hms invincible sunk in 1982?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is the problem with debating the subject?
it is prohibited?
Because?
They are the USA and UK countries with freedom of expression and democracy?
who is scared?
that there is to hide?
in the wars always born much lies... in both sides. ;)
 
Dear KC.. you only like ban this post.. why??

if no have proof, don´t disturb.
have much more topics to you.
I only have one here to investigate this case.
have people which cover the lies and people which search the true...
i prefer be the second option.
 
Originally two were short and one length. But now I am left one short and the lengths... are two. Why? :roll: :?: :?:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2173249.stm

The Royal Navy's flagship aircraft carrier, HMS Ark Royal, is the
fifth vessel to bear the distinguished name.
The first, a 38-gun ship built for Sir Walter Raleigh, saw action
against the Spanish Armada in 1588.

But following a major refit, the most recent incarnation of this proud
family is well equipped for modern warfare.

Able to operate the Navy's latest Merlin helicopters as well as
Harrier jump jets, the 20,000-ton carrier can also cruise at more than
30 knots.

A central part of the Navy's strength, the ship is both a mobile
airfield and a command and control base.


Inside HMS Ark Royal


Enlarge image

Her 686 crew work alongside 366 airmen and women to keep the vessel
and her aircraft running.

She can carry Sea Harrier FA2 jump jets capable of air defence or
ground attack and RAF Harrier GR7 surface attack planes.

But at present the Ark Royal is not configured to carry Harriers.

The carrier's flight deck has now been strengthened to take the new
Merlin anti-submarine helicopters.

Ark Royal also received a new main mast and fresh combat systems in
the two-year refit, completed in autumn 2001, at Rosyth in Dunfermline.



At 210 metres (683 feet) long, Ark Royal is larger than her sister
ships Illustrious and Invincible, and also has a steeper flight ramp
to assist take-offs.


Technical specifications
Click here for details

But she is just as versatile, able to operate almost anywhere in the
world.

Aircraft carriers are key to modern defence strategy, allowing for
early reconnaissance, the landing of special forces and land attack
from the air.

Built in 1978, Ark Royal was launched by the Queen Mother, who
remained the ship's patron.

Proud heritage

It was the fourth Royal Navy ship to bear the distinguished name in
the 20th Century.

The second Ark Royal saw service in the First World War, while the
third played a distinguished role in World War II.

It launched the torpedo plane attack which crippled the Bismarck, but
the British carrier was later sunk returning from Malta in 1941.

The fourth Ark Royal - commissioned in 1955 - was the first Royal Navy
carrier to feature all the developments enabling jet operations,
including an angled deck, steam catapult and a mirror landing aid.

The current vessel entered service in 1985 and played a key role in
the Balkans conflict in the early 1990s, mainly based in the Adriatic.

Captain Alan Massey, from Ipswich, took command of the Ark Royal last
July.

The ship's recent refit is expected to keep Ark Royal in active
service until the next generation of super carriers are ready in 2015.

Ark Royal's crew will no doubt do their best to meet whatever
challenges they face until then, taking heart from the vessel's motto
- 'Zeal Does Not Rest'.



Invincible Class Aircraft Carrier

Crew: 1089
Main weapons: Sea King helicopters, anti-sub helicopters, Phalanx
anti-missile system, Goalkeeper defence system, 20mm close-range guns
Length: 210m (683ft)
Maximum beam: 36m (117ft)
Displacement: 20,000 tonnes
Power: 4 Olympus gas turbines
 
has tips incorrect.

Despite the bad weather, on 30 May, the Argentinean Air Force and the Naval Aviation started their first really coordinated attack, deploying two Super Etendards and four Skyhawks into attack against what they believed was the main body of the British Task Force. After refueling twice from KC-130s, the strike package made a wide turn around to the south of the British fleet, and then initiated the attack by launching a single Exocet, with Skyhawks following closely behind. The British detected the threat, and shot down the missile and two Skyhawks, while the other two attacked a British frigate, misidentifying her for the HMS Invincible due to the bad weather and intensive smoke caused by AAA and ships moving at high speed.
Click to expand...
1- the smoke in this case is white and ligth..., the smoke seen by the Argentine Skyhawk pilots was not white, but black and strong.
2- Even in a stress situation like being attacked with AAA and SAM fire, it is hard to mis-identify the big, lateral flight deck of a carrier with the small helicopter flight deck of a frigate.
3- if you see my last photo posted can see easily the A4 squadron behind the SUE... is not possible in bad weather.
4- it is highly unlikely that a 114 mm shell could actually destroy a sea-skimming missile flying at 10 metres high at 1,000 km/h.
if is true, because its device is not used as anti-missile defense actually??

The date and the data about 2 Skyhawks shot down is correct.

Royal Navy change four times your official attack version.
from denying the existence to saying that the Atlantic Conveyor (sunk in May 25th) was attacked instead of the HMS Invincible.
 
more lies in your refer link...
Although claimed as damaged in the last Exocet-attack by Argentinean Navy’s Super Etendards and Air Force’s Skyhawks, on 30 June 1982, the HMS Invincible actually remained in the area long after the main body of the British Task force and was relieved on the station only by the HMS Illustrious in July 1982. Both ships can be seen here during a meeting in the South Atlantic.
Click to expand...
falklandsphoto101go.jpg

Are 2 carriers of different length.
One is short hull identificated with N and another one is long hull the identificated with L. This photo was taken advanced year 1983, not in June of 1982. ;)
 
I wonder what sort of nation NYHunter thinks Britain is :?

