Would Be Britain Able To Mount An Operation Similar To Faklands War Of 1982 ??

[Big-E]

Lets say Peru and Venezuela formed an alliance with Argentina to expel the UK from the islands. Peru supported the Argies before and Hugo Chavez recently stated to Tony Bliar:

"Senor Chavez demanded that Britain return the Falkland Islands to Argentina and stop behaving as an imperialist power. “Tony Blair, you have no moral right to tell anyone to respect international laws, as you have shown no respect for them, aligning yourself with ‘Mr Danger’ [President Bush] and trampling on the people of Iraq,” he said. “Do you think we still live in the times of the British Empire or colonialism?” London Times May 10, 2006

 

[Sea Toby]

The Falklands are secured as long as the British keep fighters at the expanded Stanley airfield. These air force elements will sink any invasion force or spash any airlift the enemy could sustain long enough for more fighters to arrive. Unlike 1982, in the Falklands the British have an air combat force in place today.

 

[perfectgeneral]

One sided?

Lets say Peru, Brazil and Chile formed an alliance with Argentina to expel the UK from the islands. Who wins that one as of today? I take that back that's a little too lop sided against the Brits. How about just adding Peru considering they actually provided support in the first war. Lets say they commit there total naval and air forces to the operation, would an Argentine/Peruvian alliance stand a decent chance?

What makes Peru, Brazil and Argentina too hard? (Chile would never join such an alliance).

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2230

(lists the fleet as of today)
We'll make it a nuclear free scrap without US/UN intervention. Any idea what the Brazillians (plus said allies) could put up?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/brazil/navy-equip.htm
The Foch and some ASW frigates (Sea Cat SAMs!)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/brazil/airforce-equip.htm
Fighters from the sixties.

Maybe they could put up a fight between them, but this is hardly a cake walk for the South American forces.

 

[Whiskyjack]

The Falklands are secured as long as the British keep fighters at the expanded Stanley airfield. These air force elements will sink any invasion force or spash any airlift the enemy could sustain long enough for more fighters to arrive. Unlike 1982, in the Falklands the British have an air combat force in place today.

Interestingly enough the RAF does not keep any air to ground capable aircraft on the Falklands. I think they are all F3 tornados.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Lets say Peru and Venezuela formed an alliance with Argentina to expel the UK from the islands. Peru supported the Argies before and Hugo Chavez recently stated to Tony Bliar:

"Senor Chavez demanded that Britain return the Falkland Islands to Argentina and stop behaving as an imperialist power. “Tony Blair, you have no moral right to tell anyone to respect international laws, as you have shown no respect for them, aligning yourself with ‘Mr Danger’ [President Bush] and trampling on the people of Iraq,” he said. “Do you think we still live in the times of the British Empire or colonialism?” London Times May 10, 2006

IMO the biggest threat a RN task force would face would be SSKs. I do not think that the Air Strike or Surface warfare assets of the above nations would be much of a threat, they have a lack of force multipliers.

Also hard to think that a successful invasion could be mounted without the British having some warning and being able to send some form of reinforcement:

· Harrier/Tornado/Typhoon(?)
· Air Refuelling/AWACS
· SSN

If the Falklands is secure they will be able to interdict all airfields and ports close to the Falklands, whereas the ability to reach the Falklands will be severely restricted due to lack of force multipliers and RAF air dominance.

Not to mention British Special Forces conducting operations.

 

[Big-E]

What makes Peru, Brazil and Argentina too hard? (Chile would never join such an alliance).

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2230

(lists the fleet as of today)
We'll make it a nuclear free scrap without US/UN intervention. Any idea what the Brazillians (plus said allies) could put up?

Without being able to bring Type 45 destroyers the only real asset the RN would have would be their SSNs. They can conduct limited TLAM strikes and maybe support commando raids but if there are almost 100 ASW platforms in the area they won't be able to launch a thing without being spotted. Whatever surface forces they bring would be overwhelmed by SA Coalition aircraft, I don't think the remaining RN Harriers and whatever can be based at RAF Mt. Pleasant can withstand the combined AFs of those three countries.

I don't see why Chile would never join the alliance. If you have been keeping up with events they have since publicly changed their position on the issue.

Chile, in a Jab at Britain, Is Suspending Flights to Falklands
New York Times May 98'
Chilean Government moves to suspend all flights betwen Chile and Falkland Islands, cutting off commercial air links between British colony and outside world; this is Chile's diplomatic swipe at Britain for its detention of former Chilean dictator, Gen Augusto Pinochet; initiative falls far short of breaking relations with London, as some senior members of armed forces have advised Government of Pres Eduardo Frei to do; measure is also intended to show appreciation to Argentina, which lost Falkland war to Britain, for its support of Chile's claim that Britain has no right to hold Pinochet...."

