..it’s a memoir, not a work of historical research. Some memoirs are very good and very well researched, others are riddled with failures of memory, self-aggrandisement and hyperbole. To ascertain the value of a book like this (any book but more so with memoirs) you need to put it in context with everything else that is available.

In an ideal world that would be true, and without having either the leisure or the inclination to engage in extensive research (“everything else…” is beyond my powers) I’m doing my best… I suppose what I’m reacting to in what might seem a nigglingly pedantic way is a degree of hyperbole, of OTT praise, for the White book, that suggests it offers a “corrective” to e.g. Sharkey Ward. But I’ll read it, together with the Martin Middlebrook book about which I was reminded by Creaking Door.

The conclusion people tend to reach has as much to do with their preconceptions as the quality of the arguments.

I hope that doesn’t apply to me: as a long-time devotee of the RAF I’m ready to be persuaded that Black Buck was an enormous success; but rather than preconceptions (which I disdain) or high quality arguments (which in a court of law can be used to ill effect as readily as the other way) I’m just curious about the evidence available. In reading White’s book, I hope I’ll find the sort of objective presentation of evidence that one can respect. Perhaps even some facts new to me. Call me cynical, but I’m just not holding my breath.
Regards, hps

redeployment of the Mirage III interceptors to defend the Argentine mainland. Wasn’t there some speculation that their absence over the Falklands was caused by lack of drop-tanks (the available tanks having been…er…dropped…during the first few Sea Harrier combats)?

I hadn’t come across that – though drop-tank availability was apparently a factor with their A4s. Just consulted the Huertas book again, chapters on Mirage III & V(Dagger) in the Falklands, and it was emphasised to him – presumably by Argentine FAA pilots – that the Mirage IIIEA’s limited fuel was a key factor: even with twin 1700l tanks (the Dagger had an additional 500l on-board tank) the loiter time was very limited, and potential combat time very brief indeed.

If the Vulcan raids caused the redeployment all the better but having said that the Mirage III came off very badly in its first encounter with the Sea Harrier and as these were the only interceptors that Argentina possessed it may have been decided not to risk their use against the Sea Harrier again.

I think that might well have been a factor, though not one the Argentines would be likely to admit….. But actually (and again from Huertas) there were 12 individual Mirage sorties on the first day of air combat, 18 more during the week following the San Carlos landings, and 15 further before hostilities ceased. So despite the Argentines’ having been allegedly concerned by the possibility of Vulcan raids against the mainland, they certainly did not hold back their Mirage IIIs altogether after Black Buck.

The RN were trying their best to (sink 25th May)…before she sought safety in harbour following the loss of Belgrano.

Ah, really? I know there was a second sub down there apart from Conqueror, but I’ve sadly neglected my RN/Falklands reading. Why could the 25th May not have been hit? Surely she was out there for long enough, and her location was pretty well known, as recounted by e.g. Ward re the recce mission carried out by 801 Sq that picked up radar emissions from the Argentine carrier group.
Regards, hps

[QUOTE=Creaking Door;1090952]A ‘textbook’ runway cutting bombing profile was used.
……………However from the post-raid photos it always looks to me like there would be more chance of success if the attack angle across the runway had been less (maybe 15°).
QUOTE]
Perhaps too much to hope for? They did staggeringly well as it is. I don’t think anyone has ever denigrated the Blackbuck missions in terms of logistics, navigation and bombing accuracy, which exemplified the highest standards of the RAF. But to return rather pedantically to the theme of this thread, I’d love to see some honest and/or authoritative anlaysis of the strategic/tactical VALUE of the raids: some attempt to assess the extent to which Blackbuck caused Argentina to transfer assets, change plans, show extra caution, and so on… AFAICS Sharkey Ward’s rough & ready assessment still makes sense. It seems popular to dismiss him (personally I think that as well as a highly professional RN pilot he’s a great “character” in a long tradition of such) but the dismissals seem to be ad hominem attacks, mean minded sniping rather than objective criticisms that offer real evidence. I look forward to reading this Vulcan 607 book (on order!) but won’t hold my breath anticipating great revelations – possibly a great flying yarn told with a great deal of “wizard prang, Sir!” puffery…?
hps

CIRCUS.

Now you’ve finished reading Mr Wards comic strip hero book, get yourself some factual and balanced information of the Vulcan operations in the book ‘Vulcan 607’.

Thanks for the reminder – I had vaguely heard of this book, must read it. So is it really “factual and balanced” – or is this simply a reflection of your own opinion, which might or might not be wholly objective….? You’re rather insultingly dismissive of Ward, who was by all accounts a brave and skilful pilot and an excellent combat commander, as well as an expert on the Harrier. In his book he pays generous tribute to a variety of people, including RAF pilots with the Task Force so it’s not quite as simplistic or dumb as your remarkably rude comment implies you think it is.
Quote from the Amazon synopsis of “Vulcan 607”:
“Rowland White takes us, for the first time, to the beating heart of the legendary raid. “Vulcan 607″ is a story of ingenuity, courage and sheer bloody-mindedness that’s destined to become a classic.”
So no mention of the Blackbuck raids’ tactical or strategic accomplishments, then?
Perhaps it’s enough – for some at least – that it was a daring and heroic raid, though – like the WW2 Dambusters mission – far more successful as a propaganda coup than in its strategic effect. I look forward with interest to reading Rowland White’s book.
hps

If they had more missiles, the careing platform wasn’t the problem, and I guess the british would have been in a deep sh!t, just as well (for the brits) they only had a limited number.

