"BBC News - Could Britain still defend the Falklands?" Topic

Useful summary of the 1982/2012 forces available.

link

(Of course that is only the forces at the time of invasion, not those subsequently sent. Perhaps someone can update the 1982 figure to show those present in May 1982).

It is not so much a case of could Britain defend it but more a question of could Argentina launch an invasion with any chance of success.

Since 1982 the British armed forces have had 30 years of almost constant operations, plenty of combat experience and are equipped with modern technology and weapons.

Since 1982 the argentine armed forces have stagnated, much of their equipment is obsolete, outdated and probably non-functional…and they have had no operational experience for 30 years.

Game over and it is time Argentina accepted the fact.

Ah but we are talking about gameable what ifs, not politically or materially restricted realities ;-)

In that case Geoff carry on!

:-)

How many aircraft could reach the Falklands from Argentina, with a meaningful weapons load?

Could any of those aircraft deal with the Typhoon fighters?

Are any ships in the Argentinian fleet able to face up to any of the British ships under a potentially unfriendly sky?

How much land forces could Argentina land in a single combat drop/ seaborne invasion?

Of course, if the Argentine forces sneaked in and knocked out the airbase by a commando action, and then arranged a mass landing of 3000 to 5000 combat troops and some field artillery… well it could be a difficult time for the British forces.

I have always thought the Argentinian people could rationally deal with the fact that the Falklands have been British Territory for a number of years and we are not going to give it back.

If we are going by Argentine logic, just because the British once held provinces in America, it is not right for the British government to demand them again more than 200 years later?

Of course giving some of the South American States licence to investigate oil under the Falklands Islands Area might be a way of establishing a better relationship, as at the moment much of the world is driven by greed.

Of course if we gave Chile Rights of Access to that Oil that might upset the Argentines…

Of course one of the interesting things about that article is that British intelligence is much better than last time meaning that the Argentinians are going to struggle to surprise the British the way they did last time (allegdly)

What if you went with a scenario where Argentina forms an alliance with Venezuel, Cuba and other like minded South American Nations and decide that the best way to distract their population attentions on their own failings is to drive up an anti-European and push to kickout 'the last vestige of imperialist colonialism' by invading the Falklands. They could even get support from Iran, Russia and China in the form of military gear and advisors and even some covert operations.

Argentina, Venezuela and Cuba could certainly use this as a domestic distraction and a means to rally the people against 'foregin aggression of imperialist powers'. Hugo Chavez has been very chummy with the president of Argentina. Whether he really has anything substantial to support the Argentians, is questionable. He'll certainly be spouting his mouth off in the least. Iran would be interested in supporting this to distract western powers and pulling the Royal Navy away from the Middle East and Iran itself. Longer term goals that China and Russia could be to form a larger power block that has more control of oil resources that choke the west.

So you can play this with a larger force against defending British forces than simply the Argentinians. Even include some more modern equipment too.

Now if you really want to throw them a surprise, perhaps Ahmedinjhad loaned the Venezuelians some of his Iranian made wonder weapons…..

Merchie drops off a small team at night with a bag of manpads… Typhoon IIs are good, but a small SAM will still upset your day.

Do the three RN ships include the Trafalgar class submarine reported as deployed to the South Atlantic? Those cruise missiles and torpedoes could be a game changer.

America constantly spies on the sneaky British military units so they don't get the drop on us like they did in 76 and 12 we know they covet our debt ridden bankrupt Land that was once theirs (before they stole it from the Amer Indians and Mexicans)we know they lust after our rust belt and bible belts. The pound is worth what twice as much as a dollar coincidence I think not . We will soon be shutting down our IFV and MBT production lines coincidence I think not. They know we don't watch the border with Canada we are to busy trying to keep the brown man out….and we ain't forgetting no Frenchmen either

The Falklanders not being able to express self-determination? Outrageous.

If you tolerate that then your islands will be next.

