The Falklands Conflict

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

Post Reply
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

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
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

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
User avatar
LarryP
Posts: 3300
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Carson City, NV

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by LarryP »

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. [:D][:D] 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.
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

It was that thread...but I thought it only fair it go back on topic. [:D]

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
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

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
mek42
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:28 pm
Location: Upstate (Central) NY

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by mek42 »

If the French shipment of Exocets had arrived and the task force severely punished, how badly would that have tarnished UK - France relations?
User avatar
dinsdale
Posts: 383
Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 4:42 pm

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by dinsdale »

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.
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

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.


Image
Attachments
Antelope3.jpg
Antelope3.jpg (9.96 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
hms-antelope2.jpg
hms-antelope2.jpg (16.27 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
300pxHMS_..e_F170.jpg
300pxHMS_..e_F170.jpg (13.13 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

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
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 3002
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by Neilster »

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

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

Cheers, Neilster

Image

Image

Image
Attachments
acmodels.jpg
acmodels.jpg (74.89 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
carrier3.jpg
carrier3.jpg (51.34 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
super_eten..ghdetail.jpg
super_eten..ghdetail.jpg (115.76 KiB) Viewed 1032 times
Cheers, Neilster
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

I'd give anything to fly a Sea Harrier sim!!
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 3002
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by Neilster »

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
Cheers, Neilster
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by 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....
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

And I apparently remember it wrong, or listened to the wrong propaganda at the time...this from Wiki
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 [:D]
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8362
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by JudgeDredd »

However it does say this (note [71])
^ [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.
[/ol]
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
Marc von Martial
Posts: 5292
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bonn, Germany
Contact:

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by Marc von Martial »

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 [:D]
User avatar
Ike99
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 11:06 pm
Location: A Sand Road

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by Ike99 »

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.
¨If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.¨ Che Guevara

The more I know people, the more I like my dog.
User avatar
Raverdave
Posts: 4882
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Melb. Australia

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by Raverdave »

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.
Image


Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
User avatar
sprior
Posts: 8294
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 11:38 pm
Location: Portsmouth, UK

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by sprior »

ORIGINAL: Ike99
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.

Image
User avatar
oi_you_nutter
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: from Bristle now living in Kalifornia

RE: The Falklands Conflict

Post by oi_you_nutter »

ORIGINAL: Ike99
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 !



ugh
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”