This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Climate control is what he did Justin, he was a refridgeration engineer. The firm he worked for was contracted by the military to service the climate control, as I understand it. But yes, not entirely sure when a psychoanalyst became a reliable source for entries....we generally rely on papers to use good sources but if we can prove the sources are crap, then I don't think we should be required to take it. Narson 14:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
The
November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot 01:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I see that MedCab case was really worthwhile ;) Narson ( talk) 01:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks From one Justin to another, thanks. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 23:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Recent edits today by an anon seem to be a little odd (replacing United States with US, using US spelling of some words, altering date formats, removing sources) can you check them and see if any of it is worth saving or whether mass revert is best? I find it hard to choose. Narson ( talk) 16:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Bah, I've grown a thick wiki-skin these days. If they want to get personal and snarl at me for reverting jingoism of both sides, **** em. As much as I hate the pro-argentine position, some of the pro-British guys are enough to make me want to be French. Narson ( talk) 15:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated,
Anibot (
talk) 23:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, I've been chatting to some guy recently who reckons his uncle was a Harrier pilot during the Falklands War. I reckon he's a WALT though, he says his uncle's last name was Howgill. Now I've read "Hostile Skies" by Dave Morgan from 800 Squadron, no "Howgill" is in the index. So if he was there, he wasn't on Hermes, is there a list of Harrier pilots on the internet? Or just ones from Invincible? He says he was RAF, but didn't know if was a GR3 or SHAR pilot. Think you can help me out with a link please mate? Ryan4314 ( talk) 05:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
It would have been more fun if you have retorted on the 'English Article for English Readers' with 'Local Shop for Local People' ;) Why are people so detirmined to bring the wrath of the nationalists down on the article? Then we end up having to fight for every darn bit of prose in the thing. Narson ( talk) 23:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
The
January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm he must be a great source of info then, but do you see my point about "does it need to be in the Falklands War article?". The article is meant to educate people about the general conflict, his info is a bit specific. Perhaps it should be reserved for the Cardiff article and possible the friendly fire article too, what do u think? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 03:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
<unident>*does the single and free dance* Though, sleeping is a pain ATM. The house is being rennovated due to subsidense damage. We are in week 7 of having builders and decorators trapsing around producing dust. Makes for alot of coughing. Narson ( talk) 01:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Anyway old chap, I think I'm going to prep for bed and get some kip. Hope the wife and kidling feel better and you get some sleep. Take care. Narson ( talk) 02:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, no comments or questions yet. This is either going very well or very badly! Though, it is nice to see there are some far more controversial candidates than me by a long way. Woo! A lighter shade of beige! :) Narson ( talk) 12:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Have the family recovered from the stomach bug? Narson ( talk) 09:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi guys. What an idiot I have been! I have been blundering my way around this thing with no or very little respect for you people. My only aim was to try and introduce more information that I have on the subject of HMS Cardiff in the Falklands war and thought you just posted away........wrong! Having read the comments made on talk pages I would be most grateful if someone would revert any work I have done and return the affected pages to a pre Griffiths911 state.
God I feel foolish, but my intentions were honourable and I am learning fast. Although I have only just worked out how to use 'talk' (albeit basics) I have 'felt' your 'guidance'. Please accept my apologies and keep up the good work.
Ken Griffiths - ex Able Seaman (Radar) HMS Cardiff 1982. ( talk) 10:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Griffiths911
Thank you very much for your kind encouragement.........you deserve to be far less generous. I'll be honest with you and admit that it was a discussion I had recently with the son of Christopher Griffin - (Gazelle blue/blue) that made me so 'hasty' to see updates to the Cardiff page. His name is paul and is obviously very emotional about the whole affair. He thinks that there has been some cover up and he cannot understand why historians have not recorded details surrounding his father's fatal flight on June 6. I explained to him that I saw the missile impact (night vision goggles) and that I really did know what had happened. As you can imagine, the conversation has brought back painful memories and in my naivety I thought I would record this part of history myself...........for him.
The pictures are mostly mine - a couple from Mark Edwards, who has kindly sent them to me and has given his permission to display on Wikipedia. Can I add that Cardiff's war had four distinct experiences for the crew in 1982:
1. The Boeing 707 incident. 2. The blue/blue Gazelle. 3. Canberra B-108 4. HMS Tiger Bay - 'Islas Malvinas'
I will not do any more editing and have removed my material from the Falklands War page (forgetting to complete the 'edit summary'). I would, however, be really grateful if you would consider to improve/change what I have done to make it credible and feel free to ask me anything you need for your material.
I'll be more than happy to be involved in any project but would rather you did the editing!!
Griffiths911 ( talk) 12:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Griffiths911
Hi Justin, I've "authored" the Cardiff article on my sandbox here. I'm trying to do it all by the book and follow the relevant project's guidelines (I've only got as far as the infobox at the moment), but could you have a look at the actual content and tell me what violates public domain (just mark it in bold or something), as I'm not really familiar with that aspect of wikipedia, cheers pal Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Looking at this and similar edits, could you please refrain from changing articles on British subjects to American Dating format? The Manual of Style can give you guidance on this subject. -- Pete ( talk) 21:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, is it ok if I E-mail you? I need some advice (no need to reapeat ur address, I've seen it before). Obviously feel free to delete this post after u reply. Ryan4314 ( talk) 18:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the support in the co-ordinator elections. I managed to come in a couple spots shy of a co-ordinator place, but closer to the co-ordinator places than I was to last place so, quite happy overall. Narson ( talk) 11:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I only fixed some typos, honest. I was provoked into finding out what I was supposed to be involved with! Dabbler ( talk) 01:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks for your message re. Sheffield. There does indeed seem to be consistency between the UK and Argentine narratives of the event. This said, there is quite a lot more that could be added about the circumstances of her loss, though much of this information is controversial so might not be appropriate here. -- Vvmodel ( talk) 12:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Nice edit. Best -- Luigibob ( talk) 18:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The
February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 04:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin, I did not remove the reference. I moved it to the right place. At the end of the sentence, it could be understand that the whole sentence is referenced. -- Keysanger ( talk) 14:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the solecism: I think you must have corrected it, as it wasn't there when I went back. And the previous note contained the reference, as it happened. Deipnosophista ( talk) 23:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Well it wasn't that sort of mistake: I thought the author had given the title of the source without author name or publication details, and it seemed a slightly contentious statement to make without full referencing. Anyway, sorted now. Deipnosophista ( talk) 09:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
LOL Justin, it's me Ryan, just on me GF's comp. The photo is one of Ken's, he's got some real good ones, so I thought I'd try and get em way out there, instead of just leaving them on Commons.
Was worried about the format (I hardly put the pic in the most relevant place) coz I didn't know if the Black Buck article was someones baby, so thought I'd offer consent for a revert. Although I think the pic's appeal (and by that I mean, what it has to offer that the other pics don't) is it's "grainy-ness" and that it was actually taken during hostilities, but that's not to detract from the other pics, they're both very relevant. 92.11.3.23 ( talk) 23:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for delaying my answer, but I have a very interesting exchange with a guy which acts like a troll, writes like a troll and uses derogative language like a troll; no doubt he's nothing more than a troll.
As for the Argentinian Type 42:
1)The page where you found the Hercules characteristics shows the current classification of the ship in the Armada Nacional; she's now a hybrid unit, not properly a destroyer. You can see the info for yourself in the last paragraph of the Wikipedia english article ARA Hercules.
2)The original configuration of the Santísima Trinidad and Hércules definitively did include four Exocet missiles; go to this ARA Santísima Trinidad page. There is a description of the original Type-42 in Argentina.
3)In any case, Harpoon missiles were never available to the Argentinian navy, as the Type-42's infobox formerly claimed. Best regards. DagosNavy 15:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, regarding your rv of my edition, which btw was not very gentile, could you please explain me why is "unnecessary" ? The sentence is cleary incomplete. Its seems that they simply turning off during the rest of the conflict. Jor70 ( talk) 12:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Man, not content with being so anti-British, you now call our bombs retarded?! How dare you sir! -.o Narson ( talk) 16:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Check out Argentine naval forces in the Falklands War. Poorly written and seems vaguely biased at first (Called the military occupation symbolic). Might want to poke it. Narson ( talk) 18:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Justin I wonder if you could help me, do u know if there is a source that can tell us exactly what the Mirages did towards the end of the war? In particular I'm looking for Mirage activity on June 13 in regards to an attack on a Lynx. Also don't suppose you have anyway of finding info out about a Boeing 707, TC-92 of Grupo 1 De Transoporte Aereo Escuadron II Ryan4314 ( talk) 10:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Yeah I thought so, seems odd to have one 707 (spare parts etc), poor old TC-92 would've been well over worked tracking the fleet all that time. Do u have time to answer a quick E-Mail? Ryan4314 ( talk) 23:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Tres M-5 Dagger, indicativo "Gaucho", armados con bombas BRP. Misión: ladera Monte Longdon. Tripulación (1) Capitán Norberto Dimeglio, (2) Primer Teniente César Román, (3) Teniente Gustavo Aguirre (este último no decoló por falla de frenos). 1 y 2 despegaron de Río Gallegos a las 11:00. En ruta, la lluvia los obligó a desviarse
Próximos a las islas, vieron un helicóptero en vuelo rasante. La sección eyectó cargas externas y lo atacó. El piloto de helicóptero ejecutó hábiles maniobras evasivas y eludió los dos pasajes de cañones de los Dagger. (Se trataba del Sea Lynx XZ 233- piloto Lt. C.H. Clayton, de la fragata Cardiff que operaba en el Estrecho de San Carlos). Regresaron a GAL, donde arribaron a las13:00 horas.
Se previeron seis salidas de M-5 Dagger de Río Grande con escolta de Mirage M-III de Río Gallegos.
(undent) LOL "floater", they are a strange bunch, I bet they don't even find that funny ;) Can you do me a favour please, I've left my copy of "Hostile Skies" at my partners, would you checking Morgan's diary entry for the June 13 for me? What do you think of the "3 Harriers"? I thought they only went out in two's (unless they were on a raid), at the weekend I'm gonna ask Ken if he can remember seeing the Daggers on radar or something. What's going on with these Tiger bay pic mate?
