March 23, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Italian MMI Giuseppe Garibaldi vs Spanish Armada Principe de Asturias.
Both are flagship of their navy and both entered in service during the cold war.
Both carring AV-8B Harrier.
What do u think about this ‘baby’ carriers?
Which one do you prefer and why?
Did they involve in true operation?
MMI Giuseppe Garibaldi

Armada Principe de Asturias

By: Gladius - 28th June 2006 at 23:47
Are you sure it is possible to build a bigger carrier for 300 million Euros, I think that is now impossible and have my doubts that it can be done for less than 900 million and probably more. Consider the Cavour has not yet entered service and currently stands at 1.4 billion Euro although that is slightly larger than all of the above.
The budget aproved for the Strategic Projection Ship (27.000 T.) is 360 Million € nothing else.
Obviously the BPE is not an Aircraft Carrier as it. The spanish BPE is an LHD with Skyjump for the AV-8B+ and F-35B, with standard capacity of 10 AV-8B+/F-35B & 10-12 SH-3/NH-90. (Max. Capacity: 30 under deck + 6 operating over deck).
The BPE is not comparable to the italian Cavour, since he is an STOVL Aircraft Carrier with a minimal amphibious capacity, whereas the main roll of the BPE is the projección of spanish Marines and Army. For that reason its dock for 4 LCM-1E/LCM-8 & 6 RHIBs, the two garages for vehicles (up to 46 MTBs and a hundred of IFVs), its capacity for more than thousand troops, it four spots for Chinooks on the deck and one for the Osprey, if the tillrotor were ordered by Spain…
By: European - 1st May 2006 at 17:31
By: Neptune - 1st May 2006 at 16:03
Can’t see the pic, but compared to tankers they’re still only moderate in size. Everything is relative.
By: European - 1st May 2006 at 15:04
USS H. Truman and MM Garibaldi during Nato operation ‘Majestic eagle 2004’.
![]()
USS carriers are huge 😮 😮 😮
By: European - 1st May 2006 at 01:15
Maybe you are confusing somethink. Operation ‘Strong Resolve 2004’ never happened.
It was in 1998 and 2002.
This story of a lacked of stability of GG it seems to appear only in some spanish military forum. It was never confirmed from official source that PdA or Nimitz covered GG during Nato exercices.
Sorry, but I doubt it can be true. :p
GG has been developed to operate planes and chopper at his max speed of 30 knots. GG operates Harrier in Afghanistan (Indian ocean).
Max speed for PdA is 25 knots.
GG has been also in Baltimore, Maryland (USA) acrossing Atlantic sea.
http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil/dvic_view/still_search.cfm?StartRow=1&maxrows=50&caption=SH-3%7CUH-3H%7C%22Sea%20King%22
By: Demon_82 - 30th April 2006 at 13:31
Demon_82, could you post the source, please?
It seems so strange. 😮
Sadly the articles I find about it are in web pages that require paid subscription, I’ll try to fin them another day in some free site. The most recent reference to this matter appears to be during the Strong Resolve 2004, in the Atlantic Ocean, three carriers had one zone to cover each one, and the Giuseppe Garibaldi wasn’t able to launch CAP flights due to the rough sea condition and the Principe de Asturias and one Nimitz had to launch more flights to cover the Italian ship zone.
It all has to do with the origin of the ship, the Italian one was at first intended as a ASW cruiser, to operate in the more quiet Mediterranean sea, and stability got less care than it should. It carries more weaponry and more soldiers than the Spanish ship, but a carrier role is to carry aircrafts and to operate them. The Spanish ship, in contrast, was designed from the ground as a pure light carrier, and it can support the rough sea better because it was taken into consideration to operate in the open ocean, not only into the closed sea. This also implies that the Spanish ship can carry more aircrafts, due to no lost space in missile launchers and this stuff, and not havind double hull, but we don’t have enough aircrafts to fill it. At the maximum configuation, the PdA could carry nearly 30 aircrafts, but we have only 17 Harriers and not much unasigned helicopters.
By: Bager1968 - 29th April 2006 at 07:33
“Next came AV-8B II+ — AV-8B with radar (APG-65) allowing firing of radar guided air-to-air missiles; should be designated AV-8C.”
No, there is already an AV-8C… it is the USMC AV-8A with control system improvements and other upgrades. This was done in the late 1970s to keep them in service until the AV-8B came into service (the upgrade was developed after the Harrier II was designated, thus the strange sequence).
The “AV-8B+” should have been designated AV-8D… especially since the entire fuselage was replaced with a newly-built redesigned one during the “upgrade”.
