what will happen to the invincible Class carriers?

Just to clarify, and I have said this before, the Invincible class can operate the F-35B It does fit on the lifts and into the hangar, and you can put the same number of Lightnings aboard as you can Harriers. The Lightning may be twice as heavy fully loaded but it most certainly is not twice as big! It’s not a Raptor after all. According to some officers from HMS Illustrious I spoke to a couple of years ago, the only limitations are that in rough weather, the Lightning would have to loaded onto the lifts diagonally as the clearance is only a few inches! Not a real problem in the grand scheme of things. Remeber that aircraft on a carrier spend most of their time between sorties on deck, not in the hangar. The hangar is for maintenance primarily, not storage. Also aircraft are only moved down to or up from the hangar whilst empty (ie no fuel or weapons) for safety reasons. Arming and fuelling is only carried out on deck because if there is going to be an accident, you would rather it happened in the fresh air than in the enclosed confines of the hangar. On deck you might lose the aircraft, in the hangar you might lose the ship…

The Invincible class are currently quoted as having a capacity of 22 aircraft, including helicopters. Those helos are Merlins and Sea Kings, which take up as much space aboard ship as a Harrier or a Lightning, so the mix of aircraft in the air group doesn’t really affect numbers. According to the RN, although more can be carried, the optimum number of Harriers they can operate is about 14, hence in the late 90s/ early 2000s they operated an air group of 7 FA2s, 7 GR7s, 3 SK AEW2s and 4 Merlins for ASW. A useful and flexible air group, screwed up by the premature retirement of the SHAR. Most Harrier Carrier operators tend to go with a 12 aircraft sqn at sea and the Invincible class would have no difficulty taking 12 Lightnings aboard. Therefore I do see the ships as having value as part of a deal to sell F-35Bs to a potential customer as a ‘Sweetener’, ie buy the planes and we’ll throw in the carrier for peanuts (and the cost of a refit).

Israel: Yes very funny! They can strike all their potential enemies easily from home soil as it is.
Pakistan: outside chance, depends on future relations with both India (going downhill) and he USA (new best friends)
Chile: Most likely option IMHO, they have a navy large enough to support an Invincible; remember her crew requirements are only about the same as 2-3 frigates (not including air group), an expansion I suspect they could manage if they wanted to.
India: If Vikramaditya falls to pieces on her delivery voyage, expect a call from the Indian MOD!
South Africa: They might want a Mistral, but they couldn’t run an Invincible, and it doesn’t fit the requirement (no dock or landing craft, though troop carry capacity is adequate).
Australia: Already have two Canberra’s on order.
Argentina: Even if the Falklands war hadn’t happened, they want a CTOL carrier anyway for their still active air group of Super Etendards and Turbo Trackers (always thoght they would have bought FS Clemenceau in the late 90s, but their lack of money meant the French saw no prospect of a sale and made no effort to maintain her after decomissioning in 97)

So two or three possibles but nothing particularly likely. Personally I want to see Invincible preserved at her birth place of Barrow (there is a campaign ongoing as we speak) and maybe one of the others preserved at Pompey. We shall see…

Lol. Ok, it was early in the morning 😮
I tend to believe F-35B is going to cause a new interest in these carriers,
and if Osprey AEW materialize, they will be potent.

No, a jump carrier in the gulf trying to intimidate would end in a complete disaster if the surrounding countries get annoyed. You will need complete air dominance even before enter, including Hawkeye’s.

You did notice I meant it as a joke, right my friend! 😉

As has been put here before, to me the definitve “kiss of death” to selling these ships abroad really is the absolute lack of low-hour airframe Harriers to go with it…

Regards

Hammer

I’m surprised that no one here even sugested Israel as a possible client! Imagine it soon heading to the Arabian Gulf for “humanitarian & oceanographic research support” :diablo::eek:

Coments?

Hammer

No, a jump carrier in the gulf trying to intimidate would end in a complete disaster if the surrounding countries get annoyed. You will need complete air dominance even before enter, including Hawkeye’s.

The CVS’s were designed as ASW hunters. The speed needed to do that job comes at a price in the Engineering dept. They aren’t cheap ships but they are very capable.

Question is who has a need for a flat top with escort turn of speed?. Anyone who just wants a cheap through deck would, whole life, do what the Aussies did….buy a BPE off the Spanish or one of the Schelde Enforcers.

Who is out there facing an evolved submarine threat?. No-one in S.America (Argentina excepted for the obvious reason!) or in Europe. Japan builds their own, as does SK, Pakistan could have a requirement, but, couldn’t begin to assemble a battlegroup sufficient to the threat arrayed against it. Taiwan the same…even well handled the threat scenario is too great for a single baby flat-top to justify is existence in combat.

