She’ll be docked in the U.S Naval Academy till this Friday morning, sure is a beautiful to look at. Nice work from the U.S!
@dlawson6885 жыл бұрын
we in the USA are super excited to see these two carriers operational! They look great and should serve wonderfully. We always got you guys back!
@jakesmith-bw1yc5 жыл бұрын
And we will always have yours 🇬🇧🇺🇸
@Cpt_Boony_Hat5 жыл бұрын
When they were in the U.S last week they tried to beat Florida Man on his home turf
@truckerfromreno5 жыл бұрын
Late entrants though, try having our backs from the start of the conflict, like we do for you.
@RR-ty6zz5 жыл бұрын
Most Americans realize the true about uk. They are two face and will always back stab us.
@jakesmith-bw1yc5 жыл бұрын
@@RR-ty6zz I don't know who told you that but most us brits love the usa so ain't no backstabbing going on
@kansasjayhawk83864 жыл бұрын
From America, awesome job Britain! Our true brothers in arms. 🇺🇸🤝🇬🇧
@ivangodbold2924 жыл бұрын
love from uk.
@haroldinho99303 жыл бұрын
🇬🇧🤜🤛🇺🇸
@selimgokalp28052 жыл бұрын
Your trues brothers ? The ones who taxed you and killed you ? 🤣
@tomisugiarto89222 жыл бұрын
brother in arms in making chaos in the world
@questionmaker56662 жыл бұрын
@@selimgokalp2805 Over 200 hundred years ago. I think they have forgiven Britain. Making friends destroys your enemy while benefitting both.
@AviationNut5 жыл бұрын
Our British friends got themselves a hot new beautiful toy. Wish you all the best from Chicago.
@tomtdh49035 жыл бұрын
Apparently it was built with the F35 in mind. Truly awesome war plane! I know we sold you the vtol blueprints years ago though haha 🇬🇧 Britain & America 🇺🇸 will always be friends. Wish we could drag the U.K. across the Atlantic.
@bazd8845 жыл бұрын
Tom tdh. So do we.
@ThePalaeontologist5 жыл бұрын
@Astuteous Maximus While it is a salient point that has a lot of truth in it, with HMS Conqueror's sinking of the ARA Belgrano, being a controversial move which nevertheless, shocked the Argentines into a more tentative approach to the Falklands Conflict, with all the strategic benefits that entailed by making them more timid to show up in the conflict after that point with their naval assets, I'd argue there are two main counterarguments to make: 1. Argentina is neither Russia or China; and those latter two are Britain's primary theoretical adversaries in most present day scenarios (of course, others like Iran and North Korea are on Britain's mind, too - North Korea only recently threatened to ''destroy'' the UK and nobody seemed to care he said that but it certainly would have raised some eyebrows; as mad as North Korea clearly is, a threat is a threat and should still be looked into) I don't trust North Korea as far as I could throw a Stegosaurus. Argentina is nothing like as strong and capable as China or Russia - and even Iran currently has far greater strategic options to use against Britain (primarily, in trying to harm our trade, and in the very least, forcing Britain to spend a lot of money on escorting our shipping through the Straits of Hormuz and distracting ships that would be valuable elsewhere in the world e.g. in disaster relief operations) The UK using hunter-killers to scare off Argentina is one thing; that won't work with China. Obviously any scenario where conflict between the UK and China happens, is theoretical only and we know that the USA and others would be drawn in too. But in the vacuum of logic scenario where the UK and China duke it out on their own in a war gaming like scenario? Hunter-killers will be very, very important for Britain; but so will the carriers. The carriers were in the Falklands, too, I must remind you - remember, the outnumbered British Sea Harriers, first won air parity and then air superiority. Hunter-killers could do little to stop the Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary, suffering severe losses and damage to Argentine air attacks, could they? The primary defence against that came, of course, from the surface fleet and the carrier air wings themselves (but inevitably, being so outnumbered at first and within such close proximity to Argentina, their attacks would get through and cause harm; French exocet missiles didn't help that situation, either, bloody French -.-) With all due respect to Argentina, the threat they posed was modest back then and pretty laughable in the 21st century now. As of 2019, the British presence on the Falklands could very easily fend off anything Argentina has at the moment. Argentina is in no shape to be fighting anyone, with a tanking economy and a military using stuff they were using during the Falklands War. Britain has Eurofighter Typhoons down there man lol not gonna see Argentina daring to attack the Falklands any time soon. Point is, carriers were just as strategically important, though of course as part of task groups with many escorts. The escorts suffered to keep the Argentines away from the carriers, which were the centrepieces of the task groups upon which all depended. Lose the carriers, lose the war. It was that simple. Sure, the British submarines could keep sinking Argentine ships well outside the exclusion zone if permitted (though, considering the backlash over the sinking of the Belgrano - whose own Captain literally stated was making a turn to get within the exclusion zone to attack British ships to disrupt their landing operations - I doubt that would ever be allowed) If submarine warfare was allowed to be unrestricted however, Argentina would lose it's entire merchant marine and surface fleet eventually. But that wouldn't change the fact that, in that scenario, British carrier/(s) had been lost and the heart of the task forces ripped out. I've seen documentaries where leading figures in the British military involved in the war, literally say that without their carriers it'd be impossible as they'd lose air cover and if they lose that it'd mean they'd have lost many more ships and hundreds, if not thousands more British lives. Quite simply, the carriers were the linchpins of the operations and without them they'd have gone home to avoid serious losses (more serious than they were, even with the carriers being there to provide invaluable air support) The hunter-killers did their job well; but the carriers did too. Both were effective. Ergo, both were valid platforms. [1/2]
@kickboxerforever004 жыл бұрын
2 Bro not 1 HMS Queen Lizzie Carrier has a Brother HMS Prince Of Wales with the same capabilities but slightly heavier :-)
@jackssmirkingrevenge93654 жыл бұрын
we have no beef with either the russian or the chinese man in the street. the era of governments getting us all to turn up and kill each other in financially ruinous wars for the benefit of a third party is quite thankfully drawing to a close. only war im fighting with china or russia anytime soon is a memewar.. in which case they will surely lose 😆
@antonleimbach6484 жыл бұрын
England has an amazing history on the oceans. As a yank it’s great to see them build these carriers. Anchors away!
