Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Old BBC documentary about the defence of the Falklands task group - technical aspects

I am not sure that I mentioned VIFFING - in the basis that it had never been used. The twin missile rails were added to the Sea Jet now longer after the war - yes I have said that I wondered why they had not already been fitted.

Organic AEW? I also thought that it was not needed to detect the Bear, but @Archimedes said that people had said otherwise. I am well aware of the fact that much of the work had already been done when the political authorisation came through on 04 May 82. The reason that the American helicopter AEW system was abandoned in the fifties was because of the technology of the day could not make it work, due to vibration.

Vertical launch Sea Wolf would have been good - but there were only two Sea Wolf armed frigates with the task force. Do you think the assertion made by @Magic_Mushroom that organic AEW would have prevented ship losses was wrong and for what reason?

The task group fought as they were - not just in terms of technology but training and tactics.
 
I am not sure that I mentioned VIFFING - in the basis that it had never been used. The twin missile rails were added to the Sea Jet now longer after the war - yes I have said that I wondered why they had not already been fitted.

Organic AEW? I also thought that it was not needed to detect the Bear, but @Archimedes said that people had said otherwise. I am well aware of the fact that much of the work had already been done when the political authorisation came through on 04 May 82. The reason that the American helicopter AEW system was abandoned in the fifties was because of the technology of the day could not make it work, due to vibration.

Vertical launch Sea Wolf would have been good - but there were only two Sea Wolf armed frigates with the task force. Do you think the assertion made by @Magic_Mushroom that organic AEW would have prevented ship losses was wrong and for what reason?

The task group fought as they were - not just in terms of technology but training and tactics.

I don't recall saying that (but might have), but it'd be within a particular context given the role intended for CVS in WW3 unless I rushed the post somewhat.

The only correlation between Bears and SKW I can find in my history was in fact this nonsense.

Wandering Bears may come with guns​
But without baggers...​
Oh dear! Crumbs!​
(with apologies to Christopher Isherwood)​

Which was not an attempt to offer an accurate reflection of Cold War TTPs or the thinking behind them...
 
Vertical launch Sea Wolf would have been good - but there were only two Sea Wolf armed frigates with the task force. Do you think the assertion made by @Magic_Mushroom that organic AEW would have prevented ship losses was wrong and for what reason?

operating in blue water with open arcs, RN ships were quite capable of beating off attacks by elderly Skyhawks dropping dumb bombs.
AEW would not have fixed the issue that ships operating near land were being significantly handicapped by clutter.

What WAS an issue was the realisation that other than the 2x22’s, the 5x42’s and the 1x82, everything else was just targets and missile magnets - see their very rapid demise after the War. And that’s an issue the old farts who rage ‘in 1982, the RN sent 100 ships to the Falkland’ rather miss.
See also the sudden re-interest in the fitting of rapid firing AA guns and dusting off VL Seawolf.
 
One more observation if I may. It wouldn't have saved the Sheff, but there were apparently ~100 barrage balloons in storage at Abingdon that would have been game changing in San Carlos Water. No one thought to bring them, or if they did decided they were not a part of warfare in 1982.
Does anyone know anything about the deploment of SHORAD at San Carlos? I know of the difficulties with Rapier but reading up on the performance of Blowpipe (Wiki I know) I find that there were 95 launches. When and where were these?

 
I don't recall saying that (but might have), but it'd be within a particular context given the role intended for CVS in WW3 unless I rushed the post somewhat.

The only correlation between Bears and SKW I can find in my history was in fact this nonsense.

Wandering Bears may come with guns​
But without baggers...​
Oh dear! Crumbs!​
(with apologies to Christopher Isherwood)​

Which was not an attempt to offer an accurate reflection of Cold War TTPs or the thinking behind them...

I am sure that you posted that some had concluded that AEW would have been greatly beneficial for the NATO role of the CVS.

operating in blue water with open arcs, RN ships were quite capable of beating off attacks by elderly Skyhawks dropping dumb bombs.
AEW would not have fixed the issue that ships operating near land were being significantly handicapped by clutter.

What WAS an issue was the realisation that other than the 2x22’s, the 5x42’s and the 1x82, everything else was just targets and missile magnets - see their very rapid demise after the War. And that’s an issue the old farts who rage ‘in 1982, the RN sent 100 ships to the Falkland’ rather miss.
See also the sudden re-interest in the fitting of rapid firing AA guns and dusting off VL Seawolf.

