and it is rather hard to believe somewhat that the ship preceding this one, the ark royal of WW2 sunk in 41, had a 72 plane airgroup and was intended for that size of a airgroup while the next in line illustrious, was onyl designed for 36 airccraft
ilustrious was by wars end carrying 57 aircraft: 36 cosairs and 21 avengers. Maybe the size of the aircaft vs the smaller sizes of the aircaft of ark royal at the time had something to do with it. oh and also both had armoured decks, maybe illustrious had more armour affecting aircaft numbers.
Rod Stewart's Saiing. Its the theme song of a BBC documentary starting this ship during the 1970s. It was also very popular during the Falklands in 1982.
Sweet clouds @ 1:30 - looks real. Unfortunately today and even more so in future, super carriers are extremely vulnerable to even 3rd rate hostile militaries.
Much dif than the old days.
You need to dedicate huge proportion of defence spending in future just to escort these things, and operate the enhanced battle group.
Maybe alternative solutions exist not yet studied?
but supercarriers can easily bring peace to conflict zones, was proven over in south china sea, hostilities were brewing, us sent just 2 supercarriers, hostilities ended once they entered south china sea
Sort of. Are you talking about future UK carriers deploying independently as strike groups, or US carrier strike groups (possibly acting in co-deployment)?
I actually had a friend who was Navigator officer aboard one of the LA class subs participating in that carrier show of force you spoke of.
Times have changed though and will continue to change over the next 10+ yrs, demanding $unprecedented$ escort/tech as part of carrier ops.
yea, will continue to change forever but for me one thing is certain, if there is no supercarriers, world would probably in more wars, and it would be nice to see some Queen Elizabeth carriers put into norfolk with a few Nimitzs, and if lets say another conflict starts brewing in south china sea, just send the QEs and a few Nimitzs, it would calm down right quick, and i was proven time and time again that if deployed like a convoy you need fewer ships to escort against subs and aircraft from the
4 carriers lets say as a example would be able to handle anything else, wether in th air, on land, or in the sea, idk how many aircraft a QE could hold, but i will say 80 each, 160 F35s from the QEs and if the american CVNs are of the Gerald R. Ford class instead, we are talking 240-280 additional F35s, so we are talking a max of 440 F35s from the combined 4 carriers, no one in their right mind would want to mess with that force right?
LOL, I can tell you like video games for sure m8. That would be one awesome virtual clash and I'd love to go along for the ride and see the conclusion after all the smoke cleared, cough. :)
Actually, I think the QE will hold something more along 25 F-35 each, plus helicopter and US carriers will have perhaps 24 F-35 each plus 2 squadrons of Super-Hornets... so yeah, 100 F-35 would be some major assets no doubt, but would consume massive % of UK's budget making major security threat if sunk.
yea but as a example i was talking if the entire air group was F35s, but imagin aho wmnay aircraft that would come up with if 12 QEs with 80 plane air groups and 12 Gerald R. Fords meet up and attacked in one spot, 960 from the QEs, and 1680, and for the gerald r fords that is also max air group for 12 of them, cause they can carry up to 140 aircraft each, but 2640 stealth aircraft is a force you do not want to mess with
and thye alwyas have a thick defense to get through and most modern carriers have upwards of a foot of armor on us supercarriers, and upwards of half a foot on others
my dad served on her during the 70's anyone know how I could get in contact with anyone else that served.he was a radar tech for the phantoms and was chief petty officer I believe. goes by the name of Tim Wilson
Had the RN had a carrier (or 2) like this old Ark, the Falklands conflict would probably never had happened, as foolish men wouldn't have risked war against a fleet so equiped. Over a thousand brave men - Argentinian and British would still be alive. Yet we think they are too expensive!
wtf? if you make an unarmed and gunned boat, then it can sink with a barrage of bullets on the water level, and why make it unarmoured it would be more like a trnasportable british airways runway, sure its cheaper but slightly pointless, defence has saved britian for hundreds of years.
