For the first time in nearly 15 years, a Royal Navy fast jet squadron is operating from the flight deck of a Royal Navy aircraft carrier.

The F-35B Lightning stealth fighters from 809 Naval Air Squadron have embarked on HMS Prince of Wales in the North Sea for a month of intensive training, supported by their counterparts from RAF Squadron 617, also known as The Dambusters.

Anyway, this training marks a significant milestone for both the squadron and the aircraft carrier as they prepare for an eight-month global deployment scheduled for 2025.

The fifth-generation F-35B jets flew from RAF Marham to the 65,000-tonne carrier where approximately 200 personnel, including engineers, technicians, armourers, logistics, and security experts, have joined the warship to support the aircraft operations.

Commander Nick Smith, Commanding Officer of 809 Naval Air Squadron, reflected on the importance of the squadron’s first deployment aboard HMS Prince of Wales, saying in a news release: “This is a big moment for 809 Naval Air Squadron, a vital building block to working up with the carrier strike group in preparation for the deployment next year.”

He added, “Joining a carrier for the first time is truly a milestone for us.”

809 Naval Air Squadron, which formed at the end of 2023, is part of the UK’s F-35B force, with personnel drawn equally from the Royal Air Force and Fleet Air Arm. For many of the ground crew, this marks their first experience working at sea.

Commander Smith spoke of the importance of uniting the squadron into one cohesive team, adding: “For me, it’s about forging one team, embracing everything from operating from the flight deck to arming and maintaining the F-35s in the hangar.” The squadron is undergoing training to integrate fully with the ship’s routine and learn the specifics of carrier-based operations.

While the F-35B is a state-of-the-art aircraft, the challenges of operating it from an aircraft carrier remain significant. Lieutenant Commander Armstrong, one of the pilots, explained in the same release: “It’s a common misconception that everything on an F-35 is automated. Landing is easier, but not easy. Imagine approaching, in the dark, 105ft above the ship, then moving across to set down on the deck.” Extensive simulator training was conducted before landing the jets on the 920ft-long flight deck for the first time.

Alongside the pilots, ground crews are adapting to the unique demands of operating at sea. One of them, Sergeant ‘Thorpy’ Thorpe from the RAF, has spent four years working with the Royal Navy on the F-35 programme, but this is his first experience at sea. He remarked in the release: “I’ve worked alongside the Navy for four years now, and while there are slightly different skills and trades, at the end of the day, we’re all working to the same high, professional standard.”

Over the coming weeks, 809 Squadron will conduct intensive training to qualify its pilots for carrier operations, while ground personnel will grow accustomed to the challenges of maintaining aircraft in the more confined and turbulent conditions at sea. Commander

Smith explained the challenges: “The fundamentals of operating F-35B at sea, compared to land – whether you are a pilot or an engineer – are broadly the same. It’s just that everything is much more challenging on a ship. It’s noisier, windier, and much darker at night, while space is far more confined in every sense.”

Following this phase, HMS Prince of Wales will form a carrier strike group with escorts and support ships for a two-week exercise called Strike Warrior, focused in the North Sea. The exercise is designed to further enhance the operational capabilities of the ship and its air wing in preparation for the full deployment next year.

This deployment marks a key moment in the Royal Navy’s efforts to re-establish its carrier strike capabilities.

Just a note for those unfamiliar with this topic: British F-35B jets have been operating from the Queen Elizabeth class for many years now. This was mostly with the RAF badged 617 Squadron. It’s important to note that these squadrons are jointly manned by the RAF and Fleet Air Arm.

Avatar photo
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

85 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Patrick
Patrick (@guest_858704)
3 days ago

If the upcoming review is going to do something idiotic, like cap the F35 purchase to 48. Then all the jets should be in the Fleet Air Arm.

Challenger
Challenger (@guest_858705)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

48 F35 would indeed be idiotic. All FAA would be extremely difficult given the manpower and budgetary constraints within the RN. Without a major uplift in people/cash something else would need to be cut to have even half a chance of sustaining a purely naval fast-jet fleet now.

