Argentinian Military

Some of the weapons that carry the AT-63.

The central gunpod is a 30 mm gun Giat-Defa 554:

Bombs and missiles:

Should use some of the local made especial purpose bombs alredy in service with the AAF.

FAS-280

High explosive 34 Kg fragmentation bomb, the blast effect is increased with the adittion of 3500 9 mm diameter steel balls with are capable to penetrate 10 to 20 mm of armour in a 100 meters radius.

FAS-800

250 kg anti Anti personal bomb, it use a proximity fuze with detonate the bomb about 20 -30 meters over the ground delivering 38.000 steel balls at supersonic speed, also caused a very nasty effect againt parked aircrafts and unarmoured vehicles. There is a 125 kg model called FAS-800B.

FAS-250

Parachute drag retarded bomb, it can be dropped safely even to altitudes of 30 meters to 0,95 Mach.

FAS-300

This is a very adaptable cluster bomb, it can be filled with 220 bomblets, or 88 mines. The mines can cover 58.500 square metes and his delayed time fuse could be set from 0,5 seconds to 54 hours.

FAS-850

Stand-Off bomb. It is rocket assisted and it can reach a 20 km range dropped from a 35000 feet altitude at 0,8 mach.

CITEFA Martin Pescador:

Air-to-ground subsonic missile, it carry a 7,5 kilogram shaped charge warhead and could be equipped with a IR or laser guidance.

Very interesting.

Isn’t “Navalizing” usually a very hefty job, though? Will they ever afford it? Aside from the obvious corrosion protection, deck landings are harsher than the normal. I also suspect that you’d need to do some redesign to ensure a good load path into the structure for that arrestor hook… unless of course it already had one on the non-Naval version for RHAG?

Any idea how much componentry etc of a Pampa is common with the Alpha Jet? I know it’s not a mere derivative, but it is most definitely inspired by, and developed using, the Alpha Jet design. I was just wondering if they use common parts in those areas possible?

Isn’t “Navalizing” usually a very hefty job, though? Will they ever afford it? Aside from the obvious corrosion protection, deck landings are harsher than the normal. I also suspect that you’d need to do some redesign to ensure a good load path into the structure for that arrestor hook… unless of course it already had one on the non-Naval version for RHAG?

Sure, it needs general reiforcements, is planed to introduce vortex generators in he wing to give better sustentation at low speed, the engine is more potent that the land based Pampa. ( 3500 pounds versus 4250 pounds)

Any idea how much componentry etc of a Pampa is common with the Alpha Jet? I know it’s not a mere derivative, but it is most definitely inspired by, and developed using, the Alpha Jet design. I was just wondering if they use common parts in those areas possible?

The only parts interchangeable are some few componentes of the nose and elevators, off course it share the wing profile and the general fuselage layout but those and different in shape and measures ( remember that the Alpha is twin engined and swept wing, the Pampa single engine and have standar wing) so the vast majority of the parts are not interchangeable.

Interesting pics of some Argentine Navy aircraft in carrier operatios…Any one recognize this carrier ?..Yes is the CVN-76 Ronald Reagan.

Super Etendar:

S-2T: ( tracker refurbished by IAI industries)

Some of the weapons that carry the AT-63.

Bombs and missiles:

Should use some of the local made especial purpose bombs alredy in service with the AAF.

FAS-280

High explosive 34 Kg fragmentation bomb, the blast effect is increased with the adittion of 3500 9 mm diameter steel balls with are capable to penetrate 10 to 20 mm of armour in a 100 meters radius.

FAS-800

250 kg anti Anti personal bomb, it use a proximity fuze with detonate the bomb about 20 -30 meters over the ground delivering 38.000 steel balls at supersonic speed, also caused a very nasty effect againt parked aircrafts and unarmoured vehicles. There is a 125 kg model called FAS-800B.

FAS-250

Parachute drag retarded bomb, it can be dropped safely even to altitudes of 30 meters to 0,95 Mach.

FAS-300

This is a very adaptable cluster bomb, it can be filled with 220 bomblets, or 88 mines. The mines can cover 58.500 square metes and his delayed time fuse could be set from 0,5 seconds to 54 hours.

