The Falklands Conflict

[Ike99]

Ok, just watched that video. Pretty decent. Maybe you could loan it to the RCAF for recruiting purposes? ( for any who may wonder, I haven't seen a REAL recruiting ad in a long time. But hey, it IS Canada we talking about)
Still, gotta wonder, pretty old jets there...Whatever happened to your Mirage 2000s?

Ahh...see there you go assuming and under estimating again.[8D]

Those jets are not old at all. They are brand new. Designed and manufactured in Argentina. In the video they are training new pilots for the expanding airforce.

The planes in that video are the 2 seater training version of the ¨Pampa¨ The modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨ A small, close air support ground attack plane designed to operate high speed at ground level.

In the fighting in 1982 the British could not shoot down the Pucara because it flew extremely close to the ground and got cluttered with the ground on the radar return. (cheap stealth) Flying in between the hills and valleys, trees, whatever. I think during 82´ they only managed to shoot down 2 ¨pucaras¨ This why the SAS were placed ashore to destroy them on the ground because they couldn`t shoot them down.

The ¨Pampa¨ is a modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨

[DuckofTindalos]

Yeah, "brand new", right... The Pucara flew during the war, and the Pampa entered service in 1988.

BTW, the Argentinians never had Mirage 2000's. They had Mirage 3/5's, which are roughly similar in planform.

[Ike99]

Terminus-Yeah, "brand new", right... The Pucara flew during the war, and the Pampa entered service in 1988.BTW, the Argentinians never had Mirage 2000's. They had Mirage 3/5's, which are roughly similar in planform.

I know the Pucara flew during the war. Yeah those Pampas are brand new. They still make them you know. No the Pampa did not enter service in 1988. A 2 seat training version has been used from 88´

The combat version of the Pampa entered service in 2000´ As far as combat aircraft are concerned best described as...¨New¨

I didn´t mention Mirages.

I note that you have also not bothered to answer any questions about thehistory of the Falkland Islands BEFORE the Spanish involvement. I wonder why?

Putting aside all the British propaganda this very short history video very clearly and undeniably shows the Malvinas belong to Argentina.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHNeUCL1cfw

[ezzler]

Great.
But hadn't you better get on with it and nvade before the 2 x new fleet carriers turn up for the RN , and the Eurofighter , and all our troops come back from Iraq and Afganstan.

I mean if there has ever been a better time to fight the UK than when its heavily engaged in fighting an insurgency and cutting military spending , while awaiting newer and better equipment.. why that must have been ....

1982 !!
[;)]

[String]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Terminus-Yeah, "brand new", right... The Pucara flew during the war, and the Pampa entered service in 1988.BTW, the Argentinians never had Mirage 2000's. They had Mirage 3/5's, which are roughly similar in planform.

I know the Pucara flew during the war. Yeah those Pampas are brand new. They still make them you know. No the Pampa did not enter service in 1988. A 2 seat training version has been used from 88´

The combat version of the Pampa entered service in 2000´ As far as combat aircraft are concerned best described as...¨New¨

I didn´t mention Mirages.

I note that you have also not bothered to answer any questions about thehistory of the Falkland Islands BEFORE the Spanish involvement. I wonder why?

Putting aside all the British propaganda this very short history video very clearly and undeniably shows the Malvinas belong to Argentina.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHNeUCL1cfw

I don't speak spanish, but I did notice that the first flag on the islands in that video was French...

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Putting aside all the British propaganda this very short history video very clearly and undeniably shows the Malvinas belong to Argentina.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHNeUCL1cfw

Oh yeah, irrefutable "proof" right there. Get over yourself; nobody here agrees with you in any way, and they never will. Just quit.

[Dixie]

That video is Argentian in origin right?  An Argentian video is hardly clear and undeniable proof of anything.  Ever.  The actions and words of a tinpot dictatorship and it's successive governments means SFA. 

