Vulcans Falkland Raid
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't the BB raids be considered along the lines
of the US Bombing of Libya from UK airbases.
Sending a message etc ........................
of the US Bombing of Libya from UK airbases.
Sending a message etc ........................
Comparing the F-111 practice bombing raid from Mccoy AFB to Europe and back home to the Black Buck Raids is fair I think.....as both were done from US Air Bases.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
Managing to put a single Vulcan over a target and get one bomb of twenty one on the target.....and you really want to compare it to the B-52 Operations in either Gulf War and think we will consider your post worthy of even a moments thought?
Remember that we weren't on our uppers with our breeches arse hanging out in those days.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And from a civilian point of view (at that stage), it had a huge
positive effect on the population of Britain.
As did the sinking of the Belgrano.
Did the sinking of the Belgrano have a huge effect on the outcome of the war ?
Kept the Argie Navy in port and ???????
21 bombs across the runway, whether it put the airfield out of action
or not certainly 1. Put the Argies on notice and 2. Sent a message to the rest
of the world.
positive effect on the population of Britain.
As did the sinking of the Belgrano.
Did the sinking of the Belgrano have a huge effect on the outcome of the war ?
Kept the Argie Navy in port and ???????
21 bombs across the runway, whether it put the airfield out of action
or not certainly 1. Put the Argies on notice and 2. Sent a message to the rest
of the world.
We put a long neglected aeroplane, with long neglected crew training over a key target and got, as near as dammit, a result. It put that vital seed of doubt/fear into Johnny Gaucho's mind. It didn't dilute resources need elsewhere. It was a success and none of you armchair warriors/loggies can take that away.
Archimedes
Did the raids achieve the missions stated purpose? Surely it had one, and that is how the results should be graded. If the bar was set low enough, BB could be considered a success. This isn't a dig at the the folks involved, indeed they were top notch.
I don't fault the RAF for ending up at a point where a max effort yielded one bomb on a runway and overall in a supporting role. It's an indictment of a government that made a decision to allow the RAF to wither.
Did the raids achieve the missions stated purpose? Surely it had one, and that is how the results should be graded. If the bar was set low enough, BB could be considered a success. This isn't a dig at the the folks involved, indeed they were top notch.
I don't fault the RAF for ending up at a point where a max effort yielded one bomb on a runway and overall in a supporting role. It's an indictment of a government that made a decision to allow the RAF to wither.
Last edited by West Coast; 16th Jan 2013 at 01:26.
Wiggy.....the BB raids did divert resources....fuel and other assets.
My response was to remind a fellow that comparing a three shot raid by single aircraft to a prolonged effort by numerous aircraft was just not a valid comparison.
No dig at the crews doing the job....not at all. As has been said...old bird, old technology, bugger all resources and a very long way to go to drop the bombs.
It is the sad commentary of how Politicians force the Troops to fight at a disadvantage because of some very poor decisions on manning, training, and equipment.
Replying in kind to a waved Willy is just good sport on this forum as there is always a surprise when a couple of Lunkers from way deep down in the hole pop up for the bait.
As to effect....did the Black Buck raids significantly alter the way the Argies employed attack aircraft as much as the Belgrano Sinking affect the way the Argies used their Navy?
I would suggest the Submarine attack was a really effective tactic.
My response was to remind a fellow that comparing a three shot raid by single aircraft to a prolonged effort by numerous aircraft was just not a valid comparison.
No dig at the crews doing the job....not at all. As has been said...old bird, old technology, bugger all resources and a very long way to go to drop the bombs.
It is the sad commentary of how Politicians force the Troops to fight at a disadvantage because of some very poor decisions on manning, training, and equipment.
Replying in kind to a waved Willy is just good sport on this forum as there is always a surprise when a couple of Lunkers from way deep down in the hole pop up for the bait.
As to effect....did the Black Buck raids significantly alter the way the Argies employed attack aircraft as much as the Belgrano Sinking affect the way the Argies used their Navy?
I would suggest the Submarine attack was a really effective tactic.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
A well placed source told me that he had no recollection of a brief that laid out what the overall aim was, but they were certainly focused on breaking the runway so that fast jets could not use it and so the fleet could operate closer to the FI.
So, if interdicting the runway was the mission and that weapons planning required between 25 and 50 aircraft, I think was can take a single hit by a single aircraft, the first aircraft at that, as a resounding success.
Anything else was PR.
So, if interdicting the runway was the mission and that weapons planning required between 25 and 50 aircraft, I think was can take a single hit by a single aircraft, the first aircraft at that, as a resounding success.
