How big were the reservoirs compared to the main runway, as big, half as big?
How close were the reservoirs, on the boundary, a runway length away?
And airfield not on the coast?
RAF Leconfield?
RAF Scampton?
RAF Coningsby?
All have reservoirs/pools near them but these aren’t really far enough north.
Didn’t 20%-30% of RAF bombs (excluding HC types) that were dropped fail to explode anyway. If that is the case there must be thousands buried beneath cities all over Europe.
How many of these have suddenly exploded since the war?
I know explosives tend to deteriorate with time but the evidence would suggest that the risk is low (at the current time) if left undisturbed.
Not much comfort if they are 25 metres from your house but it may explain the attitude of the local government.
If they do move them or try to disarm them in situ there would be considerably more risk. On examination they may decide there is no option but to detonate them in situ.
Obviously the Air Force Salvage Unit or EOCKL think the risks are worth while.
Just my two cents.
Creaking Door
I guess your right in that Lt Castillo A4C should have been in the list as a “disputed claim”. However I believe the post conflict work suggests it was more likely to have been brought down by HMS Avengers 4.5 inch.
Possible, but I doubt it.
As I see it HMS Exeter fired three Sea Dart missiles during this engagement. The first was at the last Argentine Exocet fired during the war but this (not surprisingly) missed. The second brought down Lt Vasquez and the third Lt Castillo.
HMS Avenger was firing her 4.5 inch gun but this is not a good weapon against fast, low-level aircraft. If HMS Exeter hit the first A4 with Sea Dart she should have hit the second, closer, A4 with more ease.
The Sea Dart total was derived from an addition of missiles fired by each of the Sea Dart systems down there that I’ve collected from various sources over the years. Have you ever seen an official figure?
Nope, never have but I think I came to about the same number when I tried to total them.
An interesting aside to this is that there was some surprise on the Argentine side (who were familiar with the system) that Exeter was able to take out the high flying Learjet, which was beleived to be flying outside the envelope of Sea Dart
It is an interesting point.
HMS Exeter fired her Sea Dart salvo (two missiles) from Falkland Sound. I’ve always assumed that what surprised the Argentines was that any Type 42 was so far inshore (sent there to counter high-flying Canberra night-time bombing sorties and in fact what HMS Exeter mistook the Learjet for).
Flying at 40,000 feet would be no protection in itself but if I’m correct no Type 42 had ventured so far inshore since HMS Coventry was sunk and with the height and range combined the Argentines assumed they were relatively safe.
Just my theory.
Now I am confused! Exeter was in a dry dock on the Navy days ’82 – she was very distinctive because of her blue bottom. The one with the ‘kills’ must have been Cardiff ( afloat ) – but the above list only gives one claim for her – why the extra kills on the launcher?
Simple, so soon after the end of the Falklands War there had been no confirmation of any of these ‘kills’ so in reality they were actually ‘claims’.
Although probably made in good faith most were later shown to have been made in error.
Almost no claims for aircraft ‘kills’ made during wartime have withstood close post-war analysis but claims are good propaganda and do affect morale so often get ‘official’ support. That doesn’t make them fact.
There are still Argentine aircraft with a ‘kill’ marking (damaged) for HMS Invincible (30/05/1982) but she was never damaged by enemy action during the entire war (and I’m sure there are those who will argue this point).
Rounds fired in action – 26
What is the source of the total Sea Dart rounds fired; is that an official figure?
Sea Dart Claims
1 – May 9 – HMS Coventry – A4-C – Lt Casco (KIA) – Disputed by Fuerza Aerea Agentina – Counter claim, lost in bad weather
2 – May 9 – HMS Coventry – A4-C – Lt Farias (KIA) – Disputed by Fuerza Aerea Agentina – Counter claim, lost in bad weather
3 – May 9 – HMS Coventry – Puma – Validated by Agentina
4 – May 25 – HMS Coventry – A4-B – Capt Palaver (KIA) – Validated by Fuerza Aerea Agentina
5 – May 25 – HMS Coventry – A4-C – Capt Garcia (KIA) – Disputed by Fuerza Aerea Agentina – Counter claim lost to Rapier
6 – May 30 – HMS Exeter – A4-C – Lt Vasquez (KIA) – Validated by Fuerza Aerea Agentina
7 – June 7 – HMS Exeter – Lear Jet – 5 Crew/Pax (KIA) – Validated by Fuerza Aerea Agentina
8 – 13 June- HMS Exeter – Canberra – Capt Pastran (POW) Capt Casado (KIA) – Validated by Fuerza Aerea Agentina
9 – Blue on Blue – 6 June – HMS Cardiff- Gazelle AH1 – 4 crew(KIA) – Validate by British investigation.
Usually A4-C (serial C-310) Lt Castillo (KIA) is also credited to HMS Exeter (with her third Sea Dart fired) on 30 May during the ‘Invincible attack’.
On 25 May HMS Invincible fired 8 rounds in 6 minutes at what was thought to be a low flying aircraft which they believed was popping up to have a look around. Post conflict analysis suggested that these radar contacts were more likely to have been separate & widely spaced flocks of birds.
Is this correct? I thought it was only six rounds.
