SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-21-07, 02:32 PM   #1
TLAM Strike
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 8,633
Downloads: 29
Uploads: 6


Default Questions for you Falklands Experts out there

WWII era ships aren't my area of expertise, so do you know or can you point me in the directions to a site with information and pics on how the Argentine's Allen M. Sumner and Gearing class destroyers were configured? I have the nice drawings from navsource on the former USS Hank, USS Collett, and USS Borie showing their FRAM upgrades, but is there any other info out there.

Also information and pics on the ARA Belgrano would be helpful.

I hope to make models of them for DW at some point.

Thanks.
__________________


TLAM Strike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 02:48 PM   #2
Chock
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Under a thermal layer in chilly Olde England
Posts: 1,842
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

There are some decent links on this wiki site:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_General_Belgrano

Of course, you have to be careful of wikipedia, since it does get innaccuracies from time to time, but some of the links on that page are worth following. I imagine it would be worth seeing what you could find on the USS Phoenix too, as the hull would basically be largely unchanged. Also it would probably be worth trying searches on H.M.S. Conqueror, as they might lead you to stuff about the Belgrano.

Chock

PS. Two interesting things that are little known about the Falklands War, which might make any scenarios you are thinking of creating a bit more interesting are: the carriers in the task force had nuclear depth charges on board, not because they had plans to use them, but because to remove them would have delayed the task force's departure. Also, an interesting plan which was briefly considered, was to launch a Nuclear missile (minus the warhead) at Buenos Aires, to be followed by an ultimatum basically saying 'the next one will have a warhead on it'.
Chock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 03:04 PM   #3
Jimbuna
Chief of the Boat
 
Jimbuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 250 metres below the surface
Posts: 190,473
Downloads: 63
Uploads: 13


Default

Quote:
PS. Two interesting things that are little known about the Falklands War, which might make any scenarios you are thinking of creating a bit more interesting are: the carriers in the task force had nuclear depth charges on board, not because they had plans to use them, but because to remove them would have delayed the task force's departure. Also, an interesting plan which was briefly considered, was to launch a Nuclear missile (minus the warhead) at Buenos Aires, to be followed by an ultimatum basically saying 'the next one will have a warhead on it'.
Was fully aware of the former but not the latter :hmm:
__________________
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.
Oh my God, not again!!

Jimbuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 04:34 PM   #4
Marcantilan
Weps
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 374
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

A missile against Buenos Aires?? The only "nuclear" plan revealed was one involving a Vulcan bomber and Cordoba (a city near the center of Argentina)

Argentine navy today:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armada_Argentina

Argentine old destroyers (click on Bouchard, Almte. Storni, Py, Piedrabuena...)
http://www.histarmar.com.ar/Armada%2...structores.htm

ARA Gral. Belgrano
http://www.histarmar.com.ar/InfHisto...alBelgrano.htm

(histarmar is very complete, but very slow to load. I think the server is a Commodore 64)

If you want further help, let me know...
__________________
Ultima Ratio Regis
Marcantilan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 07:37 PM   #5
Chock
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Under a thermal layer in chilly Olde England
Posts: 1,842
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

The story of the firing a missile with the nuclear warhead removed suggestion is briefly mentioned in the book, 'Sea Harrier over the Falklands' by Sharkey Ward if you want more info.

Good book, if perhaps a little biased in favour of the Fleet Air Arm. Has some good passages about fleet defence tactics and the dogfights with the Argentinean pilots, who were very courageous incidentally. As well as giving some insights into the reasons for the sinking of the Belgrano, although given the cover ups which took place following the sinking, it might not all be true!

Chock
Chock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 07:51 PM   #6
Sea Demon
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,552
Downloads: 33
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLAM Strike
I have the nice drawings from navsource on the former USS Hank, USS Collett, and USS Borie showing their FRAM upgrades, but is there any other info out there.

Also information and pics on the ARA Belgrano would be helpful.

I hope to make models of them for DW at some point.