@ragingtoastnextgen14584 жыл бұрын
Pedro Rocha get mad Argentine 😂😂😂
@grahamlait19694 жыл бұрын
Anchors away?... don't think so: Should be anchors aweigh, which means the anchor has been raised from the sea bed. 'Anchors away' means the anchors fallen off.....
@45commando144 жыл бұрын
I think you mean Britain.
@shrek_has_swag23444 жыл бұрын
Pedro Rocha Someone getting mad about the falklands?
@aranbarrett6804 жыл бұрын
United Kingdom or British isles .
@alexb19745 жыл бұрын
this aircraft carrier is so cool, well done from France 🇫🇷🤝🇬🇧
@lovelock5125 жыл бұрын
Would be wonderful to see her sailing alongside FS Charles de Gaulle one day 🇬🇧🤝🇫🇷
@dean10395 жыл бұрын
The French would be opposed to that idea. The Queen Elizabeth would dwarf the Charles de Gaulle. They wouldn't want to be seen as inadequate in comparison to the British.
@zeeshanshabbir1725 жыл бұрын
Hopefully we'll see your new aircraft carrier alongside it in the future!
@rahulchaudhary-xg9vz5 жыл бұрын
Not better than Charles De Gaulle... I just love that Aircraft carrier....❤️❤️
@CommonSenserules19815 жыл бұрын
@@rahulchaudhary-xg9vz It Is better. Holds up to 70 AC. With the lastest tech. With the best jets to go on it
@Desciplesgames4 жыл бұрын
QE class carrier, two T45s and two T26s AND an astute sub - that’s a strike group to make any nation weak at the knees. Proud!
@kevinbaboolal42253 жыл бұрын
Thats kinda pathetic tbh. The USN are the only ones who have proper carrier groups
@ashleygoggs56793 жыл бұрын
@@kevinbaboolal4225 We will most likely end up doing what the US is doing and creating multinational Carrier Strike Groups. The US is now involving German, Australian, Norwegian and Danish ships into their groups further strengthening Alliances and i see the UK going the same route eventually. Especially as we need more ships as it is to further project power to russia, china and north korea.
@oskahuxley63223 жыл бұрын
@@kevinbaboolal4225 we are a small island country give us some credit. I know some people salivate over our perceived historical power but considering our population we are doing well in my opinion.
@kevinbaboolal42253 жыл бұрын
@@oskahuxley6322 im a big RN fan and I am salty af the RN is so small
@oskahuxley63223 жыл бұрын
@@kevinbaboolal4225 likewise my guy. We have to be proud of what we have though. It's a good time for the RN .New frigates, destroyers, submarines and aircraft carriers. The only thing we can really ask for is quantity in my opinion. We need more type 26s and type 45s now that the issues have been ironed out (thanks to the American designed intercoolers). We also need to make more ships for export for example a carrier for Australia and Canada.
@Dweller4154 жыл бұрын
Beautiful Carrier and a worthy flagship of one of the world’s oldest naval powers. We in the States salute our brothers and sisters of the Royal Navy and may all who serve aboard the HMS Queen Elizabeth serve proudly, bravely and always return home safely. 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
@zutd7723 жыл бұрын
God bless our big Uncle Sam
@davidbell7094 Жыл бұрын
Your special allies and mates with the UK and Visor Verser USA..!!
@jameshunter58994 жыл бұрын
I've been on it and under it and it's an amazing piece of engineering, I'm proud of my country and our armed forces, rule britania.
@BigRed24 жыл бұрын
British Empire and military might ended 100 year’s ago with the age of the modern era
@Magpy932 жыл бұрын
@@BigRed2 pull up to our coast and see what happens
@questionmaker56662 жыл бұрын
@@BigRed2 At least be accurate, its been 77 years now, and we are still more powerful than most nations.
@Hawaiian808824 жыл бұрын
I am so stoked the the UK moved in this direction, to design and build her own Super Carrier
@jix98984 жыл бұрын
Second one coming soon!
@TheLastCrumb.3 жыл бұрын
A £3bn floating pub.... if carlsburg made pubs.....
@petermallia5583 жыл бұрын
Me too mate, I've been chomping at the bit to see these carriers on full operations, and seeing the exersises with the USMC F-35s too was amazing to see, during Exercise Joint Warrior is a major biannual multi-national military exercise which takes place in the United Kingdom, predominately in north west Scotland. It is the successor of the Neptune Warrior exercises and Joint Maritime Course. Wiki; Joint Warrior is organised by the UK Ministry of Defence and is Europe's largest military exercise
@TheLastCrumb.3 жыл бұрын
@@rec1962 im not sure.. maybe 12bn for everything involved like the f35 but I think the boat itself was 3
@shippainoki3 жыл бұрын
As a Retired United States Marine, I can only say Congrats to a great nation making a great ship. :-) This is awesome. Would love to take a tour.
@MB-gn8zl3 жыл бұрын
Thanks For Your Service Keeping Your Country Safe👏
@williamlee47313 жыл бұрын
I've had many a tour been in every compartment I worked on it
@siphotheguy18703 жыл бұрын
US Marines..... what a bunch of girls! Ha ha just kidding :)
@whutteretbrock21813 жыл бұрын
@@siphotheguy1870 I'd like to see you repeat that joke face-to-face with a Marine.
@patrickhows14823 жыл бұрын
You will be pleased to know that a USMC squadron of f-35s is on board for the first deployment as part of a joint exercise.
@deeacosta27345 жыл бұрын
Nice ship. UK needs more. Congratulations from a friend here in the US!
@RR-us2kp5 жыл бұрын
Nope. 2 is precisely enough. No more, no less.
@RR-us2kp5 жыл бұрын
What they do need is more destroyers and frigates.
