F15E's trounced by Eurofighters

Guy Alcala twisted the electrons to say:
One bomb from the Vulcan.

Well it's pretty much typical (IMHO) of Evan Brennan to make much of the
solitary bomb hit from the (3?) Vulcan raids - the reasons for which have
been well covered in in smn before - however it did occur to me that it's
curious that he regards the Vulcan raids as ineffective, yet believes
that Argentina held its Mirages back for air-defence of the mainland.
(Where they worried about ineffective raids on Argentina perhaps? :-)

[Guy: Obviously, risks worth taking in landing on a rough runway
during the war wouldn't be taken afterwards. One of the Argentine
C-130s almost crashed on takeoff during the war when a main gear wheel
hit the corner of the roughly-repaired Vulcan crater].

I think another possible factor is the differing fuel loads for a C-130
doing Stanley - Argentina, as opposed to Stanley - Wideawake ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

Alistair Gunn wrote in message ...
Guy Alcala twisted the electrons to say:
One bomb from the Vulcan.

Well it's pretty much typical (IMHO) of Evan Brennan to make much of the
solitary bomb hit from the (3?) Vulcan raids - the reasons for which have
been well covered in in smn before - however it did occur to me that it's
curious that he regards the Vulcan raids as ineffective, yet believes
that Argentina held its Mirages back for air-defence of the mainland.
(Where they worried about ineffective raids on Argentina perhaps? :-)

He is a bit inconsistent;-) BTW, my ability to respond will be
limited for a few days. My 11 year-old monitor died Sunday evening,
going out in a blaze of glory. Well, maybe not glory, but let's just
say that seeing flames light up the computer case beside (and wall
behind) it convinced me that it was time for a replacement ;-)

[Guy: Obviously, risks worth taking in landing on a rough runway
during the war wouldn't be taken afterwards. One of the Argentine
C-130s almost crashed on takeoff during the war when a main gear wheel
hit the corner of the roughly-repaired Vulcan crater].

I think another possible factor is the differing fuel loads for a C-130
doing Stanley - Argentina, as opposed to Stanley - Wideawake ...

Possible, although the Argentine a/c were carrying much heavier cargo
loads into Stanley while going light on fuel. Fursdon, who flew down
from Ascension in July, flew in one of the probe and auxiliary-tank
modified C-130s. The forward part of the cabin was almost full of two
cylindrical fuel tanks, leaving just enough room on either side for
pax in the fold-up seats, while the rear was carrying cargo and pax.
It was also necessary for the a/c to tank twice on the way down, to
give them enough fuel in case they had to abort the mission for
weather and return to Ascension. The trip was about 14 hours one-way,
and one of the RAF loadmasters told Fursdon that one of the a/c had
required three round-trips before it was finally able to land at
Stanley, aborting over the airfield on both of the incomplete
missions. 28 hours straight in a Herc would tax just about any
passenger, and to have to do it three times in a short period would
definitely not be on my wish list.

Guy

Guy Alcala wrote in message ...
One of the Argentine C-130s almost crashed on takeoff during the war when a
main gear wheel hit the corner of the roughly-repaired Vulcan crater]


"Almost" crashed? How many Harriers have almost crashed?

Spin Doctor Guy Alcala has again left out a number of inconvenient
facts -- thirty-three inconvenient facts, in this case. Between May
1st and June 13th, 1982, Argentine C-130 Hercules transports operated
33 flights into the airfield at Port Stanley, carrying 434 tons of
cargo and 514 personnel. They also managed to evacuate 264 wounded.
Evidently, the crater was not quite the detriment you and the RAF
would like us to believe.


"The focus now turned on the southern part of the runway which included one huge crater made
by the RAF Vulcan's 1,000 lb. bomb. This alone took more than 1,000 square meters of the old
Argentine AM2 matting to repair. 'We were in fact really very relieved that only one Vulcan
bomb had actually hit the runway', said a weary Sapper.


Maybe you and Alistair Gunn should pass around a collection plate to
have the crater enshrined.

