nazca_steveThanks for the info. The picture comes from the the booklet produced for the 50th anniversary of the canberra. Although only 16 pages long it is packed with pictures and data concerning the design and construction. I picked my copy up in an old bookshop. Have you seen a copy?
Paddy R
Hello Paddy,
I’m not entirely sure if I know the one you mean, but I did just bid on something like that on Ebay that I should be getting soon. If it’s of interest, I’d be happy to send you some scans.
In the meantime, I’ve been talking to some friends down south in Argentina, doing a lot research on the B.62 and T.64 variants of the Canberra. For those interested, I’ve got a fair few pics on the site I’m building here: http://www.nazcastudios.com/grupo2/index-uk.html as well as a dedicated Facebook page with tons of pics here: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=653122094&ref=profile#/group.php?gid=48690476847
ATB everyone,
Steve
nazca_steveJust came back across this thread again, really nice to read some updates to it, thanks Trumble. So…that means I won’t be doing any fancy repaints for WV910 but at least I can put that to rest now.
nazca_steveAnd finally
Here’s the prototype VN 799 13th May 1949
Paddy R
Beaut of a shot there, Paddy, but not from the 13th May – there were no real in flight pics taken on that day, and the fin has been squared-off, so it’s from one of the following flights. Not that I’m being nit-picky or anything, and anything VN799 is right up my alley.
🙂
Steve
nazca_steveAt last after your question of the yellow markings on the Canberras, I found a picture on a book in which a line up of Canberras during the war can be seen and all have the yellow markings. I can identify B-111, 101, 102 and 104 in the photo.
Very interesting indeed, Santiago. I am going to PM you about this, thanks for looking into it for me.
nazca_steveAlso, although quite a lot of effort was expended trying to stop them, how effective were these Canberra missions? The tonnage of bombs dropped was quite large but they were little danger to shipping and I cannot think of any significant land casualties caused by them? Were the Argentine command aware of this and was this why their mission was changed (back) to anti-shipping missions?
This is a good question posed by Creaking Door. On the surface it seems the raids were rather ineffective in the sense of actually accurately hitting their troop targets on night missions. I think a set of burst eardrums from a nearby 3 Para man was the only injury I’d read of reported from the British side, but there were apparently some unknown injuries from the raid by B-105 and B-109 on ‘Eagle base’ when they went for 846 Sqn Sea Kings.
Either way, it appears they (fortunately) didn’t kill anyone. Now, it does however seem that these night raids caused some unknown degree of psychological concerns among UK troops, to the point where the Canberras were apparently referred to as ‘vampire bats’. I have yet to hear that substantiated from the Brit side, but it is interesting nonetheless.
Regarding whether the Argentine command knew the (lack of) effectiveness of their night missions, that is a very good question. Whatever the case, it appears they were prepared to continue till the end, even after supplies of Mk.17 bombs were low. I can’t possibly fathom why they would want to return to anti-shipping missions. Perhaps Jualbo or Santiago can explain. My only guess is that they expected a loss from one of the night raids sooner or later and preferred to keep the bombers in reserve for such anti-shipping ops against some kind of mainland incursion?
BTW, as a brief side note, the attack on the VLCC Hercules was mentioned, for those interested, here’s a little further reading, including the dispute I’ve heard before about in which a C-130 did the bombing rather than the Canberras: http://www.histarmar.com.ar/HYAMNEWS/HyamNews2005/HY32-HerculesVLCC.htm
nazca_steveWhat exactly these ‘bits’ were is interesting, as if you read the quote from Creaking Door, Capt. Nogueira states they jettisoned tip tanks as they came in visual range of the ships, not afterwards. It’s possible these bits may have been chaff/flares dropped by Nogueira ‘s Canberra instead.