If you have anything that supports your claim of Chili supporting the UK as of today I will entertain it.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Without being able to bring Type 45 destroyers the only real asset the RN would have would be their SSNs. They can conduct limited TLAM strikes and maybe support commando raids but if there are almost 100 ASW platforms in the area they won't be able to launch a thing without being spotted. Whatever surface forces they bring would be overwhelmed by SA Coalition aircraft, I don't think the remaining RN Harriers and whatever can be based at RAF Mt. Pleasant can withstand the combined AFs of those three countries.

My understanding is that Mt Pleasant is a fully functional operating base with hardened shelters and stockpiles of equipment. All the RAF needs to do is fly in and the base is ready.

So it depends on how well the countries in question can secretly co-ordinate their operations. They would need to more men and equipment in close and I don't think the British have been sleeping when it come to intelligence gathering in the region, also Chile would probably help in the area of intelligence.

So what would the situation be with more F3s and GR4s based in the Falklands? Say 10 extra of each giving 14 F3s and 10 GR4s. With tanker AEW assets?

The Type 42 with Sea Dart, Type 23 with Sea Wolf in conjunction with Sea Harriers and Sea King AEW are still more advanced than what is targeting them.

Where are the SSNs now? Even the hint of one within 1000nm of the Falklands and it becomes much harder to plan.

All this assumes that the USN isn’t going to take an active part.

 

[Big-E]

My understanding is that Mt Pleasant is a fully functional operating base with hardened shelters and stockpiles of equipment. All the RAF needs to do is fly in and the base is ready.

RAF Mount Pleasant is a dual use civilian/military airport that only has 4 operational fighters. She could quickly be wiped out in a pre-emptive strike. The hangers are non-camo easy targets and don't look very fortified to me. All they have to do is have a few bombing runs and this airfield is out of commission permanetly leaving air cover to RN Harriers. You know this would be their first target!

 

[Big-E]

So it depends on how well the countries in question can secretly co-ordinate their operations. They would need to more men and equipment in close and I don't think the British have been sleeping when it come to intelligence gathering in the region, also Chile would probably help in the area of intelligence.

Chile help the UK with intelligence after the Pinochet incident... NO WAY!:lol2

 

[gf0012-aust]

My understanding is that Mt Pleasant is a fully functional operating base with hardened shelters and stockpiles of equipment. All the RAF needs to do is fly in and the base is ready.

It is a fully functioning dual facility base with subterranean weaps storage etc... Its designed to take heavy aircraft, and AFAIK they built HAS there a few years back. It also has basic SAMs on the perimeters.

So it depends on how well the countries in question can secretly co-ordinate their operations. They would need to more men and equipment in close and I don't think the British have been sleeping when it come to intelligence gathering in the region, also Chile would probably help in the area of intelligence.

On day one, I would be ferrying other additional air assets in. Incl Nimrods railed up with AA on their tips. I imagine that the RAF would also be undertaking fast track certification for some of their other systems. I would imagine that any avail Harriers would be unpacked and come out of mothballs in case of a support requirement.

The Chileans definitely would be providing intel assist to the UK as there is no love lost between them and the argies - or the peruvians for that matter. In fact the argies were nervous last time around about the Chileans pre-empting on them. In factr, I'd argue that the UK would be able to use the Chileans as leverage against the Peruvians. Chile would be quite happy to start large scale "training" on her western and southern borders.

as for Peru, as soon as there is an alliance I would imagine that the RN would play hard and fast.

if it was me, I'd be exercising landlord rights on Diego Garcia, and sink a major peruvian surface combatant immediately to cause them to shift their focus. I'd certainly be organising an event against their subs - and I'd establish a zone around Peruvian ports. I'd also be exercising specops opportunities via Chile on their comms and hubs. I really can't see any significant threat via the Peruvian AF.

If its "3 to 1", then I'd be going after them actively. You're also not looking at a high end capability on the OPFORS ASW elements.

The nukes would certainly get a workout in the first week.

 

[Big-E]

So what would the situation be with more F3s and GR4s based in the Falklands? Say 10 extra of each giving 14 F3s and 10 GR4s. With tanker AEW assets?

It would make it more difficult but we are talking about the AFs of 3-4 nations here who do have some modern aircraft like Mirage 2000s, Mig-29s and F-16s. There are half a dozen SA Coalition AEWs available. Besides my contention is they would launch a pre-emptive strike to wipe out RAF Mt. Pleasant before these forces would arrive. If the Argies gave warning to this strike it would make the attack 20X more difficult but not impossible.

The Type 42 with Sea Dart, Type 23 with Sea Wolf in conjunction with Sea Harriers and Sea King AEW are still more advanced than what is targeting them.

