Wi:HMS Splendid sinks vindecinco de mayo

Not much, Venticinco de Mayo went home after the initial invasion. But it would be powerful notice that the RN is not going to back down...
 
Some years back, I wanted to do a spoof front page of The Sun with a photo of a sinking carrier on fire and the caption "GOTCHA! Navy bags Argie carrier"

However, I soon realised it would be poor taste as the only photo of a carrier on fire I could find was of HMS Eagle.
 
Not a lot. All of the air attacks against the Task Force were launched from land.
The Argentines would perhaps be more determined to avenge her loss, but they really don't have the assets to do any more than in OTL anyway, so that's unlikely to make any difference.
Lose of the deck itself wouldn't make much difference to the war, she didn't manage to launch a strike herself and as stated she went home (straight after the Belgrano was sunk) and that was it for the rest of the conflict. Her only attempt to launch a strike was prevented by the weather (poor wind conditions over the deck I think, a problem that the SHAR's didnt have to deal with). Lose of her airgroup would make things a little easier for the Royal Navy, taking away 1 squadron of A-4's and some very determined pilots who caused so much trouble during the landings.
A possible extra benefit would be that while the V de M was at sea the Royal Navy had to watch for an attack from a moving platform, that until you track her location could be almost anywhere. With her either in port or sunk, the threat axis is reduced because the land bases are of course fixed and the Argentine aircraft only have a certain range. In that case, ships don't need to be looking all around the Task Force for a possible air threat, so you can load up your anti-air assets along a much easier to predict flight path. Of course, by the time of the landings this was the case anyway, so the air defence of the landings wouldn't be improved all that much.

Really the only outcome would be that several hundred more Argentine men would have died when she was sunk, and today we would be arguing as to whether it was right to sink her, whether she was in or out of the exclusion zone, whether she was turning towards the Task Force or away etc.
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
if she's lost with all her airgroup would that affect the air attacks on the fleet?

Would the Exocet threat be neutralised?

What if the Super Etendard's went down on the carrier?

Would this butterfly away the loss of the RMS Atlantic Conveyor on the 25th of May, then the loss of the Sir Galahad at Bluff Cove later on?
 
The Super Etendards weren't actually able to operate successfully off of the V de M so would still be available. During the war they flew from a land base. There was talk of the SAS doing an Entebbe and flying in aboard C-130's to destroy them and their pilots; Operation Mikado. The V de M only operated the A-4's and S-2's at the start of the war. Losing the S-2's would possibly hinder the Argentine efforts to track the Task Force as it approached the Falklands, but after the V de M returned to port this wasn't a factor either.
 
The Super Etendards weren't actually able to operate successfully off of the V de M so would still be available. During the war they flew from a land base. There was talk of the SAS doing an Entebbe and flying in aboard C-130's to destroy them and their pilots; Operation Mikado. The V de M only operated the A-4's and S-2's at the start of the war. Losing the S-2's would possibly hinder the Argentine efforts to track the Task Force as it approached the Falklands, but after the V de M returned to port this wasn't a factor either.
Why not ? She just in too bad of shape.
 
She was due to get her Cat's refitted, unfortunately the supplier wasn't to eager to provide, being that they were the enemy...

Serves them right for using a British built carrier :p

The Super Etendards weren't actually able to operate successfully off of the V de M so would still be available. During the war they flew from a land base. There was talk of the SAS doing an Entebbe and flying in aboard C-130's to destroy them and their pilots; Operation Mikado. The V de M only operated the A-4's and S-2's at the start of the war. Losing the S-2's would possibly hinder the Argentine efforts to track the Task Force as it approached the Falklands, but after the V de M returned to port this wasn't a factor either.

Loss to the Naval A4s might have implications - they are the ones whose bombs worked!

To the OP - if the Belgrano and the Vincinento De Mayo are both sunk within hours of one another might it not effectively end the war!

