News0 min ago
falklands war-british exocet???
13 Answers
my wife argues that it was common knowledge(news programmes etc)that at the time of the falklands,britain also had exocet missiles.no subsequent progs i have seen have ever mentioned this.i wasn't however home at this time as i was helping fight off some south american meat packers!
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jaberwocky. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'd find that odd.
At the time the exocet was quite a new missile and French. Buying French military hardware doesn't really gel with Margaret Thatchers policies at the time.
Perhaps there might have been one or two under evaluation but I'd be surprised if there were any deployment.
Perhaps these people are thinking of SeaWolf which was an anti- missile missile system in use on a couple of the ships at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Wolf_missile
What is now known is that initially the Argentinians did not have the capability of getting exocet up and running and the Mitterand sent them the technical expertise to do this in breech of an agreement with the UK.
Funny old war seems completely fought over national pride - no strategic or military value and we could have resettled all the islanders in luxury homes and still turned a profit.
255 British dead for natiuonal pride
At the time the exocet was quite a new missile and French. Buying French military hardware doesn't really gel with Margaret Thatchers policies at the time.
Perhaps there might have been one or two under evaluation but I'd be surprised if there were any deployment.
Perhaps these people are thinking of SeaWolf which was an anti- missile missile system in use on a couple of the ships at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Wolf_missile
What is now known is that initially the Argentinians did not have the capability of getting exocet up and running and the Mitterand sent them the technical expertise to do this in breech of an agreement with the UK.
Funny old war seems completely fought over national pride - no strategic or military value and we could have resettled all the islanders in luxury homes and still turned a profit.
255 British dead for natiuonal pride
-- answer removed --
The "quite new" Exocet missile began development as a ship-launched missile in 1967 and was first trialled by the Royal Navy aboard the Batch 2 County class destroyer HMS Norfolk in May and June 1974.
During the mid- to late-70s the missile was ordered in large quantities and installed aboard a number of RN classes including the remaining Batch 2 County class destroyers (HMS Antrim, Glamorgan and Fife), the Batch 2 Leander class frigates (HMS Cleopatra, Sirius, Phoebe, Minerva, Danae, Juno, Argonaut and Penelope) and the Type 21 (8 vessels) and Batches 1 & 2 Type 22 (8 vessels) frigates.
This makes at least 28 RN vessels armed with Exocets prior to the Falklands War. It is somewhat ironic that the missiles which struck Sheffield and Glamorgan both failed to detonate leading in some part to the decision for removal of Exocet from the RN armament in favour of superior replacements such as Harpoon.
During the mid- to late-70s the missile was ordered in large quantities and installed aboard a number of RN classes including the remaining Batch 2 County class destroyers (HMS Antrim, Glamorgan and Fife), the Batch 2 Leander class frigates (HMS Cleopatra, Sirius, Phoebe, Minerva, Danae, Juno, Argonaut and Penelope) and the Type 21 (8 vessels) and Batches 1 & 2 Type 22 (8 vessels) frigates.
This makes at least 28 RN vessels armed with Exocets prior to the Falklands War. It is somewhat ironic that the missiles which struck Sheffield and Glamorgan both failed to detonate leading in some part to the decision for removal of Exocet from the RN armament in favour of superior replacements such as Harpoon.
Not just national pride, Jake. Huge incomes from fish and oil were distinct possibilities. Thatcher definitely didn't want to lose out on these.
Another thing that was rarely mentioned...by international agreement, the rights to exploration of Antarctica go to those countries directly facing that continent. Argentina wanted to expand the tiny portion they were allotted, and could have staked their claim to a far bigger slice if they had gained the Falklands. Britain would have had its portion shrunk to almost nothing.
Though rich in minerals, exploitation of Antarctica is presently banned. But this ban might not last forever, and both Britain and Argentina may well be keeping this in mind.
Another thing that was rarely mentioned...by international agreement, the rights to exploration of Antarctica go to those countries directly facing that continent. Argentina wanted to expand the tiny portion they were allotted, and could have staked their claim to a far bigger slice if they had gained the Falklands. Britain would have had its portion shrunk to almost nothing.
Though rich in minerals, exploitation of Antarctica is presently banned. But this ban might not last forever, and both Britain and Argentina may well be keeping this in mind.
Missiles take a long time to develop The exocet missile first entered service in 1979 with the French just 3 years before the Falklands war - hence "New".
All this exploiting Antarctica rubbish was trotted out at the time - Go to war because one day it might give us an interest in drilling for unproven reserves in a continent where the conditions are attrocious and political considerations make very unlikely for 50-100 years.
I don't think so!
As much as people might like to try to find justifications it's pretty obvious to anyone who looks at it at all objectively that the war was purely fought entirely for political considerations.
Or can you point to any real practical benefits we've gained from the Falklands $1.2 Billion in 1982 is an awful lot of sheep
All this exploiting Antarctica rubbish was trotted out at the time - Go to war because one day it might give us an interest in drilling for unproven reserves in a continent where the conditions are attrocious and political considerations make very unlikely for 50-100 years.
I don't think so!
As much as people might like to try to find justifications it's pretty obvious to anyone who looks at it at all objectively that the war was purely fought entirely for political considerations.
Or can you point to any real practical benefits we've gained from the Falklands $1.2 Billion in 1982 is an awful lot of sheep
It is also interesting to note that although the British Government publicly announced its commitment to Exocet in 1970, they had started negotiations during 1969 with their French counterparts to establish a joint Anglo-French Exocet Weapons System, with a shared development and manufacturing programme (somewhat similar to that of Concorde). Several years of talks came to nought in this respect except that Britain did pay towards development of the missile.
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/exoc et?decade=1970s&page=1&sort=date
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/exoc et?decade=1970s&page=1&sort=date
1 to 13 of 13
Latest Posts
Travel1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Biggest Gap In Income And Spending Since...
News13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.