|
|
Cosmic Comet
Welcome, and good for you for putting your point of view on here - you'll not get much agreement (except perhaps on the point that both of our countries could do with improvement). On the serious strategic point, the reality is that the UK wants to retain the Falklands / Malvinas, then we need to defend them with something credible. This means air defence and anti-shipping strike, as far as I can see. S41 |
Can't really see much chance of the cruise boats being used as auxiliary transport should the need arise, seeing as how Cunard is now US owned. I don't think that there's a UK based cruise fleet with the fashion for flags of convenience in the late '80s and '90s to cut costs & allow for cheap crews.
Can't honestly see the need for all this posturing and sabre rattling in any case, but then again, that would need politicians to stop squabbling, act like adults and admit that there might be some problems that their particular policies either can't fix or are the root cause.:(:(:( |
|
BZ Roadster, anybody else think a pre-emptive Naval task force would fit the bill. If they don't land you won't be needing to drag the kitchen sink all the way down there, we're not after the cure, just not the cold in the first place!
|
Anti-ship? Take your pick...
http://www.blacksuntechnology.co.uk/...n-2%5B1%5D.jpg A bit of UOR paperwork needed for some of them, though!!! |
Cosmic Comet
Nice photos! Are they drones? There's a lot of 'Cold War Warriors' & vets' of Operation Corporate on here. As a schoolboy during the 1982 ruck & avid follower of the history of the Islands plus fortunate enough to have operated on the AirBridge until recently, I'd like to know what the 'Old School' & 'Newbies' think there should be guarding the Islands, realistically what the Argies could do & I just thought I'd toss an unpinned grenade into the room- Is it likely Hugo Chavez could 'fan the flames'? Discuss. :ok: |
Leon,
Exactly my point - don't see too much there that I'd fancy shooting at ships that can shoot back.... S41 |
Seems to me that we have a perfect platform for patrolling the area to keep an eye on shipping in the area. Could there be a reprieve for the MR2, just like the Vulcan? Or is it a case the Nimrod is a bad word for the politicians and they wont use common sense to keep an eye on UK interests down south.
|
cosmiccomet
Nice photo's both 1950's vintage designs with limited upgrades, and no BVR capability wouldn't fancy my chances vs typhoon if your government coughed up for a few dozen flankers an the other hand...... and what would you land the troops from, the nearest thing you have to an LPH is a T42 with a widened hanger so it can take a 2nd sea king like i said tub-thumping if for no other reason than the kircheners are even less willing to give their countries armed forces the kit they need to do the job than gordon brown! |
Anti-ship capability - get the gun out :ok: (only kidding)
http://i974.photobucket.com/albums/a...-hmsdaring.jpg I miss-ID'd the ALARM for a HARPOON/EXOCET - so you are quite right. However, there is a plan to integrate the PENGUIN ASM onto Eurofighter. http://www.targetlock.org.uk/typhoon...n-maritime.gif |
Hi guys!
I was born in Argentina, so I am closer to cosmiccomet than to you...:} but I want to point you some "special" things. First of all, we grew up with the idea that Malvinas(Falklands) belongs to Argentina but are eventually occupated by UK, and that´s very difficult for being change. I know that, these islands(and others near them) were forgotten by the UK for many many years, and the 82 war give a place on the map to the people who live there(said by them). On the other hand we have that Argentina hasn´t got an excellent economic situation, and that means that if a selfdetermination proccess takes place the Falkland population will always vote UK! but what about if the situation were the opposite? Do you think that people who were named as "kelpers" will have any problem for changing their goverment? Talking about the attacking forces, please realized that Argentina will never be at the same level as UK. We will never have Typhoon´s, we buy second-hand airplanes! But one thing must be said, with that oldfashioned technology our pilots did their job. Obviusly noone here cheers blood bleeding, but a war is about that, and our two countries did what they have to. And for those guys that are talking about if the Atlantic Conveyor were a civilian ship or not, if it was legal or not it´s strike, just remember where an UK submarine(sorry, I don´t remember the name) sunk the Belgrano. A war zone was dicted by UK(200Nm from Port Standley I think) and this ship was out from there... And, as somebody wrote, let´s talk like gentlemen! P.S.: Sorry about my english, I did as good as I could. P.S.2: I wrote everything without shouting or using CAPS!!!! Cheers for me!!! Jaja:} |
In fact, I take it all back...