Perhaps a less ambiguous exclusion zone - ie Neutral Vessels please stay away from the region as we will be sinking Argentine vessels on sight - less confusing for the US media and the likes of Mr Berkoff (doesn't like being called Stephen)

Then it makes it slightly easier for HMG to allow the Hunter Killers to attack the main fleet units
 
Some years back, I wanted to do a spoof front page of The Sun with a photo of a sinking carrier on fire and the caption "GOTCHA! Navy bags Argie carrier"

However, I soon realised it would be poor taste as the only photo of a carrier on fire I could find was of HMS Eagle.

Not exactly on fire and sinking, but...

l-160473.jpg



images
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
Serves them right for using a British built carrier :p



Loss to the Naval A4s might have implications - they are the ones whose bombs worked!

To the OP - if the Belgrano and the Vincinento De Mayo are both sunk within hours of one another might it not effectively end the war!

Perhaps a less ambiguous exclusion zone - ie Neutral Vessels please stay away from the region as we will be sinking Argentine vessels on sight - less confusing for the US media and the likes of Mr Berkoff (doesn't like being called Stephen)

Then it makes it slightly easier for HMG to allow the Hunter Killers to attack the main fleet units

From what I've gathered from reading "100 Days" by Sandy Woodward, the problem with the TEZ and the hunter-killer groups was that they where removed from his control and put into the direct control of the govt via the MOD.

As a consequence, his and the fleets hands where tied until both the carrier and Belgrano where breathing down the Task Forces neck courtesy of "Lombardo's Fork"

You'd need the govt to grant him full control of the subs (he originally passed the RN's Submariners Perisher course) which would allow him to hunt down effectively both enemy groups and let rip.

As for the naval A-4's, from the book "The Royal Navy & the Falklands War" by David F Brown it stated that most of the "hits" and thus damage/sinking's of RN vessels where carried out by just one unit . . . . No V Air Brigade FAA!

Regards filers.
 
What if HMS Splendid manages to fire a torpedo at the Argentine carrier, what impact does this have on the Falklands war?
Well Commander, later Rear Admiral, Roger Lane-Nott is probably never able to buy a drink anywhere there are submariners station for the rest of his life. Let's just say that the commanders of submarines and aircraft carriers are somewhat competitive.

As other have said militarily it doesn't greatly alter things for the conflict at sea since as soon as the Argentinians learned of the sinking of the Belgrano they orders all their ships back to port for the duration. Back in the UK considering the furore that was kicked up with the sinking of the Belgrano that could be even worse if they've also sunk a carrier with attendant loss of life at the same time, alternatively it might mitigate things if it better shows that the Argentinian navy was attempting a pincer attack. Post-conflict I'm not sure if it will change various navy's attitudes towards aircraft carriers since the Veinticinco de Mayo didn't have much in the way of an anti-submarine warfare escort so it can be discounted by carrier supporters.
 
The Super Etendards weren't actually able to operate successfully off of the V de M so would still be available.

The war happened too soon for the Navy, with 25 de Mayo still needing upgrades and only five air-launched Exocets delivered...
 
Well Commander, later Rear Admiral, Roger Lane-Nott is probably never able to buy a drink anywhere there are submariners station for the rest of his life. Let's just say that the commanders of submarines and aircraft carriers are somewhat competitive. ...

I wonder if it would be the same for the Argentine submarine commander had his torpedo attack/succeeded?
 
The Super Etendards weren't actually able to operate successfully off of the V de M so would still be available. During the war they flew from a land base. There was talk of the SAS doing an Entebbe and flying in aboard C-130's to destroy them and their pilots; Operation Mikado. The V de M only operated the A-4's and S-2's at the start of the war. Losing the S-2's would possibly hinder the Argentine efforts to track the Task Force as it approached the Falklands, but after the V de M returned to port this wasn't a factor either.

The S2's were in shocking condition and couldn't really operate in any way effectively. They grounded the whole lot just after the war anyway iirc.
 
Top