HMS Prince of Wales has arrived in Norway to lead a vital NATO exercise after teams from DE&S, the Royal Navy and industry worked round the clock to get her ready to sail in just seven days.
To put that in context, the normal time it takes to get a ship of this type ready for deployment is 30 days.
HMS Prince of Wales is leading an international task group in one of the most important military exercises in a generation, NATO’s Exercise Steadfast Defender.
According to a release:
“HMS Queen Elizabeth had been scheduled to take part, however an issue with her propeller shaft coupling meant she had to go in for repairs. That same weekend the enterprise across industry (BAE), Royal Navy and DE&S was mobilised to put together a one week plan to ensure HMS Prince of Wales could take her place leading Exercise Steadfast Defender as planned. A combination of team work, fast thinking and swift decision making ensured the ship sailed on time to fulfil the UK’s NATO commitment.”
Capt Duncan Humphery, Capital Ships Team Leader at DE&S, said:
“Across the week BAE, their contractors and Ship Staff all worked together to ensure that the seven-day work package was achieved. The ship was handed back to ship staff ready for basin trials on Saturday, as planned, and the Commanding Officer sailed her from Portsmouth on Monday February 12.”
“To turn her round to be available for the NATO exercises within seven days was a challenge Herculean in stature.”
HMS Prince of Wales will lead a carrier strike group of eight ships – four of them British, including frigate HMS Somerset and two Tide-class tankers from the Royal Fleet Auxiliary – supported by US, Spanish and Danish vessels.
I think the fact the RN could get this ship of the wall and sailing in seven days shows really significant capabilities and will be noted by our enemies…
Contrary to a lot of comments, ships breaking down is normal and the Elizabeth is now not a new ship. But how the RN reacted to that was impressive.
A rather more sane bit of reporting than what we’ve had from the Telegraph of late. According to them, the fact that QE had a propshaft issue was ‘an embarassment’, while the fact that the incredibly quick turnaround of PoW was delayed by a few hours from the original schedule was a further embarrassment. Oh, and apparently single digit failure rates for Trident missiles also mean the deterrent isn’t credible.
Bad news sells very well in the U.K. Many seem never happier than when they are complaining. It raely occurs to our media that other countries have similar or often worse problems.
Sad we seem to wallow in bad news. Enough is enough right?!
Today the Daily Fail says that POW is being sold off, Fleet Street working for the kremlin these days.
Absolute scum bags running what’s left of the British press.
Nah, it’s budget week. The Navy will have told the press they might have to sell, forcing the chancellor to give them more money. The RN has two strategies that vary in success when it comes to reviews and budgets. Strategy 1: Offer up something so big as a saving that they hope it’ll never be taken up thus meaning they don’t have to save… the two big ones that went wrong: The Royal Yacht in 1998 and offering a reduction in the RMs in 2020 – treasury called their bluff on both. Strategy 2: Send anonymous tips to the… Read more »
Too true.
cynical but sadly something that does seem to happen…
Unfortunately it is not a anonymous tip , a former head of defence said in a speech the navy would be forced by budgeting constraints either to mothball a carrier or sell it by 2028 . We expect far to much of the armed forces for the size they are . Everyone goes on about the £50 billion budget but both Brown and Osborne changed how the budget was calculated from the RoC method to the RoH accounting method, and in the 2012 SDR review Gideon and Alexander took the opportunity to stuff the entire budgets for pensions , MI6,… Read more »
“Fleet Street” ???? 🤔
I don’t know. We know what these (children of unmarried parents) do. Fly it up the flag pole, if it’s accepted/or causes a right row, they go forward accordingly.
“ discussed by members of the Maritime Enterprise Planning Group – looking at future strategies. The second carrier is an asset that is held in reserve and is a very expensive piece of rarely-used equipment,” the sources said. “So if we want to address balance sheet issues, disposing of her or sharing her with say an AUKUS (Australia, UK and US) ally, is an option.”