(undent) cheers, also did you see I added the Dagger attack to the article Ryan4314 ( talk) 13:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear Justin, simply I think is fair and equitable named the skirmish in both names, on the other hand I've heard english speakers talking up on the "Malvinas War" either. have a nice day talk —Preceding comment was added at 19:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I spotted vintagekits got indef'd for sockpuppeting. I wondered why I hadn't seen him on the Falkland Articles, I assumed due to the whole arbcom case before but wow. You really should keep me better informed old chap ;) Oh, speaking of, I don't suppose you happen to know much about the 'detterent' issue (nukes and the like?)...is that within your professional scope? Narson ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
This just got moved based on the 1833 article, I reverted the move and left a notice on the performer's page. I expect that there will, accordingly, be a discussion starting on the 1833 name. Must admit, the current name for 1833 doesn't quite sit right with me, just can't think of a better name without making a mountain out of a molehill (Or an invasion out of some yelling from a loud hailer) Narson ( talk) 14:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Justin, if that's a bad day then you must be a great editor. Your comments were very civil and well put out. You had an opinion and expressed without being aggressive. I didn't feel offended at all, I just disagreed with your assessment and wanted to clarify. Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself, I much appreciate it.
Sebastian Kessel Talk 16:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin, I edited HMS Cardiff (D108) per the A-class review which you are of course warmly invited to comment on. The images needed to conform to WP:MOS#Images in that left aligned images should not be interfering with the section headers. Another problem was that some of the images were sandwiching text, which at lower resolution screens leaves about 6 words to a line. There should also be a "cascading" effect so left right, left, right etc for aesthetics. (I couldn't do it with the last image as the section is too small and the image would have interfered with the header) I did shrink my resolution down to 800x600 to do a test and couldn't see any problems with my version. If you still have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks. Woody ( talk) 16:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, dunno if you actually enjoy the extra research/translation, but here's 2 accounts from 2 crew members of TC-92, thought you might wanna take a look? Feel free to delete this post as the first account is ridiculously long (it reads like it's actually out of a book)
Brig. Gral. Walter D. Barbero Actual Jefe del Estado Mayor General Auxiliar del Jefe de Operaciones de Transporte Aéreo. Tripulante de Boeing 707 durante el Conflicto.
"Hasta el 2 Abr ‘82 estuve destinado en la Escuela Superior de Guerra Aérea, como instructor, y después en el Teatro de Operaciones Sur como Auxiliar de Operaciones de Transporte Aéreo. Allí cumplí dos funciones: una como auxiliar del Jefe de Operaciones y otra volando Boeing 707. Con esta aeronave hacíamos vuelos logísticos dentro del continente, y de exploración y reconocimiento lejano en el océano Atlántico, entre la isla Ascensión y Malvinas con el fin de detectar posibles convoyes que se dirigieran hacia la zona del conflicto.
El 22 May, cuando hacíamos un vuelo de estas características con el TC-92 -se encontraba en los mandos el actual Brig. (R) Ritondale- fuimos sorprendidos por cuatro fragatas británicas que nos dispararon misiles Sea Dart. Uno de ellos venía directo a nosotros y debía hacer impacto entre los motores 3 y 4, es decir, en el ala derecha. En esos momentos yo estaba sentado en el asiento de la izquierda y el comandante de la aeronave me ordena efectuar un rápido descenso, cosa que hicimos junto con un viraje muy pronunciado, maniobras que nos permitieron evitar la zona de impacto del misil. Instantes después advertimos que otros tres Sea Dart también venían hacia nosotros pero nuestras maniobras los eludieron.
Llegamos a un nivel de vuelo mínimo para nuestro avión y pusimos rumbo al continente. No podíamos ascender porque de inmediato se encendía el alerta radar, que indicaba que estábamos siendo localizados por los radares de control de tiro de las fragatas. A medida que nos alejábamos de los buques hicimos un ascenso escalonado para ahorrar combustible y asegurarnos el regreso. Así llegamos al nivel 450 (45 000 pies, 14 000 m aproximadamente), que prácticamente era el techo máximo del B707. Con régimen de largo alcance y sin perder altura llegamos a la vertical de El Palomar con el mínimo de combustible, en donde tuvimos que realizar un descenso de emergencia y gracias a que las condiciones meteorológicas eran buenas pudimos aterrizar sin inconvenientes.
El último vuelo fue el 14 Jun pero con el B707 TC-91. Realizando una misión similar en el Atlántico sur nos encontramos con la estela de un avión tipo Harrier que al vernos cambió su rumbo y se dirigió a nosotros. El comandante de aeronave era el actual Brig. Gral. (R) Paulik, quien hizo descender al B707 rápidamente, maniobra que disuadió al Harrier de perseguirnos y nos permitió regresar. Cuando nos acercábamos a Buenos Aires sintonizamos una radio uruguaya que anunciaba la rendición de Puerto Argentino, así que pueden imaginarse la expresión en nuestros rostros y en nuestros corazones al saber que seguramente esa iba a ser nuestra última misión en un conflicto que desgraciadamente cobró muchas queridas vidas de nuestra Fuerza Aérea.
Veinte años después el primer sentimiento que aflora es de dolor y reconocimiento. Dolor por la sangre derramada, reconocimiento y admiración por los cincuenta y cinco hombres de la Institución, que en plena juventud ofrendaron sus vidas en pos de un ideal íntimamente asociado a la defensa de un objetivo nacional. El segundo sentimiento es de orgullo profesional por la fuerza armada más joven, que recibió su bautismo de fuego con su equipamiento y un excelente adiestramiento, pero con hipótesis que no contemplaban un enfrentamiento contra un adversario tan poderoso y especializado en operaciones aeromarítimas.
A pesar de esto, la FAA no eludió el compromiso asumido por la conducción política y aceptó el desafío. Aún previendo una baja probablidad de éxitos, los logros de las operaciones aéreas fueron un ejemplo de profesionalismo y virtudes humanas que hoy son motivo de estudio por analistas de todo el mundo. A veinte años de Malvinas la Fuerza Aérea Argentina rescata el valor de esta gesta, ya que considera a estas tierras parte de sus entrañas por estar regadas con la sangre de los hijos de la Patria. Quedará siempre a la espera de volver por el camino del entendimiento y negociación a aquellos tiempos en que, mediante nuestros vuelos regulares desde el continente se llegó a trasladar a más de 21 000 pasajeros en distintos viajes desde Malvinas, quebrando así con intenso trabajo aéreo el aislamiento de aquellas personas que comenzaban a conectarse con nuestra Patria.
La recuperación militar de las Malvinas ocurrida hace veinte años pudo no haber sido la única respuesta posible, pero ciertamente el 2 de Abril forma ahora parte de nuestra historia."
EXPLORACION Y RECONOCIMIENTO LEJANO CON B-707. ENCUENTRO CON EL GRUPO BRISTOL DE LA ROYAL NAVY.
En el aire, una voz dice: -...Ezeiza, Fuerza Aérea 729...
En la madrugada del frío y húmedo 22 de mayo de 1982, el crepitar del VHF sobresaltó al operador de la torre de vuelo del aeropuerto Ezeiza. La cabina del B-707 TC-92, estaba silenciosa, ordenada, fría como el amanecer que se adivinaba y pulcra como un quirófano. A 1.3 EPR los 4 turborreactores susurraban su potencia Los rostros de los tripulantes apenas se distinguían en la media luz del instrumental y sus gestos mostraban tensión y resolución. Era una tripulación clásica de la Fuerza Aérea, con hombres formados profesionalmente en la responsable conducta institucional, instruidos como los mejores, profundos conocedores de los secretos del vuelo, curtidos en distintas misiones y concientizados para la tarea que les esperaba.
-...Fuerza Aérea 729, contacto radar... Proceda directamente para final de la pista 11, QNH 1.021, viento calmo. Informe establecido en el localizador….
Las instrucciones del operador eran precisas, su voz seca, resuelta, levemente distorsionada por el transmisor. El también sabía lo que hacia, era otro de los tantos especialistas que distinguen a la Fuerza Aérea.
El hermoso e inolvidable Boeing 707 TC-92 rodó entre la neblina clásica de las horas previas al amanecer en ese frío otoño en guerra.
En la semiclaridad de la plataforma de vuelo, la actividad de la tripulación y la de los auxiliares de tierra que abastecían de combustible y de los lubricantes necesarios para una misión de más de doce horas, era afanosa, con la metódica dedicación de los que saben qué hacer en cada instante; entre las luces de camiones, vehículos de apoyo y susurrar de motores, la tensión iba en aumento.
El primero de mayo, la FAA había recibido su bautismo de fuego, su bautismo de sangre y fuego. Sangre derramada de hombres valerosos, llenos de vida y sueños. Sueños por una patria mejor, sueños por que las tierras irredentas de las Islas Malvinas, volvieran a ser patrimonio inalterable de la argentinidad. Nada pedían ni nada preguntaban. Sólo cumplían con su deber de argentinos y soldados.
El 26 de Abril, el Comando de las fuerzas británicas que navegaban hacia Malvinas, había declarado hostiles a todos los vuelos de Exploración y Reconocimiento y de no haber sido por un grave error de identificación que cometieron las fuerzas británicas y que casi determina el derribo de un avión de transporte de pasajeros brasileño, la suerte de los vuelos de Exploración Y Reconocimiento, hubiera sido otra.
En la fría oscuridad del día que se insinuaba, se realizaron con toda normalidad las tareas previas al despegue, mientras el Comandante de Aeronave y su tripulación hacían los últimos ajustes al planeamiento de la misión a cumplir. El copiloto informa:
-… Lista de control previo al despegue, completada…
Los procedimientos de control de rutina, tantas veces ejecutados, se llevaron a cabo con la precisión acostumbrada. Nuevamente las voces del copiloto y del operador de la torre:
-… Ezeiza, Fuerza Aérea 729, posición y despegue… -… Fuerza Aérea 729, ocupe posición y despegue,... viento 050 °, 6 nudos….
