Tuesday, September 11th 2012 - 05:19 UTC

Air carrier HMS Ark Royal sold for scrap metal for £ 3 million

Aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal is being sold for £3m for scrap metal by the Ministry of Defence to help tackle a multi-billion pound defence deficit. The removal of the Royal Navy's former flagship from service in 2011, five years early, was a “difficult but necessary decision”, the MoD has said.

The removal takes place five years ahead of schedule; leaves the UK with no fixed wing air carriers

Its sale follows bids to turn the ship into a London heliport, a dive site off Devon or other facilities overseas. An announcement on its future will be made in Parliament. More details about the deal are expected to be released during that announcement.

The MoD said the “new, much larger” Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers would start to enter service in 2017.

Sister ship HMS Invincible was also sold for scrap last year to a Turkish scrap metal firm.

The Ark Royal - which was in service for 25 years - was put up for sale on the Ministry of Defence's edisposals.com website, which sells off kit to raise money to equip the armed forces with everything from aircraft to clothing.

The ship, which led the UK's naval forces during the invasion of Iraq, is the fifth vessel to carry the name - the first saw battle in 1588 against the Spanish Armada.

The decision to bring forward its decommissioning was criticised because it leaves the Navy without the capacity to launch fixed-wing aircraft until replacements are brought in.

But the MoD said last year that it had access to “a range of international bases which allow us to project our air power around the world”.

The Ark Royal has been docked at Portsmouth Naval Base since it was decommissioned. One of the unsuccessful proposals had been to strip and sink the carrier for a diving site, put forward by Torbay-based dive group Wreck the World.
 

36 comments Feed

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

1 DanyBerger (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 08:48 am Report abuse
Poor Brits they cannot afford to have a carrier because the huge deficit.

Once Britain a world power and now reduced to a third world country.

It is not really sad?

I feel so sorry for all theses poor people that will have to face misery, hunger and all kind of atrocities due to their greedy political elite that submerge them to the bottom of the barrel.
2 Anbar (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 09:50 am Report abuse
“Poor Brits they cannot afford to have a carrier because the huge deficit.
Once Britain a world power and now reduced to a third world country.”

If you are going to make the first post at least make SOME effort to research your point. It really is embarassing when the first post is SO badly miss-informed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth_class_aircraft_carrier

PS: MercoPress - your picture is of an OLD, already sold-off & gone Ark Royal, not the one your article is discussing.
3 RobWilliams (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 10:21 am Report abuse
@1

I'm guessing you haven't heard of the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier?

Strike air group of 36 F-35B and 4 Merlin AEW, far superior to anything we've had before (and anything any South American country can put to sea, present or future by the way)
4 Santa Fe (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 11:33 am Report abuse
haha and the wrong picture of Ark Royal..that was the old one.
3- Shhh dont tell Duny about the new supercarriers (the first one is already looking pretty impressive in dry dock)
1- Maybe its carrier envy, your mighty Veinticinco de Mayo (ex HMS Venerable) ran away back to port for the rest of the war!!! You mock the Royal Navy but you use our second hand ones jajajajajaja
5 Rufus (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 11:56 am Report abuse
It must come as a bit of a novelty to see a carrier being kept and used by the country that built it, until it is scrapped. The usual model appears to be having third-hand ships that you eventually have to cannibalize for parts to sell to your neighbours.

I can see why they confused the pictures though, given that R09 (the Audacious class fleet carrier that is pictured, scrapped in 1980) is an earlier carrier than R07 (the Invincible class light carrier that the story is about). The incautious might assume that the highest number was the newest ship...
6 briton (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 01:50 pm Report abuse
Boy,
How the poor and envious cry at night,

Never mind, we are sure your ships will last at least another hundred years,
With a bit of TLC and some selotape, sticky plaster and a band aid.

Meanwhile we great brits, have to sell of our old ones , and renew them with up to date modern carriers,.