http://www.blacksuntechnology.co.uk/...n-2%5B1%5D.jpg The black missile 5th from the right hand side is a Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile (NSM). Read all about it here: Kongsberg test fires Naval Strike Missiles - Jane's Defence News |
P.S.: Sorry about my english, I did as good as I could By the way, having flown "A4 Alley" at 500kts+ towards Falklands Sound, I for one do not doubt the bravery of your fast jet pilots of 1982. In fact I had the pleasure of drinking with one of your Commodores, who used to fly A4s, last year. Just like most aviators, we had much in common. By the way, it was HMS CONQUERER in May 1982 against the Belgrano. You are quite right, my friend, that "blood bleeding" wars are a bad thing and we would not have spilt a drop of Argentinian blood had it not been for General Galtieri's earlier invasion. Let's hope that madness does not prevail again in the South Atlantic. LJ |
:\ Shameful mis-Id by me...
But <<Banter Mode: ON>> Which Typhoons carry them at the moment?? <<Banter Mode: OFF>> S41 |
Squirrel41!!
STAND TO ATTENTION & GIVE YOURSELF A BOLLOCKING!!!!! 7 DAYS JANKERS DETAIL FOR YOU, LADDIE!! :ok: |
I'm more than a little bemused to see so many here from what I'll call "our" side indulging in what amounts to a dick measuring contest, comparing the state of the art kit possessed by Britain versus the aged kit in the Argentinean inventory.
There might be one other nation apart from the UK which should have a better appreciation of being on the receiving end of a successfully waged asymmetric war. That nation, the US, lost a war 40 years ago to a third world nation, not because it didn't have the ability to win, but because it didn't have the national will to win. Today, history may well repeat itself if a bunch of mostly illiterate irregulars who don't even represent a nation state are as willing to hang in for the long term as the North Vietnamese were. (Despite the recent optimistic comments by General McCrystal.) Another set-to in the South Atlantic will be yet another example of asymmetric warfare, and its outcome will have far more to do with the national will of the leaders of both sides than who's got the shiniest jet or ship. Someone's said it already. If the Argentinean leadership was willing to commit a small SF force to take the airfield by stealth, the really big question will be whether a British PM of either political persuasion will have the political balls to commit his near(?) bankrupt country to the considerable expense - to say nothing of the considerable expenditure of 'blood, sweat and tears' - to take the islands back. Just as importantly, would the voting (and non-voting) population of the UK be prepared to suffer that economic and personal pain? (Any such move might have the back hand benefit getting quite a few "British passport holders" to leave the country.) I for one don't think either man likely to be occupying No 10 Downing Street in the next few years has those (forgive the perhaps unfortunate use of Spanish) political cojones to do so. |
Yep, I'm with Fubaar on this.
Whilst not indulging in wilywaving or anything like that or getting into disputes with any of the argentine contributors, who obviously are not their politicians or have the same mind set. Another contributor mentioned it earlier on as well. All they've got to do is take MPA. Once theyve taken the airfield, you're royally fecked. Possession being 9/10's and all that. What it all boils down to on both sides is political will. Does Argentina think it is worth it to plan and mount a viable assault that may have a good chance of success... Does the UK Government figure that it is worth it trying to defend the islands or if it came to it, attempt to retake them, as per CORPORATE... FWIW, I think in the next 5 years or so, I wouldnt be surprised to see something happen. Or come to the brink of it. :uhoh: Suffice it to say, the UK defence policy at the moment appears to be akin to leaving a sweet shop (tantamount to) unlocked and unguarded next to a school on a sink estate... you just know, deep down, the longer you leave it, the chances are of it being raided go up exponentially... but how long can you leave it? :confused: Brown, for certain would see his worst particular chickens coming home to roost, (as if they havent already). But, considering he's odds on for the boot regardless of who gets in in May/June, thats of not much consequence. Cameron or others on the other hand (or if theres a hung parliament...)... :confused: Nah, not sure I can see it. He might talk the talk, but... Cant exactly emulate Thatch if the cupboard is bare, can he? No. The Brits have neither the capability, the manpower, the resources, nor the political will to attempt another Corporate. Not now. We cant even prevent a middle aged couple on a yacht from being ambushed by a bunch of gung-ho bloody pirates for gods sake, let alone defend/retake a group of islands. :ugh: Hopefully, Chavez is just beating his gums because he likes the sound of his own voice. :suspect: Should we start seeing Flankers turning up in Argentina, then I'd be seriously worried. Theres only so much a limited number of Typhoons can do. :( The next five years are going to be interesting.. :sad: |
1. It’s interesting and worrying that we are expending so much bandwidth on the likelihood/means/intent of Argentina attempting to take the Islands again. The Argentinean Government may be fanatical but it’s not stupid (that’s a compliment amigos). They don’t need to take the Islands. They just need to harass the oil exploration and oil production shipping and other assets. That is very probably within their current Naval capabilities.