FAS-850

Stand-Off bomb. It is rocket assisted and it can reach a 20 km range dropped from a 35000 feet altitude at 0,8 mach.

CITEFA Martin Pescador:

Air-to-ground subsonic missile, it carry a 7,5 kilogram shaped charge warhead and could be equipped with a IR or laser guidance.[/quote]

First, most of these models are only projects from INVAP and CITEFA.

What’s more, the MP-1000 Martín Pescador was cancelled years ago, and now INVAP is working in other missile project, the AS-25K.

Super Etendards and Turbo Trackers are usually used from the aircraft carrier MB Sao Paulo (from the Brazilian Navy).

What’s more, the MP-1000 Martín Pescador was cancelled years ago, and now INVAP is working in other missile project, the AS-25K.

All right thanks for your data. :oops:

Here are some pics of the citefa AS-25K.

I already posted those pictures eagle.


Liceo Militar Argentino

The boys to the army.

Don’t they all look young!!!

Which one are you Erwin?

The tents look a bit naff though, nowt wrong with a good old fashioned basha.

PS Should you really have that commando thing in your signature mate?

lmao :lol: ,im no one of them,im young,but not that young!,and there are obviously adults cordinating the liceo,it can’t be only boys’ institute driven by them.

old fashioned?,this isn’t the bahamas,this is argentina,and that is deluxe comparing to sleeping in misiones forest where the best thing that can happen to you is getting asma!.

and i should have the signature that i do want,i choose it if i want,should you have that signature mate?

1000, a liceo is a high school, to teenagers from 13 to 18 years old. Here in Argentina you have, besides the basic subjects (as maths, spanish, english, physics, etc) different “carreers” to start at high schools, all high schools have once at least.

At my high school, there are three “carreers”, Mechanics, Design & Art and Economic sciences. (I am studying the mechanics “carreer”).

If you want, you have three schools with military subject-carreers, where the student learn the live and the job of a military person, and you don’t have to be a military if you don’t want to although you frequented your high school in that military schools, but, if you want to be a military person, you’ll have a lot of benefits studing there. That three military schools are the Military Lyceum (from the Army), the Aeronautic Lyceum (from the Air Force) and the Naval Lyceum (from the Navy).
The pictures are from the Military Lyceum.

You have anothers, it depends from the school and the location (for example, in my zone, it’s more common to find schools with that subject-carreers related with farm & country activities, because here predominates the farm works. In other places, as Cordoba, where the aeronautic activity is well managed, you will find a lot of schools with subjects about aviation.

Super Etendar walkaround.

Pod Vinten 360:

Info to support:

Super Etendard, Argentine Navy.

Units:
*11

Weapons:
*Air-Air: Matra R-550 “Magic”
*Air-Surface: silly bombs, cluster bombs and rockets
*Air-Sea: Aerospatiale AM-39 “Exocet”

Base:
*Aeronaval base “Comandante Espora”, Bahia Blanca (Province of Buenos Aires)

Aircraft carriers used by argentine Super Etendards:
*ARA 25 de Mayo (Argentine Navy)
*MB Sao Paulo (Brazilian Navy)
*Charles de Gaulle (French Navy)
*Foch (French Navy. This aircraft carrier is now the brazilian SAO PAULO)
*Different USS nuclear aircraft carriers (United States Navy)

Thanks to cpl condor I splitted some posts making a new topc in Off-topic General: Argentinean Politics.

Meantime you all are asked to post strictly on-topic.
Thanks!

And as a reply to cpl condor, FARA 83 was more than a project. At least 1193 rifles were manufactured.

http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/2400/2442.htm

http://www.instructoritb.com.ar/Fara%2083.htm (in Spanish)

From last link I post a picture:

The FARA compared with the Steyr AUG and the FAL:

And this is dedicated to Eagle…check this Argentina had some powerful military equipement before Peron…amazing . :shock: … :lol:

Battleship “Rivadavia”

Builder: Fore River, Quincy

Laid down: 25.5.1910

Launched: 26.8.1911

Commissioned: 27.8.1914

Rivadavia at her builders’ yard, shortly before trials, ca. 1914. Note she is still under US flag.

