Not all planes had his guncameras removed, fox example there is a lot of guncams of the IAI Daggers and Mirage IIIEA.
Rubbish…well if you want think so.
Argentines tell pilots too keep quiet, and maybe say 10 intell types. No more than 20 people know. The junta tell them their families are dead (free parachuting lesson out of Herc, no parachutes needed) if this gets out. 20 years down the line, no one would believe them anyway
hmmm…the picture sucks but this…kind X-files
You think that a right wing dictatorship threatening a very small number of military personnel to keep quiet about something is like the X-Files. but an open democracy like Britain keeping the sinking or damaging of a ship with over 1,000 men (including an heir to the throne and many journalists) on board is completely believable?
I am, unsurprisingly, inclined to agree with BDL – the conspiratorial silence of a handful of military personnel in a military dictatorship is eminently more believable than the connivance and 100% silence of probably tens of thousands of people in a liberal democracy with freedom of expression and freedom of the press (who were indeed present), not to mention an unfinished ship being miraculously finished and travelling back in time to take part.
The pilots probably genuinely believe that they hit it. Bad weather, stress, wishful thinking, having just had your oppos blown out of the sky, high approach speeds, similar-looking silhouettes, oblique approach angles, not wanting to disappoint the folks at home, et cetera. If there genuinely was no gun camera footage, then the only people that would have know for a fact if there was a hit are those on the ship, and almost everybody in the world accepts what they say.
It is, indeed, possibly one of the most contorted conspiracy theories since Elvis rode Shergar into his UFO at area 51 and went for a day trip to play golf at a Nazi base on the moon with Lord Lucan. Two very stressed fast jet pilots said so, and I believe them against all evidence to the contrary, because I really really want to.
You think that a right wing dictatorship threatening a very small number of military personnel to keep quiet about something is like the X-Files. but an open democracy like Britain keeping the sinking or damaging of a ship with over 1,000 men (including an heir to the throne and many journalists) on board is completely believable?
Let call a tie, aniway still sound ridiculous, the dictatorship only last 14 moths after the War ( even was not the War the major cause of his downfall).
Assume that they’re genuinely was no gun camera footage, do you really believe that this huge conspiracy involving thousands and thousands of people in a liberal democracy – who have all remained absolutely silent on to this day – and a time-travelling ship is more plausible than two very stressed and probably very scared people being mistaken?
Panzerknacker wrote:
the dictatorhip only last 14 moths after the War
Long enough to shredd the negatives and positives and tie up the loose ends. Who would believe it now anyway?
Even assuming there was camera gun sight footage, the pilots may still honestly believe they got Invincible.
If they were greeted by hordes of people who thought they had got her, they may not have been debreifed until a while after.
Then the spooks say “sorry cameras malfunctioned” as by this point the whole thing had got way out of control. BA is toasting its brave pilots, and the Junta are thinking about throwing a big cheese and wine evening.
Would you want to be a party pooper and say “well, actually you hit sod all”?
C-130 for one.
This is the main problem, the Argies believe it so badly that it happened. The fact there is no credible evidence to back it up doesn’t dampen their belief.
I think we may have exhausted the reasons why a whole 20000 ton carrier sinking couldnt be covered up in the UK now. Surely there is more to the conflict than this imaginary episode?
The persistent belief amongst some that she was hit despite all evidence and logic to the contrary with seem to indicate otherwise… and an attempt to declare an “draw” and thus imply that an impossible conspiracy and the fact that two pilots may have been mistaken are somehow equally valid…
But I suppose there are some people who for some reason will always want to believe something really really badly, and thus completely ignore all evidence to the contrary.
While I dont see it as at all plausible in real life, we can continue to counterpunch in this thread for ever over a supposed sinking of a ship. I dont really think there is more to add to this part of the Topic at all other than going round in circles. I can see what MOS means but until certain members here change their perspective its not going to happen.
I personnaly know an RN Sea King crewman who was on the Invincible and according to him it wasnt sunk! I tend to believe him myself.
I think that I make my point but seems I am wrong.
I dont believe any “conspiracy” teory , is not the JFK murder.
Long enough to shredd the negatives and positives and tie up the loose ends. Who would believe it now anyway?
Is possible
Even assuming there was camera gun sight footage, the pilots may still honestly believe they got Invincible.
If they were greeted by hordes of people who thought they had got her, they may not have been debreifed until a while after.
Yeah …also plausible
Then the spooks say “sorry cameras malfunctioned” as by this point the whole thing had got way out of control. BA is toasting its brave pilots, and the Junta are thinking about throwing a big cheese and wine evening.
Ughhh…you blew it, I said it before THERE WAS NO guncamera installed in those aircraft, a non existent thing cannot malfuction.
Firefly wrote:
I think we may have exhausted the reasons why a whole 20000 ton carrier sinking couldnt be covered up in the UK now. Surely there is more to the conflict than this imaginary episode
:evil: :evil: Seems that I am talking to a wall right here, nobody here ( at list no Argentine members) alleged that the Invincible was sunk.
I am starting to believe that this exagerated claims maybe are the invention of some british guy to discredit all the real argentine claims.
More likely Erwin after a beer too many…
A british Erwin.
I’m finding this thread a waste of time and with the potential of destroying the group. All that will happen is that our Argentine members will continue to believe that the Invincible was either sunk and replaced or damaged and that there is a huge conspiricy covering it up, while we will continue to explain why this would not be possible.
I appriciate that some of you have contributed explanations and theory’s as to why the Argentinians would make their claim but it is obvious that you are wasting your time, The success of the attack on the Invincible has become an act of faith for Argentinians, it needs no proof and cannot be denied it just is because that is what their history books tell them and it is what they need to believe. We may as well just go and bang our collctive heads against a brick wall.
Panzerknacker,
Three people on this site have argued long and hard from your position.
These were…
Erwin (aka sturmtruppen) from Argentina.
Irish Duck from Argentina
Arkantos from alledgedly Mexico but possibly from Argentina.
They were the ones who posted that idiotic pictures as proof.
However I must say that your info on gun cams is new.
I’ve locked this thread, for now, as like Firefly says this can only go round and round.
It is like disproving or proving Christ. The unbeliver wants solid proof, the beliver knows in their heart.
Topic open again.
Play nice.
That trio…well I think that probably the only reason for his sign-up ( wich happen long before the mine) was to bother the british members and to cause some kind of distress in this forum…quiet a reliable source
I think Erwin signed up for good reasons, the Falklands issue didn’t come up until he was asked about it directly.
Irish Duck and Arkantos probably did only come to the forum to fight their point of view. Certainly Irish Duck and Erwin have appeared on at least two other forums putting their point of view forward on the sinking of Invincible.
We all know they are very dubious sources. However, as has been stated before, the entire proof of whether she was hit or not rests purely on two pilots. Yet the entire ships company of the Invincible at that time have never given the slightest indication that she was hit.
Not forgetting all those thousands - not all British citizens, on board the rest of the ships, both RN & STUFT, who would no doubt have seen any damage to Invincible.
Yet there has NEVER been a single word from any of them.
Is there any information on what went wrong with the gun cameras on the aircraft?
It is peculiar that the cameras were not sorted out.
Is there any information on what went wrong with the gun cameras on the aircraft?
The third time I say this…the guncameras were removed from those A-4 early than the beggining off the war, I dont know why they were not replaced.