2. Harassment and general embuggerance will result in one of two things; a. we will send Maritime assets (I include Nimrods in that) that either aren’t currently free or no longer available to prevent/deter the harassment. b. we will negotiate some backdoor deal with Argentina to “share” the wealth. c. a combination of both (OK, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition) 3. Option “a” will require political will and backbone. It will also require money to regenerate and multiply Maritime (see, I’m being very Purple here) forces and that would be a fraction of the wealth to be “harvested”. 4. Option “b” will require no political will nor backbone. It’s totally affordable; in the short term. Who really cares what the Bennies think (well, actually, I do) and can’t we buy them off quite cheaply anyway (not necessarily)? 5. It’s all good fun playing Trump Cards and thinking like CGS (past and present) but it’s not really addressing the likely threat and the probable true loss of National wealth. Also, we can almost guarantee public apathy because it doesn’t involve singing, dancing, celebrities or sex. It also might need a waste reduction exercise in Health, Education, Benefits and anything else a Mail/Sun reader believes it’s entitled to. |
A simple solution, perhaps?
a. The Falklands are supposedly oil rich b. Everyone wants to be 'mates' with the oil rich. So, therefore, the FI become a sovereign, independent state in their own right (perhaps join the Commonwealth). They then join the UN and sign treaty's with all and sundry to come to their aid (really the oil's aid) if they are attacked/invaded. After all, look what happened when a small, independent, oil rich country (Kuwait) was invaded by it's neighbour. |
The regular answer that most people on here seem to provide, when the conversation gets around to funding the current and future MOD capability, is that there is no money. There is money, unfortunately, most of it goes into the pockets of the great unwashed, the single parents, the long term unemployed, legal aid, social security, incapacity benefits for the fat, new cars for the fat etc etc. The country needs to get itself away from rewarding those who do not want to contribute. No, I am not being unfair, most of the people I speak with all know someone who is taking the P!**.
These bits of rock around the world are the source of our future wealth along with the centuries of coal under our feet. We need to protect and defend our resources. We will be out of the Stan sooner rather than later and we then need to reset to deal with resource based conflicts. The previous post about the vulnerability of fixed airfields is well made although I think you under-estimate what it would take to be successful. |
Maybe naively, I also think you underestimate the will of the British Public were there ever another attack / invasion. I don't think they'd let the politicians get away with doing nothing, and I doubt the press would either!
Looks like the Tories are being quite clear about their beliefs - heres hoping the government do the same! |
Times Online - Argentina will ‘take measures’ to stop British oil drilling off Falklands
As the article points out, military action won't be needed on the part of the Argentines as....... controls that block shipping from using Argentine ports could render oil exploration uneconomic. |
OK, it’s the Mail;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1251901/British-warship-sent-Argentina-oil-drilling-row-deepens.html Argentina has warned Britain it 'shouldn't be complacent' and that it would defend its sovereignty in the territorial dispute off the Falkland Islands. However, Buenos Aires insisted it did did not mean a repeat of the 1982 Falklands war. The South American country has said it will take its dispute over plans by UK firms to explore oil off the islands to the United Nations. Argentine Foreign Minister It’s clearly written by one of their top reporters because it has a picture of; Type 2 destroyer the HMS York is patrolling waters off Port Stanley Argentina stopping merchant ships that it believes to be running “contraband”, to examine papers etc, would be an embuggerance and probably legal if the UN is wound up in the right way. They don't need to invade and, as I said, they aren't stupid. |
All the posturing and brow beating in the world will not hide the one truth, even Argentina realises the UK armed forces are a spent force capabilty wise to redo a re run of the Faklands war, and the reason for that is simple.......
Politician's and their endless budget cuts to feed and educate the third world and pay those that choose to sit at home all day or chose to travel to the UK to sit at home and be paid for it..... What I would do.... Unemployment benefit should be increased to help those who suddenly find themselves in the predicament with mortgage payments etc, after all paying £800 a week to put a family in a B & B is stupid if their mortgage payments are less than that.... Payments will decrease to a basic benefit until at the 2 year point when they will cease, period, these folks that sit at home and refuse jobs because they are better off will simply find them selves without anything! Sorry off topic rant. |
Surely if a ship leaves an Argentinian port for the Falklands', then it is fair game for the Argies to scream & shout about, but the chances are an Argentinian company was standing to make money from any shipment & shipping business?
