Level 7
Mr_Inconspicous wrote:
I_reaps_I wrote:
fenian wrote:
Lastly, no one knows what argentina has, Last time UK was lucky they didnt get proper training for their weapons in time, and by all accounts given the whole situation were literally only two or three missiles away from winning.
No one knew last time, no one knows now. Maybe Brazil/Russia/China see it as the best time to get a stake in the natural resources from Britian with no aircraft carrier, and other options more pipe dream than reality it would mean that realistically they would only need to supply argentina with the latest ground to air defence systems, and gps blockers, the kind of stuff that stops American jets flying over saudi countries without asking first.
Maybe European countries like France or Italy right at this moment are sending ships off with top of the range weapons to take out boats to argentina..
Realistically they dont need a whole overhaul, just some key bits.
I mean you dont find it curious that Russia has increased military trade with latin America and then Argentina starts getting pushy? Id be curious, Id like to have an aircraft carrier ready to do a proper defence if it was me, I wouldnt just laugh it off and say they were nothing to worry about.
A US carrier against a Type 45 would be a silly fight.
A US carriers only real offensive capabilty (beyond the battle group that surrounds it. THAT ALWAYS SURROUNDS IT) is its aircraft. Which the Type 45 would take care of with relative ease. Then the Type 45 would fire off its anti ship missiles, which CIWS would take care of.
Both ships would expend their offensive capabilties, and the other would counter. After a little while it would just be akward and both ships would egress sheepishly.
The Type 45 is ideal for the Falklands because it mitigates the air threat from argentina. Without air capabilities, the falklands would be untakable. Putting one in the atlatic is a great big "you cant do **** now can you!" to argentina.
Fen its a ship and I agree with Reaps
China won't do anything, they'll back up Argentina's claim but won't directly get involved as that would damage ties with the EU and US. The French are currently setting up a join command HQ with the MoD. Plus it's in the EU's interest to back the UK.
Having no carrier won't matter. There are arleady Typhoons stationed there. Plus they can base more jets as Ascension Island in reserve. The islands have air defences plus at least one Type 45 and one attack submarine armed with Tomahawks, possibly one Trident nuclear submarine. Amphibious assault ships like HMS Ocean as a base for Apache/Chinook/Merlin helicopters or simply fly them down in cargo planes same for Challenger 2 tanks. Plus drones and spy planes/AWACS Then there is arleady the garrison stationed on the islands.
Last time there was nothing defending the islands at all, so all Argentina had to was land then the islands were under their control. Now there's a garrison, constant naval presence and jets all of which can be quickly re-enforced and then Argentina has to launch an amphibious invasion using much of the same equipment that they failed to hold the islands with last time but now the enemy they'll face won't be using anything they used last time well except for the ammo in guns
Like I said before all they want is a trade agreement of some sort.
The guy who names the ships must have taken the day off.
Level 3
Do you guys actually listen to yourselves? deluded.
So your boat would go toe to toe with a US aircraft carrier and would maybe sink it, at worst come off unschated, it could handle all the aircraft from a US carrier no bother and all its defence systems, and like it or not handle the whole battlegroup and possibly submarines guarding it too?
Lets be honest here, it would be lit up like a christmas tree, so would britain.
I also like the fact that one British boat can deal with American airforce in such a situation but Argeninta cant possibly knock a british jet down, or sink a british boat, thats crazy nonsense talk, everyone knows britainia rules the waves.
Also, Russia and China are terrified of upsetting europe, thats why they stopped selling arms to syria.. Oh no wait they told Europe to get lost and sold them anyway. When it comes down to it, Russia and China will have no problems selling argentina groud to air misiles that can take out british planes. And if Europe didnt like it, well Europe can sell UK weapons if they want, and they would continue to sell them.
and if that did happen, Britain would only have itself to blame, they have been selling weapons to enemies of Russia and China for a long long time.
Level 3
fenian wrote:Do you guys actually listen to yourselves? deluded.