El piloto al mando, ajustó la potencia de los cuatro turborreactores, de acuerdo con la tabla para el despegue, EPR 1,92. El control del mecánico de vuelo, desde su posición, fue exacto, como siempre:
-Parámetros y temperaturas normales.
Mano izquierda sobre el comando de la rueda de naríz, mano derecha sobre los cuatro comandos de potencia. Suave presión sobre los pedales del timón de dirección y liberados los frenos, los casi 40.000 kilogramos de empuje de los cuatro turborreactores, se hacen sentir en la espalda de los tripulantes, la aceleración es mayor de lo habitual, el avión se encuentra sin los 35.000 kilogramos de carga habituales y eso se siente.
- 80 nudos... dice con serenidad el copiloto, -… parámetros normales….
La velocidad se incrementa rápidamente, las luces de del balizamiento de la pista 11 son ahora casi una línea continua, que los lleva al silencio del Atlántico.
-V 1...Vr...Rotación..., informa el copiloto. Con toda suavidad y exacta coordinación natural , el piloto levanta la rueda de nariz del avión e instantes después, casi mágicamente, este increíble y hermoso producto del genio de la humanidad, se eleva raudamente quebrando el silencio de la noche.
-Ascenso positivo... Tren arriba, ordena el piloto. Las instrucciones se cumplen mecánicamente, con exactitud.
Rugiendo sobre los techos de las casas cercanas, donde otros hombres y mujeres se preparan para las tareas diarias de aquel sábado 22 de mayo, el TC-92 desaparece velozmente en la frialdad de la noche. Exactamente a las 06:30 horas, en un todo de acuerdo con la Orden de Operaciones, ese rayo celeste y blanco, como los colores de la Patria, inicia su raudo ascenso, directo para el nivel de vuelo 410, a encontrarse con su destino. La misión asignada, exigía la máxima autonomía posible a fin de lograr presencia continua sobre el enemigo, en tránsito hacia el Teatro de Operaciones.
Los siete tripulantes conocían acabadamente la misión que debían llevar a cabo y los riesgos que enfrentaban. Si fueran interceptados por aviones británicos, como había ocurrido en varias misiones, antes del 26 de Abril, el peligro de ser derribados latía en el fondo de la conciencia de cada hombre. De producirse una interceptación por medios aéreos, las posibilidades de evasión eran nulas, así como las de sobrevivir a un ataque aire-aire, tal como les sucedió algunas semanas después, el 1 de junio, a los inolvidables tripulantes del C-130 TC-63.
Además de la tripulación de rutina, integrada por dos pilotos, dos mecánicos y un auxiliar de carga y despacho, fueron sumadas a la misma un fotógrafo y un radiooperador, dado los particulares equipos de comunicaciones instalados a bordo. El fotógrafo, debidamente equipado, tenía como tarea particular registrar aquellos buques que se detectaran, con el objeto de su posterior identificación, seguimiento y eventual interceptación.
La ruta de vuelo, llevó al avión y su tripulación por el limite internacional del Río de la Plata hasta aguas abiertas y desde allí, fuera del espacio soberano del Uruguay y Brasil a la zona de búsqueda, comprendida entre las coordenadas: S 16° 00’-W 22° 00’, S 16° 00’- W 15° 00’, S 22° 00’- W 22° 00’ y S 22° 00’ W 15° 00’, es decir una superficie equivalente a la de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, ubicada en la latitud comprendida entre las ciudades de Río de Janeiro y Carabelas, en Brasil, pero unas 800 millas náuticas mar adentro, en la inmensidad del Atlántico gris y bravío.
Desde el inicio de los desplazamientos de la armada británica hacia el Atlántico Sur, tanto de las unidades de combate (portaaviones, destructores y fragatas) así como de los buques de apoyo y de sostén logístico, éstos lo hicieron navegando por la bisectríz del triángulo formado por la Isla Ascensión, Islas Malvinas y las Georgias del Sur, para posicionarse al Este de Malvinas y fuera del radio de acción de nuestros cazabombarderos. Conocíamos sus procedimientos y operábamos en consecuencia.
Amanecía lentamente en el Atlántico en guerra. El mundo miraba asombrado hacia estas latitudes, donde desconocidos valientes de un ignoto país, libraban con las primeras potencias del mundo, durísimos combates por el control del espacio aéreo. Las primeras noticias del día, recibidas por radio eran dramáticas, en momentos en que alcanzaron el nivel de vuelo máximo que les permitía el peso del avión. Los manómetros de consumo de combustible indicaban el mínimo esperado y establecido por tablas, lo que les permitiría alcanzar la zona de búsqueda, descender a la altitud mínima posible, fotografiar los buques que se encontraran y posteriormente, regresar a El Palomar.
En las horas que siguieron el Comandante de Aeronave y su tripulación repasaron la tarea a realizar; los procedimientos de evasión fueron exhaustivamente analizados y establecidos los rumbos de escape, en caso de contactos con la flota enemiga. Todos sabían que a pesar de que los portaaviones británicos se encontraban mucho más al sur, existían reales posibilidades de que cazas de despegue vertical, operando desde buques con cubiertas planas, como las de los porta contenedores, pudieran llegar a ser lanzados, con el objetivo de identificar, interceptar y derribar aviones de la FAA en tareas de Exploración y Reconocimiento. También existía la amenaza de misiles SA y de artillería AA de fragatas y destructores enemigos en navegación hacia las Islas Malvinas.
El día previo a la misión, el Comandante de Aeronave, había recibido información de Inteligencia, acerca de importantes movimientos de buques logísticos hacia la zona de operaciones y precisas instrucciones acerca de la misión que debía cumplir. Dicha información era clasificada y debía permanecer como tal, incluso ante el resto de la tripulación. Por ella se conocía que un importante equipamiento logístico se estaba concentrando en la Isla Ascensión, con fuerte escolta de fragatas y destructores al igual que un inusitado movimiento aéreo hacia y en los alrededores de la isla.
El 25 de Abril, poco antes de su partida desde Plymouth el Atlantic Conveyor, recibió el primer Harrier a bordo, en tareas de instrucción de pilotos y auxiliares navales. Varios días después, ya en Ascension Island, 8 aviones Harrier GR3 de la RAF (Real Fuerza Aérea), fueron embarcados por aterrizaje en dicho buque porta contenedores, junto con 3 helicópteros Chinook y 5 Wessex para dirigirse posteriormente hacia las islas Malvinas.
En resumen, la misión de EYR establecía: Explorar, detectar y fotografiar los buques que se encontraran en la zona de búsqueda asignada, poniéndose énfasis en la información disponible, que hablaba de importantes contingentes logísticos en navegación hacia las islas.
Las circunstancias de la vida y las exigencias de la situación, habían determinado que tanto el 1er. piloto como el 2do. mecánico, realizaran ese día su primera misión operativa, es decir, muy pocos días antes habían finalizado sus periodos de instrucción e inspecciones correspondientes, por lo que el Comandante de Aeronave dispuso que el 1er. piloto volara en el asiento izquierdo, a cargo de los comandos de vuelo. Ello le permitiría al Comandante, dedicarse más libremente a la operación del equipamiento electrónico y al control general de la misión.
Hora: 09:52 ( LT) . Radar: On (Control de una vuelta de antena). Radar: Off. Transponder: ON (Control de señales luminosas) Transponder: Off . Condiciones de vuelo: FL hacia la zona de búsqueda, estimando ingresar a la misma a las 10:38 (LT), operando en silencio electrónico y con los sistemas de radio en pasivo, haciendo escucha en las frecuencias conocidas de operación de la flota británica.
A las 10:17 horas local (LT), las luces de control del Transponder, titilan levemente y traen la primera señal de presencia de radares de superficie activados y en modo búsqueda.
Instantes después, la primera vuelta de antena del radar de abordo, muestra claramente la presencia de un eco múltiple sobre la superficie del mar y de elevada energía reflejada. El azar, siempre presente en las contingencias de la vida, hizo que por un claro importante en el manto de nubes que se extendía debajo del TC-92, se visualizaran de 4 a 5 buques, (destructores y/o ragatas) que escoltaban un transporte de carga de importante eslora, de color negro y cubierta blanca. Durante los segundos que duró el contacto visual, los buques escoltas, cambiaban rápidamente su posición, acercándose al carguero.
-Registre la posición del INS (Inertial Navegation System), ordena el Comandante al copiloto. Y continúa: –Radiooperador, transmita al Comando de la FAS, el contacto registrado. Continuamos con nuestra tarea de Exploración y Reconocimiento. Posteriormente regresaremos para el control del contacto.
Todos los involucrados circunstanciales, sabían perfectamente, tanto los tripulantes del TC-92 como los integrantes del Grupo Bristol ( Denominación del convoy, según información posterior proveniente de fuentes de la Royal Navy) que partiendo de la posición registrada del convoy etectado, era prácticamente imposible que el mismo escapara a las tareas de control, dado la diferencia de velocidades relativas, a menos que se protegiera con Chaff o engañara a la tripulación de abordo generando ecos falsos en los radares del TC-92, capacidades reales de Guerra Electrónica de la mayoría de los destructores británicos.
Este primer contacto visual y electrónico con el Grupo Bristol, sirvió para incentivar aun más el espíritu de lucha de la tripulación, al comprobarse que las características del contacto y las maniobras de los escoltas, hablaban por sí solas de la importancia del mismo. Por otra parte corroboraba la información de inteligencia disponible y en conocimiento del Comandante de Aeronave.
10:41 hs. (LT). Al ingresar a la zona asignada para EYR, se inició un descenso para FL 100 y seredujo la velocidad a 250 Kts.
- Parámetros ajustados, presiones y temperaturas normales.