Anything else was PR.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 16th Jan 2013 at 09:59.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
As to effect....did the Black Buck raids significantly alter the way the Argies employed attack aircraft as much as the Belgrano Sinking affect the way the Argies used their Navy?
Certainly prevented them from deploying any forward. However, the major impact was on defensive aircraft, as I pointed out on page 1.
Selective memory loss?
PN,
Are you saying the Mission to render the airfield unusable was originally determined to need 25-50 bomber aircraft on target to be successful....but as it turned out.... a single Bomber on three nights accomplished what was set forth as being the Task during the initial planning process?
Or....despite the initial planners thinking it would take the 25-50 aircraft over the target....and after the very limited success of the three BB raids using a single aircraft....a decision was made for any number of reasons that no more raids were necessary?
What was the actual reasons for ending the raids after on three nights and the single bomb hit on the runway?
if interdicting the runway was the mission and that weapons planning required between 25 and 50 aircraft
Or....despite the initial planners thinking it would take the 25-50 aircraft over the target....and after the very limited success of the three BB raids using a single aircraft....a decision was made for any number of reasons that no more raids were necessary?
What was the actual reasons for ending the raids after on three nights and the single bomb hit on the runway?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Are you saying the Mission to render the airfield unusable was originally determined to need 25-50 bomber aircraft on target to be successful....but as it turned out.... a single Bomber on three nights accomplished what was set forth as being the Task during the initial planning process?
Weapons effort planning considers the probability for an aircraft to be serviceable (and that would include the trail), for all the bombs to function, for the bomb characteristics to achieve the aim (aside from the runway the terrain could have absorbed much of the explosive shock, for the aircraft to deliver the weapons within its predicted accuracy, the expected combat degradation for the system, attrition etc etc.
Two aircraft, one on target and one hit was spectacularly lucky.
after the very limited success of the three BB raids using a single aircraft....a decision was made for any number of reasons that no more raids were necessary?
What was the actual reasons for ending the raids after on three nights and the single bomb hit on the runway?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Official History of the Falklands Campaign - Vol 2, page 542:
"Further Vulcan raids against the airport had been requested but not provided. The best use of the Victor tankers appeared to be the daily long range Nimrod surface surveillance sortie.
Concerns about radars led to the consideration of use of the American Shrike ainti-radiation missile. BLACK BUCK 4 on 27 May was called off after 5 hours because of problems with refuelling. On 31 May BLACK BUCK 5 took off with 4 Shrike missiles. A Sea Harrier attack was co-ordinated with the raid to keep the radars turned on. Two Shrikes were launched, and one exploded - the first had detonated about 45 foot from the TPS-43 antenna, inflicting significant damage - the second missed......
It was intended to use Shrike by the GR3s. The operational was delayed as RAF engineers assembled the system from parts air-dropped to Hermes by a Hercules, but it was not ready when the Argentines surrendered.....
Another raid (BLACK BUCK 6) using Shrike on 3 June was hampered by the poor intelligence on the location of the radars...... The weather was also poor, so there could be no Harrier decoy sortie to get the radars turned on. Two missiles were successfully fired at a Skyguard site without much effect. Then, when trying to get home, the Vulcan had to divert to Rio de Janeiro because of a broken refuelling probe.......
Page 614:
On 10 June.... a report that four Pucaras had bombed and strafed 3 Para on the northern slopes of Mount Kent before returning to Stanley. No damage had been caused but Moore was worried that the airport was still in use and requested another BLACK BUCK raid on the morning of 12 June. The raid was mounted but was ineffective*. At 2120Z on 13 June, Woodward reported to CINCFLEET that: 'PR of Stanley airfield today shows that BLACK BUCK 7 bombs dropped on identical line to BLACK BUCK 2 without damage to the target'.
*Page 631:
Early on 12 June, at 0850Z, there was the last Vulcan raid on Stanley airfield - BLACK BUCK 7. The intention was to attack the airfield parking and storage area with VT air-burst bombs, but impact fusing was set in error, and the 21 bombs fell wide of the target.
"Further Vulcan raids against the airport had been requested but not provided. The best use of the Victor tankers appeared to be the daily long range Nimrod surface surveillance sortie.
Concerns about radars led to the consideration of use of the American Shrike ainti-radiation missile. BLACK BUCK 4 on 27 May was called off after 5 hours because of problems with refuelling. On 31 May BLACK BUCK 5 took off with 4 Shrike missiles. A Sea Harrier attack was co-ordinated with the raid to keep the radars turned on. Two Shrikes were launched, and one exploded - the first had detonated about 45 foot from the TPS-43 antenna, inflicting significant damage - the second missed......
It was intended to use Shrike by the GR3s. The operational was delayed as RAF engineers assembled the system from parts air-dropped to Hermes by a Hercules, but it was not ready when the Argentines surrendered.....