Rivadavia on trials, ca. 1914.

The Rivadavia class was authorised in 1908 primarily as a response to the Minas Gerais class being constructed in Brazil. An intense internal debate took place in Argentina concerning the need to purchase two such expensive dreadnoughts, costing £2.2 million each. Argentina’s recent border Controversies with Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay helped win the day for those in favour.

The Argentine method for acquiring the best possible design stirred controversy among the building nations. In 1908 Rear-Admiral Onofre Betbeder set up office in London and requested all interested patties to submit plans for the construction of two dreadnoughts with the option to build a third. The guidelines were sketchy to allow the bidders to develop the best possible plans. Fifteen companies submitted plans. The Argentinians reviewed the submissions, chose the best features from each and gave the revised guidelines to the competing firms. This process was then repeated. The competitors were in a furore and considered this as a looting of their trade secrets.

The contract was awarded to Fore River Shipbuilding Corporation of Quincy, Massachusetts, at a saving of over £224.000 per ship over the nearest competitor. European builders were shocked because the United States, which then lagged far behind Great Britain and Germany in the dreadnought race, was not considered to be a serious competitor.

The Rivadavia class closely paralleled American battleships in appearance and design. The machinery was placed amidships with the boilers grouped in separate rooms equally forward and abaft the engine room. This arrangement reduced trimming problems and separated machinery vitals into three separate compartments.

The ‘en echelon’ 12in amidships turrets could in theory fire on a 180-degree arc on the side of the ship were located and 100 degrees on the opposite side. The secondary 6in guns were mounted on the upper deck behind 6in armour. The 16 x 4in QF guns were for protection against torpedo attack; 8 of these guns were mounted in the between decks, 4 on the gun deck aft, and 4 on the upper deck forward. The 8 remaining guns were located on the-weather deck 6 on the superstructure deck and 2 on the upper deck aft. The 4in guns were not protected by armour. Two submerged side-loading TT were located in the torpedo room forward, firing broadside. The ships’ magazines stowed 120 rounds of 12in shell per gun, 300 rounds for each 6in, 350 rounds per 4in gun and 16 Whitehead torpedoes.

The ships were initially fitted with two 15ft Barr & Stroud rangefinders mounted in revolving armoured towers above the forward and after CT for controlling the 12in guns. Two 9ft Barr & Stroud were mounted on the platform on top of the king posts for the boat booms.

Typical of American-built dreadnoughts, protection received special attention. The main belt was 12in amidships tapering to 5in and 4in at the stem and stern respectively. The belt extended 5ft above and 6ft below the normal waterline. The turret armour was 12in on the face, 9in on the sides, 9.5in on the rear and 4in on the top. The forward and aft CT were 12 and 9in respectively. The protective deck extended the ship’s length 24in above the waterline amidships, sloping down to the lower edge of the main belt armour. The protective deck varied from 20lb medium steel to 80lb of nickel steel. The inner bottom extended most of the length of the ships. An inner skin was fitted around the magazines, boilers, and machinery. This was for added protection against mines and torpedoes.

The electrical plant consisted of 4375kW turbogenerators located under the midship magazines forward and aft of the engine rooms. Two 75kW generators run off of diesel engines provided electricity when the boilers were cold. An 8kW Telefunken radio had an optimum range of 1500km.

The USN Board of Inspection and Survey for Ships made the following observations concerning Rivadavia on 21 October 1913. “On the high speed runs the vessel made the exact contract speed, 22,5 knots; but it is believed that she can do a little better She . . . handles remarkably well . . . The Board prefers our adopted centerline arrangement of turrets [Wyoming class]. While theoretically the Rivadavia has an ahead and asteru fire of six guns, this is not so in reality, as it is almost certain that the blast from the walst turret guns would dish in the smokepipes and damage the uptakes… The Bethlehem Steel Company designed and made special [12in guns] breech-blocks, all of which were rejected and the regular US Navy type of breech-block was finally made and installed. With comparatively minor modifications the vessel would practically meet the requirements of our own vessels.”

A third dreadnought was authorised in 1912 in response to Brazil’s third dreadnought, the Rio de Janeiro. Since neither this ship nor the Brazilian Riachuelo ever materialised, Argentina’s third dreadnought was never laid down.