I am reminded that Fleet Street very kindly alerted General Galtieri and his crew that they were not setting the fuses correctly on their bombs for low level attacks, so they were going out the other side of our ships in San Carlos Water without going off. Not appreciated by our gallant sailors on site!
And telling the Argies Goose Green was about to be attacked.
It’s made TWZ now🙄
2 ships same failure is a latent defect of either design or build quality or maintenance procedures
Unable to get out of Port if tides and winds aren’t favourable is an operational flaw
2 failures out of 2 tests over 8 years isn’t a single digit ‘rate’. It’s a triple figure ‘rate’ …100%…ok for a prototype. Not acceptable for your only N deterrent.
Why do people keep making excuses for incompetence
Prop shalf bearings ‘going’ happens to ships quite often. The problem is there isn’t an adequate Dry Dock we use closer than 600 miles away or they could be dry docked more often. These shafts are highly stressed for the modern era. The US Carriers are likewise stressed but they have been using these sorts of power since the USS Forestall of 1955 whereas we took a holiday after old HMS Ark Royal was decommissioned.
Reinforces why two conventional carriers is better than one nuke!
Americans love to dismiss the QE class as fundamentally compromised, but I’d like to see them turn a Nimitz around that quickly.
Yes…. It would be interesting to see just how quickly it takes them to embark 90 odd aircraft against our 8……
Not sure if that was tongue in cheek or not, but I’ll bite 🙂 The embarkation of aircraft is actually a separate exercise to the ship sailing- that happens once the carrier is underway and at sea (risks involved in 8-90 aircraft running landing patterns over Portsmouth/Norfolk considered rather high!). If a Nimitz was prepping for a maintenance period, there is absolutely no way that they would be able to short notice prepare to sail within days, and that is a benefit of a conventional power plant; if we were in the French’s shoes of only having one, then we’d… Read more »
I was watching a documentary the other day about the Gerald R Ford. The chap in the US Navy said their innovation in having semi-automated ordinance lifts (built for six, fitted with one) was the only one of its type in any Navy, cutting the number of Sailors from 5,000 to 4,179. He was cooing about the lifts that go from the magazine half way up, the ordinance then has to be man-handled into a safety bay before being put on another lift to the flight deck. I’m thinking, the QE class has them with the only difference being the… Read more »
Haha, yes, the difference in “minimisation of manpower” between the two navies is something else!
Mind you, last time I checked, the USMC was the same size in manpower and about 2/3 the budget of our entire armed forces. And they don’t have to maintain a nuclear deterrent, and hitch all their lifts off of the US Navy, so their overheads are lower. The difference in scale is just mind boggling, but you’ve got to respect it!
Well said.
I reckons the american would be very keen to buy the POW. They already fly 35s and provide a detachment of crew off these carriers , the carriers spend a lot of time in the states . There is no way australia would buy one or Canada. My guess if one sold , would be Brasil , Japan , Spain and India
I think they’d be deeply interested in a QE-class carrier, you’re right. Especially instead of their America sub-class LPH without a well-deck. I’m inclined to toward HMS PWLS herself not being sold off; the Navy fought bet big on getting the two carriers, and there was some loss in the other services because of it (although I don’t think as big as Army and RAF make out). If they sold one off early, they’d lose an awful lot of clout when it comes to major programmes in future.
They are great aircraft carriers . Who would not want one if they could afford them . They would also be getting the brand new carriers at a good price , and despite niggling faults are ready to go . Being able to get the HMS PWLS out of port with few weeks notice shows how great they are
A thought that has just occurred to me is selling off our two carriers early to replace them with a QE 2.0 class one for one in the mid-late 2030s. The new ones would then arrive with lightweight Cats and Traps instead of attempting a retrofit, allowing wider use of fixed wing drones for AEW and refuelling- and even cross decking with the USN and French Navy (most modern CATOBAR aircraft have enough power to launch from a QE-class, it’s just the recovery without arresting wires that’s the problem). The problem with this is obviously cash and production capacity, but… Read more »
The US has 11 nuke as you call them. Four at sea. Three in Asia Pacific. One in Arabian waters. Three more preparing to sail. Why would you want to turn one around in a short space of time. If you want to project naval power it must be credible and at sea. The Gosport ferry has more sea time than the QEs. If 7 days to get a carrier to sea with 8 35B on board is your bar then you have to then include the US LPH fleet to your calculations.
