Hi Christian

Very interesting questions. I would doubt the Skyhawk story. However, if they had flown low level all the way to the Jason's, would the FI AEW picked them up incoming? What was providing AEW at the time?

Was it the SK, or did we have ship or submerged assets providing the warnings?

Andy

HMS Valiant was on station off Rio Grande, but she did not pick any Skyhawk (or any other attack A/C) that day.

If it is true, the raid departed from Gallegos or else.

Regards,

We should also add that FAA A-4 had been withdrawn back to Villa Reynolds by that time. COAN´s Skyhawks left were no more than 2... may be 3.

So, if they trully were A-4s, supported by KC-130, they probably came from Comodoro Rivadavia or even Trelew. Different thing if we´re talking about COAN´s Super Etendart: they most likely were flying from Punta Alta.

I´m pretty sure that no less than 15 or 20 air-contacts were reported by HMS Valiant between June 25th and 27th, most of them C-130. I should double check that. Were there any SSNs still on station just outside the 12NM zone let´s say around Puerto Santa Cruz, San Julian or Gallegos?

Christian

CAW,

There were some attacks planned on mainland airfields in the summer of 1983. This was in response to 23 Sqn's resoundingly successful participation (OK, it was the QWIP) in an otherwise spectacularly unsuccessful firepower demo for the Army on a W Falkland range. There was much running about with pink files with a big red stamp on them shortly thereafter- I think it took about a week before the "General Staff" at HQ BFFI was persuaded that committing the bulk of your AD assets to un-recce'd strafe attacks at max unrefuelled range was not out of the top drawer of cunning plans.

That said, 20mm HEI @ 6000 rounds per minute was impressive to watch from both outside and inside the cockpit and, for me at least, it topped the list of fun weapons events.

But, does this mean they were actually planned to take place, and then cancelled - or contingency plans for a retaliation in the invent of an attack by the Argentine Air Force? I would doubt that there would have been a plan for a unilateral attack by UK assests against the Argentine mainland, given the political fallout that would provoke - including the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance - but there again, I only take the view of a historian looking at the context of the time rather than someone that was there.

Could you elaborate more on the firepower demonstration on West Falkland.

Thanks

A

Andy

This never got as far as tasking or even formal contingency plan status. And you are right in thinking there would not have been a plan for a unilateral attack, the ROE profile would not have permitted that anyway. I'm not sure it was even thought of as a retaliatory option (assuming an ARG attack got through the AD system in the first place, eh Courtney?!), I think it was more of a 'great idea' moment that failed to survive contact with any sort of reality.

The firepower demo involved a bit of 4.5" Naval Gunfire Support, Lynx + TOW and F4 strafe against a few dead vehicles lying in the peat on the W Falkland mainland. There may have been some 105mm arty as well, but memory wobbles after 30 years... I believe it may all have been Army-inspired, but that could just be vicious rumour.

ff

Indeed, my friend. Would never have happened in my day!

Thanks for your post, fortissimo!!

I can now confirm that the Grupo 5 Skyhawks re-deployed to their peace-time base between June 20th and 26th. Daggers from one of the Squadrons of Grupo 6, were completly withdrawn by June 26th and back in Tandil. May be a few planes of both types remained down south for something like a week.

My guess, is that around June 18th, the FAS decided it´d start to retreat its remainig assets to recover as fast as possible, its fighting capacity. This could only be achieved by going back to peace-time routine, at least in a roulement basis. It appears to be obvious that both pilots and commanding officers needed to rest and re-think their whole experience at war, planes needed to be either repaired or upgraded, supporting lines needed to be re-stablished, and so on.

If this "strategic retreat" of late June was caused by the need to de-escalate the conflict, or by another set of aims, I still can´t tell.

Christian

CAW
 

You must be talking June 83.

June 82 was still a little too dangerous for the RAF AD Force to come out to play, so it must have been June 83 which was when they thought it was safe enough to venture south and take over from the Harriers - whilst waiting for a proper airfield to be built for them.

The Lightnings were still around then - why, oh why, did we not send them down south!!!!!..............

Surely they would have sorted all the problems of the world out!!............

:uhoh:

BomberH,

I´m not sure I clearly understand what you mean.