Thanks.
Sea Demon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 09:32 PM   #7
bradclark1
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Connecticut, USA.
Posts: 2,794
Downloads: 29
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcantilan
A missile against Buenos Aires?? The only "nuclear" plan revealed was one involving a Vulcan bomber and Cordoba (a city near the center of Argentina)
There were probably a lot of options put on the table. It's the one that's used that counts.
bradclark1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-07, 09:49 PM   #8
Heibges
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 1,633
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Default

I was watching the History Channel (big surprise), and they had an interview with an officer from the British sub who torpedoed the Belgrano.

He said that they used a WWII type torpedo because it had a larger warhead than the newer guided torpedoes, and didn't think the smaller warhead would do the job. Apparently, WWII surface warships were more heavily armored and more compartmented than modern ships.
__________________
U.Kdt.Hdb B. I. 28) This possibility of using the hydrophone to help in detecting surface ships should, however, be restricted to those cases where the submarine is unavoidably compelled to stay below the surface.

http://www.hackworth.com/
Heibges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 01:53 AM   #9
baggygreen
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top)
Posts: 1,880
Downloads: 7
Uploads: 0
Default

i've heard that somewhere too heibges, well at least the bit about the armour being thicker. I doubt the torps themselves were ww2 vintage, but were probably referred to as ww2 fish because they lacked guidance.
baggygreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 02:18 AM   #10
capt_slaughter
Swabbie
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ENGLAND great britain
Posts: 7
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default general belgrano

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLAM Strike
WWII era ships aren't my area of expertise, so do you know or can you point me in the directions to a site with information and pics on how the Argentine's Allen M. Sumner and Gearing class destroyers were configured? I have the nice drawings from navsource on the former USS Hank, USS Collett, and USS Borie showing their FRAM upgrades, but is there any other info out there.

Also information and pics on the ARA Belgrano would be helpful.

I hope to make models of them for DW at some point.

Thanks.
GENERAL BELGRANO...formaly uss phoenix
the only ship to escape pearl harbour undamaged from the japanese attack,sank by great britain in 1982 in the falklands islands...HOW IRONIC....CHEERS
capt_slaughter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 02:20 AM   #11
Jimbuna
Chief of the Boat
 
Jimbuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 250 metres below the surface
Posts: 190,473
Downloads: 63
Uploads: 13


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heibges
I was watching the History Channel (big surprise), and they had an interview with an officer from the British sub who torpedoed the Belgrano.

He said that they used a WWII type torpedo because it had a larger warhead than the newer guided torpedoes, and didn't think the smaller warhead would do the job. Apparently, WWII surface warships were more heavily armored and more compartmented than modern ships.
WWII Mk8 mod 4 torpedos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General...exclusion_zone
__________________
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.
Oh my God, not again!!

Jimbuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 05:13 AM   #12
micky1up
Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: helensburgh
Posts: 525
Downloads: 2
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baggygreen
i've heard that somewhere too heibges, well at least the bit about the armour being thicker. I doubt the torps themselves were ww2 vintage, but were probably referred to as ww2 fish because they lacked guidance.

they where mark eight straight running torpedoes used because the belgrano had what most ww2 cruisers and battleships had a reinforced steel belt around the hull at the depth bracket that a torpedo would strike the uks mk24 torp although wireguided lacked the explosive punch of the mk8 a wise decission by the captain to use those mk8's insted of the mk24's
micky1up is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 07:19 AM   #13
Jimbuna
Chief of the Boat
 
Jimbuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 250 metres below the surface
Posts: 190,473
Downloads: 63
Uploads: 13


Default

A colleague of mine has a brother who served on the Conqueror during the conflict and he reliably informs me that the eels were not set for 'straight running' but actually given a slightly offset setting in order that they travel in a curved pattern lest they be sighted and reveal the approximate locality of the sub
__________________
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.
Oh my God, not again!!

Jimbuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 09:39 AM   #14
Heibges
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 1,633
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Default

Does anyone know why ships today aren't so well armored?
__________________
U.Kdt.Hdb B. I. 28) This possibility of using the hydrophone to help in detecting surface ships should, however, be restricted to those cases where the submarine is unavoidably compelled to stay below the surface.

http://www.hackworth.com/
Heibges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-07, 10:20 AM   #15
Chock
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Under a thermal layer in chilly Olde England
Posts: 1,842
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Presumably because they aren't expected to slog it out with 14 inch guns while they are 10,000 yards from one another.

Chock
Chock is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.