'Falklands' Most Daring Raid'
Originally Posted by Marcantilan
Also, there was some speculation about a missing Phantom Sqn...
IX disbanded the month before just to avoid having to put any effort in.....
Probably not missing, just known by a number of names. Tell me more and I might be able to clarify. If it's 29 Squadron, we were operating from Ascension Island.
However, there was certain rumours and friends of friends of friends who saw Phantoms operating in southern chilean airports.
Regards!
Marcantilan
British Ground Based Radar rumoured to be in Chile was a Marconi S259 (one was also sent down south to support 63 Sqn RAF Regiment which was set up at Ajax Bay as well according to a guy I worked with in 1985). It's the reason 1 Air Control Centre's name is on the monument at Stanley even though the unit was disbanded years before.
British Ground Based Radar rumoured to be in Chile was a Marconi S259 (one was also sent down south to support 63 Sqn RAF Regiment which was set up at Ajax Bay as well according to a guy I worked with in 1985). It's the reason 1 Air Control Centre's name is on the monument at Stanley even though the unit was disbanded years before.
Last edited by MAINJAFAD; 22nd Mar 2012 at 22:29.
I think they may have been mistaken or misled, Marcantilan; not RAF Phantoms anyway. We weren't in Chile. The picture you posted was 29, surprisingly (in the South Atlantic) back to our normal duty of chasing the Soviets.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South West
Age: 74
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jamione -
The mission to which you refer had been well practiced and was do-able. Tanking was not necessary and indeed, was not available when the mission was first practiced and honed. The distance was not great for a C130 fuel load. The crews were confident that had they landed, they would have stood a good chance of RTB in one or both ac. The let-down from the cancellation of the op still depresses me to this day. As it is recalled, most participants were gung-ho to carry out the job! Some of the comments in the DT story have a fair pinch of Journo license attached but as the full story may never be told it's probably the best we'll read so far.
Nice to hear that TR is still going strong - the loudest sufferer of bruxism two-boats has ever experienced.
The mission to which you refer had been well practiced and was do-able. Tanking was not necessary and indeed, was not available when the mission was first practiced and honed. The distance was not great for a C130 fuel load. The crews were confident that had they landed, they would have stood a good chance of RTB in one or both ac. The let-down from the cancellation of the op still depresses me to this day. As it is recalled, most participants were gung-ho to carry out the job! Some of the comments in the DT story have a fair pinch of Journo license attached but as the full story may never be told it's probably the best we'll read so far.
Nice to hear that TR is still going strong - the loudest sufferer of bruxism two-boats has ever experienced.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lurk,
Extraordinary. Great to hear that we were, to all intents and purposes, ready to go. Two things that aren't clear (to me anyway) firstly why the aircrew would not have joined the Regiment boys on the egress after dumping the Herc. I assume because the proposed exit route to Chile would have tested even the hardiest of SAS souls.
Secondly why an airborne drop would not have worked. Landing a C-130 on an unlit runway at night vs a night time parachute drop. Both high risk. If getting the aircraft overhead the target was achievable without AAR (as you suggest) it must have been decided that planting it on the runway offered the best chance of getting B Squadron elements in one place at one time.
Lastly they would surely have had a difficult task finding and slotting the Super Etendard aircrew once things had kicked off? Would they have been sequestered away from the airfield? Akin to a Spetznaz raid on the OM of a V-Bomber base I suppose.
Extraordinary. Great to hear that we were, to all intents and purposes, ready to go. Two things that aren't clear (to me anyway) firstly why the aircrew would not have joined the Regiment boys on the egress after dumping the Herc. I assume because the proposed exit route to Chile would have tested even the hardiest of SAS souls.
Secondly why an airborne drop would not have worked. Landing a C-130 on an unlit runway at night vs a night time parachute drop. Both high risk. If getting the aircraft overhead the target was achievable without AAR (as you suggest) it must have been decided that planting it on the runway offered the best chance of getting B Squadron elements in one place at one time.
Lastly they would surely have had a difficult task finding and slotting the Super Etendard aircrew once things had kicked off? Would they have been sequestered away from the airfield? Akin to a Spetznaz raid on the OM of a V-Bomber base I suppose.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Landing a C-130 on an unlit runway at night vs a night time parachute drop.
