A most daring raid

[Big Bandit]

Anyone aware that on Sunday evening there's a documentary on Chanel 4 at 8:00 and described as;

On 30 April 1982, the RAF launched a secret mission: to fly a Vulcan bomber to the Falkland Islands and bomb Port Stanley's runway, putting it out of action for Argentine fighter jets. The safety of the British Task Force depended on its success.

However, the RAF could only get a single plane - a crumbling, Cold War-era Vulcan - 8000 miles south to the Falklands, because just one bomber needed an aerial fleet of 13 Victor tanker planes to refuel it throughout the 16-hour round-trip. At the time it was the longest-range bombing mission in history.

From start to finish, the seemingly impossible mission was a comedy of errors, held together by pluck and ingenuity.

On the brink of being scrapped, only three of the ageing nuclear bombers could be fitted out for war, one to fly the mission and two in reserve. Crucial spare parts were scavenged from museums and scrap yards - one vital component had been serving as an ashtray in the Officers' Mess.

In just three weeks, the Vulcan crews had to learn air-to-air refuelling, which they hadn't done for 20 years, and conventional bombing, which they hadn't done for 10 years either.

The RAF scoured the country for Second World War iron bombs, and complex refuelling calculations were done the night before on a £5 pocket calculator.

With a plan stretched to the limit and the RAF's hopes riding on just one Vulcan, the mission was flown on a knife-edge: fraught with mechanical failures, unreliable navigation, electrical storms and lack of fuel.

Of the 21 bombs the Vulcan dropped, only one found its target. But it was enough to change the outcome of the war.

Astonishingly, this great feat has been downplayed into near obscurity by history, but this documentary brings it back to life, providing a thrilling and uncharacteristically upbeat account from the Falklands War: the Dambusters for the 1980s generation.

May have been on before, but I've not seen it, should be good though.

Cheers,

Chris.

[Alan Cantwell]

just reading a book about the black buck missions, bought from a shop for 50p, thie above description is a TAD wrong, the vul was still in service, RAF jets where NEVER crumbling in service, and we had more than three available, but it will be a programme well worth watching,

the vulcans and victors where converted at woodford, some of the victors had been sitting for a while, the pilots where paid danger money to fly them in, some with their gear fixed down, all went on 24 hour rebuilds for black buck, were the workers valued after this? well, one guy who was heavily involved at chadderton and woodford is now our labourer at work,

[Pete B]

I'd recommend the book about this: Vulcan 607 by Rowland White. An absorbing read - the logistics involved in getting one aircraft over the target are mind-boggling!

Pete

[Alan Cantwell]

PETE, thats the very book i am reading, it starts with the pilots going to compete in red flag in LA, and flying below the level of the grand canyon!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Reno Racer]

Both historically and during the battle, the bombing mission by the Vulcan was a tactical failure.

The resources used to get the Black Buck raid over the Falklands did not return any tangible tactical affect on the battle; only 1 bomb hit the runway, which in any case could have been repaired in a few days, if not the next day.

Similarly, it did nothing to affect the ability of the Argintine AF to interdict and strike at RN warships and disembarking ground troops within the exculsion zone and more particulary within the Falkand Sound; they were all flying from the Argentinian mainland, only Pucarras were flying from Pebble island and Stanley and most had already been destroyed by the famed SAS raid.

However, strategically was a huge success; the demonstration that we can take a tactical bomber from the UK and hit targets in the Falklands meant we could also do the same in Argentina and not be limited by the range of the only jets we had in the exclusion zone - the FRS1 Sea Harrier. Like the prescence of our Nuclear Subs, it put a fear into the Argentinian military junta leadership, which kept the battles focus a purely tactical one based in the Falklands islands.

I'm not taking anything away from the achievement of all the crews and support that enabled the Black Buck raids; indeed at a time when we had just slashed our military forces, mothballed Phantom and Buccaneer equipped Carriers and cut the Army, we had quite a bit of inventive 'make do and mend' solutions to ensure victory.

That said, like the Bravo Two Zero story, the cold hard facts do not sell books or TV/Films.

