RN Phantoms - Operation Corporate

[Spinners 15,966]

McDonnell Douglas Phantom FG.1 - 899 Naval Air Squadron, Royal Navy, April 1982

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Stratos 3,167]

Oh yes!! Now you should add something for the Argies too, maybe a Mirage F.1?

[+JonathanRL 973]

Does not really matter what the Argies would have had, if the Ark Royal and her Phantoms and Buccaneers had been there, it would have been a massacre.

[+daddyairplanes 8,643]

Depends on what make of missle the phantoms were carrying and if the RN actually paid attn to the USNs experience over NVN from 65 to 73....

 

Also some that believe the Argentinisns wouldn't have even tried it if Britian had kept force projection capabilities like that....

Edited December 28, 2014 by daddyairplanes

[+dtmdragon 2,606]

I made a modified version of the SF2 Falklands mod which had the Royal Ark and her Phantom/ Bucc air wing in the campaign in place of the Invincible and her Harriers. To make it as realistic as I could the Royal Navy Phantoms and Buccs had the exact same capability/ weapons as the RAF versions did in 1982 (TMF F-4K_80). JonathanRL is right it was an absolute massacre to say the least!!!

Edited December 28, 2014 by dtmdragon

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

You're all assuming the weather conditions would have been clam enough to permit CATOBAR carrier ops, which, during the time of year the Falklands conflict took place, wouldn't have been. Not in region the RN CVLs operated in, at least. For these kinds of ops, it was said in the RN's analysis that any conventional carrier battle group would have to have been based further away to avoid the bad weather cells and make the most of the (somewhat) calmer conditions East/NE. It probably wouldn't have been too taxing for Phantoms and Buccs in terms of range, but it would have been a big stretch if the Poms didn't deploy a decent number of IFR aircraft, or AEW&C to coordinate air ops.

[+daddyairplanes 8,643]

remember, reliability rates were down for missile loads on USN Phantoms due to repeated carrier landings, corrosion etc.  and that was with the USNs spending levels, compared to the RNs in the late 70s early 80s.  i see still a victory, but much harder one than should be, esp if the Exocet birds mass a strike against the carrier. who's going btw, original Ark Royal or HMS Queen Elizabeth?

[Spinners 15,966]

Who's going btw, original Ark Royal or HMS Queen Elizabeth?

 

Screenies show the 'Ark' but you'll notice the ship identification letter of 'L' on the fins meaning that I'd like to have them on the 1970's 'Lizzie' (now in service in my install).