The Israelies proved that you could land several C130 on an unlit runway at night, disembark vehicles and troops and then depart when the job was done.
If you attempt a para drop of a large number of jumpers you have the risk of discovery, the possibility of injuries, the scattering of paratroopers, less equipment etc etc. The SAS proved this with one of their earlier night drops.
OTOH the Germans at Eben Emal proved that dropping directly on to the target solved some of these problems and a glider assault on the Orne River again proved the direct approach was better.
For a large area assault like on an airfield you need mobility as the distances involved are relatively large for infanty in the open. The SAS proved that a vehicle assault on an airfield can be carried out far more quickly. Pebble Island OTOH was an infantry assault but equally a small target.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Breakfast Creek
Age: 70
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Argentinians had a few more Super Entendards and a lot more Exocets, the outcome would have been quite different.
Whilst we have the attention of those with experience.... Can we put the 'Lima' contribution in it's rightful place.
As far as I can gather, there isn't one engagement where the Lima provided an advantage, in that all the engagements were from behind. Unless of course they were fired with an offset greater than the Golfs acquisition cone. I find that unlikely as combat was never 'fully developed' .
Yes or no?
As far as I can gather, there isn't one engagement where the Lima provided an advantage, in that all the engagements were from behind. Unless of course they were fired with an offset greater than the Golfs acquisition cone. I find that unlikely as combat was never 'fully developed' .
Yes or no?
Your assumption is correct and, without reviewing the film - if it exists - there's no way of telling. One thing to be aware of is the differences between the Golf and the Lima aren't just aspect limits. The L has a much more sensitive seeker head and better tracking and guidance and is less susceptible to background IR and glint. Also the aerodynamics are better so it will handle target manoeuvre better, especially at longer ranges. Different flare rejection too, but that all gets a bit complicated and probably isn't relevant. The Lima has a much better fusing system too, using active laser.
So there are situations when Lima is better even in the Golf's engagement zone.
The Argentineans had no real tactics against an all aspect IR threat. If they knew we had them, it would certainly have made them much more cautious of presenting themselves, especially as the tested Pk of the Lima is really good - probably well over 80%, but that's debatable.
So there are situations when Lima is better even in the Golf's engagement zone.
The Argentineans had no real tactics against an all aspect IR threat. If they knew we had them, it would certainly have made them much more cautious of presenting themselves, especially as the tested Pk of the Lima is really good - probably well over 80%, but that's debatable.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 23rd Mar 2012 at 11:39.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South West
Age: 74
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jamieone,
I cannot comment on the post raid plan. One day I can tell the kids, but not yet.
Tac landing at night was preferable to a drop due to the amount of vehicle support and kit required. Preferable too considering that the best case scenario included an EXFIL in one or both airframes.
The work-up for this was probably one of the most "interesting" periods of training one has experienced.
I cannot comment on the post raid plan. One day I can tell the kids, but not yet.
Tac landing at night was preferable to a drop due to the amount of vehicle support and kit required. Preferable too considering that the best case scenario included an EXFIL in one or both airframes.
The work-up for this was probably one of the most "interesting" periods of training one has experienced.
Suspicion breeds confidence
They knew we had them because they saw them on an 800 Sqn Shar flown by Simon Hargreaves if I remember. The Lima was new then and the enemy was still using the AIM-9B. I'm not sure understood what the Lima could do - or us for that matter!
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TEEEJ
I see that Google's record of the blogsite with the transcript has vanished in 24 hours!
However theres another version at
Entrevista al General Fernando Matthei sobre Malvinas - Taringa!
google transliteration at
Google Translate
Possibly easier to access the actual videos from
Chile y su participación en Malvinas (documental) - Taringa!
I see that Google's record of the blogsite with the transcript has vanished in 24 hours!
However theres another version at
Entrevista al General Fernando Matthei sobre Malvinas - Taringa!
google transliteration at
Google Translate
Possibly easier to access the actual videos from
Chile y su participación en Malvinas (documental) - Taringa!
I think they may have been mistaken or misled, Marcantilan; not RAF Phantoms anyway. We weren't in Chile. The picture you posted was 29, surprisingly (in the South Atlantic) back to our normal duty of chasing the Soviets.
Besides that, I´ve read in your very enjoyable journal that you were deployed on ASI. Some russians in an AGI down there had a history about Phantoms buzzing their ship. Is that true?