Patrick
Patrick (@guest_858716)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

The RAF would have to take the hit. I agree would be idiotic, but the current government has now indicated cuts are on the horizon. It’s beyond comprehension that cuts could even be considered. Shows the level of strategic thinking in power at the moment.

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858728)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

To be fair they have indicated a review. The doom and gloom merchants have added the rest. Frankly as long as all the jets are capable of operating from carriers in addition normal bases what does it matter if the are FAA or RAF.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_858751)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

So you honestly think labour are going to increase defence spending?

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858787)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

I don’t think I said that. I think that Labour will instinctively want to throw money at the NHS and other areas they campaigned on however they also know defence is a major issue and the US etc. want us to commit more to military spending, and support for Ukraine. Cutting things like T26 or T31 would be a waste of space because it would be a future Government in the 2030s that would be paying for it. Indeed it might be seen as a method of ‘Levelling up’ if new defence industries were introduced to certain areas of the… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_858855)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

My take; I don’t think the govt will throwing much money around except limited, very targeted amounts at key constraints. NHS scanners would be an example. F-35 numbers could be paused at the minimum number needed to ensure one carrier always available but I think this would be temporary and we will keep the carriers. MRSS may be rethought but all RN shipbuilding will continue – potential exports. RBSL
Sheffield Forgemasters, BAE, Babcock, Thales will all be good investments. Does 24 Typhoons create more jobs and UK economic growth than 24 F-35s?

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859010)
2 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

Sorry Mark. My reply wasn’t supposed to be derogatory in any way. I just meant that to me anyway, defence is never going to be a labour priority. It the sixties, seventies and nineties they have always cut defence spending. The difference recently is that the Tories have been rubbish as well so that’s why we are in the mess we’re in.

Jace
Jace (@guest_858951)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Probably not given the state of the public coffers, but the last Labour government actually ordered twice as many aircraft carriers, destroyers, etc than we got. The Tories cancelled that and other procurement to fund tax cuts and credits for the rich. The only reason we have 2 aircraft carriers is it was too late for the Tories to cancel the second without paying for it anyway so… I actually trust them more when it comes to defence than the other side.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_858979)
2 days ago
Reply to  Jace

You appear to be in a different spare from me my friend. Q.E was laid down in 2009..Labour; P.O.W. 2011..Tories. The original requirement for the T45 was for 12 ships, cut to 8..Labour by, then to 6 by Labour. All ordered after 2010 by the Tories; T31’s were authorised by the 2010 DSR by the Tories. On the question of public finances it might interest you to know that Reeves is complaining about a budget shortfall of £22 billion. When Labour left office in 2010 the shortfall was £104 billion, nearly five times as much. If you trust labour on… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_859183)
2 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Correct. The usual Rose tinted glasses for some, or, just a long time ago now so either memories fade or, uninformed.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859710)
16 hours ago

👍

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_859342)
1 day ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

That’s a balanced objective piece Geoff, nicley done.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859711)
16 hours ago
Reply to  klonkie

👍I try!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_859182)
2 days ago
Reply to  Jace

but the last Labour government actually ordered twice as many aircraft carriers, destroyers, etc than we got.”

Totally incorrect.

Ian
Ian (@guest_858756)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

The review has specifically asked for views on programmes to cut- but that is in the context of identifying programmes that aren’t likely to contribute effectively to future capabilities, particularly in light of lessons learned from the fighting in Ukraine, and the fact that we have spent the last 30 years assuming no need to operate in a seriously contested environment.

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858791)
3 days ago
Reply to  Ian

Yes. The big thing happening in Ukraine is the use of drones etc. Exactly the sort of low cost industry the UK could invest in which brought money to areas of the UK economy which needed it and would significantly improve our armed forces. Not sure there are going to be many areas which would create savings from the defence budget but there are savings to be made in Labour areas by putting people back to work.

Spartan
Spartan (@guest_858783)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

Can you point to one Defence Review that didn’t result in cuts? (with the exception of after the Falklands)

Fen Tiger
Fen Tiger (@guest_858814)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

Agree entirely. Who the hell cares whether its RN or RAF as long as they are operated effectively in the national interest’.

john
john (@guest_858744)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

There is no thinking by those in power.

