It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HMS Invincible sunk in 1982

page: 23
0
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
“There´s no photos about Invincible attack and sinking?
I can´t believe this. “
That’s correct, there are no photos of HMS INVINCIBLE attack and sinking because it never happened. Provide me with 1 (ONE) photograph that is genuine and was taken on the attack.

“But, there´s no photos about HMS-Dasher.
And the Dasher lost in 1943.... “
For the love of God, we lost a minor escort carrier in the war in confused circumstances. We were in a total war and we admitted to the loss of dozens of capital ships and carriers. It beggars belief that you assume the biggest cover up in history on the basis of one minor loss.


"R06 retrofitted to Invincible, off course!!
This is te natural replace to the vince”

What on earth are you talking about – Invincible returned home without Phalanx and received them.

”There are two posible replaces
R07 for R05 (50% of argentines think this)

or
R06 for R05
and
R07 for R06
(the other 50% of argentines think this)
The Lusty retrofitted to Vince.
And the R07 retrofitted to Lusty

And the R08 laid down in 1982 and commisioned en 195 replace the R07 and asume the name HMS-Ark Royal”

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. The sheer insanity of what you’ve suggested is enough to convince me that you are a lunatic. How many times do you have to be told very simply that HMS INVINCIBLE WAS NOT SUNK. It was and is physically impossible to build a CVS in 2 years with no notice. No nation on earth could do it in peacetime.

”The HMS-Bulwark (centaur class) was prepare to replace the Hermes in secret , if Royal navy lost the Hermes. “

Not quite, BULWARK was prepared to act as a hull to be towed south from which helos could be flown. She was in very poor material condition and the plan was scrapped.

“Why the inservible Invincible no returns inmediately to make the reparations to Port Stanley or to UK ??”

There was no visit to Port Stanley as the water isn’t deep enough for a carrier to come alongside. Standard procedure is for a Depth Under Keel at least that of a vessels hull, and the water in the port Stanley area isn’t 20m deep. Also the threat of air attack remained high as we weren’t sure whether Argentina might try something stupid again so she remained at sea. She was serviceable enough to remain at sea until Illustrious was worked up and then she went home while Lusty stayed down south.

”Why the New Vince and New Lusty, they even mantained grey towers, both even the end of 1985 (The R08 mantain grey tower too)

Why 3 years with grey towers?
And why 20 years with black towers.
Why the New Vince go and return to Gulf War in 1991 with black towers?”

What does it matter? Ships change colour schemes on a regular basis, the tower colour is irrelevant. Frankly the fact that you think the colour of a mast is important shows just how weak and useless your argument is.

”The survivors of the Vince never can see your ship sinking, because they were evacuated to Hermes.
The ship sunk in the night (at 16.00 hs was night) after 20.00hs.(argentine hours)
The international radios OC, said the 30/5/82 thah the ship was sinking and the tripulants evacuated.”

You’ve clearly never been to sea. At action stations the entire crew is on watch. In the event of a hit the fire fighting parties kick into action and attempt damage control. HQ1 will report over the tannoy what is going on to direct fire parties as required. It is impossible for the ship to have been hit without the whole ship knowing about it. Take that from someone who has done plenty of fire drills at sea. You seem to think that the entire ships company didn’t know that their entire ship was hit, that they just got up and left the ship for no good reason and didn’t notice that she’d been sunk. What on earth are you smoking, as this is ridiculous.

I will ask again – why did none of the 1200 Vinces ships company nor 2000 Hermes ships company EVER report an evacuation, why did no one ever comment on this or go to the news? Probably because it never happened.

Why has no Royal Navy damage control course ever covered what went wrong unlike every other incident on an RN warship - because there never was an incident.

As for sinking at night – well that’s total rubbish, you’d still get photos of the hull burning end from end. More to the point why does the silly picture on your website show the ship being attacked and hit and burning in the day? Oh wait, that’s because it’s a total piece of fiction, the attack never happened, the ship was never hit. If she was hit then we’d have hundreds of photos from DAYLIGHT.

“The survivors believe the extraofficial british history, that the ship was repaired. But the real history is other. The okd Vince was replace for the Lusty.
And the Lusty for the R07 (who was retrofitted to R06)"

I note you have totally avoided my questions on how a replacement would have been built or why none of the 70,000 people who would have noticed the sinking and rebuilding have ever said anything. You also forgot to comment on the official history.

Could you explain to me in simple terms how HMS INVINCIBLE went to Australia in early 1983, while HMS ILLUSTRIOUS remained in Portsmouth in refit? Oh can you also explain how HMS ARK ROYAL remained at Swan Hunters being completed if Invincible was sunk.

I can only conclude that you are deluded and cannot accept a simple fact. HMS INVINCIBLE was never attacked, hit or sunk by the Argentian Air Force. Deal with it.


