HMS Warrior, but ended up in a meeting so can't confirm. It may be possible to wind back the video on the warrior webcam, if that feature is supported.
@@glynnwright1699 QE was supposed to depart days ago but it was postponed after an "issue" was found with a coupling on the starboard propeller shaft.. PoW has indeed now departed after it was delayed over the weekend "due to wear and tear". So it was broken too, and unable to depart on time.
Why wasn’t the first one set to go and do you honestly think that in time of war an enemy will hang around for a week? Stop parking them close together, at the very least separate ports.
Getting it ready to go in a week is actually quite impressive,but I very much doubt that it’s any where near fully operational. The west side boys would be impressed but the Russians will be no more impressed than we are with their carrier
@@chrislewis8714no one is pretending that the ship or its aircraft are fully operational or even if they were,that they would be capable of tackling a tier 1 enemy
HMS Prince of Wales should be undergoing maintenance right now, which means there is a non-neglible probability that it might break down during the NATO exercise too. The sensible thing would have been for the UK to pull out of the exercise altogether, before the RN becomes the laughing stock of the world more than it already is with its overpriced ships and submarines that cannot sail.
Simons boss (UK Gov) ☎ Simon!!!!!! Your late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Simon: Sorry boss props not trwilrlying properly.......... Sunak: The trwirlrylryly thing is safe and effective!
I thought I just read that there was Propeller Shaft problem and HMS Prince of Wales would staying in port for repairs and would not be replacing Queen Elizabeth?
Yes, they got P of W ready, rolled it out, and then it headed back to port. but it DID SAIL today (Feb 12th). So, order of details are: quote: Feb 11, 2024: *_A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman said that sailing had been postponed but did not give a reason for the last-minute decision_* So, it not clear why the P & W could not set sail, but it was postponed yesterday, and details as to why are not clear as of yet. So, news is not 100% clear as to why the P OF W moved out of the harbor, only to return back to port. quote: *_But after the hitch, HMS Prince of Wales had to be brought under tow back into the harbour_* *_Within 20 minutes of the failed attempt to leave British shores, the hundreds that had gathered for the big moment realized that it would not be setting off today and began to go their separate ways_* The Mod statement so far is: *_He said: 'The aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is due to sail from Portsmouth soon, subject to suitable tide and weather conditions_* *_Any further updates on sailing times will be published on KHM Portsmouth's shipping movements later today_* So, that was Feb 11th, yesterday. Feb 12: quote: *_Royal Navy: HMS Prince of Wales finally leaves Portsmouth for North Sea Nato mission after initial delay_* So, there was a 1 day delay - details are not known as to what or why.....
@@andrewpease3688 Well, part of the idea of having 2 carriers are for cases like what just occurred. Some of the news reported that the 2nd carrier also broke down - that does not seem to be the case.
Missing the bit where it has put to sea without any CIWS. O.k. It’s a NATO exercise but surely part of that would be to test its ability to defend itself?
1) Why are RN officers dressed ike car mechanics? It's not like the captain will work on the mechanicals of the ship. 2) Why is the officer in charge of one of our largest ships a commander rather than a captain as previously. It's not like we don't have more senior officers in the navy than actual fighting ships. 3) The design and/or construction of the QE ships has proven to be sub-standard, with a litany of leaks and alignment issues. 4) How many F35Bs embarked this time? Still in single digits, or are the USMC making up numbers as usual? 6) What is the status of the Crowsnest AEW system, still only at "initial operational capability"?
1. its standard working rig 2. He is the Commander / XO not the Captain who is a 4 ringer 3. As with many first of class vessels there will be teething problems 4. The UK has 30 I believe at last count, plenty for an air wing 5????? you seem to have missed that one 6. Delays are due to the contractor not having the correct personnel to carry out the coding and also the RN being very particular to get a radar that actually works as it has been sold.
@@neilsbs8273 so how many of the UK's F35Bs were embarked and why does the UK only have two squadrons, or will when RNAS 809 is deployable in 2025. The result is that the UK has only one of HMS PoW or HMS QE deployable and has only enough F35Bs to form the kernal of the air wing on one of them anyway. Blaming civilian contractors for HMS QE not being deployable is a complete "croc". You don't build billion pound ships without ensuring you have personell and equipment to keep them in service. We are not talking about emptying rubbish bins.
@@grahamepigney8565 Obviously you know more than me so please enlighten us all with your words of wisdom. The facts are many people slate these ships and the RN in general however they can only work with the money given to them by the government. Promised over 135 F35s so built the carriers to suit, then the govt decided to reduce numbers, shortly followed by supply problems from our American friends slowing the supply of the jets. POW had a problem with her shaft 2 years ago, got it fixed and has been good to go ever since. QE was programmed to have her shaft upgrade done, yes a design fault, but u fortunately failed before they had a chance to fix it. I wasnt blaming civilian contractors for HMS QE, the question by the OP referred to the crowsnest system which is still in development. Unfortunately there will always be people who take pleasure in spouting out of date or generally wrong info from the comfort of their armchairs and security of their keyboards. And finally the jets won't be onboard until they are at sea, it is very rare to have them onboard when alongside in home port.
