Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ARA battles RN in Port Stanley Harbour

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ARA battles RN in Port Stanley Harbour

    WI Argentinians had got really serious and moved most of their fleet to the Falklands: an aircraft carrier, a heavy cruiser, 6 destroyers, 3 corvettes, and 2 submarines, with orders to stay put.

    Assuming the Argentinians can barely maneuver, and won't leave harbour because of RN submarines, without enough Harriers to sink them in harbour, do the British have no choice but to do "a Narvik Fjord" and sail in with all 4.5" and Seacats blazing? Will an Exocet fired from a moving ship succeed in locking on to a stationary ship surrounded by land masses? And vice versa?

    With its AA and fifteen 6" guns, I can see the Belgrano doing some serious damage to storming in Type 42s. With a numbers advantage, plus a likely land victory, the British being able to yomp 105mm artillery in to position to bombard the Argie ships, though coming under ship-to-shore return fire, the British win. But at what cost?



    Would Veintecinco de Mayo be able to launch and land Etandards and Skyhawks while in or near Stanley Harbour or San Carlos Water?


  • #2
    If the Argies are bottled up, why sail in at all?

    The damage to Argie status by its huddling in the harbor would have a tremendous media impact.

    And ships at anchor would be easy targets for AT missiles, guided and unguided, fired from the hills overlooking the harbor.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • #3
      Did the Argentinians at that time have the AS ability to track & take out HMS Conqueror?

      Last edited by Mifletz; 15 Jun 14, 11:22.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
        If the Argies are bottled up, why sail in at all?

        The damage to Argie status by its huddling in the harbor would have a tremendous media impact.

        And ships at anchor would be easy targets for AT missiles, guided and unguided, fired from the hills overlooking the harbor.
        Actually, the British could then pay off some of the war cost by salvaged scrap metals, spare marine gear, etc.

        However, if the ARA loads up its fleet with asphalt, construction materials, and crews, the Argies may have built an adequate runway to land their jets, protect its fleet and hold the islands...

        Unfortunately, Gaultieri stated a pointless conflict.
        fortunately- he managed it.
        The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mifletz View Post
          Did the Argentininas at that time have the AS ability to potentially take out HMS Conqueror?
          What is the Hebrew for 'floating potential artificial reefs?"
          The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

          Comment


          • #6
            Menachem Begin, once considered a hangable terrorist by the British, was tempted to sell the Argies, who were out of Exocets, Gabriel missiles at $3 million a pop, but Maggie warned him off.



            WI the Israeli arms dealers had rush-delivered 10 Gabriels, which promptly sink/disable both RN aircraft carriers and several destroyers?

            Can the British continue to prosecute the war, & what revenge, short & long-term, can Maggie do against Israel?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
              If the Argies are bottled up, why sail in at all?

              The damage to Argie status by its huddling in the harbor would have a tremendous media impact.

              And ships at anchor would be easy targets for AT missiles, guided and unguided, fired from the hills overlooking the harbor.

              I seem to remember that 22 Marines on South Georgia heavily damaged an Argentine corvette with just 200 or so small arms hits and more seriously a waterline hit by a Milan AT round.

              Mifletz - Ref. your post, yes, politics is full off ironies and chess moves.

              Menachem Begin, who was later awarded the Nobel Prize for peace, is the same man who planned the destruction of the King David Hotel and the massacre of Deir Yassin.
              Last edited by Wooden Wonder; 15 Jun 14, 11:45.

              Comment


              • #8
                It would have been far worse for the British if the Argentines had bought up say 15 to 20 Exocet for land launching and set them up covering the bays the British had to anchor out in to conduct amphibious operations.
                Sinking their LST's before they could unload, along with sinking or crippling a number of ships with these would have pretty much ended a quick campaign and landing.

                Throw in some AT missiles and such and the British are looking at a very long slog to land and take the islands back.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  It would have been far worse for the British if the Argentines had bought up say 15 to 20 Exocet for land launching and set them up covering the bays the British had to anchor out in to conduct amphibious operations.
                  Sinking their LST's before they could unload, along with sinking or crippling a number of ships with these would have pretty much ended a quick campaign and landing.

                  Throw in some AT missiles and such and the British are looking at a very long slog to land and take the islands back.
                  The Argies get lucky and one of their subs sinks HMS Ark Royal when the Brits need air cover badly.