La voz del 1er. mecánico, sonaba segura, calma, pero algo tensa, presagiando lo que vendría. Su experiencia le decía ya que la tarea que les esperaba pondría a prueba todo el temple de la tripulación. 11:02 hs. (LT). Manteniendo rumbo general 020º aproximadamente, se detecta un buque navegando con rumbo general al teatro de operaciones, a 80 nm (millas náuticas) de la presente posición.
11:03 hs. (LT). -Descenso para 1.500 pies … .Velocidad indicada 220 Kts.
11:12 hs. (LT). -¡Contacto visual!. Se dejó el buque a la izquierda del avión. Significativamente, la nave sobrevolada, redujo su velocidad de navegación hasta quedar detenida y desde su puente de mando, las luces de un destellador, en código Morse, decían de su función sanitaria. El color blanco del mismo y una cruz roja en su popa, ratificaban su actividad.
11:14 hs. (LT). -…Ascenso a nivel 100…ajuste de velocidad. Control de consumo.
La actividad en la cabina era la de una clásica rutina. Se sucedieron así varios contactos más entre petroleros y algunos buques de carga.
11:43 hs. (LT). La autonomía remanente determinaba que la EYR en el área de búsqueda asignada, llegaba a su fin.
El Comandante de aeronave dice: -Señores..., vamos a ingresar en el INS N° 1, la posición egistrada del blanco a reconocer y volaremos hacia él. Descenso para 1.500 pies, Velocidad 220 Kts…Rumbo 175º….
Las condiciones meteorológicas en el área comprendida entre el limite sur de la zona de EYR y la posición estimada del Grupo Bristol, eran las siguientes: 6 a 8 octavos de Cúmulos humilis a 300/400 metros, con precipitaciones aisladas y visibilidad reducida en la zona de chubascos. Por encima, 8 octavos de Stratocúmulos y Nimbostratus. Los Cúmulus humilis, sobre el mar se saturan de agua y cristales de sal, que producen en los radares meteorológicos, muchísimos ecos en pantalla y de elevado brillo y en este caso saturando la PPI del radar.
Pasaban los minutos y la búsqueda electrónica se hacia ahora con radar en forma contínua, a pesar del peligro que ello entrañaba. Los operadores de los sistemas de GE (Guerra Electrónica)de los buques, recibían información permanente de la posición, rumbo, altura y velocidad del TC-92.
El Comandante de Aeronave trabajaba intensamente en el radar y con la ayuda del resto de los tripulantes en la cabina, trataba de realizar algún contacto visual. Sabían perfectamente que las naves, estaban en un círculo no mayor de las 20 nm. En momentos en que el Comandante advierte que la razón de no detectarlos, se debía también a un intenso lanzamiento de Chaff que saturaba la pantalla y limitaba el contacto radar, ordena:
-Vamos arriba, necesitamos más horizonte radar …Potencia de ascenso …
Esta orden y la feliz circunstancia de contar con hombres concentrados en su tarea, salvaron la aeronave y su tripulación de ser derribados, como veremos.A 4.000 pies de altura aproximadamente, el TC-92 ingresa en una densa masa nubosa de Nimbostratus, con turbulencia moderada y quiso Dios ese día, que nuevamente hicieran contacto visual a través de unos 13.000 pies y entre dos capas de nubes, la inferior y otra de Altostratus muy por encima.
También dispuso Dios que en esos instantes, el 2do. mecánico de abordo, levantara la vista de los instrumentos de control del avión y por la ventanilla derecha, a través del pequeño espacio que queda entre el asiento del Comandante y su tablero de instrumentos, ve, saliendo de nubes una estela de humo color negro e informa:
-Señor,... por la derecha, ¡estela de un avión!...
12:17" hs. (LT). Este contacto visual no hubiera ocurrido, de encontrarse el avión, como unos egundos antes, dentro de nubes y por lo tanto tampoco se hubieran podido realizar maniobras defensivas.
El Comandante de Aeronave, me contó en alguna oportunidad, que ya antes había recibido fuego y múltiples impactos de armas de superficie, en otro tipo de avión y en circunstancias que ya no deseaba recordar. Me dijo también que en esas dos oportunidades y en otras dos más, en sendos choques en vuelo entre aviones, que culminaron en un caso con la muerte de un piloto y en el otro con un avión seriamente dañado, las sensaciones fueron las mismas:
… el tiempo se congeló y los segundos parecían días…ello me permitía pensar calmadamente acerca de cómo y cuando actuar… pero en este caso la situación era distinta… Estábamos en un enorme avión, a muy alta velocidad y sin ninguna defensa como para sobrevivir y yo no estaba solo… También supe instantáneamente, que la negra estela que avanzaba directamente hacia el motor N° 4, era producida por el quemado de un booster de lanzamiento de un misil Sea Dart y no la blanca estela de condensación de algún avión.
-¿Estela de un avión, o de un misil?...exclamó el Comandante, quien al girar nuevamente su mirada hacia el mismo, ve pasar a muy pocos metros de la raíz del plano derecho, otros dos nuevos misiles, que ascendiendo raudamente y por encima del nivel de vuelo del avión, comienzan instantes después una curva de persecución. Sólo quedaban algunos segundos para decidir y obrar.
-…Mío el avión…Fue lo que dijo de improviso el Comandante y haciéndose rápidamente cargo de los controles de vuelo, inició un rápido viraje escarpado de máxima inclinación y muy cerrado,hacia el lado del primer misil, con el objeto de reducir el radio de viraje de aquél , aumentar las aceleraciones y tratar de lograr con ello desprenderlo del guiado electrónico, a la vez que extraía los frenos de vuelo e iniciaba con un medio tonel descendente un descenso de emergencia de máxima perfomance.
Todas las alarmas se activaron, el TC-92 crujía por efecto de la velocidad y las aceleraciones, cuando escucharon la explosión del primer misil. Durante el vertiginoso descenso, otro misil Sea Dart, cruzó la línea de vuelo, muy próximo al parabrisas del avión, frío y letal como una cobra. También se vieron otros dos misiles explotar contra el mar, por el lado izquierdo del avión.
...Recuerdo que lo primero que hice, cuando escuché la explosión, fue controlar la presión del sistema hidráulico, imaginando que podríamos haber perdido el control del timón de dirección y ernos envueltos en un nuevo problema… Nada de ello pasó y con el Mach Airspeed Warning y el Ground Proximity Warning System que no dejaban de sonar y ya muy próximos al agua, entregué nuevamente los controles al 1er.Oficial, agregó en aquella conversación el Comandante de Aeronave.
Ahora sí, con el radar y el transponder encendidos y los turborreactores rugiendo a la máxima potencia permitida , levantando sobre las olas, blancas estelas de espuma, agua y sal, buscaban el rumbo de escape que los alejara de la flota. Cada vez que pretendían ascender algunos metros, el transponder usado como único medio de alerta de radares en superficie, titilaba locamente, activado por las señales de interrogación provenientes de los sensores de navegación y búsqueda y los radares de onda continua de las centrales de tiro de las unidades navales enemigas. Algunos años después un suboficial de la Royal Navy, que se encontraba a bordo de uno de los destructores, como mecánico de helicópteros, contaba que al pasar el avión entre dos de los buques, separados por algunos centenares de metros, la estela de agua que levantaban los chorros de escape de los turborreactores, era de casi el doble de la longitud del avión.
Volaron a ras de las olas por espacio de interminables 25 minutos, hasta que fuera ya del contacto de los radares de la flota, pudieron iniciar el ascenso. También durante esos minutos, se cursaron las comunicaciones de rigor, al Comando de la FAS, informando la situación encontrada y se dispuso el regreso a El Palomar.
-… Señor..., la autonomía remanente en estos instantes, sólo nos permitiría llegar ajustadamente a Río de Janeiro... El informe del 1er. mecánico, reflejaba a las claras el grado de incertidumbre en que se encontraban estos hombres. Se dispusieron nuevos ajustes a la navegación y controles complementarios sobre todos los sistemas del avión, dadas las extraordinarias exigencias a las que había sido sometido. A las 17:43 horas (LT) , es decir 11 horas y 13 minutos después del despegue de Ezeiza, el TC-92 aterrizó en El Palomar.
He conversado con el Comandante de Aeronave varias veces, acerca de las decisiones adoptadas antes y durante el vuelo, con relación a esta misión. Siempre me remarcó el grado de autocontrol y disciplina, puestos de manifiesto por cada uno de los tripulantes, en particular en los momentos mas graves de la misión, es decir cuando se encontraban bajo fuego enemigo y durante las maniobras de evasión y escape. También me expresó en reiteradas oportunidades la rustración que le causó, por un lado los instantes que perdió en determinar que el Grupo Bristol, se encontraba bajo nubes protectoras de Chaff, segundos que pudieron haber costado el derribo del avión y además que las maniobras de evasión, también le imposibilitaron el registro fotográfico, en especial del buque porta contenedores, que probablemente haya sido el Atlantic Conveyor y que tres días después fuera hundido por aeronaves de la Armada Argentina, con importantísimos pertrechos militares abordo.
Estas simples líneas, que solo pretenden reflejar una de las tantas circunstancias en que se vieron envueltas las tripulaciones de la Ira. Br.Ae, están dedicadas completamente a la memoria de cada uno de los tripulantes del C-130 TC-63, muertos heroicamente el día 1 de junio de 1982, en tareas de EYR. El Palomar, 15 de Abril de 2003.
Resumen de la Orden de Operaciones del B-707 TC-92
EyR (Visual y Fotográfico)
Objetivo: Componentes Flota Británica, navegando zona WP
A: S 16º 00’ W 22º 00’ B: S 16º 00’ W 15º 00’ C: S 22º 00’ W 22º 00’ D: S 22º 00’ W 15º 00’
Despegue: de El Palomar 220500 May 1982 de Ezeiza 220630 May 1982 Aterrizaje: en El Palomar 221743 May 1982 Tiempo de vuelo: 11:13 horas.