@BMTHmosher5 жыл бұрын
@@RR-us2kp we need a bigger navy overall
@RR-us2kp5 жыл бұрын
@@BMTHmosher exactly
@guiltseeker4 жыл бұрын
THANKS CAP'N .
@diabeat42484 жыл бұрын
Congratulations UK! Both new carriers are beautiful vessels and should be a source of great pride. Your American brothers and sisters share your excitement and are enjoying watching your enthusiasm and pride in your new carriers and ever increasingly capable Navy. Love and comradery from the USA.
@questionmaker56662 жыл бұрын
Yes
@azzarobertson954 жыл бұрын
congrats GB! awesome carriers, from australia! 🇦🇺 🤝🇬🇧
@hoggarththewisesmeagol83623 жыл бұрын
Awesome carriers and Australia should consider them its own. The motherland is back after Brexit
@azzarobertson953 жыл бұрын
@@hoggarththewisesmeagol8362 is this CANZUK idea goes ahead the empire will basically exist again and the UK, Aus, NZ and canada will make up the 4th largest economy in the world.
@allanirvine73043 жыл бұрын
@@hoggarththewisesmeagol8362 hell yeah
@DavidSmith-ul4ns3 жыл бұрын
Canzuk!
@emomuzz58833 жыл бұрын
You good folks have the shiny new HMAS Canberra, not as big but at least as cool!
@royleon35252 жыл бұрын
I joined the RN in 1958, after a year in college HMS Collingwood, I was assigned my first ship. Also numbered R08 - HMS Bulwark. Also an aircraft carrier. I was in awe of its size but disappointed that we were to spend the next 18 months in Dry Dock to be converted to a Combined Ops carrier. Finally after work up trials we sailed for the Far East. I was just 19 and thrilled beyond compare. I saw so much of the world in the next 18 months and had so many adventures. I hope the crew of the new R08 will enjoy their time on board and serve with honour..
@ar6_airsoft3375 жыл бұрын
Saw it at Portsmouth a few weeks ago it's huge and absolutely beautiful 😍😍
@williamjohn36655 жыл бұрын
AR6_ airsoft so did I and it was massive
@akhirnepaul12325 жыл бұрын
I would of seen it aswell, however my group decided it was too busy (myself included) and that we will return later... Later arrived and it was even busier. Never got past the hangar. 😭
@redted3665 жыл бұрын
airhead
@redted3664 жыл бұрын
anorak
@redted3664 жыл бұрын
@AngloSaxon. empty idiot,popeyes are in far flung places ,should be protecting our shores...like Iran does theres
@sergiodario58able4 жыл бұрын
Really beautiful ship! Congrats to the UK.. Italy is coming up with the QE little sister: it is ITS Trieste LHD Ship as well..It is similar in looks, seen it has the two separate isles as well..At 35 thousand tons is only half the size of the QE, but it will do fine for operations in a closed sea like the Med, and we're proud of it as well...Maybe sometimes in the future we shall see them sailing together in the Med, cause the situation over here is really approaching a boiling point and we need our big sis to help us out..lol..
@ingurlund96574 жыл бұрын
Great comment and that new Italian ship is a beauty. I saw it's launching in a vid and noted it had two islands.
@Joker-yw9hl3 жыл бұрын
🇬🇧🇮🇹
@ivorbiggun7103 жыл бұрын
Look forward to seeing British and Italian F-35Bs cross-decking in the future.
@hoggarththewisesmeagol83623 жыл бұрын
Maybe Italy and the U.K. need to unite militarily against the EU?
@pipmill70763 жыл бұрын
Trieste is a lovely ship, she is an aircraft carrier as well I think, she fits 14 F35b but can easily double up for helicopters.
@richardmiller80284 жыл бұрын
Don’t forget she’ll have at least one Astute class shadowing her as well as the skimmers.
@whutteretbrock21813 жыл бұрын
That's comforting.
@stanielsoncoochiesmellehsm61143 жыл бұрын
Most likely more than 1 in secret
@pyroromancer5 жыл бұрын
A ship worthy of Her Majesty's name.
@sshep865 жыл бұрын
It's not named after the current queen. It's actually named after a dreadnought ship from WW1, which in turn was named after Queen Elizabeth 1.
@Pebb865 жыл бұрын
Royalty just like religion is a stain on humanity which in turn is holding us back. And if a nuclear war occurred all royal families don’t deserve to see out the war in safety.
@helmuthvonmoltke8585 жыл бұрын
@@Pebb86 Well without rulers. A country will turn into an anarchy
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@Pebb86 how's our royalty holding us back, it's just a figurehead.
@seankilburn72005 жыл бұрын
@@helmuthvonmoltke858 royalty dont even rule anymore.
@UAPJedi5 жыл бұрын
Decent amount of UK real estate to have anywhere around the world, now we just need more destroyers and frigates.
@forzaisspeed5 жыл бұрын
You only need a few type 45's its better then anything it will come up against the type 45 is better then what the US have.
@UAPJedi5 жыл бұрын
faron tilley a few for what exactly? If you just want a few for fleet protection then we have enough, just. If you want to include for everything else they are committed too then we don’t. We don’t have nearly enough ships to cover our commitments around the world, NATO, shipping protection throughout the worlds trouble hotspots, protection of our waters unless we are happy to continue to escort hostile countries warships with patrol boats.
@FallenPhoenix865 жыл бұрын
@@forzaisspeed As good as they may be they can only be in one place at a time... originally there were meant to be 12 of them.
@forzaisspeed5 жыл бұрын
@@FallenPhoenix86 I know we were meant to have 16 then it went to 12 then 10 and now 8 but just saying 1 type 45 is better then anything else out there.
@FallenPhoenix865 жыл бұрын
@@forzaisspeed probably is, fact is though that no matter how good it might be it needs to be in two places at they same time to do what HMG wants.... At any given time at least one , maybe two, will be under a maintenance or refit cycle, so in real terms we only really have 4.