The US does indeed have 11 carriers, which are intended to be split so that 50% are at sea while their alternates are in refit/workup. Even with 11 running one on/one off, the USN reckons they don’t have enough carriers to cover what they think they need- I think they want 12 or 13. The point of turning one around in a shorter space of time is if one of the “active” carriers cannot sail or needs to come off station early for some reason, ad the quicker you can do that the better. My point was that conventional carriers… Read more »
I honestly think you have no knowledge of storing a warship in port or RAS. You certainly have no knowledge of the US Navy. The America class are age wise contemporary to the QEs. Indeed Tripoli is slightly younger than POW. Max out at 13 F35. Where in all that is Holly did you pluck that from. The standard mix would be six 35B around 10 Osprey six Stallions and a few MH 60 as well as Vipers. America briefly operated in the middle east as Mini carrier during Enduring Freedon with 20 AV 8 onboard plus a few MH60… Read more »
I don’t actually think you ever read any replies you get to your posts because you keep on with the same inane suggestions. The LCS1 is quite simply the biggest disaster of a design the USN has bought since they thought Sea going Monitors were a good idea. Despite the US having a $800+ Billion annual budget they can’t fix them so that they are a reliable ship. There is a whole tribe of countries who usually queue up to acquire US surplus Warships, and most of the time they are practically given away for free, but so far zilch… Read more »
All good news then….. Hope everything goes well, It’s a big exorcise by any stretch of the imagination…..
Just want to add that the 7 day thing was not including other prep work that might have been undertaken from the actual date the QE’s problem was first discovered…. If you also add that QE was sat alongside just a few metres away, any stores could be quickly (relatively) swapped over, shame about the Phalanx though……
Daily Fail is running a story that she will be sold…. again !
Looking very far ahead the QE Class could be replaced by a shared alliance rather than being solely owned by a single country. Though the design will be more streamlined with a much-reduced crew and manned air systems, the costs might be too great for the UK? There is growing evidence that without the two UK carriers and the smaller French and Italian vessels, Europe would be reliant solely on the US Navy. God only knows what US foreign policy will be towards European defence by then.
There have been a couple of instances of German politicians calling for an ‘EU aircraft carrier’. The French Navy’s response has been to laugh at them for the sheer, ridiculous impracticality of operating a capital ship as some kind of shared asset.
My guess is the French want the EU to fund a second carrier based on the PA-NG design to replace the CdG.
I’m sure they would like that, but the comments I’m thinking of were just random politicians with no understanding of practical realities sounding off about their latest half-baked ideas.
The 1st random Politician was Angela Merkel in 2019 and most recently by EU commissioner Thierry Breton who is a French Ecole educated EU mandarin.
Spookily it came shortly after the French started to figure out just how much PANG would cost them. To be honest I can’t see it ever happening, Germany will never help fund a Nuclear powered Carrier.
.
Von Der Layden has been calling for an EU military, central command, underwriting of an EU military manufacturing base, right up to a shared navy. Her speech on the 24th demanded it.
So, if some get their way, a new “superpower” might be on our doorstep.
Judging by some of the press articles today we will have one up for sale/lease or share in the next few years.
God help us, our next PM asking Germany to send the carrier in and Germany saying no becuase we might offend the enemy 😀
By the time the QE Class requires replacement, the World will be in technological terms, much reduced and with the help of AI, the concept of deep interoperability between nations no longer based on national sovereignty but on the essentials of bare costs and regional survival.
The QE carrier design was shared with the French and they initially we’re going to build their own QE carrier. Things could have been very different. This was during the Blair years. We could have been working quite closely with the French.
