UK aid to argentina = £450 million over 12 years, Argentina has untold reserves of their own, UK citizens face cut back after cut back across the board and our government havent finished.
why is the UK giving so much financial aid to Argentina who are so against UK interests?
If like me you are sickened by this news, you would be glad to know the UK government website has an e-petition.
google: Overseas Aid Assessment
Do your bit, spread this message, this cannot be allowed to continue.
@ashyk72 Amen brother screw them Argies the UK should only give money to their friends. I personally has a American adore the UK and all things British The WHO best Band, the Harriers best plane Aston Martins best car James Bond best Spy, Chuck Norris best bad ass whoops, well mostly anyway. So I always wanted a few million pounds sterling send it to me I'am your devoted crony and soul mate thanks
Just read a very interesting fact. HMS Dauntless (Our type 45 destroyer) Has enough fire power to destroy every fighter jet in the Argentinean air force! Please try invading again and see what happens.
@willthedrummer lol a former sea lord said he hasnt just enough firepower to render the whole argentine airforce useless, but enough firepower to render the whole of south americas air force useless.
@natasico It is called De Guello, it means no surrender to be asked or given( or fight to the death)
I have read the Mexican Army used it as a bugle call............they played it at the Alamo............and the Tennessee Boys and Texicans did not disapoint.
The FALKLAND islands is like a British ship at sea it was there before Argentina was Argentina, now this Argentinian ship has turned up and wishes to take over this British ship like the tugs and pirates they are, but they will be repulsed and beaten yet again by the Royal Navy,
@mitsubishi109 Malvinas islands were under Spanish rule since before England founded ILLEGALLY Pt Egmont. were under Spanish control. Then the English were stripped properly. When Argentina became independent as the Malvinas were dossier to the Spanish crown .. HOWEVER in 1816 Argentina announced its sovereignty over the islands and England NO TUBE objection.
@negreblodyman1 So, wgat you;re saying is the Argentine claim rellies upon Spanish colonial possession of the Falklands. Therefore, as Argentina is so upset by colonialism you'll be dropping that claim now I assume? And every Argentinian who isn't at least 50% native "Indian" will be buggering off back to whichever European country their ancetsors came from, leaving a fat cheque to say "sorry" for the treatment of native peoples?
@mitsubishi109 in 1824 signed a treaty of friendship and free trade with England where also present Argentina's sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. England again, he was not any objection, I accept the sovereignty ... then invaded the islands in 1833 as usual.
Argentina never had a settlement there. A German adventurer called Vervet did have a settlement there and the United Provinces appointed him governor. He left in 1837 but the colony remained (contrary to the propagada taught in Argentina). Vervet always acknowledged British sovereignity and indeed was compensated by the British govt.
@Leftopeningdoors Ejerciendo soberania sobre malvinas.. desde 1811 (1 año despues de la independencia) hasta 1833, ejerciendo control pleno de 1816 aprox hasta 1833.
28 air to air victories for the Harriers?? I don't think so...
Dogfights were very limited and they were mostly with the daggers.(aim-9L was given for first time by the US took care the rest...) .The Sea Harriers did an excellent job down there that is a fact! But the Argentinian air force did an unbelievable job as well. Some wrong-timed bomb fuses that did hit ships which didn't explode...and 5 more Exocet hits... would have changed the course of war. British analysts state that not me!!!
The argentines lost 100 aircraft - 21 shot down by harriers, 24 shot down from land/sea, 21 destroyed on the ground, 27 captured, 1 lost on Belgrano, 6 lost by flying accident. These are agreed by official argentine figures.
The entire Argentine airforce faced a few subsonic British seaplanes scrambled within 48 hours to travel 8000 miles on 2 tiny carriers.
The British RAF would have blown the argentine airforce from the sky.
@honwavet40 it was not to do with missiles it was to do with modern warfare, being able to get planes into the sky without a runway. Conflicts currently being fought in the desert require planes of this nature, simples.
The demolition of the A-4 Skyhawk by Sea Harriers were not in aerial combat, if not in something called Hunting of ducks. the A-4 Skyhawk only had fuel for 2 minutes in combat against British ships. this time had to throw their bombs on British ships, and did very well .. but were not prepared for a fight against a sea harrier closed. the Sea Harriers intercepted the A-4 while they undertook the escape after attacking the British ships. at no time was a dogfight against a sea harrier.
@MrStig691 No, it's because the A-4 at no time is the aggressor, always dam, and the unique maneuvers are undertaken exhaust .. dogfight is when there is an intention to hostile action by the 2 planes .. the A-4 of Argentina could not face a duel that was not enough fuel. This is called duck hunting. You can ask anyone who knows a bit of military aviation.
@KowBoySpace Yes, had little much fuel as the air base closest to malvinas was 650 km. He spent much fuel to fly low to avoid detection by radar of the frigates, besides which were to find the target manually, as many A-4 did not have radar. Then when they undertook the return, were to be replenished by a C-130 to get to Argentina
The only aircraft used for a direct confrontation with the Sea Harriers were IIIEA Mirage and Dagger IAI. happened only 2 Dogfight between Argentine and British, in the first episode the mirage IIIEA were at 20,000 feet and 5,000 feet Sea Harrier. Neither of the two squadrons up or down to meet the enemy. In the second game they faced an IAI Dagger with 2 Sea Harriers. IAI Dagger was shot down after firing a Matra Magic 1 without success ..
tengo colgado en la pared de mi estudio, restos de el harrier gr3 matricula XZ972/33,del 1sqn, HMS Hermes, comandado por el Flt.Lt. Jeff Glover, derribado la mañana del 21-05-1982 , sobre Port Howard, partes de el ala izquierda traidas por mi tio al continente en el año 1982
The Sea Harrier was not much difference what gender, the gender difference missile "sidewinder" against the matra 550 "magic" they really were crap compared to its missile. They should thank the U.S. Air Force ..
Well done to the CONDEM for reducing the Harrier fleet to... NIL! What can I say? Using Typhoons on Libya from Italy? In the age of austerity? Harrier from a carrier in the gulf of Tripoli... With the attendant marines and Apaches??? Fantastic move!
There are several errors in that, but in fact the Harrier was a temible weapon even more in hands of such a good pilots, but real temible was AIM9 sidewinder misile that EEUU sourced to UK when the conflict started. That misile shot down 80% of our aircraft loses. I remember some dogfights like Lt Clive Morell - Lt. A. Arca (Harrier - Skyhawk): Morell had in left 1 AIM9 and cannon, Arca had not cannon, misile, warning radar or countermeasures so he tried to get down the Harrier by hitting it.
all thrust vectorign is for is for short strip and vertical take of and landings ud not want to use it in a fight as it woudl slow you too much... in fact ud probably lose the fight as the enimy would be able to get aroudn you too quik once you engage. its liek puting ur flaps down mid flight not a smart thing or turnign ur engins of entierly. try slaming ur engin into nutural when at 100moh id not wanan do it or slaming my breaks onm at that speed.
Lyes, lyes, , You had your ass kicked, don´t make Harriers heroes, come back!, We know how to fight now, back then, pik nik, now, we all way´s got you out pomsy mf
@thenaturalheart the britsh allmost lost (not losted) with out guts if your gov had guts they would have put there best forces in the falklands (maldives or what ever you call them) but they never had the guts to do it as they was scared of attack from chile i belive i may be wrong ,so they kept your best back so dont talk to us about guts
you had the better air craft so they say.. a bad work man dont blame hes tools
@thenaturalheart come back do you relly want to see argentine and british lives lost if so then you are a fool and a idiot think before you talk euro fighter what have you got we also have a type 45 destroyer there please think before you comment on getting ppl killed
why does this have to be just about Argentina and UK Sovereignty there's other country's rite next to it what about Chile just at the tip they have as much rite to it as you have think about it , we should share it all between the 3 country's take all its oil and leave america with none lol
@warrior20111000 Argentina raged debate with Chile over other Islands, they also nearly went to war about that too. IRONICALLY Argentina asked BRITAIN to mediate that despute. Back in the days when Argentina accepted the Falklands were not theirs.
argentina was defeated in less than 72 days... british was sent over to OUR land with very little resources. argentina threw all their power at us british.. and we didnt even send 600 troops over there. the destroyers was all ways going to be a risk. and thats why we lost them, thats a risk we was willing to take.. argentina have no fire power in modern technology, good luck argentina if you think you will take them islands back... you'll need it!