The first RAF AD (meaning aircraft, not only SAMs), as far as I know, was stablished at RAF Stanley in June 1982. It later became the HarDet, which handed over the task to the F-4 when they got there by October 1982.

By 1983, RAF had an interesting number of planes stationed at Stanley, and as far as I was able to find out, no less than two FOBs were still manned and running.

Given that we have already read testimonies of pilots that did fly west, outside the FIPZ, given that we even have a few pictures and known locations of "encounters" between RAF and argentinean aircrafts, and -at last- given the fact that most of this facts were both known and discussed in documents that the UK Government has released, I think that the arising question here is: did the RAF have enough planes "in the theatre" to be able to think about conducting offensive operations against mainland targets, ie airfields?

I apologize if I got you wrong, BomberH. :ok:

Christian

Christian
 

No, I need to apologise to you................

My comment was banter - otherwise known as irreverent comment between different forces within the RAF.

You were interested in serious comment - so I need to apologise to you for reducing your thread to banter, rather than making worthwhile comment on the points that interest you.

You are, of course, correct - the Harriers did the business at Stanley from June 82 until the F-4s arrived. I left in July 82, so I have only peripheral knowledge of the activities that interest you.

I am sorry not to be able to offer you more meaningful comment on the points that are of interest to you.

Regarding post conflict incursions to FIPZ - Does anyone else recall the Sept/Oct time 1986 period. - I was off duty on one of the Radar sites one evenig when the boss comes in and told us to get an early night as intelligence suggested some kind of potential action from Argentina the following day.

Come daylight we manned our site fully and things were far quieter than normal with regards our flying, eventually the day passed and things got back to normal, but I've often wondered, 1: Did I make it up, and 2: If I didn't what was going on!

And precisely how would they have been deployed south?

There weren't enough diversion aerodromes to have made AAR an option, we didn't have any transport aircraft large enough to carry a dismantled Lightning - and the engineering effort to rebuild them on arrival at an austere location would have been colossal.

BomberH, there are plenty of things you could share with us.

If I may.

Could you tell us about a second Harrier FOB set up at Teal Inlet during June?

AR1,

I can confirm to you that there were at least two 707 flights, north of Byron Heights after 14th June 1986. I wouldn´t be surprised if another set of flights like that would have been scheduled for the southern Spring.

Which radar site did you manned back then, if I could ask?

Christian

Hello again and Happy New Year to you all!!

I´ve just found this picture taken at Yorke Bay sometime after June 1982. I can´t seem to place neither the exact date nor the situation pictured.

I do Know that the major landing of both materials and machinery to set up RAF Stanley, were conducted from RFA and MV vessels and did not use the Stanley jetty. I read somewhere that mexeflotes were used to land these items directly to the airport peninsula.

Could it be that this picture shows something related to those vessel-to-beach landings?

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/8356/sxzv.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Christian

CAW: I would be very surprised if that was in Yorke Bay - it was heavily mined with both anti tank and anti personnel devices, and it was a good few years before any clearance was carried out. If, however, it was taken on 29 Dec 82 it was of the only 'heavy' digger/dozer the engineers had on the island at the time. Whilst trying to dig out sand or gravel from a beach for use in construction they succeeded in bogging it down with a rapidly incoming tide and we were tasked to try to 'help' the recovery and prevent many red faces. The engineers 'reckoned' it weighed 16 tons, so even our Chinook was not going to lift it (although we did try - Op Corporate rules!). Eventually though we did succeed in helping to pull it out just before the sea would have forced an abandon ship episode.

Unfortunately I can't remember exactly which beach it was, but I seem to remember it was fairly close to PSC (Port San Carlos).

WRT Mexefloats - they were used for almost everything to do with loading/offloading ships in Port Stanley in the early days - even pax to and from accommodation ships such as the Norland as none of the port infrastructure could take the traffic. In addition the mexes got everywhere - I think we had one or two over at PSC (which was how the bulldozer got ashore in the first place).

Shackman, thank you for your answer.

As for this precise observation:

I must tell you I agree with you: that beach had been heavily mined.