SteveM
SteveM (@guest_858750)
3 days ago
Reply to  john

They have to make cuts to make up their clothing shortfalls, EVERY single one is a free loading…………………….

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858819)
3 days ago
Reply to  SteveM

To be fair Steve the clothing, as I understand it, was given by Labour donors it never came from the public purse. Which to be honest is an embarrasment to Kier as you would expect him to be able to afford his own clothing.

Alway thought this sort of thing was nonsense, like the wallpaper fiasco at number 10. The place belongs to the country who should decorate it properly every 5 years or so. 😂

Challenger
Challenger (@guest_858758)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

Taking a hit that leaves them with just 107 Typhoon’s. Can’t see it!

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_858752)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

It doesn’t have to be. The F35 A is 20/25 percent cheaper than the B version and would be welcomed by the RAF, I’m sure. The “B” would then be sufficient for the R.N.

Challenger
Challenger (@guest_858765)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

2 fleets with similar but different training and support pipelines. That went really well with the Harrier/Sea Harrier split!

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_858788)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

An F-35B can land conventionally on a normal runway. So use B version as OCU trainers.

Last edited 3 days ago by Meirion X
Challenger
Challenger (@guest_858798)
3 days ago
Reply to  Meirion X

Or maybe just 74 F35B as currently planned and then all energies and funds put into Tempest.

Grant
Grant (@guest_858802)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

Is there any info on how the Italians are getting on? They have a 75 A / 20 B order split (With something like 25 / 4 delivered). Their As are being built in Italy as well which makes them even cheaper. If we planned to order a further 48Bs, theoretically we could get 60-62As. Well worth having those extra planes.

I think that the NMH is the most likely cut, I am unconvinced there is an actual requirement: would be bad new for Yeovil, but I don’t think that constuency has ever voted labour!

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_858852)
3 days ago
Reply to  Grant

Even the Italians have destiny mailtray thinking 🤔

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859017)
2 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

You may be right but it doesn’t seem to be causing problems anywhere else. Italy, Japan, South Korea and maybe one or two others are all running two types. It may also make more sense for our F35A (?) pilots to trian with the Americans or even the Aussies or Canadians.

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_858768)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Not this old chestnut again. Give it a rest.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_858872)
3 days ago
Reply to  Grinch

Yep. Same old concern about getting the best for our armed forces. Boring to you, important to me.😉

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_859343)
1 day ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

you are correct Geoff, it is worth consideration.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859713)
16 hours ago
Reply to  klonkie

It’s got to the state my friend where almost evreything needs work doing. Thirty years of fiddle and diddle and we are going through one of the most dangerous times in a hundred years and nobody at Westminster seems to be aware of it.😠

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_859720)
15 hours ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Geoff, I must confess I have little faith in either sides of the political spectrums. They are all self serving. With age, experience, and god willing some learnt intellect, I have become more cynical.

My 60 year old rant- done! 😎

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859948)
31 seconds ago
Reply to  klonkie

Happens to us all,my friend. Ageing is a long process and we do pick up some stuff enroute !!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_858790)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Hi Geoffrey. Ideally, with a much greater defence budget. But not at our current level. One – Two small fleets is not great and undermines the QEC even more than they are already. Two – If we are getting F35A as well as the second batch of F35B that means defo no Tempest. Three – The RN does not have the budget or the people to add 2 or 3 all FAA RNAS to its ORBAT. This way, with the aircraft being ( I believe ) RAF owned, as well as jointly staffed, there is some flexibility. The issue is,… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859020)
2 days ago

Ideally, my friend, we would not of course be in this state. Thirty years of rubbish defence management. I wasn’t really envisaging the “extra” B versions being ordered. The thought behind the A is that if Labour go for cuts, and I think they will, maybe 20 or so A versions at a lesser price would be a better alternative. I do feel though that I am, in my imagination, trying to paper over cracks that wouldn’t exist is we had some decent poiticians. The rest is about ownership as you say. Budget heads can be moved to allow 30… Read more »

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_858800)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

I am sure the US has spare F-35A which it could lease a squadron of F-35A to the RAF until Tempest come along?

