How exactly did this happen where more RN vessels were damaged

>>33742984
RN task force didn't lose its most important ships, and the Argentine navy withdrew after losing the belgrano out of fear of RN submarines, the RN had sufficient ships available to soak up the losses and was able to keep its operational plan more or less the same despite the damage

The Argentine navy lost its single most important ship and the linchpin of its naval strategy, and because of that and the psychological effect of losing its most prestigious vessel withdrew, all British ship losses were caused by air attack

>>33743075
I suppose my question is moreso - Did the RN/AF not seek out the Argentine fleet or were the Argentinians simply staying back for the majority of hostilities?

It just doesn't seem right for such a vastly superior force to suffer so much more casualties.

>>33743128
The Belgrano was the first ship sunk, after that was over all of the Argentine ships save hospital vessels which can't be targeted under the laws of war withdrew from the operational area, because of that, it wouldn't make sense tactically or logistically for the British to attempt to attack them, as they no longer constituted a threat (Argentine aircraft were operating off the mainland, not off the fleet) , so they didn't

The British fleet could not withdraw as they were where the assault on the Islands were being launched from, and the combination of having to stay within the Argentine air force's operating bubble in order to support the attack, a few bad calls and some very good flying by the Argentine's resulted in the disproportionate amount of damage done

If the Argentines had kept their Armada engaged they would have been slaughtered due to the tonnage advantage going to the RN and the Argentines not being able to respond efficiently without their flagship

File: AM_39Eng%20(480%20x%20285)[1].jpg (17KB, 480x285px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x285px

>>33742984
Argentina had a lot of French anti ship missiles.

>>33743240
Really? I was under the impression that the Belgrano (fuck Argentina for losing a great ship, it should've been a museum instead of being sold to them) was sunk near the end of the war from how Argies talk about it

>>33743268
>a lot of French anti ship missiles
five.
With them they sunk the destroyer HMS Sheffield and the aircraft transport Atlantic Conveyor, and damaged the destroyer HMS Glamorgan.

>>33743316
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War#Sinking_of_ARA_General_Belgrano

Of course they would, it sank while sailing up the Thames blasting the national anthem while the captain mooned the Queen

>>33743316
It was sunk little under half way through the war, and before the British landings.

>>33742984
The Argies were pretty good at dropping bombs on the bongs, not so good at tinkering with the fuses though since they didn't adjust the bombs to detonate from low-altitude drops.

>>33743392
Kek. And I read somewhere the Americans kept quiet about it and withdrew all of the manuals for adjusting it. Don't get me wrong. My fav jet is the A4 Skyhawk and I loved to see them wreck Navy warships. Small, nimble, slow but carries almost the same bomb loads as WWII heavy bombers.

>>33742984
Your infographic is incorrect.
You fail to include the argie corvette that got shot up by the marines during the initial attack, and also a submarine that was damaged by helicopter attack.

>>33742984
Because as soon as the Belgrano went down, the Argentine navy turned tail and ran back to port. It's tough to sink ships when their are tied up to the pier.

>>33746157

Not really. Taranto and Pearl Harbor come to mind. It just really wasn't worth the effort if the Argies were gonna be cowards. The Bongs were there to recover their territory, not to annihilate the Argies.

San Luis attacked again on the night of 10 May. The frigate Alacrity had made passage up Falkland Sound, sinking an Argentine merchant navy ship on the way. As Alacrity left the channel before dawn, sister ship Arrow was waiting to accompany her back to the Task Force. San Luis detected the two ships and fired two SST-4 torpedoes, one of which did not leave its tube; the other was apparently defeated by Arrow's anti-torpedo measures.[13] There were several problems with torpedoes and torpedo systems; in particular it appears that the torpedoes were not prepared properly, and did not arm themselves after firing, so would not explode even if they did hit a target. It has been suggested that previous apparent misses could have been due to torpedoes which struck home but did not explode.[13] After the Falklands War ended, German and Dutch engineers were sent to Argentina to discover what went wrong with their torpedoes. The problem was found to be that one of the Argentine sailors who was in charge of periodic maintenance of the torpedoes had inadvertently reversed the polarity of power cables between the torpedoes and the submarine. This meant that when the torpedoes' gyros were spun up, they ran "backwards" and thus tumbled on launch, preventing the weapons from taking up their proper heading.[14][15]

>>33744558
>Small, nimble, slow but carries almost the same bomb loads as WWII heavy bombers.

