View Single Post
  #56   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
charles charles is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,155
Default OT The Vulcan Bomber

In article sting.com,
Jabba wrote:
Tim Streater scribbled...



In article
sting.com, Jabba
wrote:

harryagain scribbled...


It cost over a £1million for every bomb that hit the runway, when
the fleet had the same bombs available for their aircraft, which
were several thousand miles closer to the target. The operation
was performed to wind up the RN, in an attempt to prove that
aircraft carriers have no use. Looks like they won as we don't
have any carriers now and all the aircraft the navy used have
been scrapped.

Er. We are building new ones.


One may not be built, if it is, it will be mothballed immediately.
The second might be in service in 6 years time. So we would have
been without a carrier for almost 10 years - they're not exactly
vital to our defence are they?

Going back to the Falklands, we had 2 carriers and they were not used
well. The admiral in charge was a prat. I've read a couple of
books by harrier pilots and none have a good word for Woodward. His
****ups put pressure on the Navy afterwards.


What sort of things were they complaining about?



Not doing anything about the Hercules refuelers used by the
Argentinians. Keeping 2 aircraft on standby, on deck, throughout the
war, when they should have been used in action. Not sharing out the
raids sensibly between the carriers. Not putting Stanley airport out of
action - properly. Keeping the carrier fleet too far away from the
Falklands during the day, which meant aircraft were only able to provide
limited CAP over the landings.


Sounds to me as though the pilots have never heard of tactics. All aircaft
out on patrol and what is left for close defence. Did the two carriers
have identical aircrat on board? I though there were RAF Harriers as well
as FAA ones. They had different roles, Did the Navy have suitable bombs to
deal with the runway at Stanley? and could they have got past theair
defences (missiles). The last one was to keep the carriers out of Exocet
range. I imagine an Exocet would make a nasty mess of a carrier.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18