How France helped the UK to win the war in the Falklands

[T_igger_cs_30]

RE NATO Charter posted by aktarian post#24:

I have been rather busy of late and in my haste, and not thinking I used the NATO charter wrongly, it quite clearly states Northern not Southern so this charter does not apply in this case.
I apologise to you aktarian, I should have read it before using it.

[gunnut]

The Argentinians had no previous experience with antiship missiles, and the Exocet was a complicated and cranky weapon. The Argentinians experienced a lot of trouble fitting the Exocet launch system and rails to the Super Etendards. In November 1981, Dassault Aviation, owned by the French government and builder of the Super Etendard, sent a team of nine of its own technicians (and some additional French Aerospatiale specialists) to work with the Argentine navy to supervise the introduction of the Etendards and Exocets. Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon.18

This is an account from an investigating Journalist,you know What,He´s Argentinian.

He also goes on to say that the U.S. provided the British task Force with Information about Planes taking off from overhead Satallites.

Anyone find that mildly amusing? Apparently not even French weapons like other French weapons. :))

[chakos]

I have a Falklands question, if anybody can help thanks in advance.

The main reason i saw that the Argentinians lost the war is because a) They didnt have enough exocets to seriously damage the English at long range and more importantly b) They didnt have any of their longer ranged aircraft based on the Islands, forcing their aircraft to fight at the limits of their range against the fueled up Harriers.

My question is this... Why didnt the Argentineans put a couple of squadrons of A4s at least on the Islands? If they where able to be carrier launched then im sure they would easily be able to operate from the main airbase in the Falklands. Ideally following up any invasion force would be the engineers extending the runway to take the Super Etendards and the Daggers. Is there a reason that none of this happened, and is there a reason they didnt wait a couple of months in order to get better stocks of exocets?

[GraniteForge]

I have a Falklands question, if anybody can help thanks in advance.

The main reason i saw that the Argentinians lost the war is because a) They didnt have enough exocets to seriously damage the English at long range and more importantly b) They didnt have any of their longer ranged aircraft based on the Islands, forcing their aircraft to fight at the limits of their range against the fueled up Harriers.

My question is this... Why didnt the Argentineans put a couple of squadrons of A4s at least on the Islands? If they where able to be carrier launched then im sure they would easily be able to operate from the main airbase in the Falklands. Ideally following up any invasion force would be the engineers extending the runway to take the Super Etendards and the Daggers. Is there a reason that none of this happened, and is there a reason they didnt wait a couple of months in order to get better stocks of exocets?

The Argentine junta did not seriously contest possession of the islands. They had hoped to create fait accompli with the seizure. When the English did not accept the takeover, the Argentine government decided on a middle path: commit all of their naval assets and a significant part of the air force to contest English moves, but only use a fraction of their land forces (primarily ineffective conscripts) to occupy the islands.

[chakos]

The Argentine junta did not seriously contest possession of the islands. They had hoped to create fait accompli with the seizure. When the English did not accept the takeover, the Argentine government decided on a middle path: commit all of their naval assets and a significant part of the air force to contest English moves, but only use a fraction of their land forces (primarily ineffective conscripts) to occupy the islands.

The land forces on the island would have been enough if the air force played its role better. Say 3 squadrons on the islands including a full squadron of super etendards flying anti shipping missiles with enough exocets to cause serious damage (50+). They would be able to engage the English flotilla multiple times and a lot more effectivelly.

Imagine a squadron of A4s with free falls escorted by a full squadron of daggers or mirage IIIs. The English would have to put up pretty much their entire airwing to repulse the attack. Dont forget at the time the English didnt even have twin racks for the AIM-9L let alone any BVR missiles, Harriers where going up with 2 Sidewinders a peice. Now follow up this attack with a squadron of 12 Super Etendards firing Exocets just as the survivors from the feint attack retreat. The English fleet would have been massacred before it got close enough have any effect on the islands.

The Falklands seems to have been won in equal parts by Brit proffesionalism and Argentinean incompetence.

[GraniteForge]

The land forces on the island would have been enough if the air force played its role better. Say 3 squadrons on the islands including a full squadron of super etendards flying anti shipping missiles with enough exocets to cause serious damage (50+). They would be able to engage the English flotilla multiple times and a lot more effectivelly.

You're talking about at least 10X as many air-launched Exocets as Argentina actually had available. Sure, that would have allowed them to sink the entire English fleet as it actually deployed, but if the Argentines had actually presented that level of threat, the English would have known it, and perhaps done something else.

[TopHatter]

I saw a docu a few years back where they mentioned that Argentina exactly FIVE Exocets actually on hand before France slammed the door shut on them.

That really rocked me back...a large Royal Navy task force roaring down on them and they had a mere five state-of-the-art AShM's to wield against them. Never knew that until that doc

Some interesting tidbits from Wiki (maddeningly there are no links)

To contain the Exocet threat a major intelligence operation was initiated to prevent the Argentine Navy from acquiring more Exocets.

The operation included British intelligence agents claiming to be arms dealers able to supply large numbers of Exocets to Argentina, diverting Argentina from pursuing sources which could genuinely supply a few missiles.

France denied deliveries of recently-purchased AM39 [air-launched Exocets] to Peru to avoid the possibility of them being passed to Argentina.

Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems.

This is an account from an investigating Journalist,you know What,He´s Argentinian.

An interesting link, where another Argentine source says, although it took them 2 weeks, they did it without French help.

Who knows if we'll ever know the truth...

Of course, [the French arms embargo] deprived the 2nd Squadron of the possibility of being assisted by French technicians but the Argentine personnel of the unit, far from giving up, faced on their own the challenge to set up the Exocets.

Two weeks later, the interface between airplane and missile had been solved, and the tests on anti-ship strikes began.

Fortunately for the Argentineans, the country had bought from Great Britain two Type 42 destroyers (the same class used by the Royal Navy), the ARA Hércules and ARA Santísima Trinidad.

In consequence, the unit's pilots tested and improved the attack tactics against these kinds of ships.

[T_igger_cs_30]

Chakos reply:

I have a Falklands question, if anybody can help thanks in advance.

The main reason i saw that the Argentinians lost the war is because a) They didnt have enough exocets to seriously damage the English at long range and more importantly b) They didnt have any of their longer ranged aircraft based on the Islands, forcing their aircraft to fight at the limits of their range against the fueled up Harriers.

My question is this... Why didnt the Argentineans put a couple of squadrons of A4s at least on the Islands? If they where able to be carrier launched then im sure they would easily be able to operate from the main airbase in the Falklands. Ideally following up any invasion force would be the engineers extending the runway to take the Super Etendards and the Daggers. Is there a reason that none of this happened, and is there a reason they didnt wait a couple of months in order to get better stocks of exocets?

Basicly Argentina relied on there navy IMO.
Remember Argentina had excocets on there surface ships also, in simple terms its always talked of as if the British task force was a single entity, when in fact it was two, the submarines operated as a second task force, (each sub allocted a seperate AoR) Rear Admiral Sandy Woodward wanted command as a whole but this went against standard cold war doctrine so what you had was, Admiral Woodward in command of the carriers and escorts and Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse (c-in-c fleet) back in London in command of the two task forces as a whole.
One point to mention was the two task forces had seperate RoE.

The sinking of the Belgrano by HMS Conqueror caused the Argentine navy to cut and run back behind the countries 12 mile limit.

Some political fall out followed after the sinking of the cruiser, but thats a whole different debate.

[chakos]

You're talking about at least 10X as many air-launched Exocets as Argentina actually had available. Sure, that would have allowed them to sink the entire English fleet as it actually deployed, but if the Argentines had actually presented that level of threat, the English would have known it, and perhaps done something else.

The point i am getting to is that if you had an intention of taking on a maritime power the one thing you would make sure you had LOTS of would be anti shipping missiles. In fact they went into action with only 5. The French only cut them off because they where invading an ally. They could have kept their intentions quiet, waited for the entire order to be fulfilled (not sure how many that was for but it was for a hell of a lot more than 5) and then take on the English.

It stood to reason that if your about to attack the territory of NATO member 'y' then NATO member 'x' would stop supplying you with advanced arms. Better you have what you need to win before the war begins than to hope supply continues once the shooting starts.

The Argentineans didnt need to start the war that week... im sure a two or three month wait would not have been too much of an issue.

Did they honestly think that by using their navy of second and third hand warships they where going to take on 2 task forces of the worlds oldest and pound-for-pound arguably most effective navy???

[T_igger_cs_30]

The Argentineans didnt need to start the war that week... im sure a two or three month wait would not have been too much of an issue.
Intel is a wonderful thing, hand forced decision to be made now or never type thing. Oh the Brits wont do anything over a rock...........Biggest mistake IMO........taking 40 Royal marines prisoner bad bad mistake.....

Did they honestly think that by using their navy of second and third hand warships they where going to take on 2 task forces of the worlds oldest and pound-for-pound arguably most effective navy???
Again yes .....bad decision.

.

[aktarian]

I have been rather busy of late and in my haste, and not thinking I used the NATO charter wrongly, it quite clearly states Northern not Southern so this charter does not apply in this case.
I apologise to you aktarian, I should have read it before using it.

np, it happens ;)

What is often overlooked is that Argentina planned this invasion a few months later, during southern winter. But things got out of hand and events were rushed and it went the way it did. A few months later (in july, IIRC) would mean that some RN ships would be removed from active service and Argitina could have more Exocets.

[gunnut]

np, it happens ;)

What is often overlooked is that Argentina planned this invasion a few months later, during southern winter. But things got out of hand and events were rushed and it went the way it did. A few months later (in july, IIRC) would mean that some RN ships would be removed from active service and Argitina could have more Exocets.

I believe Hermes was about to retire when Falkland happened. Had the Argentinians waited just a few more months, they would have had more missiles and one fewer carrier to worry about.

There might have been a political pressure to start the war as well. They really couldn't wait. The economy was in the gutters and people were angry. The best way to distract them was a war.

[TopHatter]

I believe Hermes was about to retire when Falkland happened. Had the Argentinians waited just a few more months, they would have had more missiles and one fewer carrier to worry about.

Hermes to retire and Invincible to be sold. Plus Admiral Winter solidly on their side....

...if they'd waited just a little longer.

Gawd, could they have f'ed things up any worse?

[T_igger_cs_30]

TH & GN reply:

Remember back on the first page of this thread..........I mentioned the primary source of the article in the first post, Sir John Nott the Minister of Defence who handed his resignation in after the task force deployed..............Old Maggie refused his resignation at that point, ................ made him stick around to see the task force succeed despite his efforts to slash the Navy..............of course detracted from her a little too

[TopHatter]

I was actually referring to the Argentinians screwing things up (though yes, slashing through the RN budget wasn't too swift either)