The Falklands war

[Jotun]

Luckily they failed!? Hey, whose side are you on? Anyway, I think you argued my point better than I could. Well said.

When the US gov't tries to acquire tech they're obviously unable to produce themselves threough the back door instead of asking for it and paying a fair price? I'm on the side of the Germans (being German myself, obviously ) Additionally, this subject is a bit touchy for mebecause the arrogance of USN service members I met during the Dubya years still galls me. No matter who you met, they were always the best, brightest, most capable...you name it, they thought they were it. Until the next exercise, that is...
Of course, there were exceptions, but they were a very rare breed.

 

[Bill Cameron]

Now, THAT is one admittedly VERY simplistic way to look at things. To say that nuclear boats "work better" is just wrong.

Jotun,

Jacobus was wondering why the Us doesn't buy or develop diesel boats and I told him why; because diesel boats can't do the job US submarines have to do. As Nikephoros wrote; The US doesn't use submarines to patrol the coasts, they use subs to patrol hundreds to thousands of miles from shore.

Nuke boats work better at the job the US has to do. Period. That doesn't mean that nuke boats work better at all jobs.

Ask any nuc driver what he fears most.

I'm an ex-navy nuc. You needn't tell me a thing.

A couple of years back, a German 206A managed to penetrate the protective screen...

And that anecdote is as simple as you believed my explanation to Jacobus to be. The situation was extremely complicated.

The German-made boats (especially the 206A) are too small for the US sonar systems to be picked up by active sonar.

Too "small" to be picked up by sonar? Score a laugh point.

They are simply filtered out by the program.

Programs are constantly updated, rewritten, etc. Software doesn't stand still.

In a sub-on-sub scenario with a nuc and a d-e boat,, both with halfway competent crews, the non-nuc will almost always emerge victorious.

Bullshit. Brown water, maybe. Blue water, never.

Nuclear subs and diesel-electric subs do have completely disparate tasks.

Exactly. And my reply to Jacobus implied the tasks the USN undertakes.

They are fast, have high endurance but they're also patently unable to bottom the boat for longer periods (the reactor cooling pumps tend to chocke on the silt)

Bullshit. I'm an ex-navy nuc. Reactor coolant pumps never see seawater let alone silt.

At speeds greater than about 26 knots they sound like a gravel truck.

And under 26 knots?

The sound signature of the reactor pumps is another Achilles' heel.

Which is why the USN has been using natural convection reactors since the Trident-class.

"Conventional subs" specialize in littoral warfare.

Which the USN doesn't do... yet. And which, with the exception of the Mekong delta, the USN hadn't done since the American Civil War.

Luckily, they failed.

Yes, it is "lucky" that your NATO ally failed, isn't it?

My ass...

Yes, that's your ass and, yes, you're talking out of it.


Bill

 

[Jotun]

Yes, it is "lucky" that your NATO ally failed, isn't it?

Yes, that's your ass and, yes, you're talking out of it.


Bill

Actually, when our NATO ally tries to screw us, ABSO-F***IN'-LUTELY!

And thanks for the compliment. Coming from you, this means a lot ,,i,,

 

[jacobus]

I apologize to everyone for dragging this thread light-years off topic. I'm no submariner, not even a military man, but I love this stuff. Anyway, it appears we (NATO I mean, we're all on the same side after all) are close to deploying submarine-launched UAVs. Imagine what drone reconnaisance will do for the future of submarine warfare! And, what if somehow they manage to arm these drones? Interesting to think about, isn't it?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/10/german_submarine_uav/

 

[Bill Cameron]

Anyway, I think you argued my point better than I could.

Jacobus,

Think again.

Getting back to the San Luis, she did fire torpedoes - which missed - at the stationary HMS Sheffield while that vessel was afire from an Exocet hit. What else she did during the war in unknown and the claims you repeated were made later by her manufacturer.

As for the British being silent on the subject, that is understandable. What isn't understandable is why the Argentines are silent too. If San Luis had tied down and diverted as many assets as is claimed, her operations off the Falklands would be the one of the few Argentine successes of the war.

Yet, no one who was actually there talks about their huge success in bedeviling and diverting the RN task force. Not her commander, not her officers, not her crew. Not one soul after 25 years.

The only other use of submarines during the war by Argentina that we know about involved Santa Fe. She was used to ferry men and supplies to South Georgia, much like the IJN did to bypassed islands during WW2. It during one such mission that helos from RN warships spotted, engaged, and eventually caused her crew to ground and abandon her.