It carries significantly more.

Just like basically every single multirole jet in existence.

>>33742984
This image omits damage to Argentine ships as well as additional task force vessels, and the damage to many of the RN ships here was little more than being hit by a bomb that failed to explode or being strafed by 20mm.

>>33746266
They couldn't even if they wanted to.

The image leaves out damaged Argentine ships and exaggerates, massively, the damage dealt to the RN.

This is the country that claims they sank the Invincible, so there you go.

File: HMS_Queen_Mary_Jutland.jpg (365KB, 1200x647px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1200x647px

>>33743075
>the RN had sufficient ships available to soak up the losses and was able to keep its operational plan more or less the same despite the damage
Kinda like Jutland. British newspapers cried a storm about the exchange ratio but the German Navy's surface fleet was completely contained from that day on.

>>33742984
The photo is plain wrong, the biggest giveaway is the ships with "major damage" with 0 casualties. Look at the records of some of those ships, everything from unexploded bombs to minor external fires that were put out. As far i can can remember HMS Glasgow is the only ship not sunk that was forced to return to the UK - under her own power 6000 miles away.

There are also 7 sunk argentine ships and one sunk submarine missing.

Most of the damage took place at the amphibious landings at st carlos, ships were stationary close to shore unloading supplies and the Argentines launched 50 sorties against them on the first day, casualties were unavoidable but the layered air defence from the carriers, ships and rapier batteries put an end to those suicidal raids.

>>33747557

There were 5 SSN's Patrolling just off the argentine coast monitoring port activity, literally within periscope distance.

Had the UK wanted to expand the conflict beyond the TEZ then we could have sunk their entire fleet.

>>33747868
And none of them could deal with another submarine as seen by the RNs use of unguided torps.

The RN was a paper shark.

>>33748383

>The RN was a paper shark.

>being this willing to make yourself look like an idiot

The captain of HMS conqueror decided to use unguided torpedoes rather than rely on tigerfish which was least reliable when travelling close to the surface in rough seas - the conditions that were present. This was a trait of all early wire guided torpedos.

the RN SSN's could have destroyed the argentine fleet weeks before the rest of the RN arrived with a combination of torpedoes and Harpoon but they were tasked with observation only and required permission to fire on targets entering the TEZ.

>>33748611
>harpoons

this is just pathetic at this point.

Just admit that you'll never be able to actually hold onto Malvinas if Argentina actually tried. It's the only way you'll be able to get over your disillusion.

File: Hermes.jpg (926KB, 3413x2358px) Image search: [Google]

926KB, 3413x2358px

>>33748662
>this is just pathetic at this point.

Do you realise Harpoon was deployed to the Falklands on HMS Courageous? No, i guess you didn't know that otherwise, you wouldn't embarrass yourself like that.

>Just admit that you'll never be able to actually hold onto Malvinas if Argentina actually tried. It's the only way you'll be able to get over your disillusion.


tried with what? they have no fast jets, no amphibious capability, their military has gone backwards since the war and their ships are sinking in port. It's a joke.

Troll harder.

Because the other side didn't use its fucking navy

Pretty easy to have more naval losses that way

>>33748709
>Do you realise Harpoon was deployed to the Falklands on HMS Courageous?

Which is why it was used, right?

>tried with what? they have no fast jets, no amphibious capability, their military has gone backwards since the war and their ships are sinking in port. It's a joke.

O I am laffin. The RN and RAF are the smallest its ever been, has twice as many admirals as ships and they can't even sell the Canadians a ship that works. Fired off 70% of their tomahawks at Libya and never bought new ones. No one is afraid of the RN.

>>33749194
>No one is afraid of the RN.
Argentina fits the descriptor "No one".

File: US_Navy_101019-N-1324F-223_The_aircraft_carrier_USS_Enterprise_(CVN_65)_is_underway_with_the_Royal_Navy_destroyer_HMS_Daring_(D_32).jpg (825KB, 2100x1415px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 2100x1415px

>>33749194
>Which is why it was used, right?