Rivadavia in 1935.

Battleship Moreno:

Same class as Rivadavia; 23.000 tn 12 x 12 inch guns (305mm) and 12 inch belt armour.

In 1918

In 1937.

In 1942.

thank you, Danni and Panzerknacker, but in this land I still looking for
see one of these, everybody tell me this is a great weapon, it’s a pitty
we can’t count with it before. 8)

My partner Panzer, there are excellent and giant ships, I know that… but… they are north american and italian ships. If we could enter to a war where Italy or the United States would be allies of our enemy, those ships wouldn’t had aroppiate supplies, and that could cause the retreat of our “Flota de Mar” of a war.
That happened in the Malvinas war with the supplies to our north-american aircrafts (F-86, A-4B and A-4C) and our french aircrafts (Mirages and Super Etendards). They were on the british side, and we couldn’t receive supplies for them.

I am not obssesed with Peron my partner, I know that before him our forces were the best of the region, but he was the only person in the power that thought that if we could be a power nation, we would need our own industries to not depend on anyone.

Saludos che… espero q vengas pronto para tus pagos de nuevo y poder hablar.

If we could enter to a war where Italy or the United States would be allies of our enemy, those ships wouldn’t had aroppiate supplies, and that could cause the retreat of our “Flota de Mar” of a war.

I am not obssesed with Peron my partner, I know that before him our forces were the best of the region, but he was the only person in the power that thought that if we could be a power nation, we would need our own industries to not depend on anyone.

No, no…you are confused again, in regard of the hipotetic war with USA or Italy, I tell you Why?..How?..where? :shock:

In the beginnig of the XX century the relations with USA was very good and with Italy it simply could not be better, take care about this data: in 1914 the 42 % of the argentine population was foreigner and the 21 % was ITALIAN. Even the King of Italy delayed the commision of two of this own cruser in early 1900 in favour to deliver them to Argentina.

The most likely oposition for Argentina in that time was Chile or Brasil not an European power or the US.

The hurry in to buy large warships to the US is pretty clear for anyone that know a little history, in that time the Brasilian navy had already received his two first Dreadnaughts the Minas Gerais Class ( Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo), and Chile had ordered two powerful battleships to the UK, the Almirante Latorre class ( Almirante Latorre & Lord Cochrane)

The Minas Gerais can put together 24 x 305 mm guns, and the Latorres 20 x 343 mm guns. So without the solid Oposition of the neat Rivadavia Class any “trigger happy” Brasilian or Chilean admiral could put those ship in range and wiped out any coastal Argentine City.

But no… you want to wait until you have a shipyard capable of build this 190 meters and 29.000 tons ships? Those shipyard dont materialize until 1960.

And again you fall in the mistake to say that Peron was the mastermind of the arming and the national weapons independence…completely false.

Fray Luis Beltran was making guns for the Liberation Army in the 1800s, General Ricchieri do all the planing for the military equipmente and production in the late 1800s and General Savio was the first to put in production the high grade steel mills to manufacturing goverment small arms and large calibre guns in 1930.

With this steel where made the Sistema colt 1927:

And the FM M1935 rifle.

Not to mention others good weapons made by private enterprises like HAFDASA with his beautiful Ballester Molina .45:

By the way HAFDASA also produced cars, trucks and Diesel engines since 1933. look this 6x6 tractor made in 1939 and used by the Army:

In the aircraft industries side The FMA as founded in 1927 not 1947 like many love to think.

The FMA had already make good quality aircraft like the Ae Mb 1:

…and the IA-22 DL with his locally produced 9 cilinder radial.

…even so if Peron really was that protector of the national industry…Why decimate the Pulqui I an II programs ??..Why he bought Gloster Meteors and North American Sabres instead?

And other good argentine weapon the Nahuel Tank designed by Teniente Coronel (Lt. Colonel) Alfredo Baisi and build by Arsenal Esteban de Luca ( another private enterprise)

Argentine weapon made with argentine steel and by argentines…Why Peron choose to bought Shermans instead…??

Hmmmm seems that the father Peron wasnt so good after all :?