The point of AEW would be to detect the Skyhawks etc before they reached the islands and used the contours to hide in. I do wonder how the old 965 radar would have performed in open ocean. The Sheffield BOI report specifically mentioned the reflected ground wave causing the reflections from the aircraft/missile to be swamped.
 
operating in blue water with open arcs, RN ships were quite capable of beating off attacks by elderly Skyhawks dropping dumb bombs.
AEW would not have fixed the issue that ships operating near land were being significantly handicapped by clutter.

What WAS an issue was the realisation that other than the 2x22’s, the 5x42’s and the 1x82, everything else was just targets and missile magnets - see their very rapid demise after the War. And that’s an issue the old farts who rage ‘in 1982, the RN sent 100 ships to the Falkland’ rather miss.
See also the sudden re-interest in the fitting of rapid firing AA guns and dusting off VL Seawolf.
Simplistic.

The Argentinian pilots flew a very good game.

Many ships’ demise was budget-driven.
 
Simplistic.

The Argentinian pilots flew a very good game.

Many ships’ demise was budget-driven.

No ones denying the Argentine pilots flew a good game, but on a level playing field, the ships systems were quite capable of inflicting serious attrition on the raids.

At end of the day, the ships were very restricted by ground clutter, but the decision was made to keep them near land to defend the landing site - and that handed a very significant unexpected bonus to the attacking pilots.

See also the Etendard Exocet raids - none of them were bolts from the blue, all were tracked in on radar and ECM as they developed, and after Sheffield, no more RN ships hit by them. Sheffield was quite capable of successfully defending herself if she’d brought her A game.


And yes, it was a money issue - the Batch 1 T42’s were Penny pinched to the n’th degree and very critical on top weight. too much ship in too small a hull and for as little money as possible in the aftermath of the Type 82 cancellation.

Pretty much everything came back to money, and the Treasury’s refusal to spend it.
All the issues well understood. The better radar, better missile seeker, better close range defences, more channels of fire, more missiles in the sky… but as I said up page, the Treasury and MOD wasn’t interested in spending the money to fix the known problems, they were trying to cut the Navy substantially.
 
The point of AEW would be to detect the Skyhawks etc before they reached the islands and used the contours to hide in. I do wonder how the old 965 radar would have performed in open ocean. The Sheffield BOI report specifically mentioned the reflected ground wave causing the reflections from the aircraft/missile to be swamped.

the raids were not a surprise, we were using submarines as pickets off the Argentine coast.
There were dissenting voices in the Task Force who wanted to push the ships further out to let them play to their strengths. On paper, Sea Dart couldn’t the engage targets below 100ft, in practice, it proved able to go much lower.

The one thing you haven’t mentioned is the effect of the Black Buck raids in substantially shifting the balance towards the FAA. The Argentines kept their Mirages armed with radar guided missiles at home to defend mainland targets.
The FAA were particularly worried about them. The Harrier had no effective way of getting in a fight with a supersonic fighter armed with radar guided missiles, and was expected to take significant losses. See the Harriers staying lower than the Mirages in the early clashes as the Mirages couldn’t do a look down missile shot.
 
No ones denying the Argentine pilots flew a good game, but on a level playing field, the ships systems were quite capable of inflicting serious attrition on the raids.

At end of the day, the ships were very restricted by ground clutter, but the decision was made to keep them near land to defend the landing site - and that handed a very significant unexpected bonus to the attacking pilots.

See also the Etendard Exocet raids - none of them were bolts from the blue, all were tracked in on radar and ECM as they developed, and after Sheffield, no more RN ships hit by them. Sheffield was quite capable of successfully defending herself if she’d brought her A game.


And yes, it was a money issue - the Batch 1 T42’s were Penny pinched to the n’th degree and very critical on top weight. too much ship in too small a hull and for as little money as possible in the aftermath of the Type 82 cancellation.

Pretty much everything came back to money, and the Treasury’s refusal to spend it.
All the issues well understood. The better radar, better missile seeker, better close range defences, more channels of fire, more missiles in the sky… but as I said up page, the Treasury and MOD wasn’t interested in spending the money to fix the known problems, they were trying to cut the Navy substantially.