Ryan4314 ( talk) 20:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
That chap wasn't being funny, he was using the French national flag of the period before the revolution, that of the drapau blanc or however they say it. What we have ATM is the French royal personal standard. Personally I think we should go with the blue field with 3 fleur de lis in gold, as was normally used by French colonies (And is /far/ more recognisable) Narson ( talk) 11:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello :) I'm considering setting up a Falklands war task force on wikipedia and noticed you've edited the subject quite a bit. Would you consider joining the group if I go ahead and create it? Thanks, -- Tefalstar ( talk) 19:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The block thing I only mentioned because you have to expect the partisan warriors will bring it up (And I'm fairly sure the task force, if it gets going, will be a big target). If you wanted to lead you know I'd be more than happy to back you. :) Oh, and kudos on reintroducing Major Bonkers contrib to falklands, was just about to go searching for it myself after he mentioned it on my page. Narson ( talk) 11:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Interested in the Falklands War? | ||
Interested in the Falklands War? Have you ever considered joining a military history " Task Force"? The South American military history task force has a number of users involved in editing Falklands articles and is a great place for us to discuss the direction of the project. |
The
April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Thought you might be interested, there's a discussion about VK's potential unblocking AN/I at the moment. Pfainuk talk 18:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Major Bonkers wanted me to pass on thanks for going to the trouble of restoring his edit. I'm like some kind of love doctor for British editors. Now to set Ryan up on a date with ALR! Narson ( talk) 21:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin. The header in the article about GADA 601 using the name Puerto Argentino instead of Port Stanley is not PoV, nor an offense to the Islanders; it just reflects the context of May-June 1982.
Its hard to believe that the Argentinians were defending "Stanley", their people or the interest of its people against the British; they were fighting for the military garrison they called "Puerto Argentino". I think a header "Defense of Port Stanley" would be more appropiate for a situation of British or Islander forces facing an invasion from the mainland. I will modify the section's title in a salomonic way, replacing Puerto Argentino or Port Stanley by "the Capital". Regards-- Darius ( talk) 16:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Could you please add a reference or two for the changes that you made to this article? Much obliged,
Dove1950 (
talk) 20:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean "see PINK"? The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 23:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The
May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I was taking a little break in my work to make some edits and I just found your message. I guess your concern is about the Roland crew picture, the Argentine law makes clear that the image must have been published in order to be copyright-free. I haven't found any source where this pic in particular was reproduced before the 20 years deadline, thus I choose the "fair-use" tag. Thanks for cleaning up another section of "GADA 601". I have some questions for you, but later man, I'am the boss here, but I must "give the example" as we use to say in Argentina ;). Cheers.-- Darius ( talk) 13:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
So you really thing it is him? I would have figured he would have signed in using the Alex name...he seemed so cocksure of himself, I can't see him believing he has to hide. Narson ( talk) 21:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I am loving the Falkland Wars montage. Narson ( talk) 16:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
This chap is taking the piss now. Now he is removing a similar catagory from forces used for soviet occupations and replacing it with Soviet armed forces deployments. He is quacking, walking and looking alot like a POV warrior. Narson ( talk) 19:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin A Kuntz. You do know that I wrote "unintelligible" and not "unintelligent"? I just didn't expect such a lousy argument from you :-) See you at Talk:Falklands War#Fixed-wing aircraft in the Info box --Regards, Necessary Evil ( talk) 12:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin? The events article...why the heck /are/ there spanish names all over it? It is not the main article or the article on the islands...seems silly to have them. Not that I'd push to remove them, but can't say I'd revert if someone else took them out. Narson ( talk) 11:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
.... no I hadn't noticed - I can be so hopeless sometimes. Thanks for reverting, much appreciated. nancy (talk) 09:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm impressed. Ryan has certainly come along in leaps and bounds since he first appeared. Good on the kiddo. Narson ( talk) 21:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I've added a comment to your note on Uti possidetis at Talk:History_of_the_Falkland_Islands Dab14763 ( talk) 16:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Woah bloody hell! How did that happen!? Good thing I got back when I did, oddly enough I had actually planned to try n get her up once I returned. Did anyone suggest her, or did Raul just decide it? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, just in case you didn't know, I added a list of Falkands books that I have/read on my userpage, let me know what you think? Ryan4314 ( talk) 00:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
(Undent) Hi Justin, I have time to reply in earnest now to your responses. The book was "Razor's Edge by Hugh Bicheno, he's Argentine. I think the book has gathered some praise in the Falklands community, as it's told from the Argentine side and is apparently quite neutral (although it's got a big fuck off picture of Maggie Thatcher wearing an eye patch on the front!?) I was only asking if you had it, because I was flicking through a copy in a book store the whilst waiting for a friend the other day, and it mentioned a new bit of information for me (Cardiff's position during the Invincible raid, nothing major I know, but might be nice for the article).
The website with the commissioning books is great, does ever ship have a "commissioning book" then? Shame Cardiff's isn't on there, know where I could track it down??? Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
What's the deal with IP guy? Someone wiki user u pissed off from another account? Seems all his edits are reverts of your stuff. You know any admins u can defer him too? Ryan4314 ( talk) 22:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
(undent) That's a good point, we could be construed as "feeding" him. On an entirely different matter, I just joined SATF, in the nieve hope it'll encourage u and Narson to come over. There's not much to be done there, but we could add some cool resources to the list, in particular I want to add the AAF's official website timeline. Ryan4314 ( talk) 22:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
You do seem to attract these people Justin! On a more serious note, you should let people know, rather than skirting to the edge of 3RR. All it takes it an admin to get the wrong end of a stick and you are cast into the abyss for a day. These days I've started stopping at 2 reversions on a page, or trying to. Narson ( talk) 17:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Yea and we all know what happened to the last poor bunch of foreign fuckers who came to Glasgow airport! ;) Ryan4314 ( talk) 23:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Because consensus isn't about numbers, it's about arguments. Clearly this wasn't an easy one, which is why no other admin had closed it earlier and it was 10 days overdue. There seemed a genuine division of opinion on whether the category could ever be used properly, at whatever name was chosen, which is why I called it as no consensus. Narson was a "weak delete" saying that it had potential if used correctly: that's an argument about use, not existence, of the category, and I gave that delete call less weight. There were some calls for a rename, which counted in favour of retention of the category in some form, but no consensus that this was the way forward. Hence, overall, no consensus but with closing comments that I thought we'd be back here again in due course - because I'm sure someone will initiate a wider discussion at some point. Regards, Bencherlite Talk 08:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I've pruned out the occupation of japan, it was US led and rarely ever regarded as a British occupation but an American one or at worst an allied one. I've also removed the British Occupation Force, it is a formation not an occupation, and a formation subservient to a US occupation. Narson ( talk) 09:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
(undent) quick question for you both; Falklands, approx 7,000 British troops, sounds about right? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I know there are other British occupations, we must have had more of them...grr. Well, Suez is a good add I think, on reflection. Still a bit bare. Now I am going to go and fume over the ICC decision to award Pakistan a draw. Narson ( talk) 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I want to know your opinion about an article on the "own goals" incidents regarding the Falklands War. We have the "Cardiff" incident, the two FF kills of GADA 601 and the shooting down of a Gendarmerie's chopper on 30 June by a blow-pipe, this one never undisclosed by Argentine authorities. There was also a blue-blue clash between SBS an SAS units on June 1st. British AAA also killed at least one marine at San Carlos bay while fighting off an A-4 strike and there was another case during the battle of Wireless Ridge. Is there ground for an article or not?.-- Darius ( talk) 23:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion would be to let the DRV finish, see what else is said, then see what happens with the category in further use. If there's still a problem or a rename still feels like a good idea, bring it back to CFD. A "no consensus" decision doesn't rule out further debate, whereas (e.g.) it's usually seen as inappropriate to relist at CFD too quickly after a "keep" decision. I'll just let the DRV run its course now, as I didn't (and don't) see consensus for a rename – this time round, anyway. Regards, Bencherlite Talk 14:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
YEp, true I am new to that part of Wikipedia, but was asked by a friend to help find a suitable link-in location to the Orphaned article on the 'Anglo-Ottoman Treaty'. I didn't want to disrupt the flow of the article, but the treaty is a case in point of the 19th British treaty policy of creating asymmetrical trade treaties that would lead to the eventual de-facto rule. I would be grateful for any indications on how to include this treaty in a more acceptable way. --BirgittaHo (talk) 19:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I added the reference as a see as example. I hope it meets with your approval. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BirgittaHo ( talk • contribs) 10:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed your of British Empire with the comment "Undid revision 222138487 by BirgittaHo (talk) wikipedia doesn't reference itself". I have wondered sometimes whether footnotes referring to another article in a footnote are appropriate but have not seen any. I have reviewed WP:FN, MOS:LINK and WP:CS and found no answer to this question. References to other articles seem to be made either as links in the text or under something like a See Also head. Neither of those would work well for something like this (ie: For an example see ...) Your comment has me wondering, is there some policy about this? I am not familiar with the subject of this article at the level of detail being dealt with here, but looking at the article with the footnote, it seems to be a useful way to refer to an example without cluttering the text with a link in brackets. My initial reaction was that the note should not be pitched. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this. -- KenWalker | Talk 20:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting the edits of "Generalmesse"'s sockpuppet. I know you are aware he asked me to rewrite the article about Operation Agreement from the Italian side. I smelled PoV, so I kept myself silent. I'am glad his case is now under the scrutiny of admins.-- Darius ( talk) 23:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thought you might be interested in this CFD on categories related to Tierra del Fuego Province in Argentina. Cheers, Pfainuk talk 10:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
[5] Justin talk 21:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't mind, it's all right. oh, I saw that you're interested in topics about the Malvinas (Falklands) islands and geography of Argentina. Well I born here, and I'm living in Buenos Aies, in Argentina. If you've some question, just ask it. -- Gonza777 ( talk) 21:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Despite my recent comments, I notice you have re-added the tags, clearly showing you have no intention of listening (as I said with a main ref tag at top, further were are superflous, and IMDb does not say British, and the general consensus on Wikipedia (English, Scottish, Welsh rarely citied)). I suggest we get further editors involved to avoid an unpleasant edit war.-- UpDown ( talk) 08:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The
June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 19:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin. I've performed a clean up of the PNA article. The changes included the removal of the Argentine claim of a Sea Harrier shot down, along with the citation needed tag posted by you a month or so ago. I've also added some details about the attack on the Río Iguazú, with the proper citation. Regards. -- Darius ( talk) 13:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, pretty obvious. Just a note man, if you leave messages, just put down that you think the person may be interested, any indication that you are trying to suggest which way people should !vote and people will yell about canvassing. I'm becomming way too aware of wiki policies. I need to stab myself in the eye now. Narson ( talk) 11:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I will edit the quote of Brian Hanrahan on the GADA 601 article. Please, if you think that my changes are undue or PoV, feel absolutely free to revert, but go to the talk page to discuss the details. My point is that the article is written from an Argentine prospective (not PoV, just the scope of the page), thus the quotation is more appropriated for an article from a British prospective, for example an article about the Harrier/Sea Harriers campaign in the Falklands war. Hanrahan remarks are far from be 'iconic' in Argentina; I learned of them 20 years ago, when I was 18, 6 years after the war, by the translation of a British source. Recently, in my father's house, I found an Argentine magazine dating back to the first days of the conflict (May 6 or 7). Surprisely, there is some degree of sympathy toward Hanrahan work on HMS Hermes, but, for obvious reasons, no mention of his famous quote. I decided to preserve his words in the article, but as a footnote and not in the main narrative. Remember that I did the same with a small paragraph about the morale at Goose Green and the names of GADA's fallen soldiers, in the latter case as per WP:MEMORIAL. If you disagree, I insist, feel free to revert and express your opinion at the talk page. Thank you in advance.-- Darius ( talk) 01:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Cheers for the hand on SGSSI, mate. I made a note on the IP talk page and hopefully that's the end of it. The IP is Boston-based, for the record. Pfainuk talk 23:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
You are the expert ;) I know you had reverted to Fuze spelling before hence why I was thinking it was right...and it was. Huzzah. Narson ( talk) 15:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin? I know you, so I realise this is unfair that because of that you are the one I ask, but can you step bac from Red Hat on the Gib page? It just isn't helping you getting into it with Red Hat like that. You are getting into that 'Alex' place where bad things can happen. Narson ( talk) 16:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
As your our resident missile expert (lol amazing how many times a requirement for that post pops up amongst our circle of friends!) thought u should take a look at at sentence I'm gonna edit on the Air-to-air missile article. It literally reads;
In the Falklands War technically inferior British Harriers were able to defeat faster Argentinian opponents using AIM-9G missiles provided by the United States as the conflict began.
