Matrix Games Forums

In checking out WW2 naval histories, I was amazed by the story of the cruiser USS Phoenix. She was there in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 and participated in a number of Pacific battles, including the Battle of Leyte Gulf and the kamikaze attacks. Post-war, the Argentine Government purchased her and she became the ARA General Belgrano and was sunk by the British nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror during the 1982 Falklands War. I am wondering how many other WW2 veterans are still in service in the world's navies? And did any others have such a unique career as the Phoenix/Belgrano? I have to think she is the only ship ever to have been attacked by both Kamikazes and nuclear submarines during her career.

It makes me think how complete a mismatch it must have been in 1982. What possessed the Argentines to send WW2 era ships out against modern nuclear vessels? According to records, ARA Belgrano had two Alouette III helos (which I assume had some ASW capability?) and therefore depended for protection on her escort, which were the ARA Piedra Buena and ARA Bouchard. Both these Sumner-class DDs were also former WW2 USN ships. Piedra Buena was the former USS Collett (DD-730) and the Bouchard was the former USS Borie (DD-704). Not sure to what extent they had been modified in terms of ASW capabilities, but from what I can tell they had only depth charges.

Did that Argentine task force have any chance? Sounds like the naval equivalent of a knight on horseback charging a machine gun.

These were the desperate acts of a ridiculous dicatatorship in Argentina.

There are also rumors that a US CVN Battle Group was standing off in case anything went wrong for the Brits... If that was the case there were certainly also US nuke boats around too.

Did that Argentine task force have any chance? Sounds like the naval equivalent of a knight on horseback charging a machine gun.

No surface ship should have a chance against a competent nuclear sub captain and crew. The term sitting duck comes to mind.

Ship for ship the Argentines were at a disadvantage in both numbers and quality. However, after the loss of Belgrano their navy was never a factor. But this was only half the story. The land based Argentine air force was the key weapon for the South Americans. For the British, fighting 8,000(?) miles from home, with just two "aircraft carriers" to provide air cover for the entire fleet and the invasion forces, it was a close run thing.

The attack on the islands relied upon surprise to succeed initially - there was no RN presence to impede the invasion fleet - and then assumed that the British would not have the stomach for a fight once the islands were occupied by Argentine troops.

Not for the first time in history, a dictator mis-read the British.......

ORIGINAL: Pascal

These were the desperate acts of a ridiculous dicatatorship in Argentina.

There are also rumors that a US CVN Battle Group was standing off in case anything went wrong for the Brits... If that was the case there were certainly also US nuke boats around too.

Warspite1

I heard Ronald Reagan offered the services of a proper carrier, but Lady Thatcher respectfully declined; these were our islands, and we were going to get them back. Don't know whether that story is true.

Hi all,
interesting subject. As we had recently in university the Falkland war:

in informal Talks with Henry Brandon, the Sunday Times Correspondent in Washington, the U.S. Defence Minister Weinberger answered to the question what happens if the Brits loose their carriers: We will  will borrow one of ours. Of Course it was his personal statement, esp. against Haig, but it shows that if it all got worng there would be at least a strong Pro-Brit position inside the US Gouvernment.

Source: Henry Brendon; Special Relations, pp390-391.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Pascal

These were the desperate acts of a ridiculous dicatatorship in Argentina.

There are also rumors that a US CVN Battle Group was standing off in case anything went wrong for the Brits... If that was the case there were certainly also US nuke boats around too.

Warspite1

I heard Ronald Reagan offered the services of a proper carrier, but Lady Thatcher respectfully declined; these were our islands, and we were going to get them back. Don't know whether that story is true.

Dunno about the USN CVNTF access, but I do seem to recall an emergency shipment of AIM9s for the Brits' Harriers, courtesy of Uncle Sam. Seems that when the issue was most in doubt, we showed our hand and stepped away from nominal "neutrality". Then again, we've done that bit before too...

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Pascal

These were the desperate acts of a ridiculous dicatatorship in Argentina.

There are also rumors that a US CVN Battle Group was standing off in case anything went wrong for the Brits... If that was the case there were certainly also US nuke boats around too.

Warspite1

I heard Ronald Reagan offered the services of a proper carrier, but Lady Thatcher respectfully declined; these were our islands, and we were going to get them back. Don't know whether that story is true.

Dunno about the USN CVNTF access, but I do seem to recall an emergency shipment of AIM9s for the Brits' Harriers, courtesy of Uncle Sam. Seems that when the issue was most in doubt, we showed our hand and stepped away from nominal "neutrality". Then again, we've done that bit before too...