Previously we co built the jaguar fighters which the French used off carriers
And would believe the Jaguar was apparently said to be a better sea born aircraft than the super Entendart ,but because partly British the JAG was drop , from what I read some years back 🤔 would the French be so petty ?
Blair anything for European nations 😋
The irony being that he became the poodle of george bush jnr
If the QE carrier was ever made part of a “EU navy” fleet there might then be an option to convert it back to a conventional CATOBAR or a hybrid of both or just keep as is. Also like the idea sharing with US, AUS, NZ and maybe Singapore(? ) if basing down more in our region here. Or, find a way to keep in the RN and still do all the above!
Yes could have been cats and traps with French. F35b is flexible doesn’t require designated carrier wing and there are European f35 b partners potentially they can fly off QE carrier. I think multi country approach looks more convincing to opponents.
How about we build and operate the carrier and the Americans, Italians, Japanese and singaporeans can’t send planes to her,
Oh wit, we did that already 😀
No we don’t….
Now there is a thought.😄
Posted in another thread before I saw this…Mail is suggesting PoW may not be ours much longer..US or OZ mentioned as possible sale or lease.
Is there any substance to this or is it just positioning prior to the budget?
Personally I could see a strong possibility of this happening , it would be suited to either Navy.
Alternatively maybe leased to NATO as a sort of flagship (although who would crew it…not us we have enough trouble crewing our own ships) .
Thoughts?
Thoughts ???? …. Who knows…. but It’s been an ongoing concern for many years now… and will be for many more to come.
Personally i’m still a bit myth ed as to why they were designed to be so big and with so many F35’s when the basic facts are that we are many many years away from realising that capability …… There are some on here who just see that as Moaning yet those are the facts.
Frank where were you 20 years ago, your clairvoyance would have foreseen all the future problems with the F35B and you could have told the RN to order something else ? I actually thought they should have gone for CATOBAR from the start with a CAG of Sea Typhoon and E2D. Fact is no one could foresee the issues with the F35 and as for the size of the new Carriers the alternative Aircraft all require CATOBAR or STOBAR which means a similar sized Carrier or reduced CAG capacity. The RN specified KUR’s for the concept design were based on… Read more »
Great post.
Yes, It is and I agree with him, I’ve followed the Carrier programme from the beginning. followed all the design proposals and the Cat and Traps shenanigans and worries about the single choice of Fixed wing aircraft.
Which probably explains my concerns some 7 years after QE was commissioned.
Absolutely would of been interesting to see what the Phantoms and Bucaneers would of done in that conflict Buccs having a great range think they would of got that Carrier and knock out that Stanley runway .Phantoms in dog fight interesting to of seen.. However not taking anything away from the sea Harrier did brilliant job.Good post mate 🍺 🇬🇧
What’s with the Clairvoyance rubbish ? You mis understand what I said…. As do a few others here. It’s about where we are now after twenty plus years. If you are happy with the situation, that’s fine, please don’t try to belittle those of us who share concerns.
You have no Idea where I was 20 years ago in regards to this project…..
Great post though.
Great post!
This is the alternate timeline where Britain keeps CVA01, you’ll be glad you did later, we just can’t say when.
It’s the alternate timeline where Britain goes ahead and builds the G3 battlecruisers, ships that were 20 years ahead of their time, and thus 1,418 lives are saved at the Battle of the Denmark Strait.
Although ‘HMAS Prince of New South Wales’ has a ring to it…
Sounds like nonsense to me.
A singleton ship actually wouldn’t save much as you still have everything to support one and then it is a part time aircraft carrier.
OZ don’t have F35B….
US wouldn’t want a singleton but a class of 6+ and it would be USMC as the operate BRAVO variant. US would far rather we had both as QEC, Astuste, T45, T23 are the things they value from UK.
If we got rid of a QEC it would be a joke.
But you free up 700 crew.