Minor changes first;
Now then, I've been meaning to clarify this sometime anyway, What's the full story with this US-supplied sidewinder thing? I mean, the US didn't literally give us AIM9Ls the day the war started right? We must've had some already, you can't just stick a new missile system on a plane (it needs to be integrated into the computers n all that right?) and then expect the pilots to be totally proficient in using it. Do we have any sources for this?
These "faster Argentinian opponents" were the Mirages, I don't think "being slower" makes an aircraft "technically inferior". Speed is not a measure of quality, it's all about circumstance. Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Climate control is what he did Justin, he was a refridgeration engineer. The firm he worked for was contracted by the military to service the climate control, as I understand it. But yes, not entirely sure when a psychoanalyst became a reliable source for entries....we generally rely on papers to use good sources but if we can prove the sources are crap, then I don't think we should be required to take it. Narson 14:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
The
November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot 01:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I see that MedCab case was really worthwhile ;) Narson ( talk) 01:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks From one Justin to another, thanks. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 23:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Recent edits today by an anon seem to be a little odd (replacing United States with US, using US spelling of some words, altering date formats, removing sources) can you check them and see if any of it is worth saving or whether mass revert is best? I find it hard to choose. Narson ( talk) 16:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Bah, I've grown a thick wiki-skin these days. If they want to get personal and snarl at me for reverting jingoism of both sides, **** em. As much as I hate the pro-argentine position, some of the pro-British guys are enough to make me want to be French. Narson ( talk) 15:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated,
Anibot (
talk) 23:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, I've been chatting to some guy recently who reckons his uncle was a Harrier pilot during the Falklands War. I reckon he's a WALT though, he says his uncle's last name was Howgill. Now I've read "Hostile Skies" by Dave Morgan from 800 Squadron, no "Howgill" is in the index. So if he was there, he wasn't on Hermes, is there a list of Harrier pilots on the internet? Or just ones from Invincible? He says he was RAF, but didn't know if was a GR3 or SHAR pilot. Think you can help me out with a link please mate? Ryan4314 ( talk) 05:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
It would have been more fun if you have retorted on the 'English Article for English Readers' with 'Local Shop for Local People' ;) Why are people so detirmined to bring the wrath of the nationalists down on the article? Then we end up having to fight for every darn bit of prose in the thing. Narson ( talk) 23:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
The
January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm he must be a great source of info then, but do you see my point about "does it need to be in the Falklands War article?". The article is meant to educate people about the general conflict, his info is a bit specific. Perhaps it should be reserved for the Cardiff article and possible the friendly fire article too, what do u think? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 03:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
<unident>*does the single and free dance* Though, sleeping is a pain ATM. The house is being rennovated due to subsidense damage. We are in week 7 of having builders and decorators trapsing around producing dust. Makes for alot of coughing. Narson ( talk) 01:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Anyway old chap, I think I'm going to prep for bed and get some kip. Hope the wife and kidling feel better and you get some sleep. Take care. Narson ( talk) 02:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, no comments or questions yet. This is either going very well or very badly! Though, it is nice to see there are some far more controversial candidates than me by a long way. Woo! A lighter shade of beige! :) Narson ( talk) 12:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Have the family recovered from the stomach bug? Narson ( talk) 09:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi guys. What an idiot I have been! I have been blundering my way around this thing with no or very little respect for you people. My only aim was to try and introduce more information that I have on the subject of HMS Cardiff in the Falklands war and thought you just posted away........wrong! Having read the comments made on talk pages I would be most grateful if someone would revert any work I have done and return the affected pages to a pre Griffiths911 state.
God I feel foolish, but my intentions were honourable and I am learning fast. Although I have only just worked out how to use 'talk' (albeit basics) I have 'felt' your 'guidance'. Please accept my apologies and keep up the good work.
Ken Griffiths - ex Able Seaman (Radar) HMS Cardiff 1982. ( talk) 10:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Griffiths911
Thank you very much for your kind encouragement.........you deserve to be far less generous. I'll be honest with you and admit that it was a discussion I had recently with the son of Christopher Griffin - (Gazelle blue/blue) that made me so 'hasty' to see updates to the Cardiff page. His name is paul and is obviously very emotional about the whole affair. He thinks that there has been some cover up and he cannot understand why historians have not recorded details surrounding his father's fatal flight on June 6. I explained to him that I saw the missile impact (night vision goggles) and that I really did know what had happened. As you can imagine, the conversation has brought back painful memories and in my naivety I thought I would record this part of history myself...........for him.
The pictures are mostly mine - a couple from Mark Edwards, who has kindly sent them to me and has given his permission to display on Wikipedia. Can I add that Cardiff's war had four distinct experiences for the crew in 1982:
1. The Boeing 707 incident. 2. The blue/blue Gazelle. 3. Canberra B-108 4. HMS Tiger Bay - 'Islas Malvinas'
I will not do any more editing and have removed my material from the Falklands War page (forgetting to complete the 'edit summary'). I would, however, be really grateful if you would consider to improve/change what I have done to make it credible and feel free to ask me anything you need for your material.
I'll be more than happy to be involved in any project but would rather you did the editing!!
Griffiths911 ( talk) 12:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Griffiths911
Hi Justin, I've "authored" the Cardiff article on my sandbox here. I'm trying to do it all by the book and follow the relevant project's guidelines (I've only got as far as the infobox at the moment), but could you have a look at the actual content and tell me what violates public domain (just mark it in bold or something), as I'm not really familiar with that aspect of wikipedia, cheers pal Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Looking at this and similar edits, could you please refrain from changing articles on British subjects to American Dating format? The Manual of Style can give you guidance on this subject. -- Pete ( talk) 21:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, is it ok if I E-mail you? I need some advice (no need to reapeat ur address, I've seen it before). Obviously feel free to delete this post after u reply. Ryan4314 ( talk) 18:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the support in the co-ordinator elections. I managed to come in a couple spots shy of a co-ordinator place, but closer to the co-ordinator places than I was to last place so, quite happy overall. Narson ( talk) 11:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I only fixed some typos, honest. I was provoked into finding out what I was supposed to be involved with! Dabbler ( talk) 01:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks for your message re. Sheffield. There does indeed seem to be consistency between the UK and Argentine narratives of the event. This said, there is quite a lot more that could be added about the circumstances of her loss, though much of this information is controversial so might not be appropriate here. -- Vvmodel ( talk) 12:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Nice edit. Best -- Luigibob ( talk) 18:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The
February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 04:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin, I did not remove the reference. I moved it to the right place. At the end of the sentence, it could be understand that the whole sentence is referenced. -- Keysanger ( talk) 14:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the solecism: I think you must have corrected it, as it wasn't there when I went back. And the previous note contained the reference, as it happened. Deipnosophista ( talk) 23:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Well it wasn't that sort of mistake: I thought the author had given the title of the source without author name or publication details, and it seemed a slightly contentious statement to make without full referencing. Anyway, sorted now. Deipnosophista ( talk) 09:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
LOL Justin, it's me Ryan, just on me GF's comp. The photo is one of Ken's, he's got some real good ones, so I thought I'd try and get em way out there, instead of just leaving them on Commons.
Was worried about the format (I hardly put the pic in the most relevant place) coz I didn't know if the Black Buck article was someones baby, so thought I'd offer consent for a revert. Although I think the pic's appeal (and by that I mean, what it has to offer that the other pics don't) is it's "grainy-ness" and that it was actually taken during hostilities, but that's not to detract from the other pics, they're both very relevant. 92.11.3.23 ( talk) 23:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for delaying my answer, but I have a very interesting exchange with a guy which acts like a troll, writes like a troll and uses derogative language like a troll; no doubt he's nothing more than a troll.