<edited out, probably would have started a pointless flamefest>

Oh goody... I'm sure this won't spiral out of control...[8|]

May I humbly suggest that this thread is locked. It has nothing to do with the game.

ORIGINAL: elxaime

It makes me think how complete a mismatch it must have been in 1982. What possessed the Argentines to send WW2 era ships out against modern nuclear vessels? According to records, ARA Belgrano had two Alouette III helos (which I assume had some ASW capability?) and therefore depended for protection on her escort, which were the ARA Piedra Buena and ARA Bouchard. Both these Sumner-class DDs were also former WW2 USN ships. Piedra Buena was the former USS Collett (DD-730) and the Bouchard was the former USS Borie (DD-704). Not sure to what extent they had been modified in terms of ASW capabilities, but from what I can tell they had only depth charges.

Did that Argentine task force have any chance? Sounds like the naval equivalent of a knight on horseback charging a machine gun.

A knight on horseback charging a machine gun would be brutally effective if it catches that machine gun unloaded.......

The ARA Belgrano was still armed with its 15 x 6" rapid fire main battery. The effect of this firepower on a thin-skinned modern frigate can only be imagined. The big unknown was how they were going to bring this firepower to bear in this day of satellite surveillance and AWACS. However, the Argentine Navy were maneuvering to do just that and were executing a two pronged sweep to catch the RN fleet between them. The British command/politicians considered this a serious enough threat that they felt obliged to 'pull the trigger'.

This was certainly a gamble on the part of the Argentine Navy but this plan aided by some luck (such as the loss of contact by the shadowing RN submarines) was the only realistic hope they had of influencing events. Unfortunately it was not to be.

There is evidence they knew the game was up and were withdrawing before the torpedo attack which has made the whole episode rather controversial. However the fact remains they were on an offensive tactical mission against the British fleet and even the Argentinians themselves have admitted it was a legitimate attack.

May I humbly suggest that this thread is locked. It has nothing to do with the game.

+1

At least she met an honourable end and wasnt cut up by the salvage yards!! Makes me think about the greatest travesty in american naval history where the Enterprise was sent to the breakers of course she was sold during Eisenhowers administration and he had no sense of honor when it came to the Navy!!
They should have at least had the decency to tow her out to sea and sink her!!!!

ORIGINAL: Rainer

May I humbly suggest that this thread is locked. It has nothing to do with the game.

+1

There are tons of Off Topic (OT) threads. There is nothing bizarre or offensive about them. There is absolutely no reason to lock them as long as they stay civil and within the forum rules.

ORIGINAL: SargeantTex

At least she met an honourable end and wasnt cut up by the salvage yards!! Makes me think about the greatest travesty in american naval history where the Enterprise was sent to the breakers of course she was sold during Eisenhowers administration and he had no sense of honor when it came to the Navy!!
They should have at least had the decency to tow her out to sea and sink her!!!!

Tell that to the families of the crew members who "met an honorable end".

Whipple

ORIGINAL: Pascal

ORIGINAL: Rainer

May I humbly suggest that this thread is locked. It has nothing to do with the game.

+1

There are tons of Off Topic (OT) threads. There is nothing bizarre or offensive about them. There is absolutely no reason to lock them as long as they stay civil and within the forum rules.

Warspite1

+1 there have been loads of these recently and none have gone off the rails - everyone has been respectful of the forum rules and there have been some interesting debates.

Every thread is capable of going pear shaped if some moron decides they can't behave themselves or simply wants to cause trouble, why let them spoil it for the rest of us?

I have to think she is the only ship ever to have been attacked by both Kamikazes and nuclear submarines during her career.

She's the only ship to ever be sunk (deliberately) by a nuclear submarine.

ORIGINAL: sprior

I have to think she is the only ship ever to have been attacked by both Kamikazes and nuclear submarines during her career.

She's the only ship to ever be sunk (deliberately) by a nuclear submarine.

Albeit using WWII design era torpedoes.......

ORIGINAL: Reg

The ARA Belgrano was still armed with its 15 x 6" rapid fire main battery. The effect of this firepower on a thin-skinned modern frigate can only be imagined. The big unknown was how they were going to bring this firepower to bear in this day of satellite surveillance and AWACS ...

I understand that US satellites discovered the Belgrano and then tipped-off the British to its location.

I also recall that the Brit sub only used two torps; in wartime, it was authorized to use four fish to sink an enemy ship.

I believe Conqueror actually fired three Mark 8 Mod 4 torpedoes, of which two hit. I have recently seen it suggested that these weapons were selected in preference to those fancy Tigerfish thingummies because the bigger warhead was thought more appropriate, given the size of the target.