Either way, I have to agree with your supposition that it was Nogueira , and not Bagiorri. Another thing is that according to the Jorge Nunez Padin book on Argentine Canberras, the crew of B-110 were shot down and ejected at 17:04 local time, so Baigorri could not have been looking for them at 16:45 local time. The book however, does state that the Lynx observed the rapid egress of one of these Canberras, taking violent evasive action and apparently showing visual damage. Therefore it is possible this report was confused with the HMS Brilliant Lynx observing Nogueira’s Canberra.
As an anecdote, I thought you might find this interesting. An interview with Nogueira as quoted here: http://www.angelfire.com/ga4/aerovirtual/htm/Info_Canberra.html had this to say about the return flight (translated with Google):
“…during the return (to base) Captain Nogueira made a preliminary report on the radio, and heard a voice, in perfect Spanish, but with an unknown accent, asking if the plane was damaged and what kind of damage it was. Obviously it was the British who were listening and got in the frequency to obtain information. “We laid low, of course (said Nogueira).”
“…durante el trayecto de regreso y al efectuar el capitán Nogueira un informe preliminar por radio, escucharon una voz, en perfecto español pero con una tonada desconocida, que preguntaba Si el avión estaba averiado y que tipo de daños tenia. Obviamente se trataba de los británicos que estaban en escucha y se metÃan en la frecuencia para tratar de obtener información. “Nos quedamos en el molde, por supuesto.”
nazca_steveVery interesting, Santiago, regarding B-101 on June 5th. I had no idea that it had such a Sea Dart encounter, and thought that the crash was a result of a retracted main gear wheel, unless that it is what you implied. I would be very interested to hear more on what happened to Lt. Mauad if you have anything more on him.
I know I might have asked it here or elsewhere before, but given that the radome as in place, did B-101 actually use the Pelicano radar during its brief combat ops, or was it deactivated prior to the conflict? Also, did B-104 have it installed during the conflict? I have seen a photo of it installed in July ’82 at Rio Gallegos (prior to its crash in which Tejada and Cooke were killed) and wondered if this re-fitted post conflict or not?
nazca_steveThank you chaps, for clearing that one up. Looks like I was a little off-target with my info there. As always, fascinating reading. Santiago, in what way was the 125 involved in supporting the Canberra attack on the Hercules? A radio relay or nav aid?
nazca_steveHello all,
I just followed this thread after seeing Creaking Door’s link over on the other Falklands ‘What If’ thread. This is equally informative and fascinating as the other one, and I wished I’d seen this before stirring up some of the same questions regarding ‘who saw what’ on the night of the 13th June.
But anyway, the thing I wanted to address is the photo of the Lear 35 with Canberra B-108 – Santiago Rivas can probably fill you in a lot better than me on this, but as some of you may know, I believe this was part of the ‘Escuadron Fenix’ that played a part in countering ‘Operation Canbelow’ by acting as decoys of a sort. A little too effectively it would seem when one was shot down on 7th June. The human side of the conflict in this example was brought home to me a few days ago, when I was sent a wedding photos of one of the Canberra crews, in which one of the Lear crew, Major Marcelo Lotufo is shown larking around with his mates.
Steve
nazca_steveGreat stuff, Santiago, hats off to you and your colleagues for that superb article. I have now sent you a PM.
nazca_steveHello Santiago,
really good to hear from you on here, I will check tonight, but perhaps that was your article in Wings of Fame that I read. The story about Capt. Pastran is extremely moving, and one can only imagine how hard that must have been, and how he must have felt in following years prior to his death.
I would like to talk to you in more detail about your interviews with the ‘Canberristas’ and will PM you accordingly, as I probably have already strayed a touch too far from the original ‘Falklands What If’ thread topic on this.
Many thanks for getting in touch and best regards to you.
Steve
nazca_steveNice to ‘officially’ meet you, Ken, no more Griffiths again. I’m Steve for the record as well 🙂
Regarding Argentine claims, no offence taken at all, and your example of the so-called Invincible damage is spot-on and I have read several accounts where Brit authors and personnel have argued this incessantly with Argentine servicemen to no avail. It has become lore for them and that’s fine, no harm done in my mind really.