Let's not go into the why's. Let's stick to the how's. :-)

New chinese carrier fleet strolls round that area and an Exorcet accidentally damages it.Old Argie equipment or brits set it up? Or China did it to make a move in South Atlantic?
Chinese are ed off and start shifting gear over there with intention of taking islands for themselves which would be a great natural harbour for naval forces in that area.Would Argentina join forces with Britain to hold them?

I believe they currently have around 60 combat aircraft that "conceivably" could reach the Falklands, most of those being A-4s and then some Mirage IIIs, Vs, and some Daggers. I say conceivably as it's doubtful half of them are combat ready and they only have two aerial tankers. My guess is that a strike force of 10 aircraft might get there with 7-8 and maybe after the Typhoons get done with them 1 or 2 might survive to tell the tale.

For the purpose of a wargame, CmdrKiley's scenario is credible but I would restrict it to a coalition of South American countries, and perhaps Spain.

Yes, I think the 'defenders' have the where-with-all in all departments to take the battle to the 'attackers'. Naval battles in the South Atlantic would be the order of the day, with small SF actions on the islands and surrounding countries. A time period ought to be set so that no further military takes place and the victor is the one who controls the islands at the conclusion.

Supposedly, some of their aircraft have been upgraded with better bad weather nav equipment.

The Chileans reportedly have at least one sub that can launch Exocets, so if the Argentines could craft a South American coalition together, they might be a threat. That shouldn't be too difficult to do, if they promise a share of any oil profits.

The Argentines also had some trailer-mounted Exo's, so those might be deployable on various vessels as well.

Not sure if these can be used against land targets, but if so, they would be a real threat to the hardened shelters, and aircraft inside.

Brazil, or other S.A. countries might agree to help out. No doubt, Venezuela would be on board.

As mentioned, MANPADS can ruin one's day.

Seems to me the Typhoons are the linchpins of defense. Take those out, or neutralize them, and the British will have a tough time of it.

Of course, on the British side, the nuke boats will rule the seas.

If the Argies can capture the airbase(s) with a quick strike, hold them, and then fly in fighters and attack aircraft, they'll own the islands. A combined raiding force of men inserted via aircraft, sub, and/or boats/ships should be able to get them on the islands quickly.

Troops could be ferried to the islands via C-130's, and resupplied that way as well, at least for some time. Paradrops would be the most efficient way of getting the troops on the ground, until the runway(s) are secure, and safe for landing the big birds.

Of course, they'd need to avoid the Rapiers, and MANPADS as well, during insertion, so I suspect a low-altitude drop, in areas a bit of distance away from suspected, heavily defended areas, and a night march, overland against the airfield(s), and other strategic points.

Those figures are seriously flawed. When I was last there in 2004 the Military Garrison consisted of a Resident Infantry Company, at the time the mighty Support Company, Queen's Lancashire Regt. Nominally 100 men, actually more like 50. There are assorted logistics personnel, but they have operational roles other than the infantry role, although of course they could defend themselves if attacked…

Since then, unless the climate at the MoD has changed radically, the numbers will only have inexorably have slid down as funds are rerouted to far more important Civil Servant strategic roles such as extra committees and boards of enquiry….

I guess if we cold persuade the Argentine to spearhead the next invasion with penpushers we would be ok….

Those figure don't include the FDF though do they which is another light infantry company. I think the FDF is very differnt creature to the 82 version. According to the Falkland islands goverment website:-

Recent modernisation includes reconfiguring the Force into sniper/recce, machine gun, close combat, amphibious and logistic support units, co-ordinated by a central command. The Force supports the local community by providing a mountain rescue capability and trained search and rescue teams.

In 1999 members of the FIDF received training with Royal Navy establishments in the UK in the operation and maintenance of an Oerlikon 7 Alpha 20mm cannon, board and search, and various other skills associated with fisheries protection duties. Subsequently the FIDF has given the Falkland Islands Government Fisheries Department the capability of mounting armed deterrence against illegal fishing activity within the Falkland Islands conservation zones.

