Aircraft Carriers eclipsed

Discussion in 'Postwar' started by kfz, Jul 7, 2009.

?

Is the Aircraft Carrier is an effective and essential part of a modern defence

  1. Yes, the carrier is an essential defence system

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. No, its a nice to have luxury, but lets buy helicopters instead

    33 vote(s)
    100.0%
  1. kfz

    kfz Very Senior Member

    I don't think it was the quality of the men operating the ship, the rank and file, rather the upper management lacking in motivation, desire, dedication and cahonies....



    I think they where very afraid of losing the carrier, having no way (funds) to replace her. Not to mention the negative effect on morale of losing the biggest unit in the defence.

    I think it was the correct decision. Belgrano showed that the Argentine navy had no defence against the nuclear subs. Damn lucky not to lose her, they came close, if the British command had been more aggressive.

    Kev
     
  2. kfz

    kfz Very Senior Member

    Its a good thread this. Its confirmed my belief that the carrier is the most valuable and flexible uni, be the wrong decision to compromise short term needs for long term flexibility. After all we are a Island nation and the Navy has been are main defence for getting on 600 years. I dont believe thats changed.

    Kev
     
  3. A-58

    A-58 Not so senior Member

    I can agree with you on the decision to have the carrier return to port. It's hard to believe they sent her out without proper escort, asw support, etc. Both the General Belgrano, and their carrier, the 25 de Mayo that is.

    Yes, carriers are more than a naval asset, they are vital to defence, projecting influence and keeping the sealanes open.

    You are correct, good thread. Even an infantryman like me can see that.

    And if they did lose the carrier, I'm sure that we'd pull an old "jeep carrier" out of mothballs and sell it to them for next to nothing, after the crisis situation surrounding the Falklands subsided of course.
     
  4. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    After all we are a Island nation and the Navy has been are main defence for getting on 600 years. I dont believe thats changed.

    600 Years? I suppose you could reach farther than that :)

    I reccommend these two as brilliant!

    And if they did lose the carrier, I'm sure that we'd pull an old "jeep carrier" out of mothballs and sell it to them for next to nothing, after the crisis situation surrounding the Falklands subsided of course.

    Hmm, at the time the US were standing by the old ally and had quite frosty relations with the Argentine Junta. No way they'd sell them a 2nd hand carrier, even if it were a rust bucket. Maggie Thatcher would have invaded the US by herself if need be :)

    Curiously, the 25 de Mayo was the old HMS Venerable, a Colossus class carrier, 13500 tons, sold to the Dutch and then to the Argentines, while the Gen. Belgrano was the former USS Phoenix, a Brooklyn class cruiser, both WW2 vintage.
     
  5. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    if they had asked nicely we would probably have given argentina first refusal on invincible before invasion anyway.
     
  6. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    but back on topic..the falklands whether folk are pd off hearing or not is the prime example.. we wont ever need such forces. not in the eightees.. and then we are suddenly wandering how we got here..wheres the buccaneers..we need a gannet or two..oh for a fleet air arm phantom..raf showed their oft held words of we will take that role as shallow statement it always was..disband the raf..share their rescources around..3 carriers and no trident..few nuke tipped cruise will do..or we will end up with black buck rubbish again.
     
  7. James Daly

    James Daly Senior Member

    I can agree with you on the decision to have the carrier return to port. It's hard to believe they sent her out without proper escort, asw support, etc. Both the General Belgrano, and their carrier, the 25 de Mayo that is.

    It was undoubtedly the right decision, with only having the one carrier it was too risky. In the same vein, if we had only had one carrier at the time we could never even have attempted to take the islands back. As it was Hermes and Invincible were our only two serviceable Carriers, we had Illustrious nearing completion and Bulwark in mothballs, but she would have taken close to a year to re-activate - apparently she was known as Rusty B in the early 80's....
     
