The Falklands thread

Woden · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:14

Slam62 said:
I didn't know any of this and indeed haven't read it anywhere else.

and of course you have very privileged access to secret US files don't you.

you think they provided an oil tanker do you, right, like we didn't have fuel oil.

how is an oil tanker going to help

bonkers post is bonkers

Argentina would have happily sunk a British supply ship. Attacking a US one would have been suicide. We stopped when we took back the islands, the Americans wouldn't.

Slam62 · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:14

Firestar_3x said:
Erm, you do know ships need fuel, yes?

not crude oil

Firestar_3x · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:15

Slam62 said:
not crude oil

A tanker has the capacity to carry more than just crude.

Jokester · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:16

Like fuel oil.

Heliospherez · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:16

Surely it would be easier for them to just ship the 2000 odd British descendants back home and set them up in the UK with a bit of money - rather than trying to go to war.

It amazes me why such a big deal is made about such a remote island - with so little of a population on it. If it's the Oil they want - let them have it..... is it really worth losing British life over again ? Who the hell would want to live there anyway ?

Strife212 · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:17

Nutella33 said:
after we threatened the french that we would nuke Argentina if they didnt give us the codes. they werent exactly pleased with handing them over as it was perceived to ruin their sales value.

The Funktopus said:
Where did you hear this? Genuine question.

Jokester said:
"codes" lol

It's true :/

daver · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:18

Time for us to press for the Paris Club to call in the Argie debt I think

Art · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:18

Heliospherez said:
Surely it would be easier for them to just ship the 2000 odd British Islanders back home and set them up in the UK with a bit of money - rather than trying to go to war.

Hardly the point though.

Who the hell would want to live there anyway ?

They do. They've lived there for a few generations, they've built the place up the way they want it and it's home to them. They're not going to want to just walk away, which is why they've stated they want to remain on the islands as British citizens.

Woden · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:18

Slam62 said:
one ship, hmm, one technical problem, no ship.....

What exactly would they attack it with? Argentina hasn't updated much of its military in 30 years. They would be lucky to get in range of the islands with anything less than an all out attack. Which they won't do, they can't afford it and the countries official line is "give peace a chance"

Firestar_3x · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:18

Art said:
Hardly the point though.

They do. They've lived there fore a few generations, they've built the place up the way they want it and it's home to them. They're not going to want to just walk away, which is why they're stated they want to remain on the islands as British citizens.

Plus it's got proven oil & gas resources, which is just another reason why it's worth keeping.

Jokester · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:20

Strife212 said:
It's true :/

The only evidence that it ever happend is from Mitterand's psychoanalyst's memoirs.

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110663

who of course was trying to sell some books. Mitterand would have just laughed at Thatcher if she threatened to nuke Argentina - it was never ever going to happen.

NathanE · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:24

"During the preparation for the war Britain benefited from the help of France, which gave the Exocet's code and homing radar."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet

Jokester · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:25

NathanE said:
"During the preparation for the war Britain benefited from the help of France, which gave the Exocet's code and homing radar."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet

Have a look at the source.

Von Smallhausen · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:30

At GAC, I don't think the UK has non nuclear subs anymore. They are all nuclear powered. Diesel electrics were retired a while back.

Firestar_3x · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:34

Von Smallhausen said:
At GAC, I don't think the UK has non nuclear subs anymore. They are all nuclear powered. Diesel electrics were retired a while back.

I think he means one which doesn't contain nuclear armed trident II missiles

Also for reference any of our subs have unlimited range, the length of time they can stay underwater and out of port is only imited by how much food you can take with you.

NathanE · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:34

Jokester said:
Have a look at the source.

Does seem to be hyperbole on second glance.

The Glamorgan clearly had enough information/tracking about the incoming missile anyway because the captain turned the ship toward the missile to prevent a side impact that would have been far more damaging.

JonnyT · 11 Feb 2012 at 13:39

To reiterate for people like Slam62:

JonnyT said:
Simply not true I'm afraid. The Americans appeared to behave very coolly towards us when we announced our intention to retake the Falklands by force - witness US Secretary of State Alexander Haig's seemingly increasingly desperate 'shuttle diplomacy' in the run up to the war - and their opinion that the war was 'unwinnable' but the reality was very different.

Firstly, while Ascension Island is technically a British Overseas Territory, it had been leased to the US as a strategic base; both for monitoring satellite communications and general SIGINT and also as a handy runway for their (brand new) Space Shuttle to use in a emergency. The Americans agreed to let us use it for our Vulcan bombers, Victor tankers, Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft and Hercules transport aircraft. The island's location was also a very useful stop-off point and staging post for shipping and supplies on the way down to the Falklands.

Secondly, not only did they let us use the airbase on Ascension, they provided a constant supply of vast quantities of aviation fuel to our aircraft there. When the British commander told the US military commander on Ascension how much fuel we'd need the US commander remarked that we'd never use that amount; the British commander replied that it was certainly our intention to try! Don't forget that it took 11 Victor tankers to get the Vulcan in position to bomb the runway at Port Stanley!