Somewhat ironically the only nation that could employ the speed of the vessel to worthwhile use, in a threat environment permissive enough that the ship and her airgroup could actually achieve something, is India!. One country that already has its quota of old and expensive to run aircraft carriers!!!.

Chile has a decades old unflinching claim to a large slice of the Antarctic continent… Can such a ship be part of a ramp up of naval capability towards a future definitive aircraft-carrier capable force? Brazil boughttha ex-Foch on such a “temp-ship” premise…

Argentina amongst all of the sugested nations above at least has a clear and long standing military strategic requirement that might significantly benefit from its navy having a light carrier with fighters…:diablo:

I’m surprised that no one here even sugested Israel as a possible client! Imagine it soon heading to the Arabian Gulf for “humanitarian & oceanographic research support” :diablo::eek:

Also China, by being the worlds largest purchaser of old CV (HMAS Melbourne, Minsk) hulls, might certanly be interested in the “engine-less” Invincible hull to turn it into another “floating casino” like the ex-Variag! :p

And South Africa in some sorte of short term lease? Or else what about a Mediterranean Navy like the ones of Algeria or Libya? Could they be interested?

Coments?

Hammer

I would be sure that the UK wouldn’t be sell to Argentina. Would Chile have the manpower to operate carrier plus air wing considering the man power to run one invincible is most of the frigate fleet and that not including pulling a fair amount of people to train in the UK or other carrier nations to pick up the skills of deck management and harriers and all the other stuff.

Israeli doesn’t have the manpower and no desire to operate something of that size it would be a white elephant and very vulnerable and target for ever anti-ship missile in the middle east.:rolleyes:

I would rule out china as it would really have anything to learn from the original harrier carrier

But south African thats interesting as a while ago they were planning on a compation between a mini mistral and that nice MHD-150 desgin for an African humanitarian ship whether they could be convinced to buy an old harrier carrier and find away to man it.

Hopefully as the CVF’s get built we find out if anyone’s interested

Chile has a decades old unflinching claim to a large slice of the Antarctic continent… Can such a ship be part of a ramp up of naval capability towards a future definitive aircraft-carrier capable force? Brazil boughttha ex-Foch on such a “temp-ship” premise…

Argentina amongst all of the sugested nations above at least has a clear and long standing military strategic requirement that might significantly benefit from its navy having a light carrier with fighters…:diablo:

I’m surprised that no one here even sugested Israel as a possible client! Imagine it soon heading to the Arabian Gulf for “humanitarian & oceanographic research support” :diablo::eek:

Also China, by being the worlds largest purchaser of old CV (HMAS Melbourne, Minsk) hulls, might certanly be interested in the “engine-less” Invincible hull to turn it into another “floating casino” like the ex-Variag! :p

And South Africa in some sorte of short term lease? Or else what about a Mediterranean Navy like the ones of Algeria or Libya? Could they be interested?

Coments?

Hammer

that reminds me has Thailand ever used its AV-8A which it got from spain as that’s an example of a Navy trying to use second hand harriers.

Possible but with the harrier poor safety record(which is hardly likely improve with cannibalized old airframes with a new user unfamiliarity with the aircraft’s quirks) their must be a large desire to get into the fixed wing aviation but with limited funds to be unable to afford any other options

Never said it was an *ideal* solution. Besides, an Invincible class ship with just helicopters might make a usefull platform for smaller navies, for ASW, antishipping, as well as anti-piracy and anti-terrorism tasks.

Yeah, but if cheap and plentyfull, that could be an option (just vet the airframes and cannibalized the remainder as needed). And available via US foreign military aid (makes a big difference for some countries).

that reminds me has Thailand ever used its AV-8A which it got from spain as that’s an example of a Navy trying to use second hand harriers.

Possible but with the harrier poor safety record(which is hardly likely improve with cannibalized old airframes with a new user unfamiliarity with the aircraft’s quirks) their must be a large desire to get into the fixed wing aviation but with limited funds to be unable to afford any other options

They will be just as worn out as the GR.9/9A’s.

Yeah, but if cheap and plentyfull, that could be an option (just vet the airframes and cannibalized the remainder as needed). And available via US foreign military aid (makes a big difference for some countries).

Chilie
GDP: $161 Billion USD

Peru
GDP: $126 Billion USD

Pakistan
GDP: $166 Billion USD
Remembering what money they have goes mainly on their army and Airforce.

How are these nations, which are badly in need of upgrading their airforces, which are still operating Naval ships from the 1960’s and 1970’s going to be able to afford to Run an invincible class aircraft carrier and the aircraft (helicopters) they require?

Beg pardon?

