Warbird Information Exchange

Sorry, but HMS Invincible was never hit, or damaged during the conflict.

The pilot of the Super Etendard thought he was aiming at the Invincible when he fired the two Exocets, but he actually hit Atlantic Conveyer instead. I found it extraordinary actually that the Argentineans only had five Exocets in their entire arsenal when they went to war. They fired four... two at Sheffield, and two at Atlantic Conveyer. Pretty good record for the missile in some senses, however, the ones which hit Sheffield didn't actually explode... it was the unspent fuel in the rocket motors which caused the devastating fire which eventually wrote her off, and caused such huge loss of life.

Richard

The story about the bomb fusing being incorrectly set was an interesting, and sad story, for both sides in a way. In the early stages of the war, the Argentineans were dropping the bombs from such low altitude that the bombs did not have time to arm before they went off. I believe that there were at least four, and probably more, instances where bombs hit ships and did not explode.

I can think of at least one case where the bomb went completely through the ship without exploding (HMS Glamorgan). The EOD guys were very busy as well. In fact there was one tragic incident where an EOD team was lost, during the defusing of one bomb. I believe it was aboard HMS Antelope. While they were defusing the bomb, it went off. The resultant fires led to a further explosion which broke her back, and she sank very quickly.

As extraordinary as it may seem, and even though they had been told not to talk about it, one of the press men on board the task force felt it necessary to spill the beans about the fusing problems with the Argentinean bombs. Following this unforgiveable leak, the Argentineans apparently changed their fusing techniques... resulting in bombs detonating when they hit their targets. I am surprised that the culprit in the press room was not thrown overboard for his pains!

Richard

I just found a fascinating website with a day-by-day account of the conflict from the perspective of the Royal Navy. It does not appear to glorify the events, simply to recount them on an as-happened basis. There are some very interesting stories though, if you follow some of the extended links in the text.

http://www.navynews.co.uk/falklands/day_may.asp

Cheers,
Richard

A very good reason they need to be kept out of the front lines. If I were a grunt it would be very tempting to put my first shot into the Imbedded reporter head. Nothing like spies being imbedded with you. They are waiting to hang you for their 30 sec of fame.

That reporter should have been tossed over board in full view of the other reports. A good lesson to the scum.

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

Also a good record considering at the start of the war they had the
Super E's...they had the Exocets..but no fire control system. They had
to jerry-rig the system in the field very quickly...IIRC.

The Victor tankers and Vulcan bombers during Black Buck missions was
another great bit of choreography and jerry-rigging..some close moments
with fuel staging from Ascension.

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF

Does anyone remember which US museum Vulcan had its refueling probe pulled and sent back to refit on an operational aircraft for the Black Buck missions ?

IIRC the RAF sent a team to all of the preserved Vulcans to get Probes. Most of them were used on the Hercules fleet.

The SAC Museum at Offut springs to mind.

The biggest factor is that the superstructure of warships is now made from aluminum which decreases weight but also survivability. Add to it the fuel lines ect cut by the missle has it passed throught the ship (remember the USS Starke).

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Falklands Folks:

How exactly the Argies went about to ID their kill markings on their aircraft is unclear. The link below shows an unid ship plus the HMS Invencible as targets. Photo Aeromilitar Arg/Carlos Ay Via C/w.com

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y198/g ... 357680.jpg

_________________
FAH619®

The Argentineans did initially think that they had hit Invincible, as the pilot thought he had done so, and made the claim. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Invincible was ever hit. The world would have known very quickly had it been so. It is, in all probability, that the claim was made because it would boost morale amongst the Argentinean pilots. They did mark one of their Super Etendards with an Invincible hit at the time. It never happened though, and with all of the evidence available contradicting it 23 years on, I find it rather strange that anyone would persist in believing that it did. Two Exocets hit Sheffield, and two hit Atlantic Conveyer. The fifth and final Exocet was not fired.... so how do you come to the conclusion that Invincible was hit by one?

Richard

RMALLnut:

Rg! That clears the waters a bit. We are only showing the Argie pics sent to us sometime ago. We are still digging for more! Tks

_________________
FAH619®

As this is my first posting here, please bear with me if I inadvertently upset someone, but I felt I must post something regarding the Exocet missiles and the Falklands war.

It has been stated that 4 Exocet missiles out of the 5 that were available to the Argentineans hit 2 ships (2 on HMS Sheffied, and 2 on Atlantic Conveyor.)

No account has been taken of the Exocet missile that hit the destroyer HMS Glamorgan, and this missile was believed to have been ground launched from Stanley in the Falkland Islands.

Below is the extract from from the diaries of Air Chief Marshal Sir Peter Squire, Chief of the Air Staff, who at the time of the Falklands War was a Squadron Leader, my commanding officer at No. 1 (F) squadron. (And a darn good pilot and boss.)

"Sunday June 6th

Another poor weather day, this time over the Blands and only one operational sortie flown, another sortie looking for the land-launched Exocet which hit Glamorgan as she left the gun line a couple of days earlier. In fact the launcher is mobile but we attack known positions on Stanley Common at the same time as doing a photo-recce”.

This sortie was flown using No. 1(F) squadron harriers from HMS Hermes and was led by Sdn Ldr Squire. He was accompanied by Flt Lt. Mike Beech from No.3(F) squadron, RAF, who had arrived from Ascension Island on the 1st June.

Just wanted to clarify the Exocet issue, and ensure that the 12 sailors who lost their lives on HMS Glamorgan are not forgotten.

I also want to indicate that this was no small incident for those of us in the British armed forces at the time, and that although an insignificant affair to most foreigners, many brave servicemen on both sides gave their ultimate sacrifice for their country.

Thank you,

"Needle"

Thanks, Nick and Rob. I was thinking it might have been the SAC bird but just couldn't remember.

Just a quick correction to my previous post, before my RAF pension goes out the window.

I inadvertantly gave my CO the rank of Squadron Leader.
He was actually a Wing Commander. Sorry Sir.

"Needle"

"Needle" - many thanks for reminding us of the land-launched exocet attack against HMS Glamorgan, it had, sadly, slipped my mind. When I referred to the Exocet, I was thinking of the five air-launched examples the Aregentinean's had. The attack on HMS Glamorgan was a very grim affair indeed. To be honest I am amazed that more ships were not lost during the conflict... it really was a very close run thing when you think back on it! Many thanks for joining the conversation, and I hope that you continue to contribute. No. 1 Squadron played a very important part in the Falklands campaign. Were you there at the time, or did you serve later?

Rob, many thanks for the synopsis on air-losses. Not to be pedantic, but the FAH is more commonly associated with the Honduran Air Force. I am unaware of an Argentinean air arm designated as the FAH. Ironically, the Argentinean Air Force was also referred to as the FAA (Fuerza Aerea Argentina), just like the Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm. I also remember reading that several Argentinean aircraft were lost due to running out of fuel on the return leg, and didn't see them mentioned. Does anyone know the details about these losses?

Cheers,
Richard