The Falklands Conflict

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

The Falklands Conflict

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> The Falklands Conflict

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The Falklands Conflict - 8/2/2007 11:31:00 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

This was brought up in another thread, but rather than take that thread off topic, I thought I'd start this one.

Anyone is more than welcome to comment or ask questions if you need to.

The story I wanted to tell was one of 2 Para.

I seen a programme recently about The Falklands Conflict and the Padre (priest) said...

"We loaded onto the landing craft and headed for shore. When we got to shore, the front dropped and the seaman shouted "Troops out"....well we all stood there. We had never heard that command before. He shouted it again, and still, no one moved. You have to remember we are paratroopers. We are used to jumping out planes, not off landing craft. Also, we are used to seeing a read light, a green light and then hearing the word "GO"....well it wasn't until one switched on Lieutenant shouted "GO!!!" that we actually knew what to do...and we disembarked"

I thought it was a funny story that absolutely proved beyond a doubt that the Army training had worked...because during that training you were constantly reminded "You're not paid to think, you are paid to follow orders".

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

Post #: 1

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/2/2007 11:35:53 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Also, another little tidbit of info about it.

Argentina had to attack when it did. The military Junta at the time did not want to...they wanted to wait...time was on their side apart from one thing...discontent in Argentina. Had Argentina waited, they would've gained a large quantity of Exocet missiles from the French....they only had 5. These proved extremely effective against the "tinderbox" frigates of the RN. If they had more of these missiles, it's entirely possible Britain would either have had to work on a diplomatic tact...or risk the entire task force to these excellent weapons.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 2

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 12:52:07 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

If it was the thread I started about "What era to depict in a game" then you could have taken it off topic. Heck, it's gone off a few times already.

Nielster told me all about the Tasmanian Devil and that was better than the original thread by far!

I'd ask you what channel you saw this on so I could find it but we are on different continents. I really got to get The History and The Military channels.

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 3

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 1:09:33 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

It was that thread...but I thought it only fair it go back on topic.

I did buy a DVD about The Falklands Conflict (or was it just the Battle for Goose Green?)...awesome DVD...very informative. For example, did you know that the British mortars was almost useless in the Battle for Goose Green (and probably most elsewhere) because the ground was so soft it just absorbed the explosion...still had the terror effect...but very few casualties from it apparently.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 4

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 1:12:40 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Also at Goose Green, the British had sent a Frigate to provide fire support, but it didn't take part...had a problem with it's gun. Or it fired very few rounds...my memory is getting worse as I get old. I don't think it fired at all!

Also, the reason Goose Green was attacked was because purely political. There was a relatively large garrison there, but the British Commander was confident it could be contained....Margaret Thatcher, on the other hand (PM at the time) wanted a victory....to keep public morale up. I think we had lost a couple of ships by then and people were thinking "BUGGER!"

I was 15 at the time.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 5

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 4:00:37 AM

mek42

Posts: 78
Joined: 7/27/2007
From: Upstate (Central) NY
Status: offline

If the French shipment of Exocets had arrived and the task force severely punished, how badly would that have tarnished UK - France relations?

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 6

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:49:22 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mek42

If the French shipment of Exocets had arrived and the task force severely punished, how badly would that have tarnished UK - France relations?

One of the dirty little secrets of the war was that we supplied far more arms to Argentina than the French. Their SeaCat ASM, Blowpipe and Tigercat SAMs were ours, their infantry MG was the same as ours. IIRC, we sold them their boots.

They also had American helicopters and fighters, Belgian infantry weapons and German anti tank missiles. So it would have been a bit harsh to yell at the French. But as to the question, UK-French relations have been about the same since Agincourt :)

----------------

Dredd,

I also find that war fascinating for a number of reasons:

1) All I remember from the time was that the media portrayed it as a foregone conclusion from the moment the task force sailed. Reading about it afterwards though, the war could have been a much closer run thing, and was potentially disasterous. British history for the next two decades could have been dramatically different.

2) In an era where modern weapons and platforms are the stars, the war was won by infantry tactics and marching. A really unique event in the past 100 years. Not just a part of a campaign, but the entire campaign devoid of heavy tanks.

3) Us scraping together bombers from the 60's, fighters from the 70's, cruise ships and ships we sold off to the Aussies, as well as the last conflict where our infantry weapon training focussed on single shots. I think everything from being caught pants down, not having a navy to get enough men there and the state of our military is sort of the punctuation mark at the end of a 30 year long paragraph of British decay. Perhaps one of the lowest points of our history.

(in reply to mek42)

Post #: 7

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 11:08:26 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Dinsdale

Absolutely agree on all points.