@likaboss76545 жыл бұрын
Glad to see us boys in the US aren’t the only ones with big toys. This carrier should come in handy considering the rising tensions between the US/UK and Iran.
@pipmill70763 жыл бұрын
Don't forget china
@MikeJones-uc5eu3 жыл бұрын
@@pipmill7076 Don't forget Russia.
@whutteretbrock21813 жыл бұрын
@@MikeJones-uc5eu Russia will be too preoccupied with China to worry about Biden.
@acosorimaxconto56102 жыл бұрын
I think you mean russia and china
@questionmaker56662 жыл бұрын
Sadly it was always Russia
@mark-1rc5025 жыл бұрын
Your damn right that she don’t sail without a Sneaky Astute class lurking around .
@tyler_bt33265 жыл бұрын
Mark C you’ll never hear the astute, but the astute will hear you halfway across the world...
@mark-1rc5025 жыл бұрын
KiLl3R Mem3StAR Just the we like it 👍
@stephensmith44804 жыл бұрын
@@tyler_bt3326 What was that Loud Bang??🤣🤣🤣
@granskare5 жыл бұрын
in Istanbul, I visited the HMS Eagle (1951), she had 2 escorting vessels. Great ship !
@jimb1734 жыл бұрын
Beautiful vessel and a new age statement of the long history of ship building
@Andyb23795 жыл бұрын
God bless her & all that sail on her.
@redted3665 жыл бұрын
andy=gay
@echo_cx03244 жыл бұрын
@@redted366 You = 40 virgin
@seltaeb33023 жыл бұрын
@@redted366 ?
@seltaeb33023 жыл бұрын
@@echo_cx0324 ?
@redted3663 жыл бұрын
great target for them dolphins ha ha ha ha ha ha
@Dave-hu5hr5 жыл бұрын
I just want to see an old Jag driven off the ramp..
@shaunwild87975 жыл бұрын
I want to see Eddie the eagle with rockets on his ankles take off the ramp.
@mark-1rc5025 жыл бұрын
Plop gear
@waterlemon54345 жыл бұрын
Also smash a bottle of wine against the ship for extra posh points
@theancientsancients17695 жыл бұрын
I can see Jeremy Clarkson already checking the tip of the ramp 😂
@teeps81245 жыл бұрын
Leigh Pemberton Some say he grew gills and now spends his time playing poker with the local sea life.
@FBI-Banzai75 жыл бұрын
Its so awesome to see this beautiful aircraft carrier from close view💪❤
@benc6405 жыл бұрын
Now we just need enough ships to provide a suitable escort..
@benc6405 жыл бұрын
Right, because that leaves us a wealth of assets to meet our other global commitments.. Not to mention the added strain when ships require maintenance (read: often). Having almost our entire available surface fleet escorting one carrier is not a viable option. We simply need more.
@benc6405 жыл бұрын
@MI6 This is a bare bones, peacetime escort. In a hot war the RN would be forced to rely on allies for escort cover - and relations with our European partners are great at the minute, right? Take a look at the wiki for the Navy's current deployments and see if you think we have the ships to "make ends meet". We don't.
@obsidianstatue4 жыл бұрын
@MI6 not nearly enough, this battle group cannot be effective far from friendly shores, because it can't fly fixed winged AWACS, severely limiting its ability to conduct effective air operations against any competent enemy.
@obsidianstatue4 жыл бұрын
@MI6 helicopter awacs, means it cant fly as high, resulting a very short detection range, it can fly far resulting a smaller control area, it has a weak radar due to the limited weight which means fewer target tracked. as of today to only carrier battle group capable of independent missions in far seas is the US navy, with Chinese navy fast catching up with their 3rd catapult equipped carrier. the upper limit of this carrier battle group might be enough against Iran in a very limited way, even that's a bit of a stretch. Carrier are for big boys, either go big or go home, only CATOBAR carriers are true carriers.
@alexraptors954 жыл бұрын
@@obsidianstatue enough to match Iran, are you feeling ok? There's arguments to be made between catobar blah blah but they both have positives and negatives. The carriers are more than capable and a couple of the most powerful carriers in the world, with state of the art radars (just ask NATO about what training against our radars is like) Bored of people acting like anything we do is a joke.
@andrewward96015 жыл бұрын
about time! best cerrier we evr had!!! Looking forward to seeing her sister ship HMS Prince of Wales...
@walterbatch52965 жыл бұрын
BIG IS BEAUTIFUL..........A MAGNIFICENT SHIP MANNED BY THE PROFICIENT MEMBERS OF OUR ARMED FORCES, GOD BLESS HER AND ALL WHO SAIL ON HER FOR OUR MAJESTIC QUEEN TO DEFEND OUR GREAT COUNTRY.
@user-tt4bt7sq4y4 жыл бұрын
It's so beautiful aircraft carrier 🇰🇷🤝🇬🇧
@exe47473 жыл бұрын
Dokdo is japanese
@user-tt4bt7sq4y3 жыл бұрын
@@exe4747 why?
@exe47473 жыл бұрын
@@user-tt4bt7sq4y its Korean I was just kidding Btw why is ur channel name like this?
@user-tt4bt7sq4y3 жыл бұрын
@@exe4747 oh... I'm sorry lol
@exe47473 жыл бұрын
@@user-tt4bt7sq4y ok no worries
@katiahunt38893 жыл бұрын
An inspiration for a new generation who should consider a career in Her Majesty's forces. (Whether the UK, Canada, Australia or N. Z.)
@IIISentorIII4 жыл бұрын
Amazing Carrier. Fair Winds and Following Seas! Stay safe and greetings from Switzerland
@paullewis24134 жыл бұрын
Roll on HMS Prince of Wales, at last the R.N. has some prestige back after years of insignificance. Still more to do but it`s a start.
@jyotiprakash95253 жыл бұрын
Congrats UK for Powerful aircraft carriers, from INDIA 🇮🇳🤝🇬🇧
@jasonsmith11435 жыл бұрын
good luck and smooth sailing with her crews 🙏👍✌from Las Vegas
@googlebarbaralernerspectre25815 жыл бұрын
We need more than this. Britain needs the most advanced and plenty of ships for defence purposes.
