Could the Royal Navy retake the Falklands? - Page 7 - Ships Nostalgia
20:33

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

Could the Royal Navy retake the Falklands?

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #151  
Old 21st November 2011, 19:57
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadburn View Post
Lindsay, as you will have read I am a great supporter of the F. I. inhabitant's remaining British if that is what they want. Just a little puzzled about your last remark in regard's to Reagan, despite the American's "official line" which we all remember he did let us have a load of American equipment through the back door (which was stored in GB at the time ) and this was also sent South. It included, Air to Air Missile's, ration pack's and hand held marine band radio's to name just a few. Not sure what Reagan's reward was for his "back door" assistance, but Thatcher certainly looked after Pinochet when he came to London for an operation (Fortnum& Mason Hamper's) and a lot of influence I suspect in making sure he returned to Chile despite all the protest's at the time on how bad his illness really was.
I certainly agree Chadburn in relation to the air/air missiles. We obtained the latest Sidewinder that allowed the Harrier to target from many different angles instead of lining up the target to obtain 'lock'.
The 'new' maintained lock ability increased the kill rate of the Harrier - far more than the earlier mark weapon that was normally fitted.

This of course being solely due to American co-operation for which we should all be thankful.

My ten cents worth.


LouisB
__________________
R814683
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 21st November 2011, 21:11
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisB View Post
I certainly agree Chadburn in relation to the air/air missiles. We obtained the latest Sidewinder that allowed the Harrier to target from many different angles instead of lining up the target to obtain 'lock'.
The 'new' maintained lock ability increased the kill rate of the Harrier - far more than the earlier mark weapon that was normally fitted.

This of course being solely due to American co-operation for which we should all be thankful.

My ten cents worth.


LouisB

So let me get this right then. Are you saying, that without those sidewinders, Britain would not have won?
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 21st November 2011, 22:29
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsay Bremner View Post
So let me get this right then. Are you saying, that without those sidewinders, Britain would not have won?
I have absolutely no idea, I wasn't there. However the air cover we did have was by the Harrier that performed brilliantly but I would suggest that with more Argentine aircraft not destroyed we may have lost more ships which MAY have brought about different political and military decisions, not the ones that people may think!

Nobody 'wins' a war - you set out to achieve a political aim. In our case to retake land that was part of our Sovereign States responsibility and had been militarily and unlawfully taken by force against the Falklanders wishes.

People on both sides died - mostly young and with their lives ahead of them - very sad.


LouisB
__________________
R814683

Last edited by LouisB; 22nd November 2011 at 15:07..
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 22nd November 2011, 09:00
Alex Salmond's Avatar
Alex Salmond Alex Salmond is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1970 - 1989
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsay Bremner View Post
So the Argie have been claiming the Islands since 1833, the post I replied to stated both Britain and Argentina wanted the Islands for the oil.

Oil is proved, and there is nothing Argentina can do about it. Britain is not getting the oil revenue, the oil belongs to the Falklands, not Britain. The Islands are defended. I have said many times before and will say again, Argentina has nothing to bother the islands with.
So hang on a minute there mate just run that one past us again after all your (numerous) posts your telling us now that any oil found there belongs to the Falklands and not Britain ?? if thats the case why would we even bother trying to defend the Godforsaken place again let them use THEIR oil money and buy their own defences
__________________
"21st century schizoid man"
"Its life Jim,but not as we know it"
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 22nd November 2011, 09:58
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Salmond View Post
So hang on a minute there mate just run that one past us again after all your (numerous) posts your telling us now that any oil found there belongs to the Falklands and not Britain ?? if thats the case why would we even bother trying to defend the Godforsaken place again let them use THEIR oil money and buy their own defences

Well Mr Salmond, thats easy. The Falklands do not have independence, they have self determination, they look after all their own govermental departments except for foreign affairs and defence, that is taken care of by Britain. The Falkland Islands Government has already stated that they will contribute towards the defence budget when the oil comes on line.

Now hang though fella, what does Britain get from Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Po...e_Arrangements

We have also sworn to defend them. DO you have a problem with that?


Alex, do you have a problem with my NUMEROUS posts? I'm sure by now everybody has figured out that I strongly support the Falkland Islanders, I support their rights to live their lives as free people. If anybody has a problem with my support for the Islands, the islanders and the British armed forces who protect them, then please tell me, and I shall stop posting on here.

