UK unlikely to block Gripen sale to Argentina

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: bullcat

Actually, it's not. Under the NPT they won't transfer nuclear weapons or material to non-nuclear states. The UK and US were two of the three original nuclear weapons states.

Zaph, bullcat is just one of our newest "antiwest/prorussian" visitors.

He is only here for one reason, if that wasn't obvious.

"West bad and weak, russia good the strongest".

I have interacted with him several times.

Your wisdom is lost on him, that isn't his purpose for being here.

His views are not to seek out truth or knowledge, or add content.

They are more "one sided", if you get my meaning.

ETA- thanks for the thread, very good info and well done.

As I have cone to expect from your posts.

Just a couple questions though.

Does Argentina have midair refueling abity for the SU-27?

If so, that could pose major problems for the Brits with just a handful of fighters to defend the islands.

Would their fighters stay inside their AA window to protect them, or are their strats more proactive?

I think they need at least a couple of surface ships in conjunction, to even put up a moderate to weak defense against a dozen SU-27 that could harass and drop cruise missiles from just outside the islands AA range.

Am I looking at this wrong, or is this actually as it seems, and Britain is in a weakish position here?

Three points.

1. I know that the future is unpredictable, but Argentina has wisely ruled out any use of force to attempt to reclaim the Falklands again. Argentina is [I]now[/I] a democracy and I doubt the population would support an aggressive act.

2. Can Argentina afford all these new toys? The nation is worse than broke - it owes my grandma money!

3. Recent announcements in the UK is that the Falkland Islands defence systems would be upgraded (just in case) make the Falklands even more difficult to tangle with. For example, replacing Rapier units with FLAADS at some stage in the next few years. It's nice to have shiny new planes, but no so nice when they have to fly over a place defended by a professional army/navy/airforce with equipment designed to shoot down shiny new planes!

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

Yeah, they're screwed until the Queen Elizabeth and F-35s are ready to go when it comes to force projection.

They're also doubly screwed because the populous don't want more wars.

It is political suicide. Especially with an election coming up, there already is no majority parliament like they had i yesteryears.

Haha are you trying to be funny Bulcat? Nothing unites Brits like the protection of our people in the Falklands. The Falklands to Britain are like the Crimea is to Russia. Any move by the Argies will be met by a totally united front by the British people and politicians of all the main parties.

Especially for Mr Bullcat

Well even if the order went on to order the Gripen, via Basil the soonest delivery time would be maybe 2/3years away.

The RAF can add more Typhoons and very soon will have Meteor missiles 2015/2016.

I would bet nothing comes of the Gripen deal but the SU24's from Russia is a different deal altogether :-)

RAB

originally posted by: RAB
Well even if the order went on to order the Gripen, via Basil the soonest delivery time would be maybe 2/3years away.

The RAF can add more Typhoons and very soon will have Meteor missiles 2015/2016.

I would bet nothing comes of the Gripen deal but the SU24's from Russia is a different deal altogether :-)

RAB

Yeah I hear the UK is rolling in money. Where are they finding this money from to throw at new fighters and what is the lead time on them, and training new pilots to fly them?

Wouldn't it be better to just buy more drones?

How does their costs and lead times and training compare?

a reply to: johnwick

They're Su-24s, not -27s, and yes, once they have the KC-390 they'll have an advanced tanker capability that can easily get them to the Islands.

a reply to: bullcat

As for the UK added more typhoons, I'm not talking about buying anymore but the RAF has 6 Squadrons already. That's about 72 aircraft excluding the 4 already on the Falklands. If needed the UK could deploy more to the Falklands.

RAB

a reply to: paraphi

They still owe a lot on the -390s, but paid a portion of that and have worked out a deal with Brazil.

originally posted by: RAB
a reply to: bullcat

As for the UK added more typhoons, I'm not talking about buying anymore but the RAF has 6 Squadrons already. That's about 72 aircraft excluding the 4 already on the Falklands. If needed the UK could deploy more to the Falklands.

RAB

Which would dilute their NATO slavery err commitments around the world occupying err defending freedoms.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

Yeah, they're screwed until the Queen Elizabeth and F-35s are ready to go when it comes to force projection.

They're also doubly screwed because the populous don't want more wars.

It is political suicide. Especially with an election coming up, there already is no majority parliament like they had i yesteryears.

100% bollocks


The UK does not want more wars in the ME over foreign countrys.


The falklands are british land with british people living on them! A attack om the falklands is a attack on Britain itself and we DONT take attacks lightly,


To not defend our islands would be political sucide,

Out of interest, aside from invading the Falklands, what need does Argentina have for armed forces? Does it fear attack from Chile or Uruguay?

Meanwhile they continue to attack Britain for "militarising" the Falklands, whose inhabitants have every real fear of attack from colonial imperialist forces .....

And wasnt there a story recently about their hypocritical allies Russia sellng them some long range bombers?

a reply to: crazyewok
Agreed.
Personally I don't want British troops fighting anywhere, but defend our islands if they are under threat of attack? Yes, everytime. I can't imagine many Brits saying "Oh the Argies have invaded the Falklands again, oh well, best let them keep it this time".
I'd go so far as to suggest there would even be calls to send an Astute class sub off the coast of Argentina and a few cruise missiles at their military bases in the event of any future attack. Valid targets in my opinion.
Argentina would lose, let's make no mistake about that, even with the recent cuts in our military.
I can't see them being so stupid again, just more hot air words, same as same as.

a reply to: grainofsand

I agree

The fact that Britain wont block these sales just shows how confident we are, and how safe the Falklanders can feel.