The FIDF is armed with the Steyr AIG assault rifle and light support weapons system, together with GPMG's (general purpose machine guns) and .5 heavy machine guns. The FIDF has excellent support equipment and night vision capability, together with a state of the art communications system that has the capability of giving secure communications, global positioning system interface and in-field email. In general terms the FIDF is very well equipped and now has the benefit of a new headquarters from which to train.

However, its greatest asset is undoubtedly the dedication and professionalism of the volunteers that give their time in order to serve their country.

That's the solution Sparker!

Dueling penpushers and beancounters from both sides, who get to experience the errors of their ways, in person, up close and personal, on the barren, windswept plains of the Falklands, in Winter, without proper kit, or clothing.

They'll be too busy just trying to survive to worry about fighting, which should make the status of the islands moot.

I got into this discussion before and it caused all kinds of sarcastic responses…

For those that don't think the Argentinans could do it on their own what would they need to purchase to make it viable in your opinion?

More transport aircraft civilian or military?

Missiles (cruise, antiship, antiair)

How long would it take to purchase these items?

I think its viable if they can destroy the Typhoons on the ground or at least prevent them from taking off. Hit the airfield with commandos. Even if they don't destroy the Typhoons they can force the them to stay inside their hangar / bunkers. Maybe they just need to kill the pilots or prevent them from reaching the Typhoons. Another option would be a cruise missile attack on the runway cratering it followed up with a paradrop from Argentina.

Once the airfield is down an around the clock airlift from Argentina to reinforce the island.

Another option would be a flotilla of small ships / boats from Argentina rushes the island after the airfield is down, with supplies and men converging from different directions / headings. Granted their is a small UK naval presence and it can't be everywhere. Is the SSN equipped to deal with this kind of threat?

Once on the island begin a massive fortification program to make an assault look to costly and improbable to the UK. The question is how far would the UK go to get them back?

"so if the Argentines could craft a South American coalition together, they might be a threat."

In exchange for a percentage of the oil field other South American nations agree to fly "humanitarian aid" to the poor starving Falkland Islanders in civilian cargo aircraft. These aircraft will bring in all kinds of supplies to sustain the Argentinan garrison.

"Those figures are seriously flawed"- Sparker

Thank you, I hate it when the media reports a number like that 1,200. They never differentiate between support personnel and combat arms troops. Yes most support troops are rifle qualified and can defend themselves in a static position. Don't expect much more than that…

"FDF though do they which is another light infantry company"

I would be interested to know if the FDF is composed of healthy young males or looks like a Volksturm unit with some obese out of shape older men in it.

I would guess that the worst ship for Dragon';s scenario is the nuke boat. Subs only have three responses, sink the target, go quiet, or run away.

To me, one of the difficult parts for the defence is when to sink ships. Do it too early you are accused of murder, do it too late and you lose the islands.

I suspect that it would not be enough to incapacitate the Typhoons, it would be nec to secure the runway and enough of the surrounding country to stop the brits shooting down valuable planes full of soldiers with manpads.

You could see some long ferry times in typhoons from the UK to reinforce until the airport is properly secured by the Argies.

I also don't see the Chilean navy taking part. Venezuela perhaps, Cuba (OMG Floggers?), dunno about Brazil. Ecuador and Bolivia would be providing a cheer squad. Peru, possible, but doubtful.

50 riflemen is not much more than they had in '82. Mind you the Argentine amphibious lift and logistics capability is pretty bad these days.

I would be interested to know if the FDF is composed of healthy young males or looks like a Volksturm unit with some obese out of shape older men in it.

Interesting question. I watched a youtube video that followed the FDF as they were planning out a FTX. The guys I saw were on the younger side from older teens to late twenties. Granted, it was a video, but they looked rather professional and seemed to know their business. Remember, they were invaded 30 years ago and the memory of the whole affair is very much on their minds. The Falklanders take the whole thing very seriously and service in the FDF is highly regarded.

Not a "Dad's Army" by any means. As good as regulars? Probably not, but they can probably do their jobs well enough.

