Archimedes,
Thanks for the response, and the very good points you make. I was not, I'd make clear, singling you out for the suggestion on RN/RAF 'push' for the raid.
However, I stick by my conclusion that the RAF devised the 'Black Buck' raid. I don't think anyone thought the RN devised it. If the RAF thought it would not have worked, I'd expect Beetham to say so. They thought it would, and the RN command (quite rightly in my view) took it into their planning. It was part of a combined assault on Stanley starting on the 1st, and in military/damage terms it was, to say the least, 'limited'. Once again, I will say that this does not detract from the bravery and skill of the crews and their feats of airmanship to get there.
On bombing the mainland, I recollect the ROEs quite clearly, and in my view while excitable MPs might have sounded of on the issue, the main focus of operations was on the Falklands and militarily defeating the Arg forces there. It's my view (honestly held, but as ever open to disagreement) that trying to assign a number of indirect 'morale' and 'reallocation' effects solely to Black Buck is a mistake.
Did it get a lot of coverage at the time? Yes, no doubt. UK papers jumped all over it. But, from the Arg comments I have seen, the 'Belgrano' sinking was the massive and singular 'hit' on the Arg public perception. Arg pilot morale was badly affected as SHAR kills climbed (thank you the US for 9 Lima). From my direct experience on the ground before the surrender, Arg soldier morale was crumbling from day one, especially among conscripts, more so after Goose Green, helped by poor leadership and inadequate logistics (including lack of food). We found emaciated remains of conscripts just a couple of miles from massive food dumps. A horrible sight.
On sources, yes, I agree that the full picture is not yet out. But there is one full picture that is, and that is the Task Force recce shot (yes, taken by a SHAR, but using an RAF camera) that clearly shows the bomb fall. It's the dissembling on that basic stuff that I find troubling, especially on an official RAF website.
Again (and sorry to repeat here) - my concern is that overstating the effect of Black Buck generates exactly this sort of exchange, which only serves to obscure and diminish the recognition the Black Buck crews deserve. An open and honest description of the raids, without trying to hype the results, would serve those brave people far better.
Best Regards as ever,
Engines