If that video is clear and undeniable proof of ownership of the Falklands, then this is clear and undeniable proof that someone tagged Airforce One.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwU2t3BJtiM 

And U-571 is proof that the US Navy captured the Enigma machine
And The 300 is proof that the Persians had monsters in ancient times
And Pearl HArbor is proof that Ben Affleck can't act*


* This one is true [:D]

[bobogoboom]

Hey he was good in chasing amy and good will hunting

[Banquet]

No, not old at all. Their striking resemblance to the Alpha jet is just coincidence!

The Pucara is widely acknowledged as being a complete failure during the conflict. Destroyed on the ground, in the air by SAMs, small arms fire and by other aircraft. On the other hand it was a Pucara that was acknowledged with the only confirmed air-air kill made by Argentinian forces - a scout helicopter. Apparently the Pucara pilot then crashed.


[quote]ORIGINAL: Ike99

Those jets are not old at all. They are brand new. Designed and manufactured in Argentina. In the video they are training new pilots for the expanding airforce.

The planes in that video are the 2 seater training version of the ¨Pampa¨ The modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨ A small, close air support ground attack plane designed to operate high speed at ground level.

In the fighting in 1982 the British could not shoot down the Pucara because it flew extremely close to the ground and got cluttered with the ground on the radar return. (cheap stealth) Flying in between the hills and valleys, trees, whatever. I think during 82´ they only managed to shoot down 2 ¨pucaras¨ This why the SAS were placed ashore to destroy them on the ground because they couldn`t shoot them down.

The ¨Pampa¨ is a modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: 105mm Howitzer
Ok, just watched that video. Pretty decent. Maybe you could loan it to the RCAF for recruiting purposes? ( for any who may wonder, I haven't seen a REAL recruiting ad in a long time. But hey, it IS Canada we talking about)
Still, gotta wonder, pretty old jets there...Whatever happened to your Mirage 2000s?

The last decent one I saw was Top Gun!!!

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Ok, just watched that video. Pretty decent. Maybe you could loan it to the RCAF for recruiting purposes? ( for any who may wonder, I haven't seen a REAL recruiting ad in a long time. But hey, it IS Canada we talking about)
Still, gotta wonder, pretty old jets there...Whatever happened to your Mirage 2000s?

Ahh...see there you go assuming and under estimating again.[8D]

Those jets are not old at all. They are brand new. Designed and manufactured in Argentina. In the video they are training new pilots for the expanding airforce.

The planes in that video are the 2 seater training version of the ¨Pampa¨ The modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨ A small, close air support ground attack plane designed to operate high speed at ground level.

In the fighting in 1982 the British could not shoot down the Pucara because it flew extremely close to the ground and got cluttered with the ground on the radar return. (cheap stealth) Flying in between the hills and valleys, trees, whatever. I think during 82´ they only managed to shoot down 2 ¨pucaras¨ This why the SAS were placed ashore to destroy them on the ground because they couldn`t shoot them down.

The ¨Pampa¨ is a modern replacement for the ¨Pucara¨

Flying in between the hills and valleys, trees, whatever

You've never been to the Falklands, have you? lmao...trees!!

And new aircraft!!! lol That isn't a new aircraft...this puppy is a new aircraft!

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Banquet

No, not old at all. Their striking resemblance to the Alpha jet is just coincidence!

The Pucara is widely acknowledged as being a complete failure during the conflict. Destroyed on the ground, in the air by SAMs, small arms fire and by other aircraft. On the other hand it was a Pucara that was acknowledged with the only confirmed air-air kill made by Argentinian forces - a scout helicopter. Apparently the Pucara pilot then crashed.

lol. There were very few air losses on the British side.....and of the ones I know of, they were NOT from enemy fire

And this is what I remember of the Pucara...maybe you have a different image!

[JudgeDredd]

[/align]
Does anyone remember the tactic employed by Harrier pilots? Called VIFFing...Vertical In Forward Flight. I don't know if it was propaganda at the time, but it is a recognised manouver in the Harrier, whereby the nozzles are shifted forward whilst in forward flight, acting as a brake.
 
From what I can remember, in order for it to be effective, the pilot had to be quite brave...letting the enemy get with shooting range and then viffing, causing the pilot of the enemy aircraft to over shoot the harrier, which then came down on the tail.
 
I remember vaguely this tactic was touted as being used with reasonable results during the conflict.

[JudgeDredd]

Ike99
 
You buggers hit the Falklands at a time when Britain pretty much had their trousers down. There was discontent everywhere, the military was being downsized to a great degree. The navy was probably at it's leanest and the airforce appeared to be in some disarray, not seeming to have enough of the type of aicraft they needed for "general" hostilities, focusing more on the Cold War requirements.
 
We still sailed almost 10,000 miles, with a force that was in decline,  stretched to the absolute limit of supply, with extremely limited resources, with a force far inferior in numbers to the aggressors and ejected you from those islands whilst minimising our losses.
 
Unless a political settlement is reached, or you manage to break Britains historical bond with the US and form one of your own, I doubt The Falklands will be returned to Argentina anytime soon.
 
The conflict may be ongoing, as you suggest, but most people would agree the result will be the same should your government try it's hard handed tactics again.
 
Also, they may find that they don't even get their feet wet this time, being as there is more than a handful of Marines protecting the islands now!!
Britain is again suffering some of these same problems. As someone said earlier, your government better get the


[/align]

[Neilster]

This is a quote from Lieutenant Commander David Morgan DSC who flew Sea Harriers in the Falklands Conflict.

"No-one used viffing in combat - it's very much a last-ditch manoeuvre. It can be useful if the guy behind hasn't seen it before and doesn't know what you're going to do. You can decelerate from 450 knots down to 150 in about three or four seconds, and that is enough to fly people out in front - however, if he sees it coming, all he has to do is go vertical and just sit around on top of you. You end up with no energy at all and he's got all the time in the world to take you out."

http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/oldstuff/2 ... arrier.htm

Cheers, Neilster

[7th Somersets]

Also, they may find that they don't even get their feet wet this time

 
If they come by sea they probably will. There are reputedly frequent hunter-killer submarine patrols in those waters since the conflict.
 
I think that the best chance of success (without wetting their feet) would be to fly the 450km in their aeroplanes and then jump!
 
 
On second thoughts...
 

 
They probably would end up getting their feet wet that way too!
 
The political fallout for Argentina would be incalculable, with no military Junta to blame for their illegal behaviour.
 
 
 
 

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

This is a quote from Lieutenant Commander David Morgan DSC who flew Sea Harriers in the Falklands Conflict.

"No-one used viffing in combat - it's very much a last-ditch manoeuvre. It can be useful if the guy behind hasn't seen it before and doesn't know what you're going to do. You can decelerate from 450 knots down to 150 in about three or four seconds, and that is enough to fly people out in front - however, if he sees it coming, all he has to do is go vertical and just sit around on top of you. You end up with no energy at all and he's got all the time in the world to take you out."

http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/oldstuff/2 ... arrier.htm

Cheers, Neilster

Clearly I was influenced by the propaganda at the time, then.

[7th Somersets]

Clearly I was influenced by the propaganda at the time, then.

 
Judge,
 
I also remember hearing these capabilities being discussed. From memory, I remember an account in a newspaper of a dog fight between Skyhawks and Harriers where this was supposed to have been used.
 
I suspect that Lt Commander Morgan would have a better idea though as I suspect that there would have been quite a bit of discussion between the pilots re tactics used.

[Banquet]

I remember hearing that too.

On the subject of the Argentinian claim to have hit the Invincible.. does anyone else remember news reports that they also claimed to have sunk the Canberra? From my recollection one of the reasons Canberra was picked to drop off the POW's at Puerto Madryn was to show she was very much not sunk.

ORIGINAL: 7th Somersets

Clearly I was influenced by the propaganda at the time, then.

Judge,

I also remember hearing these capabilities being discussed. From memory, I remember an account in a newspaper of a dog fight between Skyhawks and Harriers where this was supposed to have been used.

I suspect that Lt Commander Morgan would have a better idea though as I suspect that there would have been quite a bit of discussion between the pilots re tactics used.

[a white rabbit]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd





Ike99

You buggers hit the Falklands at a time when Britain pretty much had their trousers down. [/align]

..total rubbish..