Illustrious Handover '82

[@davidrendall2461]

Lusty showing off there, Invincible had been at sea for months and was down to one prop. Lusty comes steaming in straight from the builders, clean hull, two props going full chat and says she saluted Invincible with that drive by. Thats one word for it.

[@MikeS-ear2ear]

My Dad is there on HMS Bristol. 👍🏻

[@Chrispy1976]

My Dad went out on the Illustrious with his squadron, and my Uncle came back from the Falklands conflict on the Invincible, I love seeing these two ships together when they handed over, my Dad kept lots of official photos of it. Thank you for sharing :o)

[@sgb1960]

Thanks. Most of the comments are negative from Argentine conspiracy theorists who firmly believe Invincible was sunk during the conflict!

[@efeunoalot]

@@sgb1960 I don't believe she was sunk but I'd like to know what happened on May 30, because our Pilots have always said the same (UK said 4 different versions), and looking your video I see a big difference between an aircraft carrier and a frigate. Regards

[@estellemelodimitchell8259]

One of the carriers is like an elite athlete overtaking the other, an older athlete without breaking a sweat.

[@bungy007]

wow! happy memories of a great victory for the RN. I was a member of the Captain's Office with First Sea Lord Jock Slater as our skippet on HMS Illustrious on this trip and well remember the drive by and handover from our sister HMS Invincible. what is all thus guff that 'Lusty' was hit by the argies?

[@efeunoalot]

Oh.. didn't you asked Prince Andrew, Lynda Cash (Brian Cash), Richard Farrand, or any other guy on Invincible at Malvinas??

[@geraldashton8589]

They all went to the breakers too soon.

[@henryvagincourt]

Great ships, HMS Plymouth myself.

[@showbizpersonality802]

Cor, that brings back memories ... I have the full uncut film on VHS over an hour long ... should I dig it out?

[@davebrundle7846]

yes

[@TheStuartbush]

yes please, I was on Bristol

[@kendonian357]

Send me a copy!!!

[@Semajsenrab72]

Yes

[@mariacornwallis1602]

Look, there is no damage to the Invincible.

[@T66ORA]

Great memories,thanks for sharing

[@jasonrushton5991]

MAGNIFICENT, Thank-You All !!!

[@gordonchapman222]

Great coverage, thanks for sharing Steve. I served 2 and a half years on the Hermes, then later 2 and a half years on the Illustrious joining her in Tyneside. I remember the above quite well, except I can't remember if it was the Hermes or Invincible sail bys (we did both) that we had a potato fight across the water. Think it was the Hermes, she looked so badly rusted up. Thanks again, formally known as George Chapman MEM(L)

[@sgb1960]

Gordon Chapman we sailed past Hermes before we left Uk waters. Invincible sail past was down south at the hand over.

[@gordonchapman222]

@@sgb1960 Thanks Steve, it's weird thinking about it now after all these years

[@sgb1960]

@@gordonchapman222 Still seems like yesterday. I've joined the Illustrious Association and there is an Illustrious 1982 facebook page if you want to reminisce further...

[@sgb1960]

@@gordonchapman222 facebook.com/groups/154583537946822/

[@geoffsmith9924]

Joined her in Wallsend. As a LMEM(L) Happy days

[@Navymedic82]

I was on board Invincible this vidio is correct

[@efeunoalot]

Mrs. Cash, what did you mean when you said you suffered postraumatic stress disroder because you have to deal with seriously injured servicemen at Invincible?? Thanks in advance. Kind regards.

[@stefanseniuk339]

I would love to know exactly how much the Royal Navy has shrunk in the last 27 years????

[@ScienceChap]

A. Lot. They deployed south with, I believe, more escorts than we now have in total.

[@Akm72]

In terms of carrier air power the RN is actually (finally) increasing in power as the QE class becomes operational and as the number of F-35Bs slowly increases over the next decade. Area air defence is difficult to measure. In 1992 we had 12 Type 42 destroyers compared to the 6 Type 45s we have today. However each Type 42 could only guide missiles towards two targets simultaneously and the reload sequence of the missile launcher seems to require 15 to 20 seconds (not official, just derived from watching video of it in operation). One Type 45 can fire 8 missiles in 10 seconds and guide 16 missiles towards 16 different targets simultanously* so, while we definately should have built all 12 Type 45s as planned, there hasn't actually been a reduction in overall capability. Anti-submarine warfare is also difficult to measure. In 1992 we still had all 14 Type 22 frigates and were in the process of building 10 new Type 23 frigates while disposing of the remaining 6 Type 21 frigates and the converted dozen or so Leanders. In the post cold war period we peaked at about 20 modern frigates in service. About 15 of those ships had the Type 2031 towed sonar for long range passive surveillance in deep water. Today we have only 13 Type 23 frigates of which only 8 have towed sonar arrays. However the Type 2087 is said to be a much better set capable of using active sonar to find submarines in noisy litoral zones as well as long range passive surveillance in deep water. *I have also seen the number thirty-two claimed for number of missiles that can be guided simultaneously, however I prefer to use the lower number.

[@robmainwaring2276]

Yup, Illustrious first deployment NOT Invincible

[@kintore2003]

Well I guess that puts an end to the Argie claim that they sunk Vinci.