That's what every navy does. It's just with something like aircraft carriers only the US has enough to fully apply the rule of 3, One just returned and in maintenance, One out* on deployment and one post maintenance working up to deploy next..
@@1chish You can literally google it and get a thousand articles on the huge problems these QEII Class carriers have been having, it's really not that difficult.
Well France aircraft carrier has been plagued with problems over the years, and they don't have a second one to use when it's not in service. Makes sense, aircraft carriers and incredibly complex aswell as new, and it takes some time to work out the bugs. Us Ford class carriers have had their issues aswell.
How can it require a crew of 1400? The ship requires a crew of around 700 with out aircrew embarked . Since it will no doubt be sailing with only 2 F35B and 5 Merlins (cos that’s how bad things have been run into the ground) why the extra 700 aircrew? 🧐🇬🇧🏴
Short answer: NO. No carriers have aircraft on board in home port for maintenance / refits. Aircraft are also flown on at sea as its safer. Change the CD mate this 'no aircraft' stuff is getting rather boring.
@@1chish He's not exactly wrong though. We initially put in orders for 128 F35B Lightning II's. Estimates say we need around 75 F35B Lightning II's to fully complement both Carriers and for spares. We have received a total of 32, and one has already been lost to the ocean. You can't just go "oh this no aircraft stuff is boring" just because it hurts your feelings and you don't want to talk about it. The fact of the matter is we don't even have HALF the number of aircraft we NEED, let alone WANT.
@@Perseus7567 No he is absolutely wrong. There are NEVER any aircraft on any carriers in home port. Its that simple. You then drift off into your own ignorant ramble. 1. The Tranche 1 order was for 48 (not '128') aircraft. 32 have been delivered in 8 years. 2. The RAF are already have the funds to buy Tranche 2 of some 30 more aircraft. 3. That will bring the total to 78 (less one crashed) 4. The 138 number was always the 'through life requirement' to cater for hull losses, accidents, airframes worn out, upgrades etc. That is still the current position. 5. Slow delivery is not a UK / MoD / budget failure. Its more down to Biden politicking. The orders have been in place long enough and we have the cash to order more. So whats your beef? 6. We already have enough aircraft to put 2 squadrons on a carrier, have the 3 remain in California and the rest for OCU training. More than enough for current needs. For you to suggest my feelings are hurt says more about your passive aggressive BS than anything I can say. I merely pointed out that even commenting on a lack of aircraft on a carrier IN PORT is just stupid.
@@1chish The question wasn’t, “does this carrier have aircraft in port” it was, “does this carrier have aircraft?” A broader answer, which acknowledges the legitimate lack of F-35s delivered, is more in line with the spirit of the question.
@@drksideofthewal So we look at spirits now? No I read words and respond to those words. If there was a different meaning then the comment should have been written differently. But to your manipulated point: Yes we do have F-35s and yes the carrier WILL have aircraft as they are flown on at sea. As I explained in detail just above barely23 hours ago. If you can't be arsed to read my replies I can't be arsed to repeat them.
Take it you have never been on a major Nato exercise? Going from home mode to how I am going to defeat my enemy mode? Who are your enemy, what capabilities do they have, what assets have they got, who is their commander, etc. You dont just pitch up. Prior preparation prevents piss poor performance. Piss poor performance results in dead sailors.
They had to dismantle scaffolding which had taken 6 weeks to erect and rebuild one of her engines as she was undergoing routine maintenance at the time. So considering she was on 30 days notice to sail and did it in 8, I don't think that's a bad effort.
by any chance where can i get info about when HMS Queen elizabeth is due to arrive to Rosyth? Cant find it anywhere on any tracker for obvious reasons.
@jonathanpardoe8722 - No you never heard anything of the sort Jonathan. You just thought that throwing that in there would make you look 'clever'. And there was no 'cancellation' let alone 'cancellation again' at all. there was a delay while they completed prepping the ship. She has been prepared for sailing in a week. The fact she needed an extra 16 hours or so to complete the task is still damn good.
@@1chish Yes, she was delayed and so the plan to sail on Sunday had to be cancelled. Stop being a pompous AH playing word games. Cancel is defined as: "1. decide or announce that (a planned event) will not take place." The Planned event: HMS Prince of Wales sailing on Sunday 11th February 2024. Did Event take place: No. Oh look, it meets the definition of cancelled. The sh*t people say on UA-cam comments to look smarter than others is honestly mindblowing.
@@Perseus7567 Your opening sentence crashes the rest of your arrogant comment. Yes she was D E L A Y E D due to prepping taking longer than expected. The departure was not C A N C E L L E D as she has departed! 🤦♂ But yes I agree : "The sh*t people say on UA-cam comments to look smarter than others is honestly mindblowing" Which was exactly the point of my first reply with which you took issue. D'UH!
the only thing they'd move to instant readiness to do would be to welcome the invaders. Its pretty much what they would do now if they could muster enough hardware to get it out of port.
