MiG-21MF/bis vs Sea Harriers ?

  • Sea Harriers would have complete air superiority.

  • Sea Harriers would have had some losses.

  • Sea Harriers would have been blasted out of the sky.

  • None of the two aircraft would have gained air superiority.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Including the generals, it appears?
 
Including the generals, it appears?

IIUC nobody in power seriously thought of invading the Falklands, until Admiral Anaya made it a condition of the Navy's support for Galtieri's power grab. Surprisingly enough there doesn't seem to even be any tabletop or map exercises for the Falklands done by the Argentines, even if only for officer training. No wonder they lost.
 
Sorry Kiltonge, I'm assuming your comment was in relation to my previous post?
If so, your analogy
It does seem a lot of what-iffery versus just bolting-on a refuelling probe to the Mirage IIIs & Daggers. IAI already had one with the necessary plumbing for the Kfir.
does make a lot of sense in terms of its straightforward simplicity, as such.
But the fact is, Argentina only has a very limited and hard-pressed C-130 Hercules fleet to facilitate such aerial refuelling. As I've also emphasised, the Mirage F1 does have greater performance parameters - critically in terms of range/endurance, when compared to the legacy Mirage III/Dagger's. This in itself would elevate a lot of pressure off the few C-130 Herc tankers, as well as going some way in eliminating the predictability of Argentinian attack paths, due to range limitations of the Mirage III/Dagger's

The Mirage and Skyhawk fleet is probably one of the best mixes that a nation on a tight budget could put together in that era.
I can't argue with that analogy of the Mirage III/Skyhawk mix mate.
I've always championed that Australia/RAAF should have had such an arrangement within it's ORBAT....

Do you think the Argentinian Air Force/Aviation Industry would have had what it took to jerryrig other transport aircraft to act as aerial refuelling tanks?

Regards
Pioneer
 
Very cordial of the Kiwi's......

One has to admit, that camo on Kiwi Skyhawk's was both cool and very effective.

Regards
Pioneer

Once the British withdrew from EoS and the US to the Philippines they really didn't have much choice who to fly their Skyhawks with.

It was cool, I saw them at Avalon back in the day.

As for IFR and Mirage IIIs, it depends if they have single point, pressure refuelling like the Israelis or multi point unpressurised like the RAAF. The latter can't be fitted with IFR.
 
Hi to all
at the time of the war, no IFR probe exits for the M-III.
The development, was past de War.
More early, I put the french model of M-III that France did.
The only M-III with IFr was this
11009686193_915f761a02_b.jpg

-fkJ3VYYcOGBHTzztP_ZX2-qHkzKzTQTLi5_A3tWqJrpTwYu6iCL-uubsi_m-25ofMRyI9Lm9hD5_8kTQTMBPpaGlc5YECMfxfZbbBsoB78BRHDvzejg

M-IIIB-2RV (for traing the crews of M-IV bombers)
In a spanish forum (Argentine ) (talking about Air Superiority in the Malvinas War) this was said, about M-III IFR capacity:
"After reading a Mirage IIIE manual there are several points to highlight.:...-When we talk about in-flight refueling capability, by 1982 there was no MIII operator in the world with an in-flight refueling probe. There were several reasons that prevented its incorporation, the absence of internal space for additional pipes and pumps, the high minimum speed that the plane had to remain in flight and allow under these conditions an increase in weight and a change in the center of gravity and a liquid oxygen tank that, depending on the percentage of oxygen required by the pilot, could be extended to 3 hours and coins or less. For this reason, when some Mirages were modernized and equipped with a refueling probe, the incorporation of a higher capacity oxygen system was included in the work."
So you need a more oxigen capacity.
https://www.zona-militar.com/foros/threads/superioridad-aérea-en-malvinas.30478/page-49
 
Very cordial of the Kiwi's......

One has to admit, that camo on Kiwi Skyhawk's was both cool and very effective.

Regards
Pioneer

Once the British withdrew from EoS and the US to the Philippines they really didn't have much choice who to fly their Skyhawks with.

It was cool, I saw them at Avalon back in the day.

The Aussies operated A-4s until 1981 off HMAS Melbourne, then sold them to New Zealand in 1984.

UK withdrawal from EOS was done by 1971, and the US were in the Philippines since the 1950s (withdrawal from Vietnam/Cambodia was done by 1975).

The RAAF had had a "reserve" component called the Citizen's Air Force (CAF) that, until its flying squadrons were disbanded in 1964, flew the Vampires the active squadrons had gotten rid of long before. If the CAF's squadrons had been kept, they could have flown the Sabres until 1981, then taken the ex-RN A-4Gs (and gotten some surplus A-4Fs from the USN's storage yard) to keep on operating.
 
IIUC nobody in power seriously thought of invading the Falklands, until Admiral Anaya made it a condition of the Navy's support for Galtieri's power grab. Surprisingly enough there doesn't seem to even be any tabletop or map exercises for the Falklands done by the Argentines, even if only for officer training. No wonder they lost.
The whole affair leaves an impression that the Argentinean side had no shade of a plan in case there is a real attempt by Britain to retake the islands and everything they did was down to knee-jerk reactions. Almost as if they put all their chips into diplomatic pressure. Which didn't work.
 