Last edited by Lindsay Bremner; 22nd November 2011 at 17:54..
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 22nd November 2011, 14:51
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
Yes but dont you think Argentina might want the oil? You say that Argentina is not a threat. People said that last time.Anyone with a Navy or a Airforce is a threat.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 22nd November 2011, 16:30
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkroyal View Post
Yes but dont you think Argentina might want the oil? You say that Argentina is not a threat. People said that last time.Anyone with a Navy or a Airforce is a threat.
Ark, Argentina has nothing to threaten us with. I posted the current state of their navy above. They have no amphibious sealift capacity, so how are they going to get their invasion fleet over? Their airforce is not in any better state than the navy. So please tell me how they are going to be able to do this? People didn't say that last time, Argentina was not considered a threat, because nobody thought they would invade.

Last edited by Lindsay Bremner; 22nd November 2011 at 17:04..
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 22nd November 2011, 18:08
Alex Salmond's Avatar
Alex Salmond Alex Salmond is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1970 - 1989
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,718
No mate you post away as much as you like my problem is your assertion that although they are not independent it is their oil !would you have said the same if Scotland had decided North Sea oil was theirs and not the UKs the Falklands were defended by British troops defending British soil therfore any oil found belongs to Britain and Falkland Islands by extension or they should be left to go their own way as New Zealand and Australia were ,what did Britain get from NZ and OZ are you kidding mate take a look at how many Anzac troops died helping Britain and then ask the same question,last time I looked we are independent and get nothing from the UK any defence agreement is just that an agreement
__________________
"21st century schizoid man"
"Its life Jim,but not as we know it"
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 22nd November 2011, 18:16
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
I said what DOES Britain get from those countries. I didn't say what DID they get. They are all independent countries now, but we are still sworn to protect.

I'm not going to discuss the North Sea and Scotland, because it has nothing to do with what I have been talking about. Whether anybody likes it or not, the oil belongs to the Falklands, the British Government says so. So if anybody is not happy with that, then bring it up with
Mr D Cameron
10 Downing Street
London.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 22nd November 2011, 18:21
LouisB's Avatar
LouisB LouisB is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1964 - 1995
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Salmond View Post
No mate you post away as much as you like my problem is your assertion that although they are not independent it is their oil !would you have said the same if Scotland had decided North Sea oil was theirs and not the UKs the Falklands were defended by British troops defending British soil therfore any oil found belongs to Britain and Falkland Islands by extension or they should be left to go their own way as New Zealand and Australia were ,what did Britain get from NZ and OZ are you kidding mate take a look at how many Anzac troops died helping Britain and then ask the same question,last time I looked we are independent and get nothing from the UK any defence agreement is just that an agreement
I believe Alex that on a pro rata basis the ANZAC losses as a percentage of population were higher than any other countries. A point often missed these days.


Dave. (UK)
__________________
R814683
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 22nd November 2011, 19:53
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
They didn't have Amphibious ships last time like Fearless or Intrepid. My veiw is if they did it before, they can do it again. They could drop special forces by Submarine and parashoot men out of planes not necicarly military planes.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 22nd November 2011, 20:10
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkroyal View Post
They didn't have Amphibious ships last time like Fearless or Intrepid. My veiw is if they did it before, they can do it again. They could drop special forces by Submarine and parashoot men out of planes not necicarly military planes.
Come on Ark. How do you think those amtracks got there in 1982?

http://www.forces80.com/argentine_forces.htm (Argie Invasion Force)

They cannot parachute in enough men and equipment, they would also be observed long before they reached the Falkland Islands and dealt with. As for submarines, fair point, but again I refer you back to the state of the Argie navy, those are very old and noisy subs. It's worth mentioning that the British armed forces are not stupid, don't you think they have already thought of that?