Another raid (BLACK BUCK 6) using Shrike on 3 June was hampered by the poor intelligence on the location of the radars...... The weather was also poor, so there could be no Harrier decoy sortie to get the radars turned on. Two missiles were successfully fired at a Skyguard site without much effect. Then, when trying to get home, the Vulcan had to divert to Rio de Janeiro because of a broken refuelling probe.......
Page 614:
On 10 June.... a report that four Pucaras had bombed and strafed 3 Para on the northern slopes of Mount Kent before returning to Stanley. No damage had been caused but Moore was worried that the airport was still in use and requested another BLACK BUCK raid on the morning of 12 June. The raid was mounted but was ineffective*. At 2120Z on 13 June, Woodward reported to CINCFLEET that: 'PR of Stanley airfield today shows that BLACK BUCK 7 bombs dropped on identical line to BLACK BUCK 2 without damage to the target'.
*Page 631:
Early on 12 June, at 0850Z, there was the last Vulcan raid on Stanley airfield - BLACK BUCK 7. The intention was to attack the airfield parking and storage area with VT air-burst bombs, but impact fusing was set in error, and the 21 bombs fell wide of the target.
ORAC
A bit of poor research / editing on BB6, if that's the official report, as even the Argies admit that a Skyguard did eat a Shrike which did kill four of the soldiers operating it or located near it. On BB5 only 2 Shrikes were carried, not four.
In fact all sorties down south from ASI requiring AAR support were authorised by Admiral Fieldhouse and it was he who decided if the sortie of the day was by a Hercules, a Nimrod, a Vulcan or in the later stages GR3s, though in the beginning only the Vulcan and Victor could do anything useful as at the same time that BB2 was taking place, the total number of AAR capable Hercs and Nimrods released to service was zero!!!
A bit of poor research / editing on BB6, if that's the official report, as even the Argies admit that a Skyguard did eat a Shrike which did kill four of the soldiers operating it or located near it. On BB5 only 2 Shrikes were carried, not four.
In fact all sorties down south from ASI requiring AAR support were authorised by Admiral Fieldhouse and it was he who decided if the sortie of the day was by a Hercules, a Nimrod, a Vulcan or in the later stages GR3s, though in the beginning only the Vulcan and Victor could do anything useful as at the same time that BB2 was taking place, the total number of AAR capable Hercs and Nimrods released to service was zero!!!
Last edited by MAINJAFAD; 16th Jan 2013 at 22:39.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shrikes
Suprised it took so many pages to recognise that BB was not just about bombs on runways. I attended a great lecture at london Society of Air Britain some years back where the senior AEO spoke of all the BB sorties. passive EW indicated the presence of Radar controlled Air Defences. what else could have taken these out. Great effort at the time to equip the aircraft with the means. Not just Flight Refuelling but new Nav and weapons systems. I certainly remember working 18 hr days. comming home for tea and back till midnight or 2am.
Dragartist
It took about 6 pages for the ARM missions to come up on the first thread about this programme as well, that thread is well worth a read if you haven't seen it as there is quite a lot of Argentinean input including that of one of the Army radar operators of the AN-TPS44 that was on the Islands at the time.
It took about 6 pages for the ARM missions to come up on the first thread about this programme as well, that thread is well worth a read if you haven't seen it as there is quite a lot of Argentinean input including that of one of the Army radar operators of the AN-TPS44 that was on the Islands at the time.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
The ARM sorties only appeared late on the threads as the threads were about the programme of the first BB mission.
Statistically the result achieved by BB1 was almost impossible. Don't forget, making the impossible a reality certainly gave the invading forces a reality check. Again, that was covered in the earlier thread. They had simply never considered that possibility.
Ten tons of bombs in 7 seconds would concentrate the mind in the same way as a battleship delivering NGS.
Statistically the result achieved by BB1 was almost impossible. Don't forget, making the impossible a reality certainly gave the invading forces a reality check. Again, that was covered in the earlier thread. They had simply never considered that possibility.
Ten tons of bombs in 7 seconds would concentrate the mind in the same way as a battleship delivering NGS.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 17th Jan 2013 at 08:28.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
A bit of poor research / editing on BB6, if that's the official report, as even the Argies admit that a Skyguard did eat a Shrike
Last edited by ORAC; 17th Jan 2013 at 13:07.
Ten tons of bombs in 7 seconds would concentrate the mind in the same way as a battleship delivering NGS.
Likewise if you had a Battleship like any of the Four we had in service for a while....the New Jersey, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Missouri.....think of the combined effect that would have had on the Argies.
Last edited by SASless; 17th Jan 2013 at 14:48.