Thank You Marcantiland , by the way let me add this : Mr Marcantiland Historian and Author of the book " Chasing the British Subs " has some amassing pictures of the conflict and accurate details of several war actions.-

And believe it or not, it never gonna change until the islands soberanity is returned to Argentina.:=:=:=

Gentelman we now know who is who and we undestand each ones feelings , lets go back to work leaving Politics aside , we still have many pending info on this first BB Mission and the following BB Missions before additional information and Pictures could be brought up regarding other Air War Actions .-

Back to page one Please .- BB # 1

One thing I would like to add regarding BB 1 - Long time ago a radio operator from the Nimrods ( British Crew ) ask me if we suffer the same radio interference that they did from some Russian Station , my replay was that I didn't , my question is , has the BB Missions sufered interference from third party Countries ( Example Russia )

Well Marcantiland , the ball is in your court , Pointus Navigator has brought up " Your Subs " - We anctiously await for your accounts .-

Re the subs - and also the jamming question

These two news reports are interesting
The Times-News - Google News Archive Search

The Miami News - Google News Archive Search

Suggestions that the Soviets were actively jamming UK transmission to our subs.
Of course it could be an attempt at psyops to let the Argentines think we had four subs in the area..

What does POSSUB HIGH 4 mean to the regulars here ? Followed by a MK46 Launch in snake search mode. Target tracked making an evasion course at 22kts and deploying decoys. No whale and no 209. Possibly the only time the UK has attacked a Soviet submarine with a live weapon. I bet the laundry had a busy day the next morning. Shame is wasn't a Stingray.

Navaleye
have you been reading this by Marcantilian?

Falklands "What if...?" - Page 9 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums

Hi,

Re: Soviet subs.

Last year, the Boletin del Centro Naval (sort of Argentine Proceedings) published an article I wrote, about Soviets involvement in the war.

The article is here: http://centronaval.org.ar/boletin/BC...S-SCIARONI.pdf and a rough translation is here: Soviets in Falklands / Malvinas

It looks like some Soviet subs were in the Ops area.

Hello, do you have any other details???

Two friends of mine, S-2E Tracker commanders, attacked (dropped a Mk.44 each) against a subsurface contact on May 5, 1982, near the Argentine carrier. The contact was sighted firstly visual / radar and later corroborated by sonar and on 9 MAD runs. Contact evaded. The scene commander classified it as PROBSUB confidence 1 and on the debrief was lowered to POSSUB confidence 3. No brit sub was there...

I wrote that article with all public domain sources. And I was wrong when pointing to Splendid. She was not there and developed some mechanical problems shortly after.

I don´t want to explain further in this topic (don´t want to drift off topic), but if someone want to open a new one about ASW ops on 1982, I will join ASAP.

Re BB1, sometime ago a poster in "Zona Militar" made this diagram about bomb it:

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/4848/1demayo.jpg

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/9545/bb1mf.jpg


Source: Operacion "Black Buck" | Página 3 | Foros Zona Militar

It could be considered accurate?

Regards!

Thank You Marcantiland , very clear the path of BB1 , I would like to add this :
As Triple AAA realized that British Planes several times flew just above the reach of the 35 mm skyguard , they started using the exercise amunition which does not detonate , but does reach far above the range of war amunition .- This was intensively used in particular by the Skyguard sections at the Airport .- They state having hit some Harrier , that could very well be correct since some pictures have shown Harriers landing at the Carriers with just a hole in the fuselage .-
They put an excercise amunition every 3 or 4 war amunition .-

And that will be for the people of The Falkland Islands to determine, not some asswipe on an internet forum, me old cock sparrow. :ok:

You would need to qualify your statement. Which Harriers?

In Price and Ethell's work it was indeed noticed that some Harriers returned damaged and others didn't. It was the GR3 that were damaged whereas the SHAR was not. It was put down not to the use of kinetic rounds but that the GR3s flew very low and well within AAA range whereas the SHAR flew at greater altitudes.

I am not saying that you didn't hit a SHAR but that your conclusion is not certain.

As this thread is all about a TV programme that airs in 7 minutes, there may be a lull. For those that cannot see it, I'll post it somewhere after editing out the adverts and give you a link. I'm guessing some of you can't receive Channel 4 - you don't know what you're missing! :cool:

Link to follow.

PN,

Reference SHAR battle damage.

The Stanley bunch put the round through Morgan's fin. AAA brought down Taylor at Goose Green and Thomas (801) took AAA that destroyed his radio - I think ivo West Falkland.

Not sure that any of the above has anything whatsoever to do with ammunition selection by Argentinian AAA.

I can't recall any accounts of people taking hits whilst en route back to mum.

orca, thanks, I have yet to trawl through Price and Ethell fo rthe GR3 aspects.

Iveson shot down ivo Goose Green, Glover shot down ivo Falkland Sound and Pook ejected en route Hermes due to catastrophic fuel leak.

Again - nothing ivo Stanley at medium level that I can think of.

No South Atlantic maps so turned a Northern Hemisphere map upside down; genius!

Hindsight is an amazing concept but this was an incredible feat of fuel planning and navigation, and remembering just how crap I was in the back of a Dominie in the 80s puts their feat in real perspective.

One bomb or all 21, it was a significant psychological effect.

Hats off.

"No South Atlantic maps so turned a Northern Hemisphere map upside down; genius!"

Unprofessional I'd say. We had maps on the seagoing squadrons. Was AIDU on leave or doing something similarly important?

Ian Mortimer, shot down by a Roland while in a SHAR - fits the bill for ivo Stanley.

Mick Strigg, what charts did you use then? What projection?

I have amended my calculations at #119 using the accurate runway width and bomb spacing. The bomb fall over the runway would have been 240 feet. With a spacing of 144 feet, had the stick been dropped just a quarter second earlier then they would have been guaranteed two hits.