MAKO69 186 Posted June 9, 2008 Does anyone know if Australia and or New Zealand assisted or wanted to assist G.B. and was not allowed, or were they nuetral in this as well like the U.S.? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverbolt 104 Posted June 9, 2008 Australia and NZ didn't . US sent some AIM-9Ls(200 i guess) sent Satellite photos with location of Argentinean fleet and some toys. BTW, Cuba probably gave some SA-7 for Argentineans and they thought in sent some Shikas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+SkippyBing 8 Posted June 9, 2008 (edited) NZ offered to send a frigate, which must have been about 30% of their navy but were told thanks but no thanks. The US didn't send the -9L to the Falklands rather they were sent to the UK to fill in some gaps that had suddenly appeared in our stocks, I'm fairly sure some Stinger missiles found their way down there as well. I have heard it said there was an offer of a US Carrier as well, but what we'd have done with it I've got no idea! Edited June 9, 2008 by SkippyBing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MAKO69 186 Posted June 9, 2008 A US carrier w/British crew members probably for their F-4 and Buccs it was only 4 years since they got rid of their conventional carriers. We were playing the hands tied behind our back on this one asking them to talk it out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted June 9, 2008 In terms of some ally help, British harrier pilots fought against french mirage pilots, in order to maximize their effectiveness, before the departure of the fleet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+SkippyBing 8 Posted June 9, 2008 A US carrier w/British crew members probably for their F-4 and Buccs it was only 4 years since they got rid of their conventional carriers. Certainly a good idea, but as we had trouble finding enough pilots for the Sea Harriers I'm guessing there was no way we could have got enough crews up to speed in the available time frame without stripping RAFG of crews most of whom would have no carrier experience. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syrinx 13 Posted June 9, 2008 The SHAR's and their support crews did a good enough job as could be expected under the restrictions they were under. AFAIK only the Kiwi's offered to help overtly, as recorded by SkippyBing above. The FRS.1 was a superb aircraft. As for the early retirement of the sublime FA.2 that's got to rank as a TSR2-type faux pas. Idiots. Anyhow, it's an eye opener to think about what might have happened had the Fleet Air Arm still had Phantom's, Bucc's and Gannets on Ark Royal at that time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viggen 644 Posted June 9, 2008 Why were the FA.2s retired so early? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted June 9, 2008 In terms of some ally help, British harrier pilots fought against french mirage pilots, in order to maximize their effectiveness, before the departure of the fleet. Also fought US F-5 aggressor pilots, and 4 F-15 pilots from Bitburg in mock engagements according to my sources. The Argentines knew about the SHARs reputation before the war started so gave it massive respect. Maybe one of the reasons that their Attack pilots were told to jettison their A-G load and disengage if they were caught by one. Should say that the French stopped supplying any more of the ordered "Exocet" missiles to Argentina - You have to wonder what would have happened if they had more than 5 of them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syrinx 13 Posted June 9, 2008 "Why were the FA.2s retired so early? " Politics and bolony, my dear boy. The British, bless us, have a history of having designing and making something really good, world beating, in many different fields. Yet those who ought to know better would flitter all this away for nothing. Well, usually it's for monetary reasons. Am I bitter, you bet I am. The FA.2 is a case in point. Excellent radar, well armed for BVR (AMRAAM), superb at dogfighting and capable of shooting down sea-skimming missiles. Just what you need for Fleet defence. The decision to withdraw the FA.2 was taken back in 2002 and they disppeared in 2006. Let's just hope that we don't suffer another "rethink" with the F-35. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted June 9, 2008 The FRS.1 was a superb aircraft. As for the early retirement of the sublime FA.2 that's got to rank as a TSR2-type faux pas. Idiots. Anyhow, it's an eye opener to think about what might have happened had the Fleet Air Arm still had Phantom's, Bucc's and Gannets on Ark Royal at that time. Well I hope the SAMs are as good as they say they are if it comes to it an (apparently) radar less GR-7/9 with AIM-9s is even worse than the First Sea Harrier - at least that had a radar (albeit not a look down one!) With Phantoms/Gannet etc - Maybe the ability to actually detect low flying targets, and intercept the Etendards before they could get a shot in - because the Etendards could pretty much do what they like from what Ive read. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syrinx 13 Posted June 9, 2008 The Buccaneers could have hit targets (ie: airbases) on the mainland easily. Ergo, no Etendard problem. However, in reality I expect ROE would have forbidden it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MAKO69 186 Posted June 9, 2008 DID any RAF Harrier's deploy on the UK carriers? