Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Falklands scenario

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sergio View Post
    With respect to the not prepared angle



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...lands-War.html

    The majority of their best troops were on the border with Chile and using the armed forces in the Dirty War no doubt hampered their military effectiveness.
    The stupid thing is that they had well trained troops for cold weather conditions, but they spent the war eyeing of Chile. Had they backed themselves and properly defended the islands Britain could easily have been forced into a humiliating backdown and Chilean troops would still have been sitting in the mountains watching. The Reagan administration wasn't unified over its approach, so its possible that if Britain was forced to choose between extending the war to the Argentinian mainland or negotiating there might have been pressure from the US to negotiate.

    As Yoda said, there is no try, there is only do or do not.
    Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by BF69 View Post
      The stupid thing is that they had well trained troops for cold weather conditions, but they spent the war eyeing of Chile. Had they backed themselves and properly defended the islands Britain could easily have been forced into a humiliating backdown and Chilean troops would still have been sitting in the mountains watching. The Reagan administration wasn't unified over its approach, so its possible that if Britain was forced to choose between extending the war to the Argentinian mainland or negotiating there might have been pressure from the US to negotiate.

      As Yoda said, there is no try, there is only do or do not.
      Or as I'm fond of saying: The only real war crime is losing...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by nastle View Post
        Where would they get a conventional AC ? Maybe French assistance ? Which against the exocets will be rather bizarre
        To my recollection a carrier group was offered from the USN as support if Maggie Thatcher had felt one was needed, as it was the L series all attitude Sidewinders were stripped from the US stocks in Europe and given to UK war stocks. An old school chum of my wife was brought up in South America and could speak the Spanish lingo like a native, he had an 'interesting' time during the Falklands/Malvinas tiff as an insert who had previously been in the Royal Signals and further trained with the Hereford lot over the Brecon Beacons.

        ps. The French did give all the help they could to the British in regard to the Exocets they had supplied to the Argentinians.
        Last edited by Wooden Wonder; 19 Feb 16, 02:09.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
          Or as I'm fond of saying: The only real war crime is losing...
          If you are going to invade someone don't **** about & do it half arsed. Come armed for bear, ready to fight and ready to make it hard for the other bloke to take it back. That doesn't necessarily mean you go the full Mongol on everyone, but you do basic stuff like upgrading facilities (airports anyone?). Also, don't 'best case' everything. Wars rarely work like that. A lesson the Bush Admin would have done well to follow.

          The Argentines started with a ton of advantages and they pissed them all away. Deserved to lose. Clowns.
          Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Wooden Wonder View Post
            To my recollection a carrier group was offered from the USN as support if Maggie Thatcher had felt one was needed, as it was the L series all attitude Sidewinders were stripped from the US stocks in Europe and given to UK war stocks. An old school chum of my wife was brought up in South America and could speak the Spanish lingo like a native, he had an 'interesting' time during the Falklands/Malvinas tiff as an insert who had previously been in the Royal Signals and further trained with the Hereford lot over the Brecon Beacons.

            ps. The French did give all the help they could to the British in regard to the Exocets they had supplied to the Argentinians.

            I believe it was a single carrier - USS Iwo Jima. Of course, if the Argentines were doing well enough to sink a carrier it would probably mean the taskforce was in pretty deep **** and the body count was rising. The ability to procure a spare carrier might not have been the most important factor in the eventual outcome.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lands-War.html
            Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by BF69 View Post
              I believe it was a single carrier - USS Iwo Jima. Of course, if the Argentines were doing well enough to sink a carrier it would probably mean the taskforce was in pretty deep **** and the body count was rising. The ability to procure a spare carrier might not have been the most important factor in the eventual outcome.

              http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lands-War.html
              The Daily Mail Australia is a bit slow:

              Ronald Reagan made secret plans to loan Britain a U.S. warship if she lost an aircraft carrier during the Falklands War, it has emerged.
              Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz40bU9HjcN
              Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
              This information was published in a 1994 book that I have written by John Dickie:

              "Special" no more : Anglo-American relations : rhetoric and reality

              I referred to it(and the carrier situation - and the other items of support from the US) in an ACG post in 2009 in an earlier "Alternative Timelines" thread entitled "Fleet Carrier present at the Falklands.":

              Originally Posted by copenhagen View Post
              ....didn't Ronny Reagan offer us the use of an American carrier to fly stuff off. ..... We turned it down obviously.
              Originally Posted by At ease View Post

              The source I referred to above does not say that the offer was turned down. Instead, it suggests that it was not necessary to take up the "secret" offer. ...."This boundless enthusiasm(of Weinberger's) to the point of total commitment was never put to the ultimate test - fortunately, since it would have caused such a row in Congress that it might have seriously jeopardized support for Britain." (Special no more pp 8.) British decision makers did not turn the offer down, it was just never made public at the time it was made and in the event did not need to be acted upon.
              References have been made concerning US offers of support to the UK during the Falklands crisis. The following book, "Special" no more, John Dickie http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/0297814869 , details the full extent of assistance provided. The following references are all from chapter 1 of the above book. The US Defence Secretary Weinberger offered, not a fleet carrier, but USS Guam(LPH-9), Iwo Jima class light carrier(but using a British crew). Sidewinder missiles(200) including training, Stinger Manpads, not previously released outside the US; Shrike anti radar missiles, Phalanx CIWS, torpedo exhaust valves, Harpoon missiles, a large variety of ammunition, spare Chinook engines, 4700 tonnes of prefab metal runway matting, "concertina city" prefab troop accommodation inc elaborate field kitchen, and the release of war emergency stocks of aviation fuel(to be resupplied as required by US tanker fleet) on Ascenscion Is. The total value supplied, excluding the Sidewinders and aviation fuel(6 million gallons) was $60M. Furthermore, according to the author it was all done immediately on receipt of the British requests, no paperwork, just "handshakes". SR-71 Blackbird flights were made as required to supply real time intel.

              http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...&postcount=108

              For some reason, there seems to have been a lot of Alt his. posts about the Falklands here @ACG.