@chezzylee The Ghurkas were devastated they never got to fight. It was all over just as they got ready to roll. If it happens again, send those bad boys in right from the off, give them a chance to get the glory they deserve. Which anyone reading, it is glory by the way, defending your terratory. Not warmongering.
@KowBoySpace yeah deffo, they are ruthless fuckers lol..i like how they are actually disapointed because they didn't get stuck in lol..i think it's amazing they think it's a gift to get picked to fight for us... if that's not dedication i don't know what it!
@jacavender Without mentioning the use of a rush shipment of the latest AIM-9 sidewinder missile from the "Yanks", your argument about being bad-ass is a little over the top.
Btw, I hope you were sharing a Harrier with a few other pilots as there were no aces during this war.
Only two pilots had three confirmed.
Speaking of loss rates, you want to talk loss rates of the RAF during Desert Storm?....I doubt it.
@jacavender WOW! You are Nigel Ward of the Fleet Air Arm? And your 3 kills have been inflated to 5? And you type in Youtube Comentry boxes? Hey Nigel, its so great to see the highest scoring harrier pilot of the falklands war typing so eloquently into a youtube box. Plus, you show a huge sense of humour , typing in the style of a retarded teenager who has some vague knowlage of tiny aspects of military history attempting to impress people whilst unwittingly making a total twat of himself.Thanks
@jacavender señor mio no fueron los misiles "Yankis" los que derribaron a los aviones argentinos? Conoce algo con el nombre de AIML9 SIDEWINDER??? Ademas puede usted asegurar que con iguales armas hubieran podido contra la F.F.A.A??
@kshhashim We designed and made the first ones in the 1960/70/80's then the US had a go and built new ones which the RAF bought then when the Sea Harrier (all UK designed) were retired we bought US designed ones to replace them. Now the RAF is getting Euro Fighters and F-35's and the Royal Navy is also getting F-35's for the two Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers.
@snakedoctor262 I only read Sharky Wards book after I made this tribute, he reckons they did not use thrust vectoring against the argies, they did not have to.The argies never closed in to dogfight after the first couple were shot down by the Sea Harriers.
@snakedoctor262 No. Thrust vectoring was used for landing. its not used for air combat or to make any fancy manouvers. All Harrier kills were stern chase low defelection diving shots. The idea that Harriers manouver tightly is a myth
@snakedoctor262 Well actually thrust vectoring had nothing to do with the SHAR's superior handling, it had everything to do with the respective drag & wing loading factors of the respective aircraft. The Mirage produces more drag in the turn & it cannot maintain a high G turn, unlike the Harrier. Thrust vectoring has nothing to do with it. Read Sharkey Wards book- he never mentions thrust vectoring ONCE- that was all propaganda hype.
@epten actually the thrust is used in a manouver called VIFF (Vectoring into Forward Flight) in which the vectors are swivelled to their limits causing massive deceleration much greater than any tailing aircraft could match. Any hostiles on the Harriers tail would soon present itself a target after a quick bit og VIFFing
@fyrep0w3r I didn't know that, thank you fyrep0w3r. Still, although harriers saw a fair bit of actual dogfight, I doubt that this manuver was ever acually used in real tactical situation.
I am convinced that Harrier is *very* maneuverable plane even without any thrust vectoring and - in right hands - is certainly formidable opponent in close aerial combat.
@snakedoctor262 He is grateful to god, that we did not have equal planes to them of you, with the technology that for this moment was of forefront and with the North American missiles with they were finding to his aim even being thrown of any position, for which if our pilots had had the same machines none of theirs had returned, any, they are the garbage of this world, invaders.
Britain did what they had to do--they went in, with inadequate air cover, no earlywarning aircraft, and they pulled it off, all because they had to, their kin were in peril.
@NAIAD49 Actually one pilot had 4 aircraft kills, 1 boat and did a bombing run, apparently shooting down helicopters in the air count towards being called and ace so he ended up being the top scoring pilot of the conflict ( i believe might be wrong) and the sad thing is he was being seconded from the RAF. he wasn't actually in the royal navy.
US would NEVER engage in a conflict of this size without adequate air cover. Twenty fighter / bombers is not sufficient to effectively defend the task force. Hence, the losses and damage of ships would be expected. This lack of air cover puts excessive pressure on the anti-aircraft systems/personnel. You MUST have air superiority in order to effect successful ground operations and minimize casualties. Think about it, not a single American soldier has had bombs dropped on him since WW II !
@1922sultan Being a mere component (north atlantic asw) in NATO defence strategy meant UK didn't have a balance naval force. Our loss of serious carriers only a couple of years before the war was what argentina was trying to capatalise on. (wouldn't be surprised if they tried it again now) It's unbelieavable what succesive government have done to our armed forces (and to our defence industry) - criminal. All the more amazing what our servicemen continue to achieve.
The SHARs have earnt their place in the history books for all the right reasons due to excellent design teams and personnel who maintained them. There are so many what ifs, however, if the Fleet Air Arm had retained the conventional fixed wing A/C inlcuding the Phantoms, Buccaneers and Gannets the Falklands' conflict may not ever have happened; there were a number of Fleet carriers in the mid 60s, HMS Eagle, Ark Royal, Victorious, Hermes carrying many capable A/C including Vixens and Scimitars.
@halonsox If the Argies would have had F4 Phantoms........the Fleet Air Arm pilots would still broadcast over the Argie pilots radio..."La Muerte Negra ess-a coming" ........Mirage, Dagger or Phantom....they would knock them down.........If Sea Dart did not get them, the Sea Harrier would.
@halonsox The F-4 Phantom is a flying brick, the Sea Harrier can outmanouevre it with ease. If the Mirage stood no chance against the SHAR, the F-4 would fare no better. Face it, the British pilots superiority in training & tactics played a huge part in the outcome of air-to-air combat. The Argentinians were completely outclassed as fighter pilots by the Fleet Air Arm pilots. You LOST- get over it & stop dreaming. ;)
@halonsox bolloox mate . You are full of ............ you talk a lot of rubbish, are you an expert? are you qualified to make this remark? My father served on the Hermes, what about you? Please tell us .
It's called the "deguello" or cut throat song, they played it for those Texas boys down San Antonio Way. They played it night and day til it was all over.
Having been employed on the FRS 2 upgrade of the FRS 1 Harrier that later became the F/A 2, CAP fighter, it was indeed very sad to have lost the best A/C we had in 2006. The GR9 Harrier 2 was another sad loss to the FAA in 2010.
the Harrier, the only aircraft in living memory to have done the job it's designed for and shot another aircraft down. Scrapped, instead of the Tornado simply because the Tornado was deployed in Afghanistan.
the RAF have done so much for this country, they fought the Germans, and Argentines outnumbered, going just on courage and pride . "never was so much owed to so few", said Churchill, now what do we give them? sharing our aircraft carriers with the French?, taking away the harriers, government spending cuts??!! its discussing.. god didnt save the queen(king) in ww2, the raf did! our goverment has turned to rubbish
The arg's never should have invaded a country where the airfield was too small to small to fly any fighter jets off :D they had to try and combat the harriers from the Argentinian main land. Not a good idea XD
In The Guerra de las Malvinas (Sorry but I'm Agentine, and I don´t want problems with nobody) The air to air combat was an unequal confrontations, because harrier were armed with air to air AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles and the Argentine fighters with 30 mm or 20 mm cannons, Mirages, Daggers and A-4 respecively. The Argentine fighters, also, came from continent almost empty of fuel, and the English Pilots knew that because the French had said that weak point about Mirages and Daggers.