As I said I was 15 at the time and tried not to miss a single news report..."I counted them all out, and I counted them all back" (Brian Hanrahan I think).

From what I recall, one of the two Carriers Britain had at the time was about to be decommissioned for scrap (HMS Hermes).

I remember when it kicked off. Prior to the "invasion" we were first told about the successful raid on Pebble Island which I think at the time was more touted as a terror raid but in actual fact dramatically increased the Argentinian Air Force flight time because they didn't want to use the airfield there...and I think the only other one was Stanley...but being as that was bombed by a Vulcan bomber flying non-stop from Wide Awake airfield in Acension Islands (albeit not very successfully), they didn't want to station their class fighter bombers there (Super Entendards and Mirage fighters I think)

I was glued to the television...then we heard about the ships dropping like flies. HMS Coventry. HMS Antelope. HMS Ardent (I may have the order wrong). All apparently because the British Government had choosen to use a cheaper material on these ships which was ended up like a spark in a tinderbox when a bomb went off.

HMS Antelope(I think) was unlucky. The bomb that ripped through her did not go off (the Argentinian pilots were forced to fly low and their fuses were not set for such a low altitude). I think it went off when they were trying to defuse it. I still remember the picture of her exploding into the night.

Attachment (3)

< Message edited by JudgeDredd -- 8/3/2007 11:10:50 AM >

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 8

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 11:28:32 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Funny thing (or not) is that the British ships were sunk by unexpolded bombs! Not all...but a larger proportion than you would've thought

http://www.naval-history.net/F62brshipslost.htm

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 9

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 11:32:17 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

There's an excellent looking flight-sim being developed based around the Falklands Conflict...

http://www.thunder-works.com/news.htm

Cheers, Neilster

Attachment (3)

< Message edited by Neilster -- 8/3/2007 11:35:10 AM >

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 10

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 12:03:01 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

I'd give anything to fly a Sea Harrier sim!!

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 11

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 12:11:56 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I'd give anything to fly a Sea Harrier sim!!

You'll be able to in this, and the authenticity they're committed to is extreme.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 12

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 12:52:10 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Another little bit of info that may not be widely known, but the US refused to get involved on any military scale. They were very active in the diplomacy, but not so on the military front. I believe a request was made for some. We didn't have enough aircraft carriers or aircraft, and I think seaborne aviation help was requested.

Maybe there were some "underground" transactions going on...but from what I remember of the news back then, we didn't have any backing.

I am going from memory here, and this in 1982, and I may have just listened to the proaganda at the time...but that's what I remember. And the reason I remember it that way is because Thatcher and Reagan were like lovers at the time!!

Anyone remember any different?

I remember Alexander Haig running around from country to country to drum up support for the British against the Argentinian Military Junta of the time....

< Message edited by JudgeDredd -- 8/3/2007 12:53:17 PM >

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 13

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 1:09:08 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

And I apparently remember it wrong, or listened to the wrong propaganda at the time...this from Wiki

quote:

The United States international image was damaged because of the perception in Latin America[70] that it broke the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (TIAR) by providing UK with all kinds of military supplies.[71] Chile is also perceived to have broken the TIAR because they supported UK troops.[72] In September 2001, President of Mexico Vicente Fox cited the Falklands War as proof of the failure of the TIAR.

*Edited*m to apologise to my American friends

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 14

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 1:10:57 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

However it does say this (note [71])

quote:

^ [8] Caspar Weinberger who was the Defence Secretary at the time ... His staunch support later earned him a British Knighthood. He provided the United Kingdom with all the equipment she required during the war. Ranging from submarine detectors to the latest missiles. All this was done very discreetly.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 15

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 2:05:22 PM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I'd give anything to fly a Sea Harrier sim!!

I think the last one I played way "Jump Jet" on the C64

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 16

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 2:24:02 PM

Ike99

Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline

quote:

Another little bit of info that may not be widely known, but the US refused to get involved on any military scale. They were very active in the diplomacy, but not so on the military front.

I believe the US was very involved. If not the British would never have recovered the MALVINAS.

To start with the British would never have been able to even undertake the operation had the US not allowed it's bases in the Atlantic to be used by the British.

Then the US rushed the new (still experimental) sidewinder missile to the British for use on their harriers to assure British air superiority.

And let us not forget the satellite imagery of all the Argentine positions on the Malvinas provided by the US to the British.

Without US help the British would have lost.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 8/3/2007 2:28:32 PM >

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 17

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 2:39:46 PM

Raverdave

Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline

The yanks did end up passing a lot of raw data via their satellites and "other" means. I well remember the war as I was in the Aussie green machine back then and we were simply busting hoping that the conflict would escalate so that we could get in on it.