So your boat would go toe to toe with a US aircraft carrier and would maybe sink it, at worst come off unschated, it could handle all the aircraft from a US carrier no bother and all its defence systems, and like it or not handle the whole battlegroup and possibly submarines guarding it too?
Lets be honest here, it would be lit up like a christmas tree, so would britain.
I also like the fact that one British boat can deal with American airforce in such a situation but Argeninta cant possibly knock a british jet down, or sink a british boat, thats crazy nonsense talk, everyone knows britainia rules the waves.
Also, Russia and China are terrified of upsetting europe, thats why they stopped selling arms to syria.. Oh no wait they told Europe to get lost and sold them anyway. When it comes down to it, Russia and China will have no problems selling argentina groud to air misiles that can take out british planes. And if Europe didnt like it, well Europe can sell UK weapons if they want, and they would continue to sell them.
and if that did happen, Britain would only have itself to blame, they have been selling weapons to enemies of Russia and China for a long long time.
I think I agree with what you wrote. But arms dealers are private organizations mostly aren't they? So most governments cannot have much control over who they decide to sell to even if they sell to countries that are former 'enemies'? Or are there controls in place? Aside from that weapons are sold illegally too.
fenian wrote:Do you guys actually listen to yourselves? deluded.
So your boat would go toe to toe with a US aircraft carrier and would maybe sink it, at worst come off unschated, it could handle all the aircraft from a US carrier no bother and all its defence systems, and like it or not handle the whole battlegroup and possibly submarines guarding it too?
Lets be honest here, it would be lit up like a christmas tree, so would britain.
I also like the fact that one British boat can deal with American airforce in such a situation but Argeninta cant possibly knock a british jet down, or sink a british boat, thats crazy nonsense talk, everyone knows britainia rules the waves.
Also, Russia and China are terrified of upsetting europe, thats why they stopped selling arms to syria.. Oh no wait they told Europe to get lost and sold them anyway. When it comes down to it, Russia and China will have no problems selling argentina groud to air misiles that can take out british planes. And if Europe didnt like it, well Europe can sell UK weapons if they want, and they would continue to sell them.
and if that did happen, Britain would only have itself to blame, they have been selling weapons to enemies of Russia and China for a long long time.
No no no... I said the only real offensive capabilities the carrier has is its aircraft and its battlegroup. Now you cant compare an entire US carrier fleet against one single type 45. Thats like getting manchester united to play against the local primary schools under 7's side.
However, the anti air capabilities of the modern destroyer are more than capable of a toe to toe engagement against carrier launched aircraft.
Firstly, the carrier can only launch 2 per launch. SO if they were launching within the engagement envelope of the destroyer, it would be a conga line of flaming death as soon as they got in the air. If the carrier launched a full wing outside the envelope of the destroyer, had the aircraft loiter then attack en masse, thats different... but the anti air capabilities of the type 45 are designed for just that, massive anti air role.
Now, the only real threat the carrier poses is in ramming or in boarding. The type 45 can out turn the carrier soramming wont happen and boarding would be reppelled by CIWS and the minigun stations.
The only real threat the Type 45 poses to the carrier is its Anti ship missiles, which the carrier, even without its battlegroup, would handle fairly robustly. Then the type 45 could ram or engage with the 4.5" deck gun. Ramming would be futile against a big target, as would the deck gun. 4.5 inch holes in a carrier are going to do very little.
Now, this means that on a one on one encounter there would only be one likely conclusion, A lack of willingness to engage. Both sides would egress probably without engaging each other.
The comparison is ludicrous.
Level 6
I_reaps_I wrote:
Now you cant compare an entire US carrier fleet against one single type 45. Thats like getting manchester united to play against the local primary schools under 7's side.
This would make for cutting edge television. Rooney would have no qualms doing a full on sliding tackle 
On a side note, the world is a very different place than it was 30 years ago. Argentina for the most part are a very under-resourced country in terms of militia, but so were a lot of other countries before arms dealers intervened. With an increasing hatred of what is seen as a "Colonialist Britain" and what is now an endless excuse to war it out for natural resources, you can bet every Tom, ***** and Harry would be keen to supply Argentina.
