Falklands War, 1982, Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
A proper aircraft carrier needs to not only be able to launch and recover aircraft. It is also a armory to re arm fighters a pit stop to fix and repair them a command node to plan there operations and deployment. A radar tower to direct and land them. The Conveyor was a flat deck some containers and a fuel tank.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
I am not convincing you, the only reason i posted the pictures, was because i did never see before the actual marks on the Etendard, let us leave it, do not make it an argument, there is no need, if you want i can tell you what the pilots say in Spanish, otherwise let us rest it here.

Here's where you should issue a retraction, or at least a clarification, BD Popeye was on active duty, on a United States Navy Aircraft Carrier at that time, if our very, very, close ally United Kingdom's Aircraft Carrier had suffered damage from a Super E??? the USN would have had a Major Discussion around each of the Carriers and Fleet wide, about the incident, the how, when, why, and how to prevent it from affecting your Ship! If it had happened, it would still be a big "hairy deal"!

NOW, BD Popeye has called your story a fabrication, (you would use the word LIE, if it were one of us)? and stated for the record that it did not happen! Jeff Head has backed up BD Popeye's rebuke of your account, it is UN-TRUE!

There was indeed a very serious discussion about the Exocet and the damage it actually did cause, and no doubt there were precautions issued and fleet directives to prevent its re-occurrence!
 

b787

Captain
The Invincible was classed as a light carrier she maxed out at 18 harriers and that's stripping her of helicopters. The USNS Chesty Puller does the samething. They are not classified as carriers because when push comes to shove they are built to support not face combat operations. The conveyor was being used to carry spares.
definitions are used to lie

Conveyor carried weapons= Harriers are weapons
Conveyor was sunk in a combat zone
Conveyor could carry and allow landing and take offs from Harriers.

Was the ideal aircraft carrier? no it was not, was classified as an aircraft carrier? no it was not.

By definition was not an aircraft carrier, at least not the one to be used as the main platform for harrier combat operations that is true, but losing the conveyor meant losing an extra aircraft carrier, because both Hermes and invincible needed space for the helos so they did not carry a full load of Harriers and they needed the Harriers there in the conveyor
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
So it was a glorified floating parking lot or an aircraft transport. It's loss hurt But loosing it was not a utter victory for Argentina as despite the loss the British continued to operate and won the war.
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
To answer you the best way is

Why do they need to carry extra Harriers in the conveyor?
Reinforcements and attrition replacements. When the Task Force sailed they had 20 Sea Harriers between the two carriers, 12 on Hermes and 8 on Invincible. Early predictions of losses were much higher than it turned out (as high as 75%). In total six sea harriers were lost to a mix of ground fire and accidents. 8 Sea Harriers of the newly reformed 809NAS arrived aboard Atlantic Conveyor, 4 were sent to Hermes and four to Invincible, as attrition replacements.
Why Invincible did not carry these harriers from the start of the operations?
Because the Task Force sailed with only 48 hour notice. Prior to that the Fleet Air Arm's peacetime strength was two frontline Sea Harrier squadrons (800NAS and 801NAS) with 5 aircraft each (manned by 8 pilots in each squadron), and the headquarters and training squadron 899NAS based at RNAS Yeovilton equipped with 12 aircraft normally. When the Task Force sailed this sqn was used to bring the two frontline sqns up to 'Wartime' strength, seven joining 800NAS aboard Hermes and three joining 801NAS aboard Invincible (due to the differences in size between the two ships.

The remaining officers and crew of 899NAS left behind then set about rounding up every Sea Harrier pilot then serving on other assignments (exchange tours with the RAF for example) and also bringing the remaining Sea Harrier airframes into service (from storage or maintenance). These Pilots, planes and ground crew were used to reform 809NAS, intended to be a 10 aircraft sqn but only 8 could be supplied. additionally a crash (ie fast) modification programme was applied to at least 10 RAF Harrier GR3s, to provide further attrition replacements. They lacked any radar, but were fitted to fire Sidewinders from their outer wing pylons to supplement the Sea Harriers on CAP. Also tie down points were fitted to the landing gear and other mods to allow them to operate at sea (a highly corrosive environment. Sea Harriers are built with these alterations). Completed in a couple of weeks these 10 Harriers joined the 8 Sea Harriers aboard Atlantic Conveyor after a ferry flight down to Ascencion Island, and after landing on they were wrapped to protect them from the elements on the journey. In short they didn't sail with the Task Force because they weren't ready to.