@hek86404 жыл бұрын
Why would we need more? All we really need is nuclear weapons, this Is mainly for humanitarian crises and overseas small operations. A Nuclear sub is more powerful than any ship in the sea
@sisamusudroka30004 жыл бұрын
Makes sense, Britain is an island, so it needs ships
@jamessmythe38735 жыл бұрын
Glad to see the Navy get its aircraft strike capability back.....its been far,far too long.
@michaeloler14774 жыл бұрын
Nice job my British friends. Glad to see you maintain your sea strength. A beautiful ship that represents Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth. We in the USA love all of England and as you have our backs, we always will have yours!
@aaronwhc4 жыл бұрын
We have our moments both of us however there's nothing more important than family. Our best friends in the world though good and bad times we look out for each other. 🇺🇸 🤝 🇬🇧 ✌ from England
@samievans96325 жыл бұрын
Simply put, "EXCELLENT".
@jamesthompson41484 жыл бұрын
Wonderful see the RN get more muscle!
@britopia13415 жыл бұрын
Of all of the forces the Royal Navy is the most important. The government must pump more money into it!
@action9634 жыл бұрын
Airforce is very close 2nd, only because the nuclear deterrent is navy would i agree
@seltaeb33023 жыл бұрын
As an ex squaddie, the army is most important. The navy & RAF can't win a land war in its proper sense, yes you can nuke them to hell & leave a unhabitable planet & then what? Just paddle or fly about saying we've won. We need all three but only the army can win & then rebuild. I salute you all. Attention..
@questionmaker56662 жыл бұрын
@@seltaeb3302 I think it's the RN. No one else can transport the army and provide expeditionary air support. The importance of the RN and army is almost equal. The RAF is third, should focus on keeping the enemy aircraft away.
@jamesdarby39913 жыл бұрын
This documentary maker is an honorary Royal Marine who earned a Green Beret by completing the commando course in his 50s. He carried a camera tripod the same weight as an SA80 rifle during his training, and went on to film the Marines in Afghanistan. His boiler suit has his commando flashes on the shoulders, you don't get them for free. Serious respect
@chippledon14 жыл бұрын
Cannot imagine the UK going w/out at least one aircraft carrier for any amount of time. The cosmic order is now in balance again !!! She's beautiful.
@mikeneufield54994 жыл бұрын
chippledon1 yes and the Prince of Wales is doing sea trials, so for the 1st time in at least 10 yrs the UK has 2 carriers in the water& it's been since before the Falklands that the Brits have had 2 full size carriers..so way to go Britain.. :)
@harleyokeefe51934 жыл бұрын
Mike Neufield not just carriers but super carriers
@tigeruntamed60363 жыл бұрын
@@harleyokeefe5193 they are not supercarriers. Only the US has supercarriers
@harleyokeefe51933 жыл бұрын
@@tigeruntamed6036 false, the Qe class have been given the classification super carriers due to being on par technologically with the Gerard R Ford and beating it in some factors like the innovative dual superstructure design. She is most certainly a super carrier.
@tigeruntamed60363 жыл бұрын
@@harleyokeefe5193 A super carrier that carries half the planes as American ones. So advanced
@iracingrookie33015 жыл бұрын
I'm. Tax payer and I wouldnt complain if they announced they was building another 2
@slammerf164 жыл бұрын
And leased a Ford class to go with them :) Of course, we'd need to bring back the Press Gang but hey, small price to pay, right? :) :)
@ratflakes31354 жыл бұрын
They are building a second one. HMS Prince Of Wales. Infact I think its already built and is undergoing sea trials rn.
@slammerf164 жыл бұрын
@Vlodec Still crying because JC got kerbstomped at the polls?
@john-im7qd4 жыл бұрын
Another two would only cost 7 billion,, thats 3 billion less than we give the EU each year for nothing in return !
@allanirvine73043 жыл бұрын
Absolutely because we are proud of our country
@turq18244 жыл бұрын
Looks awesome. No matter what we Americans will always love UK and have your guy's backs. Can't wait to see USS Gerald Ford and HMS Queen Elizabeth riding side by side like badasses! 🇺🇸💞🇬🇧
@zutd7723 жыл бұрын
God bless her and all who sail in her.
@Zxc-yi1qg5 жыл бұрын
God save the queen
@Dreibein825 жыл бұрын
Young8Apollo god shave the queen!
@Zxc-yi1qg5 жыл бұрын
SchwanzusLongus 😂
@RJM10115 жыл бұрын
Because no body else will ! :)
@stephengilmore27415 жыл бұрын
There is no god. Get someone who exists to save her instead.
@Pebb865 жыл бұрын
Loose Seal Royalty just like religion is a stain on humanity which in turn is holding us back. And if a nuclear war occurred all royal families don’t deserve to see out the war in safety.
@user-or1tp7cx8u5 жыл бұрын
I’m planning to become a royal naval warfare officer and I really want to serve on an R08 QE Class Carrier. God knows if I’ll ever get on one. Anyone have any advice ?
@simonhool30735 жыл бұрын
Tahmed Become an aviator, that’s the best bet.
@oMaGicKsv5 жыл бұрын
Yeah dont bother, get a proper job
@esalalomani76185 жыл бұрын
I wanna become an RAF Engineer and hopefully I can work with these aircraft on HMS QE
@MajorMuffins135 жыл бұрын
El-Shep Idk man, seems to me flying jets, shooting weapon systems and travelling the world seem better than sitting in an office everyday until your 68.
@jewell2785 жыл бұрын
Yeah, first step, don't ask for advice on KZfaq. Ask an AFCO.
@rageXnation325 жыл бұрын
looking good brits keep it up!
@EEVOL3 жыл бұрын
We are proud of our UK brethren for having such a mighty warship like her.
@thomaslawson801 Жыл бұрын
Lord Nelson is smiling on his beloved Royal Navy. Godspeed!!!