HMS Queen Elizabeth II was supposed to go lead the NATO exercises but broke down. HMS Prince of Wales was due to step in and take over instead. Unfortunately, it's planned sailing date (yesterday) was cancelled, either because it broke down also or because the navy hadn't finished prepping the ship in time. HMS Prince of Wales finally set sail today and, hopefully, will lead the NATO exercises.
I would not be at all surprised if this carrier also breaks down in next few days.... I bet they even sail it on a Go Slow because they know it's not reliable. Let's see what happens
It's the Type 45 class which were specifically designed to protect the carriers as dedicated anti air destroyers. There's 6 in total, as standard they would bring two of them as part of a carrier stroke group.
@@t.4999 That would just be the minimum for the air defence component. They will have a few Type 23 ASW frigates and at least one attack submarine. The carrier itself is the main offensive punch, the rest of the ships are largely just to protect it.
@@Benjd0 carrier ain’t the punch if they faced a sneak attack with hypersonic missiles or a saturated attacked that over whelms the anti air missiles. Long gone are the days of just anti air and anti sun weapons and we are in era of super and hypersonic cruise missiles that cannot be detected, hybrid missile torpedoes, saturated missile / drone attacks to cripple if not sink the naval asset. While they are good on paper (AFTER WE IGNORE HOW PATHETIC THEIR SERVICE RATE IS GIVEN THEY SPEND MORE THAN HALF OF THE YEAR AT REPAIRS THAT NEVER SEEM TO GET FIXED IN DOCKS, ENDLESSLY BREAKDOWN EVERY TIME THEY ARE TO SAIL INTERNATIONAL), there are genuine serious doubts about their war capabilities given how fragile these new assets seem to be breaking down like spoilt kids and how poorly their crews have been handling them reflecting on their training.
Every so often navies face a design problem. They can build new ships like their older ones and avoid teething problems. However, that means they're stuck with a design that may not be the best for modern warfare. Or they can create a new class of ship with new features. In the latter case they will face problems that have to be worked out. The new Ford class of U.S. carriers faced similar troubles.
I bet the sailors and families are chuffed there going away again and again at short notice I bet there is going to be a few letters on his desk when they get back.
Embarrassing is all I can say. The sailors are proud but surely not of the pathetic government that has closed off their funding especially the British Army.
Cue the usual naysayers, doom merchants and the 'too clever by half' nuggets. Nothing decent to write so they invent stuff .... 🤦♂ But BZ Crew and civvies getting the ship ready so quickly. Totally validating why we have TWO carriers.
Again, it's not inventing because it hurts your feelings that not everything goes to plan. No one has made anything up. QEII broke down. Prince of Wales has a history of breaking down. The ship failed to sail yesterday. It's not a huge leap to assume (in the face of lack of information made public) that PoW suffered some mechanical failure yesterday.
@@1chish Because he's correct, The Royal Navy could announce that it's cutting its F35 orders to 10 aircraft and we'd see you here defending it ! You sugar coat everything, our military is a shambles ....
It's a pile of shit pal. Just a cosmetic exercise. I really do hope (for the sake of the lives of the folk onboard) that it never sees any serious action.
Er, it's hangAr m'dears. You puts CLOTHES on a HANGER, AIRCRAFT in a HANGAR. (Derived from the French, meaning 'workshop'.). Bob, LAM a/e, from the days when Christ was a Corporal and our carriers worked.
Where are the Brown and black sailors who represent 20% of this fine nation? Oh yeah, either in a hotel being paid to do nothing or sitting in a hospital A&E for no apparent reason.
Roflmfao, what a bunch of lies, nevermind the propeller is broken and you needed several tugboats to pretend it "launched" with no aircraft...love the generators on the front of the ship, the only "display of power" the "super" carrier can show. 😂😂
Okay, I'm with you on the planes bit (32 out of 128 is not even close), but the tugboat thing is nonsense. All boats get escorted out of the harbour by tugboat. It's the standard procedure. Look up videos of warships leaving Portsmouth, even small destroyers or frigates get one or two tugboats to help them.
Bet 50 bucks that the HMS Prince of Wales will be back at the shipyard for major overhaul in couple of months after it sail. Frankly, it's just a piece of crap.
Bad luck for HSM Queen Elizabeth, but being able to cross-deck prep and send out HMS PoW within a week as her replacement is nothing short of an amazing accomplishment for the RN, so credit where it's due well done for pulling out all the stops.
Amazing work yes but lets not forget - the Royal Navy is a tier one blue water force and they are more than capable of this sort of thing. I hate when I read news about sudden mission changes etc and people are all "oh well, they only just managed to scrape it together huh" - its profoundly ignorant of the effort and expertise that goes into this sort of work.
The Royal Navy has a history of problem solving, thinking on the go and coming up with alternative strategies. From the smallest boat to the largest carrier, the Royal Navy is right up there with anyone else. Anyone who thinks this work is a fluke - just take a look at the Falklands campaign :D
@@dynamo1796 good grief, you must work in MOD Main Building and in the press office to come out with that fluff.
