Sea Of Fire: BBC2 2100 1/6/07

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Tomorrow night, at 2100, BBC2 will be screening a docudrama called Sea of Fire about the sinking by Argentine aircraft of HMS Coventry on 25 May 1982.

The ship losses in the Falklands have been covered in many documentaries, book and internet sites, and have been discussed in many PPRuNe threads. This, however, appears to be an attempt to reconstruct the events which led to her loss, including the attack, damage control attempts and the abandon ship phase, from the point of view of those who were there. I don't think this has been done before.

BBC page (http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/listings/programme.shtml?day=friday&service_id=4224&filename=20070601/20070601_2100_4224_3402_60)

[Navaleye]

I shall watch with interest. Ch4 covered most of the bases some years back. Sounds like the BBC have discovered that they can make a cheap prog out of stock film and the contents of David Hart-Dyke's excellent book. Land, T42s and Sea Dart systems don't mix, neither do 38 mile pot shots with Sea Dart against a C-130.

[Widger]

Oh Navaleye, you are so out of touch. Sea Dart is an excellent missile, saved the Missouri's ass in 1991. (Although the misslie fired at her would have probably bounced off). Cardiff was successful in 1982. It might have been a pot shot at the C130 but, being illuminated by 909 would almost certainly have concentrated the mind especially when combined with a great stream of s**t and smoke coming at you.

[Not_a_boffin]

Indeed. Still the ONLY maritime missile system with a confirmed combat ASM kill, although as you say the result of a hit would probably have been a "hands to brooms - upperdeck" pipe...

[Navaleye]

Sea Dart is an excellent missile, saved the Missouri's ass in 1991

Not at 38 miles when you can see it coming for the first part of its journey. It stops smoking at 8 miles when the booster drops off. After that its a pretty clean weapon as long as its target is not too low, within its no escape zone and reasonably cooperative.

[doubledolphins]

well it was better than Seaslug (was there ever a better name? "Dave" excluded.) Also I don't think the threat to the "Mighty Mo" could see it coming.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Some sources have suggested that when the Silkworm was splashed by Sea Darts from Gloucester it was heading for the Survey vessel (come command platform for mine clearance) HMS Herald. A hit by the Silkworm (massive missile with massive warhead) would have sunk her with heavy loss of life.

Going back to 1982....

The documentary on C4 was called Going Critical. Surprisingly, after all this time, there is still a section on the C4 website.

Going Critical - HMS COVENTRY (http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/going_critical/hms_coventry/crucial.html)

The problem with the Sea Dart system but with the air search radar the T42 had in 1982, particularly with respect to performance against clutter due to the large beamwidth. (I covered this briefly at University - being taught about radar by a lecturer who is ex RN).

Broadsword's computer failure didn't help, and don't forget Broadsword was herself hit, and communication between the two ships broke down, leading to Coventry obscuring Broadsword's Sea Wolf firing arcs.

What the documentary didn't mention, but the books of Sandy Woodward and Sharkey Ward do, is that the Skyhawks were being chased by a pair of Sea Harriers, but the Sea Harriers were called out so they didn't enter the missile engagement zone. If organic AEW had been around, and the Skyhawks has been intercepted early things may have been very different.

Personally, I am interested in this from a damage control and sea survival viewpoint.

Bet it doesn't mention the role of the media, was it really such a good idea telling the world (Argentines included) that the bombs weren't exploding as they were not airborne long enough to arm. The bombs used that day were parachute retarded - coincidence?

[Magic Mushroom]

As HMS Cardiff proved in the Falklands War when she tragically shot down an AAC Gazelle flying overland, Sea Dart has always had a limited overland capability.

[MaxAOB]

WEBF, Hmm exactly what silkworm splashed by Gloucester are you discussing here? I was onboard within the Shah Alum MDZ that night and i am not sure you have the full story - and even though i was there am not even sure that i do!! It was a very interesting night - especially for the javellin crews that we carried. The Fighting 'G' waas also infamous at that time for its gung ho and extremely unpopular warfare staff. At the time Gloucester was limited in its ability to fire and the first decoys were fired by exeter. Or are you discussing a different incident? :rolleyes:

[AllTrimDoubt]

The Fighting 'G' waas also infamous at that time for its gung ho and extremely unpopular warfare staff.

Correct.

[Spurlash2]

Back to the No1 post...
I thought it was very good, and brought back memories of DC pre and post FI.
As an aside, I spent over a week, last year, endeavouring to get WO 'Trev' Trevarthan (unfortunately no turtle) from MPA to Pebble Island to lay a personal wreath for his oppo’s on the Coventry. Poor weather and u/s aircraft conspired against; but as in ’82, the aim was eventually achieved.

[buoy15]

We always briefed SeaDart with a threat range of 38nm based on it's performance envelope - surely it should be on it's last legs outside of that with little chance of a hit?
I read that during Range/Sea Trials a SeaDart took out a 4.5" shell fired from another ship - now that is impressive.
We also considered the RN a bigger threat to us than the Soviets when on DS.
Type 42 (Batch 3) was the best in the inventory and looked the part - also hosted the best cocktail parties with it's massive quarterdeck

[WE Branch Fanatic]

I believe that it was Sea Wolf that hit a 4.5 inch shell.

I thought the programme was very good. A few things seemed a bit odd (like the alarm sound) but it did give you an idea of what it must have been like. The personnel interviewed came across well with both dignity and humanity.