The concept was it would be shared with allies but with a change in government looming I doubt that it would be to deployed to the pacific, which is where the US and Oz would want it. The next government has made it clear Europe is where UK needs to focus on defence. Shared with Europe, now there’s a thought.
But the story is posturing, I think the Navy is looking for a political reaction from Labour and the Tories, it will be interesting if it get raised in parliament.
The US doesnt readily want/need QEC out in the Pacific, we just sent her there as part of our ’tilt’ towards the East.
QEC will be used to backfill the carrier capability in the NA, so that the US can release more carriers out East if required. That is also partly why we have had an agreement with the French ref carrier rotation in the Atlantic.
So after the US wanting us with them in every conflict for at least the past 4 decades they’ve had a change of heart and don’t what Astutes, T26, T45 F35 & QEC to help them. Why did the US bother ensuring marines could interpolate with us on the QEC. What so USMC can deploy to the mid Atlantic. There also huge political weight in the US not acting alone.
Sorry, there is no credible evidence to suggest there’s some backfill arrangement.
The USA is in some kind of social trouble right now as we are too. The Republicans are selling the idea that Europe has been bludgeing off the USA for long enough and the USA needs to look after its own. This is slightly disingenuous and is borne of ignorance in my opinion. The USA economy is in fact powering ahead in no small measure due to Trumps resetting industry during his presidency. How they spend their resources is up to them. My solution would be to ask Trump how he fancys Putin playing Golf on his Scottish courses without… Read more »
Yes how crazy that would be. Throughout history we have always been at the limit with ships both in size and numbers. This is nothing new. We could go back to plan B which is to have one carrier on a 30 day notice. I don’t realistically see much benefit in that. The answer is to increase defence spending. Russia and China aren’t going to go away just yet. I think we should focus on the Maritime/Air defence of UK and friends in Europe. When QNLZ comes back from refit next up should be planning for Cats and Traps for… Read more »
I agree China and Russia are not going away.
I do t understand the constant demands for cats-n-traps. There is so little performance difference between Bravo and Charlie variants that it is a waste of time.
The whole AEW debate will change shortly with drone enabled successors to CROWSNEST and EC3.
There are enough countries interested in ski jump launched heavy drones that it will happen.
Neither of them would want it, or be able to operate it, it would make no sense given that the Navy’s future capability is all around CSGs, and the Mail- like most newspapers- prints any old nonsense that will attract readers. Remember there is no legal or financial penalty for just making stuff up unless it falls foul of libel laws.
Its not made up it was discussed at a future maritime event. But its the Navy sounding alarm bells in my opinion and positioning.
No. OZ have made it very clear they have no desire to go down the fixed wing naval aviation option and why would America want her. Standard Mail BS.
I would think the same scare mongering BS that has Albion and Bulwark sold off every other year, and which the DM no doubt trumpeted a few weeks ago.
Its not a govenment position it was discussed at some future maritime event. But the Navy said its unafordable unless defence budget is raised (or funds realocated from one of the other services). Very unlikely to happen as the Navy is the prime target for cuts with the Army being better funded is the way we’re heading.
This further cements a view I’ve had for sometime the Carriers my not be around much longer, certainly 1 anyway.
The next government had its get out of jail card, we have to do it because the last government screwed the economy.
Its warning shot from some in the Navy that without more funds it will need to go by 2028.
My view has been for sometime is at least one carrier will go as part of the next governments plans. Switching to a European defence prosture then having carriers cruised around the North Sea is pointless and illogical.
It’s not so obvious from a map but Russia is closer than you might think on a round earth being right on the other side of the arctic. They regularly send planes over that way. The threat to Europe is from both the east and north, making the north sea and arctic ocean extremely relevant.
But you you don’t need strike groups based around carriers to defend against whats going to come from the North or East. Subs MPA T26 and the purchase of longer range strike airframe do a better job.
The threat to Europe is it can’t easily strike deep into the east of Russia to interrupt military supplies.
