Do you think a remark I heard from ex RAF pilot would have worked in the Falkland campain"If we had sent a sqaudron of Vulcans over Beunos Aires we wouldent have had to fight for the Falkland Islands they would have packed it in there and then",I dont think he meant to bomb them but remembering how powerfull and intimidating five in one go would have been.I know the logistics of flying one to bomb Port Stanley were a nightmare,Comments please.
2006-09-27 09:49:47 · 13 answers · asked by Francis7 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I do wish some folk would read the questions properly,IT SAYS A NONE BOMBING RUN.
2006-09-27 10:17:56 · update #1
tom 1 The Vulcan has no hard points all amarment was carried internaly in bomb bay,exept for the experimenta blue stel missile but thanks for the contribution.
2006-09-27 20:54:21 · update #2
Frank M:
I am one of those "Yanks" being referred to, and this is my prospective on the Falklands War. The U.S. government considers both Great Britain and Argentina as friends and allies. What do you do when two of your friends get into a fight with each other? Official we had to stay neutral, but the secret is that we were really giving our support to England. We look upon England and the English people as our nearest and dearest friends. Maybe that's because so many of us are from British ancestry, I am. Our hearts went out to the families of the sailors who lost their lives when the British warships Coventry, Ardent, and Antelope were sunk. And we were relieved when the war ended so quickly.
The Vulcan bomber is a ominous aircraft and I agree that a flight of Vulcans flying low over the skies of Beunos Aires would have caused the Argentines to "get religion". The noise would have been deafening, the ground would have shaken, and it would have been a totally frightening experience This especially since the citizens at large had no idea what was happening during the war.
2006-09-27 13:54:21 · answer #1 · answered by Peedlepup 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sorry people but no way would a simple fly by of the Vulcan have stopped the war in its tracks. Firstly, look at the passion the Argentines have for the Falklands (Malvinas). The rights of the Argentines to the Falklands is drilled into the Argentine nation from a very early age, while at school. I can not see that a flyby of war planes would have put so much as dent in the support the Junta were getting at the time.
Secondly, yes I have read Vulcan 607 and although this was a historic bombing run the logistics, time and money spent were incredible. Also, was 1 crater on the main part of the runway worth risking the lives of the Vulcan bomber and Victor tanker crews? I would have to agree with 'Sharky' Ward and say that this was simply the RAF trying to get a slice of the pie. However, nothing can be taken away from those crews mentioned, they did what they were asked and pulled off a semi successfull attack.
As for the American thing: No they could not jump in and fight along side us, due to the nature of politics as Peedlepup has stated and the whole NATO et al agreements. Also, this was not the type of war that we are seeing today in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Americans gave us the missiles and the use of 'Wideawake' but above this Alexander haig (Secretary of State) spent many days shuttling from Britain to Argentina trying to produce a peacefull outcome.
2006-09-28 03:45:37 · answer #2 · answered by hottotrot 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a scare tactic it would have been great, I saw the last Vulcan fly at navy days in Pompey and it was incredible. So if five had come in and flown low and fast over a city it would have gotten the message thru so fast .
As for that dip **** Peter W , what are you on about, the Yanks had little to do with that conflict, As is always the case no oil no interest. they may have sold us a few missiles but that was before the conflict. All they gave us was some satellite info.
If you want to read a great book try reading
Vulcan 607
Its about the Vulcan raid on the Falklands . great read.
Cant wait to see when the Vulcan Bomber is flying again. What a sight.
2006-09-27 10:43:11 · answer #3 · answered by Dirty Rob 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No I don't think it would have worked. Mainly because the bombers would have been shot down by the Argentine airforce before they reached Beunos Aires. The Argentines had supersonic Mirage fighters armed with heat seaking missiles that would have made micemeat of the bombers. The only way it could have had any effect would have been if they had been a fighter escort to protect them. It's one thing to send a single bomber to attack an island some distance away from Argentina, it's another to fly a group of them over a countries capital.
2006-09-28 21:00:34 · answer #4 · answered by PETER F 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Vulcan is an impressive aircraft. However, no war was ever won by air power alone. You have to put boots..troops on the ground to seize and hold the territory. The 1st Gulf War is an example. So is the aerial blitzkrieg into Poland in WWII.
Either way, the Royal Marines would have had to landed and the Royal Navy blockade the island.
2006-09-27 10:42:25 · answer #5 · answered by iraq51 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there's a Vulcan nearing the top of an finished overhaul and at the same time as finished it will be airworthy and used at air exhibits. I comprehend it really is envisioned with the intention to fly again in June yet no matter if this will be in time for Cosford i do no longer understand. i keep in mind that the Vulcan (large noisy pungent exhaust belching monster) changed into the worst aeroplane I ever worked on as an RAF electrician and that i changed into no longer sorry to work out the again of them inspite of the reality that, honest to assert, they were the finest of all 3 "V" bombers and served the RAF nicely for decades. Having suggested all this they were an superb sight contained in the air and that i'd like to work out one flying again.
2016-11-24 23:00:07 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe the show of air power would have saved lives on both sides, but I still think that an actual shooting war would have happened.Argentina was at that time run by a fascist junta who courted popularity whilst it destroyed all opposition to it within Argentina. Taking over the Falklands was a populist move designed to take the heat off the Generals
2006-09-27 19:51:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would have made things much more difficult for the Argentine junta who were able to keep the civilian population cut off from outside news. As usual with a dictatorship, the people did not know anything was going wrong until the cargo ships full of repatriating surrendered soldiers arrived back. Perhaps the overthrow of the military government that occurred when that happened could have occurred before the British fleet arrived and all that damage would not have had to occur.
2006-09-27 10:07:20 · answer #8 · answered by sdvwallingford 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the Yanks would have liked that very much. Bearing in mind that they had given us tacit agreement to re-invade the Falklands and were at the time providing us with much information and state of the art sidewinder air to air missiles for our Harriers. Bombing Buenos Aires would probably have been seen by most as a step too far.
2006-09-27 10:04:44 · answer #9 · answered by Peter W 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
You can't intimidate someone with an airforce, no matter what its size, the only way you can intimidate another nation is through combat and the reputaion of your own armed forces.
2006-09-28 12:53:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