Hey Ieofer1976 thanks for you comment but the whole point of warfare is to exploit those weaknesses, which the Argentina air force and navy failed to do. Your country completely out numbered the British forces out 20 to 1 this is a documented fact and should have beaten the navy's harriers as these where in mutirole ops. .
In that time Fuerza Aerea Argentina was well trained an well equiped force - for example Dassault Super Etendard with Exocet was formidable combo - but the leaders feared to use it in proper scale on the proper battlefields... They despatched Skyhawks or Daggers without any fighter cover because they were scared of bombing argentinian mainland after the RAF´s Vulcan Black Buck missions. So the fighters stood in north of Argentina without any use.
Although the United Kingdom was only a breath away from losing the Falklands War, supperior training, and the age long British Military professionalism paid off and saved the U.K. from a possible and humiliating defeat!!
Sea Harrier proved time and again she was the pre eminent fighter in Europe before her disgraceful treatment by the penny pinchers....and that's despite the lack of development.
@NAIAD49 Yes the FA2 had awesome radar and long rang missile systems, more than a match for any supersonic fighter - she proved herself time and again on exercises.
Ah, the Swordfish! I think that in cost-efficacy relation that biplane was the best in the WWII... The damages that they produced, a airplane with low prestations...wow. I think something like this with the A-4s in Falklands.
@elgriegodemalvinas The Swordfish would be no good to yous without the Fleet Air Arm crews of the Royal Navy............they are what made the Swordfish so successful.
Credit where due. Argentine pilots were brave and skilled. But the rest of the A armed forces were either incompetent, scared, or they just didn`t have the will to fight against a superior enemy. Navy forsook their comrades in their UK-built ships, Arg infantry was a rabble.
We can split hair for a 1,000 years over points of view. Fact is, Arg chose to surrender. The British could have finished them completely, but they treat them well, even returned them home. Arg was lucky.
@transonicbuoy1 you were lucky. The army want to fight but menendes was a coward. your soldiers those days were knightmen but now they deserve to be kill.
NAIAD, I m afraid you missed many points, 1)WE were outnumbered in the air, not Britain 2) As the Mirages couldnt be refuel on air, they didnt have enough fuel for dogfight, so the A4 had to attack the ships armed only with bombs without air cover, so the only things your pilots had to do once they found them was to pull the trigger. 3) you had 34 Harriers with the American sidewinder 4) Our pilots were trained here, by ourselves, not in Israel!!!
At one point we were down to only 20 Harriers or less.......how can 20 jets outnumber the Argie Air Force?
Where did I say they went to Israel to train?
They were trained by French and Israeli pilots.........just like theFrench technicians that trained them to fire Exocet missiles from French aircraft.....or did they learn that themselves.......don't make me laugh.
1) The British NEVER had more aircraft than the Argentinians
2) They had plenty of fuel to dogfight, they just did it very badly
3) The Sidewinder only works if it is used CORRECTLY (see my comment about bombs)
4) Maybe ...
Please do not think I am being rude about Argentina, its airforce or its pilots.
Many British people, including myself, are sad that this war happened. We never asked for it to start. But we are happy that Argentina is now a democracy :)
you where trained by the French the dagger pilots were a Israeli version of the the mirage the Argentine air force despite its bravery was decimated, let us look at today the roles are reversed, we can hit Argentine Airfields we can destroy Argentine ships not from 7000 meters but a 1000 miles maybe Christina should stop chucking her toys out of her pram and face realism
Despite news reports at the time which said Hermes had 12 harriers onboard, she actually had 22 when she sailed from Pompey. When the RAF GR3's joined us we had 28
Daggers used Mica missiles. Their tactics were poor (welded wing not combat spread)
Argentinian pilots attacking the British ships in San Carlos were very brave but not effective because they released their bombs outside of the correct limits.
Many bombs ended up inside British ships unexploded because they had been dropped too low and not had time to fuse correctly.
Brave yes. Professional no. Apologies, but that is the truth
There were reports just after the war of their bombs being very old American made.............the bombs removed from some British ships were new and British made.
well...argentine pilots were very proffessional in that war,they don´t have altimeter,VLF,and they fougth with old and crap planes. Their only weapons were chronometer,his eyes,and bombs for the ground,not for combat over the sea...is suicidal fight against modern ships with that.Remember your forces had used sidewinders,that was your "silver bullet" in 82.That´s the true.
steveturner1967, our pilots had to be sent in waves of 4 to 6 to face your Harriers (34), land defenses (Rapiers, Stingers, Blowpipes etc) and your entire fleet with seadarts, seawolfs, 40 mm etc), short of fuel and without air cover, and even so they managed to hit more than 30 of your ships.
Your pilots couldnt even hit one huge inmovil target: the airstrip at Stanley. So if our pilots werent professionals, what were yours???
@Arminevh I am sorry if you are offended by my comments however, 4 or 6 FAA aircraft normally faced 2 Harriers on CAP ... NOT ALL the Harriers available. Yes you are correct about the Vulcan raids, they were also unprofessional at times. One time the bombs were not fused ... do you see what I mean?
Flying lower and lower when faced with AAA \ SAMs means a pilot does not deliver his bombs in a way that they will hit AND destroy the target.
@UKCallum1 Yes, Argentinian navy Air Fleet had 4 Super Etendard and 5 Exocet anti-ship missiles, not that much.... Anyway, if you study this peculiar war, you'll see reaching Royal Navy ships with A4 or Dagger planes at very low level, lifting their bombs on them, was quite a challenge, quite a sporting effort. Almost no air coverage, they had to go for it no matter what, and They did it as good professionals, as any other UK pilot did it as well. Respect to ALL UK and ARGENTINA brave warriors.
@lucianoestivill.. thats because our anti aircraft missiles had a limitation which was they they couldnt fire if your planes flew below radar, but thats been fixed with our new Aster 15 and 30 missiles.. your air force was the only section of your armed forces that gave UK a headache.. i have respect for argentine pilots and UK pilots were also heavily outnumbered aswell
Point taken. Argentine pilots were brave. But, the land war: British completely routed Argen troops when they landed. And they walked 80 miles, still fresh.
With all respet I must say you that Harriers had sidewinders missiles, and our aircrafts had not other thing that bombs and cannon. (Argentine air force were destinated to sunk and strike and not to win air to air combats)
pancho133......some of the Mirage and Daggers did carry missiles and fired them at the Harriers.Look at all the comments and you will find replies when I explained this to other people saying that the Argentine planes had no air to air missiles........they did.
But mostly the Argentine pilots were looking to drop their bombs and get out as fast as they could.
after the early sorties they did not want to dog fight............they used the right tactics,get in then get out fast.
yeah, i agree. all dictators are the same damned thing. they think like' people, our citizens? they're our pets'.wow! can you imagine that.and how can you understand spanish?
con mejor armamento ganaba argentina, si los mirage hubieran tenido sidewinders, uff quien sabe. pero el dilema es este: gracias a que argentina perdio, cayo la dictadura y es por eso que hoy en dia son el gran pais que son. si hubieran ganado la guerra....da que hablar
Yes,the Argentine dictatorship fell because of the defeat at the hands of the British............so in the bigger picture of things,we did the Argentine people a favour..........all the lost lives on both sides are at the hands of the Argentine dictators.They ruled by the bullet not the ballot box.