Sorry Ark, but I have to ask the question (though you do not have to answer). Why are you so convinced that Argentina could do anything?, given that they have very old ships in their navy and their air force is not in a very good shape either.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 22nd November 2011, 21:40
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
Well, I just think with determanation they could re-take it if they wanted. Im British and I do think the Royal Navy would be better than the Argentine navy ut the Royal Navy with small numbers still needs to patrol other parts of the world and I think we could all agree that a task force at a big scale could not be assembled. But as for submarines , they have two exGerman submarines which are good. They also have two being built. Deisel submarines are quiate. As for the airforce they might be able to fire modern missiles? At the momnet your giving a very good fair agument. The airforce isn't very good though but who knows what they might have which we dont know about.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 22nd November 2011, 22:04
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkroyal View Post
Well, I just think with determanation they could re-take it if they wanted. Im British and I do think the Royal Navy would be better than the Argentine navy ut the Royal Navy with small numbers still needs to patrol other parts of the world and I think we could all agree that a task force at a big scale could not be assembled. But as for submarines , they have two exGerman submarines which are good. They also have two being built. Deisel submarines are quiate. As for the airforce they might be able to fire modern missiles? At the momnet your giving a very good fair agument. The airforce isn't very good though but who knows what they might have which we dont know about.
Fair comment. However, they don't have the missiles for a dogfight with a Typhoon, their A4s and Etendards would be heading for the water long before they even knew a Typhoon was in the air. The Typhoon really is that good an aircraft.

Their navy doesn't seem to have any air defence weapons. In recent times, the only new aircraft they have received were old A4s from the USA, and these were investigated by Britain before the deal went through, Britain allowed it because we knew they were no match for the Tornadoes we had on the Falklands at that time.

The Etandards are maritime strike aircraft, not land strike, so they have no capacity to hit land targets. The A4s could, but with the air defence and the missile defence, I just cannot see how they would be effective. The chances of them having a missile or aircraft that we don't know about are very slim. As I have said before, Britain will not be caught out by the Argies again. We are watching them.

Their submarines today are very old, and would be (and have been) picked up by sonar long before they knew they had been found. As for the new SSNs (if they are ever built) we will just have to wait and see what they are capable of, yes they can be quiet, but the sonar on the RN SSNs these days are a completely different animal from what the Argies will be able to get for their SSNs.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 22nd November 2011, 22:22
wigger wigger is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 3,722
Yep, we'd have no chance of doing that again. But I think your wrong in righting off their air force, I'd be more worried about that than the navy. (not THAT worried you understand) I think they might actually have 3 submarines in service, but the key here is in what sort of condition. The serious lack of spending over the years has left the navy in not too good a shape. I think that might explain the budget increase thats been mentioned, it may well have doubled but its not necessarily to buy new equipment, more likely to salvage what they have left and put that to better use, something we could learn from in all honesty.

Argentina is not so secretive to have a hidden airforce, its not like they are suddenly going to bring out a squadron of F-22s. Having said that Mirages, Super Etendards et all are good aircraft, but think back to how they faired against a handful of Sea Harriers, we were well down on numbers but through talent (and some nifty AIM-9s as has been discussed) we managed to keep them busy if not a tad worried.
I think fear is a big factor here also, there was a big stink when the Typhoons deployed to MPA, that says a lot, technically its possible they could try to fly in, but the potential for being blown out of the sky, and at a greater distance is far higher now than it was 1982, and as much as anything is probably whats helped keep the peace for the last 29 years. If 4 old Phantoms kept the peace, then the Tornado's, I think the Typhoons could easily keep up that tradition.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 22nd November 2011, 22:54
LEEJ's Avatar
LEEJ LEEJ is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
My location
Posts: 566
A couple of points. On a recent tv programme filmed onboard a RN sub off Libya recently the captain was shown admonising his crew for not spotting a US carrier fleet.So I wonder as to the deterrent to an Argentine fleet. Bearing in mind that the fleet was allied I find that astonishing. Any comments?
Also, as regards all the back slapping for the US support during the Falklands conflict I believe that US personnel were maintaining Argentine A4s on their return from attacks on the British off the islands.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 22nd November 2011, 23:04
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEEJ View Post
A couple of points. On a recent tv programme filmed onboard a RN sub off Libya recently the captain was shown admonising his crew for not spotting a US carrier fleet.So I wonder as to the deterrent to an Argentine fleet. Bearing in mind that the fleet was allied I find that astonishing. Any comments?
Also, as regards all the back slapping for the US support during the Falklands conflict I believe that US personnel were maintaining Argentine A4s on their return from attacks on the British off the islands.
On the 1st point about not spotting a US carrier fleet, I couldn't in all honesty comment as I didn't see the program and have not read anything about it. Any link you can supply would be appreciated.