However if a ship bound for the Falklands' from ANY OTHER port, South American or not, is sailing in international waters & is stopped, boarded, searched & confiscated by the Argentine Armada, isn't that tantermount to piracy? 4 more Tyffies, 8 GR4's with Sea Eagles, 4 Nimrods, an extra tanker & a pair of AWACS, another Sub, a Frigate, a Destroyer & an RFA tender should be sent to MPA on an 'Exercise'. I'm sure the Americans can cover our NATO obligations in exchange for an oil deal or 2 & HMG should get it's finger out & build the airfield on TdC that the islanders want... just in case... :ok: |
After reading carefully all your posts, I wonder, What is the problem???!!! If Argentina do not allow ships entry their docks, just knock on Chile´s door!
This is only a "presure problem", very far from becoming a war. You must remember what happen to Brazil when the oil costs raised one year ago, they started to explore their waters in order to find a place for drilling and save money. UK, and it´s my opinion, is trying to get some reserves for the future. There is no benefit getting out oil nowadays with the price of a barrel. And for everyone, if you have the opportunity go to Falklands, there is nothing at all for visiting! When I was there, they only had 2 hotels and the biggest part of the islands are empty(if you do not take note of sheeps and mines of the war). But if you finally decide to go do not miss the opprtunity to visite Argentina!:) |
Fubarr
i assume your comment was directed at me the point i was making to people like jabba-tg12 who said "All they've got to do is take MPA." With what? there's no realistic propect of an inavsion, special forces or conventional they don't have the kit! their politicains dislike and underfund their armed forces to an even greater extent then brown does in the UK, though in their case given their history its understandable |
So all this talk from Argentina and assurances from Brown that we are prepared. So what happens when we reconfigure to a COIN only military? Chinooks are awesome in the Stan but its short sighted to be cutting the RAF and Navy in just about every other way. How long will it be before we are incapable of undertaking such an operation down south I wonder? Do we never learn the lessons of history!
|
I'm pretty sure Officers & Men (and others) of HQBFSA are well briefed & familiar with scenario's such as the Argie SF crash landing, say for example, a Punta Arenas departed/ Antarctica bound 'GreenPeace' Chartered, Angolan registered Herc', declaring 'Electrical problems' & 'Mayday'ing in to an unsuspecting MPA leaping out & saying "Buenos Dias, Gringo y Amigas"!....
...by the way, how did the last exercise go? ...INCOMING!!!!! :ok: |
I am a little shocked by what a huge huge effort it was to get those 4 Phoons down to MPA - and how long it took. It's clear to me that against an organised Argie attack we would have no chance of increasing that number in a timely manner.
|
Well with 232 on order, why not just put a half dozen from each delivery tranche there permanently, and do this while we can, even if not crewed.
The classic "TTW" phase might not exist in this scenario. It didn't last time. Edited to add "It didn't last time, or at least the Int wasn't believed". |
with 232 on order Otherwise nice idea;) |
Good point. Delete 232, insert 160.
|
But you only need 4 for a flypast at an airshow; so we could put 156 on the Malvinas:O
Duncs:ok: |
"Do we never learn the lessons of history!"
No, Never. :(:(:(:( |
Perhaps the F3s should have been left down there as well. :confused:
|
Cosmiccomet.
Hi again. I think we may be having a problem as English is not your first language (and Spanish isn't one of mine at all:}). I am not blaming the Argentine people for being interested in the world cup (and yes we were here too). I just feel that British troops felt more supported by the British public than the Argentine troops were by the Argentine public. This is not a complaint against your people, but IMHO did make your troops wonder why they were going through such tough times if no one cared about them. I am also not saying Britain is a great place to live, or Argentina is a bad place. It is good you are sticking up for your country. You may also know that no matter how much politicians cause trouble, and start wars, that the troops of both sides usually can get on well together, and have things in common. You mention your air force pilots. I think most folks on this site will agree that your air force and navy pilots were very brave in their missions, and were well trained. But of course, it was a war, and so we did our best to win, just as your side did. So, please don't confuse any digs at your countries leader of the time, with a dig at the general population. |
|
Perhaps the Afghan Army can lend a battalion or two to help us out
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:27. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.