Yet take heart because Britain will once again be in the large deck carrier business once construction is complete on the new Queen Elizabeth class CVFs. Lets pray that we never have to use them in anger though.
What happened to the navy in the 70's? Well the former colonies realised it was better to manufacture their own raw materials than to send them to us only to sell them back again. Britain was in a painful process of re organizing its industry to take this into account. There were more important things to spend money on at home and the military had be geared to fight in europe agains the Warsaw Pact. The carriers were an unfortunate victim.
Nice real nice such a shame we lost those big carriers, my father served on the Ark in the 1950's so it was Scimiters and Vixens and Buccaners. well at least she's back in service in pixel form nice one!
Its a heart warming glow to hear all the stories from ex RN members too, I was only 5 years old when they scrapped her, but did get to go onboard a year before when my father was serving on her. A ship like that sticks with you.
Absolutely beautiful, and very well made. Decided to emigrate, this country isnt what it used to be anymore. Three events that symbolise that are scrapping Concorde, scrapping TSR2 and scrapping Ark Royal IV. This country's place in the world and its ability to defend its place was no better defined than by this ship - the petty MoD wouldnt even allow it to be turned into a museum. And we have a Labour government to thank for all three.
To be honest the Sea Harrier was better suited to the conflict than the Phantom. However, having the Bucaneer fleet in the South Atlantic would have made a big difference with their bombing capabilities. The ultimate capability in the conflict would have been a carrier the size of Ark Royal with the Harriers. However, it must be remembered that the main problem in the Falklands was a shortage of aircraft rather than carrier capacity.
Beautiful video, very remisnicent of "BBC's Sailor" :) Good to see that Ian got his "perfect" Ark Royal. No doubt the DSB, RNV, RAFv Ark Royal experience had provided a small measure of background test & capabilities.
The Falkland's might not have even happened had they not scrapped the Ark. Blame politicians for that genius move, and then moving Endurance away from the South Atlantic....that certainly didn't send the right signals to Argentina, did it.
I imagine Argentinas Military top brass were too professional and knowledgeable to have incurred the wrath of the mighty Ark Royal. I have no doubt the war would not have happened and many many lives would have been spared. She should have been refiited and kept in service.
Love the video. It's a shame we scrapped our fixed-wing aircraft carriers. It would have been interesting if the Ark Royal was still in service when the Falklands conflict broke out.
The current HMS Ark Royal is R07. The previous Ark Royal as depicted here had the pennant number R09.
timzsta 3 years ago
H.M.S Ark Roayl is RO7 Not RO9
Plopnose 3 years ago
and it is rather hard to believe somewhat that the ship preceding this one, the ark royal of WW2 sunk in 41, had a 72 plane airgroup and was intended for that size of a airgroup while the next in line illustrious, was onyl designed for 36 airccraft
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
Yeah but this one carried bigger and heavier jet aircraft and such.
theredraven 3 years ago
i know but i was talking about the H.M.S. Ark royal sunk in 1941
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
ilustrious was by wars end carrying 57 aircraft: 36 cosairs and 21 avengers. Maybe the size of the aircaft vs the smaller sizes of the aircaft of ark royal at the time had something to do with it. oh and also both had armoured decks, maybe illustrious had more armour affecting aircaft numbers.
pramboy74 3 years ago
yea, but that was on both the deck and in the hanger, Ark royal of 41 could carry 72 just in its hanger
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
what song is this, just teh name plz?
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
Rod Stewart's Saiing. Its the theme song of a BBC documentary starting this ship during the 1970s. It was also very popular during the Falklands in 1982.
aarvark9999 3 years ago
yea, sketchy told me that about 1 1/2 months ago
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
Where can i download this??? Please help
twistor96 3 years ago
This is absolutely brilliant!
Where can I get this scenery please?
George Said
Malta GC
saidg001 3 years ago
Nice video... Nice tribute to Britian's last REAL AIRCRAFT CARRIER...
