Falklands "What if...?"

[jualbo]

Hi again.

My memory may be wrong here because I remember the raid being 20 or so degrees on our starboard bow tracking left to right passing 15nm to starboard. This does not fit with what I have read recently but that is what I remember.

This means Cardiff was eastern. On the right of the axis of the attack (it´s the way to watch them passing from left to right).

Our gun crews opened fire to Starboard at flashes on the horizon. There were only three ships in that vicinity, Cardiff, Exeter and Avenger (transiting towards the inshore gunline) and none were in visual range of Cardiff. It is not possible to see a ship launch chaff beyond the visual horizon.

What´s about Tinkler´s book claim of an Exocet falling 400 yards from them in this raid? Do you think he is wrong? Or perhaps he mixed the date of the failed MM-38 Exocet attacked from shore on 1st june?

According to FAA pilots, the visual range was about 8-9 miles that day. But although low, they had a better point of view flying over 30-45 feet higher.

I suspect you were NE from Exeter. This would let you to see the raid from left to right. Also let to see the Sea Darts following a NW to SE course. But
15 miles doesn´t match. If then, you should have shot at them. It would be in the range of you Sea Dart. Except for a failure in the system (not rare at all). A kind of triangle: Avenger south. 12,5 miles NW from her Exeter and in an unknown distance but just north from Avenger and NE from Exeter, Cardiff.
The distance to detect a low level raid must be around 25 miles at most (the horizon radar is around that distance for very low level target as this was). You place the target at 15miles. So your relative position from Avenger could be in the range of 15-25 miles. What do you think? Is it reasonable?


Cardiff was not in company with the frigates inshore that night which included
Penelope, Avenger, Ambuscade and Active. These little warriors were conducting Naval Gunfire Support (NGS) or on escort duty. Is it possible the pilots were seeing muzzle fire and fall of shot from 4.5" shells, not to mention all the ships launching chaff including HMS Fearless? Some distance offshore away from all this commotion Cardiff, the only vessel that could have caused any damage to the enemy formation launched a single missile, it was a very calm and simple engagement. I was reporting the raid to all ships on HF radio and one of the carriers launched a single Harrier that eventually turned back as it had no chance of catching up with the outbound raid. It has always been a mystery to me why the Arg pilots reported what they say they saw and I suspect they did not see the single Seadart that impacted with B-108.

I tell you my particular point of view. Mirages were some miles behind Canberras. Only one of them turned on his radar in order to follow "Bacos". So we have two separated pairs of planes. The leader of second pair emiting a Cirano IIB radar signal with his wingmen following him in visual contact.

The ingress route was from Lively island to Mt Longdon. When Canberras dropped their bombs from high altitude (40000 feet) probably made it from a medium way betwen Fitzroy and Longdon. Then, turned 180º to come back for the same way. This means that Mirages, which were separated from them some miles, probably never overflew farer than Fitzroy.

By the other hand Canberra fell to sea south Fitzroy so probably impacted just north from it while heading south. Cardiff detected Cirano IIB emisions.
Is there a possibility that Cardiff engaged the southern pair (Mirages)?

I remember (don´t ask me where) discussions on the net (I know not the best source) about this that placed Exeter on scene. Exactly north, north-east of Stanley. Do you have a way to contact your friend on her to confirm they weren´t close to shore that night?

About the incident of Penelop and Nordic Ferry:
http://www.rna-10-area.net/falklands.html

Penelope launched Sea Cats or chaff rockets against the suposed hostile missile they saw. Could it be your Sea Dart flying from east to west heading for the target (according to your map)?
Were short range Sea Cats the missiles seen by Mirage pilots?

If they were close to Fitzroy, could they be fired by SAM Rapiers (on 8th june they were deployed in that area). Although again they are too short range to hit at such a high altitude as both pairs of planes (Bacos and Plutons) flew the raid.

Regards

[jualbo]

According to FAA webpage:

27 may attack on San Carlos area: 04:30 (local time): 2 Canberras (Odín)
http://www.fuerzaaerea.mil.ar/conflicto/dias/may27.html
Result: A vivac is hit (according to FAA).


29 may attack on San Carlos area: 02:08 (local time): 2 Canberras (Charrúa)
http://www.fuerzaaerea.mil.ar/confli...as/may29a.html
Result: Unknown

31 may attack on Fern valley Creek: 05:20 (local time): 1 Canberra (Charrúa) on Port San Carlos area and 2 Canberras (Odín) Eagle Base (Base of 846ºSqn Royal Navy)
http://www.fuerzaaerea.mil.ar/conflicto/dias/may31.html
Result: Some injured personnel on Eagle Base although no helos presents at the moment cause had been evacuated to HMS Fearless to spend the night.
Del libro "Falkland Air War" de la Royal Navy

From Falklands the Air War:
"A las 02:30 del 31 de mayo, una carpa de la “Base Águila” fue demolida y una central telefónica dañada durante un bombardeo de Canberra (del Grupo 2). Ninguno de los Sea King fue dañado cuando las cuatro bombas explotaron. Infortunadamente el Lt Cdr RC Harden (jefe técnico) sufrió heridas faciales como resultado del ataque y se lo debió recuperar a Bahía Ajax y de allí al Uganda para ser tratado."

