Falklands Conflict

Admin's and Mod's Admins and Mod's - Archive Room
#1721

The ARA Salta is an U-209 class submarine.

I repeat… the Salta couldn’t find the British submarines.
The british submarines couldn’t find the Salta.

If the Salta could find the british submarines, SH-3 Sea Kings and S-2T Trackers would supported to the Argentine submarine and together would attacked to the intruders, as the navy did on April the 5th, with a POSSUB (POSible SUBmarine).

If the british nuclear submarines could find the Argentine submarine, they would attacked it in order to remove that threat from the sea.

Nothing happened. If these submarines were in the same place by nearly four months, please explain me what they did if they couldn’t catch each other. The answer is simple. The british submarines weren’t in the Argentine sea watching and tracking the Air Force and Navy Aviation. That information was supported by Chile and his radars.

#1722

I’d take the opposite view myself.

The Brit subs were on a recce Op, and of major importance during any recce mission is to remain unnoticed.
Blowing a big hole in an enemy ship and the accompanying loss of life would quite possibly have been spotted by the higher command, which would have compromised the Op.

Not for nothing are the RN U-boats called the Silent Service.

#1723

But cuts, the major fear to the Task Force in the sea, always were the submarines.

Argentina had three submarines in service and another in reparations. The “San Luis” attacked at least 4 times to the Task Force, but as the submarine had in bad conditions the filo-guided torpedos, the succes was void.
The “Santa Fe” supported the operations in Georgias.
The “Salta” with problems in the propulsion system only “played” at the defence, in the Argentine sea.

I repeat, as the Task Force found the submarines as the most dangerous threaten in the sea of the Argentine power, do you think the submarines wouldn’t attacked to the Salta, if they found it patroulling, and possibly could enter in action as his twin, the San Luis which was in the center of the Task Force??

I think the UK submarines would attacked it.

#1724

It still makes no military sense. There was no reason whatsoever that the RN should target the Salta.

Even if the Brits had thought the Salta was a threat to the main Task Force, and if they had only sent the two SSNs to the area, one could still have shadowed the Armada Republica vessel while the other remained on post.

Had the Salta sailed towards the surface ships she could have been taken when further out in the South Atlantic by the shadowing SSN or more likely by any of the other RN subs without compromising the recce Op.

A much better idea than letting the SH-3 Sea Kings and S-2T Trackers you mentioned in on the party.

Wasn’t the Santa Fe seriously damaged by Lynx and Wasp choppers from HMS Brilliant and HMS Endurance respectively ?
I thought she was taken out of the equation on or around 23 Apr 82.

#1725

If 2 x SSN didnt want to be found and were used to give warnings of Air Attackes, they would have had to get a bearing on the bases of the Arg aircraft.

Increased radio chatter etc could tell of a raid taking off, just as it was used in WW2.

They wouldnt fear a surface ship, but would be wary of ac thats for sure.

And if you think they couldnt do it to Argentina, why not, they did it day in and day out against an enemy with much more resources, The Soviet Union.

#1726

Eagle mate, as cuts has said.

If a sub, or infantry patrol, is on a recce it will seldom start having a pop at all and sundry around it!!!

A nick name for the ICBN carrying subs is “chicken of the sea”. Both American, British and Russian Boomer subs hid from everything. That is what they do.

An attack sub would not attack another sub if it was on a ELINT gathering mission. FULL STOP!!!

If your Destroyers and Subs reported a sub in the area, would they not try to take it out?

The brit subs sat and listened. Your subs may have been sat right infront of the tube doors, but they would have still sat and waited, in silence.

Belgrano was removed because Conqueror wasn’t on a recce. She had been sent to destroy Belgrano.

We gained far too much info from not being detected than running around shootin gthings!!!

#1727

Argentina had three submarines in service and another in reparations. The “San Luis” attacked at least 4 times to the Task Force, but as the submarine had in bad conditions the filo-guided torpedos, the succes was void.

I had not heard that before, but if they had launch a torp they had better run very fast. It is also worth pointing out the role of the RN for 30 odd years had been ASW. I am certain that the RN had Sea King ASW screens out. On a launch being detected, and it most definitely would have been, all hell would have been let loose and counter measures launched. And later that day the commander of the ASW screen would be looking for a new job.

The “Santa Fe” supported the operations in Georgias.
The “Salta” with problems in the propulsion system only “played” at the defence, in the Argentine sea.

