Argentine fast jet weapons choice - Falklands
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Tourist, sorry, couldn't resist. Sadly 6x45 is quite limiting though. I would guess two to escort the QE, one in maintenance, one in work up, ....
Now if they could produce a mobile, air transportable version or, as Harry mentioned S400 or Patriot we would be in business.
Now if they could produce a mobile, air transportable version or, as Harry mentioned S400 or Patriot we would be in business.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always said we'd be better off with 10 45's rather than 2 carriers
it would also be a good idea to fit all of them with a decent surface to surface missile as well but God forbid we 'd have a ship that could do more than one job.............................
it would also be a good idea to fit all of them with a decent surface to surface missile as well but God forbid we 'd have a ship that could do more than one job.............................
Returning to the OP question, I finally had a reply from the A4B pilot I have contact with. I think the reason he took so long to reply is that they had their reunion at the weekend, and I guess he wanted to confer. Anyway, here is the translation of his reply to my questions - as per the OP.
"The pilots were well aware of the technological inferiority of their aircraft and the survival equipment with regard to carrying out attacks against the RN ships. We knew we had to minimise the time we were exposed to the radar and the anti aircraft artillery of the ships. With regard to the Zuni rockets, I can tell you that when it was analysed what we needed to do to carry out an effective attack against a target, it was necessary to carry out an attack at an angle in excess of 10 degrees and from a distance that serious compromised our chances of survival, as much from the anti aircraft fire as the shrapnel from our own rockets. It was concluded that an attack with bombs from very low level gave us the greatest chance of survival."
Cheers
"The pilots were well aware of the technological inferiority of their aircraft and the survival equipment with regard to carrying out attacks against the RN ships. We knew we had to minimise the time we were exposed to the radar and the anti aircraft artillery of the ships. With regard to the Zuni rockets, I can tell you that when it was analysed what we needed to do to carry out an effective attack against a target, it was necessary to carry out an attack at an angle in excess of 10 degrees and from a distance that serious compromised our chances of survival, as much from the anti aircraft fire as the shrapnel from our own rockets. It was concluded that an attack with bombs from very low level gave us the greatest chance of survival."
Cheers
Thread Starter
Thanks Andy,
I can see that in open water and that was always going to be a much harder environment to survive in.
I was thinking that rockets would have been preferable in San Carlos Water though.
No detection until the attack aircraft pop over a ridge with quite a short distance to run - effectively you get the pop up for free.
What was the preferred ordnance attacking ships at Loch Ewe on JMC's - pretty similar environment I would have thought?
I can see that in open water and that was always going to be a much harder environment to survive in.
I was thinking that rockets would have been preferable in San Carlos Water though.
No detection until the attack aircraft pop over a ridge with quite a short distance to run - effectively you get the pop up for free.
What was the preferred ordnance attacking ships at Loch Ewe on JMC's - pretty similar environment I would have thought?