Jamieone,
I cannot comment on the post raid plan. One day I can tell the kids, but not yet.
I cannot comment on the post raid plan. One day I can tell the kids, but not yet.
I think the original plan had very poor intelligence.
The presence of the AN/TPS-43 radar was noted, but I think RAF/RN had no idea about three more radars in the area (two SPS-20s, one in Bouchard and the other in Piedrabuena destroyers, just a couple of miles from the airport - and an ELTA radar very near the runway)
Plum Duff helo claimed that was never detected until aborting and moving to Chile, but I shared more than a coffe with Rio Grande sector commander (a Marine) and he told me that night duty officer called him informing a helo inbound from the sea, then helo landing and finally helo departing. Info coming from the AAF radar, ELTA and Bouchard, along with someone with a sharp ear! So, if the helo was detected AND people were very jumpy about that first detection, I could assume that chances of being discrete were very slim: SAS could face an alerted reinforced Marine Battalion?
In the other hand, Super Etendards were dispersed and not in line in the airfield, pilots were sleeping in a hotel in town (far from the airport) and Exocets...were not there.
I am pretty sure that RAF plus SAS could mount a succesfull attack, but not without proper intelligence (and it looks like this is the case).
British Ground Based Radar rumoured to be in Chile was a Marconi S259 (one was also sent down south to support 63 Sqn RAF Regiment which was set up at Ajax Bay as well according to a guy I worked with in 1985).
Regards to all,
I would like to know if the AIM-9L were used on May 1st. There are some rumours about -9Gs were used that day.
There is a debate in Zona Militar ZM forum about the Nimrod equipped with Sidewinder AIM-9G at Ascencion island.
Some guys said that the Nimrod was not capable of launching the missiles.
About Air to Air tactics, the Argentine Air Force was trained in AA tactics by the Israeli Air Force when Argentina took delivery of the IAI Dagger A/B in 1978.
Obviusly the Israelies at that time also didn´t have experience in combat with all aspect AA missiles.
As far as I know all aspect AA missiles had being used for first time in 1982...so it were too new for a us.
Moreover, the Matra 550 Magic I missiles were just delivered to the Argentine Air Force one or two month before the war and only 7 Mirage IIIEA were capable of launching it.
The Argentines also had underestimated the Sea Harrier FRS1 armed with -9L capabilities.
There is a debate in Zona Militar ZM forum about the Nimrod equipped with Sidewinder AIM-9G at Ascencion island.
Some guys said that the Nimrod was not capable of launching the missiles.
About Air to Air tactics, the Argentine Air Force was trained in AA tactics by the Israeli Air Force when Argentina took delivery of the IAI Dagger A/B in 1978.
Obviusly the Israelies at that time also didn´t have experience in combat with all aspect AA missiles.
As far as I know all aspect AA missiles had being used for first time in 1982...so it were too new for a us.
Moreover, the Matra 550 Magic I missiles were just delivered to the Argentine Air Force one or two month before the war and only 7 Mirage IIIEA were capable of launching it.
The Argentines also had underestimated the Sea Harrier FRS1 armed with -9L capabilities.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Not to confuse numbers, but we know the Arg had Matra 530 and 550, but I remember a contemporary account that we were unaware that they had an all aspect capability (not sure which one) and that had we been aware the SHAR would have adopted different tactics.
Ignorance was bliss
Ignorance was bliss
Nimrod AIM-9G Capability
Cosmiccomet
The Nimrod was fitted with LAU7/A launchers taken from spare Phantom stocks which were then specially modified over a weekend. A Nimrod was then flown to our Phantom base with pylons already fitted. The LAU7/A launchers were then fitted to the pylons and electrical checks carried out successfully. I stand to be corrected by any Nimrod aircrew who subsequently deployed with the system, but I doubt that we would have been tasked to do a specific modification if they were just for show.
The Nimrod was fitted with LAU7/A launchers taken from spare Phantom stocks which were then specially modified over a weekend. A Nimrod was then flown to our Phantom base with pylons already fitted. The LAU7/A launchers were then fitted to the pylons and electrical checks carried out successfully. I stand to be corrected by any Nimrod aircrew who subsequently deployed with the system, but I doubt that we would have been tasked to do a specific modification if they were just for show.