[edit on 15-9-2005 by Jim30]




posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Oh check out this link about where Invincible got to in 1983

www.harrier.org.uk...

Bear in mind Illustrious was commissioned in March 1983 at the same time as Invincible was on deployment? How was that possible?

What about squadrons - note that different squadrons deployed at different times - don't you think they might have noticed?



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 05:55 PM
link   
MD6:
The R05 old Invincible had black towers and end of chimes, since 1977 until 30/5/82.

The R06, R07 and R08 had grey towers until 1985

Is courious but the R07 launched in 1981 with black towers.

The R08 laid up in 1982, launched with grey towers (and grey obra muerta !!!!!, the inferior part of the ship) trails with grey towers

In 1985 all Invincibles return to the paint of original ship....no more words
------------------------------------------------------
Jim:
The Dasher had a 70% of ton, than Invincible class.
And sunk by an accident with only a friendly plane (no kamikaze, no bomb, no missile and no torpedo)

The ship tha an increible period of three month after the war, the 17/9/82 was not the original invincble.
It was a new an clean ship, with a base of phalanx in pope anda acomplete Phalanx in prow (in estribor, te right side of the ship)

The invincible never entry to Port Stanley, because it sunk before the 14/6/82
The ARA-25 de mayo (colossus clas)
hermes (centaur class)
Illustrious (invincible class)
can entry to port stanley

The Invincible , no enter to none port arround the world.
Why, please, why was the only ship that not arrive to none port for more than 90 days !!!

And the survivor returns in other diferent ship

Why mister Ward lie with a photo of april 1982 (invincible original, black towers) and said ...this is the return of the carrier at the end of corporate oparation (Ward, don´t knows the suppose change of colours of towers and chimnes??)
Why Jim, why...
Was Ward a stupid pilot?

The Bulwark russhed complet to replace a hermes in secret (that history was confirm for a official or Royal Navy)

The British is the most famous and historic industry of all class of ships.
You (and the yankees of course)can make a micro carrier in two years without problem.

There are a lot of evidences that indicate a lost of the ship and a replace for a sister.

In 1983 you have two sisters ship finished (R06 and R07) both with grey towers (R07 repainted black original to grey, and retrofited your sky jump angle)
And both with two phalanx (estribor prow and estribor pope)

And the R08 in rushed construction.

Please you seem a good person , and dedicate your time to clarify the true.
Take a time to watch in tke detail, the ship that return to Portsmouth the 17/9/82.




posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   
You always seem to ignore the question about how they hid the money, and kept thousands and thousands of people quiet about building a new ship.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes

The ship tha an increible period of three month after the war, the 17/9/82 was not the original invincble.
It was a new an clean ship, with a base of phalanx in pope anda acomplete Phalanx in prow (in estribor, te right side of the ship)


Again with the Pope's phalanx. I thought the Swiss guards would have carried it for John-Paul, not inserted it in him.



The Invincible , no enter to none port arround the world.
Why, please, why was the only ship that not arrive to none port for more than 90 days !!!


Will someone please get me some Spanish lessons. This is like listening to Manuel. "How do you like my English, I learned it from a book."



The Bulwark russhed complet to replace a hermes in secret (that history was confirm for a official or Royal Navy)


WHAT?!? The Bulwark rushed to completion? Next you'll be telling us they were refitting HMS Valiant specifically to deal with the Belgrano.



The British is the most famous and historic industry of all class of ships.
You (and the yankees of course)can make a micro carrier in two years without problem.


Then why aren't they?



There are a lot of evidences that indicate a lost of the ship and a replace for a sister.


Where?



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Off course.
If the englishmen and englishwomen learn a little bit of spanish, the comunication wil be better.

But this situation is better than the silence.

What´s happend with Belgrano.
It was a very old ship made in usa in the second war.
It´s sunked by a super submarine new and with atomic propulsion, 323 persons die.

I can put a lot of pathetic photos about Coventry and Antelope, ultra modern ships, sunked for old A4 planes. Planes of the end of the Korean war.
But it is not the propose of this post.
-----------------------------
About the cost of a new light carrier....300.000.000 dolars

The Operation Corporate, how much cost to UK citizen?
20.000 millions, 30.000 millions

Do you know the cost of this inutil war?

To the UK or the alied USA, 300 millions are nothing.
The honour and prestige of Royal Navy, Shipbuilders, NATO and other arms builders, had more cost.

Other evidence:
the 1/6/82 First Minister of Australia cancel unilateral the buy of the Invincible...why?
Why the australians not buy other class Invincible?
Why UK can not sell other Class Invincible for nobody?

There is a dozen of evidences more.

To know the truth is good for all.
For the argentine and for the british.