I repeat, as the Task Force found the submarines as the most dangerous threaten in the sea of the Argentine power, do you think the submarines wouldn’t attacked to the Salta, if they found it patroulling, and possibly could enter in action as his twin, the San Luis which was in the center of the Task Force??

I do not think the subs were a threat. These subs are defence, shallow water boats. How much experience did the subs have in long range patrolling. According to my big book of subs they are likely to have PRS 3-4 passive sonar which is similar to the British Type 2001 so its capabilities would be known. I am also sure that the FRG would have provided any info needed on the subs, including weapon fit.

#1728

Ok it could be, but is not the point. I keep thinking at least once the submarines would be found by the Salta or the Trackers. The fact of two nuclear submarines in the Argentine sea to track the argentine aircrafts is only a rumour.

In the book with the “official” (between quotation marks because I don’t believe that is the true story… I found problems in several points) story of the british government, UK recognize the support of Chile, with radars, bases and more.

About the Santa Fe, entered in battle on April, the 25th, with a frigate and two helicopters. The submarine tripulation defended themselves with a portable SAM and machine guns, but a few minutes later the battle finished with the ship surrended. In order to sink the surrended ship, an argentine sailor started flooding the ship. British guards understood what he was doing and killed him. He was buried with all he honours in Georgias.

#1729

Hey Chris, I thought your name was Erwin?

#1730

[quote=“butteryknob”]

Hey Chris, I thought your name was Erwin?[/quote]
:lol:
my religion is christian/catholical roman,is it bad wrote?

#1731

“christian” is correct, but it’s also a valid first name in English (e.g. the writer Hans Christian Anderson).
“catholical roman” is usually “Roman Catholic” in English. There are actually quite a lot of us about in the UK - I and IIRC at least one other UK board member are Catholics.

#1732

Hey Chris, I thought your name was Erwin?[/quote]
:lol:
my religion is christian/catholical roman,is it bad wrote?[/quote]

I am just pulling your leg (making a joke), what you said was ok. YOur English is definitely better than my Spanish.

#1733

Is any one in this forum familar with the saying Either he wont get it, doesnt get or simply doesnt want to get it :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

#1734

I couldn’t get it.

#1735

Just to confirm…

The past Thursday the former Commander of the Chilean Air Force ensured to CLARÍN, the best newspaper from Argentina, that Chile supported to the United Kingdom forces in the South Atlantic War.

He specified the support, and they are that I wrote here, a few pages ago.

#1736

Then you’ll have a link to this information then?

#1737

Of course my partner, if you know the spanish…

http://www.clarin.com/diario/2005/09/01/um/m-1044631.htm

#1738

“Galtieri dijo “Vamos a recuperar todos los territorios argentinos que no pertenecen todavía a la Argentina”. Como teníamos un conflicto por el Beagle, era una clara referencia a Chile. Fue un conflicto que no buscamos nosotros”, argumentó.

Sounds like a perfectly good reason to have a bilateral agreement with the Brits to me 8)

#1739

Sorry this is a bit late (was off on my TA RSW at the weekend, among other things, so have only just managed to look up the relevant book) but here are the full details of the submarine operations.

The book I’m using as my source is “We Come Unseen” by Jim Ring, ISBN 0-7195-5694-5.

The first reference is around page 198, where it states that some time between the 18th and 21st of May HMS Spartan was used to watch San Antonio, HMS Splendid was used to watch Rio Gallegos, and later within the same time period HMS Valiant was used to watch Rio Grande.
The book also states that HMS Valiant was bombed (they think by accident by an aircraft dumping bombs) without sustaining damage. The same thing apparently happened to HMS Spartan off Comodoro Rivadavia.
It also gives two specific references for raids spotted. In the first, it states that at 1700 on the 25th of May HMS Spartan spotted six Skyhawks taking off from Rio Gallegos. The second is that HMS Valiant spotted six Daggers taking off from Rio Grande on the 6th of June, but that the warning it sent didn’t get through to the ships those Daggers later hit at Bluff Cove.

I’d be interested to see how this information meshes in with the position/activities of the ARA Salta

#1740

Of course, I am not against Chile because they supported the Task Force. The decision was reasonable, but… I am against them because they encovered all.

They said in the Buenos Aires Embassy… WITH CHILE, ARGENTINA HAVE IT BACK WELL-COVERED… fuc.king hypocrites