HMS Sheffield papers released

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Bloodnok, Nov 2, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    Courts martial!
  2. I've already complained to them today for referring to Rommel as a 'Nazi Commander'.


    Edited to add: Here's the report itself.
  3. "They found firefighting was poorly co-ordinated and pumps were "abysmal"."

    A good friend of mine was an officer on board Sheffield - he told me that the ship had three separate fire fighting controls and pumps. One each end and one in the middle (I'm no sailor, I even feel sick on a cross-channel ferry). The one at the sharp end was stripped down and being fixed after breaking down, the missile struck in the middle at an angle to the ship not square on, wrecked the centre pump area, and travelled down the length of the ship without exploding coming to rest in the area of the rear pump. It also started fires along the full length of its journey through the ship. Thus the remaining firefighting system seems to have consisted of buckets attached to lengths of rope.

    Under the circumstances firefighting was doomed to be ineffective.

    The BBC comment hardly seems appropriate to me.
  4. From what I can tell, the report comments that after the bridge was evacuated due to smoke coming from the forward machine room and unspent propellant, no further HQ was established to coordinate the efforts.

    It does however go on to say that the efforts that were made were' well-briefed, determined attacks' on the fires.

    Make of that what you will.
  5. I read the report, and i can't find out where it mentions anything was "abysmal" pumps or otherwise. Maybe i missed it.
  6. Neither can I, stolly. Most of the 'blame' seems to lie with an unnamed officer , the fact the ship wasn't at action stations, smoke and the failure of the ships 4 pumps and 5 of the portable pumps. The word abysmal is not used, nor is there a roundabout criticism of the training. Certainly training areas were identified for development, but that's a different thing.

    Complain to the beeb. I would, but I've already done it once today :D
  7. It will. The guys from '82 have been waiting and pushing for this Report for ages, and I don't think this is what they wanted to hear/read.

    Doug Laybourne, it should be borne in mind, has a book waiting to be published which was going to draw on the BOI release for some information - he has tabled some parliamentary questions, and has corresponded with the MOD for a long time trying to get the story out (or his angle on the story confirmed). They seem more concerned about a cover up relating to one of the Warfare Officers (Nick Batho), and various reports either damn him or exonerate him - they expected the MOD report, redacted as it is, to push the story one way or the other.

    It should also be noted that some of the other Sheffield vets are not supportive of the "lostoppos" sites trying to relive the events of '82, and their forum frequently descends into paranoia on "bacofoil tin hat" levels.
  8. Mentioned here:

    "The performance of a number of Rover gas turbine pumps, collected from several ships, was abysmal. Of the five pumps eventually tried onboard SHEFFIELD only one...operated successfully"
  9. These guys are heroes.

    The ship is sinking and on fire. 150 miles from the nearest freindly ship. 8000 miles from home. The crew gathered on the unburnt bit start singing "Look on the Bright side of life".

    Maybe its a myth maybe its true -but its really British ;)
  10. Regarding the un-named Officer, from Admiral Woodward;

  11. This is driving the release of papers under FOI

    ......accused the navy of a cover-up after it lost or destroyed vital documents which could hold the key to a Falklands tragedy. The crew of HMS Sheffield have always refuted claims that the destroyer was "asleep" when an exocet missile struck it in May 1982, killing 20 men.
    They say the Ministry of Defence tampered with their testimony to a board of inquiry into the sinking - something Whitehall has always denied. Now the MoD has admitted testimony from that board of inquiry has vanished from government archives - the very evidence some sailors say was altered to hide the true story of the disaster.

    They are not happy about what has now been released under FOI nor teh spin being put on it.

    main thread on the forum is here:


    "..initial reaction is shock at the stunning amount of exemptions being employed to withhold information, including the insidious Human Rights Act. Second knee jerk is Whitewash!

    Currently trawling through the letters from the FOI Cell which also contain the info posted on the site. Will have to print it all off and analyse it in slow time, shipmate.

    In fact, if their website doesn't show the list of questions they're refusing to answer and all the exemptions being used, I'll publish them here. I'm livid!"

    Further allegations of tampered documents, crew members having been pressured to give the "right" version of events etc etc.

    Turning nasty? No, it already is.
  12. Whats wrong with this fecking country. We go to war, against an invading aggressor, we sink onre of their ships and everyone is up in arms and demands an explanation. They sink one of ours and we do the same.
    The loss of life is a tragady, but thats war. poeple die and ships sink.

    Why arn't we having a go at the French who sold them the missles, and then gave them the software codes, after the war started and after promesing that they wouldn't.
  13. I was told by a Navy mate that warnings of an incoming raid were not acted on, the radar was inoperative while the satcom was in use due to interference and in the critical moments as the missile closed in the warfare officer responsible for air defence in the ops had gone for a slash. If true, a very expensive one!