Possible, although the Argentine a/c were carrying much heavier cargo
loads into Stanley while going light on fuel. Fursdon, who flew down
from Ascension in July, flew in one of the probe and auxiliary-tank
modified C-130s. The forward part of the cabin was almost full of two
cylindrical fuel tanks, leaving just enough room on either side for
pax in the fold-up seats, while the rear was carrying cargo and pax.
It was also necessary for the a/c to tank twice on the way down, to
give them enough fuel in case they had to abort the mission for
weather and return to Ascension. The trip was about 14 hours one-way,
and one of the RAF loadmasters told Fursdon that one of the a/c had
required three round-trips before it was finally able to land at
Stanley, aborting over the airfield on both of the incomplete
missions. 28 hours straight in a Herc would tax just about any
passenger, and to have to do it three times in a short period would
definitely not be on my wish list.

Guy

It is fascinating that the only supply chain for spares to the task force in
1982 was to fly the spare part to Wideawake, then do the 28 hour round trip
by C130 (with multiple refuelings from Victors) to drop the part in a water
tight bag (and float) to be picked up by a RN helo and transfered to the
required ship!! It was of note that the maximum speed of the C130 was below
the stall speed of a Victor unless both were in a dive - so that's how you
refueled. The RN was kept fully operational in this manner with no ships
falling out of the line for lack of spares! It is a bit like invading Japan
from California with only the Midway airfield available in the middle!

David

On 30 Mar 2004 19:31:11 -0800, (Guy alcala)
wrote:

He is a bit inconsistent;-) BTW, my ability to respond will be
limited for a few days. My 11 year-old monitor died Sunday evening,
going out in a blaze of glory. Well, maybe not glory, but let's just
say that seeing flames light up the computer case beside (and wall
behind) it convinced me that it was time for a replacement ;-)

Typically spurious rationale advanced to justify further
slef-indulgent PC equipment purchases to a sceptical wife. We've all
been there. Extra marks for the flames though - very convincing
touch.

Gavin Bailey

--

Now see message: "Boot sector corrupt. System halted. All data lost."
Spend thousands of dollar on top grade windows system. Result better
than expected. What your problem? - Bart Kwan En

(Guy alcala) wrote:

28 hours straight in a Herc would tax just about any
passenger, and to have to do it three times in a short period would
definitely not be on my wish list.

Guy

I'll say!...we occasionally did it on Argus but that a/c is
designed for that kind of thing...bunks and easy-chairs etc.
--

-Gord.

On 30 Mar 2004 21:26:39 -0800, (Evan Brennan)
wrote:

Guy Alcala wrote in message ...
One of the Argentine C-130s almost crashed on takeoff during the war when a
main gear wheel hit the corner of the roughly-repaired Vulcan crater]


"Almost" crashed? How many Harriers have almost crashed?

Spin Doctor Guy Alcala has again left out a number of inconvenient
facts -- thirty-three inconvenient facts, in this case. Between May
1st and June 13th, 1982, Argentine C-130 Hercules transports operated
33 flights into the airfield at Port Stanley, carrying 434 tons of
cargo and 514 personnel. They also managed to evacuate 264 wounded.
Evidently, the crater was not quite the detriment you and the RAF
would like us to believe.

Don't talk tosh - Guy specifically stated that the runway was still
useable....

"The Argentinians had temporarily back-filled the five large craters,
enabling them to continue to fly in C-130 Hercules transports right up
to the end"

Neither did he leave out many facts in a detailed description of the
damage to the runway and the repairs to it.

SO you're the one doing the spin doctoring.......as usual.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster

(Evan Brennan) wrote in message om...
Guy Alcala wrote in message ...
One of the Argentine C-130s almost crashed on takeoff during the war when a
main gear wheel hit the corner of the roughly-repaired Vulcan crater]


"Almost" crashed? How many Harriers have almost crashed?

Spin Doctor Guy Alcala has again left out a number of inconvenient
facts -- thirty-three inconvenient facts, in this case. Between May
1st and June 13th, 1982, Argentine C-130 Hercules transports operated
33 flights into the airfield at Port Stanley, carrying 434 tons of
cargo and 514 personnel. They also managed to evacuate 264 wounded.
Evidently, the crater was not quite the detriment you and the RAF
would like us to believe.

