A Falklands What-If?...

MacCaulay · Apr 3, 2012

...straight from my dad, who remembers wars so far back he was listening to reports of the Six Day War on the radio while driving to the machine shop:

We were talking about the 30th Anniversary of the Falklands War yesterday, and he said something very interesting: "I was always worried they'd find a way to put an Exocet into the side of the QE2. That could've been a disaster."

Just something I thought people would like to mull over.

Voyager75 · Apr 3, 2012

The QE2 was nowhere near the Falklands. It was used for transporting troops to South Georgia.

MacCaulay · Apr 3, 2012

Voyager75 said:
The QE2 was nowhere near the Falklands. It was used for transporting troops to South Georgia.

It's too early in the morning for me to check. I'll take your word on it.

(that's so sad...the Sandy Woodward's memoir is literally in the other room)

Theodoric · Apr 3, 2012

Don't the Argentinians claim those areas as well? It might've been beyond their capabilities, but an extra ambitious invasion of South Georgia right at the same time as the QE drops of those men would be mighty interesting.

Fellatio Nelson · Apr 3, 2012

Theodoric said:
Don't the Argentinians claim those areas as well? It might've been beyond their capabilities, but an extra ambitious invasion of South Georgia right at the same time as the QE drops of those men would be mighty interesting.

Delivered how? Across the exclusion zone after their surface ships had returned home? With the bulk of the RN in that region. With several warships resting at South Georgia, as well as QEII's escorts - there was still a slight submarine threat throughout.

The Argentinians had been on S Georgia (after a little tussle with the RM detachment there, which is well worth reading about as it resulted in several gallantry awards and an Argentine ship damaged by an anti-tank rocket), but had since been evicted by the RN and SAS. South Georgia had been retaken as a prelude to the FI campaign 'proper'.

Grimm Reaper · Apr 3, 2012

Fell's right about the Argentine landing on South Georgia becoming a larger affair than anticipated, particularly the ship walking into anti-tank rocket fire.

MacCaulay · Apr 3, 2012

Grimm Reaper said:
Fell's right about the Argentine landing on South Georgia becoming a larger affair than anticipated, particularly the ship walking into anti-tank rocket fire.

That is such a weird event. I can't even find two accounts of that that are similar. Maybe because it just sounds too much like a piece of fiction, you know?

Fellatio Nelson · Apr 3, 2012

There's an article about the defence of South Georgia here:

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/South-Georgia.html

Bureaucromancer · Apr 3, 2012

MacCaulay said:
It's too early in the morning for me to check. I'll take your word on it.

(that's so sad...the Sandy Woodward's memoir is literally in the other room)

Its true, and was the case specifically to avoid such a scenario. Canberra on the other hand sailed right up to shore, so it would be easy enough to have something happen to her. Loosing the better part of the parachute regiment could certainly be bad...

Theodoric · Apr 3, 2012

Too bad the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo never saw much direct action during the Falklands. The good old Carlos Portero never had the ability to launch aircraft at British carriers, which would've been really interesting, seeing as it was itself a former British carrier.

Fellatio Nelson · Apr 3, 2012

Theodoric said:
Too bad the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo never saw much direct action during the Falklands. The good old Carlos Portero never had the ability to launch aircraft at British carriers, which would've been really interesting, seeing as it was itself a former British carrier.

The 25 May was a former British carrier too.