                  But the Britis send in their Vulcan Bombers and plaster the Argie Fleet and land barracks

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    With a dozen exocet or other missile capable of seriously damaging a ship the Argentines only needed to whack the amphibs:



                    The Royal Navy was not wealthy with amphibious landing ships or craft. Crippling and sinking most of these puts an end to landings and a quick win.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                      The Argies get lucky and one of their subs sinks HMS Ark Royal when the Brits need air cover badly.

                      But the Britis send in their Vulcan Bombers and plaster the Argie Fleet and land barracks

                      Must have been a very long range sub. to be able to reach Swan Hunters yard on the Tyne.

                      Ark Royal only commissioned in November 1985.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Doveton Sturdee View Post
                        Must have been a very long range sub. to be able to reach Swan Hunters yard on the Tyne.

                        Ark Royal only commissioned in November 1985.
                        When you hate the British as much as he does, anything's possible.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          ------
                          'I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.' - Thomas Jefferson

                          If you have questions about the forum please check the FAQ/Rules

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mifletz View Post
                            Menachem Begin, once considered a hangable terrorist by the British, was tempted to sell the Argies, who were out of Exocets, Gabriel missiles at $3 million a pop, but Maggie warned him off.



                            WI the Israeli arms dealers had rush-delivered 10 Gabriels, which promptly sink/disable both RN aircraft carriers and several destroyers?

                            Can the British continue to prosecute the war, & what revenge, short & long-term, can Maggie do against Israel?
                            The moment assets like that start being lost, the bigger the escalation. After that point Thatcher's got little choice but to keep going to make good on the loss.
                            Even the seppos helped the RN and Operation Black Buck - they'll help even more if BAOR and North Atlantic duties have to be weakened to make good on the investment . With the exocets the Argentinians had they couldn't take out BOTH RN carriers and SEVERAL destroyers - 10 Israeli missiles does not guarantee a disproprotionate loss of surface assets. Meanwhile the Argentine Armada will be home to crabs as more SSNs get sent south.


                            Originally posted by TAG
                            It would have been far worse for the British if the Argentines had bought up say 15 to 20 Exocet for land launching and set them up covering the bays the British had to anchor out in to conduct amphibious operations.
                            Sinking their LST's before they could unload, along with sinking or crippling a number of ships with these would have pretty much ended a quick campaign and landing.
                            In that case, don't risk 'em. The landing was done under certain conditions, with those conditions unlikely/impossible = no landing.

                            I'd sink the Argie fleet with better use of submarines - if they're already sinking more ships then revisit the Belgrano until there isn't much of an Argentine fleet left, meanwhile keeping the RN task fleet out of the most dangerous range.

                            Before long the peasant conscripts are eating each other and committing atrocities on the local populace - that'll look good for Argentina. In exchange, Russel up a few more sidewinders from Ronnie and Caspar and maybe even take up that lovely offer: http://planetar65.blogspot.co.uk/201...-to-great.html as just a couple of options

                            Long and the short of it; War is a reciprocal and non-linear enterprise and every advantage offered to the Argentinian menace can go the other way, and indeed, vice versa.

                            The big change would be, as MT pointed out, the establishment fo a proper runway - better airpower on the isles makes the whole enterprise a lot harder.
                            ------
                            'I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.' - Thomas Jefferson

                            If you have questions about the forum please check the FAQ/Rules

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I should think that if the Israelis were foolish enough to supply the 'Argies' with Kosher missiles and they caused problems, that Maggie Thatcher would be on to the 'phone to the Whitehouse, and ask her mate Ronald to have stern words with Tel Aviv - and get the IFF and jamming frequencies.

                              I also suspect the 'conflict' would be cranked up a notch or two with deployment of more RN surface and submarine assets, including all the seawolf armed frigates. I have a feeling Wideawake on Ascension Island would get rather crowded with Vulcans {don't forget they could also carry Sidewinders], and most of the Tankers that the RAF possessed - and whatever else could be cobbled together.

                              Also, 'Revelation made by former U.S. Secretary of the Navy John Lehman
                              Reagan would have loaned Britain use of amphibious warship USS Iwo Jima should harm have come to either HMS Invincible or HMS Hermes
                              U.S. was officially neutral during the two-month conflict.

                              Mr Lehman said that he formulated the plans to stand behind Mrs Thatcher with Secretary of Defence Caspar Weinberger following a British request.

                              Mr Reagan is said to have approved their proposal without hesitation, telling Mr Lehman: 'Give Maggie everything she needs to get on with it.'
                              Last edited by Wooden Wonder; 16 Jun 14, 09:01.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X