Your figures are wrong a frigate built in the late 1970's would have cost less than US $100m.
Cost is not relevant the result is the only relevance. The Royal Navy was successful in landing thousands of troops without loosing any of them and then supporting them throughout the war. The Sea Harriers and RN SAM's did not win air superiority but they inflicted enough losses on the Argentines that by the end of the war their ability to lanch attacks was seriously degraded.
La RAF no consiguió el dominio aereo sobre las islas, aunque haya derribado 22 aviones los ataques siguieron hasta un día antes de terminar la guerra, de haber conseguido dominar el espacio aereo los ataques de la FAA y el COAN hubiesen cesado mucho antes.
My friend Sharkey Ward in no 100.
floppyd0g 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Que Vachaché .piantá de aquí!! Malvinas es Argentina!!! a tus muertos ? shapó..a los mios gloria y honor!!!
escalante67 6 days ago
Que Vachaché .piantá de aquí!! Malvinas es Argentina!!! a tus muertos ? shapó..a los mios gloria y honor!!!
escalante67 6 days ago
@kudaiargen Pirates don't fly harriers you retard.
EnglandAtheist 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please see this video about the Malvinas/Falklands subject: watch?v=sZB5fzMe_qA
agormanvideos 1 week ago
UK aid to argentina = £450 million over 12 years, Argentina has untold reserves of their own, UK citizens face cut back after cut back across the board and our government havent finished.
why is the UK giving so much financial aid to Argentina who are so against UK interests?
If like me you are sickened by this news, you would be glad to know the UK government website has an e-petition.
google: Overseas Aid Assessment
Do your bit, spread this message, this cannot be allowed to continue.
ashyk72 1 week ago 7
@ashyk72 Amen brother screw them Argies the UK should only give money to their friends. I personally has a American adore the UK and all things British The WHO best Band, the Harriers best plane Aston Martins best car James Bond best Spy, Chuck Norris best bad ass whoops, well mostly anyway. So I always wanted a few million pounds sterling send it to me I'am your devoted crony and soul mate thanks
bonkeydonkable 3 days ago 4
@bonkeydonkable top man thank you for support, more of a bruce lee man myself still chuck rocks. Thanks again.
ashyk72 2 days ago
@ashyk72 I think if Chuck Norris was in a Harrier with its 20mm 2000RPM cannon he would kick Bruce Lees ass within 10 or 20 minutes easy.
bonkeydonkable 2 days ago
@bonkeydonkable maybe but could a harrier snap a piece of 2x4 with its head, blindfolded, while making girly noises, I think not :)
ashyk72 2 days ago
The Royal Navy........TO GLORY WE STEER.
The Royal Airforce....THROUGH ADVERSITY TO THE STARS
The British Army........CRY HAVOC AND LET SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR
Argentina ..................THIS CORNED BEEF TASTES LIKE SHITE!
elswick1542 1 week ago
Just read a very interesting fact. HMS Dauntless (Our type 45 destroyer) Has enough fire power to destroy every fighter jet in the Argentinean air force! Please try invading again and see what happens.
willthedrummer 1 week ago
@willthedrummer lol a former sea lord said he hasnt just enough firepower to render the whole argentine airforce useless, but enough firepower to render the whole of south americas air force useless.
MrPubman84 5 days ago
@MrPubman84 hahah that's awesome! Who needs aircraft carriers when we've got those bad boys!
willthedrummer 5 days ago
95 Argentinians didn't like this video.
FantasticBob7000 1 week ago
some satellites form the us had forgotten on this video....
luissuriani 2 weeks ago
music is cool, what is it?
natasico 3 weeks ago
@natasico It is called De Guello, it means no surrender to be asked or given( or fight to the death)
I have read the Mexican Army used it as a bugle call............they played it at the Alamo............and the Tennessee Boys and Texicans did not disapoint.
NAIAD49 3 weeks ago
@NAIAD49 I search for the song in yt but i found a lot of versions, can you please find me an original version. Thanks for the info.
natasico 2 weeks ago
The FALKLAND islands is like a British ship at sea it was there before Argentina was Argentina, now this Argentinian ship has turned up and wishes to take over this British ship like the tugs and pirates they are, but they will be repulsed and beaten yet again by the Royal Navy,
mitsubishi109 3 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos
@mitsubishi109 Malvinas islands were under Spanish rule since before England founded ILLEGALLY Pt Egmont. were under Spanish control. Then the English were stripped properly. When Argentina became independent as the Malvinas were dossier to the Spanish crown .. HOWEVER in 1816 Argentina announced its sovereignty over the islands and England NO TUBE objection.
negreblodyman1 3 weeks ago
@negreblodyman1 So, wgat you;re saying is the Argentine claim rellies upon Spanish colonial possession of the Falklands. Therefore, as Argentina is so upset by colonialism you'll be dropping that claim now I assume? And every Argentinian who isn't at least 50% native "Indian" will be buggering off back to whichever European country their ancetsors came from, leaving a fat cheque to say "sorry" for the treatment of native peoples?
1daveyp 2 weeks ago
@mitsubishi109 in 1824 signed a treaty of friendship and free trade with England where also present Argentina's sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. England again, he was not any objection, I accept the sovereignty ... then invaded the islands in 1833 as usual.
negreblodyman1 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Argentina never had a settlement there. A German adventurer called Vervet did have a settlement there and the United Provinces appointed him governor. He left in 1837 but the colony remained (contrary to the propagada taught in Argentina). Vervet always acknowledged British sovereignity and indeed was compensated by the British govt.
mitsubishi109 3 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos
@negreblodyman1 OK, so how long has Argentina actually been in direct control or the Falklands? Because I make it about 3 years?
Leftopeningdoors 5 days ago
@Leftopeningdoors Ejerciendo soberania sobre malvinas.. desde 1811 (1 año despues de la independencia) hasta 1833, ejerciendo control pleno de 1816 aprox hasta 1833.
negreblodyman1 4 days ago
@MrFattyfatfatboy always going to be a servant is not free your flag is tainted with the blood of the people .. British pirates ..
dario2015 3 weeks ago
90 Argentine pilots did not like this factual video, the rest are al bottom of the south Atlantic.
mitsubishi109 3 weeks ago
28 air to air victories for the Harriers?? I don't think so...
Dogfights were very limited and they were mostly with the daggers.(aim-9L was given for first time by the US took care the rest...) .The Sea Harriers did an excellent job down there that is a fact! But the Argentinian air force did an unbelievable job as well. Some wrong-timed bomb fuses that did hit ships which didn't explode...and 5 more Exocet hits... would have changed the course of war. British analysts state that not me!!!
xtdesign 3 weeks ago
@xtdesign
The argentines lost 100 aircraft - 21 shot down by harriers, 24 shot down from land/sea, 21 destroyed on the ground, 27 captured, 1 lost on Belgrano, 6 lost by flying accident. These are agreed by official argentine figures.
The entire Argentine airforce faced a few subsonic British seaplanes scrambled within 48 hours to travel 8000 miles on 2 tiny carriers.
The British RAF would have blown the argentine airforce from the sky.