Bill

 

[jacobus]

Bill,
At this point, I would be a fool to try to argue with you! You're a submariner, or former submariner. It would only make me look foolish. But of course, you learn more by listening; speaking doesn't teach you anything. And learning new things is one of the main reasons I come here.
Anyway, submarines have always been an interest of mine; I don't know why. It seems they'll be more important in the future than ever before. When I see some of the wierd new designs for catamarans and other stealth surface ships, it makes me wonder where submarine design is heading these days.

 

[Dure]

Bill,

Educate me a little. When you said:

Which is why the USN has been using natural convection reactors since the Trident-class.

Do you mean that the primary cooling circuit uses natural convection to circulate the working fluid when the boat is in a normal mode of operation and running the engines and all the main sub-systems? Or do you mean that the system can make use of natural convection cooling when the circulation pumps for the primary cooling circuit have been shut down and the vessel is operating under minimum load/stored power? Perhaps you meant something else entierly? I ask this because if you are taking about the former then it is a very impressive engineering achievement.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Bill,

Educate me a little. When you said:



Do you mean that the primary cooling circuit uses natural convection to circulate the working fluid when the boat is in a normal mode of operation and running the engines and all the main sub-systems? Or do you mean that the system can make use of natural convection cooling when the circulation pumps for the primary cooling circuit have been shut down and the vessel is operating under minimum load/stored power? Perhaps you meant something else entierly? I ask this because if you are taking about the former then it is a very impressive engineering achievement.

I'm not Bill, I'm not a submariner, or anything, but it is my understanding that the USS Narwhal was built in 1969 to run with the reactor just using natural convection; and that most? many? US subs can operate (at low speed, but fully functionally) in that mode.

 

[altamiro]

Jotun,
Yes, it is "lucky" that your NATO ally failed, isn't it?
Bill

I assume Jotun thinks it lucky that our possible business competitor failed. Here it is not a question of alliance but simply a business takeover.

If Airbus tries to take over Boeing and fails, a lot of people in USA will think themselves lucky too, alliance or not.

Yes, I think it is good that there are other technology providers within NATO that are not owned or directly contracted by US government. A little interdependency doesn't hurt, and will probably help the alliance.

 

[Fellatio Nelson]

Last I heard, the USN was considering small SSKs that could be shipped to the area of operations for use in shallow waters. Seems rather expensive, however, especially given the need to divert men and resources to these vessels (and re-acquiring operational experience in them after decades without) when pretty much all bar 2 NATO partners operate them.


Oh, btw, you may like to learn the San Luis (or the other one) could've been blasted away by a RN sub soon after the war whilst snorting,when both navies were still operating in the area on a war-footing.

 

[Admiral Brown]

Jacobus,

Think again.

Getting back to the San Luis, she did fire torpedoes - which missed - at the stationary HMS Sheffield while that vessel was afire from an Exocet hit. What else she did during the war in unknown and the claims you repeated were made later by her manufacturer.

As for the British being silent on the subject, that is understandable. What isn't understandable is why the Argentines are silent too. If San Luis had tied down and diverted as many assets as is claimed, her operations off the Falklands would be the one of the few Argentine successes of the war.

Yet, no one who was actually there talks about their huge success in bedeviling and diverting the RN task force. Not her commander, not her officers, not her crew. Not one soul after 25 years.

The only other use of submarines during the war by Argentina that we know about involved Santa Fe. She was used to ferry men and supplies to South Georgia, much like the IJN did to bypassed islands during WW2. It during one such mission that helos from RN warships spotted, engaged, and eventually caused her crew to ground and abandon her.


Bill

well, Bill, I'm afraid that's not exactly so. Here's an article about the San Luis, in which her comander is being interviewed. The article sustains many of jacobus' claims, although, admitedly, there are no sources, and precisions are extremely vague. Unfortunatle, it's in Spanish, and too long to translate.

I'm not saying this kind's of subs are better than nuclear subs (1), nor that the San Luis did what jacobus said it did. I'm just saying that at least there are claims that it did something like what jacobus said it did:

I quote: "no habían logrado hundir ningún buque y aunque habían provocado, tal como confesaron luego los ingleses, una verdadera psicosis en el mar y habían logrado retardar con su amenaza submarina el desembarco en las islas"

Which means: "They hadn't been able to sink any ship, but they had provoqued a real "psicosis" at sea, as the English later confesed, and had been able to delay, with their submarine threat, the British landing on the islands."

True, it didn't work well, but that was more a matter of bad manteinance than anything else. For example, acording to the article, the computer divise which controled the firing of torpedoes broke before the operations started, so they had to be fired manualy.

The article also tells how the sub had to remain quiet over the sea floor for more than 23 hours, in order to avoid being sunk by the British Fleet, after her presence had been detected because she fired a torpedo (which didn't explode due to malfunctioning, of course!). It wasn't sunk, an the British avandoned the chase.