Level 9
I_reaps_I wrote:
fenian wrote:Do you guys actually listen to yourselves? deluded.
So your boat would go toe to toe with a US aircraft carrier and would maybe sink it, at worst come off unschated, it could handle all the aircraft from a US carrier no bother and all its defence systems, and like it or not handle the whole battlegroup and possibly submarines guarding it too?
Lets be honest here, it would be lit up like a christmas tree, so would britain.
I also like the fact that one British boat can deal with American airforce in such a situation but Argeninta cant possibly knock a british jet down, or sink a british boat, thats crazy nonsense talk, everyone knows britainia rules the waves.
Also, Russia and China are terrified of upsetting europe, thats why they stopped selling arms to syria.. Oh no wait they told Europe to get lost and sold them anyway. When it comes down to it, Russia and China will have no problems selling argentina groud to air misiles that can take out british planes. And if Europe didnt like it, well Europe can sell UK weapons if they want, and they would continue to sell them.
and if that did happen, Britain would only have itself to blame, they have been selling weapons to enemies of Russia and China for a long long time.
No no no... I said the only real offensive capabilities the carrier has is its aircraft and its battlegroup. Now you cant compare an entire US carrier fleet against one single type 45. Thats like getting manchester united to play against the local primary schools under 7's side.
However, the anti air capabilities of the modern destroyer are more than capable of a toe to toe engagement against carrier launched aircraft.
Firstly, the carrier can only launch 2 per launch. SO if they were launching within the engagement envelope of the destroyer, it would be a conga line of flaming death as soon as they got in the air. If the carrier launched a full wing outside the envelope of the destroyer, had the aircraft loiter then attack en masse, thats different... but the anti air capabilities of the type 45 are designed for just that, massive anti air role.
Now, the only real threat the carrier poses is in ramming or in boarding. The type 45 can out turn the carrier soramming wont happen and boarding would be reppelled by CIWS and the minigun stations.
The only real threat the Type 45 poses to the carrier is its Anti ship missiles, which the carrier, even without its battlegroup, would handle fairly robustly. Then the type 45 could ram or engage with the 4.5" deck gun. Ramming would be futile against a big target, as would the deck gun. 4.5 inch holes in a carrier are going to do very little.
Now, this means that on a one on one encounter there would only be one likely conclusion, A lack of willingness to engage. Both sides would egress probably without engaging each other.
The comparison is ludicrous.
Once again fen reads what he wants to read 
Anyway I never said China wouldn't sell arms, I said they wouldn't get involved directly ie. commit boots on the ground. Also if the first of the Queen Elizabeth Class carriers is ready and F35Cs are delivered then the French Military may have to get involved if there are French Sailors on board when she deploys.
Also I never said the Navy or Aircraft aren't vulnerable but even if China sold SAMs to Argentina why would that matter? The jets would be flying no were near the main land and will be way out of range. If they have them on ships then those ships would be have to be very close to the islands and the Astute class subs with torpedoes and Tomahawks
Then there's the fact the Argentinean Airforce only has 63 jets all of which are 2nd and 3rd generation. Then where are they going to be launched from? Seeing as they have no carriers so immediately have to allow for 500+ mile flight to get there and back which doesn't give them much effective combat time near or over the islands against Typhoons that are already there and potentially Tornado's, Apaches from either land or HMS Ocean/Bulwark/Albion (last 2 capable of deploying Challenger 2 tanks) Also HMS Illustrious is still in active service another platform for Apache's plus Merlins and Chinooks potentially even the Harriers that were sold to the USMC leased back to the Royal Navy/RAF. Then there is HMS Queen Elizabeth which is due in 2016 with F35C's.
How would Argentina establish a beach head on the Falklands and then take control?
Website ©2013 Sony Computer Entertainment Europe
All content, game titles, trade names and/or trade dress, trademarks, artwork and associated imagery are trademarks and/or copyright material of their respective owners. All rights reserved. [more info]