WR982 used to get run on public open days, but not any more, since the public open days stopped in 2001.
Why did the public open days stop?
Meteor crankshafts are identical to the Merlin…
Zero-timed Meteor cranks have been used successfully in flying Merlins.
I hadn’t appreciated until now that the ‘ends’ of a Merlin crank are separate (the reduction gear pinion and supercharger drive) so could be changed to suit the Meteor.
You learn something every day…usually that you didn’t know as much as you thought you did. 🙂
Ethell and Brown claim only three aircraft were shot down by Seawolf ,namely the three Skyhawks splashed by HMS Brilliant on May 12. However Brown mentions two other Seawolf kills – a Dagger brought down by HMS Broadsword on May 21 and a Skyhawk also destroyed by Broadword on May 23.
The first of these two kills (recorded on tape from a camera fitted to the Seawolf tracker) was shown on ITN news in 1982 and can be seen on the video “Gun Camera Action” (DD Video).
I think most sources would basically agree on the number and types of Argentine aircraft lost. Some dispute remains as to what system shot down what actual aircraft loss (and we’re talking about surface-to-air systems here).
It has been many years since I read ‘The Royal Navy and the Falklands War’ (Brown) but if I remember correctly it tends to site examples of ‘two Skyhawks splashed’ rather than giving the names of the pilots and the aircraft serial numbers as ‘Air War South Atlantic’ (Ethell and Price) does. I know which I give more credence.
Aren’t some of the losses in ‘Air War South Atlantic’ credited to ‘multiple weapons’?
Wouldn’t this account for example for one of the ‘missing’ Sea Wolf kills?
I know the Sea Wolf video footage you mention well and there is no doubt in my mind that it confirms destruction of a Mirage/Dagger by that system (and regrettably the death of the pilot).
Have you read ‘Falklands – The Air War’ (Burden/Draper/Rough/Smith/Wilton) which IMHO is the best account of the conflict in the air?
This design of piston was introduced on the Meteorite and M120, then subsequently fitted to the Meteor.
The b&w pic shows the Meteorite piston.
ANY part with an FV or EM part number is Meteor family and similarly never went anywhere near an aircraft.
So a piston with four rings (two compression, two oil-control) all above the pin as in your B&W photo is from a Meteorite only, or could it come from a Meteor (or M120)?
Is an M120 ‘just’ a fuel injected Meteor?
What is the difference between a FV (fighting vehicle?) and an EM part number?
HMS Cardiff was a relatively late arrival and by this time the war was on for real. Her crew would have felt (and been) quite justified in firing an extreme-range salvo at this 707 reconnaissance operation.
The Argentines were well aware of the capabilities of Sea Dart and had a very healthy respect for it. I think they would have kept well out of the way.
HMS Cardiff also fired a salvo (2) of Sea Dart missiles at some Canberras that were attempting a bombing mission on 14/06/1982, the last day of the war. One was shot down but it is usually credited to HMS Exeter.
So that’s four Sea Dart missiles fired plus the one(s) fired to down the British helicopter (Gazelle AH1 XX377). To me that’s getting close to seven (equals seven enemy aircraft shot-down)?
Ignore where the camshaft drives are. It is to do with which end of the engine the power take off is.
A Meteor is essentially the same as a Merlin, the supercharger is removed and replaced with the fan drive pulleys.
Logical I suppose but in the case of aircraft with the propeller at the front…
…all their engines are in backwards! 😀
All very confusing…I’m sure most descriptions of a Merlin site the reduction-gears as being at the ‘front’.
At least it works out nicely for the Antar, Cromwell, and Comet…vehicles the engines weren’t designed for!
I seem to remember, rather confusingly, on Jaguar (cars) straight-six engines, number one cylinder is at the back (flywheel end)…maybe also on the vee-twelve.
Where is number one cylinder on a Merlin, near the supercharger? :confused:
No wonder the Merlin/Meteor cylinder banks are called ‘A’ and ‘B’ and not ‘right and left’!
So Merlin and Meteor engines definitely run in different directions?
Brown’s book also refers to an incident in which HMS Cardiff attempted to shoot down a Boeing 707 reconnaisance plane but the aircraft’s crew saw the missile coming and took violent evasive action which caused the Sea Dart to miss.
This highlights one of the problems I have with “The Royal Navy and the Falklands War” by David Brown.
IMHO it would be quite impossible for a high-flying 707 to evade a salvo (2) of Sea Dart missiles with HMS Cardiff firing in open-water!
In training during the transit south ‘Sharkey’ Ward CO 801 NAS offered his Sea Harrier as a target to train the operators of the Sea Dart systems of the Task Force. He tried his best to ‘break the lock’ of the tracking radar (in open water) but was unable to do so.
The Argentine Navy had two Type 42 destroyers fitted with Sea Dart so I’m sure Commander Ward wasn’t just playing at being the target.
If such a pilot couldn’t evade Sea Dart in a small, fast, agile Sea Harrier (with RWR) how much chance would a big target like a 707 have?
I’ve got a Cromwell of my own to do which will also have a 4b/III hybrid.
I recently finished the restoration of my Sherman. This has a 30 cylinder engine weighing 2.5 tons…
Will you marry me? 🙂
…or at least post a few pictures.