At 02:30 on 31st may, a tent in Eagle Base was demolished and a telephone set damaged during a bomb course by Canberras from Grupo 2. No Sea King was damaged when the four bombs exploded. Unfortunately, Lt Cdr RC Harden (technical chief) was injured in his face as a result of the attack and had to be evacuated to Ajax Bay and from there to hospital ship Uganda to be treated.


"Pelicano project" was on course to convert all surviving Canberras (10) plus two new planes to carry a doppler radar and new electronic equipment just when the war began. New planes were embargoed. A prototype was under conversion and was operative on 25th may. It flew war missions until suffered a going out from the runaway that left it unservicible for the rest of war. The radome caused turbulences that led the project to finish when a plane crashed after the war.

[Griffiths911]

What´s about Tinkler´s book claim of an Exocet falling 400 yards from them in this raid? Do you think he is wrong? Or perhaps he mixed the date of the failed MM-38 Exocet attacked from shore on 1st june?

I did not know that the late Lt. Tinkler had written anything about this incident, it is the first time I have heard about this. Avenger claims she shot down the Exocet with her 4.5" gun. I doubt that happened and think the missile was seduced by chaff, ran out of fuel and ditched into the sea, but nowhere near Glamorgan.

According to FAA pilots, the visual range was about 8-9 miles that day. But although low, they had a better point of view flying over 30-45 feet higher.

I recall it was a bright, clear and brisk day with good visibility...good flying weather.

I suspect you were NE from Exeter. This would let you to see the raid from left to right. Also let to see the Sea Darts following a NW to SE course. But
15 miles doesn´t match. If then, you should have shot at them. It would be in the range of you Sea Dart. Except for a failure in the system (not rare at all). A kind of triangle: Avenger south. 12,5 miles NW from her Exeter and in an unknown distance but just north from Avenger and NE from Exeter, Cardiff.
The distance to detect a low level raid must be around 25 miles at most (the horizon radar is around that distance for very low level target as this was). You place the target at 15miles. So your relative position from Avenger could be in the range of 15-25 miles. What do you think? Is it reasonable?

You could well be right. Again, I was not officially on duty in the radar room and witnessed the attack standing behind a seated radar operator. I was not orientated properly and got a series of strange 'snapshots' of the event. If you asked me tomorrow what I witnessed I would say that we detected the raid at around 20nm they were very intermittent contacts with Exeter's link 10 data 'dancing' around them. We did not achieve a lock up with our 909s. They passed us to Starboard around 15nm. I'm sorry, I know I must be wrong but that is how I remember it.

I tell you my particular point of view. Mirages were some miles behind Canberras. Only one of them turned on his radar in order to follow "Bacos". So we have two separated pairs of planes. The leader of second pair emiting a Cirano IIB radar signal with his wingmen following him in visual contact.

The ingress route was from Lively island to Mt Longdon. When Canberras dropped their bombs from high altitude (40000 feet) probably made it from a medium way betwen Fitzroy and Longdon. Then, turned 180º to come back for the same way. This means that Mirages, which were separated from them some miles, probably never overflew farer than Fitzroy.

By the other hand Canberra fell to sea south Fitzroy so probably impacted just north from it while heading south. Cardiff detected Cirano IIB emisions.
Is there a possibility that Cardiff engaged the southern pair (Mirages)?

I remember (don´t ask me where) discussions on the net (I know not the best source) about this that placed Exeter on scene. Exactly north, north-east of Stanley. Do you have a way to contact your friend on her to confirm they weren´t close to shore that night?

I have been in touch with my friend who served in Exeter 1982 for many years. There is no question (100%) that Exeter was not inshore that night/morning. However, this could be important – I recall an email sent to me by Rear Admiral Harris (Commanding Officer HMS Cardiff 1982) in 2007 in reply to my query about this incident. He thanked me for the letter that had been printed in the aviation magazine 'FlyPast' where I attempted to put the record straight about the Exeter/Cardiff error. He also said that our Seadart flew over the island to reach Canberra B-108 and I'm quite sure he said that we were positioned North of Port Stanley. This would make total sense with regard to the overland flight of the Seadart.

Sadly, I did not save that email, however, I am sure I sent a copy to Creaking Door who was pivotal in getting my letter printed in FlyPast, he may recall reading it or indeed still have a copy?

I have updated my map accordingly.