@paullufc25184 жыл бұрын
now we can fully support our US friends across the oceans
@neoconwarhawk10015 жыл бұрын
Britannia ruled the waves🇬🇧🏴🏴🏴
@Kvasiir5 жыл бұрын
Used to, lol
@CommonSenserules19815 жыл бұрын
@@Kvasiir He said ruled not rules. :P
@phndr4 жыл бұрын
@@CommonSenserules1981 😄
@jamesgarrison30133 жыл бұрын
Beautiful Floating Air Base. Damn good work, GB. Keep the peace. From a US Army Vet.
@Rtgv1234 жыл бұрын
As an Indian I must say UK carriers are definitely battle worthy since we operated their veteran carriers ( HMS Hermes , HMS Hercules ). Best example is blockade by INS Vikrant ( Hercules) of Pakistan naval Base which led to Pearl harbor style raid on it . I hope India and UK Collaberate together for third Indian carrier ,we desperately to curb Chinese intrusive activities. Being non nuclear is not always an advantage , it's a hurdle at least for nation like us
@daniellastuart31454 жыл бұрын
That would a good idea manned by Indian and Royal navy could also bring Australia and New Zealand in to the mix
@erickrcisneros5 жыл бұрын
2:00 reminds me of Dracula for a second
@blech714 жыл бұрын
Joker’s little sister
@richardpoblador91775 жыл бұрын
God bless the Royal Navy 😘😘.
@ph11p3540 Жыл бұрын
Aircraft carriers. Unparalleled versatility and super long range projection. Glad to see England firmly back in the super carrier club. More wings. More bang. More strength
@momoplaysvideogames63964 жыл бұрын
British/Filipino; proud. 🇬🇧🇵🇭
@MrEvansj15 жыл бұрын
1:39 that’s the guy who was in Warship: Life at Sea on channel 5 a while ago
@mysteryj04305 жыл бұрын
I was wondering why I recongized him.
@Horizon301.5 жыл бұрын
wesley yes that’s correct. I remembered him also
@mag16315 жыл бұрын
love from a US Army vet. Great job UK!
@thisaccount7632ijn5 жыл бұрын
GamerBoyLive1 all I’m gonna say is that, based off your name and about section. You dont sound like a veteran
@turq18244 жыл бұрын
Yeah right.
@lki344425 жыл бұрын
From your former colony: amazing looking ship. Way to go Britain.
@cherovimlee70325 жыл бұрын
Long live her majesty
@VanderlyndenJengold5 жыл бұрын
What happens when the carrier is needed quickly and the frigates and destroyers needed to support it are deployed elsewhere? Do you send it with less support or allied support? Or not send it at all? Or maybe fully fund the navy at all times to carry out the tasks you demand of it?
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
We only have a few frigates/ destroyers to far for it it be a issue
@tams8055 жыл бұрын
There will always be frigates and destroyers attached to the carrier group and they will likely go in for maintenance at the same time as the carrier. So while a carrier is available, there will always be ships to escort it. Whether we have enough to provide an adequate escort is an issue, but our allies should on many occasions be able to help provide some of it.
@Mac-pi4cy5 жыл бұрын
It gets sunk....
@sshep865 жыл бұрын
Boris will sort it. ;)
@weshoskins46575 жыл бұрын
My ferry from iow was delayed by 20 minutes as this was departing
@simonhool30735 жыл бұрын
Clash_Royale Gameplay How did you cope?? A whole 20 minutes!
@Alucard-gt1zf4 жыл бұрын
Clash_Royale Gameplay definitely worth it
@billygibson26134 ай бұрын
Very strong defence against terrisom marsters for everyone safety reasons God bless you all
@Bereit184 жыл бұрын
What an asset this will be. A fantastic piece of kit which when fully operational will give us lot's of options. Nice work to all involved.
@mysteryj04305 жыл бұрын
Saw her leave portsmouth today
@redted3665 жыл бұрын
wow,,,saddo
@alimcmoet5 жыл бұрын
Billions and billlions and billions. Very impressive but just how effective? Makes me think of the Mary Rose.
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
Likely very. Even if it was vulnerable against a top tier enemy we don't tend to fight them.
@2headedtasman2005 жыл бұрын
Its so nice to see my boys in the UK getting back into the carrier club.
@Calaka_14 жыл бұрын
Ok, so it’s basically a venator class star destroyer.
@weaponisedadhd37443 жыл бұрын
Or the unsc pillar of autumn
@tonyyates20125 жыл бұрын
The two type 45s and two type 26 frigates might be a potent protection force, but an additional heavy missile cruiser wouldn't go amiss. I'd also feel more comfortable if the RN pushed for more onboard CIWS protection, three doesnt seem enough against a Chinese or Russian swarm attack. Lastly a cheap diesel electric, autonomous, mini sub fleet please, three for each carrier group, ta.
@mk_gamíng06095 жыл бұрын
The type 45 is a anti air destroyer , the best in the world designed to lock and destroy swarms of aircraft with 2 defending it well good luck to any air craft trying to even get close
@eyeofthetiger60025 жыл бұрын
But Britain is not likely to engage China or Russia anytime soon alone though!
@derricklanders25714 жыл бұрын
@@mk_gamíng0609 This ain't WWII....modern air tactics wouldn't have valuable aircraft trying to "strafe" a modern naval vessel - "Fire & Forget" missile swarms and horizon-hugging cruise missile attacks. The U.S. would probably send AWACS to try to jam or counter the 45"s radar suites...
@chloejenkins11524 жыл бұрын
both ships are to be fitted with ship to air missles,i beliee the sea ceptor
@RichardMorris-hl4mq3 жыл бұрын
The new Royal Navy is a far cry from the rust buckets that I served on during the 1960s. We need a Navy that is up to the job. At last our people have modern equipment to work with. The government is doing our proud nation just what it has always longed for. My last draught was on Beira patrol on board HMS Llandaff.
@abubakrmala45534 жыл бұрын
To all racists and islamaphobes I am a Muslim a British Muslim and proud of my Great Britain . Allah save the Queen .