We havent been a true blue water navy for thirty years or more, not with the resources we've got. And the Falklands campaign was a bloody close run thing and certainly something that we couldnt do today.
@@stevem-h3562 The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency of the United States has defined the blue-water navy as "a maritime force capable of sustained operation across the deep waters of open oceans. A blue-water navy allows a country to project power far from the home country and usually includes one or more aircraft carriers. Smaller blue-water navies are able to dispatch fewer vessels abroad for shorter periods of time."
If you can show me any evidence that the RN does not meet that criteria, I will be shocked. As an example, prior to decommissioning HMS Enterprise in 2023 the ship was deployed for 3 years straight (can't find the exact number, could be just shy of or just over). As well, CSG21 & CSG25 see a fleet of some of the most advanced warships in the world deployed for more than half a year visting dozens of countries. Bear in mind as well that the CSGs aren't the only forward deployed force at the time they're out, there are also individual ships on different assignments dotted around the globe.
If the UK Royal Navy doesn't constitute a true blue water navy, then neither does the United States Navy.
@@stevem-h3562 I'm not MOD, just someone who believes in our forces. I'd love to see things done better - more ships, more crews and more spending.
What we've got isn't perfect. People like you however who only focus on the negatives only see problems - I'll never convince you to change your perspective even if I cared enough to try (which I definitely don't).
As for the Falklands - the history is clear, it was a difficult operation to mount and everyone expected it to fail. Imagine their suprise when it didn't. My point is to the negative nannies like yourself - maybe go touch some grass.
The best Service always!
Nice work by the Royal Navy. 🇺🇸🤝🇬🇧
Dentist you say!! Now that’s a reason to join.
😂😂😂
Maybe, maybe not. It depends on your service. I once talked to a retired US Navy dentist. Much of his career was spent removed perfectly fine wisdom teeth from Marine recruits. The USMC's policy was to remove those teeth during boot camp, so they wouldn't become an issue during later combat.
That's especially true if you're British!
Well done to you all! Only the BRITISH ROYAL NAVY could have turned round such a hugely complex ship from a sustained maintenance period to being fully operational in such a short time. I am very proud to have served in the RN as a Royal Marine. Clearly it was achieved by good leadership and pride in their ship at all levels and by all who were involved - civilian as well as RN personnel.
True, we did it in 2 days in the falklands.
Good training opportunity. Things do not go as planned, especially with complex systems, so adapt and overcome.
Great work!
Nice one lads more money the Forces 👍🇬🇧
Well done POW team. It’s the challenge that brings out the best in people.
God speed to the ship and her company.
God bless the Royal Navy!
Exceptional effort, well done all 👌🏻
That’s real impressive. Well done navy .
Just as commendable as the turnaround of USS Yorktown after the Battle of the Coral Sea, making her ready for Midway.
How long did it take the task force to sail for the Falklands….. to an actual war???
They really need to sort these propeller couplings out.
Nothing wrong with PoWs couplings. It was sorted a long time ago and she has crossed the Atlantic twice since.
people really should just move on ...
@1chish difficult to move on when QE has also broken down with the same problem. If the problem was known it should give been sorted out before it broke down. Bad contingency planning by RN and MoD.
@@ds1868 Well as with all armchair Admirals you made an assumption to fit your narrative of dissing the RN and MoD to look clever.
But not ONE fact!
.
None of us know exactly what the issue was with QE. Rumours and gossip are not facts. However it had not 'broken down' as you suggest (twice!) as it was still serviceable. The FSL made a very clear statement the day it happened to dispel the usual nonsense from people like you. He confirmed that if it was an emergency or pressing situation she would have sailed and been safe. But we have a second carrier and so that was pressed into service. And it sailed in very quick order.
So yes people like you should move on and stop a) making assumptions, b) turning assumptions into false facts and c) using false facts to criticise people who know far more about it than you do.
But it still had to be replaced by another ship..... You have to admit it has not been perfect so far. We can move on when the gremlins are fixed.
@@zakelwe What 'gremlins' are those then? Please tell us...
She did not HAVE to be replaced at all. She could have sailed but they CHOSE to use PoW.
The First Sea Lord confirmed last week QE COULD have sailed if it was urgent but it wasn't. This was a normal operational decision that happens in every Navy in every week of the year.
No gremlins were involved ... 🤣🤣
Many thanks incredible technology on this ship.
Good job lads and lasses. I've got family on POW, safe sailings brother.
Good luck everyone.
This aged like a fine wine eh.
Very professional
BZ to the ship's company of HMS Prince of Wales.
Great presentation ! Well done !.
"One ship is broken, scramble the other one... What do you mean it's broken too?! Someone get me PR on the phone I've got a plan...."
It isn't broken, it has sailed.
@@glynnwright1699 Any video of her sailing? I know it is a bit daft but always love seeing them at sea
@@Irisishunter I was watching the webcam on HMS Warrior, but ended up in a meeting so can't confirm. It may be possible to wind back the video on the warrior webcam, if that feature is supported.