Beside, if the Argies try again, it wont be playboy Andrew they have to face but serious warriors William and Harry

originally posted by: AndyMayhew
The fact that Britain wont block these sales just shows how confident we are, and how safe the Falklanders can feel.

Good business sense to be fair, Argentina is like an angry dog with only a few teeth in it's mouth these days.
I mentioned an Astute class sub or two attacking their airbases (of which they have 10 in the country) with cruise missiles, then wondered what Argentina's submarine capability is, so did a search and found this gem lol...
South Atlantic News Agency 2012 article

...finally the submarine crews which operate from Mar del Plata need at least 190 days of immersion practice and in the last year only spent 19 hours submerged. Submarines Salta, Santa Cruz and San Juan have maintenance difficulties

They have 3 officially 'active' subs, if you can call 19 hours submersed in a year as active.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Russia may be leasing them Su-24s. Not long range without tanker support, but quite capable still, even for their age.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I can discover Argentina has just one or two air refuelling tankers in service, so take them out as an initial priority during hostility and they are effectively done with as a threat to the Falklands.
A few cruise missiles at their airbases from our subs and it's all over.
I really can't see Argentina being that stupid now, so I can see why UK gov are not blocking the profitable arms deal. They are a minimal threat.

a reply to: grainofsand

The other part of this buy is six KC-390s. If they were to go part way with the strike package, the defenses would be too worried about the package to go after them.

Similar to the C-130, the -390 is capable of operating from roads and small airfields.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Ooh, that does sound a supiciously cunning plan by Argentina, why would they want refuelling capabilities for their defence, refuelling implies attack outside of their borders.
I still think they'd be spanked on their mainland military bases in any future conflict. £800,000 a pop on the Cruise missiles, but the psychological factor of attacking their land would be supported in Britain and would make a massive difference.
I think we should have attacked their homeland in '82, one of my older brothers fought there and his stories when we are one to one are sad, a crap supply chain thousands of miles from the UK, he took the boots off a dead Argentine soldier because his were #ed.
The support in Britain for attacking Argentina would be strong if they tried it again...it is a recent memory for many.

They are a minimal threat.

Just thought I would throw this in..

HMS Alacrity - slightly damaged by bomb near misses

HMS Arrow - slightly damaged by cannon fire

HMS Glamorgan - slightly damaged by bomb near misses, all off Stanley by Daggers of FAA Grupo 6.

Tuesday 4th May


HMS SHEFFIELD - mortally damaged south east of Falklands by Exocet missile fired by Super Etendard of CANA 2 Esc. Burnt out and sank in tow on Monday 10th May.

Wednesday 12th May


HMS Glasgow - moderately damaged off Stanley by unexploded bomb (1) dropped by A-4B Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 5. Bomb passed through hull but damage took some days to repair and she shortly returned to UK.

Friday 21st May


HMS Antrim - seriously damaged in Falkland Sound outside San Carlos Water by unexploded bomb (2) dropped by Daggers of FAA Grupo 6. UXB removed but damage took some days to repair.

HMS Broadsword - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by cannon fire from Daggers of Grupo 6.

HMS Argonaut - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by rockets and cannon fire from Aermacchi MB.339A of CANA 1 Esc, and then seriously damaged by two unexploded bombs (3/4) dropped by A-4B Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 5. Removing the UXB's and carrying out repairs took a number of days and although declared operational, she soon sailed for the UK.

HMS Brilliant - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by cannon fire from Daggers of Grupo 6. (Different attack from "Broadsword")

HMS ARDENT - badly damaged in Grantham Sound by bombs - hits, UXB's (5+) and near misses - dropped by Daggers of Grupo 6, then mortally damaged by bombs from A-4Q Skyhawks of CANA 3 Esc off North West Island. Sank the following evening.

Sunday 23rd May


HMS ANTELOPE - damaged in San Carlos Water by two unexploded bombs (6/7) dropped by A-4B Skyhawks of Grupo 5. One of the bombs exploded that evening while being defused and she caught fire and sank next day.

Monday 24th May


RFA Sir Galahad - damaged by unexploded bomb (8) and out of action for some days,

RFA Sir Lancelot - damaged by unexploded bomb (9) and not fully operational for almost three weeks,

RFA Sir Bedivere - slightly damaged by glancing bomb, all in San Carlos Water probably by A-4C Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 4.

Tuesday 25th May


HMS Broadsword - damaged north of Pebble Island by bomb from A-4B Skyhawk of Grupo 5 bouncing up through her stern and out again to land in the sea.

HMS COVENTRY - sunk north of Pebble Island in same attack by three bombs.

ATLANTIC CONVEYOR - mortally damaged north east of Falklands by Exocet missile fired by Super Etendard of CANA 2 Esc. Burnt out and later sank in tow.

Saturday 29th May


British Wye - hit north of South Georgia by bomb dropped by C-130 Hercules of FAA Grupo 1 which bounced into the sea without exploding

Tuesday 8th June


HMS Plymouth - damaged in Falkland Sound off San Carlos Water by four unexploded bombs (10-13) from Daggers of FAA Grupo 6.

RFA SIR GALAHAD - mortally damaged off Fitzroy by bombs from A-4B Skyhawks of Grupo 5 and burnt out. Later in June towed out to sea and sunk as a war grave.

RFA Sir Tristram - badly damaged off Fitzroy in same attack and abandoned, but later returned to UK and repaired.

LCU F4, HMS Fearless - sunk in Choiseul Sound by bomb from A-4B Skyhawk of Grupo 5.

Saturday 12th June


HMS Glamorgan - damaged off Stanley by land-based Exocet missile.