How would this aircraft land on the Queen Elizabeth carriers if it lacks a tailhook?

That ought to warm up the tarmac.

re; Geo Lemay
The F-35B is a STVL (Short Takeoff Vertical Landing) it land on 2 columns of air just like it just took off.

That takes one gutsy test pilot, the guy has my full respect!

Enormous amount of tech to develop the VTO and VL features, but i wonder what their practical uses are in the real world. The vid shows it doing its thing, but i was hoping to see it move forward after hovering. Also, does it use some kind of air braking system to stop before descending? That's a giant expense for when the pilot has to take a quick leak :)

"How would this aircraft land on the Queen Elizabeth carriers if it lacks a tailhook?"
Geo Lemay
The F-35B recovers the same way the Harrier II does, landing vertically.
"The F-35B is a STVL (Short Takeoff Vertical Landing)(sic) it land on 2 columns of air just like it just took off."
Slowburn
Correct acronym is STOVL.

Seems like it'd be better to pop the nose up and use the rear jets like a rocket to take off.

This white elephant needs to stop and stop now. It is slow, expensive and could be replaced more cheaply by upgrading various US and ally jets or drones in existence. Most experts in all branches of the US armed forces deem in not needed. If its "supply chain" was not farmed out by "congressional district dictates" more than technical dictates it would have been gone long ago. Yet another reason the Military Industrial Complex is out of control. If they can sell enough "tech downed " versions to world wide allies and petro-dictators then perhaps it has a future, but not in the US military.

re; Matthew Harden
Tail sitters are harder to land and are very difficult to put on the wheels for a horizontal takeoff or need significantly more thrust than the maximum gross weight of the airplane. Workable in a point defense interceptor but impractical in an attack plane.