EddieExile 3 weeks ago
@xtdesign 1 nuke on buenos aires "would have changed the course of the war"
DoctorEnzo 3 weeks ago
@honwavet40 it was not to do with missiles it was to do with modern warfare, being able to get planes into the sky without a runway. Conflicts currently being fought in the desert require planes of this nature, simples.
jamessential 4 weeks ago
God Save The Queen.
douglasr3684 1 month ago
The demolition of the A-4 Skyhawk by Sea Harriers were not in aerial combat, if not in something called Hunting of ducks. the A-4 Skyhawk only had fuel for 2 minutes in combat against British ships. this time had to throw their bombs on British ships, and did very well .. but were not prepared for a fight against a sea harrier closed. the Sea Harriers intercepted the A-4 while they undertook the escape after attacking the British ships. at no time was a dogfight against a sea harrier.
negreblodyman1 1 month ago 2
@negreblodyman1 No, that IS a dogfight.
MrStig691 1 month ago
@MrStig691 No, it's because the A-4 at no time is the aggressor, always dam, and the unique maneuvers are undertaken exhaust .. dogfight is when there is an intention to hostile action by the 2 planes .. the A-4 of Argentina could not face a duel that was not enough fuel. This is called duck hunting. You can ask anyone who knows a bit of military aviation.
negreblodyman1 1 month ago
@negreblodyman1 interesting that the Skyhawk didnt have much fuel. What with the Falklands being so close to Argentina and all that?
KowBoySpace 3 weeks ago
@KowBoySpace Yes, had little much fuel as the air base closest to malvinas was 650 km. He spent much fuel to fly low to avoid detection by radar of the frigates, besides which were to find the target manually, as many A-4 did not have radar. Then when they undertook the return, were to be replenished by a C-130 to get to Argentina
negreblodyman1 3 weeks ago
@negreblodyman1 100% true
aztecAmericanpride 2 weeks ago
The only aircraft used for a direct confrontation with the Sea Harriers were IIIEA Mirage and Dagger IAI. happened only 2 Dogfight between Argentine and British, in the first episode the mirage IIIEA were at 20,000 feet and 5,000 feet Sea Harrier. Neither of the two squadrons up or down to meet the enemy. In the second game they faced an IAI Dagger with 2 Sea Harriers. IAI Dagger was shot down after firing a Matra Magic 1 without success ..
negreblodyman1 1 month ago
it doesn't matter lads the sea harrier still kicked the argies arses !!!!!
wolverine3126 2 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
tengo colgado en la pared de mi estudio, restos de el harrier gr3 matricula XZ972/33,del 1sqn, HMS Hermes, comandado por el Flt.Lt. Jeff Glover, derribado la mañana del 21-05-1982 , sobre Port Howard, partes de el ala izquierda traidas por mi tio al continente en el año 1982
pdrodarbon 2 months ago
NAIADA49 :
No Fleet Air Arm pilot ever claimed 5 kills in the Falklands.
Your use of English and the word "craft" betrays you as an ill-educated impostor.
You need to show more respect than that.
TroyaE117 2 months ago
The Sea Harrier was not much difference what gender, the gender difference missile "sidewinder" against the matra 550 "magic" they really were crap compared to its missile. They should thank the U.S. Air Force ..
JONASSTORECBA 2 months ago
@jacavender I HOPE THAT YOU LIVE A BIT MORE TO SEE SINCE WE THEM ANNIHILATE IN THE NEAR WARLIKE CONFLICT. ASSASSIN, ASSASSIN
pabloi320 2 months ago
Well done to the CONDEM for reducing the Harrier fleet to... NIL! What can I say? Using Typhoons on Libya from Italy? In the age of austerity? Harrier from a carrier in the gulf of Tripoli... With the attendant marines and Apaches??? Fantastic move!
adamc1407 2 months ago
There are several errors in that, but in fact the Harrier was a temible weapon even more in hands of such a good pilots, but real temible was AIM9 sidewinder misile that EEUU sourced to UK when the conflict started. That misile shot down 80% of our aircraft loses. I remember some dogfights like Lt Clive Morell - Lt. A. Arca (Harrier - Skyhawk): Morell had in left 1 AIM9 and cannon, Arca had not cannon, misile, warning radar or countermeasures so he tried to get down the Harrier by hitting it.
Cochotoro 2 months ago
all thrust vectorign is for is for short strip and vertical take of and landings ud not want to use it in a fight as it woudl slow you too much... in fact ud probably lose the fight as the enimy would be able to get aroudn you too quik once you engage. its liek puting ur flaps down mid flight not a smart thing or turnign ur engins of entierly. try slaming ur engin into nutural when at 100moh id not wanan do it or slaming my breaks onm at that speed.
phillcom3 3 months ago
next time use heart of oak or a fleet air arm peice please .. not an Argentinean sounding piece :)
phillcom3 3 months ago
Lyes, lyes, , You had your ass kicked, don´t make Harriers heroes, come back!, We know how to fight now, back then, pik nik, now, we all way´s got you out pomsy mf
thenaturalheart 3 months ago
@thenaturalheart Youre from Spain .Whats that got to do with Argentina???
williamblair11 3 months ago
British bull shitt, Argentina had old air planes, and the British all most losted, with out gutts
thenaturalheart 3 months ago
@thenaturalheart the britsh allmost lost (not losted) with out guts if your gov had guts they would have put there best forces in the falklands (maldives or what ever you call them) but they never had the guts to do it as they was scared of attack from chile i belive i may be wrong ,so they kept your best back so dont talk to us about guts
you had the better air craft so they say.. a bad work man dont blame hes tools
dennislions1 3 months ago
@thenaturalheart come back do you relly want to see argentine and british lives lost if so then you are a fool and a idiot think before you talk euro fighter what have you got we also have a type 45 destroyer there please think before you comment on getting ppl killed
dennislions1 3 months ago
why does this have to be just about Argentina and UK Sovereignty there's other country's rite next to it what about Chile just at the tip they have as much rite to it as you have think about it , we should share it all between the 3 country's take all its oil and leave america with none lol
warrior20111000 2 months ago
@warrior20111000 Argentina raged debate with Chile over other Islands, they also nearly went to war about that too. IRONICALLY Argentina asked BRITAIN to mediate that despute. Back in the days when Argentina accepted the Falklands were not theirs.
KowBoySpace 3 weeks ago
Harriers killing Maradonas...Good movie..thumbs up !
philosoma9 3 months ago
@jacavender Oh please, even the American pilots admit the best pilots are German.
DaytonaRoadster 3 months ago
AV-8Bs kick ass
imtomodly1234 3 months ago
@imtomodly1234 i get a feelign it wasnt 8bs in argantina it was mark 1s and 2s..
phillcom3 3 months ago
correction - Falklands
phillcom3 3 months ago
@phillcom3 i kno but if they had 8b they would have done more
imtomodly1234 3 months ago
argentina was defeated in less than 72 days... british was sent over to OUR land with very little resources. argentina threw all their power at us british.. and we didnt even send 600 troops over there. the destroyers was all ways going to be a risk. and thats why we lost them, thats a risk we was willing to take.. argentina have no fire power in modern technology, good luck argentina if you think you will take them islands back... you'll need it!
chezzylee 3 months ago
@chezzylee The Ghurkas were devastated they never got to fight. It was all over just as they got ready to roll. If it happens again, send those bad boys in right from the off, give them a chance to get the glory they deserve. Which anyone reading, it is glory by the way, defending your terratory. Not warmongering.
KowBoySpace 3 weeks ago
@KowBoySpace yeah deffo, they are ruthless fuckers lol..i like how they are actually disapointed because they didn't get stuck in lol..i think it's amazing they think it's a gift to get picked to fight for us... if that's not dedication i don't know what it!
chezzylee 3 weeks ago
it is clear that Argentina beat England in the war from the air .. its pilots with fewer things better than the British film ...
alechueco1 3 months ago
@jacavender Without mentioning the use of a rush shipment of the latest AIM-9 sidewinder missile from the "Yanks", your argument about being bad-ass is a little over the top.
Btw, I hope you were sharing a Harrier with a few other pilots as there were no aces during this war.