On the 2nd comment. I have heard plenty stories about US mercenaries fighting in the Falklands, but I have never actually read or seen a single thing to back that claims with. I would guess that is just as real a story as the sinking of Invincible. That said, if you can link me to something, my opinion might be changed.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 22nd November 2011, 23:43
pensioner pensioner is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Electrician
Active: 1966 - 1983
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
My location
Posts: 631
If we had to I wonder how many nationality's and languages there would be on either ship and would this cause any conflict of religous doctrine?
regards
__________________
There may be snow on the roof but the attic has not frozen yet
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 22nd November 2011, 23:50
Lindsay Bremner Lindsay Bremner is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
My location
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by pensioner View Post
If we had to I wonder how many nationality's and languages there would be on either ship and would this cause any conflict of religous doctrine?
regards
Sorry pensioner, you have me beaten! I'm not sure what you mean.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 23rd November 2011, 09:11
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
Lets just hope that our Submarines pick up the Argentine subs before they sink one of our ships. The Argentine navy have air defence wepons on there ships as there ex German. But what elce they got of the Germans??? I think were just have to agree that if the Islands were to be invaded it would be difficult to preturmin an outcome. But lets hope that dont happen!
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 23rd November 2011, 11:11
LEEJ's Avatar
LEEJ LEEJ is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
My location
Posts: 566
Lindsay,
the programme was called simply Submarine I think and was on only recently. Possibly Channel 5. Also I distinctly remember a documentary on the Falklands that showed US servicemen at an Argintine airbase. No link I'm afraid.

Rgds,
LeeJ
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 23rd November 2011, 14:47
Arkroyal's Avatar
Arkroyal Arkroyal is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
I watched that Submarine documentry about HMS Turbilant off Lybia.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 23rd November 2011, 18:31
Stevo's Avatar
Stevo Stevo is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Office / Administration
Active: 1989 - 2001
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,289
The US does work with the Argentines, just last week I was talking to a US Air Force pilot who was being assigned to Argentina for a two year period. Didn't get much out of him but I made damn sure he knew it was called the Falklands and told him to remind our friends down South.

As others have mentioned, the Argentines have subs but... In what condition? Subs require plenty of TLC and expertese I'm not convnced they have this. In addition what of the crew training, do they experience a Perisher style course for skippers or a punishing work up? Of the new subs building, they have been on the stocks for over ten years, with no completion date in mind. With no previous experience at building subs it seems a good bet they will be low quality noisy boats (consider China's early attempts!)

My concern now is that Britain does not have international support as it did in 82, and Obama will be no friend to us especially in light of his use of the Malvinas title, (sooner he goes the better!)

If I was Argentina I'd seek a partner who would be willing to lease their equipment and some crew (consider India and it's Charlie class nuclear boat in the 80s and now the Akula). A wet lease of equipment and or A silent partner offering services could again change things. That might seem a bit of fictional talk but war/conflicts are not known for following rules of engagement ( just ask the crew of the Belgrano) and any future war will be damn underhand and dirty. Sadly I fear as the clamber for oil gets desperate we will eventually lose those Islands.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 23rd November 2011, 19:09
Cisco's Avatar
Cisco Cisco is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1963 - 2006
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
My location
Posts: 6,275
I see the Argentinians have just upped the ante... http://en.mercopress.com/2011/11/23/...arios#comments

I also read recently that they intend to complete a diesel boat of german design that has been sitting unfinished somewhere in Argentina for about 30 years..... but they will be leaving out the diesels and putting an argentinian designed and built nuclear plant into it..... or so said Christina....

I think they are all mouth.. no trousers....
__________________
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 23rd November 2011, 19:17
stein stein is online now  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,912
Interesting link Cisco, I liked this quote: Argentine writer Borges once described the 1982 Falklands War as being like “two bald men fighting over a comb.”

Last edited by stein; 23rd November 2011 at 19:20..
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royal Navy Ark Royal visits city (BBC News) SN NewsCaster News and Views from the Shipping World 1 7th May 2012 03:12
Hi all from Tasmania Auistralia Ex Royal Navy & Merchant Navy in the 1950 janandgeoff Say Hello 13 1st January 2012 02:27
Royal Navy-US Navy Joint WWI Venture? LAlvarez Royal Navy 0 14th September 2008 03:54
New Navy ship bound for Falklands (BBC News) SN NewsCaster News and Views from the Shipping World 0 20th August 2007 21:50
royal navy mickswa Royal Navy 5 22nd April 2007 01:40



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.