It’s true the Task Force was lucky not to have to face a fusillade of Exocets, but it’s not a “super weapon”: two ships were hit, one a merchantman with no close-in defences (that particular missile might or might not have been deflected by chaff fired from nearby RN ships) and the other, the unfortunate Sheffield, was (it is generally suggested) caught unawares without a proper radar watch… You can bet that lesson was learned quickly, and subsequent air-launched Exocets were deflected and/or missed their targets, or – a slender possibility admittedly – were shot down, namely the last remaining missile on 30th May supposedly launched at Invincible but in fact it seems at Exeter…
Then there was the cleverly improvised ground-launched Exocet that winged Glamorgan.
I’m not convinced that the possession of more Exocets would have proved decisive for Argentina. (It’s a pity the Sea Eagle fit for the SHAR came too late to be employed against Argentine surface units…)
King Jester, that photo of the two Learjets is nice, new to me. The post-conflict livery is what I referred to previously, very handsome – VR-17 in this scheme appears as a colour plate in Chant’s “Air War in the South Atlantic 1982” (Osprey), a clear mistake since at that time it sported the dark blue cheat lines and the “VR” planes were not the PR versions that actually overflew the Falklands…
Roberto Yeager, your pics of that Chilean Falcon with an Exocet fit are fascinating – maybe I spoke too soon when I dismissed the possibility of a Lear being so fitted.
Regards, hps

The disagreement seems to hinge over whether or not Douglas Bader visited England with the cooperation of both sides in 1941 and 42 I don’t remember which?
For me if Bader did visit England so what? How does this detract from the man’s achievements? Or cast a slur on his character? If anything it adds to his legend.
There are allot of conspiracy theories ….. The fact that may or may not have visited England or any other personal quirk he may have had wouldn’t reduce my respect or affection for him one bit, why would it?

What on earth is this utter tosh? Motivated by mild curiosity – I read as much WW2 aviation biog/autobiog as comes my way, including fairly recently the Burns book, “Bader, The Man and his Men” – I glance at this thread and find references to bizarre conspiracy theories I’d thankfully never heard of, but which rival the wackiest “Elvis is alive and living in Billericay” garbage to be found anywhere…
Haven’t you people got better things to discuss, such as whether the moon is made of green cheese?
If there are any rational folk among you, my apologies for being so blunt, but really…
Bader was undoubtedly a great man in his way, if widely disliked by many people who nevertheless respected his courage and leadership. Let’s not trivialise his memory with childish spats and witless speculation.
hps

…Yeah the west is good and Iran is evil… right…

I wonder if you always indulge in such over-simplication, traducing other people’s arguments thus… From others’ comments it seems as if you might.

Yeah, like the millions of Russians that wanted democracy… and within 5 years of getting it wanted Stalin back.

More over-simplification! Have you ever actually read any 20thC history? Perhaps not. After 70 years of totalitarian government no-one should be surprised that Russia, whose citizens had never in their history known political liberty, has had a hard time getting to grips with democracy. But I suspect that those Russians who do, have a better appreciation of its value than you appear to…

In the same way that the Stasi kept order, or the Nazis…

Let’s get this straight – you’re actually likening the US to the Third Reich and the former DDR? This is so absurd it doesn’t merit a proper response. (US immigration officials might not always seem welcoming, but they’re worlds away from the VoPos or their equivalents elsewhere in WarPac countries, that I’ve visited.)

(re NZ speaking Chinese or Indonesian) So what? What is wrong with that?

Come on, you’re just being contrary! You cannot mean this! I’ve known a few Kiwis and I’d love to be in the same NZ bar when you float this idea, and see you get flung through the window… My old friend Alec, who died a few years ago, was a delightful bloke with hardly a bad word for anyone. He’d flown Seafires in the RNZ Navy in WW2, flying top cover e.g. on one of the early bombing raids against the Tirpitz, subsequently becoming a carrier-deck landing instructor. I can imagine his disbelieving fury at hearing this sort of crap from you…

…..The only countries likely to feel the wrath of Iranian nukes would be the US and Israel.

In which collection of fairy stories did you read this? And even if it was true, you’re suggesting that might be OK? Seems to throw into question your claims to superior morality.

Regarding the anti theocracy BS,…….
We treat our criminals better than we treat the sick and the old in the west.

A strange little addendum. So the Medieval approach to crime & punishment in Islamic states such as Iran is admirable? Perhaps you think the Third Reich wasn’t so bad, because Hitler (allegedly) made the trains run on time…
I see what Phantom II meant – clearly, he knows you of old…
hps

…. Don’t care what the facts are America is to blame…. might make that my signature.

You said it… Your reflexive anti-Americanism and naive liberal internationalism go hand in hand. Being from New Zealand doesn’t make it OK to think international affairs are like a game of cricket: suggesting as you do that Iran has as much “right” to nukes as anyone else is either breathtakingly foolish & irresponsible, or demented – but I don’t know your state of mind. Your country shares the values, by and large, of the USA, UK and “The West”. These values are pretty good on the whole, and light-years in advance – in terms of human liberty, tolerance, and the ability to allow people to develop their potential – of anything in the Islamic world, especially the Dark Ages theocracy of Iran. Far from going happily to their deaths during the Iraq-Iran war, many thousands of Iranians were brutally conscripted teenagers coerced into human-wave mass suicide; a high proportion of Iran’s population is, one gathers, deeply discontented with the Mullahs and would love more “Western” society…
America is far from perfect and I often criticise it. But it’s American might that keeps the world more secure than it might otherwise be – without it, NZ might well be speaking Chinese or Indonesian… NUkes in US, British etc hands? OK. Even nukes in Israeli hands don’t threaten world peace. But nukes in Iranian hands? Don’t be silly. They have to be stopped – for our sake, and everyone else’s.
hps