Only two pilots had three confirmed.
Speaking of loss rates, you want to talk loss rates of the RAF during Desert Storm?....I doubt it.
rampking1 4 months ago
It was the rush shipment of the latest version of the AIM-9 missile from the USA that made the Harrier the victor....
(Plenty of fuel for the Argentine pilots hundreds of miles off the coast? ...no air tankers.)
Argentina had nothing that came close.
Outside of a limited number of Exocets, the Argentine had all the wrong munitions.
rampking1 4 months ago
@jacavender WOW! You are Nigel Ward of the Fleet Air Arm? And your 3 kills have been inflated to 5? And you type in Youtube Comentry boxes? Hey Nigel, its so great to see the highest scoring harrier pilot of the falklands war typing so eloquently into a youtube box. Plus, you show a huge sense of humour , typing in the style of a retarded teenager who has some vague knowlage of tiny aspects of military history attempting to impress people whilst unwittingly making a total twat of himself.Thanks
tommiatkins 4 months ago
@jacavender
SuperCrotox 4 months ago
@jacavender señor mio no fueron los misiles "Yankis" los que derribaron a los aviones argentinos? Conoce algo con el nombre de AIML9 SIDEWINDER??? Ademas puede usted asegurar que con iguales armas hubieran podido contra la F.F.A.A??
SuperCrotox 4 months ago
@EddieExile oh.. Ok.
kshhashim 5 months ago
I heard harriers were made by american.but design was british.
kshhashim 5 months ago
@kshhashim not true - the harrier was designed and built in the UK - but the americans also built some for their marine corps.
EddieExile 5 months ago
@kshhashim Harriers were designed and built by the British, the design was leased to the Americans
ScottishCaledonian 5 months ago
@kshhashim We designed and made the first ones in the 1960/70/80's then the US had a go and built new ones which the RAF bought then when the Sea Harrier (all UK designed) were retired we bought US designed ones to replace them. Now the RAF is getting Euro Fighters and F-35's and the Royal Navy is also getting F-35's for the two Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
Comment removed
snakedoctor262 5 months ago
@snakedoctor262 I only read Sharky Wards book after I made this tribute, he reckons they did not use thrust vectoring against the argies, they did not have to.The argies never closed in to dogfight after the first couple were shot down by the Sea Harriers.
NAIAD49 5 months ago
@NAIAD49 guess i heard wrong.. cheers
snakedoctor262 5 months ago
@snakedoctor262 No. Thrust vectoring was used for landing. its not used for air combat or to make any fancy manouvers. All Harrier kills were stern chase low defelection diving shots. The idea that Harriers manouver tightly is a myth
tommiatkins 4 months ago
@snakedoctor262 Well actually thrust vectoring had nothing to do with the SHAR's superior handling, it had everything to do with the respective drag & wing loading factors of the respective aircraft. The Mirage produces more drag in the turn & it cannot maintain a high G turn, unlike the Harrier. Thrust vectoring has nothing to do with it. Read Sharkey Wards book- he never mentions thrust vectoring ONCE- that was all propaganda hype.
LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH 4 months ago in playlist Liked
@snakedoctor262 On Harriers, thrust is not vectored during flight, certainly not during combat. It is only vectored while taking of and/or landing.
The Harrier turns tighter because it is a better turning aircraft, not because of thrust vectoring.
epten 2 months ago
@epten actually the thrust is used in a manouver called VIFF (Vectoring into Forward Flight) in which the vectors are swivelled to their limits causing massive deceleration much greater than any tailing aircraft could match. Any hostiles on the Harriers tail would soon present itself a target after a quick bit og VIFFing
watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rtQRHm1CZdI#t=283s
fyrep0w3r 2 months ago
@fyrep0w3r I didn't know that, thank you fyrep0w3r. Still, although harriers saw a fair bit of actual dogfight, I doubt that this manuver was ever acually used in real tactical situation.
I am convinced that Harrier is *very* maneuverable plane even without any thrust vectoring and - in right hands - is certainly formidable opponent in close aerial combat.
epten 2 months ago
@snakedoctor262 He is grateful to god, that we did not have equal planes to them of you, with the technology that for this moment was of forefront and with the North American missiles with they were finding to his aim even being thrown of any position, for which if our pilots had had the same machines none of theirs had returned, any, they are the garbage of this world, invaders.
pabloi320 2 months ago
@snakedoctor262 Thrust vectoring had nothing to do with the Harrier's ability to out turn the Mirage & it's delta wing. Read Sharky Ward's book!
LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH 2 months ago
OMG THIS IS SO GAY!
mrkjottulf 5 months ago
Britain did what they had to do--they went in, with inadequate air cover, no earlywarning aircraft, and they pulled it off, all because they had to, their kin were in peril.
Planetar17 5 months ago
@jacavender Thought it was A4's (skyhawks) not F4's?
bluemuleii 5 months ago
@jacavender No Sea Harrier pilot had 5 kills, the most was 3.
You are a Walter Mitty............Sea Harrier pilot my arse.........they would not come on here and brag.
"5 KILLS to my craft and me"
They could not take the little Sea Jet...............come on Sharkey, lets be hearing from you son.
jacavender here claims he shot down more than you.
NAIAD49 6 months ago 8
@NAIAD49 Actually one pilot had 4 aircraft kills, 1 boat and did a bombing run, apparently shooting down helicopters in the air count towards being called and ace so he ended up being the top scoring pilot of the conflict ( i believe might be wrong) and the sad thing is he was being seconded from the RAF. he wasn't actually in the royal navy.
callum988 3 months ago
US would NEVER engage in a conflict of this size without adequate air cover. Twenty fighter / bombers is not sufficient to effectively defend the task force. Hence, the losses and damage of ships would be expected. This lack of air cover puts excessive pressure on the anti-aircraft systems/personnel. You MUST have air superiority in order to effect successful ground operations and minimize casualties. Think about it, not a single American soldier has had bombs dropped on him since WW II !
1922sultan 8 months ago
@1922sultan Being a mere component (north atlantic asw) in NATO defence strategy meant UK didn't have a balance naval force. Our loss of serious carriers only a couple of years before the war was what argentina was trying to capatalise on. (wouldn't be surprised if they tried it again now) It's unbelieavable what succesive government have done to our armed forces (and to our defence industry) - criminal. All the more amazing what our servicemen continue to achieve.
bluemuleii 6 months ago
Comment removed
bluemuleii 6 months ago
The flight crew of the RAF are the best in the world.
sands2003 8 months ago
argentinian aircrafts was only carged bombs ,without defence anti harriers , they fly to hell or death or glory!!!
daniel30marzos 9 months ago
CONGRATULATIONS MEN OF THE FLEET AIR ARM, BECAUSE THE SEA HARRIER, is "POWERFULL" AIRCRAFT.
9federal 10 months ago
The SHARs have earnt their place in the history books for all the right reasons due to excellent design teams and personnel who maintained them. There are so many what ifs, however, if the Fleet Air Arm had retained the conventional fixed wing A/C inlcuding the Phantoms, Buccaneers and Gannets the Falklands' conflict may not ever have happened; there were a number of Fleet carriers in the mid 60s, HMS Eagle, Ark Royal, Victorious, Hermes carrying many capable A/C including Vixens and Scimitars.
Dianea2009 11 months ago
If Argentina Would have had F4 Phantoms, in that war, many harriers would had been defenitly lost
halonsox 11 months ago
@halonsox If the Argies would have had F4 Phantoms........the Fleet Air Arm pilots would still broadcast over the Argie pilots radio..."La Muerte Negra ess-a coming" ........Mirage, Dagger or Phantom....they would knock them down.........If Sea Dart did not get them, the Sea Harrier would.