As for the Argentinian Type 42:
1)The page where you found the Hercules characteristics shows the current classification of the ship in the Armada Nacional; she's now a hybrid unit, not properly a destroyer. You can see the info for yourself in the last paragraph of the Wikipedia english article ARA Hercules.
2)The original configuration of the Santísima Trinidad and Hércules definitively did include four Exocet missiles; go to this ARA Santísima Trinidad page. There is a description of the original Type-42 in Argentina.
3)In any case, Harpoon missiles were never available to the Argentinian navy, as the Type-42's infobox formerly claimed. Best regards. DagosNavy 15:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, regarding your rv of my edition, which btw was not very gentile, could you please explain me why is "unnecessary" ? The sentence is cleary incomplete. Its seems that they simply turning off during the rest of the conflict. Jor70 ( talk) 12:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Man, not content with being so anti-British, you now call our bombs retarded?! How dare you sir! -.o Narson ( talk) 16:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Check out Argentine naval forces in the Falklands War. Poorly written and seems vaguely biased at first (Called the military occupation symbolic). Might want to poke it. Narson ( talk) 18:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Justin I wonder if you could help me, do u know if there is a source that can tell us exactly what the Mirages did towards the end of the war? In particular I'm looking for Mirage activity on June 13 in regards to an attack on a Lynx. Also don't suppose you have anyway of finding info out about a Boeing 707, TC-92 of Grupo 1 De Transoporte Aereo Escuadron II Ryan4314 ( talk) 10:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Yeah I thought so, seems odd to have one 707 (spare parts etc), poor old TC-92 would've been well over worked tracking the fleet all that time. Do u have time to answer a quick E-Mail? Ryan4314 ( talk) 23:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Tres M-5 Dagger, indicativo "Gaucho", armados con bombas BRP. Misión: ladera Monte Longdon. Tripulación (1) Capitán Norberto Dimeglio, (2) Primer Teniente César Román, (3) Teniente Gustavo Aguirre (este último no decoló por falla de frenos). 1 y 2 despegaron de Río Gallegos a las 11:00. En ruta, la lluvia los obligó a desviarse
Próximos a las islas, vieron un helicóptero en vuelo rasante. La sección eyectó cargas externas y lo atacó. El piloto de helicóptero ejecutó hábiles maniobras evasivas y eludió los dos pasajes de cañones de los Dagger. (Se trataba del Sea Lynx XZ 233- piloto Lt. C.H. Clayton, de la fragata Cardiff que operaba en el Estrecho de San Carlos). Regresaron a GAL, donde arribaron a las13:00 horas.
Se previeron seis salidas de M-5 Dagger de Río Grande con escolta de Mirage M-III de Río Gallegos.
(undent) LOL "floater", they are a strange bunch, I bet they don't even find that funny ;) Can you do me a favour please, I've left my copy of "Hostile Skies" at my partners, would you checking Morgan's diary entry for the June 13 for me? What do you think of the "3 Harriers"? I thought they only went out in two's (unless they were on a raid), at the weekend I'm gonna ask Ken if he can remember seeing the Daggers on radar or something. What's going on with these Tiger bay pic mate?
(undent) cheers, also did you see I added the Dagger attack to the article Ryan4314 ( talk) 13:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear Justin, simply I think is fair and equitable named the skirmish in both names, on the other hand I've heard english speakers talking up on the "Malvinas War" either. have a nice day talk —Preceding comment was added at 19:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I spotted vintagekits got indef'd for sockpuppeting. I wondered why I hadn't seen him on the Falkland Articles, I assumed due to the whole arbcom case before but wow. You really should keep me better informed old chap ;) Oh, speaking of, I don't suppose you happen to know much about the 'detterent' issue (nukes and the like?)...is that within your professional scope? Narson ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
This just got moved based on the 1833 article, I reverted the move and left a notice on the performer's page. I expect that there will, accordingly, be a discussion starting on the 1833 name. Must admit, the current name for 1833 doesn't quite sit right with me, just can't think of a better name without making a mountain out of a molehill (Or an invasion out of some yelling from a loud hailer) Narson ( talk) 14:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Justin, if that's a bad day then you must be a great editor. Your comments were very civil and well put out. You had an opinion and expressed without being aggressive. I didn't feel offended at all, I just disagreed with your assessment and wanted to clarify. Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself, I much appreciate it.
Sebastian Kessel Talk 16:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin, I edited HMS Cardiff (D108) per the A-class review which you are of course warmly invited to comment on. The images needed to conform to WP:MOS#Images in that left aligned images should not be interfering with the section headers. Another problem was that some of the images were sandwiching text, which at lower resolution screens leaves about 6 words to a line. There should also be a "cascading" effect so left right, left, right etc for aesthetics. (I couldn't do it with the last image as the section is too small and the image would have interfered with the header) I did shrink my resolution down to 800x600 to do a test and couldn't see any problems with my version. If you still have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks. Woody ( talk) 16:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, dunno if you actually enjoy the extra research/translation, but here's 2 accounts from 2 crew members of TC-92, thought you might wanna take a look? Feel free to delete this post as the first account is ridiculously long (it reads like it's actually out of a book)
Brig. Gral. Walter D. Barbero Actual Jefe del Estado Mayor General Auxiliar del Jefe de Operaciones de Transporte Aéreo. Tripulante de Boeing 707 durante el Conflicto.
"Hasta el 2 Abr ‘82 estuve destinado en la Escuela Superior de Guerra Aérea, como instructor, y después en el Teatro de Operaciones Sur como Auxiliar de Operaciones de Transporte Aéreo. Allí cumplí dos funciones: una como auxiliar del Jefe de Operaciones y otra volando Boeing 707. Con esta aeronave hacíamos vuelos logísticos dentro del continente, y de exploración y reconocimiento lejano en el océano Atlántico, entre la isla Ascensión y Malvinas con el fin de detectar posibles convoyes que se dirigieran hacia la zona del conflicto.
El 22 May, cuando hacíamos un vuelo de estas características con el TC-92 -se encontraba en los mandos el actual Brig. (R) Ritondale- fuimos sorprendidos por cuatro fragatas británicas que nos dispararon misiles Sea Dart. Uno de ellos venía directo a nosotros y debía hacer impacto entre los motores 3 y 4, es decir, en el ala derecha. En esos momentos yo estaba sentado en el asiento de la izquierda y el comandante de la aeronave me ordena efectuar un rápido descenso, cosa que hicimos junto con un viraje muy pronunciado, maniobras que nos permitieron evitar la zona de impacto del misil. Instantes después advertimos que otros tres Sea Dart también venían hacia nosotros pero nuestras maniobras los eludieron.
Llegamos a un nivel de vuelo mínimo para nuestro avión y pusimos rumbo al continente. No podíamos ascender porque de inmediato se encendía el alerta radar, que indicaba que estábamos siendo localizados por los radares de control de tiro de las fragatas. A medida que nos alejábamos de los buques hicimos un ascenso escalonado para ahorrar combustible y asegurarnos el regreso. Así llegamos al nivel 450 (45 000 pies, 14 000 m aproximadamente), que prácticamente era el techo máximo del B707. Con régimen de largo alcance y sin perder altura llegamos a la vertical de El Palomar con el mínimo de combustible, en donde tuvimos que realizar un descenso de emergencia y gracias a que las condiciones meteorológicas eran buenas pudimos aterrizar sin inconvenientes.
El último vuelo fue el 14 Jun pero con el B707 TC-91. Realizando una misión similar en el Atlántico sur nos encontramos con la estela de un avión tipo Harrier que al vernos cambió su rumbo y se dirigió a nosotros. El comandante de aeronave era el actual Brig. Gral. (R) Paulik, quien hizo descender al B707 rápidamente, maniobra que disuadió al Harrier de perseguirnos y nos permitió regresar. Cuando nos acercábamos a Buenos Aires sintonizamos una radio uruguaya que anunciaba la rendición de Puerto Argentino, así que pueden imaginarse la expresión en nuestros rostros y en nuestros corazones al saber que seguramente esa iba a ser nuestra última misión en un conflicto que desgraciadamente cobró muchas queridas vidas de nuestra Fuerza Aérea.
Veinte años después el primer sentimiento que aflora es de dolor y reconocimiento. Dolor por la sangre derramada, reconocimiento y admiración por los cincuenta y cinco hombres de la Institución, que en plena juventud ofrendaron sus vidas en pos de un ideal íntimamente asociado a la defensa de un objetivo nacional. El segundo sentimiento es de orgullo profesional por la fuerza armada más joven, que recibió su bautismo de fuego con su equipamiento y un excelente adiestramiento, pero con hipótesis que no contemplaban un enfrentamiento contra un adversario tan poderoso y especializado en operaciones aeromarítimas.
A pesar de esto, la FAA no eludió el compromiso asumido por la conducción política y aceptó el desafío. Aún previendo una baja probablidad de éxitos, los logros de las operaciones aéreas fueron un ejemplo de profesionalismo y virtudes humanas que hoy son motivo de estudio por analistas de todo el mundo. A veinte años de Malvinas la Fuerza Aérea Argentina rescata el valor de esta gesta, ya que considera a estas tierras parte de sus entrañas por estar regadas con la sangre de los hijos de la Patria. Quedará siempre a la espera de volver por el camino del entendimiento y negociación a aquellos tiempos en que, mediante nuestros vuelos regulares desde el continente se llegó a trasladar a más de 21 000 pasajeros en distintos viajes desde Malvinas, quebrando así con intenso trabajo aéreo el aislamiento de aquellas personas que comenzaban a conectarse con nuestra Patria.
La recuperación militar de las Malvinas ocurrida hace veinte años pudo no haber sido la única respuesta posible, pero ciertamente el 2 de Abril forma ahora parte de nuestra historia."
