Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Argentine Air Power

...Imagine if it had occurred to them to adjust the fusing on the bombs they were employing against the surface ships?

Imagine if the RAF had targeted the Argentine mainland.

Imagine if HMS Splendid had engaged the 25 de Mayo Rather than just shadowing her.

Imagine if prototype Sea Eagle missiles had’ve been made available.

Imagine if we’d have got Sea King AEW down before the end of hostilities.

What’s the point?

I’d also suggest that we significantly out-performed Argentina on the improvisation front when Vulcan, Nimrod, Hercules, Harrier GR3, SS Canberra, QEII and a myriad of other examples are concerned.

Regards,
MM
 
Imagine if the RAF had targeted the Argentine mainland.

Imagine if HMS Splendid had engaged the 25 de Mayo Rather than just shadowing her.

Imagine if prototype Sea Eagle missiles had’ve been made available.

Imagine if we’d have got Sea King AEW down before the end of hostilities.

What’s the point?

I’d also suggest that we significantly out-performed Argentina on the improvisation front when Vulcan, Nimrod, Hercules, Harrier GR3, SS Canberra, QEII and a myriad of other examples are concerned.

Regards,
MM

All well taken, except perhaps for the last point. Improvisation may not be the correct word to have used, I was trying to suggest a certain lateral thought approach rather than say Black Buck which was unprecedentedly complex but no single manuver was novel.

Just to be clear I'm arguing for another thread (badly apparently).
 
Imagine if the RAF had targeted the Argentine mainland.

Imagine if HMS Splendid had engaged the 25 de Mayo Rather than just shadowing her.

Imagine if prototype Sea Eagle missiles had’ve been made available.

Imagine if we’d have got Sea King AEW down before the end of hostilities.

What’s the point?

I’d also suggest that we significantly out-performed Argentina on the improvisation front when Vulcan, Nimrod, Hercules, Harrier GR3, SS Canberra, QEII and a myriad of other examples are concerned.

Regards,
MM
You can only speculate so far... After that, it just turns into fantasy!!
 
Arg Skyhawks had AIM-9B capability; they held a couple of aircraft on deck alert in a 2xAIM-9 fit when the 25Mayo went to sea (before HMS Conqueror unsportingly intervened in proceedings.


The Pucara/Torpedo combination involved the WW2 vintage Mk13; once they'd managed to sort out the pylon to accommodate the torpedo, they then had all sorts of bother in testing because they'd no 'air tail' for the weapon. These had to be fabricated, and once done, the torpedo would survive being dropped into the water.

Someone then realised that the proposed drop speed was so slow that even missiles like Sea Slug and Sea Cat would take the Pucara out as it approached, long before the release point; more trials had to be done at a higher air speed, which required a deeper testing venue. The first test at the new airspeed (to see if the weapon survived) was scheduled for the afternoon of 14 June 1982. The testing team listened to the news, sighed and went and had lunch instead...

Imagine if the RAF had targeted the Argentine mainland.

They did - the attack was never prosecuted of course, but some targeteering/ weapons-target matching had occurred....
 
Last edited:
All well taken, except perhaps for the last point. Improvisation may not be the correct word to have used, I was trying to suggest a certain lateral thought approach rather than say Black Buck which was unprecedentedly complex but no single manuver was novel...

I didn’t mention BLACK BUCK, although the jets were modified for a role the crews had never practiced, over distances never envisaged, in a scenario never anticipated. Nor should we forget the Vulcan SEAD sorties Using AGM-45 Shrikes.

For better examples of innovation, I’d cite Nimrod MR2s being equipped with Sidewinders and attempting intercepts without GCI, Nimrods being used to control Vulcans onto their tankers, chaff stuffed into Harrier air brakes, the GR3 BLUE ERIC jammer...and that’s just a little of the stuff that’s in the public domain!

Regards,
MM
 
I didn’t mention BLACK BUCK, although the jets were modified for a role the crews had never practiced, over distances never envisaged, in a scenario never anticipated. Nor should we forget the Vulcan SEAD sorties Using AGM-45 Shrikes.

For better examples of innovation, I’d cite Nimrod MR2s being equipped with Sidewinders and attempting intercepts without GCI, Nimrods being used to control Vulcans onto their tankers, chaff stuffed into Harrier air brakes, the GR3 BLUE ERIC jammer...and that’s just a little of the stuff that’s in the public domain!

Regards,
MM

Hmmm...

Time to concede here and see if I can think of a snappy title for the proposed 'other' thread.

Genuinely though, chaff in the air brakes? I assume its an Exocet decoy or to with the radar guided AAA rather than an air to air countermeasure?
 

Yokel

LE
Sharkey Ward mentions chaff bundles in the Sea Harrier's air brakes in his book. I thought that the Harrier GR3 already had decoy dispensers due to its role on the German frontline?

It was radar guided SAMs that they wanted to decoy - I think I am correct in saying the Argentines had no radar guided AAM at the time. Ironically, when the task group lost contact with 25 De Mayo (the Argentine carrier), a Sea Harrier detected the radar of the escorting Type 42 - same radars and missiles as our ones.
 
The Pucara/Torpedo combination involved the WW2 vintage Mk13; once they'd managed to sort out the pylon to accommodate the torpedo, they then had all sorts of bother in testing because they'd no 'air tail' for the weapon. These had to be fabricated, and once done, the torpedo would survive being dropped into the water.

A good job they didn't have a squadron of Swordfish.....
 
