Falklands War, 1982, Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Miragedriver said:
Some interesting statistics:

British Naval losses in the campaign
(The flowing is taken word for word from Wikepedia)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

  • Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    - Argentine fighters returning from an aborted mission jettisoned bombs in attack on submarine- Minor Damage
Trawler/
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
- Minesweeper Auxiliary (MSA)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
If we look about the main event Landing to San Carlos British achieved an almost perfect landing no AA ships destroyed, damaged only a FFG destroyed and some very minor damages

For it Argentinan pay a heavy toll with 14 aircrafts : 10 A-4/Dagger, 2 Pucara and 2 helos mainly destroyed by Sea Harriers in CAP have do great job !

70 sorties this day max some others days 20 low curious 60 -70 fighters-bombers based to Rio Grande and San Carlos stange...
In more about 10 Mirage III close Buenos Aires and 8 Canberra enough far to Trelew.
Small attacks flight of 4 max but numerous

40 % of losses for Argentinian combat aircrafts during the campaign.

In this excellent !
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
FORBIN said:
CV 25 de Mayo

Can't launch A-4 the 02/05 i suspect for two reasons linked her low spped 15/20 kn i find with low winds which don't help.
She coul have a CAW of max 20 aicrafts : 11 A-4, 4-5 S-2 + 3-4 helos
Also a problem 2 elevators in the middle in the deck not convenient
Her steam cat do 44 m long
3200 t fuel in more 450 t for aviation

An excellent article here
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


also
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

Wow an article all you want for the 25 de Mayo

Main point, Attack planned after S-2 have detected UK CVBG
Taking into account the valuable information obtained by S-2E Tracker from the position of the British FT, the "Commander of the Sea Fleet" ordered the planning of the attack in the early hours of May 2. They were offered to 6 A-4Q armed with four MK 82 bombs. One would reserve a plane and another as fuel refueler.

According to the probability tables, which stated that British anti-aircraft artillery and air defense, of the 6 raiders only 4 could launch their bombs (16 bombs), with a 25% probability of impact. Of these, it was expected that only two would return to "25 de Mayo". The neutralization of a British aircraft carrier justifies the loss of 4 Skyhawk.
Click to expand...

canceled coz as i have say with old boilers max speed 20 kn only and impossible with low winds launch A-4Q with 1 t of bombs...

May, the only thing that could do 20 knots, insufficient speed to produce wind on the runway required to start up the planes with four bombs. The probability of impact would be insignificant, not what justified the attack. The mission was aborted.
Click to expand...

A difference between Navy's A-4Q and Air Force A-4B/C ?
 
b787

b787

Captain
Miragedriver said:
The Argentine forces had long played a central role in domestic politics, and had never fought a modern external enemy. This blinded the junta to the likelihood that Britain, led by a Thatcher government that could not be seen as “appeasing” an opponent, would not only fight, but make every possible exertion to regain the islands. Further, the junta was stunned that the Reagan administration sided with Britain. South America was a hotbed of Communist activity in those days, and the Reagan White House had made a concerted effort to assist South and Central American governments and strengthen diplomatic and military ties throughout the region. How the junta managed to convince itself this would outweigh 70 years of the “special relationship” and an alliance through two world wars as well as the ties of NATO is an open question. The junta thought they were going to negotiate a solution to the standoff, and just possibly had to fight. The British, on the other hand, assumed they would have to fight, and if there was a diplomatic breakthrough, so be it. This mindset clearly gave the British the upper hand in preparation for the coming battle.
Click to expand...
Politics are far more complex Mirage, while the British like to paint themselves like the victims (Argentina invaded the Falklands) the reality is the war was planned in England, the war moves by Argentina, were just a reaction to political and military moves by England, see

Incident. "In order to feel attacked Britain caused an incident in Georgias so clumsily executed that it was exposed sending its fleet at the end of March against the workers, forcing the Argentine government to prepare a defense plan," said the businessman.

The English maintained that in the Georges there were in fact Argentine civilians and military with other very different intentions to scrap dikes. British media, such as the BBC, reported on 19 March 1982 that reports indicated that the alleged workers had arrived aboard a ship sent by the Argentine military government and that events were seen as a "provocative step" in The diplomatic dispute that then took place between Great Britain and Argentina by the archipelago.


"In addition, the report by Lord Franks, which the House of Lords requested from the British intelligence service, published in 1983, states in article 230 that the disembarkation (of the operatives) did not enter into the plans of the Argentine military junta, nor Davidoff had nothing to do with the Navy "of his country, he stressed.

For Davidoff, Argentina had no choice but to go to war. "If he agreed to take over the workers' retreat, he allowed the British to do so, or he agreed to a passport, as the English demanded, he proved to the world that we agreed to be on foreign soil and we lost the right of sovereignty over The islands, "he said.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
Equation

Equation

Lieutenant General
Miragedriver said:
Some interesting statistics:

British Naval losses in the campaign
(The flowing is taken word for word from Wikepedia)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

  • Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    - Argentine fighters returning from an aborted mission jettisoned bombs in attack on submarine- Minor Damage
Trawler/
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
- Minesweeper Auxiliary (MSA)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

Although only a few of the British ships were sunk but that is a lot of damage and scores done by the Argentina forces. But yet still didn't stop the British from retaking those islands. Now with that in mind how much did it cost to the British tax payers in this war as compare to the Argentinians? My guess is it cost the UK a lot more money definitely, but it's the lives that the Argentinians lost in both air men, soldiers, and sailors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top