Penelope launched Sea Cats or chaff rockets against the suposed hostile missile they saw. Could it be your Sea Dart flying from east to west heading for the target (according to your map)?
Were short range Sea Cats the missiles seen by Mirage pilots?

Yes Yes! I have argued this view with a radio operator who served in Penelope 1982. He was very annoyed with me. He is convinced that an Israeli Gabriel? (unsure) missile that was purchased by FAA was fired at them, how bizarre is that? I am convinced they saw our dart and thought a missile had been fired at them and the missile they saw at close range was a rouge close range weapon.

I forgot to mention that HMS Yarmouth was inshore conducting NGS that night also.

Aaargh!...The fog of war

[nazca_steve]

Fascinating information from all involved and has cleared up a lot of my questions about this incident, even if the jury is still, and potentially always will be, out on what exactly was fired at who.

I had no idea that B-108 was potentially severed in two by the Sea Dart, in fact I'm curious to know where that info came from. My guess is that it might have broken up after Pastran ejected, or broke up on impact. I wonder then, did the Royal Navy find some wreckage from it? Is it also possible (bear with me here, total civvie question) that radio transmissions could have been interecepted? I ask this because Pastran was captured shortly afterwards, and I wonder if the RN knew he had ejected? Sharkey Ward talks about the 'muerta negra' transmissions in his book, so perhaps RN personnel heard that Pastran was ejecting...

[Creaking Door]

Originally Posted by Griffiths911

Sadly, I did not save that email, however, I am sure I sent a copy to Creaking Door who was pivotal in getting my letter printed in FlyPast, he may recall reading it or indeed still have a copy?

I remember the e-mail but I’m not sure if I still have a copy.....I’ll have to check.

[Creaking Door]

Originally Posted by nazca_steve

I had no idea that B-108 was potentially severed in two by the Sea Dart, in fact I'm curious to know where that info came from.

You may be surprised to learn that many British surface-to-air missiles are designed to cut-up the airframes of their targets. This is achieved with a ‘continuous-rod’ type of warhead which I believe Sea Dart carries; Sea Slug mark 2 certainly carried such a warhead (with only about 25kg of explosive compared to over 90kg in the blast type warhead of of Sea Slug mark 1).

I think I’m also right in saying that the shot-down Argentine Learjet had its tail cut-off by the Sea Dart fired by HMS Exeter.

Originally Posted by nazca_steve

I ask this because Pastran was captured shortly afterwards, and I wonder if the RN knew he had ejected?

If I remember correctly his capture came as something of a surprise to British forces.

[Griffiths911]

Originally Posted by nazca_steve

Fascinating information from all involved and has cleared up a lot of my questions about this incident, even if the jury is still, and potentially always will be, out on what exactly was fired at who.

I had no idea that B-108 was potentially severed in two by the Sea Dart, in fact I'm curious to know where that info came from. My guess is that it might have broken up after Pastran ejected, or broke up on impact. I wonder then, did the Royal Navy find some wreckage from it? Is it also possible (bear with me here, total civvie question) that radio transmissions could have been interecepted? I ask this because Pastran was captured shortly afterwards, and I wonder if the RN knew he had ejected? Sharkey Ward talks about the 'muerta negra' transmissions in his book, so perhaps RN personnel heard that Pastran was ejecting...

To be quite frank there is no speculation on the Royal Navy side about who shot at who that night. There is some mystery as to why HMS Penelope's crew perceived that an air to surface missile had attacked them but that apart the rest is very simple. One Seadart missile was fired by the only Seadart fitted ship within range of the attacking bomber formation and escorts (let us not loose sight of their mission that night) and that ship was HMS Cardiff. Some of my memories that relate to that night/morning are bound to be flawed but not the fact that Cardiff shot down B-108 with a single Seadart at a range of 32nm. I so am confident of this I could bet my life on it.

I cannot recall where I got the information about our Seadart breaking B-108 in two but the impact speed combined with the expanding rods mentioned by Creaking Door would have caused a fair bit of damage. I would be interested to hear, in his own words what Captain Pastran experienced when his aircraft was struck.

I have no idea if our Comms Tech boys were listening to the Arg pilots, sorry.

Interesting questions.

[nazca_steve]

Thanks to Creaking Door and Griffiths for their details on missile design, again, had no idea about that. Therefore it does appear highly likely it was severed at some point, but I'm not sure when.

Regarding Capt. Pastran's personal account, it makes an interesting read if you have 'Wings of Fame' Vol.17, which has a detailed article on FAA Canberras and several accounts of their missions. I've been in contact with the sons of a few of the pilots/navigators who are still well connected, so there is a chance I might get hold of Capt. Pastran if he wants to talk.