@juliustongco91614 жыл бұрын
all hail the queen
@WalterDWormack2145 жыл бұрын
The U.S. Navy, REALLY *ENVIES,* the Royal Navy, for one *specific* reason! The R.N., *serves BOOZE!* aboard their *"Ships Of The Line"!* I was hoping the video tour, would've included a visit to the various 'Clubs' (Enlisted/NCO/Officer's) aboard ship LOL!
@majgijoe5 жыл бұрын
Walter D Wormack I wouldn’t call it hate, I’d call it envy.
@para78435 жыл бұрын
@Caleb M. F we are good eggs just get on with it get it done home for tea and crumpets. We make no fuss really it's in our nature just to crack on.
@oMaGicKsv5 жыл бұрын
@@para7843 who asked?
@neilhellens89565 жыл бұрын
Nope.The rum ration was stopped years ago......aaargh
@WalterDWormack2145 жыл бұрын
@@neilhellens8956 Really? *No "Rum Ration", aboard Royal Navy Ships of the Line?* What's next? Are they going to *bring back flogging, & keel-hauling?* (Hey, There's a thought! Maybe if a certain *"badly-coiffed, U.S. President", were to 'mis-behave', towards Her Majesty, what better way to teach a lesson, than to "run him under the keel of the Aircraft Carrier, that's named after her!"*
@Dweller4155 жыл бұрын
Beautiful ship.
@Leap6 Жыл бұрын
Something big needs to be measured. Football pitch: my time has come to shine.
@skylongskylong19825 жыл бұрын
The flaw is it only operate vertical aircraft, and lacks its own ship air defence missile/ gun system.
@mikeymike10015 жыл бұрын
And its not nuclear powered
@mikeymike10015 жыл бұрын
@Ayaz Afridi The article was about Aircraft Carriers not subs! The USA has more Aircraft Carriers than the rest of the world put together. Ten of them are 'Super' carriers, nuclear powered.
@gaz-37115 жыл бұрын
mikeymike1001 why nuclear power? got its pro’s sure but far less than conventional. they would still require RAS for av gas, and resupply, all escorts bar the sub need to be fuelled too. It restricts what sea lanes and port will take them. Then there is the far lower lifetime overall cost including what to do with spent fuel rods and eventual decommissioning that can cost just as much as building a new ship. Hell most of the old Polaris subs are still sitting waiting decommissioning.
@EFChartley5 жыл бұрын
Who has FAITH in the UK? WE DO!
@sarpedonzeus18745 жыл бұрын
It's a fab looking ship.. Always thought there should b 3 QE class carriers with 2 operational at all times. They need to kit them out with some MV-22's as well.
@medicman9411 Жыл бұрын
I am glad you guys are on our side!
@ssglbc1875 Жыл бұрын
Sadly thing breaks down on the way to the us
@gunshipzeroone35465 жыл бұрын
Going to USA to get fitted with 3x cwis guns.
@gaz-37115 жыл бұрын
Simon Robinson Welp best get to unbolting the ones already fitted.... The MOD holds a stock pile of Phalanx of around 50 of the bloody things for ship and land use. So no they are not going to the US to get CWIS fitted.
@duncancallum5 жыл бұрын
WOW
@elykeom15 жыл бұрын
Maybe they should anyway, CWIS is crapola against most treats, and the RAM is Bolt-Plug- and play on the same mount.
@derricklanders25714 жыл бұрын
@@gaz-3711 Who cares...you're damn sure over here trying to work with our Carrier Groups...stay over there and do your own thing..
@derricklanders25714 жыл бұрын
@@elykeom1 Let me guess, you were on a ship that used CWIS and it didn't work and massive amounts of people were killed? If that isn't your experience please shut up.
@eboyblackout5 жыл бұрын
The video was alright but the shots were very weird and random...
@AlphaBravoCheeseCake3 жыл бұрын
Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov is a floating, burnt out wreck and lost multiple AC in the MED. They always say the carrier is out of date because they can't afford to build one. the RN has two supercarriers
@markpound40022 жыл бұрын
Proud of my country 🇬🇧 and the British armed forces God bless you 🙏
@Welkon15 жыл бұрын
He said “even the Americans are interested”, yeah it’s a good ship
@davidrobertsemail5 жыл бұрын
Shame it’s a ski jump. At 65,000 should have had catapults for the proper f35s No frigates either. Sad state of affairs indeed.
@davidrobertsemail5 жыл бұрын
Mark Cooke we don’t have enough of either frigates or destroyers. 1982 we had 42 frigates now we have 13 and they aren’t being replaced with nearly enough. Hence the cost cutting from 12 to 6 destroyers and the cost cutting measure of the type 31s. Simply put if this shop goes to sea we don’t have any ships elsewhere. It’s numbers that are the problem.
@kwekjengyong19455 жыл бұрын
Sadly catapults are expensive to develop and require high levels of maintenance. They are also power hungry. I think the British did a darn good job here, a great carrier and a solid hangar complement. The costs savings and lower dry weight can allow it to possibly carry more munitions but ultimately its all the Navy’s decision. (I agree that the British need more DDs and Frigates)
@davidrobertsemail5 жыл бұрын
Kwek Jeng Yong the design of these carriers was decided by politicians who wanted to save money. They chose to have ski ramps instead of catapults for political reasons not defense driven requirements. That was decided by then chancellor Gordon Brown. The next PM David Cameron wanted to install catapults by because of his cost cutting to the military budget stuck with cheaper ski ramps. Both these governments between them cut the number of replacement frigates and destroyers significantly from the already inadequate number. So the whole history of military spending on these projects has been a farce. The end result is a large carrier with short range jets with low payloads and not enough ships for the navy. Notwithstanding no carrier capability for over a decade and the loss of skills associated with it. The whole thing has been a shambles.
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@davidrobertsemail the military ignored Cameron changing to catapults and continued with the STOVL plan which they chose in the first place off the back of the Harrier.
