Low-cost, muti-role aircraft for small militaries

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

^^ That's what happens when people with free-thinking and independence, fight for their rights. To them, it doesn't matter who the enemy is, just that the enemy needs to be destroyed or defeated. Gone are the days when free-thinking people courageously challenged the imperial-scavengers, irrespective of the power they welded.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Dolcevita said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Export Ceremony for export of Z-11 Helicopter to Argentina held on July 9, 2012. Expected arrival on September.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the information. I was reading in the newspaper that the helicopters were being assembled from parts with an excepted full production and assemble in the future.
Can you recommend a translation site for this article?

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Miragedriver said:

Thank you for the information. I was reading in the newspaper that the helicopters were being assembled from parts with an excepted full production and assemble in the future.
Can you recommend a translation site for this article?

Click to expand...

Try this link. Translation is not perfect but you get the general idea. Hope this works for you.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

asif iqbal said:

ah the Argentinian airforce, well they did do a good job in 1982, did you know that during the war 6 x 1000lb bombs were diffused onboard ships which didnt explode, yes thats 1000 lb bombs, imagne the damage they would have caused had they gone off, estimates after the war suggested that between 750-1000 further UK casualties would have occured, thats 4 times the number that were killed on the UK side

and do you know the reason why the fuses didnt go off? because they were dropped from very low altitude and didnt have time to explode , they needed atleast 10-15 seconds of freefall before the bomb became armed

one such attack came in Bluff Cove Air Attacks when RFA Sir Galahad a landing ship was struck, the bomb never went off but still killed 50 people, had it, the craft would hav exploded into a fireball with hundreds on board

say what u like but the Argentinain airforce pilots were very brave and very daring

Click to expand...

Thank you for the comment. The Argentine pilots fought bravely in the war, but where let down by the timing mechanism on the old iron bombs they where utilizing. Honestly Argentina was not prepared with up to date munitions to properly involve its self in a conflict. It’s like have working rifle with old surplus bullets.

The Discovery Channel (in Spanish) had an excellent series on the air war. I believe it is on e youtube.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Argentinia has a choice, if they want to launch a military challenge of the possession of the Falklands anytime soon, they need aircrafts without any possible know-how transfer to the UK. The USA, France, Sweden, Israel, Japan and Korea are not suitable partners in any such venture. They can choose Russian, Chinese or Indian. The Eurofighter so far seems an outstanding fighter aircraft and any counter would need a very capable fighter wing - latest models of highest generation available. That's expensive, time will tell whether Argentinia wants to invest so much into the hostile option.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Miragedriver said:

Thank you for the comment. The Argentine pilots fought bravely in the war, but where let down by the timing mechanism on the old iron bombs they where utilizing. Honestly Argentina was not prepared with up to date munitions to properly involve its self in a conflict. It’s like have working rifle with old surplus bullets.

The Discovery Channel (in Spanish) had an excellent series on the air war. I believe it is on e youtube.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

that is the belief many wonder, however the truth which has been extensively studied by UK/Argentinian war planners, is that Argentina in 1982 was infact very well prepared for the war, but in my opinion sometimes you just need a little bit of good luck, and that is what they needed a little bit more of

did you know very early in the war the Argentinian Navys aircraft carrier had infact located the Royal Navys task force which included HMS HMS Invincible with its Harrier air wing, Argentinain scout planes located the distance and the were ready to launch, but the distance was about 10 miles too far away, Argentinians then added extra fuel to their aircraft and started to ready themselves for launch when they realised they were now too heavy to take off, then the carrier turned into the wind to get the extra lift needed, and can you believe it, the wind in the South Atlantic died down, which only happens once in a blue moon!

the Argentinian carrier then had no opition but to close in a little further, then a scout report came in saying the task force were in threat of giving aways in position and might be detected by Royal Navy scout planes, fearing the element of suprise had been lost the captain of the Argentinian Carrier called off the attack

had this attack been carried out UK would have lost its airwing or atleast at minimum resulted in a damaged HMS Invincible, and without Harrier aircover the landings would never go ahead, even more suprising is that Royal Navy planner planned to use the Atlanic Conveyor as a back-up carrier if HMS Invincible was sunk, and guess what, Atlantic Conveyor was sunk by the greatest threat of all, the Exocet

this is yet just another story how close Argentina came to winning the war, i have so many more to tell, i count atleast 12 occasions where Argentina lost the war, due to unseen circumstances that seem to appear from nowhere

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Well, the case you mentioned was not just one of bad luck, but also one of bad planning and management.

I know hindsight is always 20/20, but still, the Captain of the Argentine carrier should not have ordered extra fuel to be added to his planes. In battle, gilt-edged opportunities like that came extremely rarely, and once it does, you need to seize it without hesitation.

If the captain had the kind of training I would expect, he should have had the battle of midway spring up in his mind at the idea of wasting time faffing about adding more fuel to his planes for the sake of 10 miles.

Obviously his Seahawks were already carrying max fuel for take off, the commanding officer should have been aware of that, if not, that is a massive balls up. So assuming that isn't the case, adding more fuel would be a conscious decision to make them dependent on weather in order to take off. That is not good planning or leadership as it means taking a big risk without really having to, and it cost them big time.

If I was in command, I would have ordered the launch, but kept the carrier heading towards the British task force. That should easily make up for the 10 mile shortfall to allow safe recovery of planes. If the fighters had done their jobs, the British task force would be destroyed or at least in no state to launch a counter attack. Even of they were, 10 miles would not have a material difference to whether they would be able to strike back anyways.

In war, as in life, there will always be elements beyond your control. The key difference between a good and bad plan are to make sure you leave as few things to chance and luck or the weather as you can. Learn to rely on things you can control, and wherever possible, have redundancies and back ups for when things fail or people screw up.

If the distance had been something like 50 miles or more, whereby the carrier would not be able to cover the distance in time to allow for recovery of the fighters, what the captain did would have been the best call. But he had other, better options in his case. As such, I would chalk that one up as a failure of command as much as it being a case of bad luck. Some might consider that harsh, but this is the business of war, not a country club. If you do not hold yourself and your men up to the highest possible standard, when things get real, you increase the odds that you and your men will pay the ultimate price for your laxity.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

it comes down to a pretty simple rule, if you have good planning and organisation as well as good tatics, stratedgy, intelligence, training, information, etc etc the luck will take care of itself

however if u have poor organisation and planning, then you rely on luck, and if unlucky you have yourself to blame for not planning in the first place

so yeah i agree, Argentinians should have launched with whatever they had, same as Japanese at Midway, instead of changing from bombs below deck

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Miragedriver said:

One form member suggested purchasing the first generation J-10s that are now 5 to 7 years old as a replacement.

Click to expand...

1. Get a venture capitalist to put up themoney to purchase 50 J-10s and 100 C-803s plus awacs and some quiet diesels subs
2. kick the brits out of Malvinas.
3. split the oil and gas revenue with the venture capitalists.

Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

What if the Argentinians simply forget it? They can't take the Malvinas by force, nor is there a supporting population. This scheme saves a lot of money. Argentinia can possibly kill all British fighters there and occupy the islands. what then? UK submarines make it impossible to ship military supplies there and maintain military aircraft facilities by missile and special forces strikes.
The UK can take more time and hunt down all ill-supplied Argentinian soldiers. As long as Argentinia doesn't have a capable aircraft carrier the islands are off limits. Take different considerations for buying these aircrafts.