He said there was an explosive decompression after the initial impact, so if it wasn't completely severed, it certainly was in a bad way. There is speculation that Capt. Casado's seat was damaged by the impact as well, as he had told Pastran that he was "trying to eject but it's stuck". The account runs that Pastran tried to buy time for Casado to eject, but around 10,000ft it started spiralling, and after the third spin, Pastran realised he had to leave, telling Casado the same, but received no reply. He was knocked unconscious by the ejection, but woke up shortly before he hit the water. That cannot have been pleasant at all, waking up to hit the freezing south atlantic, but he was lucky enough to inflate his raft after a bit of trouble.

I suppose we'll never know exactly what happened to Capt. Casado during that descent, but the fact that some of his remains were recovered implies B-108 might have broken up prior to hitting the sea. These remains, as you may have read, were rightfully returned to his family late last year.

Interesting that it was a suprise when he was captured. By all accounts he was lucky to make ejecting from a spiralling aircraft at night into the freezing sea.

[Griffiths911]

Do you know where B-108 came down and also the location where the partial remains of Captain Casado were found?

On my second deployment to the Falklands in 1982 I went ashore on Lively Island and was shown part of an undercarriage that the locals said was from a downed Argentine Canberra. They told us the Canberra crashed with such force the earth shook noticeably. Can they be right about it being a Canberra? Did any other Argentine aircraft crash on Lively Island?

Did you know that Cardiff's pennant number was D108?

[Creaking Door]

Originally Posted by nazca_steve

Fascinating information from all involved and has cleared up a lot of my questions about this incident, even if the jury is still, and potentially always will be, out on what exactly was fired at who.

Why should the jury still be out? In my opinion this incident has got to be one of the most clear-cut engagements of the conflict.

There is no dispute about the Argentine aircraft involved or in the loss of a single aircraft, Canberra B-108. There is no dispute that this Canberra was brought down by a Sea Dart missile or the Type-42 destroyer HMS Cardiff was within range at the time and fired at least one Sea Dart.

Conflicting accounts suggest that more than one Sea Dart was fired at elements of the formation, possibly by HMS Exeter, but no account suggests that any other aircraft was damaged in any way. However the suggestion that HMS Exeter also engaged the formation conflicts with accounts that she was out of range acting as picket to the carrier battle group.

What of the other ‘sightings’ made during this engagement? Aircrew reported seeing Sea Dart (or other missiles) and flak fired at them. Ships crews reported seeing missiles impacting the sea close to them. The fog of war?

Nothing really ‘concrete’ in these sightings, and wasn’t it dark? British aircrew repeatedly misidentified what they saw during this conflict, in many cases ‘seeing’ what they expected (or feared) to see. Was this another case of the same?

[nazca_steve]

Chaps, there's some confusion here. I didn't mean the jury was out on B-108 being shot down by Exeter's Sea Dart, not for a second. What I was saying was that there exists confusion about the reported sightings of what else was fired. Basically what Creaking Door summed up in his last post. The fog of war compounded by a night op means that there might be certain beliefs on the Argentine side that more than one missile went up, despite what concrete evidence exists on the Brit side.

Anyway, I'm not on here to ruffle any feathers about that, I am really more interested in the downing of B-108. To answer Griffith's question on where it crashed, I don't know exactly, but I believe it was south of Fitz Roy but I will check. Very interesting about that undercarriage part found on Lively Island. Did it look anything like a Canberra u/c part? If the locals heard and felt an impact, it kind of thickens the plot, since I thought it crashed into the sea...perhaps parts ended up on land. When were deployed for the second time? The reports say Casasdo's remains were found in '86, but I have yet to find where.

D-108...nope, didn't know that, what an eerie co-incidence.

[nazca_steve]

OK, I managed to track down this article in spanish describing what appears to have been an article based on an interview with the late Capitan Roberto Pastran (died in 2005, I had no idea):

http://www.aveguema.org.ar/Gacetas%2...%20derribo.doc

I would run it through Google translate, unless your spanish is good. The article confirms however, that at least up until Pastran's ejection, the plane was intact, albeit on fire, as he was able to throttle down and deploy airbrakes. My guess is that the nav's compartment was a mess, as the glow of fire was visible to the pilot, implying the rear pressure bulkhead had ruptured, behind which the No.1 fuel tank was burning. It is someways a miracle it did not explode in mid-air.

It also confirms that no one was looking for him, and he himself signalled a chopper upon the point of exhaustion, and who can blame him?

[Griffiths911]

I think we deployed late December 1982. I really could not tell you what a Canberra undercarriage looks like therefore I didn't know what I was looking at back then.