Most definetly more advanced but the one who wins this battle is the one who has air dominance. With RAF MP destroyed I think that goes to SA Coalition.

Where are the SSNs now? Even the hint of one within 1000nm of the Falklands and it becomes much harder to plan.

No one's going to know the answer to that. I think they would be the biggest threat to an invasion but with all the ASW platforms available to the coalition I think they will be marginalized. If you control the battlespace above the subs they become liabilities more than assets.

All this assumes that the USN isn’t going to take an active part.

There is no way the US with SA relations as they are and the reliance on fossil fuels are going to do anything ATM.

 

[Seaforth]

Times have changed...

Well, here's my opinion...

Knocking out defended airfields is actually quite a hard job. Runways are hard to hit in a conflict scenario, and can be repaired!

During the 1982 conflict, the British had a lot of trouble knocking out the airfields on the Falklands used by the Argentine Pucaras and helicopters, even with 4.5inch gun-armed surface ships, two carriers equipped with bomb capable Harrier GR3 and Sea Harrier FRS1, and the odd strike by Vulcan bomber. In the end, the Pucaras had to be taken out by special forces.

The Vulcan dropped a bomb right in the centre of the main runway at Stanley. I understand that the crater was filled in overnight.

The British have runway repair equipment that can be rolled over levelled ground to patch up craters. Fill in the crater, roll it flat, roll out and fix down the band aid patch...

Bear in mind that reinforcing Tornado fighters (of both air defence and surface attack varieties including specialists in anti-shipping strike), some Nimrods (of both maritime & electronic warfare and varieties), and even AWACS assets would start arriving at the Mount Pleasant base within 48 hours of any heightened state of alert.

Transport aircraft and chartered long haul jets would be able to ship reinforcing army assets direct from the UK and Germany, including troops, helicopters, small tracked vehicles (battle tanks are useless in the boggy Falklands terrain) and artillery pieces.

Tanker aircraft could be based at Mount Pleasant to assist with maintaining combat air patrol, and de-risking the air bridge to Ascension.

The situation today would be quite different to 1982, as the assets involved on the UK side would be quite different, plus over the last 10 years the British forces have become much more accustomed to moving air force assets around, and air-freighting large army units and materiel into hostile zones.

 

[Big-E]

Well, here's my opinion...

Knocking out defended airfields is actually quite a hard job. Runways are hard to hit in a conflict scenario, and can be repaired!

During the 1982 conflict, the British had a lot of trouble knocking out the airfields on the Falklands used by the Argentine Pucaras and helicopters, even with 4.5inch gun-armed surface ships, two carriers equipped with bomb capable Harrier GR3 and Sea Harrier FRS1, and the odd strike by Vulcan bomber. In the end, the Pucaras had to be taken out by special forces.

The Vulcan dropped a bomb right in the centre of the main runway at Stanley. I understand that the crater was filled in overnight.

The British have runway repair equipment that can be rolled over levelled ground to patch up craters. Fill in the crater, roll it flat, roll out and fix down the band aid patch...

Every nation in the SA Coalition has CBUs. If you try repairing that runway alot of good young men and women are going to die. It doesn't matter how accurate they are, everything that lands there is going to be ripped to shreds. With a few tons of CBUs that field will be uninhabitable.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Every nation in the SA Coalition has CBUs. If you try repairing that runway alot of good young men and women are going to die. It doesn't matter how accurate they are, everything that lands there is going to be ripped to shreds. With a few tons of CBUs that field will be uninhabitable.

Have you got access to this months USNI Proceedings? If so there is some very pertinent info on Sth America and how some of those nations are shifting into a blatantly adversarial position. Its worth reading.

 

[Big-E]

Have you got access to this months USNI Proceedings? If so there is some very pertinent info on Sth America and how some of those nations are shifting into a blatantly adversarial position. Its worth reading.

S America is turning from democracy to nationalistic dictatorships. The Bush administration has been so myopic with the GWOT that he forget to check his backyard. From Bolivia kicking out foreign nationals owning oil and gas fields to Hugo Chavez telling Tony Blair to stick his Imperialistic asscot where the sun don't shine I don't see another Falklands War a total unlikely scenerio. :shudder

 

[Aussie Digger]

It would make it more difficult but we are talking about the AFs of 3-4 nations here who do have some modern aircraft like Mirage 2000s, Mig-29s and F-16s. There are half a dozen SA Coalition AEWs available. Besides my contention is they would launch a pre-emptive strike to wipe out RAF Mt. Pleasant before these forces would arrive. If the Argies gave warning to this strike it would make the attack 20X more difficult but not impossible.



Most definetly more advanced but the one who wins this battle is the one who has air dominance. With RAF MP destroyed I think that goes to SA Coalition.