First Naval Aviators....Best Naval Aviators.
NAIAD49 11 months ago 28
@halonsox yeah but they didnt and we won
iSmeLLbUd 8 months ago
@halonsox The F-4 Phantom is a flying brick, the Sea Harrier can outmanouevre it with ease. If the Mirage stood no chance against the SHAR, the F-4 would fare no better. Face it, the British pilots superiority in training & tactics played a huge part in the outcome of air-to-air combat. The Argentinians were completely outclassed as fighter pilots by the Fleet Air Arm pilots. You LOST- get over it & stop dreaming. ;)
LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH 6 months ago
Comment removed
philosoma9 3 months ago
Comment removed
philosoma9 3 months ago
@halonsox bolloox mate . You are full of ............ you talk a lot of rubbish, are you an expert? are you qualified to make this remark? My father served on the Hermes, what about you? Please tell us .
MsMantous 2 months ago
@halonsox Not with spics flying them.
RattyTheSecond1 1 month ago
Oh, please. 100 A-4D Skyhawks, which wasn't even a fighter design, vs. 20 AIM-9-equipped Harriers? Argentina doesn't stand a chance
historylover54 11 months ago
It's called the "deguello" or cut throat song, they played it for those Texas boys down San Antonio Way. They played it night and day til it was all over.
whisperingdeath308 11 months ago
Having been employed on the FRS 2 upgrade of the FRS 1 Harrier that later became the F/A 2, CAP fighter, it was indeed very sad to have lost the best A/C we had in 2006. The GR9 Harrier 2 was another sad loss to the FAA in 2010.
Dianea2009 1 year ago
the Harrier, the only aircraft in living memory to have done the job it's designed for and shot another aircraft down. Scrapped, instead of the Tornado simply because the Tornado was deployed in Afghanistan.
thetubewithin 1 year ago
the RAF have done so much for this country, they fought the Germans, and Argentines outnumbered, going just on courage and pride . "never was so much owed to so few", said Churchill, now what do we give them? sharing our aircraft carriers with the French?, taking away the harriers, government spending cuts??!! its discussing.. god didnt save the queen(king) in ww2, the raf did! our goverment has turned to rubbish
kishawiboi 1 year ago
Comment removed
pundy1969 1 year ago
The arg's never should have invaded a country where the airfield was too small to small to fly any fighter jets off :D they had to try and combat the harriers from the Argentinian main land. Not a good idea XD
Mil3sIJ 1 year ago
"I counted them all out, and i counted them all back".
Hanrahan.
TroyaE117 1 year ago 2
Last flight today, very sad. A monumentally stupid decision by the Tories.
MITCHWILD 1 year ago
In The Guerra de las Malvinas (Sorry but I'm Agentine, and I don´t want problems with nobody) The air to air combat was an unequal confrontations, because harrier were armed with air to air AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles and the Argentine fighters with 30 mm or 20 mm cannons, Mirages, Daggers and A-4 respecively. The Argentine fighters, also, came from continent almost empty of fuel, and the English Pilots knew that because the French had said that weak point about Mirages and Daggers.
leofer1976 1 year ago
@leofer1976
Hey Ieofer1976 thanks for you comment but the whole point of warfare is to exploit those weaknesses, which the Argentina air force and navy failed to do. Your country completely out numbered the British forces out 20 to 1 this is a documented fact and should have beaten the navy's harriers as these where in mutirole ops. .
madjaime2007 1 year ago
In that time Fuerza Aerea Argentina was well trained an well equiped force - for example Dassault Super Etendard with Exocet was formidable combo - but the leaders feared to use it in proper scale on the proper battlefields... They despatched Skyhawks or Daggers without any fighter cover because they were scared of bombing argentinian mainland after the RAF´s Vulcan Black Buck missions. So the fighters stood in north of Argentina without any use.
007Galahad 1 year ago
Although the United Kingdom was only a breath away from losing the Falklands War, supperior training, and the age long British Military professionalism paid off and saved the U.K. from a possible and humiliating defeat!!
Billyyank1 1 year ago
democrac todayy isnt that what is was
40UmdrehungenMinimum 1 year ago
Great post,
Sea Harrier proved time and again she was the pre eminent fighter in Europe before her disgraceful treatment by the penny pinchers....and that's despite the lack of development.
shredjoe1 1 year ago 4
@shredjoe1 Do you mean when they gave the newish FRS2 away for peanuts to save money.Then the Royal Navy had to share the RAF's Harriers?
Cannot remember what went on,but it was all about saving money.
Aircraft Carriers without aircraft,we are now a joke.Thanks to our political leaders.
NAIAD49 1 year ago 6
@NAIAD49 Yes the FA2 had awesome radar and long rang missile systems, more than a match for any supersonic fighter - she proved herself time and again on exercises.
shredjoe1 1 year ago
@NAIAD49
please stop to fantasying. the GB goverment is a lier, even they lie to its own citizens.
pleas again, dont you be innocent.
greetings!!
respectfully
maurisciensen 1 year ago
@maurisciensen it might be fantasy to you, but it is all fact to me.......The Sea Harriers and the pilots did a fantastic job.
As for being innocent............All governments tell lies(mine and yours).
Thatchers government at that time told it pretty much as it was.
But the British people are being told some big lies today about other wars(Afghanistan)for example.
You do not be so innocent also...........Regards.
NAIAD49 1 year ago
Ah, the Swordfish! I think that in cost-efficacy relation that biplane was the best in the WWII... The damages that they produced, a airplane with low prestations...wow. I think something like this with the A-4s in Falklands.
elgriegodemalvinas 1 year ago
@elgriegodemalvinas The Swordfish would be no good to yous without the Fleet Air Arm crews of the Royal Navy............they are what made the Swordfish so successful.
NAIAD49 1 year ago 2
Credit where due. Argentine pilots were brave and skilled. But the rest of the A armed forces were either incompetent, scared, or they just didn`t have the will to fight against a superior enemy. Navy forsook their comrades in their UK-built ships, Arg infantry was a rabble.
We can split hair for a 1,000 years over points of view. Fact is, Arg chose to surrender. The British could have finished them completely, but they treat them well, even returned them home. Arg was lucky.
transonicbuoy1 1 year ago 9
@transonicbuoy1 you were lucky. The army want to fight but menendes was a coward. your soldiers those days were knightmen but now they deserve to be kill.
Leogalvanhalen 1 year ago
@transonicbuoy1 jajaja entonces por que "decretaron 90 años de secreto militar"????....256 bajas?????...ajajajajajja liar¡¡¡¡...
NicoGrind 1 year ago
NAIAD, I m afraid you missed many points, 1)WE were outnumbered in the air, not Britain 2) As the Mirages couldnt be refuel on air, they didnt have enough fuel for dogfight, so the A4 had to attack the ships armed only with bombs without air cover, so the only things your pilots had to do once they found them was to pull the trigger. 3) you had 34 Harriers with the American sidewinder 4) Our pilots were trained here, by ourselves, not in Israel!!!
Arminevh 2 years ago
This is a tribute to the Harrier pilots.
The basic facts are near enough true.
At one point we were down to only 20 Harriers or less.......how can 20 jets outnumber the Argie Air Force?
Where did I say they went to Israel to train?
They were trained by French and Israeli pilots.........just like theFrench technicians that trained them to fire Exocet missiles from French aircraft.....or did they learn that themselves.......don't make me laugh.
NAIAD49 2 years ago 2
@NAIAD49 well said fucking argies
M374EVL 1 year ago
@NAIAD49 "or did they learn that themselves.......don't make me laugh"
yes, cuz frenchs technicians left arg when war started, argentinians technicians worked for days tryng to active these exocets
LADYAW 1 year ago
@Arminevh NO, NO, NO and maybe
1) The British NEVER had more aircraft than the Argentinians
2) They had plenty of fuel to dogfight, they just did it very badly
3) The Sidewinder only works if it is used CORRECTLY (see my comment about bombs)
4) Maybe ...