Edited By Christian Ackroyd on 14/03/2012 23:29:10

Edited By Christian Ackroyd on 14/03/2012 23:30:49

[Big Bandit]

Hi Pete,

I read that one last year, might be worth another read.

Cheers,

Chris.

[Daithi O Buitigh]

On a slightly different note, I was told by a guy who was a member of the grey funnel line back then that it was decided to get some Gannets out of mothballs to serve as anti-submarine and reconnaissence - then they realised they hadn't got a carrier that could launch them

[andy watson]

Alan- I could have saved you 50p! I read the book whilst researching the Vulcan for my build.

Whilst describing the Vulcans as crumbling is probably overstating it, they were being run down with a view to ending their commision. The main issue was the air to air refueling, which had been basically decided to be redundant. This means that when it was suddenly needed there were no trained crews, but also much of the required bits of the plane had been removed, and considerable scaveging was required to make them operational.

Christian- I have to disagree with you. The raid was a great success for a number of reasons.

Firstly as you said- it showed the Argentinians that we were prepared and capable of striking directly at the Falklands (and therefore Argentina itself). However it was also a tactical success in that the Argentinians changed their decision to base their fast jets on the Falklands as a result of the raid. Partly because the repairs made to the runway were not deemed strong enough to take the stresses of the jets taking off and landing, and partly because the jets would have been "in harms way". This decision ultimately gave Britain air superiority in the conflict.

[Mowerman]

So if the Argies invade Tomorow we have -

No Vulcans, No Carriers, No Harriers. - No Hope.

Just a bunch of short sighted polliticians.

[Wingman]

We have nuclear subs using stand-off pin-point accurate weapons - no need to for a task force now.

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Mowerman on 15/03/2012 08:49:41:

So if the Argies invade Tomorow we have -

No Vulcans, No Carriers, No Harriers. - No Hope.

Just a bunch of short sighted polliticians.

 

Also I think a couple of Tornado's could take out the runway much more effectivelly than a Vulcan, plus Tornados are equipped with air to air refuelling. But it would probably be more effectrive to do the job with a couple of missles or even using an unmanned drone.

 

Part of the reason the Argies invaded the Falklands in the first place was because they were poorly defended and political think at the time was that they wouldn't be invaded, we now keep some fast jets and a naval prescence in the South Atlantic as a deterrent, probably more cost effective than having to retake them. The biggest mistake first time around was to leave them vunerable.

Looking forward to the program though, the book was a great read.

Edited By Frank Skilbeck on 15/03/2012 09:50:49

[Daithi O Buitigh]

Weren't there nuclear subs with guidance systems the last time too (think Belgrano)?

Besides which - how man troops can fit in a submarine for a land invasion?

Also, if I recall correctly, the British government sat on its hands despite all the warning signs (the 'occupation' of S Georgia was quite some time before the 'invasion'. There was plenty of time toi send troops before it actually happened. Additionally, James Callaghan pointed out that it had been tried once before - and they discreetly sent reinforcements. For some reason the government at that time knew what was coming (heck even the dogs in the street could see it) but did squat and allowed it to happen. Maybe I'm just cynical regarding politicians, but wasn't an election due shortly the time the task force was sent?

Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 15/03/2012 09:55:03

[Steve Hargreaves - Moderator]

& four Typhoons stationed down there as well.....but I think its certainly true that if Argentina did invade we would be very hard pressed to evict them this time around......maybe France would lend us a carrier or two.....

[Vinno]

Posted by Steve Hargreaves - Moderator on 15/03/2012 09:53:07:

maybe France would lend us a carrier or two.....

 

...doubt it , they'd be too busy selling them arms like last time, despite any EU/UN sanctions.......

 

 

Edited By Vinno on 15/03/2012 10:27:39

[Terry Walters]

Posted by Vinno on 15/03/2012 10:18:53:

Posted by Steve Hargreaves - Moderator on 15/03/2012 09:53:07:

maybe France would lend us a carrier or two.....

...doubt it , they'd be too busy selling them arms like last time, despite any EU/UN sanctions.......