(1) A subject about which I'm entirely ignorant, cause I don't know anything about submarines

 

[Admiral Brown]

The San Luis crew in 1982

here's a picture of the crew which operated the sub in 1982:

 

[Admiral Brown]

One last picture

The San Luis commander at Sea, more than 25 years ago:

 

[daniel_g]

Yet, no one who was actually there talks about their huge success in bedeviling and diverting the RN task force. Not her commander, not her officers, not her crew. Not one soul after 25 years.

Given the Royal Navy's primary role was ASW in the GIUK gap against highly proficient sub captains, the fact they they didn't have a clue as to the San Luis' location is testament to the Captain's skill.

The US Navy report that the San Luis attacked British ships ('several times'; and Argentine sources cite 4 attacks on British ships.

On 1st May, HMS Brilliant and HMS Yarmouth spent the day unsuccessfully searching for the San Luis north of the Islands. Their lack success is not surprising as the Captain has reported his activities to be to the south of the islands at this time. The Royal Navy view was that the San Luis made it's final attack of several on 10th May (Belgrano sunk on 2nd, Sheffield on 4th).

 

[flamelord]

Can we get back on topic please?

 

[Nikephoros]

Yes it could. Had TF Mercedes been a fully equipped Argentine infantry battalion I have little doubt 2 Para would have been massacred. That said, much of the blame for that must be laid to the exceptionally incompetant Lt Col Jones.

But here is the question: If TF Mercedes was a fully equiped infantry battalion and its status was known, would 2 Para still have been sent?

 

[Bill Cameron]

Can we get back on topic please?

Flamelord,

Sure.

It is impossible for Argentina to "win" the Falklands War without PODs that would be so "deep", "large", or "violent" that they would also effect world events far beyond Argentina, the Falklands, and the South Atlantic.

The junta could have waited until the RN so-called carriers were sold off, they could have sent in a more professional garrison led by actual soldiers rather than political hacks, the garrison could have used it's assets far better, and all the other previously mentioned breaks could have gone Argentina's way too.

The end result of an Argentina that grabs the Falklands when Britain no longer has the mean to respond, of an Argentina that garrisons the Falklands in a manner that Britain cannot tackle, or of an Argentina that repulses a British attack is a Britain that invokes Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

And when that happens, Argentina loses. Period.

With Pershing-2 missile deployment already scheduled for NATO and the US needing every political friend it needs within the alliance so that the deployment can go forward, a naked land grab by a Latin American military junta attempting to divert it's people's attention away from the "dirty war" it is busily waging against them will not stand. At that time, the US needed Britain and NATO far more than it needed Argentina and the OAS.

Argentina can "win" militarily in a number of ways. However, Argentina cannot win politically in any manner whatsoever. She simply isn't important enough on the world stage.

The effect on the Falklands population of a longer Argentine occupation, and one doomed by international diplomatic/military pressure, would not be pretty. The junta mandated the use of Spanish and the metric system three days after occupying the islands and in April appointed BRIG Mario Menendez as governor. He had an interesting reputation as the "dirty war" commander in north-west Argentina. The usual Third World practice of heavy penalties for failure to "show respect" to "officials" and "national symbols" soon followed Menendez' appointment.

More such personnel were available for the Argentine administration of the "Malvinas" too. LCMDR Alfredo Astiz, the commander of the South Georgia garrison, was one such with warrants issued by Sweden and France over his role in the "disappearances" of a teenager and two elderly nuns. After being captured, he was released per the Geneva Convention before France or Sweden could act only to disappear himself in Uruguay.

A Falklands occupied by an increasingly desperate junta for months or even a year would not be a pleasant place.


Bill

 

[Riain]

Doesn't NATO end at the tropic of Cancer so that an attack on the Gambia or New Caledonia doesn't lead to Norweigan troops being sent to Africa and the Pacific?

 

[Workable Goblin]

I did just read over the North Atlantic Treaty text from the official NATO site, and it does seem that the UK could not have invoked Article 5 for the Falklands, since it specifically limits the treaty zone to Europe and North America (and islands etc. north of the Tropic of Cancer). That said, it seems unlikely that the US would not assist the UK in the event that they started having significant difficulties down south.

 

[67th Tigers]

But here is the question: If TF Mercedes was a fully equiped infantry battalion and its status was known, would 2 Para still have been sent?

Yes, it was envisioned as a raid rather than a battle. CO 2 Para rather exceeded his orders. After 2 Para started floundering like a beached whale the brigade commander was willing to throw everything in rather than lose the first battle.