I thought AIM-9s on a Skyhawk depended on the missile's seeker head entirely, in that the aircraft had no radar or range finder so launching one was a bit of "by guess and by God". It offered some capability but nothing as good as the 9Ls.
 
...Genuinely though, chaff in the air brakes? I assume its an Exocet decoy or to with the radar guided AAA rather than an air to air countermeasure?

The airbrake chaff was primarily to provide a 'one-shot' defence against the Argentine Roland SAM and Skyguardian radar laid AAAs expected to be encountered. Basically, the pilot would briefly blip his speedbrake, the chaff would be dragged out

...Sharkey Ward mentions chaff bundles in the Sea Harrier's air brakes in his book. I thought that the Harrier GR3 already had decoy dispensers due to its role on the German frontline?

It was radar guided SAMs that they wanted to decoy - I think I am correct in saying the Argentines had no radar guided AAM at the time. Ironically, when the task group lost contact with 25 De Mayo (the Argentine carrier), a Sea Harrier detected the radar of the escorting Type 42 - same radars and missiles as our ones.

...It was radar guided SAMs that they wanted to decoy - I think I am correct in saying the Argentines had no radar guided AAM at the time...

Argentine Mirage IIIs could carry a single R530 Semi-Active Radar Homing AAM. There was a suggestion that at least one was fired Capt Gustavo Cuerva or Lt Carlos Perona during their engagement against Flt Lt Paul Barton and Lt Steve Thomas on 1 May 82. However, it's now considered that Barton mistook the Argentine pilots jettisoning their wing tanks for a missile which failed to guide.

...I thought that the Harrier GR3 already had decoy dispensers due to its role on the German frontline?...

Staggering as it is, I don't believe the GR3s had any self defensive aids at that time.

RN and RAF fast jets mostly lacked even basic RWR until the early 70s and defensive aids such as chaff, flares and defensive aids didn't appear until later in that decade (standing by to be corrected by @Archimedes) when the Buccs got Vietnam era AN/ALQ-101s (which was also fitted to Vulcans during CORPORATE).

I thought AIM-9s on a Skyhawk depended on the missile's seeker head entirely, in that the aircraft had no radar or range finder so launching one was a bit of "by guess and by God". It offered some capability but nothing as good as the 9Ls.

To be fair, the Sea Harrier FRS1's pulse only Blue Fox radar was of limited value, particularly overland and highsea-states. Most engagements were from visual acquisitions or controlled from ships-visual.

Partly due to this, all Sea Harrier missile engagements were stern-shots so technically did not need the AIM-9L's all-aspect capability. However, the Lima was more reliable than the alternative AIM-9Gs,

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:

chrisg46

LE
Book Reviewer
Great find. I had heard about the idea before, but had no idea it got as far as a trial. Was using an aircraft launched torpedo against a surface warship really a good idea in the age of missiles?

Talking of missiles, here is an 1984 article by the Argentine Naval Officer who commanded the Super Eterndard squadron in 1982.

Super Eterndard Operations

Cdr Columbo not only mentions the Argentine tactics, but also that the Argentine Air Force was unprepared for anti ship attacks, and the Argentines relied heavily on a very limited number of Hercules tankers.

The Super Eterndard was intended to fly from their carrier. I also understand (was told) that the Argentine Navy A-4Q could carry AAMs and they did think of putting them against Sea Harrier

If i read that right, was that the basis for the claim of a successful attack against the Invincible?
 
If i read that right, was that the basis for the claim of a successful attack against the Invincible?

Incredibly, there are still people in Argentina who are convinced they sank Invincible and there was then an elaborate cover up by the UK to hide her loss with Illustrious being renamed and an additional CVS produced!

Regards,
MM
 

Yokel

LE
If i read that right, was that the basis for the claim of a successful attack against the Invincible?

The two Skyhawk pilots who did not get shot down bombed a ship (the Type 21 Avenger - missed) and reported hitting Invincible. They expected Invincible to be there - so they probably thought that was the ship, as flying a low level and being shot out kept their minds occupied.

As for the Exocet fired that day - the chaff decoys did their job.
 
The two Skyhawk pilots who did not get shot down bombed a ship (the Type 21 Avenger - missed) and reported hitting Invincible. They expected Invincible to be there - so they probably thought that was the ship, as flying a low level and being shot out kept their minds occupied.

As for the Exocet fired that day - the chaff decoys did their job.

But mistaking a T21 for Vince is a bit of a stretch. Anyway sky god Sharky Ward was on Invincible and could have taken down the brace with just a steely eyed look.
 
And to think relations were normalising until they elected the adorable mrs K - who consequently went full retard.

Without her contributions its noy unlikely we wouldnt have lifted the embargo several years ago
 

Yokel

LE
Argentina not getting FA-50s


I wonder what parts are British made? I am guessing that it is more than the ejection seat and a few transformers, PCBs, and hydraulic components.

Argentina could help themselves by committing to respecting the wishes of the Falkland Islanders - it really is that simple.
 
I wonder what parts are British made? I am guessing that it is more than the ejection seat and a few transformers, PCBs, and hydraulic components.

Argentina could help themselves by committing to respecting the wishes of the Falkland Islanders - it really is that simple.

IIRC, in order to get the Anglo-Irish Agreement ratified, the RoI had to amend its constitution by removing the article laying claim to the territory of the North. Argentina could easily do the same re. the Falkland Islands.
 
The Koreans will not do anything to upset HMG, it has its eyes on a much bigger defence sale prize than a few jets to Argentina in return for 2,000 tonnes of corned dog.
 
Top