@@glynnwright1699 QE was supposed to depart days ago but it was postponed after an "issue" was found with a coupling on the starboard propeller shaft.. PoW has indeed now departed after it was delayed over the weekend "due to wear and tear". So it was broken too, and unable to depart on time.
@@glynnwright1699 cheers
About time this ship was sent into service. She always seemed to be second best. To queen elizabeth
You go to war (or war games) with what you have, not what you want. That’s why you have a backup.
Why wasn’t the first one set to go and do you honestly think that in time of war an enemy will hang around for a week? Stop parking them close together, at the very least separate ports.
Please take care of the greatest menace in the sea of Bahrain: the HMS Chiddingfold.
Taalks more like a middle manager than a Commander/Captain of a capital ship, a warship....
Relax. He's given a script by the PR people and told to read it. He doesn't get a say.
Seems Officers don't have elecution lessons any more either
Get yourself a spelling lesson @@theoccupier1652
He’s the executive officer not the captain
@@jongulliver984 OK. So where the hell's the skipper?
You can tell that everyone on board likes Cox.
For those wondering, HMS POW has already departed for the NATO exercise.
Go Navy as professional as ever
Getting it ready to go in a week is actually quite impressive,but I very much doubt that it’s any where near fully operational. The west side boys would be impressed but the Russians will be no more impressed than we are with their carrier
Prince of Wales was ready to go in 8 days. Kuznetsov has been out of action for 7 years.
One of these things is not like the other.
@@chrislewis8714no one is pretending that the ship or its aircraft are fully operational or even if they were,that they would be capable of tackling a tier 1 enemy
HMS Prince of Wales should be undergoing maintenance right now, which means there is a non-neglible probability that it might break down during the NATO exercise too. The sensible thing would have been for the UK to pull out of the exercise altogether, before the RN becomes the laughing stock of the world more than it already is with its overpriced ships and submarines that cannot sail.
@@BucyKalmangood point,but I think the basic mechanicals are probably OK.Warfighting,no chance
I’ve heard they’re both broken, just saying it’s a joke
Simons boss (UK Gov) ☎ Simon!!!!!! Your late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Simon: Sorry boss props not trwilrlying properly..........
Sunak: The trwirlrylryly thing is safe and effective!
I thought I just read that there was Propeller Shaft problem and HMS Prince of Wales would staying in port for repairs and would not be replacing Queen Elizabeth?
Dunno where you read that, but it's already set sail
Yes, they got P of W ready, rolled it out, and then it headed back to port.
but it DID SAIL today (Feb 12th).
So, order of details are:
quote:
Feb 11, 2024:
*_A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman said that sailing had been postponed but did not give a reason for the last-minute decision_*
So, it not clear why the P & W could not set sail, but it was postponed yesterday, and details as to why are not clear as of yet.
So, news is not 100% clear as to why the P OF W moved out of the harbor, only to return back to port.
quote:
*_But after the hitch, HMS Prince of Wales had to be brought under tow back into the harbour_*
*_Within 20 minutes of the failed attempt to leave British shores, the hundreds that had gathered for the big moment realized that it would not be setting off today and began to go their separate ways_*
The Mod statement so far is:
*_He said: 'The aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is due to sail from Portsmouth soon, subject to suitable tide and weather conditions_*
*_Any further updates on sailing times will be published on KHM Portsmouth's shipping movements later today_*
So, that was Feb 11th, yesterday.
Feb 12:
quote:
*_Royal Navy: HMS Prince of Wales finally leaves Portsmouth for North Sea Nato mission after initial delay_*
So, there was a 1 day delay - details are not known as to what or why.....
@@Albertkallaldiversity and inclusion deployment assessment paperwork not ready
@@andrewpease3688
Well, part of the idea of having 2 carriers are for cases like what just occurred.
Some of the news reported that the 2nd carrier also broke down - that does not seem to be the case.
Just 24 hrs late@@CynicalPlatapus
Half the staff be leaving in next two years ….😂😂😂😂😂 if not sooner
Another mong who knows nothing
I'm supposed to be impressed that you went to Tesco's?!?!
commander? this man is a middle management civil servant
Great effort guys what the state of play with the f35b
Well done and best regards ,, ,, Henry IX (aka "No. 9")
Hi, l am interested to see. Please how could l know when the warship move in and out of Portsmouth? Thank you.😊
Would have been great if the Cdr had the correct epaulette on!!!
Missing the bit where it has put to sea without any CIWS. O.k. It’s a NATO exercise but surely part of that would be to test its ability to defend itself?
Superb Naval professionals increasingly let down by dodgy machinery. Our shipyards need to build more reliable ships.
I'm curious about the defect on QE.
Is it the same one that damaged the Prince of Wales?
Unfortunately it seems the carrier is only reliable when static.
Total bollocks. Why write this cow manure?