              I'm not sure there is much more to add, yet somehow they seem to keep reappearing.
              Last edited by At ease; 19 Feb 16, 03:30.
              "It's like shooting rats in a barrel."
              "You'll be in a barrel if you don't watch out for the fighters!"

              "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
              — Sergei(son of Igor) Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003.

              Comment


              • #22
                The Australians and New Zealanders offered to help out their British "kith & kin" by despatching 7 destroyers and frigates.

                WI the Argentinians had started deep-sixing cobbers and kiwis in to the South Atalntic?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Mifletz View Post
                  The Australians and New Zealanders offered to help out their British "kith & kin" by despatching 7 destroyers and frigates.

                  WI the Argentinians had started deep-sixing cobbers and kiwis in to the South Atalntic?
                  I haven't seen any evidence of this previously.

                  Would you care to supply a source backing up what you suggest?
                  "It's like shooting rats in a barrel."
                  "You'll be in a barrel if you don't watch out for the fighters!"

                  "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
                  — Sergei(son of Igor) Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by At ease View Post
                    I haven't seen any evidence of this previously.

                    Would you care to supply a source backing up what you suggest?
                    I am fairly sure that it didn't happen. Both New Zealand & Australia imposed sanctions on Argentina, but neither offered to provide warships as part of the task force.

                    New Zealand did, however, provide two frigates (Canterbury & Waikato) to relieve British warships operating in the Indian Ocean, and enable them to be redeployed.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Doveton Sturdee View Post
                      I am fairly sure that it didn't happen. Both New Zealand & Australia imposed sanctions on Argentina, but neither offered to provide warships as part of the task force.

                      New Zealand did, however, provide two frigates (Canterbury & Waikato) to relieve British warships operating in the Indian Ocean, and enable them to be redeployed.
                      Many years ago I did a thesis on Australian Defence policy during the 1980s. The relevance of the Falklands was discussed, but I certainly don't remember any mention of it in any of the stuff I've read. No mention of in in PM Fraser's numerous accounts of the period, though he did claim to have persuaded VP Bush to tell Reagan to back Britain & thus 'save NATO'.
                      Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        Many years ago I did a thesis on Australian Defence policy during the 1980s. The relevance of the Falklands was discussed, but I certainly don't remember any mention of it in any of the stuff I've read. No mention of in in PM Fraser's numerous accounts of the period, though he did claim to have persuaded VP Bush to tell Reagan to back Britain & thus 'save NATO'.
                        It was, with Australia playing the part of Argentina, to the extent of a hostile naval task force descending upon the Australian coast- and how it should be dealt with.
                        "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                        Samuel Johnson.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                          If you are going to invade someone don't **** about & do it half arsed. Come armed for bear, ready to fight and ready to make it hard for the other bloke to take it back. That doesn't necessarily mean you go the full Mongol on everyone, but you do basic stuff like upgrading facilities (airports anyone?). Also, don't 'best case' everything. Wars rarely work like that. A lesson the Bush Admin would have done well to follow.

                          The Argentines started with a ton of advantages and they pissed them all away. Deserved to lose. Clowns.
                          Exactly - the Argentinians stood a very good chance of winning and in fact probably should have. Or at the very least if not won certainly made it a hell of a lot more costly than it was. In fact Woodward said that if they had been able to hold out for a bit longer then they would have probably won. Fortunately they did not capitalise on their advantages.
                          Last edited by Sergio; 27 Feb 16, 06:23.
                          "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
                          G.B Shaw

                          "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
                          Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I don't know about that. The land commanders weren't exactly thrilled with Woodward. He didn't seem to know much of what was going on ashore. Both Julian Thompson's and Taillyour-Southby's books are very critical of him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                              I don't know about that. The land commanders weren't exactly thrilled with Woodward. He didn't seem to know much of what was going on ashore. Both Julian Thompson's and Taillyour-Southby's books are very critical of him.
                              You are probably correct about that and he may well be overstating the case - it is not an area I know enough about. There is a book by Kenneth L Privratsky on the logistics side of things and a bit of it available on Google Books says it was not the problem people suspect. Looks an interesting read. Although I think Woodward was talking about the Fleet itself.

                              Had the Argentinian resistance been longer lasting and more aggressive that might well have been a different issue as certain supplies were being used at a far greater rate than expected. Had the Argentinian pilots gone for the supply ships as they seem to have been ordered to do on many occasions, it might have turned out differently. Again, fortunately, it was not.

                              http://www.nids.go.jp/english/event/...df/2013/08.pdf

                              http://dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/....pdf:surprise:

                              It has been quite a while since have read anything about the Falklands and I have to say this thread has sparked my interest again in the subject.
                              Last edited by Sergio; 28 Feb 16, 05:22.
                              "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
                              G.B Shaw

                              "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
                              Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                so lets make a list what kind of aircraft /ships/missiles if argentina had they could have taken the Falklands

                                Inflight refuelling tanker?

                                More ASM and another type e.g Gabriel ?

                                Missile gunboats ?

                                Attack submarines ?

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X