Despite Britains Official Secrets Act, there is no way that the British government could keep an event as big as this secret.

I can't even think of a good enough reason why they should
 
Just a quick question, which was the carrier Australia had put a deposit on, but was cancelled due to the Falklands. It was either the Ark Royal or the Invicible, I cannot remember for sure, but we did order one Surplus off the RN, but it was cancelled.
 
The picture is bollocks. The aircraft in the background is a C-130 not a refueling tanker, so it makes me doubt any other information. Additionally how can you prove where and when this picture was taken... the pilot isn't holding a newspaper up for us to see. :lol:

Further I believe Charge is right that the UK would not be able to silence the families for 20+ years about this.

Finally, why would they do this?
 
UK constructed the Invincible Class to sell a ship at least.
Two days after the collapse of the Invincible, the 1/6/82 Australian first minister cancelled the purchase of the Invincible or any other twin one of that class.
UK never could sell no Invincible class after the War of the Falklands.
In spite of to have hidden the damage, the loss extended in naval atmospheres.
Nobody wanted a Invincible class in its fleet military.
 
NYhunter. What country are you from anyway?
Mate, the world is not full of conspiracy. Get over it.
The evidence you post here is pointless. Photos of planes that don't identify anything about the context don't prove anything. I can do that, but it doesn't prove a thing.
 
:) AussieNick:
The Argentina Navy and the Argentina Air Force, protest from 1982 by the impact and at least one important failure in the HMS-Invincible the 30/5/82.
Groups of Argentine historical investigators, protest by the collapse of the Invincible and allege a multiple spare part by and the secret construction of a fourth twin one between 1982 and 1984.

Two Argentine pilots died in the attack, Vazquez and Castillo.
Both surviving, Ureta and Isaac, they allege testimony about the impact of the Exocet and the ending of the ship with 3 pumps of 250 kg.

English official history says that the Argentine heroes are liers.

You request you photograph that they contribute forceful tests.

Here we will show to official photos of the return of the ship clone to you, Portsmouth the 17/9/82, this ship simulates to be the Invincible, but is it new and have an anti-missile cannon Phalanx in prow.

The sunk original Invincible did not have any phalanx.

The clone that returned replacing to the Invincible was the twin R06 or the R07.

7entrada1estribor3vn.jpg


8entrada1estribordetallephalan.jpg
 
AussieNick said:
NYhunter. What country are you from anyway?
Mate, the world is not full of conspiracy. Get over it.
The evidence you post here is pointless. Photos of planes that don't identify anything about the context don't prove anything. I can do that, but it doesn't prove a thing.
Click to expand...
I take English and Argentine blood in my veins, by that reason desire to find the truth of the happened thing for the good of the two nations.
you can help me? i am not an specialist in this :(
welcome aboard!!! :D :D :D
 
bulldogg said:
The picture is bollocks. The aircraft in the background is a C-130 not a refueling tanker, so it makes me doubt any other information.
Click to expand...
What is the difference that you can see in this photo, show me. sorry but I am not specialistic in Kc-130.

bulldogg said:
Additionally how can you prove where and when this picture was taken... the pilot isn't holding a newspaper up for us to see. :lol:
Click to expand...
About 12:30 hrs on May 30th 1982, two Super Etendards took off from Río Grande; the SUE 0752/3-A-202, piloted by the leader, Warship Lieutenant Alejandro Francisco, took off first , and second was the SUE 0755/3-A-205, flown by the wingman, Warship Lieutenant Luis Collavino. Five minutes later, the A-4Cs, belonging to the Air Force, also took off. Francisco carried the Exocet, and Collavino provided support and verification. The call signs of the Super Etendards and Skyhawks were 'Ala' and 'Zonda' respectively.

All the planes climbed to an altitude of 7,000 meters (21,000 feet) and flew to the rendezvous point with the KC-130H, where all the fighters were resupplied with fuel for 300 kms. After this refueling the planes turned to the east, with both SUEs separated by 1,600 meters (1 mile) and two Skyhawks behind each. When all of them were at 304 kms (190 miles) from the target area, they dived to an altitude of 30 meters (100 feet). Around 14:32 'Ala 1', Francisco, reported they had locked the Exocet on the target. 'Ala 2', Collavino, confirmed the lock and so Francisco launched the missile. With this launch, the participation of the 2nd Air Naval Squadron in the war came to an end. Both Super Etendards turned back and headed towards the meeting point with the KC-130H, and after that arrived at Río Grande without problems.

sueya4c0hh.jpg


This historical photograph shows the SUE # 0752/3-A-202 piloted by Warship Lieutenant Alejandro Francisco when refueling on its way to the target, HMS Invincible on May 30th 1982. The last AM.39 Exocet can be seen under the right wing of the SUE, and the four A-4C Skyhawks of the 4th Fighter Group of the Argentine Air Force can also be seen far behind, waiting for their turn to refuel.
Click to expand...
see more in this link http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/Exocet.html

bulldogg said:
Further I believe Charge is right that the UK would not be able to silence the families for 20+ years about this.
Finally, why would they do this?
Click to expand...
for the same reason which they impose a secret by 90 years for all the related one to the Falklands, still having recovered the islands ;)
they already did it with the HMS Dasher by 30 years
see more in this link http://www.submerged.co.uk/dashertragedy.php
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top