We have no shortage of airbases or roads to launch aircraft from within Europe so again logically having a carrier sitting off the coast a few hundred miles makes no sense.
But it remains to been seen how long the USN carrier can remain on station in the Gulf, if balloon goes up in the east.
Recent events have absolutely proven the need for at least 2 ships, one able to stand in for the other at short notice. Otherwise we wouldn’t be sending anything on exercise or elsewhere.
Agree.. Two are always needed. I think these comments in the press are total nonsense.
I agree. In the event of a War with Russia we should base one in St Johns, Canada.
Not a moan but an observation
Why this “British aircraft carrier arrives in Norway”This being a British page why not just say someting like HMS PoW and not BritishPlease dont take offence as i think your site is brilliant
The number of exercises is somewhat alarming…
hopefully no german frigate in the area. their frigate Hessen just missed a US Reaper drone in Yemen with 2 SM2 missiles fired at it. 🤔
That is the problem with not having g a single integrated force with a marked up and flagged air picture.
Both an expensive miss and an expensive save! Lol 😁
I just hope the rumours about PoW being sold are totally false . The fact she was able to deploy at short notice for the stricken QE proves that we need both of them . To be able to rotate ships and crew is necessary , to be able to deploy both in an emergency give us a massive boost that most of our allies and potential foes can’t match . We just need to get the aircraft numbers up
“British Aircraft Carrier arrives in Norway”… to be sold to the highest bidder.
Based on the headline, I was hoping to have learnt more about where the carrier is in Norway right now and what its plans are? Is shore leave planned for a few days etc?
More cuts are to come, for me it will not be strange to see one carrier sold.
My son is on the PoW and loke the crew worked all hours to be ready to sail, the delay had nothing to do with the ship.
I don’t see them selling one within the next 5 years. Conservatives won’t be in power long enough to negotiate a sale and Labour have talked about bolstering defence. Selling a carrier kills all that credibility.
That said going into the parliament after that, who knows, I hope the GE cycle really embeds into the publics psyche that defence spending must increase.
Having read through this thread of chat and comments i feel obliged to put my views on carriers. Lets not forget in 1982 HMS Invincible crew were recalled to ship on Friday 3rd April and we sailed Monday 5th prompt at 10.00 so how is that for deadlines and readiness. Any repairs we needed were completed after sailing and before we got out of the Channel and past Plymouth, all in the history books. Invincible class carriers proved their worth throughout all their commissions. Current carriers may be larger but more seems to go wrong with them and costs are… Read more »
Good post mate 🍺
I imagine (from your post) you were present on HMS Invincible during the conflict? If so, thank you for your service.
The MOD is denying a Telegraph report that Prince of Wales will be decommissioned by 2028 (41 years early!) and has been quietly offered for sale to the USA and Australia. Some desperate last-minute kite flying seems to be going to persuade Hunt to throw the MOD at least a few billion in the budget next week. But I suspect the real problem is Sunak, he would prefer to spend the money buying a few votes in the upcoming general election rather than maintaining, let alone strengthening, national security.
Co-share or HMAS AUKUS?
Very true when it comes to Defence Sunak plays the A side of the Record we spent on Defence then ever but B side different story 🙄
Really been a busy time for 617 Sqn taking the brunt with F35s ,it really would be good to see another F35 Sqn from the flight deck given 617 a rest .Know things move on with firstly joint force Harrier RAF-RN ,and now F35s but at times 617 most think of themselves has RN SQN .Should they do a swap over ?🤔 . For this talk of selling one of carrier’s off hope not 🙄 let’s hope it’s just talk .At the end of the day HMG play the Record there put more money in Defence ,, but to me… Read more »
The Telegraph has an article published today, reporting HMS Prince of Wales might be sold at a bargain price to either Australia or the US, to raise funds as HM Treasury will not be providing any new money in the budget next week for defence.
The RN has denied the report…… let’s hope it’s not true and just angling by some to get HM Treasury to pony up!
Have to wait and see I guess ,fingers crossed mate