<If we are going by Argentine logic,…it is not right for the British government to demand them again more than 200 years later?>

Now that would be more interesting to game. Of course, it needs a force equaliser to make this viable. How about blue States siding with the Brits?

With regard to the FDF I only met some of them socially when the gun club that hosted a days Clay Target shooting for my sailors seemed to consist of the entire Port Stanley detachment. Great guys, who looked tough and fit and very outdoorsy. More to the point, they know 'the camp' terrain inside and out….

BTW, for any Clays shooters out there, you haven't shot proper Down the Line until you've done so in a Falklands 'breeze'!

Out of curiosity, why didn't the Argentinians base aircraft at the field in the Falklands? Was it not up to snuff for basing fighters?

I'd go with a sub or merchant ship launched commando raid on the airfield if I were the Argentinians. You can take out Typhoons on the ground with a few old LAWS rockets or even a few well placed grenades. In the air the Typhoon rules, but on the ground it's a very expensive target.

Take out the Typhoons and the British Navy doesn't have much it can do in the way of air cover.

However, as pointed out elsewhere, the Argentinian armed forces haven't progressed much since the first war. It's not like they are riding a high water mark in their capabilities.

Out of curiosity, why didn't the Argentinians base aircraft at the field in the Falklands? Was it not up to snuff for basing fighters?

Pretty much. The airfields on the Falklands could handle civilian and some cargo planes like the C-130. But nothing on the islands could support modern jets.

The British fixed them problem with the "new" base that they built after the war.

Port Stanley is big enough, but the main problems were logistical – fast jets require massive support to keep them flying and that would have added a major headache to an already strained logistical operation. They did operate MB-339 ground-attack jets out of Port Stanley in 1982 and it is capable of acting as a diversionary airfield for fast jets.

I would be interested to know if the FDF is composed of healthy young males or looks like a Volksturm unit with some obese out of shape older men in it.

They look pretty professional to me

If I recall, the airfield was deemed to be a bit short.

Also, there was the enemy carrier/Sea Harrier threat (now no longer an issue).

Flood the islands with a flotilla of small boats, carrying men from Argentina, after the Typhoons are neutralized.

It'd be a waste of missiles/torpedoes, if the SSN can even engage those.

Flood the islands with a flotilla of small boats, carrying men from Argentina, after the Typhoons are neutralized

Thats when the Falkland islands deploy their Patrol vessel Protegat which had a refit to include

Mr Summers said, "A permanent base plate was welded to the deck to facilitate the siting of the 20mm Oerlikon Gun"

(I'm still going with suicide penguins)

Yes, of course the UK can defend the Falklands.

For those that don't think the Argentinans could do it on their own what would they need to purchase to make it viable in your opinion?

A credible Navy.
A credible Air Force.
Maybe some upgrades to the Army.

A magical wand that voids the NATO member defense treaties.

Maybe a couple hundred nuclear missiles.
-Kle.

Take out the Typhoons and the British Navy doesn't have much it can do in the way of air cover.

Given the capabilities of the ship we've just sent down there, it doesn't need air cover…

It carries more missiles than the Argentinians have planes, and can knock them out on their runways whilst staying in Falklands waters.

£1.00 GBPbn buys you a very capable bit of kit…

Seems the Argentinians have now decided to harm their tourist industry by stopping cruise ships which have visited the Falklands from stopping off in Argentina.

(I'm still going with suicide penguins)

LOL That one just made my day! Now to wipe spilled coffee off my keyboard….

Yes, we had the suicide penguins debate a while back.

As the original article points, the current forces stationed in the Falklands are perfectly adequate to defend it against a conventional attack. The problem is that if, somehow, the Argentinians do get ashore (by some dastardly and underhand trick no doubt) we can't retake the islands because our illustrious leaders have decided we don't need any aircraft carriers at the moment (and no Harriers to fly off them either). Perhaps the French would lend us a carrier?

Flood the islands with a flotilla of small boats, carrying men from Argentina, after the Typhoons are neutralized

Can anybody tell me how fast small boats can go? We are talking about 300 miles at the nearest point remember.

