Not sure if these should be in this section or history, but here goes. The video clip is of Phantoms and Buccaneers landing on HMS Ark Royal c.1976. It is apparently an excerpt from a very popular 1970s documentary on Ark Royal called Sailor. Ark Royal (IV) was the RN's last fixed-wing carrier and was retired in 1978.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5lpja_ark-royal-traps_tech

The audio clip is made up of recordings from the intercom system on the Type 42 destroyer HMS Glasgow, from the day she was hit by a bomb during the Falklands War. Luckily the bomb did not explode and went through one side of the ship and out the other. Glasgow was however out of action for the remainder of the war and returned to the UK for repairs.

http://ia310809.us.archive.org/3/items/Hms...Bombed_64kb.mp3

That video was great! Thanks, Baboon! Planting a Phantom on a small British carrier is NOT for the faint of heart.

Golly good old man! that's a cracker of a video!

Upon reflection, riding behind a nervous pilot trying to make his first trap on a small Brit carrier can't be very happy-making either.

I had some fun a few years back "playing" with the 1970s RN. This article details the principal warships and their equipment which existed in that time period, then suggests some might-have-beens.

I remember watching the show the first time round. Spent many happy hours building model Ark Royals out of old Jaffa cake boxes. I think its where the modelling bug (as well as the belly) comes from.

To be fair and since nobody has said anything, the Sea Harrier is the last fixed wing carrier-capable aircraft.

Okay, Ark Royal was the last CTOL carrier then!

Thanks, I was looking for that article on my hard drive the other day but couldn't find it and couldn't remember where I had saved it from!

I know this question has been asked many times before on various forums but why did the RN keep Ark Royal in service instead of Eagle? Eagle was apparently in much better condition and still had defensive armament (4x2 4.5-inch mounts and 6 Seacat launchers); Ark Royal's armament had been removed during a refit in the 60s. Would the rest of Eagle's armament have had to be removed to enable her to operate Phantoms?

If you go back just a few years from 1970, around 1964-66, the RN had quite a formidable carrier force, with Eagle, Ark Royal, Victorious and Hermes in the strike role (with Sea Vixens and Buccaneers-landing them on Hermes must have been interesting- plus Wessex ASW helos and Gannet AEW aircraft) and Albion and Bulwark as commando carriers (each capable of carrying a RM Commando and a squadron of Whirlwind or Wessex helicopters to take the troops ashore).

http://www.btinternet.com/~a.c.walton/navy/rn-cv3.html

EDIT: there was also Centaur for part of that period (with Sea Vixen, Gannet and Wessex).

Buccaneer launching from Eagle, 1966- how do like that angle of attack!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKKah5mTTE

Aircraft from Ark Royal at Vieques weapons range, Puerto Rico, 1976

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mN_jsBxVt0&NR=1

IIRC Ark was modernised to take the Phantom and funds were cut by the time Eagle's turn was up, so she was written off. Although on paper and on the looks side, they looked great, it was a paper tiger force, hampered by smaller than optimal carriers and technology that was leaping ahead, and IMO the RN did a diservice to itself fighting with the RAF over TSR.2 and ensuring no money was available for either TSR.2 or new carriers, but this last may have been killed by Polaris.

Take a look at the Phantom flyby at about 4:14, is it actually ripple firing SNEB's (or whatever)?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mN_jsBxVt0&NR=1

shane

True, there were some rather silly mistakes and pointless infighting, as well as the cuts by the Labour government, but it was still a force second only to the US Navy, and far ahead of anyone else.

<shameless self promotion>
An excellent source of information.
</shameless self promotion>


That's pretty much the reason behind it. Ark was due for a refit but Eagle had just been through one just before the Phantom decision was made. If they'd have updated Eagle instead of Ark they would have had to either do without a large carrier for a couple of years or do a minor refit on Ark (no Phantoms - just to keep it going) first.

Bloody good videos there man.

Really sad we don't see that from the UK any more.

And it's all more or less gone at this point.

The Flatiron had a tailwheel for that reason.

Also, the beards on some of the crew are startling for an American!