When the Conveyor was sink did some helicopters were lost?
Yes, Also stored on deck were six Wessex HU5s of 848NAS and five RAF Chinooks of 18 squadron. One Chinook stayed behind on Ascencion Island to help with logistics there, and of the four remaining, one was flown off prior to the ship being attacked. When stored one deck, the Chinooks had their rotor blades removed to save space (they did not and still do not fold), whilst the Wessexes did have folding rotors and folding tails, they were again stored and not easily accessible. There wasn't time to prep any of them for flight and they were all destroyed by the fire. The ship was also carrying a huge amount of material vital to the war effort below decks, including the bulk of the steel matting required to lay a temporary air strip at San Carlos Bay. Only about a quarter of what was sent (which was on another ship) therefore arrived and was set up (named Sid's Strip) and later in the War was used as a refuelling stopover for all the Harriers. The single Chinook that was available was heavily overtasked and the lack of helicopters meant the troops had to walk from san Carlos to Port Stanley. Other equipment was lost too, preventing it from becoming a full forward air base.
cas058.jpg


Obviously trying to say it is a transport does not hold any waters, the harriers could fly with stores fuel tanks at least, once they lost the conveyor they lost an auxiliary aircraft carrier, not the main carrier, but a ship with the ability to allow landings and takeoffs of Harrier jump jets
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Atlantic Conveyor could not support any aircraft as already stated, she had no maintenance facilities, no fuel tanks, no weapons stores, no hangar. Any aircraft launched from her deck with stores aboard brought those stores with them in the first place. So she's good for one sortie from each aircraft, and a short ranged one at that given the weight limits imposed by Vertical takeoff. The last photo above shows the Shars and Harriers shortly after arriving on board in the warm waters of Ascencion. They were soon wrapped up for the journey, as shown here, and were only unwrapped on arrival near the Task Force. There was never any intention to operate them from the ship, they went straight to the actual carriers. After that Atlantic Conveyor headed for San Carlos Water to offload the rest of her cargo, but en route was attacked and hit by two Exocets.cas014.jpg
167548_1796490591363_1212662619_2118553_7263066_n.jpg
 
Last edited:

b787

Captain
Atlantic Conveyor could not support any aircraft as already stated, she had no maintenance facilities, no fuel tanks, no weapons stores, no hangar. Any aircraft launched from her deck with stores aboard brought those stores with them in the first place. So she's good for one sortie from each aircraft, and a short ranged one at that given the weight limits imposed by Vertical takeoff. The last photo above shows the Shars and Harriers shortly after arriving on board in the warm waters of Ascencion. They were soon wrapped up for the journey, as shown here, and were only unwrapped on arrival near the Task Force. There was never any intention to operate them from the ship, they went straight to the actual carriers. After that Atlantic Conveyor headed for San Carlos Water to offload the rest of her cargo, but en route was attacked and hit by two Exocets
you are just trying to minimize its importance and say it was no important victory, the Conveyor had an important feature you want to avoid, it was a Harrier launch pad regardless it was only with fuel and fuel tanks, the victory shows a trend, on 28th the conveyor was struck and on the 30th the invincible was attack, in 2012 Prince Andrew said he was on the invincible when it was under attack and he was there.

You might swallow the lure of the British press, but i do not, the concealment of the attack was given because on the 28th and 30th of May Argentina was trying to knock down the British airpower, the Conveyor was a total success, the Invincible well i do not the degree of success but the fact the Prince Andrew spilled the beans after 30 years shows how ill prepared were the British and how close to defeat they were, and while British propaganda claims how well they were trained, the fact is if France would had delivered more Exocet, the British fleet was not going to survive.

Against the Soviets, with Backfires the British fleet had no chances, very likely the French would had defeat them too and the reason to conceal the attack is simple, in 1982, the British were a decaying power, and they only beat Argentina thanks to France never delivered more Exocets
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Again the prince never said" on May 30th I was huddling in fear as the Argentine Air force attacked the Invincible". He said the funniest thing was me and my mates on the deck with a rubix cube during the Falklands war."
You B787 are making the claim that it must have been on that date. I have produced a video interview of June 26 1982 where shows no indication of having barely survived a Argentine middle attack and if anything seem nonchalant about being on the deck of the Invincible in similar conditions.
 

b787

Captain
Again the prince never said" on May 30th I was huddling in fear as the Argentine Air force attacked the Invincible". He said the funniest thing was me and my mates on the deck with a rubix cube during the Falklands war."
You B787 are making the claim that it must have been on that date. I have produced a video interview of June 26 1982 where shows no indication of having barely survived a Argentine middle attack and if anything seem nonchalant about being on the deck of the Invincible in similar conditions.
Terran, the Argentines only claim a single attack, on May 30th 1982, Price Andrew said he was under attack in 2011
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the video you post does not prove anything, he said that not in 1982, but in 2011, Argentina fired its last exocet on 30th may 1982 at the Invincible, so i do not need the Prince to say the date, only to say he was under missile attack in 1982 aboard the invincible.
By the way the guy was too young to claim he had mental issues in 2011

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


here is the Argentine version of the event, if they were successful that is debateable and i admit hard to prove they were sucessful, but the Duke of York and the pilots stories match
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Ah but B787, Argentina had more Exoset missiles... What you say? Here is the kicker they only had 5 air to surface types sold to them by the French and the French admitted such. All of those five were fired the last being on May 30 1982, in your account on the Invincible by the British account on a attack on the Avenger. They however did have surface to surface types.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top