Don't get too drawn in by the Lively Island thing. I have asked Falkland Islanders via the SAMA82 site if they knew anyone still alive who lived on Lively Island in 1982 (Falkland Islanders move around a bit) and if any are found could they ask them about a possible Canberra crash. I got nothing back that indicated anyone had any information about a Canberra crash on Lively Island, also, one would expect to have seen a picture of the wreckage on the internet by now.

nazca-steve, don't take this the wrong way but I get the feeling that no matter what evidence is produced about various disputed engagements there will be no way of persuading the Argentinean military, past and present, that the official post combat reports by the pilots of the day were, in some cases fundamentally flawed. Even today twenty-seven years on Argentina cannot accept that an Exocet did not damage HMS Invincible.

That aside, I am more than happy to discuss what I remember about my time back then.

Call me Ken or Griffiths911...Griffiths is my surname and you are giving me flashbacks to my very junior navy service.

[nazca_steve]

Nice to 'officially' meet you, Ken, no more Griffiths again. I'm Steve for the record as well

Regarding Argentine claims, no offence taken at all, and your example of the so-called Invincible damage is spot-on and I have read several accounts where Brit authors and personnel have argued this incessantly with Argentine servicemen to no avail. It has become lore for them and that's fine, no harm done in my mind really.

Thanks for checking on the SAMA82 site about Lively Island. It turns out the remains of Capt. Casado that were found in '86 were on a beach, so in all likelihood, the plane did indeed crash into the sea, even if scattered wreckage may have hit land. I talked to Sharkey Ward about this last summer and he recalls something about Canberra wreckage being found on somewhere on East Falkland (!) so it would be nice to get to the bottom of it.

[santiagorivas]

Hi guys, although I'm not a veteran of the conflict, I investigated a lot about it as an aviation researcher from Argentina and since I arrive to this forum some days ago I followed this thread, which is very interesting. I see Mr. Griffiths' stories of too much interest, as from all the other participants. I had the pleasure to interview Pastrán in 1999 for an article about the Canberra. He was an excellent guy and when he told me the story of this last mission he was almost crying, remembering how his best friend died. He told me he felt the missile hit the bomb bay and that maybe damaged Casado's seat. He waited for him, but when he was at 10,000 feet he said to Casado: "I have to leave you", and then he ejected.
I also interviewed Nogueira, who also passed away some time ago. He doesn't talked too much but he told me about that missile that almost destroys his plane. He described almost the same that was posted here, that he saw the missiles and started to turn, when he heard an explosion and saw that his wingtip was severely damaged. First he decided to try to land at BAM Malvinas, because he thought his wouldn't be able to fly to Trelew. Then he saw that handling was still good and returned with the other planes.
Now I'm arranging a new meeting with Comodoro Vivas, who was also a Canberra pilot during the war. I'm in contact with him because he is writing the official story of the FAA's attack planes through history and I'm helping him. In the last meeting we talked briefly about the war, as we talked more on Avro Lincolns and Lancasters.
He has a lot of knowledge about the Chaff/ flare dispensers done during the war for the Canberras and Learjets. The chaff were made cutting aluminium plates with a spaghetti machine.
I'm also in contact with Brigadier Chevallier, who also was a Canberra pilot on the war, but now he is the Joint Chieff of Staff of the Armed Forces and is very difficult to ask him for time to talk about the Canberras. He really loved the plane and was responsible for extending the life of the planes from 1998 to 2000.

[santiagorivas]

Hi guys, although I'm not a veteran of the conflict, I investigated a lot about it as an aviation researcher from Argentina and since I arrive to this forum some days ago I followed this thread, which is very interesting. I see Mr. Griffiths' stories of too much interest, as from all the other participants. I had the pleasure to interview Pastrán in 1999 for an article about the Canberra. He was an excellent guy and when he told me the story of this last mission he was almost crying, remembering how his best friend died. He told me he felt the missile hit the bomb bay and that maybe damaged Casado's seat. He waited for him, but when he was at 10,000 feet he said to Casado: "I have to leave you", and then he ejected.
I also interviewed Nogueira, who also passed away some time ago. He doesn't talked too much but he told me about that missile that almost destroys his plane. He described almost the same that was posted here, that he saw the missiles and started to turn, when he heard an explosion and saw that his wingtip was severely damaged. First he decided to try to land at BAM Malvinas, because he thought his wouldn't be able to fly to Trelew. Then he saw that handling was still good and returned with the other planes.
Now I'm arranging a new meeting with Comodoro Vivas, who was also a Canberra pilot during the war. I'm in contact with him because he is writing the official story of the FAA's attack planes through history and I'm helping him. In the last meeting we talked briefly about the war, as we talked more on Avro Lincolns and Lancasters.
He has a lot of knowledge about the Chaff/ flare dispensers done during the war for the Canberras and Learjets. The chaff were made cutting aluminium plates with a spaghetti machine.
I'm also in contact with Brigadier Chevallier, who also was a Canberra pilot on the war, but now he is the Joint Chieff of Staff of the Armed Forces and is very difficult to ask him for time to talk about the Canberras. He really loved the plane and was responsible for extending the life of the planes from 1998 to 2000.
Here I also add a picture taken by me on March 15th, 1999, during the withdrawal ceremony of the old A-4B and A-4C Skyhawks. On that day I flew on Learjet serial T-22 with the two Canberras, B-101 and B-109. This was almost the last flight of the Canberras, the Learjet and me, as we were very close for a collision minutes before the flypast, when we went down with the Learjet and reduced power, but the pilot didn't advice the Canberra pilots.
I hope I can help you with the information I have about the conflict. I'm very interested on the British points of view and experiences. Also the information posted by Rey del Castillo and the other guys from my country is very interesting for me.