Thanks for checking on the SAMA82 site about Lively Island. It turns out the remains of Capt. Casado that were found in ’86 were on a beach, so in all likelihood, the plane did indeed crash into the sea, even if scattered wreckage may have hit land. I talked to Sharkey Ward about this last summer and he recalls something about Canberra wreckage being found on somewhere on East Falkland (!) so it would be nice to get to the bottom of it.
nazca_steveOK, I managed to track down this article in spanish describing what appears to have been an article based on an interview with the late Capitan Roberto Pastran (died in 2005, I had no idea):
http://www.aveguema.org.ar/Gacetas%20Malvinenses%20Digitales/LGM%2017/El%20ultimo%20derribo.doc
I would run it through Google translate, unless your spanish is good. The article confirms however, that at least up until Pastran’s ejection, the plane was intact, albeit on fire, as he was able to throttle down and deploy airbrakes. My guess is that the nav’s compartment was a mess, as the glow of fire was visible to the pilot, implying the rear pressure bulkhead had ruptured, behind which the No.1 fuel tank was burning. It is someways a miracle it did not explode in mid-air.
It also confirms that no one was looking for him, and he himself signalled a chopper upon the point of exhaustion, and who can blame him?
nazca_steveChaps, there’s some confusion here. I didn’t mean the jury was out on B-108 being shot down by Exeter’s Sea Dart, not for a second. What I was saying was that there exists confusion about the reported sightings of what else was fired. Basically what Creaking Door summed up in his last post. The fog of war compounded by a night op means that there might be certain beliefs on the Argentine side that more than one missile went up, despite what concrete evidence exists on the Brit side.
Anyway, I’m not on here to ruffle any feathers about that, I am really more interested in the downing of B-108. To answer Griffith’s question on where it crashed, I don’t know exactly, but I believe it was south of Fitz Roy but I will check. Very interesting about that undercarriage part found on Lively Island. Did it look anything like a Canberra u/c part? If the locals heard and felt an impact, it kind of thickens the plot, since I thought it crashed into the sea…perhaps parts ended up on land. When were deployed for the second time? The reports say Casasdo’s remains were found in ’86, but I have yet to find where.
D-108…nope, didn’t know that, what an eerie co-incidence.
nazca_steveThanks to Creaking Door and Griffiths for their details on missile design, again, had no idea about that. Therefore it does appear highly likely it was severed at some point, but I’m not sure when.
Regarding Capt. Pastran’s personal account, it makes an interesting read if you have ‘Wings of Fame’ Vol.17, which has a detailed article on FAA Canberras and several accounts of their missions. I’ve been in contact with the sons of a few of the pilots/navigators who are still well connected, so there is a chance I might get hold of Capt. Pastran if he wants to talk.
He said there was an explosive decompression after the initial impact, so if it wasn’t completely severed, it certainly was in a bad way. There is speculation that Capt. Casado’s seat was damaged by the impact as well, as he had told Pastran that he was “trying to eject but it’s stuck”. The account runs that Pastran tried to buy time for Casado to eject, but around 10,000ft it started spiralling, and after the third spin, Pastran realised he had to leave, telling Casado the same, but received no reply. He was knocked unconscious by the ejection, but woke up shortly before he hit the water. That cannot have been pleasant at all, waking up to hit the freezing south atlantic, but he was lucky enough to inflate his raft after a bit of trouble.
I suppose we’ll never know exactly what happened to Capt. Casado during that descent, but the fact that some of his remains were recovered implies B-108 might have broken up prior to hitting the sea. These remains, as you may have read, were rightfully returned to his family late last year.
Interesting that it was a suprise when he was captured. By all accounts he was lucky to make ejecting from a spiralling aircraft at night into the freezing sea.
Sign In