Are you seriously suggesting that the landing forces should have been left undefended?

Does the HMS Sheffield BOI mention the problem of the target reflection being lost in the ground wave of the 965 radar? Yes or No? Still - at least you acknowledge the money issue, rather than just blaming the ship's company of Sheffield and everyone else.

You seem to ignore the loss of the Atlantic Conveyor - why? Surely the defence of important logistics vessels is a major issue?

Last sentence - see Nott.

the raids were not a surprise, we were using submarines as pickets off the Argentine coast.
There were dissenting voices in the Task Force who wanted to push the ships further out to let them play to their strengths. On paper, Sea Dart couldn’t the engage targets below 100ft, in practice, it proved able to go much lower.

The one thing you haven’t mentioned is the effect of the Black Buck raids in substantially shifting the balance towards the FAA. The Argentines kept their Mirages armed with radar guided missiles at home to defend mainland targets.
The FAA were particularly worried about them. The Harrier had no effective way of getting in a fight with a supersonic fighter armed with radar guided missiles, and was expected to take significant losses. See the Harriers staying lower than the Mirages in the early clashes as the Mirages couldn’t do a look down missile shot.

The Type 42/22 combination was an attempt to do just that, in lieu of AEW - but things went wrong. If the Sea Harriers had nor been pulled of from that intercept then it would have changed the course of events that led to the loss of Coventry. The BOI report is here.

Did Argentina have a radar guided AAM? Did they know how to use it? @Archimedes probably knows - and @Magic_Mushroom did not that the tactics employed by the Argentines were poor.
 
I've never heard of Mirage IIIs carrying anything other than Magic or Sidewinder - both short-range and not radar-guided.

Great play was made in the media the time of us getting the -9L. The Argentinians only had, from memory, the -9B.
 
They didn't have SARH weapons - R530 with the IR head; Shafrir or early model AIM-9.

As an aside, this is coming out at the end of next month (for those who find Amazon links don't show up for them, it's John Shields, Air Power in the Falklands Conflict: An Operational Level Insight into Air Warfare in the South Atlantic (Publisher: Air World [and offshoot of Pen & Sword])


Amazon product ASIN 1399007521
The author will, I am sure, get hate mail and accusations that this is 'another attempt by the crabs to rewrite history and claim victory' (I'm sure there'll be some letters in green ink with a Grenadian postmark), which will demonstrate that the authors of said missives haven't actually read the book (Black Buck OK, but didn't force withdrawal of Mirages; Harrier GR3 OK, but problems - most of them answering to the name of Linley Middleton; joint [1982-style] planners became obsessed with bombing Stanley, etc, etc). It's a properly-researched book and includes footnotes to primary sources and everything.

I know Magic_Mushroom would recommend it (he isn't the author and nor am I, before anyone wonders)....
 
From paragraph 8 of the HMS Coventry BOI report:

CAP aircraft were fast approaching Station 33, 25 miles to the East but were unable to engage the first pair of aircraft. Their movement was slightly hampered by the AOA missile zone. Quick reactions by COVENTRY's fighter controller got the CAP within 3 miles of their weapon release point on the second pair of aircraft but the CAP was hauled off when Sea Dart was believed to have acquired.

Broadsword
and Coventry were ten nautical miles offshore, but the radar that Coventry had was unable to overland targets (excessive beamwidth/clutter), Broadsword's radar could. If the Sea Harriers had done the intercept and splashed the Skyhawks, Coventry would have survived. AEW would have made the 42/22 tactics unnecessary. Post conflict, doctrine was changed to intercept with fighters in preference to waiting to them to enter missile range. AEW would also have noticed the Super Eterndards coming from the North (the attack against the Atlantic Conveyer).

Sidewinder 9L's all aspect capability was probably a factor in the Argentine tactics to avoid Sea Harrier if they could - over 450 attack sorties were abandoned.
 
They didn't have SARH weapons - R530 with the IR head; Shafrir or early model AIM-9.

They had a number of 530E’s for their Mirage III’s. But they could only carry one, on the centre line. The French provided technical details and DCAM support to the FAA, our FAA, not the Argentine FAA.
It was found they couldn’t get a lock on a Harrier as long as it kept it’s energy up and didn’t stay high. It wasn’t the worlds most agile missile, with a sluggish seeker.
 
Top