Falklands War, 1982, Thread

[TerraN_EmpirE]

In the Mexican deal the US said go for it. It was Mexico who walked away

 

[b787]

In the Mexican deal the US said go for it. It was Mexico who walked away

If you have read the articles you will understand by 1977, Carter imposed an Embargo of weapons on Latin America, Peru decided they did not care, so they bought Su-22s.

Argentina played with Reagan in the Iran-contras deal, that is the reason they thought the USA was going to support them.
Originally the Argentine A-4 could use AIM-9Bs, but in the Malvinas/Falklands they were straffing like this picture shows from 1982 while attacking a British ship

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Loading of the Exocet that Destroyed the HMS Sheffield

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Photo of the four A-4s and 2 Super Etendard before attacking the HMS Invincible

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[b787]

ARA 25 de Mayo aircraft carrier

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[FORBIN]

The British Landed at San Carlos Bay on the Western Side of East Falklands Island. the plan was to land and then chopper to Port Stanley, This plan failed when the Helicopters on the Atlantic Conveyor were destroyed by 2 of the then 3 remaining Air to surface Exocet missiles ( the first two used to destroy the Sheffield, The last was fired and Failed May 30 1982) .
the British ground forces were 3 Commando Brigade reinforced with 2 Para and 3 Para , 5 Infantry Brigade reinforced with Scots guards and Welsh Guards these two units were normally ceremonial guards for Buckingham Palace.
The Argentines were the 3rd Mechanized Infantry Brigade, 10th Mechanized Infantry Brigade, 5th Naval Infantry Battalion, Compañía de Fuerzas Especiales 601 de Gendarmería Nacional, 601st Air defence artillery group, B Battery, 101st Anti-Aircraft group and the 1st Marine Anti-Aircraft Battalion.

Have you number for ground troops i think around 6000 for 3 RM Cdo Bde reinforced and 3000 + for 5th Brigade, for Argentina 10000 - 20000 troops ?

 

[FORBIN]

Good post but the graphic of the Belgrano is the wrong ship; armament is correct though.View attachment 35583 View attachment 35584

One main turet removed curious i see always 5, know you where are the 2 Seacat launchers ?

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Have you number for ground troops i think around 6000 for 3 RM Cdo Bde reinforced and 3000 + for 5th Brigade, for Argentina 10000 - 20000 troops ?

I have been trying to find numbers but have as yet had no luck.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

If you have read the articles you will understand by 1977, Carter imposed an Embargo of weapons on Latin America,

No the ban was on Argentina not Latin America as a Whole.

Peru decided they did not care, so they bought Su-22s.

Peru was taken over by a Pro Soviet Peruvian Army General Juan Velasco Alvarado in 1968 via a Coup.
The US imposed a embargo on Peru as a result. Peru was forced to seek Soviet military aid. And Acquired a large number of Soviet aircraft. This lasted until 1984 When Peru began acquiring western equipment again.

Argentina played with Reagan in the Iran-contras deal, that is the reason they thought the USA was going to support them.

The Iran Contra affair was 3 years Later!

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

One main turet removed curious i see always 5, know you where are the 2 Seacat launchers ?

"One Main Turret Removed"? She retained all five to the end of her life. No3 Turret was mounted at weather deck level the same as no 1 and no 5 turrets, so could only fore broadsides, not ahead.

In the upper photo you can just about make the Sea Cat Launcher at the rear of the bridge super structure, just in front of the forward funnel. Sea Cat was designed to replace a 40mm Bofors mounting in terms of space and weight requirements, one main reason it was so successfully installed on so many ships old and new around the world. It had 'Low ship-impact' as one of it's main design criteria. General Belgrano received two Sea Cat systems, one either side of the bridge

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

Tell me when did the Harrier could carry AIM-154?
Please re read my post, you appear to be deliberately misinterpreting me. You brought the Backfire into the discussion, and the only context in which Backfires could attack RN ships would be in the North Atlantic as part of a Warsaw pact attack on NATO, and that is the context I framed my answer. I never said Sea Harriers could carry either Phoenix or Sparrow, but if Backfires attacked these are the weapons they would face, from F-14 Tomcats. That's the whole point of the Alliance, War with one is war with all.


You forget a few things about geopolitics, The USA had an embargo of weapons in Latin America, have you ever seen the USA selling good weapons there?
Answered in detail already by others, but Latin America has always been viewed by the USA as a convenient place to offload second hand weapons, as the region was more likely to be involved in local disputes with each other, unlike Europe which was in the frontline against the Soviet Union and because of both NATO and the EU was unlikely to be involved in internal strife. Europe got the good stuff, Latin America got the leftovers. Harsh but true.

The most capable fighters in Latin America are not US made, are the Russian built Su-30s of Venezuela. and before that were the MiG-29s and MiG-23ML of the Cuban air force
The A-4s were capable to carry AIM-9 but the USA capped their capability

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But Argentina`s were limited from Washington.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Were your Harrier pilots very brave? no way you lost 25% of your Harrier force and even with an Embargo to Argentina.
Why do you equate success with bravery? The success of any mission is unconnected to the bravery level of those engaged. The Sea Harrier Pilots went to war knowing they were outnumbered 10 to 1, and popular opinion was that they would suffer 75% losses. They went anyway and did their job. I'd call that Brave. I have already said that the bravery of the Argentine pilots was never disputed either, certainly not by the UK
The only reason you will not see further war is thanks the Falklands/Malvinas war, was only a territorial dispute, Brazil was willing to Stay neutral as long as South America`s continental surface was out of the war, this allowed to keep Brazil`s navy out of the war.
The UK Government never had any intention to attack the continent of South America. Our Territory was invaded, we went to take it back. Simple as that.
But be honest, you almost lost the war and that is even with help, this shows you are making a myth, you were ill prepared, and not very well trained.
It has never been disputed that we came close to losing the War. Poor political decisions by successive Governments since WW2 are to blame for that. ON BOTH SIDES! We were certainly ill prepared as the focus for twenty years had been on fighting the Warsaw Pact in the North Atlantic and Europe. But we are nothing if not flexible, and we did the best we could with what we had. Just like the Argentine forces. For the land battle we sent our best troops, including the Royal Marines and the Paras. Argentina sent ill-trained conscripts to face them. That was a bad move on the part of Argentina, for whatever reason.

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

Just to further clarify:
"One Main Turret Removed"? She retained all five to the end of her life. No3 Turret was mounted at weather deck level the same as no 1 and no 5 turrets, so could only fire broadsides, not ahead.

In the upper photo you can just about make the Sea Cat Launcher at the rear of the bridge super structure, just in front of the forward funnel. Sea Cat was designed to replace a 40mm Bofors mounting in terms of space and weight requirements, one main reason it was so successfully installed on so many ships old and new around the world. It had 'Low ship-impact' as one of it's main design criteria. General Belgrano received two Sea Cat systems, one either side of the bridge

When sunk the UK Government Cited the threat of Exocets as justification, but Belgrano was not fitted with them. Her two escorting Destroyers, WERE fitted with Exocets:
...And the biggest scandal of the sinking (from the British side) was that an obsolete WW2 Cruiser armed only with Guns (15x 6Inch, 5x3) posed a genuine and serious threat to a supposedly modern missile armed first world Navy. On the Argentine side the unspoken scandal was that when she was sunk her two escorting destroyers sailed away with indecent haste and didn't stop to pick up survivors.