Without lies, liers, alcoholics governors, there wil be not more unnecessary wars.

Only the thrut is the way.

Sorry for my english, but is better than the silence.
I do a lot of efforts to understand the spanish of the englishmen when they arrive to Argentina.
And i survive without problems.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
You've been smoking again haven't you. There's NO WAY that they could hide the money for a new carrier. If they pulled that off, then there are even MORE people that would have to know the truth and kept their mouth shut for 20 years. *snort* You DO know the saying "Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead" right? You're talking about thousands and thousands of people that have kept quiet for 20+ years. Not. A. Chance.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   
How much was the cost of the Corporate Operation ??
Nobody can answer this question.

The Invincible affaire, has 23 years, but now with Internet , the tatcher´s history is inacceptable.

The Dasher affaire, with 350 died, was oculted for more than 4 decades.

We was talkink with Royal Navy´s people in Buenos Aires.
When the topic was the Invincible, they say "I don´t know"

Is impossible to analyze a big ship with more than 1000 tripulants on board in the middle of the sea, never sight in none port, for more than 90 days after the end of the war.

With a reclamation of attack of te enemy forces.
That revive as a new and clean diferent ship, with vissible differences.

And why an englishmen wanted take the risk to affirm that the ship was sunk?
If a few people can see the fire and the collapse.

The satellite showed a infrared radiation in the position of the atack, that it moved in South East, burning until 20.00 PM (the same hour that the radios said the ship inminent sunk.

The westinghouse rada of argentine air force detect a inusual activity of copters in the zone, i the lapse 14.30 - 16.00

The Invincible harries was flying at max height to save combustible, without certain destiny.

The survivor pilots of FAA (Ureta e Isaac) (I can read the original separate manuscript after the mission) said and wrote the same history. With the exact profile of the Vince, sight from stern (pope or popa)

We can write a book of the evidences.

The shipyard workers work in a military zone of restricted information.
They are not expert in nomenclature of ships, nor have because to know she registers it of each ship or if they were finishing a unit, or refitting it or if he is new or old.
They are workers no the military experts or secerts agents.
Single they want his money.
Non problems with the government, the judicial power or the intelligence services.
The Englishmen love their country, are disciplined and have more experience in wars.



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Shipyard workers are most definately experts in ship identification. After all they spend years working on them. I've heard of some workers that can look at a small piece of a ship and not only identify the ship type, but identify the individual ship. If they suddenly start building a ship type that no one had ever seen built in their shipyard, they're going ot ask questions, and know that something is going on. Not to mention the 1000+ people on the ship that "sank" and the 2000 on the ship they "transferred" to, not to mention the 1000+ on the ship that "replaced" it. Your story has holes that you could pilot the Invincible herself through.



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 03:06 AM
link   
The Invincible was never SUNK in Argentina, She sailed back from the Falklands in 1982 and I was there to see it. She was in tact, and she had been fired at in the WAR! but was never hit. She does still have the number R05 (believe me) and I was only on board six weeks ago. WE built the ship HMS Invincible and I can tell you that there has only been ONE Invincible which is a through-deck Cruiser and one with RO5!

Not sunk Never! and I should know for sure.
L



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes


I can put a lot of pathetic photos about Coventry and Antelope, ultra modern ships, sunked for old A4 planes. Planes of the end of the Korean war.
But it is not the propose of this post.
-----------------------------


Other evidence:
the 1/6/82 First Minister of Australia cancel unilateral the buy of the Invincible...why?
Why the australians not buy other class Invincible?
Why UK can not sell other Class Invincible for nobody?


Because as well as buying the Invincible to replace the Melbourne we would also have had to buy Harriers to replace our Skyhawks (definitely not from the Korean war), a massive expenditure for a small nation. (Never mind that India can afford to do just that sort of thing...)

And the Brits withdrew it from sale after they realised they needed three carriers, two in service and one in refit. One in service and one in refit was not enough to cover the RN's commitments worldwide, a lesson they learned in the South Atlantic.

[edit on 16-9-2005 by HowlrunnerIV]



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   
britains-smallwars.com...



30th May 1982.
1331 hours.
Two Super Etendards and four A-4C Skyhawks from FAA Grupo 4 attack task group from south. Two A-4s destroyed probably by Sea dart fired from HMS Exeter. HMS Avengers 4.5inch gun also claimed one of the aircraft. Both pilots, Lt. Varquez and Lt. Castillo, are killed.


Your attack , which you claim to have sank the carrier , was intercepted and destroyed.

I have also spoken to an Able Seaman who served on invincible in 1982 , and he just simply states that what you spouting is complete rubbish.

There is enough evidence , on reputeable websites (and the multitude of books) to completely refyte what you say.



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
you have 2 excellent programs in BBC...
"changing rooms" and "changing wife"...