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted June 9, 2008 (edited) The Buccaneers could have hit targets (ie: airbases) on the mainland easily. Ergo, no Etendard problem. However, in reality I expect ROE would have forbidden it. Well the Argentine Mirage 3s would have been a massive threat still so they wouldnt have had it easy - Im not sure even with F-4s we could have had Air superiority over Argentina itself - though its something to think about Always makes me laugh on the claim that the Mirages were held back incase a single Vulcan tried to attack Argentina - im not sure even with wishful thinking a Vulcan would have got that far undetected enough to be intercepted and bought down with guns even! Edited June 9, 2008 by MigBuster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted June 9, 2008 DID any RAF Harrier's deploy on the UK carriers? RAF GR-3s were on the Carriers - they came down later in the conflict though on cargo ships Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viggen 644 Posted June 9, 2008 Think they were on the Hermes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverbolt 104 Posted June 9, 2008 Still with curiosities about the Malvinas war.... France: they gave to UK the Exocet codes(radar band i guess), but they didn't have time to decode it.... Brazil: lend 2 P-95 Bandeirulha to Argentina in hunting of HMS Conqueror . oh, and we got one Shrike that came with Vulcan when it landed in Rio de Janeiro after a blackbuck fail, this probably explain the born of our Anti radiation Missile, the MAR-1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MAKO69 186 Posted June 9, 2008 Shrikes were pretty rare into the 90's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverbolt 104 Posted June 9, 2008 (edited) Think they were on the Hermes. Not sure about this info but here it is: The Harriers came in HMS Atlantic conveyor (the exocet hitted), but they were put them in HMS Hermes when they meet in Ascension Island. i found a photo of Atlantic conveyor with an Sea Harrier on the front IIRC this Sea Harrier was there to intercept any threat but ....it had no sucess against the Sue. Edited June 9, 2008 by Silverbolt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverbolt 104 Posted June 9, 2008 Shrikes were pretty rare into the 90's. that was in 82' precisely in Black Buck 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted June 9, 2008 Atlantic Conveyor sailed down with: 8 x Sea Harriers 6 x GR.MK3 Harriers 6 x Westland Wessex 1 x Westland Lynx 4 x Chinooks (CH-47) When it was hit 3 of the Chinooks (with all the spare parts/tools/manuals etc)were onboard (AFAIK) and went down with the ship. The remaining Chinook (Bravo November) had to fly from East Falkland Island - and became a bit of a legend by all accounts for the work it now had to do by itself! Pretty sure the Harrier didnt stick around to operate from that Pad - it wouldnt have intercepted the Etendards anyway even if it could find them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+pato poli 73 Posted June 9, 2008 hit the continent? no way dud... they try and they faild, the mission was top secret, an even a member of the SAS call it "suicide mission", a chooper was lost on that mission and the crew return home by Chile the airbase in the continent was very well defended, a lot of AAA, and if you read about it, the argentine AAA personel was very efectiv. the idea of keep the Mirage 3 for pinpoint defense look like stupid, but no one in Argentina high level was very sure about Chile intentions and if the Vulcan come home...well, thanks Gods they didnt, right? The Vulcan that land at Rio stop their engines with 400kg of fuel...less than nothing he??? an A-4 drink 500kg from start to get the runway take off position!!!! on a radar you only see echoes, no the name of the ship, they do what told shoot to the big one, maybe a carrier, maybe a supply ship. without aircraft or supply the british should stop offensive and get talking. the frenchys have done a real good job, the plane and the missile are very affective, even our models without upgrades, they beat the AEGIS cruiser...thats a simply high professional killing ship machine.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+SkippyBing 8 Posted June 9, 2008 IIRC this Sea Harrier was there to intercept any threat but ....it had no sucess against the Sue. The Shar had cross decked to the carriers by the time Atlantic Conveyor was hit by the Exocet. On the subject the UK had Exocet at the time so we were pretty clued up on how it worked. As for the Sea Harriers retirement, the farce goes along these line. 1. Form Joint Force Harrier as some politician thinks it'd save on costs despite the two versions in UK service sharing nothing more than the name and the ejector seat. 2. Put all the maritime assets (i.e. Nimrod, SHAR, SAR, Harrier) in 3 Group RAF, thus putting RN units in the RAF chain of command. Put a Commodore in charge initially so the Navy doesn't think it's getting seen off. 3. RAF review decided to put all fast jet assets into 1 Group, taking the SHAR further away from RN control. 4. Defence Logistics Organisation (newish tri-service blanket stacker organisation) decides the UK can only have 4 types of Fast Jet, thus letting the bean counters dictate aircraft numbers on no rational basis what so ever. 5. Someone in Strike Command decides they'll keep the Typhoon, Tornado, Harrier and Jaguar. Approximately no one in the Fleet Air Arm is surprised. 6. RN Harrier force fights a continues uphill battle as it attempts to man squadrons to RAF levels rather than RN levels. As the RN generally have a lower manpower level if only to fit on a ship it all gets very trying. As an aside, anyone watching the Warship programme on the UK's Channel 5 I'd like to say the rest of the Navy isn't that amateurish, and 814 are a bunch of pansies! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+SkippyBing 8 Posted June 9, 2008 they try and they faild, the mission was top secret, an even a member of the SAS call it "suicide mission", a chooper was lost on that mission and the crew return home by Chile The Chopper was lost on purpose, the old boss of my air station was the pilot. It's a fairly straightforward radius of action calculation, it never had enough fuel to get there and back in the first place. As to hitting the continent, the Black Buck raids were to demonstrate the Vulcan could bomb it. That's not the same as the cancelled SF mission to invade the SuE's base, kill everyone there and fly back for tea and medals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverbolt 104 Posted June 9, 2008 On the subject the UK had Exocet at the time so we were pretty clued up on how it worked. Does the UK Type 42s had MM-40 launchers? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