B61 nuclear bomber were never deployed in Germany because they were never used right? This is literally how retraded you sound.

>O I am laffin. The RN and RAF are the smallest its ever been, has twice as many admirals as ships and they can't even sell the Canadians a ship that works. Fired off 70% of their tomahawks at Libya and never bought new ones. No one is afraid of the RN.

Cry all you like, we're one of the only two blue water navies in the world and not a thing you cry about will change that.

>>33742984
>How exactly did this happen where more RN vessels were damaged or sunk?
Someone hid in port the whole time.
Guess who.

>>33749194
then why hasn't Argentina tried to retake the Falklands?

The RN has some of the most modern Submarines, and one of the best Air defence ships in the world, combined with what is soon to be 2 aircraft carriers.

If no one was afraid of them, why has no one moved?

File: w88-image10.jpg (81KB, 640x536px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x536px

>>33742984
These things are expensive and the lack of Argentinian beef would be annoying.

>>33749301
>then why hasn't Argentina tried to retake the Falklands

The true question is why hasnt the Falklands tried to take Argentina? Just need to get a little backing from Brazil.. and BAM we got ourselves a nation.

>>33749368
Yeah, fire those secret ship building facilities back and give them heck. :)

>>33749397
*up

>>33742984

You do realise that infographic is extremely misleading yeah? For one it completely fucking ignores all the other ships and subs the Royal Navy rekt, or the fact that the entire Argentine Navy immediately broke and fled the moment the subs got on the scene.

Can't get hurt if you give up and leave immediately.

It also hugely exaggerates the damage to the RN. Many of the ones there were minor damage that didn't put them out of action at all.

>>33749194

>and they can't even sell the Canadians a ship that works

Remind me of the last "ship" we sold Canada?

>The RN and RAF are the smallest its ever been

And the Argentine Navy is surging in size, right?

>Fired off 70% of their tomahawks at Libya and never bought new ones

Patently false.

File: HMCS_Victoria_SSK-876_near_Bangor.jpg (123KB, 1000x372px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1000x372px

>>33749464
We sold them some subs that didn't like being on fire with the hatches open at sea.
Call it an education.

>>33744558
Yeah Max Hastings talked about the fuses in his book.

>>33742984
>Its another Argie butthurt thread
DAILY REMINDER
https://youtu.be/VKkcTpCur7g

File: bring it.jpg (65KB, 764x422px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 764x422px

>>33742984
Retaking the Falklands was logistically like Argentina taking this place.

Job got done.

>>33749655
Nah retaking the falklands was easier
Taking the Isle of Wight would be some nightmare level shit, considering Portsmouth is right fucking there and the military can mass for a counter attack much more quickly and have a much shorter distance to travel to get onto the island

>>33747594
>As long as we've got more lads to throw away than you, we win!

No wonder Britain couldn't do anything of note in WW2 until the burgers came along

>>33749301
>the best air defence ships
>not even half the magazine of a burger burke class let alone anything China, Australia, Japan, Korea or Russia makes
>doesn't even have a helo that can carry a good airborne radar
>no third party targeting available for any of its anti air munitions
>b-b-b-b-but muh radar that's sooper great that can detect things flying high and being stupid

The fucking state of bongoloids

File: Falklands-War.jpg (138KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1200x630px

>>33750126
In WW2 the UK basically paid for the Burgers.
Falklands: Regulars are worth an awful lot more than conscripts.

>>33750201
Hmm... Foreign chap then. Best Korea possibly.

File: fullscreen-capture-31-oct-15-095954-bmp.jpg (158KB, 631x424px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 631x424px

Foreign chap on the left seems to have a silenced Stirling.

File: HuJHTS7.jpg (65KB, 855x717px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 855x717px

>>33750249

>>33750278
Yeah, I thought so.

>>33750299
What is that even supposed to mean?

File: Atlantic-Conveyor-off-Ascension-Island-01.jpg (348KB, 1024x687px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1024x687px

>>33750582
Similar.
Aircraft carrier. Exocet. Pity about that non existant CIWS.

