Query on Vulcan/Falklands War?
Thread Starter
Query on Vulcan/Falklands War?
Question for you guys, I understand a book has been published about the Vulcan attack on the runway in the Falklands during the war. Can anyone advise author and title please?
Horrendous Flak over the target....searchlights...intense fighter attacks on the way in and out from the target....did they even hit the runway by chance?
An article on another bombing mission...for perspective.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Nov1997/1197lineback.asp
An article on another bombing mission...for perspective.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Nov1997/1197lineback.asp
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pianosa
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horrendous Flak over the target....searchlights...intense fighter attacks on the way in and out from the target....did they even hit the runway by chance?
An article on another bombing mission...for perspective.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Nov1997/1197lineback.asp
An article on another bombing mission...for perspective.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Nov1997/1197lineback.asp
2. Hit the runway, argentinian fast jets forced to operate at the limits of their endurance for the remainder of the conflict - mission accomplished.
3. We won our war in less than three months, including the time it took to get there- how did you guys get on? You had ten years so I'm sure it was an even bigger victory.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
SASLess, never mind the irony, thanks for the link, I have been trying to get that info before.
Wash,
No disrespect meant....but after months of reading about the "great contribution" the Vulcan provided during the Falklands....I felt a bit of "perspective" would be useful.
As to Vietnam, imagine if we had done the B-52 thing from Day 1....and not pissed about with LBJ's message sending. If one thinks about it....we bombed our allies and never invaded the north...which seems an ass backwards way of fighting a war.
Pontius,
Having seen some B-52 strikes from way too close....they are in all correct usage of the word simply "awesome". To imagine 80+ of the things raining down bombs on the same target simply begs the imagination. In those days, they could carry up to 80,000 pounds of bombs each.
No disrespect meant....but after months of reading about the "great contribution" the Vulcan provided during the Falklands....I felt a bit of "perspective" would be useful.
As to Vietnam, imagine if we had done the B-52 thing from Day 1....and not pissed about with LBJ's message sending. If one thinks about it....we bombed our allies and never invaded the north...which seems an ass backwards way of fighting a war.
Pontius,
Having seen some B-52 strikes from way too close....they are in all correct usage of the word simply "awesome". To imagine 80+ of the things raining down bombs on the same target simply begs the imagination. In those days, they could carry up to 80,000 pounds of bombs each.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: shrewsbury
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wash,
Pontius,
Having seen some B-52 strikes from way too close....they are in all correct usage of the word simply "awesome". To imagine 80+ of the things raining down bombs on the same target simply begs the imagination. In those days, they could carry up to 80,000 pounds of bombs each.
Pontius,
Having seen some B-52 strikes from way too close....they are in all correct usage of the word simply "awesome". To imagine 80+ of the things raining down bombs on the same target simply begs the imagination. In those days, they could carry up to 80,000 pounds of bombs each.
...and shooting down Mig 21's while dodging flocks of SAM's.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
B-52D with Big-Belly mod carried 84 x 500lbs or 42 x 750lbs internal. External pods carried another 24 of either. Max load, therefore, 42K + 16K = 58K. Not sure if it was rounded up or bullets ´n chaff, but max weapon load was 60K.
The B-36 had a max bomb load of 84,000 lb..........
The B-36 had a max bomb load of 84,000 lb..........
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Looking over your shoulder
Age: 50
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on thats like comparing the Spit with a camel.
The B52 is the most capable and awesome High altitude heavy bomber in the world, but it was designed long after the B-17 and the Lanc.
I'm sure that if designers were requested to that they could now design something ridiculous that would carry 160,000lbs of ordnance.
The B52 is the most capable and awesome High altitude heavy bomber in the world, but it was designed long after the B-17 and the Lanc.
I'm sure that if designers were requested to that they could now design something ridiculous that would carry 160,000lbs of ordnance.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you put dates on those 4 aircraft, you'll find the gaps between them aren't as big as you might think at first. The real difference in capability and aspiration was the jet engine.
My eyesight is not what it used to be....but do I see just the one single hit on the runway?
Mike,
Looking at the bomb string on the earlier map....I would think a precision bombing attack would have straddled the runway about midpoint in the string vice only at one end or am I missing the point vice the bomb dropper?
Nice string of bombs at the West end of the runway in this photo.
Looking at the bomb string on the earlier map....I would think a precision bombing attack would have straddled the runway about midpoint in the string vice only at one end or am I missing the point vice the bomb dropper?
Nice string of bombs at the West end of the runway in this photo.