Chile has replaced ALL its 6 major surface combattants (2 Leanders + 4 County’s) with the afore mentioned 8 Type-22 en -23, L- and M-frigates. Respectively, these date from
Type 22: 1988
Type 23: 1984, 1986 and 1992
L-class: both 1986
M-class: 1991 and 1993.

The Peruvian Lupo’s were commissioned, respectively, 1979, 1979, 1984 and 1987. The four Lupos acquired more recently from Italy are from 1977 through 1980.

While the current PN ships are Type 21s and date from 1974-1977, these are currently in the process of being replaced by 4+ new built F22P and 1+ used FFG7 Perry class ships. A country like Pakistan gets such deals such as the McInerney (FFG8 OHP frigate) for just USD 65 million. McInerney commissioned 1979. Additional ships of this class that PN might receive all date from 1982 or later. They might get a deal like that from UK and some military aid to run it, if the US and UK find that is in their interest.

This might also apply for Taiwan, which is seeking used FFG7s to replace the 8 Knoxes it still operates. If acquired, these too would date post 1982. The next oldest in Taiwanese service are 4 Kidd DDGs dating from 1981 onward. The 8 locally built OHPs are from 1993 onward and the 6 La Fayettes are from 1996 onwards.

Note that e.g. the Turkish navy also still operates 1 Knox class ship (5 others recently retired) even as it is operating new Meko 200s and used OHPs and beginning to build its own ships domestically. Likewise, Spain only very recently (2004-2006) decommed the similar Baleares class. So, the fact that a navy today still operates 1970-era ships doesn’t say that much. Besides, while e.g. Thailand ordered 4 new ships from China in 1990, one cannot say these ships are better than e.g. the Type 21s operated by Pakistan or the Lupo’s operated by the Peruvian navy.

i do hope that someone eventually plans to make a museum ship out of one of the invincibles. after the USN, the royal navy has been the most prolific builder of aircraft carrier hardware in the world with no museum carriers preserved for posterity to show for it, which is a shame.

i would have really liked to have seen ark royal (R09) or eagle (R05) preserved; it’s a damn shame that those mighty beasts were both scrapped.

March 1973 in Peruvian service… she was laid down September 5, 1939, launched December 19, 1941, and (after being suspended during the rest of WW2, then re-designed), completed November 18, 1953, serving in the Royal Netherlands Navy until her sale to Peru.

yea yea yea (you’re talking to a Dutchman). First entered RNthN service in 1953.

GERMANY :rolleyes:

Japan would be the perfect customer if it bought these + F-35Bs + V-22

Why would Japan want them? Look at what Japan builds. Why get clapped-out old ships when it could build better new ships itself?

[Edit] I see that’s already been said. 😉

If the money was there to keep the Ark in service a bit longer it would be better spent on a lengthy refit for Ocean before the end of the decade in order to squeeze a couple more years out of her.

Yes. Ocean is much cheaper to operate.

What about all of the U.S.M.C Av8s that will be retired soon?
Could a country buy 1 or 2 invinc and U.S. harriers?

They will be just as worn out as the GR.9/9A’s.

What about all of the U.S.M.C Av8s that will be retired soon?
Could a country buy 1 or 2 invinc and U.S. harriers?

If the money was there to keep the Ark in service a bit longer it would be better spent on a lengthy refit for Ocean before the end of the decade in order to squeeze a couple more years out of her.

In case you missed it, Chile has in recent years acquired 1 Type 22, 3 Type 23, 2 L/Heemskerck and 2 M/Doorman frigates. That doesn’t create the impression of a shoestring operation.

Between 2004 and 2006, the navy of Peru has seen 4 ex-Italian Lupo frigates added to the 4 already in Peruvian service. An Invincible class ASW carrier could allow them to (finally) retire their even older steampowered ex-Dutch De Zeven Provinciën-class cruiser BAP Almirante Grau (CLM-81), which dates from 1973.

I’m sure useable SeaKings could be found (e.g. from US under FMS/FMA), in case EH-101s are too expensive.

Don’t know about the other countries, they were just examples of navies that could benefit from such a vessel.

Chilie
GDP: $161 Billion USD

Peru
GDP: $126 Billion USD

Pakistan
GDP: $166 Billion USD
Remembering what money they have goes mainly on their army and Airforce.

How are these nations, which are badly in need of upgrading their airforces, which are still operating Naval ships from the 1960’s and 1970’s going to be able to afford to Run an invincible class aircraft carrier and the aircraft (helicopters) they require?

Given the recent declarations by the OAS, I don’t see the UK selling any naval capability in that area of the world for the time being, not even to Chile.

And yes I understand support to Argentina & action on her behalf are two different things.