Even, you really need to take off your dark goggles occasionally. You
might then have less trouble reading the portion of my post
immediately preceding the part which you quoted out of context, to
wit:

"During the campaign the runway had been cratered by the Vulcan bomber
and Harrier raids, and had suffered over 1,000 'scabs' or shallow
scuffs in its surface. The Argentinians had temporarily back-filled
the five large craters [Guy: 1 deep one by Vulcan, the other four
shallower, by retard bombs dropped by SHAR/GR.3], enabling them to
continue to fly in C-130 Hercules transports right up to the end.
They had also arranged rings of earth on the runway
to show up as craters on British air reconnaissance photos.

"By properly repairing three craters and dealing with about 500
'scabs', No. 1 Troop of 59 Commando Squadron Royal Engineers had the
northern half of the runway ready to accept the first British Hercules
on 24 June [Guy: Obviously, risks worth taking in landing on a rough
runway during the war wouldn't be taken afterwards."

Which part of this, especially the note in the last sentence, did you
have problems comprehending?

"The focus now turned on the southern part of the runway which included one huge crater made
by the RAF Vulcan's 1,000 lb. bomb. This alone took more than 1,000 square meters of the old
Argentine AM2 matting to repair. 'We were in fact really very relieved that only one Vulcan
bomb had actually hit the runway', said a weary Sapper.


Maybe you and Alistair Gunn should pass around a collection plate to
have the crater enshrined.

Why would we need to do so? The only reason either of us mentioned it
was because you were referencing an anecdotal quote provided by Moro;
I merely provided the facts. How you get from there to our supposed
worship of the crater, I have no idea (or perhaps you think we're
claiming some great accuracy for the Vulcan, but I admit that I'm
unable to follow your convoluted thought processes, not having to
process everything first through an anti-British filter). BTW, what
crater? The runway has long since been shortened and narrowed, to
3,013' x 63' (from 4,100' x 150' pre-war, extended to 6,100' x 150' in
the immediate aftermath, until RAF Mt. Pleasant was opened in 1995),
presumably to make it less useful in a war while still allowing the
FIGAS Islanders to land at Stanley. The AM-2 etc. was packed up and
shipped off to the UK, there presumably to be warehoused in case it's
needed.

Guy

"David Nicholls" wrote in message ...

snip

It is fascinating that the only supply chain for spares to the task force in
1982 was to fly the spare part to Wideawake, then do the 28 hour round trip
by C130 (with multiple refuelings from Victors) to drop the part in a water
tight bag (and float) to be picked up by a RN helo and transfered to the
required ship!! It was of note that the maximum speed of the C130 was below
the stall speed of a Victor unless both were in a dive - so that's how you
refueled. The RN was kept fully operational in this manner with no ships
falling out of the line for lack of spares! It is a bit like invading Japan
from California with only the Midway airfield available in the middle!

I've always thought that the RN could have really used something like
a V-22 COD in 1982. The ability to land vertically on a large number
of ships would sure make a lot of sense for those countries that can't
afford a CTOL carrier. KV-22 tankers would have really made things
sweet, because that would have allowed the V-22 CODs to land on many
ships midway between Ascension and the TF, or even land and refuel at
Tristan da Cunha'. If the a/c has to take off vertically, limiting
its fuel load, it can immediately top-off from the KV-22 (which would
also takeoff vertically from the same place), eliminating all that
tedious round-trip flying to and from Ascension by Victors and/or
C-130s.

Guy

Presidente Alcazar wrote in message . ..
On 30 Mar 2004 19:31:11 -0800, (Guy alcala)
wrote:

He is a bit inconsistent;-) BTW, my ability to respond will be
limited for a few days. My 11 year-old monitor died Sunday evening,
going out in a blaze of glory. Well, maybe not glory, but let's just
say that seeing flames light up the computer case beside (and wall
behind) it convinced me that it was time for a replacement ;-)

Typically spurious rationale advanced to justify further
slef-indulgent PC equipment purchases to a sceptical wife.

I will deny, to the last breath in my body, that my rationale is
spurious, that I'm being self-indulgent, and that I have a wife,
sceptical or otherwise. I have sedulously avoided such legal
complications, preferring my relationships to
be of a more informal (and non-legally-binding) nature ;-)

Guy