Best regards

Santiago Rivas

[nazca_steve]

Hello Santiago,

really good to hear from you on here, I will check tonight, but perhaps that was your article in Wings of Fame that I read. The story about Capt. Pastran is extremely moving, and one can only imagine how hard that must have been, and how he must have felt in following years prior to his death.

I would like to talk to you in more detail about your interviews with the 'Canberristas' and will PM you accordingly, as I probably have already strayed a touch too far from the original 'Falklands What If' thread topic on this.

Many thanks for getting in touch and best regards to you.

Steve

[santiagorivas]

Dear Steve, don't hesitate to contact me of PM. The article on Wings of Fame was written with me together with Juan Carlos Cicalesi and Salvador Mafe Huertas in 1999. This month a new version is going to be published on Brazilian magazine Asas.

Best regards

Santiago

[nazca_steve]

Great stuff, Santiago, hats off to you and your colleagues for that superb article. I have now sent you a PM.

[jualbo]

Hi again.

There is a report of a wreckage in Lively islands. It was fuel drop tanks from the Dagger of Ardiles. He probably jettisoned them before combat against Penfold-Hale.

Griffiths911, I saw the correction you made to Cardiff position on map during 13th june night. In that place, Penelope and the ferry would have to locate at Berkeley Sound, closer to shore in order to see the Sea Dart in his way towards the Canberra and confuse it with a hostile one.

In major Sánchez account of facts, there is a mention to an erratic missile, and a volley of two right towards him. Do you think that Rapier missiles from Fitzroy could play into action that night?. Or well, did he see Sea Cats from Penelope? During 13th june A-4B raid against Thomson HQ in Two Sisters area there is a report to Rapier launchings, so may be they also could be fired. In all cases, argentineans planes were out of range for that SAMs (Rapier and Sea Cat).

Santiago, welcome to the forum.
Rivas, Cicalesi and Núñez Padín are one of the most considered argentinean air historicians. Salvador Mafé, my spanish compatriot, is also an expert in Falklands war. He has published many articles about the conflict in spanish and foreign magazines.

On 1st may I think the first trio of Canberras were not fired missiles. On HMS Yarmouth and Brilliant webpages there are reports of chaff rockets launchings at the time of Canberra sorrrounding (probably feared an Exocet attack). Perhaps they were confused with SAM and then turned violently scrapping the waves and deflecting the wingtip. The sound he heard could be the impact against sea. What do you think? Is there any photo of that wing after landing at Puerto Deseado? I listened some opinions from argentineans in the way that the damage seemed as caused by an impact not by a explotion.

The second trio was intercepted just 24 miles from Invincible according to Ward. Do you think they made an erroneous northern navigation than the first trio (in both cases the target were the same suposed british landing ships in Berkeley Sound) that guided them in the Task Force heart?
May be Ward is wrong in the distance? Such a number of miles from a carrier would be where type 42 were suposed to be and argentinean pilots didn´t watch them. What do you think?

Regards

[santiagorivas]

Hi Jualbo, thanks for your opinion about us. About the 1st of May, I'm trying to see which ships they encountered, if were was the ships looking for the ARA San Luis or if was the Invincible group, that was to the north of the islands and very close to the route of the bombers. The planes were arriving from the north- northwest, from Trelew and Nogueira told he saw missiles fired towards him from the front of a ship (possibly a Sea Dart from a Type 42 or a Sea Wolf almost out of range from a type 22). I don't think they hit the water, as the wing damaged was the one that was higher on his turn. Sadly there are no photos about this damage. I think it was a Sea Dart, as the Sea Wolf was first fired on May 12th and was very accurate, the Sea Dart only hit the target in the cases when the target didn't see the missile before impact (example: the Learjet T-24 or Canberra B-108).

[Creaking Door]

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

I think it was a Sea Dart, as the Sea Wolf was first fired on May 12th and was very accurate...

The first Sea Dart missiles fired during the conflict were the two (or three) missiles fired by HMS Coventry on 9th May.

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

...the Sea Dart only hit the target in the cases when the target didn't see the missile before impact (example: the Learjet T-24 or Canberra B-108).