[NURSE]

One thing the documentry showed that the campaign showed was that reliance on missiles is a poor idea the T42 were fitted with phalanx post war and T22/III have a good combination of systems including goalkeeper. But come T23 on its Seawolf and 2x 30mm. And What apart from aster and 30mm will T45 have.
There is still a place for Guns in the airdefence umberella.

[vecvechookattack]

thought the programme was very good. A few things seemed a bit odd (like the alarm sound) but it did give you an idea of what it must have been like. The personnel interviewed came across well with both dignity and humanity.

You have to remember that this programme was filmed on a modern warship (T23 I think) and therefore the main broadcast alarm is different. There were many technical errors (such as many of the sailors filmed were OM's - a branch which didn't exist in 1982) but overall I agree with you,I think it was a superb film and just showed how strong leadership and sheer Naval determination can win the day.

BTW, do our modern 25 man liferafts still have pussers blue liners in them?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Vec

According to the credits, the programme was filmed aboard HMS Exeter. Of course these days she has kit that may have been handy in 1982 like Phalanx.

[bad livin']

Yes, the Fighting G has had some VERY gung ho warfare types ;-)

[Strictly Jungly]

No Blue liners any more....................

I have only watched the first 15 mins (on tape) so can't really comment on its entirety, however, from what I did see wasn't bad at all.

Oh and there weren't any red rank badges in sight either.
SJ

[doubledolphins]

Any Splits?:=

[vecvechookattack]

Ah, but Phalanx is never servicable long enough to get more than 20 rounds away....

DD...Naughty :=

[NURSE]

This is the thing Phalanx being a complex electromechanical piece of kit has more bits to go wrong. Yes the Humble Oerlikon or Bofors has a simpler system but they have manual controls that can work (in the older models) without power and have a crew on them to sort out any stoppages. The principle of KISS should be applied to the last layer of the airdefence bubble. Yes have the missiles and phalanx but a few more crew served manual weapons have their place.
Can the Naval Minigun mount elevate enough to provide AAAD? and maybe a few .5's on ships would be useful additional airdefence.

[Double Zero]

Now you're talking common sense - that will never go down well !

People are sure to jump up & say " by the time an attacking aircraft has got within that range, he's lobbed something nasty & pointy at you ".

Probably true, but if I were skipper on a warship I'd be quite keen on having a row of crew with guns & Manpads, & relying on 1 or 2 anti-missile sytems just won't cut it with anyone but shore based accountants...

How about a war role for bean counters as fenders / anti splinter mats ?!

[bad livin']

When closed up at action, any war canoe will have (NBCD etc allowing) upperdeck gun crews closed up on 20mm and GPMG. Phalanx/Goalkeeper will be set to AAW Auto if required. To be fair...Phalanx VS Sunburn is still going to be bad day out...a few tons of burning, bus sized weapon coming your way at Mach several will part your hair. Phalanx just divides it neatly into chunks first.

[NURSE]

True but Phalanx isn't Be all and end all as the israelis found out of Lebanon when a UAV that flew out side the parameters of Phalanx nearly took out one of their ships.
I am aware of the Trade off's between top weight and weapons but surley allowances should now be built into ships to allow them a dramatic increase in the number of Light anti aircraft guns

[Not_a_boffin]

As one who's job is ship design, the problem is not topweight - it's actually upperdeck space these days. If you want to mount cannon-calibre weapons, you have to be able to site them with R/U locker space close at hand, good arcs (and elevs) of fire and comms to the warfare team. All these areas have to be clear of RAS routes and boat handling areas. Oh and being away from RADHAZ zones also tends to be winner in terms of wanting kids with the right number of heads......

Take a look at the more recent designs and you'll see there is less and less space available with the trend towards "stealthy" designs. Wrong move in my opinion, but don't hold your breath waiting for it to change.

[bad livin']

Notaboffin - are you really telling me that adding significant topweight to legacy platforms such as T42 B3 is not a factor? I would contend that changes in GZ AND physical space would both be significant factors. T45 of course doesn't have the upperdeck free area her predecessors do, but then she was designed with all the spare space on the INSIDE.

PS It's been SHIPHAZ for a few years now...RADHAZ having not been quite all inclusive enough of risk factors.

[Biggus]

What about the value of good old fashioned low calibre rapid fire weapons for situations such as pirate boats armed with RPGs off Somalia, or other asymmetric situations which most poeple in the know will already be fully aware of.

Big expensive missiles and a single high calibre gun are all very well and good in high tech WWIII scenarios, but that is almost the least likely situation these days.......

[Not_a_boffin]

BL

On the legacy ships you are of course correct.There is neither space nor margin to mount anything on the 42s. I was referring to Nurse's built-in comment with regard to new ships and the point remains valid for T45. Having just completed a feasibility assessment for a potental fit to T45, it's bl00dy difficult to find anywhere sensible for additions requiring arcs. Space on the inside is well and good for some applications, but if you want to mount "stuff" there ain't no alternative to weatherdeck and lots of it.


You may talk SHIPHAZ, we still use old money, particularly where RFE are the main issue.

[Stratofreighter]

Anyone know if/when this programme will be repeated?

[NURSE]

Have to say Not a Boffin I do agree with you about the design of warships IMHO some of the Falklands lessons appear to have been forgoten. and a smaller calibre 20-30mm is multi purpose and better for stopping smaller vessels on the high seas a 4.5 being pointed at a foreign vessel could be more diplomatically embarassing than a 20mm oerlikon or 40mm Bofors.
The stealth design may lower the detectability but we must always plan for ships to be attacked and have the layers to defend themselves. The best the royal navy has at present IMHO is the T22/III. The 23's were a step backwards in not having a phalanx or goalkeeper system.