Of course, as with the “Super Hornet” F/A-18E/F, the “Harrier II” AV-8B should have been designated as a completely different aircraft, as it really is one… then we would have the AV-12A (no radar) & B (APG-65) Harrier II [being designed after the Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II and its competitor the Fairchild A-11], and the F/A-24 A/B Super Hornet & EF-24C Growler [being designed after the F-22 & F-23 were already in development, but before the out-of-sequence X-32/F-32 & X-35/F-35]!
The A-12 would have then been the A-13, which would have been very fitting considering its fate!
Of course, this is all more hair-splitting babbling… feel free to ignore, laugh, or take my ramblings as the basis of a new religion… whichever strikes your fancy!
By: European - 28th April 2006 at 23:12
Demon_82, could you post the source, please?
It seems so strange. 😮
By: Demon_82 - 28th April 2006 at 22:19
I must say in favour of the Spanish ship, that in some NATO manuevers where both ships were participating, some years ago in the Mediterranean sea, the Principe de Asturias has been operating (launching and receiving aircrafts) with much worse sea conditions than the ones that the Giuseppe Garibaldi was able to, thus giving an important advantage to the Spanish ship. Adding stabilizers to the Italian ship was considered, but it was shortly scrapped, as it would have required too much structural changes to the ship.
By: European - 26th April 2006 at 17:42
Thanks for the info Pilatus,
I dont see the flag :rolleyes:
Anyway,
very nice pictures. 🙂
More opinion about PdA and GG? 😀
By: pilatus - 26th April 2006 at 12:35
Woowww, wonderful,
the three european carriers, PdA, GG and CdG.
The Invincible is missing?
that was not the CdG it was the ex Foch which is now the Sao Paulo and is flying the Brazilian flag!
By: pilatus - 26th April 2006 at 12:23
Woowww, wonderful,
the three european carriers, PdA, GG and CdG.
The Invincible is missing?
that was not the CdG it was the ex Foch which is now the Sao Paulo and is flying the Brazilian flag!
By: Wanshan - 14th April 2006 at 18:09
In Scramble i found this….so…..
In 1994 the Italian Navy received it’s first five Harriers. Two TAV-8B dual seat trainers were delivered to the GRUPAER at Grottaglie – Taranto while three USA built AV-8B+ aircraft remained in the USA for pilot training with the United States Marines Corps. The other 13 AV-8B+ aircraft were constructed by Alenia at Torino-Caselle and by end 1998 all 18 Harriers were delivered to the Italian Navy.
13th by end 1997, according to Boeing press release
As for first, says here they got theirs in 1989. This may be all or first. Or could be typo, in which case 1989 was erroneously inserted instead of 1998.
AV-8B Harrier II — Two versions were developed. The first was commonly known as the “Day Attack” variant (1983). Later, a “Night Attack” variant was fielded (1991). The Night Attack Harrier incorporated a Navigation Forward Looking Infrared camera (NAV FLIR) and the cockpit was made compatible with night vision goggles (NVGs). It was also able to use the larger Rolls Royce engine. The II+ described below is identical to the Night Attack variant, except it incorporates an APG-65 radar, the same as in early F/A-18 Hornets. Next came AV-8B II+ — AV-8B with radar (APG-65) allowing firing of radar guided air-to-air missiles; should be designated AV-8C.
Question: did Italy initially use AV-8B Day attack and later switched to AV-8B Plus?
By: BME330 - 14th April 2006 at 17:32
We began with 8 AV-8S/TAV-8S, in the 80´s more were delivered.
Survivors were sold with a brand new carrier, (SCS design won, GG lost)
And Boeing still says that only 20 Harriers were sold to Italy, so call them….
By: European - 14th April 2006 at 17:21
Oh Yeah, the never used 7+2 AV8S that Spain sell to Thailand. 😀
You are right, during 80’s Dedalo operates 7 AV8S.
By: swerve - 14th April 2006 at 16:02
What did Spain operate in ’76?
AV-8S Matador (AV-8A variant) to start with, flying off Dedalo , ex USN Cabot.
By: European - 14th April 2006 at 12:43
What did Spain operate in ’76?
By: European - 14th April 2006 at 12:42
22 av-8b+, 2 TAV-8B Two-seat trainer. 1 has been lost.
By: BME330 - 14th April 2006 at 08:47
In Scramble i found this….so…..
In 1994 the Italian Navy received it’s first five Harriers. Two TAV-8B dual seat trainers were delivered to the GRUPAER at Grottaglie – Taranto while three USA built AV-8B+ aircraft remained in the USA for pilot training with the United States Marines Corps. The other 13 AV-8B+ aircraft were constructed by Alenia at Torino-Caselle and by end 1998 all 18 Harriers were delivered to the Italian Navy.
By: Wanshan - 14th April 2006 at 08:15
Spain is operating VSTOL planes since 1976. Italy since the early 90´s?
1989 actually. (was already discussed)