I’m not sure I would agree with that statement; many Sea Dart launches were made at extreme range when the actions of the target made little difference to the outcome of the engagement, but generally if a target was within range and the Sea Dart system functioned correctly the target was destroyed.

[santiagorivas]

In the cases of kills by Sea Dart, in all cases the pilots didn't react to the missiles.
The first one was the Puma helicopter on 9th of May, the second was the A-4B Skyhawk of Lt Palaver, the third one was the A-4C Skyhawk of Lt García both on May 25th. On May 30 the A-4Cs of Lt Vázquez and Castillo were shot down by Exeter during the attack on HMS Invincible.
The same ship shot down the Learjet T-24 and the last was the Canberra.
In all this cases the pilots didn't realize they were under attack. In the Invincible mission, the survivor A-4C pilots, Ureta and Isaac, told they didn't saw the Exeter nor the missiles approaching. Also in the case of Palaver and García, they didn't saw the missile coming: Palaver survived the impact and tried to return to his base, but the airplane was losing fuel and fell into the sea.
In the case of the T-24, the crew of the other Learjet saw the missile seconds before impact and they said they avoided a second missile fired upon them.
The Canberra pilots said they avoided Sea Darts fired during the night missions on June 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th and 12th. On June 5th, the B-101 was almost shot down by a missile that passed very close and made the pilot (1st Lt Mauad) to lose control of the plane. When the pilot landed he went off the runway and caused minor damage to the plane. This was one of the radar equipped Canberras.
Also was the case of the Boeing 707, although in this case the missiles were fired very far, but one exploded very close to the tail of the plane.
Also on may 9th two Learjets (callsign Pepe, sadly I don't have the serials of those planes as they are not stated on the FAA records) on a diversion flight to the islands, simulating an attack mission, at 10:30AM local time saw two missiles coming towards them and manoeuvered succesfully to avoid them. Those were the first two missiles fired by HMS Coventry.
As Nogueira said the missile was fired from the front of the ship and they were not very close, I think it was a Sea Dart.
In the case of the Sea Wolf, none pilot said it could be avoided and most missiles fired hit their targets.

[nazca_steve]

Very interesting, Santiago, regarding B-101 on June 5th. I had no idea that it had such a Sea Dart encounter, and thought that the crash was a result of a retracted main gear wheel, unless that it is what you implied. I would be very interested to hear more on what happened to Lt. Mauad if you have anything more on him.

I know I might have asked it here or elsewhere before, but given that the radome as in place, did B-101 actually use the Pelicano radar during its brief combat ops, or was it deactivated prior to the conflict? Also, did B-104 have it installed during the conflict? I have seen a photo of it installed in July '82 at Rio Gallegos (prior to its crash in which Tejada and Cooke were killed) and wondered if this re-fitted post conflict or not?

[Creaking Door]

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

As Nogueira said the missile was fired from the front of the ship and they were not very close, I think it was a Sea Dart.

But no Sea Dart missiles were fired before 9th May so how could this be?

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

In the case of the T-24, the crew of the other Learjet saw the missile seconds before impact and they said they avoided a second missile fired upon them.

HMS Exeter did fire two missiles on this occasion but I understand there was a technical failure onboard one missile long before it could be ‘avoided’ by any other Learjet.

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

The Canberra pilots said they avoided Sea Darts fired during the night missions on June 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th and 12th. On June 5th, the B-101 was almost shot down by a missile that passed very close and made the pilot (1st Lt Mauad) to lose control of the plane. When the pilot landed he went off the runway and caused minor damage to the plane. This was one of the radar equipped Canberras.

That is interesting; were Sea Dart missiles definitely fired on all these occasions?

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

Also on may 9th two Learjets (callsign Pepe, sadly I don't have the serials of those planes as they are not stated on the FAA records) on a diversion flight to the islands, simulating an attack mission, at 10:30AM local time saw two missiles coming towards them and manoeuvered succesfully to avoid them. Those were the first two missiles fired by HMS Coventry.

I didn’t know that Learjet decoy flights were flown to the point that they could be engaged by Royal Navy warships. The time, 10:30am (Buenos Aires time?) would be fairly close to the time 14:15 Zulu (GMT) that HMS Coventry fired two or three Sea Dart missiles at a suspected C-130 with ‘escorts’. Two FAA Skyhawks and pilots were lost also on 9th May (Casco C-313 / Farias C-303) and it has been claimed that these two aircraft could have been the targets for the Sea Dart missiles fired by HMS Coventry. Do you have any information about the routing and timing of the Skyhawk mission or information about any other aircraft involved?

[Griffiths911]

Originally Posted by santiagorivas

The Canberra pilots said they avoided Sea Darts fired during the night missions on June 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th and 12th.