>>33750249
>>33750299
>>33750651
what are you even talking about?

File: main-qimg-6b4b50721196955bfc375d9a8301da42.gif (21KB, 369x261px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 369x261px

>>33750776
>>33750278
That wankstain and this the coaling station near Chile.

File: map.jpg (92KB, 600x598px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x598px

Caution. Potential invasion by belligerent local basket case during cruise.

>>33743128
>Did the RN/AF not seek out the Argentine fleet or were the Argentinians simply staying back for the majority of hostilities?
Both. The UK declared an exclusion zone for 200 miles around the islands, and declared anything inside of it dies and everything that stays outside of it will be left alone. Then they *sort of* broke their own rule when they intercepted communications and realized the Belgrano and other Argentine warships were encircling and PLANNING to enter the zone. After the preemptive attack on the Belgrano, the Argentine navy aborted their attack plan and returned to port for the rest of the war, and the UK decided not to pursue them or attack the mainland.

>>33751501
That's not really the story of the TEZ. The TEZ was "anything in here dies unconditionally", and outside the TEZ the UK could attack at their own whim if they felt it was a threat.

For anyone interested, here's a first hand account with pics written by a machinist's mate aboard the Argonaut someone posted in a previous thread:
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/falklands-war-hms-argonaut.244349/

Makes for a fascinating overall narrative of the naval conflict with specific timeline and events in the Argonaut's two 1000lbs bomb hits and damage control.

Why did the USA lose 10,000 aircraft in Vietnam and North Vietnam only lost 200?

>>33742984
to put it another way, the british sank everything that even went near a combat zone, while the argentinians managed to sink only a few vessels at the cost of most of their airforce

>>33749497
>We sold them some subs that didn't like being on fire with the hatches open at sea.

not to nitpick but the fire happened because despite clear instructions not to do so the canadians insisted on opening said hatches while at sea, the fire was entirely the fault f the canadians

>>33751844
First of all and most importantly because the NVA didn't have much more than 200 aircraft, and just about everything they sent up against us got wrecked over time. Almost all the US losses were to SAMs or ground fire; in A2A the US soundly beat the North Vietnamese.

Secondly, in order of relevance:
>over half of those were helicopters, which were always under the altitude ceiling for AAA guns and very vulnerable in early air cav tactics
>poor but improving tactics against nascient IADS/SAM/AAA threats for ground support and strike aircraft - this is one of the conflicts that saw SEAD/DEAD tactics initially developed
>visual ID ROE for A2A engagement
>poor USAF A2A training, 4-ship formations and doctrine
>compared to today, lack of PGMs meant that aircraft were forced to go low and slow if they wanted their ground strikes on target, which exposed them to ground fire and SAMs

>>33751533
>>33751533
>That's not really the story of the TEZ. The TEZ was "anything in here dies unconditionally", and outside the TEZ the UK could attack at their own whim if they felt it was a threat.

indeed and they made a int of reminding the argies of that fact at the same time as the declared the TEZ
'In announcing the establishment of a Maritime Exclusion Zone around the Falkland Islands, Her Majesty's Government made it clear that this measure was without prejudice to the right of the United Kingdom to take whatever additional measures may be needed in the exercise of its right of self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. In this connection Her Majesty's Government now wishes to make clear that any approach on the part of Argentine warships, including submarines, naval auxiliaries or military aircraft, which could amount to a threat to interfere with the mission of British Forces in the South Atlantic will encounter the appropriate response. All Argentine aircraft, including civil aircraft engaged in surveillance of these British forces, will be regarded as hostile and are liable to be dealt with accordingly.'

>>33752015
I think you missed the relevance of the question in relation to the OP

>>33752312
I think you're upset that your shitpost failed to elicit the reaction you wanted.

File: Belgrano-Sunk-copy2.jpg (87KB, 893x581px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 893x581px

>>33749301
Argentina do not have the military resources to preform an invasion again and the British are actually prepared this time.

https://youtu.be/_fg5amio4jU

>>33746266
>Pearl Harbor
>grand total of 2 capital ships that were a total loss
>two more sunk but returned to service

Maybe pick a better example.

>>33752324
No, he's right. You just didn't get. I would say no shame in that, but you did make yourself look a little stupid.

