Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fatty
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hakahura
Last time 3 simple unguided Mk8 torpedos found their target, the General Belgrano was sunk and the rest of the Argentinian Navy fled for port. Possibly the most cost effective Naval engament ever? An entire fleet taken out for the cost of 3 vintage torpedos.
|
Actual UK equipment casualties:
10 (Sea) Harriers
24 helicopters
2 destroyers
2 frigates
1 LSL landing ship
1 LCU amphibious craft
1 containership
Source: wiki. Puts things into a different perspective I think. |
Yes those figures are correct fatty.
I was referring to the main "Naval" engagement of that war.
After the sinking of the General Belgrano the Argentinean Navy returned to port for the duration of hostilities. The losses you quote were inflicted by land based aircraft and ground forces.
As this is a Submarine based forum I was trying to illustrate the shear dominance of the SSN in blue water operations.
Stategically the sinking of the General Belgrano was huge. It proved the dangers of approaching the exclusion zone, thus denying resupply from sea. This then left resupply from air as the only option. An option long known to be fraught with difficulty. Even more so if there is only one usable runway.
Today 25 years on the same submarine/s that patrol the oceans have the ability to close airfields themselves. Were a conflict such as the Falklands War to be repeated the antagonists would have to be certain they could eliminate UK SSNs. Whilst not an expert on Venezuelan ASW capability I believe this is a task beyond their reach.
I'll say it again "Sabre Rattling"
Though something else for the UK goverment to keep its eye on.....
Trouble at home, whiping up the population against a foreign power... ect...
Not a new trick in politics, one I'm sure all readers can think of a few examples of throughout history.