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

Will the UK build a new 3rd aircraft carrier to augment the Royal Navy's might?

The Royal Navy currently operates 69 ships in active service as of 2023. There are 10 nuclear-powered submarines (4 ballistic missile submarines and 6 fleet submarines) and 21 large surface combatants (2 aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers, 11 frigates, and 2 amphibious transport docks). There are also 26 patrol ships, 2 survey ships, an icebreaker, and the historic battleship Victory in the Navy's arsenal.

It is important to note that the United Kingdom has a long history of utilizing aircraft carriers as essential components of its naval forces. The development and deployment of these carriers have played a crucial role in enhancing the UK's maritime capabilities and projecting its power globally.

[squirepraggerstope]

PPS; The HMS Hermes that fought in the Falklands War of 1982 was NOT the same ship as the HMS Hermes commissioned in 1924.

[richardthornton]

Oh god, another badly researched video! HMS Argus was the first aircraft carrier in any fleet, of any navy. Not just, have the U.K. been ‘using carriers’ for a long time, they actually invented them, along with steam catapults, and pretty much everything that was associated with aircraft carriers, certainly during the early years and even up to after WW2.
HMS Hermes may have been the first ‘purpose’ built, from scratch carrier, but it was a fair few years beforehand, that aircraft we re being launched from a ship in the manner we are accustomed to today. History is so fascinating, especially the factual bits of it..

[theGovnr]

They not only need more carriers but they also need more support ships, subs, fighter and bomber aircraft and of course many more service men and women.

[jimorr]

First complete the support vessels for the two current carriers, then start a third

[alungiggs]

They don’t have enough aircraft for the two carriers they already have.

[grahamkearnon]

The question is why a mid sized European nation needs carriers at all. The old Admirals reasoning was " keeping maritime trade moving" of coarse now the UK is not such a big trade player that old saw will not work. Perhaps it's the empire dreamers wanting the 'old days'. Funny how Germany/Japan much bigger trade machines don't seem to patrol the Red Sea, maybe the UK could take a hint. Veteran of Hermes 1982.

[carlosnuckols]

They need a third carrier, the Air Force needs more euro fighters, the army needs more tanks and all branches of service need a minimum of 50, 000 personnel each.

[sidsod]

I think you'll find HMS Argus was the first aircraft carrier although it wasn't the first purpose built aircraft carrier from the ground up.

[squirepraggerstope]

No, we do not need another carrier. We NEED to ensure finally that the two we already have are optimally configured, fully armed, and...
1) WILL be equipped routinely with the large, well-balanced airwings comprising ALL relevant types of fixed and rotary winged aircraft that they should already be operating
2) WILL be accompanied routinely by FULL UK battlegroups comprised of ALL RELEVANT TYPES OF fully armed, top-end combat-capable escort vessels (AA/MW; ASW, ASuW optimised AND real, top end tier-1 GPFs too!!)

[vincentrees]

The Royal Navy is the Royal Navy. As an island nation, it is both the sword and the shield of the UK. Regardless of its size, it will always be a power player.

[chris]

Royal Navy's main problem is recruiting and retaining people. No point building more ships of any kind if they have to rotate them in harbour for lack of crew.

[StuartKoehl]

Rule of thumb says you need three to keep one on station--one on station, one working up, one in dockyard hands.. With three, you can also surge two for a limited time, but you will pay the price for deferred maintenance downstream.

[havokx]

Pretty sure the Brits heard about France’s PANG project and said “BLOODY HELL! OUR NAVY IS NOT ABOUT TO BE OUTDONE BY FRANCE OF ALL COUNTRIES!”

[jammiedodger]

Needs to go back up to 14 destroyers not build another bloody aircraft carrier.

[ricdale]

Being a 100% vulnerable Island nation it Most certainly needs another Carrier or 3. Honestly they should have 4 minimum. Japan is another vulnerable island and should have a 4-5 strong Super Carrier force.

[Waywind]

It doesn't need a 3rd carrier, in fact 2 carriers is already pushing things pretty far.

2 carriers ensures that at least 1 will always be available at any given time and 2 carriers in a fleet will give the UK plenty of punch against most of the worlds militaries, that's probably 100+ strike fighters able to go anywhere on the planet.
The UK itself is it's own aircraft carrier for projecting force around Europe.

[davec]

It was a different HMS Hermes in the falklands war. The one you pictured was sunk in ww2.

[i-on-u]

What The UK need is a strong Air Force and/or air defense, it’s Air Force rank about 8th or 9th in the world, …Carriers are for Power projection, protect your homeland first.

[RegimentalVideos]

No, we need more sailors and more escorts. You cant have 3 super carriers when there is nobody to man them, fix recruitment and retention first.

[IMGreg..]

If you don't have a minimum of 3 you could effectively have none when you need them, as they need to be rotated through deployment, overhaul and training.