No one's going to know the answer to that. I think they would be the biggest threat to an invasion but with all the ASW platforms available to the coalition I think they will be marginalized. If you control the battlespace above the subs they become liabilities more than assets.



There is no way the US with SA relations as they are and the reliance on fossil fuels are going to do anything ATM.

The problem is the range that the fighters on both sides are operating at. At best both sides were able to get air dominance for "moments" at a time. No SA Country has particularly great AAR capability.

Do you think it possible that the Coalition you have mentioned could move significant forces to Argentina without Britain noticing? They would certainly be useless otherwise, and Argentina would be in a worse position than last time, given Britain's position and force improvements, already mentioned.

Any strike on British positions would be replied with Tactom strikes on Argy airfields from RN SSN's. At such a point NEITHER side would be able to gain air superiority and it would become a light infantry v light infantry fest that the first one was.

Such a situation would be resolved much like the last one, due to the undoubted quality of British infantry forces...

Diego Garcia, GF? Do you expect British forces to deploy to the INDIAN ocean for this one??? They'd best get those Vulcan's dusted off, cause nothing else is going to have the range...

 

[Big-E]

Do you think it possible that the Coalition you have mentioned could move significant forces to Argentina without Britain noticing? They would certainly be useless otherwise, and Argentina would be in a worse position than last time, given Britain's position and force improvements, already mentioned.

Any strike on British positions would be replied with Tactom strikes on Argy airfields from RN SSN's.

If Argentina strikes RAF Mt. Pleasant first then wait for the TLAM strikes they can then quickly move in the allied air assets and muster the naval combatants before the RN can respond with more TLAM strikes. They can build some hiden air-fields on the coast and say they are slash-burning for crops when in reality they are clearing air-fields. I just can't understand why the pommes only have 4 Tornado F3s to defend the islands.

Diego Garcia, GF? Do you expect British forces to deploy to the INDIAN ocean for this one??? They'd best get those Vulcan's dusted off, cause nothing else is going to have the range...

This is the second time he's made basing mistakes with Diego Garcia, he must love that base:heart

 

[Whiskyjack]

It would make it more difficult but we are talking about the AFs of 3-4 nations here who do have some modern aircraft like Mirage 2000s, Mig-29s and F-16s. There are half a dozen SA Coalition AEWs available. Besides my contention is they would launch a pre-emptive strike to wipe out RAF Mt. Pleasant before these forces would arrive. If the Argies gave warning to this strike it would make the attack 20X more difficult but not impossible.

Yes they have the equipment but at what quality, logistics, availability and training? Also the ability to keep quiet and deploy these assets into Argentina are not going to be great IMO. All allowing time for the UK to deploy additional assets

Most definetly more advanced but the one who wins this battle is the one who has air dominance. With RAF MP destroyed I think that goes to SA Coalition.

Assuming they have air dominance, how far out from the mainland can they project it? To invade successfully they also need dominance on their sea lanes and one SSN can make a mockery of that. Other SSNs will be using TLCM on the ports and airports. The Any invasion will fall apart from a logistics point of view. They may get spares for their Mig-29s but Mirage 2000 and F-16s?

No one's going to know the answer to that. I think they would be the biggest threat to an invasion but with all the ASW platforms available to the coalition I think they will be marginalized. If you control the battlespace above the subs they become liabilities more than assets.

I disagree with that, I have never heard that the South American nations are particularly great with their ASW elements and it would be a brave commander that would go up against one or more RN SSNs, Harpoons and Tomahawks are not going to be easy to stop. If it is going to be hard to hide Aircraft movements then ship and troop movements will be harder, what about training for an invasion? Store? Leave cancelled? etc etc All this allows for the RN and RAF time to position, not good for the SAs.

There is no way the US with SA relations as they are and the reliance on fossil fuels are going to do anything ATM.

But the US will allow for the UK to go it alone? After the support the UK has given it? IMO the UK will have political, intelligence and logistics at the very least.

I do not say that the UK will stroll down and be back for lunch. Under your scenario the RN, RAF and Army will take losses, but the UK forces are an order of magnitude above what they were in ’82, the SA forces are not.

 

[Waylander]

I really think the US would support the UK with a CAG and a MEU if the UK thinks that they are not able to handle it by themselfes. Especially after their help in Iraq.

 

[Miles]

The key issue is a British SSN. In 1982 one attack by a British SSN sent the Argentinian fleet to port, and remember that the General Belgrano was sunk with WWII vintage MArk 8 torpedoes. Now the RN has Spearfish torpedoes (probably the best torpedo in the world) and Sub-harpoon. Just the fear of a British SSN woul dprevent an attack, as (I believe) happened in the late seventies, and would be even more of a threat now. Without an invasion fleet there would be no invasion.

By the way, Chavez is not a dictator, he is merely following the wishes of the majority of his people. That is called democracy.