Edited By Vinno on 15/03/2012 10:27:39

WOT! After last Sunday!???? Has Ireland got any carriers? (A/c carriers that is not Ryanair!) We could arrange to lose to them this w/e as a friendly gesture?

Read Vulcan 607 - it is a great read and when you read Max Hastings revised Falklands War as well then you realise just how easy it would have been to lose te war.

Terry

[Steve Hargreaves - Moderator]

There was a wonderful quote from Nicholas Sarkozy when they agreed to share the carriers between France & the UK which I can''t find now but to paraphrase when Sarkozy was pressed about how France would respond to a possible British need for carriers he said something like "Can you honestly imagine a situation where our British allies are in need of support & France would simply sit on her hands & do nothing?" & I thought..."er yes I can......"

[Daithi O Buitigh]

Irish carriers? The Irish Navy could take on any navy in the world and beat them (the other side would run out of fuel trying to FIND the Irish navy)

[Lee Smalley]

The detachment we now have on the Falklands is far stronger than it was in 82 we have modern fast jets that would wipe the floor with their ageing mirages plus we have a modern air defence system now, their ships would get no where near the island before our hunter killer subs sank more than enough to warrant it being suicide, so don't panic the argies are not that daft anymore

[Lee Smalley]

It's a great book 607 and it will be a good programe to watch, but we do need a carrier, the Tories eh some idiots voted for em!

[Daithi O Buitigh]

The 'hunter-killers? All ONE of them?

HMS Astute is the only one in service - Ambush is on sea trials and won't be in service until 2013, Artful, Audacious and Anson are still under construction while Agamemnon is 'on order, long lead orders placed' and Ajax is confirmed - but not ordered.

The older Swiftsure and Trafalgar class boats are already decommissioned

Oh, and the FAA is also equipped with A-4AR Fightinghawks

Rule number one in tactics - NEVER underestimate the opposition (and the corollary is never overestimate your own resources)

Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 15/03/2012 12:28:23

[Big Bandit]

Posted by Lee Smalley on 15/03/2012 12:02:52:
It's a great book 607 and it will be a good programe to watch, but we do need a carrier, the Tories eh some idiots voted for em!

Not me Guvnor .

[Erfolg]

I did think that Christian was making the point that raid did achieve success at the strategic level. Putting the Argentians in the position of needing to readdress what ever their plans were.

It is the same reason that Churchill made a bombing raid on Berlin, there would invariably be a resetting of priorities and evaluation of potential risks and disposition of assets.

If the Argentians had been fully aware of the situation, they may have ignored the raid, on the basis that any repeat would almost certainly fail, where ever directed and very little damage would be materially achieved (although politically may have been another matter).

I guess that cruise type missiles were not available in the 80's? As they would seem to more effective, at lower cost.

With respect to Aircraft Carriers, as long as the opposition has no effective Navy, Airforce or Missile systems, they may be safe to wander the world unsupported. In any other case they do need a massive support infrastructure to ensure there continued existence. Can the UK afford to spend so much of its income on such an weapon system (as a system it is).

I do believe that the Falkland Islanders do deserve to decide their own future, which we should support for both historical and ethical reasons. It does seem incongruous that all nations do not see it is unacceptable for any country to make spurious claims such as the Argentian, are many not really Democracies?

[Keiran Arnold]

The Vulcans carried out a total of 5 missions during the falklands including 2 skrike ARM missions (with some sucess).

Tornado was still too new for the govenment to risk while Buccaneers did not have the oil capacity for the distance.

AGM 86A cruise missiles were just becomming available but the US was unlikely to let use the (unlike the latest AIM9L sidewinders which they sent straight to the FAA)

Edited By Keiran Arnold on 15/03/2012 13:54:27

Edited By Keiran Arnold on 15/03/2012 14:05:43

[Simon Chaddock]

Well done Kieran! Yes there were indeed five missions.

Each was a miracle of air refueliing logistics with tankers refuelling tankers. No less than 11 Victor tanker sorties were required to complete one Vulcan mission.

Only one mission was not fully completed when the Vulcan broke its refuelling probe on the return leg and had to land in Brazil. It was allowed to leave after 9 days although its one remaining Shrike anti radar missile was confiscated.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]