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@davidrobertsemail a carrier group has 2 frigates and 2 destroyers. That leaves 15 left, how can't we have any elsewhere?
@frankmcgee32134 жыл бұрын
Captain Moorhouses’ first step to First Sea Lord in 15 years 😁
@michaelmitchell66292 жыл бұрын
We docked in old gorgous navy base stateside Naval station long beach in southern California during first lebanon era
@apondo1005 жыл бұрын
Across a "geographic region".. I always knew technical people speak meaningless words
@ULSTERISBRITISH5 жыл бұрын
What a beautiful ship and hearing talk of a complete U.K. self sufficient carry group, fantastic. U.K. funded U.K. designed U.K. pioneered U.K. operated and nary a European in sight. This is proof that we’re not only extremely capable but better off as an independent nation. For too long we’ve been servants for the EU being it’s 2nd biggest dues payer, 2 nd biggest aid contributors, most military capable contributors . We’ve always had to put ourselves and our nations best interesting from laws to trade, from migrants to refugees and much much more second to that of the demands of the EU. Take a look, there’s no finer example of how capable, how much better off we are doing our things our way! In size in geographical terms were one of the smallest in EU, but in many other ways were one of even sometimes the biggest in EU. This shows me that we have nothing to fear and so much to offer. The EU needs us more than we’ll ever need them. Our military and its capability is one of the finest examples of that. NS 🇬🇧❤️🇬🇧❤️🇬🇧
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
The EU doesn't need our military because the EU isn't a military organisation. NATO might need our military, we aren't leaving that.
@ULSTERISBRITISH5 жыл бұрын
How does the EU not need our military?? Look at all the diployments in the Middle East? after the states we are by far the biggest deployed military to the regions. We also supplied the most medical staff after the states . Along with US we were responsible for the majority of of logistics and infrastructure. What about our current Eastern European deployments. Yes those are UN deployments but we still are answerable to the EU. out of it, we’d have less obligation not just in deployments but train EU country militaries. Plus , we were instrumental in the design, build and deployment of the Euro. Fighter. Again though we were later able to refit and modify to our own needs , during its design and construction we had to concede certain parts to France. So I really don’t see how our military is nothing to do with our standing in the Eu. Which also includes intelligence sharing. Again once out of the EU we’ll have zero obligation to share and any we do will be completely at our discretion? So again I’m baffled how you see our military as having nothing to do with our EU membership? And that’s before you get into things like shared weapons development etc??
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@ULSTERISBRITISH EU = economic organisation. NATO = military organisation. You've named lots of NATO based deployments and direct government to government projects like the Eurofighter but not EU ones. Try learn what the EU is?
@arronblack674 жыл бұрын
Worked on both in Rosyth dockyard, absolute monsters of ships. You really don’t appreciate the size of them until working on them or on board
@springbok40155 жыл бұрын
Nice 🇿🇦🤝🇬🇧
@Music53625 жыл бұрын
Not the UK's most powerful warship. The nuclear ballistic subs are by far.
@ThePalaeontologist5 жыл бұрын
True, HMS Dreadnought and the other three could obliterate a continent between them :/
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@ThePalaeontologist Dreadnought wouldn't do much, it's still on the drawing board. Vanguard however...
@ThePalaeontologist5 жыл бұрын
@@davidhouseman4328 I was quite clearly speaking generally about what will come to pass. Your comment is invalid as the Queen Elizabeth-class are not yet fully operational themselves (with full air wings in full service) Andrew Baker had compared the carriers to the submarines. It is fair to compare an incomplete ship with an incomplete sub, as what is actually being compared is their firepower in the original comment, obviously. And no, Dreadnought is not still on the drawing board. Dreadnought was laid down for construction on the 6th October 2016; a day shy of 35 months ago. Valiant, Warspite and King George VI are the ones still just having been announced. £38 Billion plus will go to the entire program, for the 4 subs, at least as planned. I get what you're saying that the Vanguard-class is *currently* the one that could do that. But that wasn't what I was referring to. How do you know I wasn't broadly including the near future in what I said? Obviously they aren't finished (and yes, the QE-class are much further along than the Dreadnought-class) But the point remains; you're wrong about what I said. I was speaking generally not just about the operational, currently in use (as of September 2019) ones. You assumed that, not me. All about context.
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
@@ThePalaeontologist I was wrong on the drawing board. But it's odd to respond to UK most powerful warship with one that won't be launched for years.
@ThePalaeontologist5 жыл бұрын
@@davidhouseman4328 It isn't odd at all. Dreadnought will be far more powerful than Vanguard. That is the point, get it?
@Acc0rd795 жыл бұрын
They should build 2 or 3 more! Always better to have and not need for war than need them for war and not have them.
@FrostySire5 жыл бұрын
They are already building another one and I think I read somewhere they might be considering a third
@stevesheppard65385 жыл бұрын
You got 6-9 billion to spare? ;)
@danlugo43655 жыл бұрын
You have absolutely no need for even one carrier. It's a ridiculous vanity project you were duped into by the yanks so they could sell some F35s
@gaz-37115 жыл бұрын
dan lugo Alternatively the need to replace what would have been a 45 year old set of three through deck cursers and a similar group of aged Harrier air frames might have had a bigger input to the choice. What was the alternative? given at the time the government was serious about a carrier based eurofighter at the same time.
@P135864 жыл бұрын
That's a young captain! He must be a hot shot.
@derekdelboytrotter88813 жыл бұрын
the Royal Navy quite often come to my local harbour and port, i hope to see this in port one day.
@paulconnors20785 жыл бұрын
What a huge mistake the MOD and RN made building these ships WITHOUT catapults. These ships cannot use AEW aircraft like the Grumman E2D Improved HAWKEYE. USN and French Navy have them for fleet protection. RN does not and will not! HUGE MISTAKE!
@davidhouseman43285 жыл бұрын
We have an AEW aircraft, its Merlin crowsnest. It may not be a capable but it won't cost us 1bn for catapults and then 1bn for the Hawkeye fleet. That means we can keep two carriers. France is also supposed to have two carriers...