Discussion
Simpo Two said:
I thought the torpedo that sank the Belgrano was some new type that cost more than the Belgrano was worth?
The Conqueror carried two types of torpedo, the WW2 era mk8 and the wire guided Tigerfish. The Conqueror had not managed up to that point in time to fire a Tigerfish and have it hit it's target never mind detonate. The mk8 however was proven technology with a much larger warhead, ideal when you're dealing with 6" of WW2 era steel on the water line.
I understood it was an older mark torpedo as well. I think the Pacific campaign was a different kettle ofd fish to Jutland, it had turned into an air power war so the carriers got it, the big ships ended up as gun platforms? Hence no battle ships lost. Carriers, well, they did take a hammering.
Ganglandboss said:
I've never understood all the fuss. It was a belligerent vessel so it's position relative to the exclusion zone was irrelevant - it was a legitimate target wherever it was.
Indeed.And had HMS Spartan been able to find the Veintcinco de Mayo they would have put a couple of Mk8's into her as well.
Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 29th December 17:43
My opinion is that it was war, the exclusion zone was only an area that we told all Argentinian forces to leave immediately. I considered any Argentinian ship or aircraft outside the exclusion zone to be a genuine military target. No war is ever fought in a ring fenced area, the zone was just a "this is UK territorial waters/land get out now" and until you surrender we will sink and shoot down all Argentinian Forces we see.
Sinking was entirely justified as at sea it posed a threat, however small a threat a pre-WWII light cruiser could be.
And to reiterate something I posted last year after more sabre rattling of the Argentinian government, there were British settlers on the Falklands long before Argentina had ever come into existence as a country. If anyone thinks our Naval and Air Forces couldn't handle the Argentinians. Well have a look at what they have: They have 4x 28 year old Frigates and one 40yr ex-RN type 42 Destroyer converted to a transport & command vessel, 2x 27yr old diesel electric subs and 1x 40yr old diesel electric sub, that's their Naval Force. Air Force is 7x (circa 1960s) Mirage III, 14x IAI Daggers (Israeli built Mirage V), 7x French built (30yr old design) Mirage V and 34 Pucara, the 35 year old turboprop ground attack aircraft that were shot down like fat Turkeys in 1982. They'd have problems beating the Faroe Islands.
Edited to add, the 34 A-4AR Fightinghawk they still operate. Fairly modern updates of a 55 year old design (USA, A-4M Skyhawk) but only if you compare them to Angolan Mig-21s.
If they had another Belgrano it would never leave port.
Sinking was entirely justified as at sea it posed a threat, however small a threat a pre-WWII light cruiser could be.
And to reiterate something I posted last year after more sabre rattling of the Argentinian government, there were British settlers on the Falklands long before Argentina had ever come into existence as a country. If anyone thinks our Naval and Air Forces couldn't handle the Argentinians. Well have a look at what they have: They have 4x 28 year old Frigates and one 40yr ex-RN type 42 Destroyer converted to a transport & command vessel, 2x 27yr old diesel electric subs and 1x 40yr old diesel electric sub, that's their Naval Force. Air Force is 7x (circa 1960s) Mirage III, 14x IAI Daggers (Israeli built Mirage V), 7x French built (30yr old design) Mirage V and 34 Pucara, the 35 year old turboprop ground attack aircraft that were shot down like fat Turkeys in 1982. They'd have problems beating the Faroe Islands.
Edited to add, the 34 A-4AR Fightinghawk they still operate. Fairly modern updates of a 55 year old design (USA, A-4M Skyhawk) but only if you compare them to Angolan Mig-21s.
If they had another Belgrano it would never leave port.
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Friday 30th December 00:06
aeropilot said:
Indeed.
And had HMS Spartan been able to find the Veintcinco de Mayo they would have put a couple of Mk8's into her as well.
If Admiral Woodward had been allowed to run the war his way and he'd been given direct command of the three SSN's then the Veinticinco de Mayo would've been getting some mk8's at roughly the same time as the Belgrano.And had HMS Spartan been able to find the Veintcinco de Mayo they would have put a couple of Mk8's into her as well.
Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 29th December 17:43
Tango13 said:
aeropilot said:
Indeed.
And had HMS Spartan been able to find the Veintcinco de Mayo they would have put a couple of Mk8's into her as well.
If Admiral Woodward had been allowed to run the war his way and he'd been given direct command of the three SSN's then the Veinticinco de Mayo would've been getting some mk8's at roughly the same time as the Belgrano.And had HMS Spartan been able to find the Veintcinco de Mayo they would have put a couple of Mk8's into her as well.
Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 29th December 17:43
We were lucky that the weather interviened on the day before the sinking of Belgrano, as Veinticinco de Mayo had attempted a carrier launch of it's airwing after it's S2 Trackers had located the RN Task Force, in what would have been the first carrier vs. carrier battle since WW2. With the sinking of Belgrano on the next day, she didn't attempt another launch and withdrew from the area.
aeropilot said:
Apart from the fact that she hadn't been found by HMS Spartan....
We were lucky that the weather interviened on the day before the sinking of Belgrano, as Veinticinco de Mayo had attempted a carrier launch of it's airwing after it's S2 Trackers had located the RN Task Force, in what would have been the first carrier vs. carrier battle since WW2. With the sinking of Belgrano on the next day, she didn't attempt another launch and withdrew from the area.
One of the SSN's had found the Veinticinco de Mayos' supply ship and would've trailed it until it made contact but due to the way Northwood was running the war, ie NATO style boxes of engagement it had too break off contact.We were lucky that the weather interviened on the day before the sinking of Belgrano, as Veinticinco de Mayo had attempted a carrier launch of it's airwing after it's S2 Trackers had located the RN Task Force, in what would have been the first carrier vs. carrier battle since WW2. With the sinking of Belgrano on the next day, she didn't attempt another launch and withdrew from the area.
Admiral Woodward, an ex submariner himself wanted to be in direct command of the SSN's and give them free reign on the grounds that anything submerged would be friendly and any skimmers would be either neutral (RN) or a target (Argentine)
Tango13 said:
Admiral Woodward, an ex submariner himself wanted to be in direct command of the SSN's and give them free reign on the grounds that anything submerged would be friendly
That would be with the exception of the Argentine submarmine San Luis, which was active against RN task force ships in the first two weeks of May......onyx39 said:
Just been reading on pprune that intelligence has been made public that indicates that the sinking was the right course of action, apparently she WAS heading toward the exclusion zone, and under orders to do so!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/896...
Coincidentally...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/896...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/8944544...
Edited by Balmoral Green on Friday 30th December 15:16
EnoontsurT said:
Simpo Two said:
EnoontsurT said:
They hit another ship in that area and it was not planned and it did not detonate.
Names would be helpful. Do you mean Conqueror?
Tango13 said:
The Conqueror launched three torpedos, not two as the Telegraph reported in the link. Two hit and sank the Belgrano the third is thought to have struck a glancing blow on one of the escorting Type 42's without detonating.
Could have been embarrassing.... "hello Mrs Thatcher, we have sunk an Argie Heavy Cruiser, oh and a type 42 Destroyer!"
onyx39 said:
Could have been embarrassing.... "hello Mrs Thatcher, we have sunk an Argie Heavy Cruiser, oh and a type 42 Destroyer!"
I read that as a Type 42 (Argentine) destroyer escorting the Belgrano.Aha: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_H%C3%A9rcules_%28... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Sant%C3%ADsima_Tr...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff