Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Military Photos

Options
12223252728

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Ten Of The Most Massive Warships In The World. Interestingly Brazil and India are included, US Nimitz class is tops -

    http://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-i/battlefield-1-review-powerful-emotional-campaign-fun-engaging-multiplayer.html

    USS_Nimitz_in_Victoria_Canada_036-640x424.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Ten Of The Most Massive Warships In The World. Interestingly Brazil and India are included, US Nimitz class is tops -

    http://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-i/battlefield-1-review-powerful-emotional-campaign-fun-engaging-multiplayer.html

    If you are talking about Carriers, Brazil is out, they've finally accepted reality and decommissioned the Foch, their thinking about buying HMS Ocean when she's sold off next year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    See post #719.

    You, Sir, are becoming extremely tiresome in your Brit-bashing.

    tac


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    See post #719.

    Post numbers don't appear for me on mobile (android). never noticed that before.


    https://i1.wp.com/militaryhistorynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/F-82C_Twin_Mustang_1.jpg


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    sparky42 wrote: »
    If you are talking about Carriers, Brazil is out, they've finally accepted reality and decommissioned the Foch, their thinking about buying HMS Ocean when she's sold off next year.
    Well done you know your stuff. I just posted what was in the thread, but yes they are scrapping it. A bit of it's history - The São Paulo began life as the French aircraft carrier Foch. It served for 37 years until it was replaced by the nuclear-powered carrier Charles de Gaulle. Brazil bought the vessel from the French government in 2000. More than 860 feet long and displacing 32,000 tons fully loaded, the carrier was capable of carrying up to 39 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/02/21/brazil-decommissioning-its-only-aircraft-carrier-sao-paulo/


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    I am sure stars and stripes will be super happy when the British ship queen Elizabeth is service ready this year and will be included in the "largest" lists haha. Only the US will have bigger! Not that size matters or so I am told ;-)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    " epic " to get a single bomb on an airfield !! Not exactly a bang for yer buck, another heroic failure story for the Brits yet again :D

    The point of the Black Buck raids was not to damage a runway, or even damage aircraft - it was to make the Junta realise that the RAF possessed the capacity to 'reach out and touch' the Argentine mainland, and specifically Buenos Aires.

    The tactical damage inflicted was minimal - although the cratering and the botched repairs prevented the FAA from using it for fast jet operations, which meant jets had to fly from Argentina across a couple of hundred miles of open water (always popular among drivers of single-engined jets ;))......and that a proportion had to be held back for air defence on the off chance Mr Vulcan might make a house call.

    ......it was bit like the attack of the Hell Divers at Midway - they only scored 6 hits but the strategic and political damage that resulted far, far outweighed the immediate tactical damage.

    The real 'beauty' of the Black Buck raids was the re-fueling plan - you'd think to get so many aircraft so far south and back again safely the plan would be complicated - and the Yanks certainly thought so. They were helping the RAF out with some computer support and the story goes they produced a computer printout that ran to 90 pages detailing the choreography of the plan.......the senior RAF planner, looked at it, pulled out a single page of A4 and sketched a schematic to show how it would work - it was utter simplicity.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Jawgap wrote: »
    The point of the Black Buck raids was not to damage a runway, or even damage aircraft - it was to make the Junta realise that the RAF possessed the capacity to 'reach out and touch' the Argentine mainland, and specifically Buenos Aires.

    The tactical damage inflicted was minimal - although the cratering and the botched repairs prevented the FAA from using it for fast jet operations, which meant jets had to fly from Argentina across a couple of hundred miles of open water (always popular among drivers of single-engined jets ;))......and that a proportion had to be held back for air defence on the off chance Mr Vulcan might make a house call.

    ......it was bit like the attack of the Hell Divers at Midway - they only scored 6 hits but the strategic and political damage that resulted far, far outweighed the immediate tactical damage.

    The real 'beauty' of the Black Buck raids was the re-fueling plan - you'd think to get so many aircraft so far south and back again safely the plan would be complicated - and the Yanks certainly thought so. They were helping the RAF out with some computer support and the story goes they produced a computer printout that ran to 90 pages detailing the choreography of the plan.......the senior RAF planner, looked at it, pulled out a single page of A4 and sketched a schematic to show how it would work - it was utter simplicity.

    Listen, they could have caused a tear in the space time continuum in which intelligent life forms peered through and decided such an audacious flight plane proved mankind was evolved enough to receive such information as to cure cancer, travel faster than light and make proper kebab house sauce at home and stars and stripes would not be impressed saying stupid Brits closed down my local kids hospital and up da garlic!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    gallag wrote: »
    Listen, they could have caused a tear in the space time continuum in which intelligent life forms peered through and decided such an audacious flight plane proved mankind was evolved enough to receive such information as to cure cancer, travel faster than light and make proper kebab house sauce at home and stars and stripes would not be impressed saying stupid Brits closed down my local kids hospital and up da garlic!

    yeah, I'm sure I've seen that film :D:D:D

    cdf23c7706c969fab72df97daca82c40.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    While it was a triumph of aviation and the people who did it. (That book 607 is a fantastic read if you are military aviation buff.)

    I'm not sure all of the military claims for Black Buck are that credible. I would say they are all partly true. But then results of military actions are never quite as initially reported anyway.

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/operation-black-buck/analysis/

    Its kinda like the Doolittle Raid


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Fuch, caught plagiarizing a kirk Douglas movie, a new personal low, aw well, only ways up from here!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    It was on the TV recently


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    beauf wrote: »
    It was on the TV recently

    Think I saw it about 20-30 years ago, never since.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    beauf wrote: »
    While it was a triumph of aviation and the people who did it. (That book 607 is a fantastic read if you are military aviation buff.)

    I'm not sure all of the military claims for Black Buck are that credible. I would say they are all partly true. But then results of military actions are never quite as initially reported anyway.

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/operation-black-buck/analysis/

    Its kinda like the Doolittle Raid

    The same author did one on the Ark Royal as well, another interesting read I thought.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Jawgap wrote: »
    The point of the Black Buck raids was not to damage a runway, or even damage aircraft - it was to make the Junta realise that the RAF possessed the capacity to 'reach out and touch' the Argentine mainland, and specifically Buenos Aires.

    The tactical damage inflicted was minimal - although the cratering and the botched repairs prevented the FAA from using it for fast jet operations, which meant jets had to fly from Argentina across a couple of hundred miles of open water (always popular among drivers of single-engined jets ;))......and that a proportion had to be held back for air defence on the off chance Mr Vulcan might make a house call.

    ......it was bit like the attack of the Hell Divers at Midway - they only scored 6 hits but the strategic and political damage that resulted far, far outweighed the immediate tactical damage.

    The real 'beauty' of the Black Buck raids was the re-fueling plan - you'd think to get so many aircraft so far south and back again safely the plan would be complicated - and the Yanks certainly thought so. They were helping the RAF out with some computer support and the story goes they produced a computer printout that ran to 90 pages detailing the choreography of the plan.......the senior RAF planner, looked at it, pulled out a single page of A4 and sketched a schematic to show how it would work - it was utter simplicity.
    And the winner for the best fictional post of the week goes to - Jawgap !! Must have been the most expensive hole in the history of the world, they should have got a few lads from the local council with a JCB who could have done the same for a millionth of the cost and it would probably have been better :D


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Interesting perspective on the American Civil War -

    Joseph%2BE.%2BJohnston%2BWar%2BAdvantages%2Bquotepic.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    And the winner for the best fictional post of the week goes to - Jawgap !! Must have been the most expensive hole in the history of the world, they should have got a few lads from the local council with a JCB who could have done the same for a millionth of the cost and it would probably have been better :D

    Strategic bombing isn't about damage - its about politics.

    The Doolittle Raid - as referenced earlier - did nothing in terms of impacting Japanese steel or munitions output but it did shocked the Japanese to their core.

    Likewise, the early RAF raids against Berlin were utterly farcical.

    Btw, don't take my word for it.......I won't be Martin vanCreveld biggest fan, but my opinion is based on his analysis (in the Age of Airpower) - but sure what would a Dutchman who teaches in the US Navy War College and who is the only non-Yank on the US Army's officer's reading list, know about such matters?

    ....given we're pretty much talking about the pre-GPS, pre-internet era and they were using radar bombing tech that a Lancaster crew over Germany would have recognised, it was some feat of airmanship......and the whole matter of going half way around the world, with the wrong kind of kit and evicting an enemy from defensive positions they've had weeks to prepare..... is studied to death by staff colleges around the world - it even gets an honourable mention in the PLA-endorsed tome "Unrestricted Warfare."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Strategic bombing isn't about damage - its about politics.

    The Doolittle Raid - as referenced earlier - did nothing in terms of impacting Japanese steel or munitions output but it did shocked the Japanese to their core.

    Likewise, the early RAF raids against Berlin were utterly farcical.