Still,
We know you poor admirers mean well,
Lololol.
.
7 aussie sunshine (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 03:31 pm Report abuse
*3 or the Prince Of Wales.....
8 RobWilliams (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 03:35 pm Report abuse
@7

I was referring to the class of ship, rather than individual examples. Hence why I didn't use HMS Queen Elizabeth.
9 Santa Fe (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 04:49 pm Report abuse
7... Nice try fake Aussie but poster was correcttans referring to the class, google it the new carriers Look fantastic...
10 Englander (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 05:31 pm Report abuse
New and better ships in the process of being built.
No need to get upset.
11 aussie sunshine (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 05:46 pm Report abuse
but again I say why invest so much in military hardware when there is so much need in The UK at the moment and a recession ahead........
12 Santa Fe (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 06:14 pm Report abuse
11.... It's peanuts when you look at the total cost of project, we give £8 billion pounds a year to third world countries. could buy an American nuke carrier a year!!! Although the F35 planes are mega expensive, but hey you have to upgrade your defences, look what happened last time we were going to sell our carriers to Australia some tin pot country will try something on. got to carry a big stick. countries with our GDP can afford to buY the best, although our famous mod does like spending cash.
13 briton (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 06:45 pm Report abuse
then again, if argentina had not been caught commiting burglary,

we would not need extra policing would we .lol.
14 Clyde15 (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 06:48 pm Report abuse
#1
At least we have a barrel to sit in, which is more than your lot have.
Whereas we are floating in the shit, in our comfortable barrel, you are paddling desperately in it before you disappear. Glug, glug, glug
15 briton (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 06:54 pm Report abuse
apparently
the might CFK and argentina, are going to show the world, that they to can have mighty ships,

today, they have instructed [airfix industries]
for a quote for 3 carriers 20 destroyers and 30 frigates,
to be delivered by christmas .?
16 ChrisR (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 07:53 pm Report abuse
Looking at the AG ships in port and the fact that they never move, it struck me they could all be sitting on concrete and all have rotten hulls. LOL
17 briton (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 08:59 pm Report abuse
we bet they are only plastic anyway.lol.
18 RobWilliams (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 09:06 pm Report abuse
@16

Funny thing is, because of the British boycot on military goods being sold to Argentina, that means they have no supply chain for their T42 destroyer nor do they have access to spare parts for the propulsion systems of their MEKO 360H2 destroyers, because those are Rolls Royce turbines ;)

Meaning they can't run them too hard or they won't be able to run them at all.
19 ChrisR (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 09:16 pm Report abuse
18 RobWilliams

Well, they could always convert them to nuclear power, just like the Thyssen 1700s AREN'T. LOL
20 RobWilliams (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 09:24 pm Report abuse
@19

Loved that bit

“Hey, you know what would be a GREAT idea? Let's shoehorn a nuclear reactor into a hull which isn't designed to have one put in it, won't be able to actually fit in it, and has been in crates for the past 20ish years”

The fact it's not actually been built isn't the big issue, would make it easier to fit a reactor. But the point is if it wasn't build with diesel/electric propulsion because of cost, how the hell is a nuke sub going to be any cheaper?! :L
21 Malvinero1 (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 09:25 pm Report abuse
defences, look what happened last time we were going to sell our carriers to Australia some tin pot country
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! county with our GDP.......2.2 trillion P,1 1 trillion public debt,9 trillion foreign debt.....Just sell yourself santa,and pray santa,uk will need it!
22 Xect (#) Sep 11th, 2012 - 10:52 pm Report abuse
Ah Malv, about as educated as poor old danny.

They have combined about as much logic and factual knowledge as a piece of burnt toast!

LOL
23 Frank (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 01:37 am Report abuse
@9 Peronistas including RG sunshine don't understand 'class' except when used in the form 'underclass'....
24 Santa Fe (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 06:56 am Report abuse
21.... I mentioned in 1982 we were going to sell one of our invinsible class carriers to Australia.
The tin pot country i reffered to was ''Argenweena'' as you remember they made a move for the falklands, and we all know the outcome...the lost badly.