But I tell you what I really have to take off my hat to those argie pilots. I thought that the huge effort that went into bombing the airfield by the RAF was a waste of effort.....IIRC the bombers had to tank eight times? But it made the blue-suiters look good in the press.

_____________________________

Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 18

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:44:46 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99

quote:

Another little bit of info that may not be widely known, but the US refused to get involved on any military scale. They were very active in the diplomacy, but not so on the military front.

I believe the US was very involved. If not the British would never have recovered the MALVINAS.

To start with the British would never have been able to even undertake the operation had the US not allowed it's bases in the Atlantic to be used by the British.

Then the US rushed the new (still experimental) sidewinder missile to the British for use on their harriers to assure British air superiority.

And let us not forget the satellite imagery of all the Argentine positions on the Malvinas provided by the US to the British.

Without US help the British would have lost.

Just to correct a few things:

1. The US did do a rush delivery of the all-aspect AIM-9L which gave the FAA (Fleet Air Arm) and RAF Harriers a distinct advantage over the, er, FAA (Fuerza Aerea Argentina).

2. Ascension Island is a dependency of the British overseas territory of St Helena, not a US dependency. Yes, NASA does have dibs on the runway there but Wideawake Airfield is a joint RAF/USAF base.

3. Yes, the satellite imagery was very useful, thanks.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to Ike99)

Post #: 19

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:50:43 PM

oi_you_nutter

Posts: 418
Joined: 10/28/2004
From: from Bristle now living in Kalifornia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99

quote:

Another little bit of info that may not be widely known, but the US refused to get involved on any military scale. They were very active in the diplomacy, but not so on the military front.

I believe the US was very involved. If not the British would never have recovered the MALVINAS.

To start with the British would never have been able to even undertake the operation had the US not allowed it's bases in the Atlantic to be used by the British.

Then the US rushed the new (still experimental) sidewinder missile to the British for use on their harriers to assure British air superiority.

And let us not forget the satellite imagery of all the Argentine positions on the Malvinas provided by the US to the British.

Without US help the British would have lost.

the use of the (US administered) Wideawake airfield on (British) Ascension Island was critical, so was the US supply of aviation fuel. read the "Vulcan 607" book for details. that airfield was the busiest in the world for a period of time.

the Vulcan missions were a massive undertaking with little results, but imho not a waste of effort, even if just for morale purposes.. they gave the Brits a victory and (luckily) the main cost was an awful lot of fuel !

(in reply to Ike99)

Post #: 20

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:51:36 PM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

Have you ever read how the Malvinas became the Falklands in the first place?

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 21

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:53:27 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

One of the dirty little secrets of the war was that we supplied far more arms to Argentina than the French. Their SeaCat ASM, Blowpipe and Tigercat SAMs were ours, their infantry MG was the same as ours. IIRC, we sold them their boots.

They also had American helicopters and fighters, Belgian infantry weapons and German anti tank missiles. So it would have been a bit harsh to yell at the French. But as to the question, UK-French relations have been about the same since Agincourt :)

ARA Veinticinco de Mayo was ex-HMS Venerable, Santissima Trinidad and Hercules are both Type 42 destroyers and the FAA flew Canberras on recon.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 22

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 6:54:47 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

Have you ever read how the Malvinas became the Falklands in the first place?

Yes.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to junk2drive)

Post #: 23

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 7:21:00 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

I was 11 and can remember being intensely interested, although a little fearful that it might somehow escalate into a global nuclear war. This probably sounds crazy to the younger generation but was a legitimate fear during any major Cold War crisis.

The Aussie media (and less overtly, the government) basically backed the British whilst providing a realistic appraisal of the risks involved. Hindsight demonstrated the dodgy nature of much of their equipment and victory, it seems, was won mainly by good training, good planning, good tactics, toughness, courage and traditional British stubbornness. "Good show chaps, what!"

Cheers, Neilster

Attachment (1)

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 24

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 8:22:21 PM

Banquet

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I was 11 and can remember being intensely interested, although a little fearful that it might somehow escalate into a global nuclear war. This probably sounds crazy to the younger generation but was a legitimate fear during any major Cold War crisis.

I was a similar age (13). I could be wrong, but seem to remember there being some issue that the British might bomb Argentinian mainland airbases and Russia saying basically 'don't do that, or we might become involved' So there was a possibility of it turning really nasty.

In my naivety I wrote to the MOD asking them for details of which ships had been sent to the Falklands (to help me follow events) and they wrote a nice letter back saying unfortunately that information was a secret.

I seem to recall a news item that a French ship had been intercepted by the British somewhere trying to supply Argentina with more exocets. I wasn't feeling any love for the French after I heard that!