Still, the reference I have mentiones Yorke Bay. Since I remember reading about some fast de-mining activity carried oud by RE personal after June 18th around the airstrip and beyond the area, and adding to that the fact that Stanley´s jetty was no use given the volumes and speed requiered for RE´s equipment to be offloaded... well, I just thought that it could all relate.

There´s another detail in the picture that makes me think about the Pembroke Peninsula: those two isles in the back. Aren´t they the Toussac Island, just a few houndred meters north of the peninsula´s shore.

Could it be that the beach was not actually Yorke but the one east of it?

http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/8717/p2ut.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here´s another one of the dozers:

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/6990/54s9.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Cheers!
Christian

.

CAW, re Mexe and unloading kit at Port Stanley

Have a read of this

That Famous Runway at Port Stanley ? Part 3 (Post Conflict) - Think Defence

The kit and construction materials, at least for the interim operating capability, seem to have been offloaded by a combination of Mexeflotes and RLC RCL's at a number of jetties in and around Port Stanley.

For your research, have you got a copy of Edward Fursden's book, picking up the pieces. It is very good


Will have a look through some of my other reference materials for you to see if I can add anything to the bulldozer information posted by Shackman

Happy New Year by the way !

ThinkDefense,

Thanks for your answer. I´ve read all of your "papers" on RAF Stanley and those related to the Malvinas War. I´ve been doing a research of my own for some years now and look forward to publish in the near future.

I do not own a copy of the book you mention, but I´ll try to get one. Anyways, if you know of free dowload site, I´ll much appreciate it.

Thanks again.

Christian

CAW, if you look at the Amazon link the book can be had for pennies, then its just postage charges I guess

"The kit and construction materials, at least for the interim operating capability, seem to have been offloaded by a combination of Mexeflotes and RLC RCL's at a number of jetties in and around Port Stanley"

If my recollections are correct (I was there 11 July 82- Oct 82)there were two jetties, Sir Tristam was tied to one and the other was used purely for troop movements. There was one slipway in use that the Mexi floats and Landing craft brought all the stores and vehicles ashore at, this was a major choke point.

I have seen this image a few places but I think relevant

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8111/8...3df1af6a_o.jpg

And a couple of comments from the post I linked to earlier

when I was at 17 P&M years later there was a great story about a mexe cox’n during this period moving civilian plant equipment ashore in slightly lumpy seas; the digger or whatever it was shifted on deck and simply slipped over the edge into the oggin whilst the mexe continued serenely on. For whatever reason the cox’n simply tried to bluff it out when questioned later about the missing kit, claiming he couldn’t remember whether it had been loaded or not

and a follow up to that one

Have read the vessel logbook you are on about the vehicles were called haulmatics but were soon renamed aquamatics!!! according to the logbook they were recovered and eventually returned to service

I was at Stanley from Dec 82-May 83, and was living on the Rangatira in Stanley Harbour. We had to get to and from the airfield everyday, by landing craft to the Stanley Jetty, and then trucks to the airfield. I say Stanley jetty, but not sure of the names for them all, but it was the main one with the shop just of to the left, as you got off the jetty. I can't recall seeing anything bigger than a landing craft using that jetty. The Tristram was tied up to the left, East, of that jetty, didn't ever hear it called anything, for the time I was there. There was a sort of beachhead landing area a bit further to the East of the Tristram, and I seem to recall it was quite busy and was used to land stuff of the mexifloat craft. It was quite impressive watching the Eager Beavers unloading cargo from them, and negotiating the slope, to load lorries.


(I say that we used to use the landing craft everyday to/from work, but one day the sea was to rough, and we had to use the company helicopter.)

Dan Gerous ... IIRC it was called the "Public Jetty" during my time there (May-Sep 83)

More Stanley memories of water taxis and water skiing
 

I remember the RN water taxi service which carried people to Navy Point and to the various ships in the inner (and sometimes also the outer harbour) which were I think crewed by a coxswain and a couple of matelots.

I remember a couple of shall we say "heavy landings" when some RN officer was given a turn at the wheel by the usually Petty Officer cox'n, supposedly to keep his hand in. All I can say is that the more junior the helmsman the more comfortable the trip! Though to be fair conditions could get a bit rough with a tricky crosswind.