>>33750651
>Thinks Atlantic conveyor was an aircraft carrier and not just a civilian transport with a landing spot.

>wants to know why a civilian ship taken up fro m trade has no CIWS when the fleet sailed 2 days after the invasion (if you look at the logistics involved this is the most impressive feat of military logistics and organisation we have ever seen)

The exocet was also spoofed by its warship target fairly easily, unfortunately it caused it to lock onto Atlantic Conveyor in the background instead.

Even missing the supplies and aircraft that it was carrying the argies sill got curb stomped on land.

File: ColonelDM1205_228x390.jpg (27KB, 228x390px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 228x390px

Because the Brits are reckless glory chasers. There's the commanding Lt. Colonel killed at Goose Green during this war:

>Colonel Jones immediately seized a sub-machine gun, and, calling on those around him and with total disregard for his own safety, charged the nearest enemy position. This action exposed him to fire from a number of trenches. As he charged up a short slope at the enemy position he was seen to fall and roll backward downhill. He immediately picked himself up, and again charged the enemy trench, firing his sub-machine gun and seemingly oblivious to the intense fire directed at him. He was hit by fire from another trench which he outflanked, and fell dying only a few feet from the enemy he had assaulted.

Avoidable and stupid for a colonel.

>>33757428

You clearly don't know anything about the battle if you're advocating them to not charge forward.

File: 209794.jpg (31KB, 590x438px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 590x438px

Reminder that this very vehicle caused Argentina to chimp out big time, and try to kill a camera crew who were going to play football with them.

>>33742984
Where's the submarine the Argentinians lost?

>>33757428
Wasn't his unit caught out in the open with no cover? Sources state he panicked and did what he thought was right; charge straight into the enemy.

Better than get shot up hiding in a ditch.

>>33755307
This is just pathetic. Your shitpost failed. Learn from it and try better next time

>>33757428
>https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/falklands-war-hms-argonaut.244349/
>royal marine
>time and place
>no giant mustache

what gives?

>bongistanis perform badly
>make up any excuse they possibly can to explain it

you guys put burgers to shame

>>33752324
Read the question, read the OP, then try to understand how the question relates to answering the OP.

File: 29-Regiment-Royal-Artillery-740x556.jpg (122KB, 740x556px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 740x556px

>>33758025
>bongistanis perform badly

Nice bait.

>>33758124
It really doesn't, it's just an attempt at baiting while being extraordinarily butthurt over nothing.

>>33742984

How much of a fit would the media have if the RN lost that many destroyers today?

>>33757571
They were attacking an Argentine trench and had failed to notice a trench closer to them on the left flank, as he assaulted onto the suppressed trench he was hit in the back from the one that hadn't been seen

File: 1486381073742.jpg (773KB, 3000x2041px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 3000x2041px

>>33759651
how many memes would we have if the argies tried to take the falklands and lost their entire airforce and navy to a single T45?

>>33760055
Probably none because it wouldn't happen. The RN of the time was capable of dealing with high flying objects that the type 45 is designed for as well.

Meanwhile, they got STRAFED by planes and even had iron bombs dropped on them without retaliation.

Pretty pathetic all things told

>>33762216
difference is a type 45 is also capable of handling sea skimmers.

>>33743348
Didn't they get the HMS Penelope as well? Working from memory.

>>33758025
>perform badly
they performed professionally and had access to better technology.
our pilots damaged all those vessels because they were reckless psychos that engaged naval targets speeding barely 5 meters from the sea and used freefall munitions on an horizontal trajectory, as if they were rockets.
had the retards at the military junta actually told the air force beforehand that they were going to invade there would be a lot more red on the brit side.

>>33762810
All the junta had to do was wait another 6-12 months, they would of had a full squadron of Super Etendards, many more Exocets, and the HMS Invincible would of been sold to Australia.
Although they probably would of collapsed by then.

>>33746568
>After the Falklands War ended, German and Dutch engineers were sent to Argentina to discover what went wrong with their torpedoes.
Reminder Britain was part of the EU at this time and the French sold the Argies their exocets, and they wonder why Britain had less than total loyalty to their European ideal.