I think this is another case of aircrew exaggerating their post combat reports, let me explain. With reference to the night Canberra missions my ship HMS Cardiff constituted 50% of the Type 42 contingent on the dates quoted. HMS Bristol had Seadart but was not tasked with inshore night missions throughout her time down south and only one of the Type 42s were detached from picket duty at any one time.

4 June: Cardiff on NGS gunline Bluff Cove - no Seadarts fired.

12 June: Cardiff in San Carlos - no Seadarts fired.


Without looking to see where Exeter was on the other nights in question , how do you explain the airborne Seadarts on the 4th and 12th June?

[Creaking Door]

Ironically I’ve just been reading ‘Forgotten Voices of the Falklands’ (the book that prompted the start of this thread) and there are a couple of interesting accounts in there, particularly from Captain Hugh Maxwell Balfour the captain of HMS Exeter.

Following the action of 30th May he writes:

"I’d been down to ten Sea Dart missiles from twenty, and now was down to seven, and I didn’t know when I could resupply..."

Now my understanding is that HMS Exeter fired three Sea Dart missiles on 30th May, one at the Exocet which missed, and two which destroyed an A4 Skyhawk each (hence the seven remaining missiles down from the previous ten). I think I am correct in saying that a Type-42 can carry a total of twenty-two Sea Dart missiles but that two missiles are telemetry missiles that are fired at the start of a deployment to check the calibration of the Sea Dart system (hence the starting number of twenty missiles).

HMS Exeter didn’t arrive in the combat area until 21st May and didn’t shoot-down Learjet T-24 (with two missiles) until 7th June. So it would seem that HMS Exeter fired a least fifteen missiles during the conflict and had fired thirteen of these by 30th May.

That is a lot of Sea Dart missiles that are unaccounted for; the question is what were they fired at?

[santiagorivas]

[quote=Creaking Door;1359590]

HMS Exeter did fire two missiles on this occasion but I understand there was a technical failure onboard one missile long before it could be ‘avoided’ by any other Learjet.
QUOTE]

I don't know if the missile had a technical failure and I think this is almost impossible to know. The account of captain Bianco, pilot of the other Learjet, says his copilot saw the two missiles coming towards them. He advised De La Colina and he replied he also saw them and that he will start a tight turn to the left. Bianco also turned in the same moment he saw the impact on the T-24. Immediately he started to return to the mainland.

[santiagorivas]

Originally Posted by Griffiths911

I think this is another case of aircrew exaggerating their post combat reports, let me explain. With reference to the night Canberra missions my ship HMS Cardiff constituted 50% of the Type 42 contingent on the dates quoted. HMS Bristol had Seadart but was not tasked with inshore night missions throughout her time down south and only one of the Type 42s were detached from picket duty at any one time.

4 June: Cardiff on NGS gunline Bluff Cove - no Seadarts fired.

12 June: Cardiff in San Carlos - no Seadarts fired.


Without looking to see where Exeter was on the other nights in question , how do you explain the airborne Seadarts on the 4th and 12th June?

Hi, It's possible that they exaggerated. On June 5th they said they saw the missiles very close and the plane passed through the contrail of one missile losing control because of the turbulence. On June 4th Casptain Freijó, pilot of B-105 flying with callsign Puma said that after his bombing he was advertised of a PAC by the FAA radar. Later he drop chaff and by mistake also flares. He said he saw two missiles on the same moment the radar advertised that the PAC wasn't that and were the missiles they saw. If they were not missiles I don't know what did they saw. In the middle of the night it's easy to get confussed about what you see.
On the report of the 12th of June the pilots of B-108 are not clear about the presence of missiles.

[santiagorivas]

Originally Posted by Creaking Door

Ironically I’ve just been reading ‘Forgotten Voices of the Falklands’ (the book that prompted the start of this thread) and there are a couple of interesting accounts in there, particularly from Captain Hugh Maxwell Balfour the captain of HMS Exeter.

Following the action of 30th May he writes:


Now my understanding is that HMS Exeter fired three Sea Dart missiles on 30th May, one at the Exocet which missed, and two which destroyed an A4 Skyhawk each (hence the seven remaining missiles down from the previous ten). I think I am correct in saying that a Type-42 can carry a total of twenty-two Sea Dart missiles but that two missiles are telemetry missiles that are fired at the start of a deployment to check the calibration of the Sea Dart system (hence the starting number of twenty missiles).

HMS Exeter didn’t arrive in the combat area until 21st May and didn’t shoot-down Learjet T-24 (with two missiles) until 7th June. So it would seem that HMS Exeter fired a least fifteen missiles during the conflict and had fired thirteen of these by 30th May.

That is a lot of Sea Dart missiles that are unaccounted for; the question is what were they fired at?

Do they fired missiles at San Carlos?? When this ship went to San Carlos for the first time?