Jerry01966 4 years ago
My mate served on this ship in the 60s, I reckon he'll love this vid.
blert88 4 years ago
Sweet clouds @ 1:30 - looks real. Unfortunately today and even more so in future, super carriers are extremely vulnerable to even 3rd rate hostile militaries.
Much dif than the old days.
You need to dedicate huge proportion of defence spending in future just to escort these things, and operate the enhanced battle group.
Maybe alternative solutions exist not yet studied?
gigisup 4 years ago
but supercarriers can easily bring peace to conflict zones, was proven over in south china sea, hostilities were brewing, us sent just 2 supercarriers, hostilities ended once they entered south china sea
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
Sort of. Are you talking about future UK carriers deploying independently as strike groups, or US carrier strike groups (possibly acting in co-deployment)?
I actually had a friend who was Navigator officer aboard one of the LA class subs participating in that carrier show of force you spoke of.
Times have changed though and will continue to change over the next 10+ yrs, demanding $unprecedented$ escort/tech as part of carrier ops.
UK could better deploy funds, imo.
gigisup 3 years ago
yea, will continue to change forever but for me one thing is certain, if there is no supercarriers, world would probably in more wars, and it would be nice to see some Queen Elizabeth carriers put into norfolk with a few Nimitzs, and if lets say another conflict starts brewing in south china sea, just send the QEs and a few Nimitzs, it would calm down right quick, and i was proven time and time again that if deployed like a convoy you need fewer ships to escort against subs and aircraft from the
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
4 carriers lets say as a example would be able to handle anything else, wether in th air, on land, or in the sea, idk how many aircraft a QE could hold, but i will say 80 each, 160 F35s from the QEs and if the american CVNs are of the Gerald R. Ford class instead, we are talking 240-280 additional F35s, so we are talking a max of 440 F35s from the combined 4 carriers, no one in their right mind would want to mess with that force right?
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
LOL, I can tell you like video games for sure m8. That would be one awesome virtual clash and I'd love to go along for the ride and see the conclusion after all the smoke cleared, cough. :)
Actually, I think the QE will hold something more along 25 F-35 each, plus helicopter and US carriers will have perhaps 24 F-35 each plus 2 squadrons of Super-Hornets... so yeah, 100 F-35 would be some major assets no doubt, but would consume massive % of UK's budget making major security threat if sunk.
gigisup 3 years ago
yea but as a example i was talking if the entire air group was F35s, but imagin aho wmnay aircraft that would come up with if 12 QEs with 80 plane air groups and 12 Gerald R. Fords meet up and attacked in one spot, 960 from the QEs, and 1680, and for the gerald r fords that is also max air group for 12 of them, cause they can carry up to 140 aircraft each, but 2640 stealth aircraft is a force you do not want to mess with
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
and thye alwyas have a thick defense to get through and most modern carriers have upwards of a foot of armor on us supercarriers, and upwards of half a foot on others
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
and that would be a awesome clash, and i do liek video games but i dont have much time anymore to play them
HUNDLEYGUY95 3 years ago
my dad served on her during the 70's anyone know how I could get in contact with anyone else that served.he was a radar tech for the phantoms and was chief petty officer I believe. goes by the name of Tim Wilson
delaner24 4 years ago
6000th view haha.
meercat666 4 years ago
Had the RN had a carrier (or 2) like this old Ark, the Falklands conflict would probably never had happened, as foolish men wouldn't have risked war against a fleet so equiped. Over a thousand brave men - Argentinian and British would still be alive. Yet we think they are too expensive!
richrainbow 4 years ago
wtf? if you make an unarmed and gunned boat, then it can sink with a barrage of bullets on the water level, and why make it unarmoured it would be more like a trnasportable british airways runway, sure its cheaper but slightly pointless, defence has saved britian for hundreds of years.
shanehayman 4 years ago
The greatest warship the R.N. will ever have.
These new ships are unarmoured, slow unarmed and will only be able to use v.s.t.o.l aircraft with reduced range and payload.
Very poor shadows of the mighty Ark
matt010565 4 years ago
Yet take heart because Britain will once again be in the large deck carrier business once construction is complete on the new Queen Elizabeth class CVFs. Lets pray that we never have to use them in anger though.
Caspian237 4 years ago
What happened to the navy in the 70's? Well the former colonies realised it was better to manufacture their own raw materials than to send them to us only to sell them back again. Britain was in a painful process of re organizing its industry to take this into account. There were more important things to spend money on at home and the military had be geared to fight in europe agains the Warsaw Pact. The carriers were an unfortunate victim.
Caspian237 4 years ago
That nearly brought a tear to my eye. What happened to the Navy in the 70's? Thanks Callaghan......!
31oooh 4 years ago
Nice real nice such a shame we lost those big carriers, my father served on the Ark in the 1950's so it was Scimiters and Vixens and Buccaners. well at least she's back in service in pixel form nice one!
logbasher 4 years ago
Thanks for all the comments on the video all!
Its a heart warming glow to hear all the stories from ex RN members too, I was only 5 years old when they scrapped her, but did get to go onboard a year before when my father was serving on her. A ship like that sticks with you.
sketchy74 4 years ago
Absolutely beautiful, and very well made. Decided to emigrate, this country isnt what it used to be anymore. Three events that symbolise that are scrapping Concorde, scrapping TSR2 and scrapping Ark Royal IV. This country's place in the world and its ability to defend its place was no better defined than by this ship - the petty MoD wouldnt even allow it to be turned into a museum. And we have a Labour government to thank for all three.
geoff705 4 years ago
why?
foxhoundleeds 4 years ago
To be honest the Sea Harrier was better suited to the conflict than the Phantom. However, having the Bucaneer fleet in the South Atlantic would have made a big difference with their bombing capabilities. The ultimate capability in the conflict would have been a carrier the size of Ark Royal with the Harriers. However, it must be remembered that the main problem in the Falklands was a shortage of aircraft rather than carrier capacity.
mbarratt27 4 years ago
Absolutely Brilliant! Beautifully done.
It was a bad day, when we lost those carriers, and that sort of air power...
TFC001 4 years ago
Superb work fellers... Hope you get round to Eagle/Hermes/Centaur for us Sea Vixen fetishists. Once again, tremendous job.
llanbo 4 years ago
Beautiful video, very remisnicent of "BBC's Sailor" :) Good to see that Ian got his "perfect" Ark Royal. No doubt the DSB, RNV, RAFv Ark Royal experience had provided a small measure of background test & capabilities.
Well done guys.
P.S. HMS Victorious, Hermes etc?
Yuknohoo 4 years ago
That was brilliant! Well done!
garethmurtagh 5 years ago
The Falkland's might not have even happened had they not scrapped the Ark. Blame politicians for that genius move, and then moving Endurance away from the South Atlantic....that certainly didn't send the right signals to Argentina, did it.
cw28pn 5 years ago
I imagine Argentinas Military top brass were too professional and knowledgeable to have incurred the wrath of the mighty Ark Royal. I have no doubt the war would not have happened and many many lives would have been spared. She should have been refiited and kept in service.
matt010565 4 years ago
Love the video. It's a shame we scrapped our fixed-wing aircraft carriers. It would have been interesting if the Ark Royal was still in service when the Falklands conflict broke out.
andrewuk184 5 years ago
Thank you for posting this, it would be great if in time, other carriers get done (HMS Eagle)
P.
peterjayy 5 years ago
I would love to get the Eagle up there soon too! Thanks for posting your comment!
sketchy74 5 years ago
Hiya skatchy - brilliant video you have there - very moving. Where can I get this scenery?
wahaya2 4 years ago
Never mind, I found it. However, can I also ask where I can get the buccaneer model you used in this vid?
wahaya2 4 years ago
how did you get the planes and carrier?
KerRodDave 4 years ago