1) Why are RN officers dressed ike car mechanics? It's not like the captain will work on the mechanicals of the ship. 2) Why is the officer in charge of one of our largest ships a commander rather than a captain as previously. It's not like we don't have more senior officers in the navy than actual fighting ships. 3) The design and/or construction of the QE ships has proven to be sub-standard, with a litany of leaks and alignment issues. 4) How many F35Bs embarked this time? Still in single digits, or are the USMC making up numbers as usual? 6) What is the status of the Crowsnest AEW system, still only at "initial operational capability"?
1. its standard working rig
2. He is the Commander / XO not the Captain who is a 4 ringer
3. As with many first of class vessels there will be teething problems
4. The UK has 30 I believe at last count, plenty for an air wing
5????? you seem to have missed that one
6. Delays are due to the contractor not having the correct personnel to carry out the coding and also the RN being very particular to get a radar that actually works as it has been sold.
Clearly, you know nothing, and why are you asking the questions, when you would not undertsand the answers?
@@neilsbs8273 so how many of the UK's F35Bs were embarked and why does the UK only have two squadrons, or will when RNAS 809 is deployable in 2025.
The result is that the UK has only one of HMS PoW or HMS QE deployable and has only enough F35Bs to form the kernal of the air wing on one of them anyway.
Blaming civilian contractors for HMS QE not being deployable is a complete "croc". You don't build billion pound ships without ensuring you have personell and equipment to keep them in service. We are not talking about emptying rubbish bins.
@@grahamepigney8565 Obviously you know more than me so please enlighten us all with your words of wisdom. The facts are many people slate these ships and the RN in general however they can only work with the money given to them by the government. Promised over 135 F35s so built the carriers to suit, then the govt decided to reduce numbers, shortly followed by supply problems from our American friends slowing the supply of the jets. POW had a problem with her shaft 2 years ago, got it fixed and has been good to go ever since. QE was programmed to have her shaft upgrade done, yes a design fault, but u fortunately failed before they had a chance to fix it.
I wasnt blaming civilian contractors for HMS QE, the question by the OP referred to the crowsnest system which is still in development.
Unfortunately there will always be people who take pleasure in spouting out of date or generally wrong info from the comfort of their armchairs and security of their keyboards.
And finally the jets won't be onboard until they are at sea, it is very rare to have them onboard when alongside in home port.
So we have 2 carriers built just to make sure one works. Just like having an heir and a spare really!
The problem is that both have mechanical problems, most likely design flaws.
That's what every navy does. It's just with something like aircraft carriers only the US has enough to fully apply the rule of 3, One just returned and in maintenance, One out* on deployment and one post maintenance working up to deploy next..
@@BucyKalman So what 'mechanical problems' are those then Chiefie? I am sure the Navy would love your skilled input. 🤦♂
@@1chish You can literally google it and get a thousand articles on the huge problems these QEII Class carriers have been having, it's really not that difficult.
Well France aircraft carrier has been plagued with problems over the years, and they don't have a second one to use when it's not in service. Makes sense, aircraft carriers and incredibly complex aswell as new, and it takes some time to work out the bugs. Us Ford class carriers have had their issues aswell.
Why are you explaining yourself on social media?
How can it require a crew of 1400? The ship requires a crew of around 700 with out aircrew embarked . Since it will no doubt be sailing with only 2 F35B and 5 Merlins (cos that’s how bad things have been run into the ground) why the extra 700 aircrew?
🧐🇬🇧🏴
Did she sail?
Yes,a day late
But , " Can you put a fruit pastille in your mouth without chewing it ? "
Does this carrier have aircraft?
Short answer: NO.
No carriers have aircraft on board in home port for maintenance / refits.
Aircraft are also flown on at sea as its safer.
Change the CD mate this 'no aircraft' stuff is getting rather boring.
@@1chish He's not exactly wrong though.
We initially put in orders for 128 F35B Lightning II's.
Estimates say we need around 75 F35B Lightning II's to fully complement both Carriers and for spares.
We have received a total of 32, and one has already been lost to the ocean.
You can't just go "oh this no aircraft stuff is boring" just because it hurts your feelings and you don't want to talk about it. The fact of the matter is we don't even have HALF the number of aircraft we NEED, let alone WANT.
@@Perseus7567 No he is absolutely wrong. There are NEVER any aircraft on any carriers in home port. Its that simple.
You then drift off into your own ignorant ramble.
1. The Tranche 1 order was for 48 (not '128') aircraft. 32 have been delivered in 8 years.
2. The RAF are already have the funds to buy Tranche 2 of some 30 more aircraft.
3. That will bring the total to 78 (less one crashed)
4. The 138 number was always the 'through life requirement' to cater for hull losses, accidents, airframes worn out, upgrades etc. That is still the current position.
5. Slow delivery is not a UK / MoD / budget failure. Its more down to Biden politicking. The orders have been in place long enough and we have the cash to order more. So whats your beef?
6. We already have enough aircraft to put 2 squadrons on a carrier, have the 3 remain in California and the rest for OCU training. More than enough for current needs.
For you to suggest my feelings are hurt says more about your passive aggressive BS than anything I can say. I merely pointed out that even commenting on a lack of aircraft on a carrier IN PORT is just stupid.