Last edited:
Ok, after further deliberation, I guess the only realistic option for an anti-ship missiles for the Argentinian Air Force, regardless of the type of fighter/fighter-bomber they employ, would have to be the Nord AS.30 or AGM-12 Bullpup (or derivatives of), if they choose to have a serious inventory. I guess there's nothing wrong with thinking Argentina licence-manufacturing either missile.
If given the choice, I'd probably be inclined to support the AS.30, for both reliability, effectiveness and geopolitical assurances (France having a better, yet dubious, track record to supply weapons/equipment in round about ways and means).
I fully appreciate that the AS.30 ain't no Exocet when it comes to anti-shipping, and it's radio command guidance system is somewhat clunky and antiquated (One would assume Argentina would see merit in aquiring the laser-guided AS.30L as well) but it does give some form of stand-off attack performance, and let's face it, anythings better than having to flying into a fleets area defence zone to drop 1000 Ib and 500 Ib dumb bombs, whilst exposing you to every weapon that can shoot at you, from 114mm, 20mm, and 7.62mm, once you've survived the Sea Dart's, Sea Wolf and Sea Cat SAM's....

Another consideration is that two AS.30's could be carried by either Mirage IIII/Dagger and Skyhawk......

Regards
Pioneer
 
...so it probably wasn't a hardware problem.

Make no mistake, Argentina had considerable materiel shortcomings. They had no counter to SSNs so couldn't use their navy without risk of total destruction. Their air force was at the very limit of its tactical range without the use of Port Stanley airport. Their maritime patrol capabilities were very marginal and recce capability in general although by being on the islands this might be manageable. Even with good planning and better use of available resources Argentina would struggle.
 
The Aussies operated A-4s until 1981 off HMAS Melbourne, then sold them to New Zealand in 1984.

UK withdrawal from EOS was done by 1971, and the US were in the Philippines since the 1950s (withdrawal from Vietnam/Cambodia was done by 1975).

The RAAF had had a "reserve" component called the Citizen's Air Force (CAF) that, until its flying squadrons were disbanded in 1964, flew the Vampires the active squadrons had gotten rid of long before. If the CAF's squadrons had been kept, they could have flown the Sabres until 1981, then taken the ex-RN A-4Gs (and gotten some surplus A-4Fs from the USN's storage yard) to keep on operating.

The twists and turns of RAAF fleets are a thread of its own.
 
The UK's domestic politics under Thatcher were a significant factor in Galtieri's junta's decision to attack the Falklands. One factor was the Nott's 1981 Defence White Paper, which would largely eliminate the RN's cap ability to perform amphibious assaults. The second was the Nationality Act of 1981, which made it far more difficult for residents of any British overseas territories to move to the UK. The junta's misogyny (both the head of government and the head of state of the UK were women) may have been a third factor.

One wonders whether a slightly different British defense policy -- not even a significantly more expensive one -- could have deterred the Argentinian government.
 
Not just that, Argentina occupied South Thule in 1976 and the British military response Op Journeyman ended without evicting the occupation. There was also the never ending negotiations about the Falklands, as opposed to saying "NO the matter is closed"!
 
Even with good planning and better use of available resources Argentina would struggle.

Of course they would, but they never even tried.

They squandered a month while the task force was at Ascension which they could have used for preparation and planning. They could have set up land defenses, bring better trained soldiers, shore artillery, mines. They totally missed the spec forces that were landed and did whatever they wanted on the islands. They knew about SSNs, but did nothing - Belgrano's escorts never switched their sonars on (if they even were functional).

It's a wonder they did get as much hits as they did, but think how painful that could have been if some coordination and planning was applied to those chaotic attacks. And all they actually needed was one hit on a carrier.

What I am trying to say - if you gave them better planes and better missiles, there is no guarantee they would have behaved differently, and thus the result would be the same.
 
Last edited:
...so it probably wasn't a hardware problem.
Combined response:
Make no mistake, Argentina had considerable materiel shortcomings. They had no counter to SSNs so couldn't use their navy without risk of total destruction. Their air force was at the very limit of its tactical range without the use of Port Stanley airport. Their maritime patrol capabilities were very marginal and recce capability in general although by being on the islands this might be manageable. Even with good planning and better use of available resources Argentina would struggle.
But some relatively small hardware changes (and a few other things that were completely within Argentina's capabilities at the time) would have made it a lot more likely to succeed.

I mean, every air force has a unit whose job is to fix and repair the runways. Send those guys to Port Stanley, and tell them you need another 2000ft of runway. Or however much more flat ground there is available there. Use some of the "instant set" concrete cure methods, so the runway is plane ready in a week.
 
Send those guys to Port Stanley
They squandered a month while the task force was at Ascension which they could have used for preparation and planning.

In the reluctance to send any additional guys to Port Stanley and give them some meaningful assignments lies a considerable part of the problem :)

But some relatively small hardware changes (and a few other things that were completely within Argentina's capabilities at the time) would have made it a lot more likely to succeed.
Obtaining those things also required planning *welp*
 
Combined response:

But some relatively small hardware changes (and a few other things that were completely within Argentina's capabilities at the time) would have made it a lot more likely to succeed.

I mean, every air force has a unit whose job is to fix and repair the runways. Send those guys to Port Stanley, and tell them you need another 2000ft of runway. Or however much more flat ground there is available there. Use some of the "instant set" concrete cure methods, so the runway is plane ready in a week.

I agree, Argentina had some potentially useful kit that wasn't used, 155mm guns spring to mind. However even these make the job harder rather than impossible, Britain's defence industry was just picking up speed as the 10 week conflict ended.
 

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom