Ewen,
Dave
Why assume an E-3? How about an E-2 off the boat?
Because there'd have had to have been a USN Carrier somewhere for it to fly off, and I think we'd have spotted an aircraft carrier, seeing as we were quite keen to locate the Argie one at the time.
As for satellites - yes, I'm sure satellite info was provided, but AWACS isn't satellite based and the question was whether the US provided AWACS to the fleet.
A geostationary satellite is in equatorial orbit (it has to be) and I'd be quite surprised if an equatorial satellite could 'see' something near the Falklands, which must be approx 50S...that's a slant range in excess of 3000nm. Any photo support would, I imagine, have been from a periodic overflight by a 'normally' orbiting photosat. I'd have thought Elint and radio intercept via satellite was probably more useful. (If you read the recent book about the sinking of the Belgrano it's apparent that somebody was reading the Argentine orders - make your own mind up about how that was being done).
How could a USAF AWACS fly in support of the fleet? It took masses of AAR to put each aircraft near the F.I., AAR's to refuel AARs, each creeping ever closer until the last tanker could refuel the Vulcan, Nimrod, Herc... (Vulcan 607 describes the extent of this AAR effort). Where did the AWACS and its associated AAR come from? It wasn't Ascension Is. and if you think Ascension was a long way from the F.I. then see how far away the next closest UK or US (or friendly enough to allow such a flight) base would have been.
No, even if I knew nothing about it anyway, I'd still have to say the whole idea has more holes in it than a big holey thing with a huge number of holes in it.
Mind you, Andrew Marr doubtless has as much idea of what AWACS is as most of the media - he probably thought he was describing the little shop on Ascension where you could buy flip flops and garish T shirts, or perhaps the Class 6.
Dave