Senior enlisted onboard US Navy Ships (and I think officers) could wear beards for a time, certainly back in the 80s. Zumwalt allowed that but a later admiral put a stop to it.

I read somewhere that while beards were permitted in the USN, they had to be full-grown; the "in-process" phase where it looked thin and scraggly was a no-go. For all practical purposes, the sailor that wanted a beard had to "disappear" until it was full. This sounds like a " back-door"prohibition, making growing one more trouble than it was worth.

Even then, I'm sure a lot of officers and CPOs were able to express disapproval while officially allowing beards; kind of like the hassle one can get carrying an exposed sidearm in an official "open-carry" jurisdiction.

Great video although the guy that went through 4 bolters and a wave-off wouldn't like to be reminded...

IIRC, they all had to come off for the Falklands, since flash hoods (or those of the time) wouldn't fit properly. I imagine there was some mirth as the matlows had to shave off splendid beards whilst paras etc retained their muttonchops and droopy moustaches (it was not a good look )

That's interesting; I thought the RN was always big on anti-flash gear and would have made allowance for beards. Most vids and photos I've seen of the RN at action stations showed crewmembers wearing anti-flash hoods and gloves. For that matter, I've wondered why the USN didn't mandate anti-flash gear.

I thought it was for respirators, not flash hoods.

ASFAIK, the USN did, and I have seen footage of it use, but the mandate observed often in the breach, I am told.

What is most often seen, and done, is to wear clothing with sleeves and top collar buttons fastened and trouser legs stuffed into socks.
In my limited time at sea, I never saw RN type flash protection in the USN. Never served in an enclosed magazine, mount or turret, however, where gunners and ammo/propellant handlers might have had spl gear.

Could be. It was just as I joined, so my memory of what other people were having to do is reduced by what I was putting up with at the time!

Article on beards in the RAN, I would think this applies to the RN too:

http://www.gunplot.net/regoffice/index.php?itemid=5

First two episodes (don't know if there are more) of a BBC documentary from 1983 called Submarine, about HMS Warspite during Exercise Ocean Safari, in which she played the part of an "Orange" (Soviet) submarine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF0zcOHK2lI...feature=related

Confirmed, at least from my present-day experience as a bearded British naval type. A beard doesn't interfere with anti-flash at all (I don't really see how it could?) but I can't get a good enough respirator seal to pass the test. It passes the "hand over the air inlet" rough test, but not the "simulated agent in a tent" test. I suspect it affects breathing apparatus performance too and I get a little less air time than I would clean shaven.

Here's a clip of Sea Vixens and Buccs on Eagle from a '60s documentary......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKKah5mTTE...F47&index=7

There was a series on Uk ITV a cuple of years ago on HMS illustrious, showing ops vs the baddies in Afghanistan, which I'm sure is available on line somewhere

Dave

I took time to watch the "Submarine" episodes last night, and what I found interesting was the use of English measurements on an English ship ( ). I thought metric would have been used, in the '80s. The heavy smoking shouldn't have been a surprise, since the "No-smoking" jihad hadn't gotten started yet*. What surprised me though, was the palm-down salute that was used at the promotion ceremony in Episode 2; I thought the palm-forward salute was more the Brit style (or is it a service thing?). The use of an auto cassette player as depicted during the church service was startling. Was that a submariner improv, or was money that tight during construction? Seeing what the crew had for entertainment/recreation, I can see how modern tech gives crews many more resources for passing the time--Several weeks in a steel tube has to be stressful from simple monotony.

*As a lifelong non-smoker, I wouldn't miss the smoke at all, though.

The Royal Navy has traditionally used the palm down salute, unlike the Army and Air Force.

That's what I gathered; thanks for confirming.

What was the context?

Thanks to the convenient fiction of 1 nautical mile = 2000yds a lot of of navigation is done in yards for the easy maths.

The control crew was using yards, miles and feet in their professional conversation. And you're right; "2000yd=1nm" is much easier to work with than "1970yd= 1nm".

That's one of the things that annoys me about StrategyPage; the way they intermingle English and metric; I have to pull out my pilot's "whiz wheel" to figure conversions. It would be simpler if they would stick with one* and give the other in parentheses.

*English, natch; I'm one of those backward Colonials.