@@1chish
The question wasn’t, “does this carrier have aircraft in port” it was, “does this carrier have aircraft?” A broader answer, which acknowledges the legitimate lack of F-35s delivered, is more in line with the spirit of the question.
@@drksideofthewal So we look at spirits now?
No I read words and respond to those words. If there was a different meaning then the comment should have been written differently.
But to your manipulated point:
Yes we do have F-35s and yes the carrier WILL have aircraft as they are flown on at sea. As I explained in detail just above barely23 hours ago. If you can't be arsed to read my replies I can't be arsed to repeat them.
Hope the Falklands are not invaded! Task force?
Task force? Ah, that must be the task force of tradespeople I need to fix the ships.. I've been looking for them, where'd you find them?
How can it take a week to move stuff from the broken aircraft carrier right beside you? Both vessels are identical.
Take it you have never been on a major Nato exercise? Going from home mode to how I am going to defeat my enemy mode? Who are your enemy, what capabilities do they have, what assets have they got, who is their commander, etc. You dont just pitch up. Prior preparation prevents piss poor performance. Piss poor performance results in dead sailors.
They had to dismantle scaffolding which had taken 6 weeks to erect and rebuild one of her engines as she was undergoing routine maintenance at the time.
So considering she was on 30 days notice to sail and did it in 8, I don't think that's a bad effort.
They are not identical. PoW is larger
Lots of trolls comments
😂😂😂😂😂😂, tic tac tic tac tic tac......soon in the workshop to repair
Well ... hopefully THIS ONE won't: Break down, run aground, turn back to port after 1 day...etc.
Britain you gotta do better.
It wont, Prince of Wales just got out of maintenance
@@thwalesproductions 🤣😂 There's always hope :)
Is it ready though? They have both been broken recently. 🤞🤞
It's literally at sea now.
The issue with the drive is a concern , but it'll get ironed out
by any chance where can i get info about when HMS Queen elizabeth is due to arrive to Rosyth? Cant find it anywhere on any tracker for obvious reasons.
These ships are starting to get a bad rep!
. 0:07
Woops
And now I have just heard that the POW has cancelled her sailing again due to another fault with the propshaft Could anybody enlighten me .
Her sailing isnt cancelled, she has already left port a few hours ago, it was only a 1 day delay potentially due to equipment not fully ready yet
No it’s a secret.
@jonathanpardoe8722 - No you never heard anything of the sort Jonathan. You just thought that throwing that in there would make you look 'clever'. And there was no 'cancellation' let alone 'cancellation again' at all. there was a delay while they completed prepping the ship.
She has been prepared for sailing in a week. The fact she needed an extra 16 hours or so to complete the task is still damn good.
@@1chish Yes, she was delayed and so the plan to sail on Sunday had to be cancelled.
Stop being a pompous AH playing word games.
Cancel is defined as:
"1.
decide or announce that (a planned event) will not take place."
The Planned event: HMS Prince of Wales sailing on Sunday 11th February 2024.
Did Event take place: No.
Oh look, it meets the definition of cancelled.
The sh*t people say on UA-cam comments to look smarter than others is honestly mindblowing.
@@Perseus7567 Your opening sentence crashes the rest of your arrogant comment.
Yes she was D E L A Y E D due to prepping taking longer than expected. The departure was not C A N C E L L E D as she has departed! 🤦♂
But yes I agree :
"The sh*t people say on UA-cam comments to look smarter than others is honestly mindblowing"
Which was exactly the point of my first reply with which you took issue. D'UH!
I thought this carrier also broke down last week
That was her sister ship, Prince of Wales set out here to replace her on exercise yesterday.
They got some sailors then .
Chummy not plummy.
Right lads were being invaded.move to instant readiness!
the only thing they'd move to instant readiness to do would be to welcome the invaders. Its pretty much what they would do now if they could muster enough hardware to get it out of port.
@@stevem-h3562mate if there was an invasion and there was a call up you’d be first to get the white feather
Right I’m slightly confused…………which Carrier is ‘Tits up’ and which one is going!? Ffs!! 🤦♂️
HMS Queen Elizabeth II was supposed to go lead the NATO exercises but broke down.
HMS Prince of Wales was due to step in and take over instead. Unfortunately, it's planned sailing date (yesterday) was cancelled, either because it broke down also or because the navy hadn't finished prepping the ship in time.
HMS Prince of Wales finally set sail today and, hopefully, will lead the NATO exercises.
I would not be at all surprised if this carrier also breaks down in next few days.... I bet they even sail it on a Go Slow because they know it's not reliable.
Let's see what happens
What protection does the UK navy have in terms of vessels to defend the carrier? not a lot as far as I am aware.
It's the Type 45 class which were specifically designed to protect the carriers as dedicated anti air destroyers. There's 6 in total, as standard they would bring two of them as part of a carrier stroke group.
@@Benjd0lol 2 destroyers with only anti air capabilities and limited anti submarine warfare capabilities, no offensive punch? Gotta be kidding right?
