Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Deegan
I think you missed my point. I wasn't just talking about attacks on British ships. I was talking about Argentina landing troops and equipment on the islands by air.
The Falkland Islands consist of 778 islands that cover 4700 square miles. Now although the type 45's weapons have a range of up to 70 miles. They simply can't cover the whole of the Falklands at once, to prevent troop landings.
|
HMS Dauntless isn't the only aspect of the islands' defence. There are four Typhoons permanently based there and the RAF has the capability to rapidly reinforce that number should the need arise.
Troops attempting to establish a beach head are incredibly vulnerable and under constant bombardment large numbers are required (because a lot of them are going to get killed). The UK sent a very large naval force to the Falklands in 1982 but suffered greatly from being vulnerable to Argentine fighter jets - the famous Simon Weston was injured (and many of his colleagues killed) while on board RFA Sir Galahad awaiting landing.
The defensive arrangements are supposed to make the Argentine government consider a military assault too costly (hence the further unprecedented leaking of information about a nuclear submarine deployment this weekend). In 1982 the British military posture (or rather, the lack of it) gave Argentina reason to think the UK would not defend the islands if it came to a fight. The policy aim now is to let the Argentine government see exactly what they would face were they to decide to have a go.
Hence my reference to him spending time with anyone who has served on a Type 45, rather than spending time on one himself (as you already corrected that point when I posted).