YEAFT: What can Argentina get instead of Veinticinco de Mayo?

Jukra

Now, YEAFT stands for Yet Another Falklands Thread, but WI Argentina decides that buying an aircraft carrier in late 1960's is not the optimal route for naval striking power and something else might be bought instead?

What would be the options? Other used warships - those B and C have to be outmatched! Buccaneers and (say) Atlantiques for naval strike and ASW?
 

King_Arthur

HMS Eagle for irony points.

They could probably get Lexington or a Midway class but its not really an improvement over 25th of May.

If Forrestal is damaged worse I could see them buying it, but I doubt the ship will be looked after very well.
 
Vanguard45

Vanguard45

A missile cruiser and spend the money that would've been used on the carrier and its planes on bomb maintenance?
 

Jukra

King_Arthur said:
HMS Eagle for irony points.

They could probably get Lexington or a Midway class but its not really an improvement over 25th of May.

If Forrestal is damaged worse I could see them buying it, but I doubt the ship will be looked after very well.
Click to expand...

Now, these are noble suggestions and might damage Argentine Navy even worse than Veintecinco De Mayo, but I specified no carriers! (or at least tried with my English)
 

Jukra

Vanguard45 said:
A missile cruiser and spend the money that would've been used on the carrier and its planes on bomb maintenance?
Click to expand...

The timeframe is in late 60's, maybe ex-USN Providence-class cruiser (Cleveland class CLG-conversion) but with different missiles?
 

King_Arthur

Oops, misunderstood you there! Now what would be interesting is an Iowa ending up in the not-so-capable hands of the Argentine Navy.
 
Vanguard45

Vanguard45

King_Arthur said:
Oops, misunderstood you there! Now what would be interesting is an Iowa ending up in the not-so-capable hands of the Argentine Navy.
Click to expand...
That is way too expensive for any nation save the US or USSR at the time.

And yes Jukra, that is what Im thinking of. Focus on a intergrated fleet structure supported by the air
 

DaveB

King_Arthur said:
Oops, misunderstood you there! Now what would be interesting is an Iowa ending up in the not-so-capable hands of the Argentine Navy.
Click to expand...
No, an Alaska, obviously.

[OOC: ducks for cover and stares wildly around looking out for Calbear’s vengeance]
 

Guilherme Loureiro

DaveB said:
No, an Alaska, obviously.

[OOC: ducks for cover and stares wildly around looking out for Calbear’s vengeance]
Click to expand...

If there were three complete Alaskas, I'd say that would be a possibility, sell one of each to Argentina, Brazil and Chile, mirroring what they did with the Brooklyn/St. Louis-class CLs.
 
juanml82

juanml82

Is there something that can replace the strike power of an aircraft carrier in the 1960s? Cruise missiles are still many years away and so is the Harrier. The only alternative I can think is some ship with heavy artillery to fight Chile in the constricted waters of the Magellan Strait, but that does nothing against Brazil.
As for land based air power, did the West had something to perform long range maritime strike? Even the Soviet Tu-22M didn't enter service until late 1960s/1970s. Missile technology isn't there yet during the time a replacement for ARA Independencia would be discussed and long range bombers would be felt as the domain of the Air Force rather than the Navy.

EDIT: An alternative procurement would be if there is no Latin American debt crisis so the Argentine economy is in better shape in the 1980s. 25 de Mayo's engines break down by the late 1980s, as in OTL, and a replacement or an alternative to a carrier based fleet is discussed during the early 1990s, when there are plenty of other options available: Russian bombers, missile armed surface combatants or missile armed submarines
 
Last edited:

Aphrodite

Banned
We have to understand that Argentina was ruled by juntas- coalitions of the armed forces. Each service gets to spend its share of the budget anyway they see fit. So if we cut out the carrier, the navy is spending it. Their best bet would be submarines but that would disrupt the internal politics of the Navy- more submarines mean less promotions for Surface Warriors.

So more destroyers would be your next best option and the more likely one
 

Ramontxo

Donor
Argentina Lancasters are replaced by a squadron of Victors. Instead of a old carrier la Armada de la República Argentina gets three squadrons of Buccaneer and one of Nimrod and a couple of 82 cruisers for flagships...
 

Jukra

juanml82 said:
Is there something that can replace the strike power of an aircraft carrier in the 1960s? Cruise missiles are still many years away and so is the Harrier. The only alternative I can think is some ship with heavy artillery to fight Chile in the constricted waters of the Magellan Strait, but that does nothing against Brazil.
As for land based air power, did the West had something to perform long range maritime strike? Even the Soviet Tu-22M didn't enter service until late 1960s/1970s. Missile technology isn't there yet during the time a replacement for ARA Independencia would be discussed and long range bombers would be felt as the domain of the Air Force rather than the Navy.
Click to expand...

But for how long range are you supposed to strike? Buccaneer, for example, had combat radius of some 800NM's, with air-to-air refuelling further, are you really supposed to be able to project farther from Argentine shores? Early on, you could have iron bombs like Skyhawks with ASM's further on the road from late 1970's. An Orion or Atlantique would be able to recce any targets via ESM and radar much farther out.

Besides, land-based air is much cheaper than carrier based one.

As for surface combatants, Veintecinco de Mayo lists some 1200 person crew. One could man, say, four Darings modernized a la Peruvian model, or two Tre Kronor's or one ex-USN CL for that crew, if you're seeking for used alternatives.
 
juanml82

juanml82

Jukra said:
But for how long range are you supposed to strike?
Click to expand...
As far as a carrier can. In a war with Chile, that's not much of an issue, since all of Chile is in range from Argentine land based aircraft. In a war with Brazil, a carrier allows the Argentine Navy to engage the Brazilian one far away from the Argentine shores (though admittedly, I don't know what plans the Argentine Navy had for a war against Brazil)

Buccaneer, for example, had combat radius of some 800NM's, with air-to-air refuelling further, are you really supposed to be able to project farther from Argentine shores? Early on, you could have iron bombs like Skyhawks with ASM's further on the road from late 1970's. An Orion or Atlantique would be able to recce any targets via ESM and radar much farther out.

Besides, land-based air is much cheaper than carrier based one.

As for surface combatants, Veintecinco de Mayo lists some 1200 person crew. One could man, say, four Darings modernized a la Peruvian model, or two Tre Kronor's or one ex-USN CL for that crew, if you're seeking for used alternatives.
Click to expand...
The Buccaneer would be a good choice, but I think it would be seen as Air Force material - interservice rivalry played a part in procurement options @Aphrodite said. Plus, there is the issue of pride/arrogance/jingoism: would the Argentine admirals want to replace a carrier with land based air power at a time when Brazil had a carrier of their own? And I don't think the military thought cost was much of an issue (at least within reason) - I doubt they were concerned with being efficient in the use of public funds.
 

NOMISYRRUC

Derek Pullem said:
Either Blake or Tiger for the irony.
Click to expand...
It's not ironic in the slightest.

In addition to the Colossus class aircraft carrier Independencia the Argentine Navy of the late 1960s still had both Brooklyn class cruisers and the training cruiser La Argentina. It's conceivable that HMG would be willing to sell Blake and Tiger's sister ship Lion to Argentina as two Type 42 destroyers were sold to Argentina at about the same time.

The Swedes sold their cruiser Göta Lejon to Chile and the Dutch sold both their De Zeven Provinciën class cruisers to Peru. The Argentine Government might be able to use the money saved on not buying 25 de Mayo to outbid the Chilean and Peruvian governments for one of those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top