  8. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    there was always the oft touted usa offor of a mothballed carrier to uk if we lost one..impractical though it was..crewing it..equipping it with what..better to wait the year for the rusty B..roll on the nelson...the rodney renown..that rusty old bucket is bound to go down...
     
  9. A-58

    A-58 Not so senior Member

    600 Years? I suppose you could reach farther than that :)

    I reccommend these two as brilliant!



    Hmm, at the time the US were standing by the old ally and had quite frosty relations with the Argentine Junta. No way they'd sell them a 2nd hand carrier, even if it were a rust bucket. Maggie Thatcher would have invaded the US by herself if need be :)

    Curiously, the 25 de Mayo was the old HMS Venerable, a Colossus class carrier, 13500 tons, sold to the Dutch and then to the Argentines, while the Gen. Belgrano was the former USS Phoenix, a Brooklyn class cruiser, both WW2 vintage.

    Well, maybe much later then. Some years ago, I remember watching a program on the History Channel (before it started going downhill) about the Argentine Naval Air Arm. At the time, they didn't have a functioning carrier (this was about 10 years after the Falklands War). A US carrier task force was operating in the area, and it allowed Argentine naval aircraft to conduct landing and take-offs to keep their pilots carrier qualified. That was what I was basing my statement about selling them an old WW2 era jeep carrier on.
     
  10. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    Later on, yes, after the Junta had gone down. At the time there was no way of knowing if or when they were to be replaced by a democratic government, as we all know the US never sold arms to dictatorships.

    :curtsey:
     
  11. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    we did though...jolly profitable too..cosford 1979.. 2 school of technical training..main hanger..senor..you have a light per vavor..certainly mr argie airman..hows the training going..what do you think to that new generator..? apologies to za for rotten spanish accent..but they outnumbered raf in that hanger..
     
  12. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    Apologies to Za? Yes, I do speak Spanish, but not nearly as well as French. it's another foreign language to me :lol:
     
  13. A-58

    A-58 Not so senior Member

    Later on, yes, after the Junta had gone down. At the time there was no way of knowing if or when they were to be replaced by a democratic government, as we all know the US never sold arms to dictatorships.

    :curtsey:
    Uhhhhhh, yes, you are right I think....
     
  14. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    yeah sorry za ..portugese..spanish..french..if its not scouse its all foreign to me..yanks not selling..they gave and traded didnt they a58? ..so we are still on it seems for 2 big carrieds...ok ..im for carriers..but why not updated invincible type of hull..e dont need jfk.s...any idea what other nato nations are doing?
     
  15. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

  16. James Daly

    James Daly Senior Member

    Italy and Spain went as far as to copy our Harrier-Carrier concept after its success in the Falklands. I havent read anything recently about their future naval plans, although I would doubt that they would plan to build anything like the size that we are.
     
  17. sol

    sol Very Senior Member

  18. A-58

    A-58 Not so senior Member

    yeah sorry za ..portugese..spanish..french..if its not scouse its all foreign to me..yanks not selling..they gave and traded didnt they a58? ..so we are still on it seems for 2 big carrieds...ok ..im for carriers..but why not updated invincible type of hull..e dont need jfk.s...any idea what other nato nations are doing?
    Oh yes, we lended and leased for awhile, then I believe it went to cash and carry, just as long as they lined up with us against the commies that is....
     
  19. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    well thats that then.. Times online reports the navy have now agreed second hull prince of wales will be a commando carrier. Reduction in number of aircraft cited as reason. So as they point out when the queen elizabeth is in refit we will have no carrier strike anyway..Goes on to imply we would then liase with french over the deployment of joint assets..or words to that effect.
     
  20. urqh

    urqh Senior Member

    Oh dear...Guardian reports today...Indias interest in purchasing the second one...last time this happened we ended up sailing the navy to the south atlantic... We should ready the fleet..what is not on holiday in gulf that is..for an invasion to retake Bermuda from the Nicuraguans..Any time now..
     

Share This Page