[@sgb1960]

👍

[@mariacornwallis1602]

El 30 de mayo de 1982, en un último esfuerzo desesperado por cambiar el rumbo de la guerra a favor de Argentina, la armada argentina intentó atacar al grupo de trabajo británico con su último misil Exocet. La Fuerza Aérea intentó aprovechar la gloria, cometiendo cuatro A-4 Skyhawks. El ataque fue un fracaso. El Exocet falló, dos de los Skyhawks fueron derribados. Los dos restantes intentaron bombardear el HMS Avenger pero fallaron. Sin embargo, los ardientes nacionalistas argentinos están convencidos de que uno de los dos portaaviones británicos fue alcanzado ese día. Los británicos supuestamente lo han encubierto para robarle a Argentina su momento de "gloria". Curiosamente, la maquinaria de propaganda argentina afirmó haber hundido el HMS Invincible en seis ocasiones distintas durante la guerra. Cualquiera que tenga tiempo en sus manos puede consultar Wickipedia para ver cuándo se desmanteló el HMS Invincible en 2005. Se proponen fantásticas teorías de conspiración para explicar este defecto cegadoramente obvio (que el barco que afirman está en el fondo del Atlántico Sur sirvió en la Marina Real, incluida la guerra de Bosnia). No se ofrece absolutamente ninguna evidencia para justificar esta teoría, pero eso no impide que los argentinos exijan que los británicos demuestren que ella no estaba hundida. Sí, es cierto que los británicos tienen que proporcionar pruebas de que los argentinos no hundieron un barco que fue dado de baja el 3 de agosto de 2005. No podrías escribir comedia como esta ...

[@dean1039]

Why is it we could afford such power before the EU, but post Maastricht and integration we can't. Connection?

[@Akm72]

While certainly better than nothing the Invincible class CVS and Sea Harrier FRS.1 don't actually represent a lot of power. Good enough for ASW in the North Atlantic but that is primarily a defensive task rather than global power projection.

[@brucass93]

No

[@MrHws5mp]

We couldn't afford it on the existing defence budget then. Pre-Falklands, the plan was to sell Invincible to Australia. After the Falklands that was cancelled and the RN got a massive budget increase that lasted until the end of the Cold War and the calls for a 'peace dividend' started.

[@claudiojaviertajan1024]

@@MrHws5mp nada es invencible si se lo ataco es por que no tenian buena defensa o subestimaron a mis compatriotas

[@MrHws5mp]

@@claudiojaviertajan1024 Not sure what your point is, but yes, nothing is 'invincible', and the RN definitely proved to have serious gaps in it's defences. The Argentinian Air Force and Naval Air Arm put up the best show they could under difficult circumstances and showed themselves to be very brave and skillful.

[@ProteussTresher]

1981

[@gordonchapman222]

1982

[@j.boylan3343]

2021.

[@jimburden5113]

What's with the music? American aircraft carrier would sink that rust bucket in a minute

[@paulmarchant9231]

Have a job.... We scrapped it years ago

[@stefanseniuk339]

But it's not designed to fight US carriers, anyway no matter how much bigger the US Navy is, it's still not as cool..the RN is just a class above the rest when it comes to style...

[@garwhittaker3743]

Jim Burden ...You are they exact type of person most military personnel from the US are very embarrassed about ..

[@Sonofdonald2024]

Sad little troll lol

[@dean1039]

Why would Britain be at war with America. They were never designed to fight the United States, they were designed to defeat the likes of Argentina, which they did rather well.

[@mariacornwallis1602]

El 30 de mayo de 1982, en un último esfuerzo desesperado por cambiar el rumbo de la guerra a favor de Argentina, la armada argentina intentó atacar al grupo de trabajo británico con su último misil Exocet. La Fuerza Aérea intentó aprovechar la gloria, cometiendo cuatro A-4 Skyhawks. El ataque fue un fracaso. El Exocet falló, dos de los Skyhawks fueron derribados. Los dos restantes intentaron bombardear el HMS Avenger pero fallaron. Sin embargo, los ardientes nacionalistas argentinos están convencidos de que uno de los dos portaaviones británicos fue alcanzado ese día. Los británicos supuestamente lo han encubierto para robarle a Argentina su momento de "gloria". Curiosamente, la maquinaria de propaganda argentina afirmó haber hundido el HMS Invincible en seis ocasiones distintas durante la guerra. Cualquiera que tenga tiempo en sus manos puede consultar Wickipedia para ver cuándo se desmanteló el HMS Invincible en 2005. Se proponen fantásticas teorías de conspiración para explicar este defecto cegadoramente obvio (que el barco que afirman está en el fondo del Atlántico Sur sirvió en la Marina Real, incluida la guerra de Bosnia). No se ofrece absolutamente ninguna evidencia para justificar esta teoría, pero eso no impide que los argentinos exijan que los británicos demuestren que ella no estaba hundida. Sí, es cierto que los británicos tienen que proporcionar pruebas de que los argentinos no hundieron un barco que fue dado de baja el 3 de agosto de 2005. No podrías escribir comedia como esta ...