OK about 10 hours I guess at 27ish knots. Is that too fast for the type of boats we are talking about or too slow?

"We are talking about 300 miles at the nearest point remember."-Bridget

Prestage from freighters or fishing trawlers much closer than 300 miles and carry extra fuel.

@KLE

More sarcasm… You can what if with nukes and NATO intervention and the entire might of NATO military against the Argentinans. Even Martin said once the Argentinans are ashore The UK doesn't have any aircraft carriers or Harriers so they could not retake the islands.

My scenario is totally improbable but we are living in the realm of what if…

Thanks for the FDF clarifications for those that posted.

C-17s can fly directly to the Falklands and can put down on a number of airstrips, as well as Port Stanley and MPA. Assembling any sort of invasion force will trigger a rapid reinforcement via C-17. How many Apaches can a C-17 carry, I wonder…? Typhoon can also fly straight there. Tornado and Phantom could not.

There is no NATO obligation to get involved in the Falklands, as the Treaty only covers attacks on NATO members in Europe or North America. The original NATO members had no wish to get involved in the colonial wars of other NATO members (though the founding charter did include Algeria, as that was regarded as a part of 'Metropolitan France'). If NATO had been obliged to get involved under NATO's founding charter, that would have happened in 1982.

However, I do seem to remember there being a defence clause in the Treaty of Lisbon (added by France), requiring EU powers to get involved following an attack on the colonial territory of an EU member. I'm not sure if that was ever passed as part of the final treaty, but it was certainly discussed at the time.

Re Carriers; the Royal Navy does actually still have HMS Illustrious, which will stay in service as a helicopter carrier until HMS Ocean comes out of refit in 2014 or thereabouts.

My guess is that a strike force of 10 aircraft might get there with 7-8 and maybe after the Typhoons get done with them 1 or 2 might survive to tell the tale.

The typhoons have AMRAAM and ASRAAM – no-one's getting home after tangling with those bad boys.

Going back to the graphic in the OP – do they really have Rapier FSB in the Falklands, and not FSC ?

It's just a stock Rapier graphic. They've got FSC down there and I think FSB is long-dead anyway. It would also be the work of a moment to stick Starstreak down there as well.

TGerritsen asked:

why didn't the Argentinians base aircraft at the field in the Falklands? Was it not up to snuff for basing fighters?

The runway in Port Stanley was too short for Skyhawks and Mirages in 1982. The aircraft based by Argentina in the Falklands were limited to 24 x Pucará, 6 x Aermacchi MB-339 and 4 x Beech T-34 Mentor.

Argentina has learnt since 1982 too. They won't attack the Islands. Just will do noise, forcing the already strained British economy to sink more money on the islands. In the meanwhile, they will be pressuring in the international fora to get their part in the cake of the oil reserves in South Atlantic. Britain will boast her military prowess. Argentina will boast her improved economy.

I thought the time was right to retake the Malvinas from the northern heathens!!!

YouTube link

Dan

The funny part is this: "Given the capabilities of the ship we've just sent down there, it doesn't need air cover…"

keywords being 'the ship' and 'it'… we're going to win a war with one warship? What if the enemy cheats and brings two?

Reminds me of the outstanding tactical genius last time around who put all the heavy lift choppers on one merchantman. You know, the big one that stopped a couple of exocet because it made the best target for miles around.

The whole plan for defense/recapture seems to hinge on the opposition being even more decrepit than we are.

To those who advocate invading after crossing 300 miles of South Atlantic waters in small boats, I say : after you please! You wouldn't be fit to fight your way out of a sleeping bag…

I think the main reason the Falkland Islands will stay British is the firm resolve of the Falkland Islanders to remain so…OK, they are white and anglo-saxon, but surely their views must still count for something at the UN?

Or am I being naive again?

As nobody's mentioned it, I thought it was nice to see Sean Penn reprising his role from Team America: World Police last week. :o)