Last edited 3 days ago by Meirion X
Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859013)
2 days ago
Reply to  Meirion X

They’re probably desperate as well but your idea is potentially a good one. Oldest ally and so on ..

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_859205)
2 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Yes, the US should return the favour to the UK, of providing lots of cheap Harrier parts in 2010/11!

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859265)
2 days ago
Reply to  Meirion X

Yep. God knows we got rid of them cheaply. A fiasco.

Iain
Iain (@guest_858817)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Why does everyone always forget that we cannot refuel the F-35A so in real terms our F-35Bs actually have the ability to go further. Fix that problem first with all the extra expense that comes with it and then we can talk about buying the F-35A. Fixing the issue will also solve the problem of being able to refuel the E-7s and P-8s too.
Alternatively have them build an F-35D, an F-35A body with an F-35C cockpit section.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859016)
2 days ago
Reply to  Iain

Same problem across the board Iain. Too few aircraft trying to do too much with too little money.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_858848)
3 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Think it could make sense 👍

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859011)
2 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

I’m glad somebody thinks it’s a sane idea !!🙂

NigeO
NigeO (@guest_859467)
1 day ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

The only problem is we can’t refuel the F35A due to restrictions imposed by the Airtanker contract & the Voyager not having a refuelling boom fitted.
The restrictions imposed by the Airtanker contract means we can’t use the A400 as a tanker & unlike other A400 users we don’t have the flexibility to use them to refuel helicopters & supplement the Voyager fleet.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_859714)
16 hours ago
Reply to  NigeO

Another classic piece of UK defence planning.

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_858767)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

In commercial enterprises, such a transfer (from RAF to FAA( would also transfer the funding used for support and the funding earmarked for further purchases.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_858854)
3 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

Yep unless more money is found then Manpower and Equipment issues will never go way ,we’ll just keep going in bloody circles 🙄

James
James (@guest_858707)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

If it is limited to 48 over the lifespan of F35 it will be a huge waste of investment to start with, the Americans will be particularly annoyed (it may even breach the contracts for the production aspects of F35 that we have) and if it does happen scrap Block 4 integration and sell the carriers, is no point having them.

Use the existing jets for UK protection and QRA.

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858730)
3 days ago
Reply to  James

We definately should not even be dreaming any of this. It is nonsense

Roy
Roy (@guest_858736)
3 days ago
Reply to  James

If one needs to find money – and most programs are way over budget, described for a long time by the NAO as “unaffordable” – then the cuts will most logically fall on programs where the internal political impact will be minimal. That could mean mothballing/trying to sell one of the carriers – no jobs lost – and capping the F-35 orders at 48 or perhaps 60.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_858749)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

One hundred per cent accuarate and sensible, which is why it won’t happen.😏

Redshift
Redshift (@guest_858805)
3 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

How about waiting for the review to happen rather than just making things up and then slamming labour for something that is literally just in your head?

Patrick
Patrick (@guest_858816)
3 days ago
Reply to  Redshift

John Healey has said painful decisions will have to be made. How is that making something up?

Enobob
Enobob (@guest_859133)
2 days ago
Reply to  Patrick

NONE of the jets are in the Fleet Air Arm! They are part of a joint RN/RAF Force and the actual jets are all owned by the RAF for logistical and support purposes.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_859181)
2 days ago
Reply to  Enobob

👌 Yes, I believe so. The Sqn has RNAS number plate.

Jack.
Jack. (@guest_858714)
3 days ago

Wonderful to see.

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_858731)
3 days ago
Reply to  Jack.

Agreed.

Jack.
Jack. (@guest_858718)
3 days ago

Let’s try to post a link to something great, ‘Royal Navy Aviation in the 60’s’ on youtube with some stirring Vangelis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epr0GOfZuYo

I know UKDJ tends to delete posts with links sometimes, but this is haunting stuff.

Mark P
Mark P (@guest_858739)
3 days ago

Probably a silly question but is there plenty of room for new infrastructure for the extra 26 F35 ‘s at RAF Marham if they’re not canceled? I presume there must be?