Thirdly, the US made available the latest, most technically advanced version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile; Specifically the AIM-9L 'All Aspect' version. Previous versions of the Sidewinder needed to be fired towards the rear of the target aircraft - the hot jet exhaust - in order to have a decent chance of scoring a hit. Having to get on the tail of a enemy aircraft in a dogfight rather than just getting it on one's sights at any angle adds greatly to the difficulty and danger of a dogfight. This new 'All Aspect' version could be fired at a enemy jet from any angle (hence the nickname!), greatly reduced this risk and provided the Sea Harriers with a significant advantage. That is not to say that the missile did all the work, but it did provide a massive boost in capability.

Fourthly, the US also made available to us the Shrike anti-radiation (radar) missile. We had been investigating using the Martel missile attached to the Vulcan to attack Argentine radar installations on the Falklands but the Shrike was a much more capable missile. Several of the later Black Buck Vulcan raids (including the infamous one where a Vulcan had to make a emergency landing in Rio due to its' inflight refueling probe breaking off) were launched with this purpose, taking out several Argentine radar installations on the island. This enabled the Sea Harriers (and RAF GR3s which joined later on in the conflict) to operate with more impunity in the air above the Falklands and provide Close Air Support (CAS) to our forces on the ground.

In short, the US kept up appearances that they were not in support of our Falklands campaign, but behind the scenes they did provide some significant assistance which probably proved vital to the successful outcome.

All discussed here. All the information is well know thanks to books such as Vulcan 607 by Rowland White (the story of the first Black Buck raid) and Nigel "Sharkey" Ward's memoirs (he commanded 801 (Sea Harrier) Squadron during the conflict).

I_M_Weasel · 11 Feb 2012 at 14:15

The oil tanker support wasn't with the task force, it was at Ascension, our own replenishment ships resupplied the task force.

The only defence against exocet at the time was chaff and put yourself end on to the target. Sheffield was attacked at very close range, her sea dart missiles were designed to hit high flying soviet bombers, not a sea skimming missile.

I've always felt it somewhat ironic that the Type 42 destroyer whos main mission was air defence was pretty poor at air defence in the Falklands and that the Type 22, mainly an anti sub warfare ship was very good at air defence.

Amp34 · 11 Feb 2012 at 14:17

Slam62 said:
I didn't know any of this and indeed haven't read it anywhere else.

and of course you have very privileged access to secret US files don't you.

you think they provided an oil tanker do you, right, like we didn't have fuel oil.

how is an oil tanker going to help

bonkers post is bonkers

No I don't... It's all public domain information...

The Stinger's combat debut occurred during the Falklands War fought between Britain and Argentina. At the onset of the conflict soldiers of the British Special Air Service had been clandestinely equipped with six missiles, although they had received very little instruction in their use. The sole SAS trooper who had received training on the system, and was due to train other troops, was killed in a helicopter crash on 19 May.[3] Nonetheless, on 21 May 1982 an SAS soldier engaged and shot down an Argentine Pucará ground attack aircraft with a Stinger.[4] On the 30 May, at about 11.00 a.m., a Aerospatiale SA-330 Puma helicopter was brought down by another missile, also fired by the SAS, in the vicinity of Mount Kent; six National Gendarmerie Special Forces were killed and eight more wounded.[5] The main MANPADS used by both sides during the Falklands War was the Blowpipe missile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger

As for the fuel tanker someone else has already mentioned this in the thread. The other sat coms and GPS tidbit is also fairly well known...

EDIT:

During the Falklands War of 1982, SAS teams worked alongside the SBS in many operations before the main force landings at San Carlos and after the landings ahead of the Forward Edge of Battle Area (FEBA). These included operations in South Georgia, guiding Harrier attacks on Stanley airport to destroy Argentine helicopters, and the destruction of eleven Pucará attack aircraft on Pebble Island. During the war, 22 SAS, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Mike Rose, were the only land unit that had their own satellite communications back to the UK.

(although that doesn't mention where they came from)

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/sas1.html

For someone who apparently knows a lot about the Falklands war you appear to have a severe lack of knowledge on it... :confused:

There are plenty of books on the subject, for example the blackbuck mission books and books on the SAS involvement that would help with the stuff I just mentioned.

EDIT 2: and yes, I should have said aviation fuel tanker. It was needed as Ascension was at one point the busiest airport in the world during the Falklands.

EDIT 3: and a little mor information on the aviation fuel question...

Because of the distance from northwest Europe, the British took advantage of forward located supplies where they were available to them. The nearest forward base to the Falklands was on the British island of Ascension. The facilities there were run by the United States but they released their strategic stockpiles on the island. Chief among these was the provision by the US Air Force of aviation fuel. The US forces provided a total of 12.5 million US gallons (47,000 m3) or about 40,000 tons for British aircraft.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_logistics_in_the_Falklands_War

Essentially the US parked a tanker off the Island and replenished it when needed for us.

I_M_Weasel · 11 Feb 2012 at 14:24

Amp34 said:
I should have said aviation fuel tanker. It was needed as Ascension was at one point the busiest airport in the world during the Falklands.

Sharkey Ward is quite critical at the enormous amount of fuel it took the RAF to drop a couple of bombs on Port Stanley runway and the effect it had on his flight operations to support those bombings.