As I understand it there has been not a lot of if any trials of SRVL, rolling landing on the QEC class carriers
I am not aware that any aircraft has landed on any QE class ship, so that does rather mean that no SRVL trials on QE class ships (can I call them boats yet?) have taken place. However SRVL has been done for real by a digital STOVL jet pretending to be an F-35B, on a ship that was, for demonstration purposes, a passable stand-in for a QE class ship (but it wasn't as fast, the flight deck wasn't welded on straight with regards to the rest of the ship and other aircraft kept turning up and knocking lumps out of the deck paint). It's been done, lots and lots, by simulated F-35Bs on simulated QE class ships (and other ships). Hard sums have been done to look at amongst other things, the sort of tedious metal bendy stuff that excites people if for some reason something goes "twang" unexpectedly. Or possibly "crack". People are still interested in having a go for real, which might suggest to you that there are least some people that think it's not a lost cause. We'll see.
, this is necessary to enable a loaded F35B to return to the ship with weapons aboard.
No it isn't. I suspect you might mean something like "very heavily loaded in weather conditions that are unfavourable", in which case you have a point. But that's not going to happen all the time is it? I leave it an an exercise for you to work out how often it will happen. However, my point is that F-35Bs loaded with (inert) weapons have already landed on ships, so clearly SRVL is not an essential pre-requisite.
Let us hope that the stresses of ski jump take off and rolling landing do not necessitate the F35D, an F35B with the heavier undercarriage of the F35C....
like I said, "hard sums". But hey, the Harrier's undercarriage was designed well before ski-jumps were invented and you had to work pretty hard to break them by doing a ski-jump. Like by steering off the side or taking way too long a run-up and having the nose-leg go "twang" on ramp-exit, (on the occasion I know of, because the bloke given the job of marking the take-off roll start line during land-based ski-jump trials didn't appreciate that the distance was referenced to ramp-exit, not the base of the ramp. Fortunately, the aircraft landed safely with a bust nose-leg, 'cos STOVL jets can do that, and subsequently had a long and interesting flight test career including doing the SRVL thingy which failed to break any more legs).
If "Engines" had written this post he would have been a bit more polite. But he's a bit more professional than I am, whereas I've just seen this stuff done and felt I ought to say something.