Quite.

Needs must and 6 month delay would have given time for the need to be satisfied. Same with the Gannet; that time would have been needed to get it ship shape.

I would agree that it was a moot point if they had recognised the need before the event. Similarly that they needed two ships, one with long range SAM and one with short range SAM, only seemed to arise when it was realised the ASM threat was different from the Soviet ASM threat.

Martin
The point I was trying to make was that we would have been better off if we had delayed our response - not if the Argentinians had delayed their attack.
If the Argentinians had waited, then Bulwark would have been scrapped, several frigates sold to Chile, Invincible to Oz, Stronmess to the USA (had Tarbatness already gone or was that also held back?), the Tide tankers pensioned off....

As originator of this thread and a newbie to this site, may I convey many thanks to all for the very informative and interesting posts to a query I thought might have been considered a tad too fanciful. But then the truth certainly smacked of being stranger than fiction in 1982.

Archimedes' eloquent synopsis sets the scene nicely, and it seems apparent from further contributions that Vulcan was the only serious contender, though Nimrod might have been able to do the job had political premise deemed it worth a go. Must admit though, a Canberra ex Chile would have been a really interesting strategy, there were of course similar dodgy dealings afoot at that time. Then the AOC might have trully been able to effect his 25 to 50 missions. I guess it begs the question though as to just how relatively difficult it was to get the Vulcan back into service from the knackers yard, knowing it to be a preferable optimised system. And I'd like to add to the "timing" arguments with regard to training and equipment considerations.

Nice gen, but then I think the real decider was simply that Galtieri's hide was on the line and his act of national unity was in desperation, surplus to strategic considerations. Luckily for us it would seem. With so many possible tangents to explore in this vain, I'd encourage others to continue as they see fit, its all good. Thanks though for the "Buccs for Black Buck" referal, of which I was not aware, that answers my main query.

Just thought I'd leave with the thought however of my reaction to the crisis as a 12 year old boy. The tabloids sold out before I could get a copy and I remember pestering my old man to go in search of one. "But why do you want that for son?". " Because they have a centrefold featuring all the task force assets". "What on earth do you want that for". "So I can cross them off when they get sunk". "Dont be so silly........"

Yes, but the Argies attacked in Autumn 1982 (for the Southern Hemisphere) hoping that they could entrench over the harsh winter expected in the FIs from May/Jun 82 for 4 months onwards (normally). Luckily for us Winter was later in 82 than in previous years.

actually on thinking about it, if they'd attacked six months later even the requisitioned Fleetwood long distance trawlers would have gone: Cordella, Farnella, Junella, Northella and Pict, were all sold overseas fairly soon after returning, and not replaced by Marrs.
I guess they weren't too important, but in terms of total number of hulls available it all adds up

were all Hull trawlers, if you don't mind, Milo! ;)

Milo, only one answer, STUFT :)

The Tonados would have been very vulnerable in a low-level attack using JP233. At a higher level, the Vulcan was the right aircraft for the job.

in that sense, what was really needed would have been a Vulcan-launched stand-off JP233
Would it have been feasible to fit wings to a JP233 dispenser and glide / rocket it over the target if launched from a Vulcan bomb bay?
I realise this is fantasy world, but just sometimes the mad ideas work....

I do recall seeing a project brochure in the '80's for that very purpose, I suspect that crews tasked with this role pretty soon pushed back with 'you want us to fly straight and level for HOW long?'

What became JP233 was originally intended to be a powered munition. It was a joint US/UK project and destined for F-111 and Tornado. When economies reduced it to a free fall weapon the US pulled out of the project.

...and bought the Durandal instead. If memory serves, the 20th TFW used some in 1991, and there is/was one on display alongside the Tornado the RAF donated tothe USAF Museum in Dayton (again, IIRC).

The vulnerability, kiwibrit, was very nearly a big issue for the Vulcan which probably only survived the first attack at 8000ft because they achieved the first principle of war - surprise. This was despite Hanrahan the night before reporting from Hermes that they were loading bombs on the Harriers - really? what for? Good job the Argies did not ask.

could the Hercules carry wing-mounted Durandal? In hindsight that may have been a better option?

Tarby was in Portsmouth (North Corner Jetty if I remember correctly) destoring for sale. I do remember the heated argument with the Stores staff who were diligently landing stores as planned and most reluctant to heed "put them back".

Did the WEC in '74, visited Huntings. Asked about a powered JP233. They blanched as they thought we were in a position to cancel the overflight version.

Didnt realist that JP233 became available early enough, though you might imagine it to have been the weapon of choice. Begs the question as to how easy it would have been to integrate it with the Vulcan or Buccaneer? Perhaps a learned armourer could also enlighten me as to whether this system was ever tried in part ie. without a full complement of bomblets, for say weight considerations? And was it ever trial dropped from altitude?

I'd want to check, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Durandal required a delivery at no more than 200ft and at around 550kts to be fully effective. I'm not entirely sure that sort of attack profile would necessarily be conducive to the good health of a C-130 crew, even with the benefit of surprise...

A similar problem might have applied to Vulcan/JP233. The low height in a AAA zone would have been very dangerous. The delivery speed may also have been an issue.

With dumb bombs the time interval could be adjusted to ensure the proper interval between bombs. Did JP233 have a variable time dispense control?

The Vulcan doctrine was for a nuclear laydown attack as low and as fast as possible. With 117TUs a conventional laydown attack was feasible but not against a heavily defended target with AAA. There was a preferred option against AAA of 8,000 feet minimum.

Against medium SAM 18,000 feet was deemed acceptable, but all these were predicated against Soviet weapons in the early 70s.

"I'd want to check, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Durandal required a delivery at no more than 200ft and at around 550kts to be fully effective. I'm not entirely sure that sort of attack profile would necessarily be conducive to the good health of a C-130 crew, even with the benefit of surprise..."


I looked up the Durandal when it came up in another thread (I think the Big Blu thread) and I thought it was a MINIMUM of 200 ft, but like you, I'd want to check :ok: