Another 'What If': Falklands II.

[BansheeOne]

While we're in the Falklands ... I just saw a German newspaper report claiming that in 1982 San Luis fired eight torpedos at Invincible from a distance of 7000 meters, but managed to miss with all due to misconnected guidance wires. I'm aware of San Luis missing either Brilliant or Yarmouth in one instance, and Arrow and Alacrity in another due to technical and user faults, but never heard of this incident. I suspect it's a "we could have won the war if only" type myth that's derived from the actual occurrences ... anybody can confirm?

[philgollin]

While we're in the Falklands ... I just saw a German newspaper report claiming that in 1982 San Luis fired eight torpedos at Invincible from a distance of 7000 meters, but managed to miss with all due to misconnected guidance wires. I'm aware of San Luis missing either Brilliant or Yarmouth in one instance, and Arrow and Alacrity in another due to technical and user faults, but never heard of this incident. I suspect it's a "we could have won the war if only" type myth that's derived from the actual occurrences ... anybody can confirm?

 

There are so many versions of what supposedly happenedwith the Argentinian submarines that no one really knows - the Invincible claim is one of the more extremely unlikely ones.

 

The BRITISH official history can't really say.

 

There is an acknowledgedment that the sub did manage to evade detection, but as to exactly how good any attacks were, or weren't, no one can say - certainly many details given over time by the Argentinians are contradictory. The Argentian reason/excuse that the fire-control system wasn't properly set-up would only make sense if the Argentinians had NEVER fired a single torpedo against a proper target or they had sailed with a broken sytem (but a trial run against any simple merchant ship passing by would have shown whether it gave the right result at short ranges).

 

Until the Argentinians tell a consistent, technically coherent story then no one can really say.

 

.

[RETAC21]

With a couple of Trafalgars or maybe an Astute off the coast? Maybe even forward deployed Nimrods? Good luck.

 

They can cover all the coast all the time? we come back to the alert level, if there's warning and the RN deploys there's no invasion, it happened in the 70s. If the Argies want to pull this out it needs to be a bolt out of the blue like in 82, so there won't be a Nimrod or a Trafalgar around.

 

In addition, tracking SSKs has not become easier that I know of. If the USN is having trouble with them, you think the RN is so much better? they could try the active path (which would work) but the Argies do have P-3s.

[RETAC21]

While we're in the Falklands ... I just saw a German newspaper report claiming that in 1982 San Luis fired eight torpedos at Invincible from a distance of 7000 meters, but managed to miss with all due to misconnected guidance wires. I'm aware of San Luis missing either Brilliant or Yarmouth in one instance, and Arrow and Alacrity in another due to technical and user faults, but never heard of this incident. I suspect it's a "we could have won the war if only" type myth that's derived from the actual occurrences ... anybody can confirm?

 

Urban legend. The Argentinians submarines were caught with the pants down in this one. The 2 TR1700 were being fitted out in Germany, of the Guppys "Santiago del Estero" had been withdrawn and "Santa Fe" had its batteries worn out and was unable to submerge (that was why she was caught on the surface). Of the 209s, "Salta" had a noise problem and was undergoing refit and "San Luis" had just ended up his and was sent to sea with a cobbled together crew, if I recall correctly the fire control became non-operational shortly after sailing.

 

The story of the torpedoes depends on the source, the Argentinians claim they came defective from Germany (no, they hadn't fired a practice warshot in 1982) while German sources say an NCO crossed the wires on them.

 

The Argentinians don't claim a sub attack on Invincible, they claim a coordinated attack with Super Etendards and A-4s in poor visibility. According to their story, the SuE fired the last Exocet and then the A-4s pressed forward loosing 2 in the attack but heavily damaging Invencible which was left on fire.

 

According to British sources, the Exocet was downed by gunfire and the A-4s engaged one of the Amazon class frigates with no damage caused.

 

Obviously, the British were right.

[harryRIEDL]

They can cover all the coast all the time? we come back to the alert level, if there's warning and the RN deploys there's no invasion, it happened in the 70s. If the Argies want to pull this out it needs to be a bolt out of the blue like in 82, so there won't be a Nimrod or a Trafalgar around.

 

In addition, tracking SSKs has not become easier that I know of. If the USN is having trouble with them, you think the RN is so much better? they could try the active path (which would work) but the Argies do have P-3s.

the argie subs are hardly state of the art the 209 their about 30 years old without many upgrades[if any] and the t1700 are a similar vintage so the tracking the argie SSK should be easier than the moden Gotland which is more moden.

[RETAC21]

We dont know for certain there isnt an SSN (or for that matter, an SSBN) deployed in the area all the time. To be honest, from what little ive read on the subject, at least until the mid 90s, the USN still regarded the RN as good as them at Subsurface warfare, and in some respects their commanders were considered better trained. Whether thats the case today I coudnt say, but perisher courses have been highly regarded for the past 40 years. Shallow waters are not great for SSNs, Ill fully admit. But then they didnt seem to have much trouble in 1982.

 

As for a bolt from the blue, well it wasnt really last time, the warning signs were there but we chose to ignore them. With all that oil under the Falklands, Ive my doubts we would be so lax this time.

 

There was a SSN deployed during the 80s on a regular basis as Armed Forces reported the rotations. Now, with less subs available they may not be there full time. Even if they are, there's still a lot of sea to patrol, to catch the 2 TR1700.

 

As for modernisation, in response to Harry, it's very dangerous to assume a potential opponent is dumb because he was beaten once. Jane's 2004-2005 shows Salta as modernised in 1995 (engines, sonar and weapons) with the 2 TR1700s (sonars and engines) in 2002 (Santa Cruz) and San Juan since august 2007.

[TonyE]

Argentina was supposed to buy the french LPDs Ouragan and Orage as they were retired last year, but the deal seem to have been delayed or cancelled.

[swerve]

Argentina was supposed to buy the french LPDs Ouragan and Orage as they were retired last year, but the deal seem to have been delayed or cancelled.

 

Argentina decided that the asbestos (common in ships of that era) in them was unacceptable, & the cost of removing it too great.