The next program to will be exported:

"changing Carriers" or "R08 New Brother" ??


(all rigths reserved 55Heroes - 2005)



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:12 AM
link   
the "accidental fire" in the R05, after attack of 30 May... (denied by us)
was COOKING???



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
you have 2 excellent programs in BBC...
"changing rooms" and "changing wife"...


The next program to will be exported:

"changing Carriers" or "R08 New Brother" ??


(all rigths reserved 55Heroes - 2005)



Also know as... "Yankie Brother"



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Will you answer the questions regarding to the money needed to build a carrier and the supposed silence of tens of thousands of people in a democracy (and in an open shipyard)?

this is not argentina , the uk have freedom of speech and freedom of the press.



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Yes Harlequin
UK is a perfect democracy.

Your governors never lie to him, to the UK citizens....

The 350 died´s family and friends of thein the HMS-Dasher must have lived in another one pais by 40 years, then.

The political corruption is a world-wide problem. It is not a problem only of the Argentine citizens



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
the "accidental fire" in the R05, after attack of 30 May... (denied by us)
was COOKING???

-
Personally, this is a load od HOGwash! There was no cover up carrier built for Invincible, there are new Carriers going to be built, but they will not be ready until 2012 and that's debatable.
There has only been 1 Invincible bearing the number R05 and she was not sunk. There are no pictures, no nothing of this. The Invincible sailed back into Portsmouth after the Falklands War! and sailed back unscathed.
The Attack was not cooking ????? because there was none of this that took place, in fact they missed the Ship altogether. yes there were ships hit and sunk but R05 was not one of them!
So no Invincible was sunk in 1982!!
And everyone else on here knows that too.

L



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
Yes Harlequin
UK is a perfect democracy.

Your governors never lie to him, to the UK citizens....

The 350 died´s family and friends of thein the HMS-Dasher must have lived in another one pais by 40 years, then.

The political corruption is a world-wide problem. It is not a problem only of the Argentine citizens



Can someone understand this at all?


HMS Dasher was an accident in WW2 - which bears no relevance to a war involving the UK and ARG 40 years later.

And you STILL haven`t answered the questions regarding MONEY or all the people that would see it being bult (like every other carrier around the world)



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
MD6:
The R05 old Invincible had black towers and end of chimes, since 1977 until 30/5/82.

The R06, R07 and R08 had grey towers until 1985

Is courious but the R07 launched in 1981 with black towers.

The R08 laid up in 1982, launched with grey towers (and grey obra muerta !!!!!, the inferior part of the ship) trails with grey towers

In 1985 all Invincibles return to the paint of original ship....no more words
------------------------------------------------------
Jim:
The Dasher had a 70% of ton, than Invincible class.
And sunk by an accident with only a friendly plane (no kamikaze, no bomb, no missile and no torpedo)

The ship tha an increible period of three month after the war, the 17/9/82 was not the original invincble.
It was a new an clean ship, with a base of phalanx in pope anda acomplete Phalanx in prow (in estribor, te right side of the ship)

The invincible never entry to Port Stanley, because it sunk before the 14/6/82
The ARA-25 de mayo (colossus clas)
hermes (centaur class)
Illustrious (invincible class)
can entry to port stanley

The Invincible , no enter to none port arround the world.
Why, please, why was the only ship that not arrive to none port for more than 90 days !!!

And the survivor returns in other diferent ship

Why mister Ward lie with a photo of april 1982 (invincible original, black towers) and said ...this is the return of the carrier at the end of corporate oparation (Ward, don´t knows the suppose change of colours of towers and chimnes??)
Why Jim, why...
Was Ward a stupid pilot?

The Bulwark russhed complet to replace a hermes in secret (that history was confirm for a official or Royal Navy)

The British is the most famous and historic industry of all class of ships.
You (and the yankees of course)can make a micro carrier in two years without problem.

There are a lot of evidences that indicate a lost of the ship and a replace for a sister.

In 1983 you have two sisters ship finished (R06 and R07) both with grey towers (R07 repainted black original to grey, and retrofited your sky jump angle)
And both with two phalanx (estribor prow and estribor pope)

And the R08 in rushed construction.

Please you seem a good person , and dedicate your time to clarify the true.
Take a time to watch in tke detail, the ship that return to Portsmouth the 17/9/82.


There has never been a carrier (Invincible Class) R08 there are only R05 R06 and R07
So this information above is so untrue. There was NO R08 rushed in construction.
The Invincible arrived at at a Port (Portsmouth) will all crew on board!
We know the facts on this. Our Ship returned safely and that Ship was R05, because the same crew returned that went out on her. For crying out loud! it took 7 years to complete the building of the Invincible from start to finish! and that speaks for itself.

L of a person!




top topics



 
0
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join