    Btw, don't take my word for it.......I won't be Martin vanCreveld biggest fan, but my opinion is based on his analysis (in the Age of Airpower) - but sure what would a Dutchman who teaches in the US Navy War College and who is the only non-Yank on the US Army's officer's reading list, know about such matters?

    ....given we're pretty much talking about the pre-GPS, pre-internet era and they were using radar bombing tech that a Lancaster crew over Germany would have recognised, it was some feat of airmanship......and the whole matter of going half way around the world, with the wrong kind of kit and evicting an enemy from defensive positions they've had weeks to prepare..... is studied to death by staff colleges around the world - it even gets an honourable mention in the PLA-endorsed tome "Unrestricted Warfare."
    Yep, I'm sure the Argentine command were quaking in their boots when they heard about the hole made in the runway and the people of Buenos Aires were jamming the tv and radio stations in fear of their existence and demanding their troops be immediately returned :) Should have got the lads from the local council though, mush cheaper and you could then have claimed it was the SAS in a daring do mission ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Interesting perspective on the American Civil War -

    Joseph%2BE.%2BJohnston%2BWar%2BAdvantages%2Bquotepic.jpg

    Kind of makes you wonder how they lost at places like Missionary Ridge, or why they weren't able to stop Grant's Wilderness Campaign - where the terrain favoured infantry?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Yep, I'm sure the Argentine command were quaking in their boots when they heard about the hole made in the runway and the people of Buenos Aires were jamming the tv and radio stations in fear of their existence and demanding their troops be immediately returned :) Should have got the lads from the local council though, mush cheaper and you could then have claimed it was the SAS in a daring do mission ;)

    It wasn't really about the damage - it was about the impact. Instead of having a flight of a few minutes over open water to attack the RN, the FAA had to fly for 200 miles.......instead of having all their aircraft available for offensive operations, they had to keep fully a third back.......it's a bit like the sinking of the ARA Belgrano - the loss was catastrophic but the impact was even greater as it led the Argentinians to pull back their only carrier and keep it in port......meaning it's A4s had to fly from Rio Grande......meaning each aircraft could likely only do one sortie per day......when the Sea Harriers were averaging 1.41 sorties per day.

    Incidentally, looking at the FAA deployments - 12 Mirage IIIs were held at Moreno to cover Buenos Aires......with more at Rio Gallegos to provide air defence cover for Rio Grande.....and more still at other bases to provide air defence......

    ......so of a combat strength of about 103 fighter aircraft, the Argentinian Navy and Air Force had to commit nearly 30% of their force to air defence....and nearly all their Mirage III force.....all because someone made a hole in the ground ;)

    .....it also meant leaving the A4s and SuperEtendards to do the heavy lifting in attacking the RN taskforce.....which is probably why the poor sods in the A4s got hammered.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Poor sods? I guess so, from their perspective. That's not quite how the British saw them as they dropped their bombs on their warships tied at anchor.

    One Argentinian of my acquaintance was a Skyhawk pilot who not only saw his brother annihilated in front of his eyes by a Rapier missile, but caught some of the wreckage from his aircraft that he carries to this day. As he landed his badly damaged plane back at base - an astonishing feat of airmanship for which he got no recognition of any kind - it was obvious that he'd flown his last flight as an airplane driver.

    The AAF lost three pilots in three minutes, only recovered one of them, and he never flew again.

    tac


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    tac foley wrote: »
    Poor sods? I guess so, from their perspective. That's not quite how the British saw them as they dropped their bombs on their warships tied at anchor.

    One Argentinian of my acquaintance was a Skyhawk pilot who not only saw his brother annihilated in front of his eyes by a Rapier missile, but caught some of the wreckage from his aircraft that he carries to this day. As he landed his badly damaged plane back at base - an astonishing feat of airmanship for which he got no recognition of any kind - it was obvious that he'd flown his last flight as an airplane driver.

    The AAF lost three pilots in three minutes, only recovered one of them, and he never flew again.

    tac

    No, I'm guessing if I was on a ship and saw an A4 barreling towards me, the last thing I'd be thinking is 'poor sod'.......but with the perspective of time I think we can maybe see how the pilots, marines, soldiers and sailors of the Argentinian forces were committed to a war mostly for reasons of domestic politics and were poorly led (especially politically), poorly provisioned and poorly equipped for the job, so in that sense they were 'poor sods.'


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Awesome flying by the argies. The Vulcans Also had Shrikes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    beauf wrote: »
    Awesome flying by the argies. The Vulcans Also had Shrikes.

    Needless to say, the admiration shown to their flying skills by the British that they were bombing was less than minimal.

    tac


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Jawgap wrote: »
    No, I'm guessing if I was on a ship and saw an A4 barreling towards me, the last thing I'd be thinking is 'poor sod'.......but with the perspective of time I think we can maybe see how the pilots, marines, soldiers and sailors of the Argentinian forces were committed to a war mostly for reasons of domestic politics and were poorly led (especially politically), poorly provisioned and poorly equipped for the job, so in that sense they were 'poor sods.'

    Regardless of their motivation, my sympathies for the Argentinian invaders can be measured in the weight of a dot on this page.

    tac


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Kind of makes you wonder how they lost at places like Missionary Ridge, or why they weren't able to stop Grant's Wilderness Campaign - where the terrain favoured infantry?
    It does all right, those southern boys today are still as fond of arms as their ancestors.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,024 ✭✭✭Owryan


    tac foley wrote: »
    Regardless of their motivation, my sympathies for the Argentinian invaders can be measured in the weight of a dot on this page.

    tac

    As much as s+s's anti Brit bias is annoying at times your pro Brit bias can be as bad.


    Anyway, by the time of the 1864 wilderness campaign the army of Northern Virginia was a shadow it's old self and it's a minor miracle they were able to hold Grant off for so long.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 272 ✭✭Stars and Stripes


    Jawgap wrote: »
    It wasn't really about the damage - it was about the impact. Instead of having a flight of a few minutes over open water to attack the RN, the FAA had to fly for 200 miles.......instead of having all their aircraft available for offensive operations, they had to keep fully a third back.......it's a bit like the sinking of the ARA Belgrano - the loss was catastrophic but the impact was even greater as it led the Argentinians to pull back their only carrier and keep it in port......meaning it's A4s had to fly from Rio Grande......meaning each aircraft could likely only do one sortie per day......when the Sea Harriers were averaging 1.41 sorties per day.

    Incidentally, looking at the FAA deployments - 12 Mirage IIIs were held at Moreno to cover Buenos Aires......with more at Rio Gallegos to provide air defence cover for Rio Grande.....and more still at other bases to provide air defence......

    ......so of a combat strength of about 103 fighter aircraft, the Argentinian Navy and Air Force had to commit nearly 30% of their force to air defence....and nearly all their Mirage III force.....all because someone made a hole in the ground ;)

    .....it also meant leaving the A4s and SuperEtendards to do the heavy lifting in attacking the RN taskforce.....which is probably why the poor sods in the A4s got hammered.
    According to Major Walter F. DeHoust of Marine Corps Development and Education Comman of Quantico, Virginia -

    " There are mixed opinions as to the purpose or success of the Vulcan raids. To the British, the raids were fruitful, especially the first, in which the airfield at Port Stanley was cratered. They believed that the Argentines intended to operate Mirage III's and perhaps Super Etendard's from the airfield and the cratering by the Vulcans iron bombs prevented such use. Had the Mirages operated from Port Stanley to carry out its intended mission of intercepting the Vulcans7, substantial loss of the bombers may have been incurred. "

    " However, the success of BLACK BUCK can be at best described as minimal. The seven attempted missions included three aborts, three of undetermined results and one of minimal success (the first). The runway was continually used by Argentine C-130's until the end of the war. The Argentines would leave the runway covered with piles of dirt during the day causing British intelligence to surmise that repairs were still in progress. This deception mislead the British as to the condition of the airfield and the success of their raids. The most critical judgment of the use of the Vulcan centers on the argument that their use was "...largely to prove [the air force] had some role to play and not to help the battle in the least." This illustrates the practice of armed services to actively seek a "piece of the action" when a conflict arises, even if their capabilities or mission are not compatible with the circumstances of the conflict. Using BLACK BUCK as an example shows the effects of this practice can be trivial and the results not worth the effort involved. "


    There ya go me old China, should have let the lads from the council dig the hole :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    It does all right, those southern boys today are still as fond of arms as their ancestors.

    ah, I see we're ninja editing......;)

    What happened to asking for links to the FAA deployments?

    Don't forget some of us get email updates as soon as a post is made.

    EDIT: And there it is above ^^^^ - apologies for suggesting otherwise.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Owryan wrote: »
    As much as s+s's anti Brit bias is annoying at times your pro Brit bias can be as bad.


    Anyway, by the time of the 1864 wilderness campaign the army of Northern Virginia was a shadow it's old self and it's a minor miracle they were able to hold Grant off for so long.

    True, but sure it's a bit ridiculous to suggest that the Union's artillery superiority was the significant reason for their victory? If anything, it was probably the arrival of generals like Grant who could campaign, instead of merely make battle?


Advertisement