Please do not think I am being rude about Argentina, its airforce or its pilots.
Many British people, including myself, are sad that this war happened. We never asked for it to start. But we are happy that Argentina is now a democracy :)
steveturner1967 2 years ago 12
Comment removed
pk5887 1 year ago
you where trained by the French the dagger pilots were a Israeli version of the the mirage the Argentine air force despite its bravery was decimated, let us look at today the roles are reversed, we can hit Argentine Airfields we can destroy Argentine ships not from 7000 meters but a 1000 miles maybe Christina should stop chucking her toys out of her pram and face realism
brendancoul 2 years ago
you maybe mental
MegaDanji 2 years ago
U are right man
Julyanch 1 year ago
@Arminevh
Your facts are inconclusive
madjaime2007 1 year ago
Was that a Swordfish at the end?
jtp0321 2 years ago
Yes,that was a Stringbag(Swordfish).
The Fleet Air Arm attacked a few Battleships and Battlecruisers with their
obsolescent machines.
Bismarck,Scharnhorst,Gniesenau and the Italian battleships in Taranto harbour.
Would of had a go at a Japanese Battleship given half the chance.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
Despite news reports at the time which said Hermes had 12 harriers onboard, she actually had 22 when she sailed from Pompey. When the RAF GR3's joined us we had 28
bombermills61 2 years ago
Daggers used Mica missiles. Their tactics were poor (welded wing not combat spread)
Argentinian pilots attacking the British ships in San Carlos were very brave but not effective because they released their bombs outside of the correct limits.
Many bombs ended up inside British ships unexploded because they had been dropped too low and not had time to fuse correctly.
Brave yes. Professional no. Apologies, but that is the truth
steveturner1967 2 years ago
Very well summed up steve.
There were reports just after the war of their bombs being very old American made.............the bombs removed from some British ships were new and British made.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
Hi man,how are you...
well...argentine pilots were very proffessional in that war,they don´t have altimeter,VLF,and they fougth with old and crap planes. Their only weapons were chronometer,his eyes,and bombs for the ground,not for combat over the sea...is suicidal fight against modern ships with that.Remember your forces had used sidewinders,that was your "silver bullet" in 82.That´s the true.
tinchou85 2 years ago
If they are not proffessional...tell me what is?. British military, recognize the professionalism argentine pilots...why a youtube user,not?
It a surprise for me to see british who don´t know that .
Anyway,greetings from buenos aires.
tinchou85 2 years ago
steveturner1967, our pilots had to be sent in waves of 4 to 6 to face your Harriers (34), land defenses (Rapiers, Stingers, Blowpipes etc) and your entire fleet with seadarts, seawolfs, 40 mm etc), short of fuel and without air cover, and even so they managed to hit more than 30 of your ships.
Your pilots couldnt even hit one huge inmovil target: the airstrip at Stanley. So if our pilots werent professionals, what were yours???
Arminevh 2 years ago
@Arminevh I am sorry if you are offended by my comments however, 4 or 6 FAA aircraft normally faced 2 Harriers on CAP ... NOT ALL the Harriers available. Yes you are correct about the Vulcan raids, they were also unprofessional at times. One time the bombs were not fused ... do you see what I mean?
Flying lower and lower when faced with AAA \ SAMs means a pilot does not deliver his bombs in a way that they will hit AND destroy the target.
steveturner1967 2 years ago
you didnt just have bombs you have exocet anti ship missiles. they wont be able to defeat phalanx or the type 45
UKCallum1 2 years ago
@UKCallum1 Yes, Argentinian navy Air Fleet had 4 Super Etendard and 5 Exocet anti-ship missiles, not that much.... Anyway, if you study this peculiar war, you'll see reaching Royal Navy ships with A4 or Dagger planes at very low level, lifting their bombs on them, was quite a challenge, quite a sporting effort. Almost no air coverage, they had to go for it no matter what, and They did it as good professionals, as any other UK pilot did it as well. Respect to ALL UK and ARGENTINA brave warriors.
lucianoestivill 1 year ago
@lucianoestivill.. thats because our anti aircraft missiles had a limitation which was they they couldnt fire if your planes flew below radar, but thats been fixed with our new Aster 15 and 30 missiles.. your air force was the only section of your armed forces that gave UK a headache.. i have respect for argentine pilots and UK pilots were also heavily outnumbered aswell
UKCallum1 1 year ago
Point taken. Argentine pilots were brave. But, the land war: British completely routed Argen troops when they landed. And they walked 80 miles, still fresh.
transonicbuoy1 2 years ago
With all respet I must say you that Harriers had sidewinders missiles, and our aircrafts had not other thing that bombs and cannon. (Argentine air force were destinated to sunk and strike and not to win air to air combats)
pancho133 2 years ago
pancho133......some of the Mirage and Daggers did carry missiles and fired them at the Harriers.Look at all the comments and you will find replies when I explained this to other people saying that the Argentine planes had no air to air missiles........they did.
But mostly the Argentine pilots were looking to drop their bombs and get out as fast as they could.
after the early sorties they did not want to dog fight............they used the right tactics,get in then get out fast.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
here google is bullshit. God will one day we can have that. haha
lebronchuck 2 years ago
yeah, i agree. all dictators are the same damned thing. they think like' people, our citizens? they're our pets'.wow! can you imagine that.and how can you understand spanish?
lebronchuck 2 years ago
Google Translate my friend.........thats how.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
con mejor armamento ganaba argentina, si los mirage hubieran tenido sidewinders, uff quien sabe. pero el dilema es este: gracias a que argentina perdio, cayo la dictadura y es por eso que hoy en dia son el gran pais que son. si hubieran ganado la guerra....da que hablar
lebronchuck 2 years ago
Yes,the Argentine dictatorship fell because of the defeat at the hands of the British............so in the bigger picture of things,we did the Argentine people a favour..........all the lost lives on both sides are at the hands of the Argentine dictators.They ruled by the bullet not the ballot box.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
Your figures are wrong a frigate built in the late 1970's would have cost less than US $100m.
Cost is not relevant the result is the only relevance. The Royal Navy was successful in landing thousands of troops without loosing any of them and then supporting them throughout the war. The Sea Harriers and RN SAM's did not win air superiority but they inflicted enough losses on the Argentines that by the end of the war their ability to lanch attacks was seriously degraded.
flashgrim 2 years ago
You're forgetting the SAS raids?
TheLabrador43 2 years ago
The SAS raid on Pebble island destroyed 6 Pucara's and I think 4 T-34 aircraft. the Pucara's were the main target.
The total number of Argentine fixed wing aircraft lost in the war was 75 aircraft.
flashgrim 2 years ago 2
Both argentinean and british pilots proved to be really brave and skillfull, regards from spain.
Godsdreamagent 2 years ago
Yes thr Argentine aircraft were effective in sinking our ships......as you state.
But the Argentine aircraft lost the war of attrition with the Royal Navy.....that is fact.
And if you use the fact the a ship costs more than a plane as you have in your above reply..........its a poor attempt by you
to play up your side.We could debate forever and we will not agree.....you have had your say,I have had mine,lets leave it at that..........regards.
NAIAD49 2 years ago
La RAF no consiguió el dominio aereo sobre las islas, aunque haya derribado 22 aviones los ataques siguieron hasta un día antes de terminar la guerra, de haber conseguido dominar el espacio aereo los ataques de la FAA y el COAN hubiesen cesado mucho antes.
090889a 2 years ago