GDP UK 7th in the world vs Argentina 25th (and falling) jajajajajajajaa

hows your worthless peso????? jajajajajaja
25 DanyBerger (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 08:14 am Report abuse
@retarded

Oh! Poor guys living in fantasyland showing rendered images from a 3d software of a carrier that they don’t know if will ever have.

Is not sad?
26 Santa Fe (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 11:42 am Report abuse
www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?163878-Queen-Elizabeth-Class-Aircraft-Carriers-News-and-Discussion/page477

25 - Looks pretty real to me duny
The second one is underway as well...jajajajaja
27 briton (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 11:46 am Report abuse
It does not matter what we have,

They will always be envious and jealous of us.
.
28 Santa Fe (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 11:58 am Report abuse
25- How are the nuclear submarine conversions going in Argentina???
29 ChrisR (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 03:52 pm Report abuse
28 Santa Fe

These of course are the old Thyssen 1700s with single motor drive, which together with the dc generator will probably be the only things left from the original boat.

However, PutridJelly the so called 'Defence Minister' says it will take until 2020 to have a working example. By that time of course the original hull will be 37 YO and probably creak from all the rust weakening and the thing will be as noisy as a kettle at sea.

BTW: the Malvanistas think that having a 'nuclear' sub means they have nuclear weapons as well. You just HAVE to laugh!
30 Santa Fe (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 05:58 pm Report abuse
37... Wow they will be pretty potent boats then, a 37 year old rusting hull with a bodied nuke reactor crammed in, volunteers for the first and last cruise?...
31 ChrisR (#) Sep 12th, 2012 - 08:34 pm Report abuse
30 Santa Fe

I have every confidence that given the AG propensity to announce something, it will never happen.

But you are perfectly correct about the reactor. The Dutch builders (you didn't think it would be the AGs did you) claim it will fit the hull. What the Full Reactor Thermal Performance will be has not been disclosed, I wonder why?

When I was a child I had a meths fired boiler traction engine toy. Lovely little thing, it taught me two things:
1) Find out what you are going to do before you do it;
2) Keep your fingers off anything that had steam in it.

These are lessons that the AGs have yet to learn by the looks of it.

You have to laugh at this bunch!
32 Santa Fe (#) Sep 13th, 2012 - 11:42 am Report abuse
Trolls have gone, new orders...await final posting about Pirate Ships or Prince Harry in Vegas
33 Rufus (#) Sep 13th, 2012 - 12:07 pm Report abuse
@15 Briton

Ask and you shall receive...

Carriers: www.airfix.com/airfix-products/ships/warships/a14201-hms-illustrious-a14201/
Destroyers: www.airfix.com/airfix-products/ships/warships/a12203-type-45-destroyer-a12203/
I'm struggling for Frigates, so here's a light cruiser instead: www.airfix.com/airfix-products/ships/warships/a04212-hms-belfast-a04212/

And even better for the mad ramblings of KFC, they do nuclear powered submarines as well: www.airfix.com/airfix-products/ships/submarines/a03260-trafalgar-class-submarine-a03260/
34 ChrisR (#) Sep 13th, 2012 - 02:14 pm Report abuse
33 Rufus

Great links, I didn't know that Airfix were still trading.

Added the home page to favourites, thanks!
35 British_Kirchnerist (#) Sep 16th, 2012 - 07:57 pm Report abuse
£3million for a warship, thats peanuts. Still better NOT to have the agressive ship imho
36 Santa Fe (#) Sep 17th, 2012 - 08:31 pm Report abuse
35... an aggressive ship like the mighty 25 de mayo , a truly exceptional reverse gear...run away!!!!!!!!

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!

Advertisement

Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!