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: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   
It's not enough because your arguments are full of holes.

1. It's impossible for them to have built another carrier and nobody notice.
2. It's impossible that ALL of the journalists and crew members on board the Invincible, PLUS the entire British battle group that was there would be hushed. Even with an order of secrecy the chances of someone talking are very good.
3. The families would have noticed if that many people were killed or didn't return home.
4. There are too many eyewitnesses, such as fathers of members, that were serving on the ship that deny it happened.
5. It's impossible to pass off one ship as another for the years it would take to build another carrier. With all the people that track movements of the ships, SOMEONE would notice that one of the carriers was missing all the time.

Shall I go on about the other holes in your story?

Your last post has what exactly to do with British soldiers that died in 1982? You were posting dates in 1944 in there.

[edit on 3-9-2005 by Zaphod58]




posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
THIS PACK OF WANKERS HAS TRIED THIS BEFORE , WOT A SURPRISE


GOT THIER BACKSIDES SPANKED AT ARRSE , SO SLITHERED OVER HERE

DEATH TO ALL TROLLS - NO PUNISHMENT IS TOO CRUEL OR UNUSUAL



YRS - APE



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
1. It´s possible i explained it before.
2. All was TOP SECRET they paid all the people very well all is possible.
3. What´s up with HMS Dasher?? here is the same.
4. They are serving to UK and don´t want to tell evrybody "hey look an argie sunk the best ship of the Task Force".
5. Yes someone noticed that´s why i´m here telling this.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
THIS PACK OF WANKERS HAS TRIED THIS BEFORE , WOT A SURPRISE


GOT THIER BACKSIDES SPANKED AT ARRSE , SO SLITHERED OVER HERE

DEATH TO ALL TROLLS - NO PUNISHMENT IS TOO CRUEL OR UNUSUAL



YRS - APE



oo yes you are that kid of arrse who dedicated me a topic about my post of WW2 forum.

Remembered ww2 forum censured me and without reason.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
you like more proof?

HMS Invincible (R 07)
1999: Refit Portsmouth October


HMS Illustrious (R 06)
2000: Deployed to Gulf January 17, Atlantic January 19


HMS Ark Royal (R08)
1999: Rosyth naval base major Refit October


www.geocities.com...

and R05?????





posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
you like more proof?

HMS Invincible (R 07)
1999: Refit Portsmouth October


HMS Illustrious (R 06)
2000: Deployed to Gulf January 17, Atlantic January 19


HMS Ark Royal (R08)
1999: Rosyth naval base major Refit October


www.geocities.com...

and R05?????






Well i have something better here...

Another "mistake"???

HMS Invincible R 06 Portsmouth
HMS Ark Royal R 07 Portsmouth

you can see it here:
www.seawaves.com...




posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
if today visit the link, you can see it:
Britain
HMS Invincible (R 07)
2005: Portsmouth

HMS Illustrious (R 06)
2005: Portsmouth

HMS Ark Royal (R08)
Extended Readiness thru 2006
2005: Portsmouth

HMS Invincible (R05) disappear, vanished or in South Atlantic preventing a new Argentine attack to the Malvinas / Falklands?



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   
obvious... its present position cannot be publishes, because it is in secret mission... .


so secret that it is under water



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
It might be a little more believable if you got your information right from your own quotes. lol.

According to that the Invincible was R 06 and the Ark Royal was R 07.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
It might be a little more believable if you got your information right from your own quotes. lol.

According to that the Invincible was R 06 and the Ark Royal was R 07.


lmao..........who are these guys...............cheech & chong..............lol

spacemunkey



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   
So typos mistakes on 2 sites (one of which links RN R05 webpage) out of thousand on the net, despite the fact staring you in the face is conclusive proof that invincible was sunk, you guys are so desperate to believe this fantasy to resurrect some faded glory for a bunch of fascist military dictators that murdered thousand of their citizen and who only invade the Falklands as they saw it as the only way escape the mounting opposition to them in their own country.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   
in his country also is equal, first shoot after ask... Jean Charles de Menezes, remember??


news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Popeye
So typos mistakes on 2 sites (one of which links RN R05 webpage) out of thousand on the net, despite the fact staring you in the face is conclusive proof that invincible was sunk, you guys are so desperate to believe this fantasy to resurrect some faded glory for a bunch of fascist military dictators that murdered thousand of their citizen and who only invade the Falklands as they saw it as the only way escape the mounting opposition to them in their own country.


And Maggy?

www.maggiethatchersdead.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:29 PM
link   
the R08 Ark Royal is really the twin ship..



It was constructed possibly in the USA for that reason it did not do upgrade and it continues conserving phalanx system.


[edit on 3-9-2005 by 55heroes]



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Yet again, there is NO WAY that a new carrier could be built in secret. It would take years and thousands of people. Those people would take pride in their work and brag about it to friends. There is NO WAY you hide something like that and keep it secret for 13 years, with NOT ONE PERSON talking about it.

Oh and by the way I like the way the story changes when the "facts" are proven wrong. First the Illustrious pretended to be the Invincible, and the "new" Invincible was R08, now the Illustrious is the "new" carrier.

[edit on 3-9-2005 by Zaphod58]



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Nobody can´t answer nothing here.

[edit on 3-9-2005 by TheIrishDuck]



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   
it is possible.
but in this forum nobody knows nothing about this and they are starting to insult. It´s a shame.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Yet again, there is NO WAY that a new carrier could be built in secret. It would take years and thousands of people. Those people would take pride in their work and brag about it to friends. There is NO WAY you hide something like that and keep it secret for 13 years, with NOT ONE PERSON talking about it.

Oh and by the way I like the way the story changes when the "facts" are proven wrong. First the Illustrious pretended to be the Invincible, and the "new" Invincible was R08, now the Illustrious is the "new" carrier.

[edit on 3-9-2005 by Zaphod58]



No the new carrier is Ark Royal.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 55heroes
the R08 Ark Royal is really the twin ship..



It was constructed possibly in the USA for that reason it did not do upgrade and it continues conserving phalanx system.


[edit on 3-9-2005 by 55heroes]



HMS Invincible and Illustrious each have three Thales Nederland (formerly Signaal) Goalkeeper CIWS. Goalkeeper's Gatling principle 30mm gun provides a maximum firing rate of 4,200 rounds/min with a range of 1,500m.

Though originally both Phalanx

It is HMS Ark Royal (R07) which is armed with three Mark 15 Phalanx close-in weapon systems (CIWS) from Raytheon and General Dynamics as it has not yet under gone the refit that the other 2 recieved.

www.naval-technology.com...



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Sent its construction in 1982 (some site in USA, after the visit of the Illustrious) in 1984 already it was sailing and in trials (finished in 1985). Very showy, by its gray upper works, to already have in its first version the disposition of the Phalanx in the semicircular platform of stern port. And the balcony in the port windows.... It is the R08, the fourth twin, that takes the name of Ark Royal, and the original R07 has been renamed like R07, third twin of the series was hurled in 1981, and was the definitive replacement of the sunk Invincible, and therefore renamed like R05.




new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join