ASW and 1982 South Atlantic War
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Marcantilan,
Henry Jones, (H Jones grandson) is running a “On this day” commentary on his Twitter page. Some interesting documents and pictures coming to light.
Thought others may be interested otherwise I would have sent pm.
Henry Jones, (H Jones grandson) is running a “On this day” commentary on his Twitter page. Some interesting documents and pictures coming to light.
Thought others may be interested otherwise I would have sent pm.
Thread Starter
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ht-death-65731
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ands-war-63657
It looks like the journalist enjoyed "A Carrier at Risk"!
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ands-war-63657
It looks like the journalist enjoyed "A Carrier at Risk"!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those of you who subscribe to the book of faces may be interested in the EE Canberra Appreciation Group. A chap called Eduardo Luis Angelelli is posting a few pictures of the Canberra being bombed up for ops in 82. I guess photos from his own private collection that have not previously been published.
I remember as a boy seeing lots of Canberra's parked up outside Salmesbury during the war.
I was told these were embargoed Argentine ones but suspect not not I am older.
Can anyone shed any light.
Thanks
I was told these were embargoed Argentine ones but suspect not not I am older.
Can anyone shed any light.
Thanks
A second contract was placed in 1981 for a further two aircraft - WH914 (a B.92) and XH583 (a T.94). These were prepared for delivery but were embargoed because of the Falklands Conflict. Both aircraft were later dismantled and scrapped.
I had a search around the enthusiast forums and an enthusiast noted the following at Samlesbury during May 1982.
WT483, WT488, WH846, WH850, WE192, WJ639, WJ721 and WK122. Plus rear fuselages of Canberra WH777, WH796 and WH798.
There was possibly more Canberras but not visible to the enthusiast? Possibly the two Argentine Canberras were still at Warton having recently been refurbished?
By 1986 one of the Argentine ones XH583 was noted and photographed by an enthusiast at Samlesbury. Both XH583 and WH914 were reported as being scrapped at Samlesbury between 1988 and 1991.
typerated,
Not sure what period you are referring to but certainly in the mid early to mid 70's there was a large gaggle of ex 213 Sqn B(I)6 aircraft very visible at Samlesbury. They were there for potential refurbishment and sale overseas but I think were all eventually scrapped. Don't think a single Argentinian Canberra was embargoed as they were delivered in early 70's.
Not sure what period you are referring to but certainly in the mid early to mid 70's there was a large gaggle of ex 213 Sqn B(I)6 aircraft very visible at Samlesbury. They were there for potential refurbishment and sale overseas but I think were all eventually scrapped. Don't think a single Argentinian Canberra was embargoed as they were delivered in early 70's.
Thanks Gents,
It would have been during or just after the war I saw them,
I assumed they had returned for refurbishment.
So maybe a element of truth to the story.
It would have been during or just after the war I saw them,
I assumed they had returned for refurbishment.
So maybe a element of truth to the story.
I was on the GD Aerosystems Course in 82 and, as part of Industry Engagement, we visited the Dassault facility in Bordeaux. Wandering into a hangar we discovered a row of brand new Super Etendards with Argentinian markings.
The French Government rep was a bit disconcerted when we all started posing by them for photos which conveniently captured all the tail numbers. Much Non, Non which got ignored. Never did find out if they were actually delivered.
The French Government rep was a bit disconcerted when we all started posing by them for photos which conveniently captured all the tail numbers. Much Non, Non which got ignored. Never did find out if they were actually delivered.
I was on the GD Aerosystems Course in 82 and, as part of Industry Engagement, we visited the Dassault facility in Bordeaux. Wandering into a hangar we discovered a row of brand new Super Etendards with Argentinian markings.
The French Government rep was a bit disconcerted when we all started posing by them for photos which conveniently captured all the tail numbers. Much Non, Non which got ignored. Never did find out if they were actually delivered.
The French Government rep was a bit disconcerted when we all started posing by them for photos which conveniently captured all the tail numbers. Much Non, Non which got ignored. Never did find out if they were actually delivered.
"They paid their bills weekly in cash, which after a while raised suspicions, and led to their arrests"
Should have worn appalling bright clothes, gone out every night on the lash and slept in until 1midday - and better still speak English and talk loudly about what a bunch the Spanish were....... they'd never have been noticed.......
Should have worn appalling bright clothes, gone out every night on the lash and slept in until 1midday - and better still speak English and talk loudly about what a bunch the Spanish were....... they'd never have been noticed.......
