Now, what would have happened. If the Graf Zeppelin had been ready and escorted the Bismarck on her final sortie?

It would have ended its days at the bottom of the Atlantic instead of the Baltic 😮 😮 :p

Graf Zep Pics.

Great pics. Gunner, I have never seen these before, do you have any objection to me posting them on an Oz Forum

Yours in fear & loathing
Tiddles

Harps on Zac

Hi Ja
There is a pic of the HMAS Anzac with Harpoons fitted on the inside back cover of the latest Navy League Magazine ,however I am not sure on the rules re uploading pics from the magazine itself
Cheers
Tiddles

Usually true, but not necessarily. Gripen, for example, could probably cope with carrier landings without landing gear modifications.

What makes you say this. IMO It might get down OK a few times but would not last the course in the long run. The technique to landing on a carrier is more brutal than landing on an unprepared airstrip. Do Saab claim that it can, if so I will change my opinion.Although the Gripen can operate away from normal airfields ,pretty much all the road landing strip pics I have ever seen are all well paved.

anzac helos

The Anzac class can operate the Seahawk and regularly do so,it can only carry one versus two for the Perry.Our Perrys had to be lenghtened to carry the Seahawk. The Seasprites were originally sought to operate off a class of OPVs that were never built and were to form the basis of a Coast Gaurd, the Seasprite if it ever gets into operation is fitted out for mainly anti surface operation as against the Seahawk being mainly anti submarine. i agree with you both in that the Anzacs should have been a proper sized Frigate with the appropriate basic armament. Paradoxically the “big Gun” on the Anzacs is the only weapon [helos excluded] that has been used in anger by either class of ship ,it was used to help provide with RN ships accurate shelling in support of the AL Faw operation by the British early in GW2.The 76mm weapon on the Perrys seems almost like an afterthought considering its cramped position amidships.
Cheers
Tiddles

STEVE WHO??

Hehe ..unfortunately it’s the name on my birth certificate and i can’t do much about it

Hi Steve, I am also a Steve,but does it really matter what we call ourselvesup to a point. This was the first Forum that I joined & I took it for granted that all members were expected to use some sort of pseudonym that probably only meant anything to themselves,I imagine that most new members have had similar thoughts. No prizes for guessing who I named myself after. However I dont think there is room for HotLesbianBabes type of names,it is fairly harmless but it just opens the door for the sort of names that would reduce the credibility of this Forum. There are plenty of other forums that allow this sort of thing if people are determined to try those sort of psuedonyms.

Spanish Armada

Hi Scooter- I remember on the old previous LHD thread you were promoting the Spanish duo as best for OZ. It is unlikely that there will be any major changes to the F100,some small ones maybe, already it is being suggested that bigger motors ,special pollution control measures and naturally some Australian comms. & IT.will be fitted but no stretch etc. To try and now introduce the enhanced F100 design now would compromise the competition. The G&C design with the standard F100 as its alternative OTS design won the comp.with the OTS ship being eventually selected. Both Navantia & B&V had enhanced versions of their basic ship entered in the comp. with the basic as the OTS alternative. An OTS alternative was mandatory under the Kinnaird Report requirements for military comps. to avoid some of our procurement mistakes.Good result I think, this ship may not be the one the RAN really wanted but it is about right for a mid size Navy and is already in service and seemingly working well.
I initially liked the Mistral LHD as it is up and running ,but people with contacts on OZ Forums have suggested that all this has shown is how bad it .is.The Navantia ship appears like the right decision to me.

Great Line

If they can get the ship going, at least they can say “fitted for, but not with” about the aircraft 😉

LOL:D 😀 😀 😀 😀 Great line but probably true,definately taking it to the extreme 😀 The other saying also probably appropriate is “Space & weight allowed for” or somthing like that ,it applied to our ANZAC Frigates for a long time,but an AC dear oh dear!