I also remember wondering why the US appeared to be staying neutral diplomatically, but it soon became clear they were helping us in a quieter way. The AIM9L's certainly gave us a huge advantage in the air.

_____________________________

http://i904.photobucket.com/albums/ac241/norfolktraveller/command-banner_zps8a55d0fa.jpg

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 25

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 8:41:26 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

It's been a long, long time since I dusted it off and pulled it from the shelves and my recollection of distinct details is decidely foggy by now, but that most excellent British military historian Max Hastings wrote a superb book on the subject.

I can well recall the time period of the conflict. At that time in US society the feminist movement was in full swing with all of us pig-headed males being branded as chauvinists and the subject of the possibility of a female president would surface in discussions now and then (quite appropriate now with the looming possibiltes in the coming elections). I recall how I used to turn the tables on the discussions by pointing out that I wouldn't hesitate to vote for a woman for president as long as her name was Margaret Thatcher. I did then, and still do, have a tremendous amount of admiration for the Iron Lady.

I highly recommend Hasting's book on the Falklands War.

(in reply to Banquet)

Post #: 26

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 9:56:13 PM

oi_you_nutter

Posts: 418
Joined: 10/28/2004
From: from Bristle now living in Kalifornia
Status: offline

1982 was a heady year for me, i turned 16 during the Falklands Conflict and like everyone else i was glued to the telly and eagerly read the newspapers for whatever little info they had

in September '82 I started my apprenticeship at British Aerospace Dynamics, the post-Falklands buzz was evident and you could sense the pride of the employees that their kit was involved, it was intoxicating for a 16 year old to be around that, and how envious I was of the older apprentices who were were more involved with the equipment that helped win the war.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 27

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 10:08:59 PM

Jeffrey H.

Posts: 3154
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Another little bit of info that may not be widely known, but the US refused to get involved on any military scale. They were very active in the diplomacy, but not so on the military front. I believe a request was made for some. We didn't have enough aircraft carriers or aircraft, and I think seaborne aviation help was requested.

Maybe there were some "underground" transactions going on...but from what I remember of the news back then, we didn't have any backing.

I am going from memory here, and this in 1982, and I may have just listened to the proaganda at the time...but that's what I remember. And the reason I remember it that way is because Thatcher and Reagan were like lovers at the time!!

Anyone remember any different?

I remember Alexander Haig running around from country to country to drum up support for the British against the Argentinian Military Junta of the time....

I recall hearing that the US had supplied AA missles to British ships via sea transfer while the British ships were enroute. I imagine there was some level of intel cooperation, but we never heard anything about that of course.

This is indeed a very interesting topic.

My own memory of the conflict was one of images of the Argentine skyhawks screaming in at low level flying through English ship formations. Also, I recall the land battles but US coverage on the war was essentially useless sound bite shiznit.

I am interested in learning more and I agree this could make for a very interesting game.

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 28

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 10:20:43 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

[/quote]

I am interested in learning more and I agree this could make for a very interesting game.

[/quote]

Try this:

http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Falklands-Hastings-Simon-Jenkins/dp/0393301982

and here is an interesting tidbit of history from Wikipedia:

"When Hastings was with the 2nd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment as part of the British press corps reporting the Falklands War, the troops were ordered to stop but Hastings received no order and walked on, becoming the first man with the Falklands Task Force to arrive in the capital, Port Stanley. He then arranged an interview with the commanding officer of the Argentine forces who had occupied the islands. It was this audacity that won him a double award in 1982: Journalist of the Year and What the Papers Say Reporter of the Year."

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 8/3/2007 10:27:31 PM >

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)

Post #: 29

RE: The Falklands Conflict - 8/3/2007 10:58:58 PM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: oi_you_nutter

the use of the (US administered) Wideawake airfield on (British) Ascension Island was critical, so was the US supply of aviation fuel. read the "Vulcan 607" book for details. that airfield was the busiest in the world for a period of time.

the Vulcan missions were a massive undertaking with little results, but imho not a waste of effort, even if just for morale purposes.. they gave the Brits a victory and (luckily) the main cost was an awful lot of fuel !

As I recall the US supplied jet fuel was not supposed to be used for offensive actions....

There is also a common feeling that the Black Buck missions were a waste of effort. In particular people point to the few hits scored on Stanley's runways. The bomb run was planned in such a way that there was only the possibility of 2-3 hits maximum on the surface from a single bomb load of 21 bombs. The raids (a) Caused the Argentinians to keep their fast jets as a defence against raids on the mainland and (b) Closed Stanley as a base for fast jets, the craters caused were beyond the capability of the Argentine forces to repair at the time and the craters kept on subsiding.

_____________________________