Found these while searching for the documentary on the Vulcan, thought some will enjoy this on the Harrier. The vulcan one I remember watching a few years back. Enjoy
Information
Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
Take nothing away from the Argi pilots they had what it takes, in my book by the daily mail (I think) The Falklands War the Argi pilots had to fly at nought feet for hundreds of miles to evade the radar, one pilot who was flying a Miracle (Nickname for a Mirage) said of a raid, "We were flying fast and so low you were constantly looking for any higher than normal waves that could hit the aircraft and cause you to go in." "Also when we got back to base the aircraft had to be washed immediately with fresh water as they were covered in a salt crust from the spray made by the waves."
The Argi pilots pushed pretty hard and gave the fleet hell as the British found out with the Exocet the ships burnt freely and any one who has tried to put out burning metal without the right gear special fire retardant foam its a pretty one sided affair.
The other side of the coin was Conqueror sinking the Belgrano with heavy loss of life, was it really necessary considering her position in relation to the fleet and her vintage it will probably raise conjecture the thing is they were at war so in reality it posed a threat to the fleet which made it a target.
My Brother in law was on Conqueror at the time, that's all he says about it.
Having worked on Harrier II I can tell you that despite everyone loving it, it was a bag of s***e to work on. I learnt that in reference to spare parts, the word "Interchangable" and "INTERCHANGABLE" had different meanings ....in that they are not!!
Take nothing away from the Argi pilots they had what it takes, in my book by the daily mail (I think) The Falklands War the Argi pilots had to fly at nought feet for hundreds of miles to evade the radar, one pilot who was flying a Miracle (Nickname for a Mirage) said of a raid, "We were flying fast and so low you were constantly looking for any higher than normal waves that could hit the aircraft and cause you to go in." "Also when we got back to base the aircraft had to be washed immediately with fresh water as they were covered in a salt crust from the spray made by the waves."
The Argi pilots pushed pretty hard and gave the fleet hell as the British found out with the Exocet the ships burnt freely and any one who has tried to put out burning metal without the right gear special fire retardant foam its a pretty one sided affair.
The other side of the coin was Conqueror sinking the Belgrano with heavy loss of life, was it really necessary considering her position in relation to the fleet and her vintage it will probably raise conjecture the thing is they were at war so in reality it posed a threat to the fleet which made it a target.
The Argentine pilots were without doubt extremely brave men and hugely skillful pilots. Its interesting to note the amount of former Argentine and British Sea Harrier pilots who have become firm friends in the intervening years.
As for sinking the Belgrano, it was war (campaign my arse), i'm afraid, in all it's awfulness, big boys games, big boys rules. I might be taking a simplistic look at this, but in my opinion the aggressor has to take responsibility, had the Falkland islands not been been invaded by a Dictator desperately trying to prop up his insidious regime, than the Belgrano would simply not have been sunk.
The dreadful loss of life on both sides in that Campaign has to be laid firmly on General Galtieri's and his henchmen's heads.
I think its also worth remembering that in the aftermath of the War, that dreadful regime, that enslaved and murdered thousands of innocent Argentine's, collapsed and Argentina regained Democracy.
Originally Posted by Brit plumber
Having worked on Harrier II I can tell you that despite everyone loving it, it was a bag of s***e to work on. I learnt that in reference to spare parts, the word "Interchangable" and "INTERCHANGABLE" had different meanings ....in that they are not!!
The USMC really got themselves the sale of Century when we virtually gave away the GR9 fleet and all the spares in the aftermath of the 2010 SDSR. It will let them carry on flying their AVAB's for years to come with all those parts...
My Brother in law was on Conqueror at the time, that's all he says about it.
One of the Shipwrights in our fleet was on the Conqueror at the time, I met him 9 years ago when I was pool man ( your assigned to a vessel, but will be required from time to time to go on other vessels to cover leave and sick etc) in fact just got off that same one this week but am on a different shift, he was getting on when I was getting off.
BP I'll send a PM with the lads name, your Brother in law may remember him.
I did hear it suggested, on a documentary some years ago I believe, that at around the time or just before the Belgrano was sunk we did also have an opportunity to sink the Argentine carrier but a political decision was made not to do so. After the Belgrano was sunk the Argentine carrier made a hasty trip to port and remained there until after the war was over. If the we had of sunk the Argentine carrier there could well have been a larger loss of life than on the Belgrano. If true, this this shows restraint on our part, in my opinion.
You talking of Conquerer and the non interhangeability of spare parts got me wondering......... Non interchangeability of parts......, he could have been referring to Conqueror tanks of the 60's! Strangely, I walked a beagle pack dog called Conqueror for 6 months. What a xxxxx raving looney bin he was! I walked loads when I was younger......... Comet, Cromwell, Harvester, Heathcliff, Heroin....... Dainty, Dutchess and the beautiful Dido
PM
Originally Posted by CINDERS