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_858770)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark P

Yes, plenty of room.

Mark P
Mark P (@guest_858794)
3 days ago
Reply to  Grinch

Thought there must be, just wondered if any might have been based anywhere else which would be very costly. Cheers Grinch!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_858793)
3 days ago
Reply to  Mark P

RAF Marham in recent memory had 4 Tornado GR4 Squadrons.

Mark P
Mark P (@guest_858888)
3 days ago

Ah plenty of room then 👍

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_859180)
2 days ago
Reply to  Mark P

Yes and no. I need to check but I recall only 2 HAS sites available, and I understand, maybe incorrectly, that a Sqn occupies one HAS site.
So aircraft lined up on the ramp, which is not great for a front line FJS on an station with no GBAD.
At any one time some of the F36 force will be in depth maintenance or maybe storage at Shawbury so not all will be at Marham.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider (@guest_858745)
3 days ago

By the by, 617 Squadron is now under the command of a Lt Col. Mike Carty.

Yup, a Colonel – he is a Royal Marine fast jet pilot. I knew we had marine helicopter pilots but this is the first Royal Marin fast jet pilot I am aware of. Must be other I guess.

Anyway, congrats to Lt. Col. Carty.

Cheers CR

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_858773)
3 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

+ 1

Knight7572
Knight7572 (@guest_858754)
3 days ago

If we had not lost the Harrier 2 force back in 2011 then the Royal Navy would not have had to spend time and money regenerating capabilities

James
James (@guest_858761)
3 days ago
Reply to  Knight7572

My memory might be getting old but which carrier would they have been operating off to keep the capabilities?

AlexS
AlexS (@guest_858771)
3 days ago
Reply to  James

Illustrious was the last decommissioned.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_858792)
3 days ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Much of it was already gone by that time, cut by the previous government, along with the Sea Harriers.
A small operational fleet is an easy cut to make.

Knight7572
Knight7572 (@guest_858795)
3 days ago

The Harrier 2 GR.7 and GR.9 could and should have been retained and used to get Queen Elizabeth into service earlier as the Harrier 2 can fit on a QE carrier

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_858812)
3 days ago
Reply to  Knight7572

The Harrier 2 was not specifically a Sea Harrier, it was really for a ground attack/CAS role based on a GR version of Harrier. So may have lacked air combat capabilities?

Last edited 3 days ago by Meirion X
Enobob
Enobob (@guest_859135)
2 days ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Really? You think so? There was a reason that the two RN Sea Harrier squadrons were reduced to the two flight ‘Naval Strike Wing” because the RN couldn’t resource the 2 squadrons…

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_858774)
3 days ago

What, nobody asked how many aircraft??

Erich W
Erich W (@guest_859284)
2 days ago
Reply to  Grinch

7 from 809 NAS

Darryl2164
Darryl2164 (@guest_858831)
3 days ago

I would love to know where the escorts and RFA support ships are coming from

RB
RB (@guest_858873)
3 days ago

Just 4 F-35B’s embarked and many of the squadron personnel are RAF and/or loaned from 617 Sqd RAF. I’m not sure that is really a “Royal Navy fast jet squadron”.

Erich W
Erich W (@guest_859283)
2 days ago
Reply to  RB

7 embarked – on the low end but more or less makes a squadron (6-9 was typical for the Invincible class per squadron). 617 will embark separately at a later stage.

RB
RB (@guest_859313)
2 days ago
Reply to  Erich W

Ta for the correction / update.

David Craig Stevens
David Craig Stevens (@guest_858995)
2 days ago

I actualy wonder about things like hurricanes and typhoons.Can a force 2 hurricane just “clear the decks” of all thier aircraft?

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_859200)
2 days ago

You wouldn’t go near one! Carriers at sea will receive weather reports, especially of impending severe weather, so will find shelter elsewhere.

peter
peter (@guest_859003)
2 days ago

Forgive my aged brain but what have “carriers” been doing beforehand ? I was under the impression we had at least enough planes for 1 carrier ?