@@t.4999 That would just be the minimum for the air defence component. They will have a few Type 23 ASW frigates and at least one attack submarine. The carrier itself is the main offensive punch, the rest of the ships are largely just to protect it.
@@Benjd0 carrier ain’t the punch if they faced a sneak attack with hypersonic missiles or a saturated attacked that over whelms the anti air missiles. Long gone are the days of just anti air and anti sun weapons and we are in era of super and hypersonic cruise missiles that cannot be detected, hybrid missile torpedoes, saturated missile / drone attacks to cripple if not sink the naval asset.
While they are good on paper (AFTER WE IGNORE HOW PATHETIC THEIR SERVICE RATE IS GIVEN THEY SPEND MORE THAN HALF OF THE YEAR AT REPAIRS THAT NEVER SEEM TO GET FIXED IN DOCKS, ENDLESSLY BREAKDOWN EVERY TIME THEY ARE TO SAIL INTERNATIONAL), there are genuine serious doubts about their war capabilities given how fragile these new assets seem to be breaking down like spoilt kids and how poorly their crews have been handling them reflecting on their training.
Look harder. It's a carrier group and contains ships specifically designed for that purpose
Let’s hope we have appropriate anti aircraft defences in its port so that it isn’t sunk at the dock!
Will these ships ever be problem free? Whats going on tradespeople? Have we no skills left in design and build.
Every so often navies face a design problem. They can build new ships like their older ones and avoid teething problems. However, that means they're stuck with a design that may not be the best for modern warfare. Or they can create a new class of ship with new features. In the latter case they will face problems that have to be worked out. The new Ford class of U.S. carriers faced similar troubles.
for those in peril on the sea good sea and save journey to all who sail
I pray that PoW does not end up limping home in a few days time.
I bet the sailors and families are chuffed there going away again and again at short notice I bet there is going to be a few letters on his desk when they get back.
Moral is high
Really ?? How are you powering the vessel ? Oars ?!!
Embarrassing is all I can say. The sailors are proud but surely not of the pathetic government that has closed off their funding especially the British Army.
"Hi, I'm the commander of Hayche M S Prince of Wales"? 😂 🙄
they better have 2 tug boats to accompany it just in case
Cue the usual naysayers, doom merchants and the 'too clever by half' nuggets.
Nothing decent to write so they invent stuff .... 🤦♂
But BZ Crew and civvies getting the ship ready so quickly. Totally validating why we have TWO carriers.
Again, it's not inventing because it hurts your feelings that not everything goes to plan.
No one has made anything up. QEII broke down. Prince of Wales has a history of breaking down. The ship failed to sail yesterday. It's not a huge leap to assume (in the face of lack of information made public) that PoW suffered some mechanical failure yesterday.
@@Perseus7567 Why are you trolling all my comments dude?
Nothing better to do?
Sad little nugget.
@@1chish Because he's correct, The Royal Navy could announce that it's cutting its F35 orders to 10 aircraft and we'd see you here defending it ! You sugar coat everything, our military is a shambles ....
What a joke of an aircraft carrier. Pathetic and an embarrassment to the legacy of British navy
A colossal waste of money
Back for repair in a week😂😂😂
Can not sail no gas 😂
It's a pile of shit pal. Just a cosmetic exercise. I really do hope (for the sake of the lives of the folk onboard) that it never sees any serious action.
lol..ok.dont be bullshitters.you serve yourself better by honesty…plonkers.
What are you on about
Er, it's hangAr m'dears. You puts CLOTHES on a HANGER, AIRCRAFT in a HANGAR. (Derived from the French, meaning 'workshop'.).
Bob, LAM a/e, from the days when Christ was a Corporal and our carriers worked.
Pity it can't stop a dinghy.
It doesn't look anywhere near diverse enough on that privalidged white man's boat!!
Take your meds and work on your spelling.
If you don’t like our country and traditions , you know what you can do !!
@@user-wn3cm6jf8e Hes being sarcastic mate
@@user-wn3cm6jf8e well said.
Where are the Brown and black sailors who represent 20% of this fine nation? Oh yeah, either in a hotel being paid to do nothing or sitting in a hospital A&E for no apparent reason.
Might be wise to bring a tug…
Don't worry this boat has no reverse. So a woman can drive this boat
Roflmfao, what a bunch of lies, nevermind the propeller is broken and you needed several tugboats to pretend it "launched" with no aircraft...love the generators on the front of the ship, the only "display of power" the "super" carrier can show. 😂😂
Okay, I'm with you on the planes bit (32 out of 128 is not even close), but the tugboat thing is nonsense.
All boats get escorted out of the harbour by tugboat. It's the standard procedure. Look up videos of warships leaving Portsmouth, even small destroyers or frigates get one or two tugboats to help them.
Both carriers are a joke and totally useless for purpose in what is coming!
Bet 50 bucks that the HMS Prince of Wales will be back at the shipyard for major overhaul in couple of months after it sail. Frankly, it's just a piece of crap.
It's not ready now.
. 0:28
. 0:17