Falklands War, 1982, Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

janjak desalin

Junior Member
Easier said than done. The Argentine's first has to find those troop carrying ships and where they are at in real time situation. I'm not saying they lack the intellect, just the equipment and intelligence and data gathering information necessary to conduct it.
Absolutely, easier written than done! And not that my Monday-morning QB strategy would have changed any outcomes. But the Don Quixote-esque attacks on the British Task force, at sea, were simply poor strategy, if the art of strategy, as I understand it, is the most effective use of one's resources, whatever they may be, to achieve one's objectives.
If you've only got one shot, are you going for the head shot, or for center-mass?

 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Actually, the Argentine Air Force did not use the strategy I suggested.

Had they, the need to get either by or through any naval escorts would have been obviated as attack routes from south-southwest did not necessitate any engagement either north of West Falkland or east of Falkland. Campaign maps illustrate that the predominant majority of British Ships were deployed to the north of the islands, and that the Argentine Air Force chose to engage them there, a tactical error.
My point was simple...the Argentines found and attacked the British troop ships.

In the moment, I believe the Argentine's not only did the best they could...but they did better than anyone expected.

It is relatively easy, after the fact, to look at maps, charts, and come up with better tactics.

But in the heat of the moment, and facing the uncertainties and the things they did not know...that we can see so clearly after the fact...they found the troop ships, attacked them, and inflicted significant damage on them.

These are the facts of what happened.

Now, the rest is hypothesizing on what might have been, and that certainly has its place for future operations. In fact, IMHO it is essential for military planners and leaders to do that if they want to optimize and maximize their effectiveness over time when they make their plans for future battles.

In that sense you are absolutely correct...there were ways the Argentines might have done better, But I was not attempting to come up with a better battle plan as much as I was simply trying to note what happened.
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Interesting !


Reflecting on the life and times of the Type 42 destroyers
...
RN service
First of class, HMS Sheffield commissioned in February 1976, built at Vickers Shipbuilding in Barrow (now part of BAE Systems and dedicated to nuclear submarine construction) and the construction programme was spread between Swan Hunters (Newcastle – now closed), Cammel Liard (Birkenhead – closed but revived as ship repair yard) and Vosper Thorneycroft (Southampton, moved to Portsmouth then swallowed by BAE and now closed)

The Falklands war dominated the story of the Type 42. On 4th May 1982 HMS Sheffield was hit by an Exocet missile, caught unawares while transmitting on satellite comms, she failed to detect the missile but without adequate CIWS would probably have been unable to save herself anyway. The missile hit and resulting fire eventually destroyed the ship, killing 22 of her crew. On 12th May HMS Glasgow was hit by a 1000lb bomb which fortunately passed right through the ship without exploding. She was patched up but had to limp home leaving HMS Coventry as the only remaining air defence ship in the task force. Coventry was sunk on 25th May 1982 by bombs while bravely operating in an exposed position to defend the landing ships with Sea Wolf-armed HMS Broadsword. The idea was that the combination of Sea Dart and Sea Wolf would provide long and short-range anti-aircraft coverage but although initially a success, Coventry’s luck ran out when she accidentally blocked Broadsword’s field of fire. This would not have been a problem for a single ship fitted with both weapons. HMS Exeter and Cardiff arrived as replacements and Exeter (with her better radars & electronics) achieved 3 aircraft kills. The Sea Dart system was a partial success in the Falklands war, exact figures are disputed but it achieved a roughly 50% hit rate. Its greater achievement was to force Argentine pilots to attack at low-level where their bombs sometimes didn’t fuse properly and failed to explode. What can be seen is that the presence of fighter aircraft (Sea Harriers) was a more effective weapon against attacking aircraft. Ship launched missiles are generally inferior to fighter aircraft, although missile systems in theory can be available 24/7 when it is difficult to maintain continuous combat patrol (CAP) cover. Although 2 were lost and 1 damaged the expendable ‘fighting 42s’ achieved their main strategic objective that was to defend the carriers and other ships that ultimately won the war.
...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Interesting !
Decent coverage.

Bottom line is, the Argentine were afraid to commit their carrier group because of the nuclear attack sub(s), and they had to rely on land based air with weak radars, and then operating at extreme range.

They still did a lot of damage, but they were unable to get through to and do damage to the large carrier task force and as long as that was the case...they were not going to be able to stop the British.

...and they didn't.

May I suggest the following great book:


000-BattleoftheFalklands.jpg
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I have this book in my own library and it is a great read and a LOT of details about the entire campaign from both sides.
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Decent coverage.

Bottom line is, the Argentine were afraid to commit their carrier group because of the nuclear attack sub(s), and they had to rely on land based air with weak radars, and then operating at extreme range.

They still did a lot of damage, ut they were unable to get through to and do damage to the large carrier task force and as long as that was the case...they were not going to be able to stop the British.

...and they didn't.

May I suggest the following great book:


View attachment 35282
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I have this book in my own library and it is a great read and a LOT of details about the entire campaign from both sides.
The right book ! better in french for me hehhe

Internet is amazing much things free especialy but for have détails and i am difficult ! nothing want a book or a magazine in paper and yes :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top