I'm not sure of the class of vessel but they were brought in as deck cargo and craned off. They were not combat support boats (CSB's) which I also remember trying to water ski behind, I managed a couple of laps but after only a short time in the water your hands were too cold to grip the handle on the tow rope. The immersion suit was ok for normal ops, but when I fell I made the mistake of holding onto the rope too long and so entered the water head-first and the neck seal was shall we say, compromised.

The result being what felt like several pints of icy sea water but was probably no more than a quart, followed by a strong gasp reflex, a sharp constriction in breathing and then it worked its way down.....

Aged 25 it seemed like fun at the time.:ok:

MB

Underwater Haulmatics
 

I was sat at the back of the General's morning brief in HQ BFFI when the door was pushed open by his ADC. This was normal, and usually he just showed a "thumbs up" to indicate that the daily morale-boosting flight by Hercules from Ascension had passed the half-way point and thus had mail etc en route. This time the ADC told the General that there had just been a problem in Stanley Harbour and all the Haulmatics had tipped overboard from a Mexeflote taking them out to a ship which was to take them and their full loads of stone from the airfield quarry round to San Carlos (if my memory is correct). Great consternation - how quickly could they be replaced? Some months, as they would have to be bought and shipped by sea. REs and Navy clearance divers tasked to sort out, and all were recovered, including one or two complete with loads of stone, within a couple of weeks. REME got them dried out and running, and, apart from copious dents, cracked or missing windscreens and wads of seaweed, they carried on regardless. Haulmatics (if that was the right name) were huge dumper trucks, and ISTR there were at least half a dozen on the Mexe, which was a large proportion of the total at the quarry.
Can't remember when this was, but I was there Nov 82 - Mar 83, and I would think this was in early 83.

MPN11, bells dinging, that's the one.

:ok: Didn't one of them run around with a life belt hanging on the front of the radiator grill..until a certain SO had a sense of humour failure?

Excuse me, if I may, why were they shipping loads of stone to San Carlos? May be road-building?

Christian

I think I saw the first one driving about within a couple of days of their "total immersion". The logo had been adjusted by some wag to read "Aquamatic."

Nothing matters very much, most things don't matter at all.

CAW
Can't honestly remember why the stone was going to San Carlos or wherever. Although there was stone all over the islands, the only stuff that was processed into decent sizes was the stuff from the airfield quarry. There have been various threads about the flight safety/health and safety/barking madness of blowing up huge amounts of rock in the middle of an airfield, but in those days needs overrode logic a lot of the time.

Ahh, them big trucks!! Here's one being led by GEF's "GT Tractor" towing something :cool:

http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/m...TC/Scan-2.jpeg

First thing I read.

Can anyone comment on this, please?

http://i61.tinypic.com/2qsuw0l.jpg

Christian

AVM Ian Macfadyen
 

AVM Ian Macfadyen talking about the development of flying from Stanley in 1982 -83 at London Society of Air Britain. Wednesday 12th March. Victory Services Club starts at 19.30


AVM has featured a few times recently. FL put a photo up relating to the Banquet. Also mentioned in the alternative to the Red Arrows thread.

i thought FRADU was Fleet requirement......

It was....

Those Haulmatics
 

I was recently at the Interim port and storage system and spotted them still working!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...4&l=6dfdd6cd62

I come back again hoping for someone to clarify something for me.

Here´s the thing: was there an Operation CANNONBALL during the war of 1982? (As I understand it, it was supposed to be an air-trasport operation, a RAF only-operation? I don´t know) or was it something that started after Operation CORPORATE ended?

Was it actually related with air-transport or did it include all air traffic between ASI-RAF Stanley?

Thanks to you all,
Christian

The only Op Cannonball I've ever heard of was the North Americans trying to get OBL.

Cannonball was the name we used on 216 Sqn for the bi-weekly run to ASI. The Cannonball crew flew the leg to ASI then handed over to the pre-positioned FI crew who carried on to MPA. The Cannonball crew overnighted at ASI and then flew the return leg back to BZN. I did it a few times, left BZN on Thursday night, spent most of Friday and Friday night on the beach etc at ASI before returning to BZN on Saturday night. This may or may not be the Cannonball you are referring to.