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,761
Received 2,742 Likes
on
1,168 Posts
A fascinating read and it looks like we were lucky not to lose more.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval...ol-during-1982
More though we maybe cannot access them.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...edge-falklands
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...-falklands-war
https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval...ding-falklands
https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval...ol-during-1982
The San Luis began her patrol with the intention of striking the task force north of the Falkland Islands. During her one continuous patrol she claimed three torpedo attacks against British shipping. She claimed to have fired two German-manufactured SST-4 antisurface ship torpedoes and one American Mark 37 antisubmarine torpedo. Her first engagement was against HMS Yarmouth (Type 12 frigate) and HMS Brilliant (Type 22 frigate).
The San Luis’ attack did not result in any hits and she sustained a determined ASW battle for 20 hours, surviving depth charges and one torpedo. The San Luis broke contact and began her second run on 8 May against a British submarine. Twelve minutes after firing her torpedo, the San Luis heard an explosion from her target’s same bearing; however, the Royal Navy claimed no losses of any submarines during the conflict, and it is speculated that the San Luis’ torpedo may have struck the bottom.
Her final run was conducted on 10 May against two more warships, firing one torpedo against HMS Arrow (Type 21 frigate) and HMS Alacrity (Type 21 frigate). After six minutes, a small explosion was heard on the frigate’s bearing, and when HMS Arrow retrieved her towed countermeasure, it was evident that she had been hit.
The main British Task Force was located and attacked without success by the Type 209, San Luis. That submarine was at sea, and at times in the area of the British force, for an estimated 36 days. The threat from Argentine submarines was a continuous concern for the British Task Force commander, and numerous attacks were made against suspected submarine contacts, with a large number of ASW weapons being expended. In any event, San Luis survived all British ASW efforts, but at the same time was unable to inflict damage on the British force because of materiel problems.”
The submarine has been identified as firing its munitions too deep, having an outdated fire-control system that required the crew to calculate their solutions manually; broken wires after the torpedoes were fired, which denied the ability to steer the fish to their targets; lack of preparation of the SST-4s in the torpedo room’s tubes; which did not allow the torpedoes to arm themselves after firing, and an inexperienced crew.5 All these factors combined to allow the targeted ships to escape the San Luis’ attacks.
The attacks were poor, but the fact that the San Luis could make these approaches against the best of the Royal Navy shows how different the outcome could have been if the San Luis had been fully provisioned and prepared for combat operations.
It is significant, however, that these attacks and ASW battles took place. A German designed and manufactured U-boat had fired live torpedoes in anger against warships of her majesty’s Royal Navy for the third time in the Atlantic during the 20th century. This time, the submariners in this Latin American version of Das Boot had encountered a stroke of luck as they managed to slip past the Royal Navy’s determined depth charge and torpedo attacks and returned home without a scratch.
The San Luis’ attack did not result in any hits and she sustained a determined ASW battle for 20 hours, surviving depth charges and one torpedo. The San Luis broke contact and began her second run on 8 May against a British submarine. Twelve minutes after firing her torpedo, the San Luis heard an explosion from her target’s same bearing; however, the Royal Navy claimed no losses of any submarines during the conflict, and it is speculated that the San Luis’ torpedo may have struck the bottom.
Her final run was conducted on 10 May against two more warships, firing one torpedo against HMS Arrow (Type 21 frigate) and HMS Alacrity (Type 21 frigate). After six minutes, a small explosion was heard on the frigate’s bearing, and when HMS Arrow retrieved her towed countermeasure, it was evident that she had been hit.
The main British Task Force was located and attacked without success by the Type 209, San Luis. That submarine was at sea, and at times in the area of the British force, for an estimated 36 days. The threat from Argentine submarines was a continuous concern for the British Task Force commander, and numerous attacks were made against suspected submarine contacts, with a large number of ASW weapons being expended. In any event, San Luis survived all British ASW efforts, but at the same time was unable to inflict damage on the British force because of materiel problems.”
The submarine has been identified as firing its munitions too deep, having an outdated fire-control system that required the crew to calculate their solutions manually; broken wires after the torpedoes were fired, which denied the ability to steer the fish to their targets; lack of preparation of the SST-4s in the torpedo room’s tubes; which did not allow the torpedoes to arm themselves after firing, and an inexperienced crew.5 All these factors combined to allow the targeted ships to escape the San Luis’ attacks.
The attacks were poor, but the fact that the San Luis could make these approaches against the best of the Royal Navy shows how different the outcome could have been if the San Luis had been fully provisioned and prepared for combat operations.
It is significant, however, that these attacks and ASW battles took place. A German designed and manufactured U-boat had fired live torpedoes in anger against warships of her majesty’s Royal Navy for the third time in the Atlantic during the 20th century. This time, the submariners in this Latin American version of Das Boot had encountered a stroke of luck as they managed to slip past the Royal Navy’s determined depth charge and torpedo attacks and returned home without a scratch.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...edge-falklands
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...-falklands-war
https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval...ding-falklands
Last edited by NutLoose; 22nd Oct 2021 at 12:58.