EXPLORACION Y RECONOCIMIENTO LEJANO CON B-707. ENCUENTRO CON EL GRUPO BRISTOL DE LA ROYAL NAVY.
En el aire, una voz dice: -...Ezeiza, Fuerza Aérea 729...
En la madrugada del frío y húmedo 22 de mayo de 1982, el crepitar del VHF sobresaltó al operador de la torre de vuelo del aeropuerto Ezeiza. La cabina del B-707 TC-92, estaba silenciosa, ordenada, fría como el amanecer que se adivinaba y pulcra como un quirófano. A 1.3 EPR los 4 turborreactores susurraban su potencia Los rostros de los tripulantes apenas se distinguían en la media luz del instrumental y sus gestos mostraban tensión y resolución. Era una tripulación clásica de la Fuerza Aérea, con hombres formados profesionalmente en la responsable conducta institucional, instruidos como los mejores, profundos conocedores de los secretos del vuelo, curtidos en distintas misiones y concientizados para la tarea que les esperaba.
-...Fuerza Aérea 729, contacto radar... Proceda directamente para final de la pista 11, QNH 1.021, viento calmo. Informe establecido en el localizador….
Las instrucciones del operador eran precisas, su voz seca, resuelta, levemente distorsionada por el transmisor. El también sabía lo que hacia, era otro de los tantos especialistas que distinguen a la Fuerza Aérea.
El hermoso e inolvidable Boeing 707 TC-92 rodó entre la neblina clásica de las horas previas al amanecer en ese frío otoño en guerra.
En la semiclaridad de la plataforma de vuelo, la actividad de la tripulación y la de los auxiliares de tierra que abastecían de combustible y de los lubricantes necesarios para una misión de más de doce horas, era afanosa, con la metódica dedicación de los que saben qué hacer en cada instante; entre las luces de camiones, vehículos de apoyo y susurrar de motores, la tensión iba en aumento.
El primero de mayo, la FAA había recibido su bautismo de fuego, su bautismo de sangre y fuego. Sangre derramada de hombres valerosos, llenos de vida y sueños. Sueños por una patria mejor, sueños por que las tierras irredentas de las Islas Malvinas, volvieran a ser patrimonio inalterable de la argentinidad. Nada pedían ni nada preguntaban. Sólo cumplían con su deber de argentinos y soldados.
El 26 de Abril, el Comando de las fuerzas británicas que navegaban hacia Malvinas, había declarado hostiles a todos los vuelos de Exploración y Reconocimiento y de no haber sido por un grave error de identificación que cometieron las fuerzas británicas y que casi determina el derribo de un avión de transporte de pasajeros brasileño, la suerte de los vuelos de Exploración Y Reconocimiento, hubiera sido otra.
En la fría oscuridad del día que se insinuaba, se realizaron con toda normalidad las tareas previas al despegue, mientras el Comandante de Aeronave y su tripulación hacían los últimos ajustes al planeamiento de la misión a cumplir. El copiloto informa:
-… Lista de control previo al despegue, completada…
Los procedimientos de control de rutina, tantas veces ejecutados, se llevaron a cabo con la precisión acostumbrada. Nuevamente las voces del copiloto y del operador de la torre:
-… Ezeiza, Fuerza Aérea 729, posición y despegue… -… Fuerza Aérea 729, ocupe posición y despegue,... viento 050 °, 6 nudos….
El piloto al mando, ajustó la potencia de los cuatro turborreactores, de acuerdo con la tabla para el despegue, EPR 1,92. El control del mecánico de vuelo, desde su posición, fue exacto, como siempre:
-Parámetros y temperaturas normales.
Mano izquierda sobre el comando de la rueda de naríz, mano derecha sobre los cuatro comandos de potencia. Suave presión sobre los pedales del timón de dirección y liberados los frenos, los casi 40.000 kilogramos de empuje de los cuatro turborreactores, se hacen sentir en la espalda de los tripulantes, la aceleración es mayor de lo habitual, el avión se encuentra sin los 35.000 kilogramos de carga habituales y eso se siente.
- 80 nudos... dice con serenidad el copiloto, -… parámetros normales….
La velocidad se incrementa rápidamente, las luces de del balizamiento de la pista 11 son ahora casi una línea continua, que los lleva al silencio del Atlántico.
-V 1...Vr...Rotación..., informa el copiloto. Con toda suavidad y exacta coordinación natural , el piloto levanta la rueda de nariz del avión e instantes después, casi mágicamente, este increíble y hermoso producto del genio de la humanidad, se eleva raudamente quebrando el silencio de la noche.
-Ascenso positivo... Tren arriba, ordena el piloto. Las instrucciones se cumplen mecánicamente, con exactitud.
Rugiendo sobre los techos de las casas cercanas, donde otros hombres y mujeres se preparan para las tareas diarias de aquel sábado 22 de mayo, el TC-92 desaparece velozmente en la frialdad de la noche. Exactamente a las 06:30 horas, en un todo de acuerdo con la Orden de Operaciones, ese rayo celeste y blanco, como los colores de la Patria, inicia su raudo ascenso, directo para el nivel de vuelo 410, a encontrarse con su destino. La misión asignada, exigía la máxima autonomía posible a fin de lograr presencia continua sobre el enemigo, en tránsito hacia el Teatro de Operaciones.
Los siete tripulantes conocían acabadamente la misión que debían llevar a cabo y los riesgos que enfrentaban. Si fueran interceptados por aviones británicos, como había ocurrido en varias misiones, antes del 26 de Abril, el peligro de ser derribados latía en el fondo de la conciencia de cada hombre. De producirse una interceptación por medios aéreos, las posibilidades de evasión eran nulas, así como las de sobrevivir a un ataque aire-aire, tal como les sucedió algunas semanas después, el 1 de junio, a los inolvidables tripulantes del C-130 TC-63.
Además de la tripulación de rutina, integrada por dos pilotos, dos mecánicos y un auxiliar de carga y despacho, fueron sumadas a la misma un fotógrafo y un radiooperador, dado los particulares equipos de comunicaciones instalados a bordo. El fotógrafo, debidamente equipado, tenía como tarea particular registrar aquellos buques que se detectaran, con el objeto de su posterior identificación, seguimiento y eventual interceptación.
La ruta de vuelo, llevó al avión y su tripulación por el limite internacional del Río de la Plata hasta aguas abiertas y desde allí, fuera del espacio soberano del Uruguay y Brasil a la zona de búsqueda, comprendida entre las coordenadas: S 16° 00’-W 22° 00’, S 16° 00’- W 15° 00’, S 22° 00’- W 22° 00’ y S 22° 00’ W 15° 00’, es decir una superficie equivalente a la de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, ubicada en la latitud comprendida entre las ciudades de Río de Janeiro y Carabelas, en Brasil, pero unas 800 millas náuticas mar adentro, en la inmensidad del Atlántico gris y bravío.
Desde el inicio de los desplazamientos de la armada británica hacia el Atlántico Sur, tanto de las unidades de combate (portaaviones, destructores y fragatas) así como de los buques de apoyo y de sostén logístico, éstos lo hicieron navegando por la bisectríz del triángulo formado por la Isla Ascensión, Islas Malvinas y las Georgias del Sur, para posicionarse al Este de Malvinas y fuera del radio de acción de nuestros cazabombarderos. Conocíamos sus procedimientos y operábamos en consecuencia.
Amanecía lentamente en el Atlántico en guerra. El mundo miraba asombrado hacia estas latitudes, donde desconocidos valientes de un ignoto país, libraban con las primeras potencias del mundo, durísimos combates por el control del espacio aéreo. Las primeras noticias del día, recibidas por radio eran dramáticas, en momentos en que alcanzaron el nivel de vuelo máximo que les permitía el peso del avión. Los manómetros de consumo de combustible indicaban el mínimo esperado y establecido por tablas, lo que les permitiría alcanzar la zona de búsqueda, descender a la altitud mínima posible, fotografiar los buques que se encontraran y posteriormente, regresar a El Palomar.
En las horas que siguieron el Comandante de Aeronave y su tripulación repasaron la tarea a realizar; los procedimientos de evasión fueron exhaustivamente analizados y establecidos los rumbos de escape, en caso de contactos con la flota enemiga. Todos sabían que a pesar de que los portaaviones británicos se encontraban mucho más al sur, existían reales posibilidades de que cazas de despegue vertical, operando desde buques con cubiertas planas, como las de los porta contenedores, pudieran llegar a ser lanzados, con el objetivo de identificar, interceptar y derribar aviones de la FAA en tareas de Exploración y Reconocimiento. También existía la amenaza de misiles SA y de artillería AA de fragatas y destructores enemigos en navegación hacia las Islas Malvinas.
El día previo a la misión, el Comandante de Aeronave, había recibido información de Inteligencia, acerca de importantes movimientos de buques logísticos hacia la zona de operaciones y precisas instrucciones acerca de la misión que debía cumplir. Dicha información era clasificada y debía permanecer como tal, incluso ante el resto de la tripulación. Por ella se conocía que un importante equipamiento logístico se estaba concentrando en la Isla Ascensión, con fuerte escolta de fragatas y destructores al igual que un inusitado movimiento aéreo hacia y en los alrededores de la isla.
El 25 de Abril, poco antes de su partida desde Plymouth el Atlantic Conveyor, recibió el primer Harrier a bordo, en tareas de instrucción de pilotos y auxiliares navales. Varios días después, ya en Ascension Island, 8 aviones Harrier GR3 de la RAF (Real Fuerza Aérea), fueron embarcados por aterrizaje en dicho buque porta contenedores, junto con 3 helicópteros Chinook y 5 Wessex para dirigirse posteriormente hacia las islas Malvinas.
En resumen, la misión de EYR establecía: Explorar, detectar y fotografiar los buques que se encontraran en la zona de búsqueda asignada, poniéndose énfasis en la información disponible, que hablaba de importantes contingentes logísticos en navegación hacia las islas.
Las circunstancias de la vida y las exigencias de la situación, habían determinado que tanto el 1er. piloto como el 2do. mecánico, realizaran ese día su primera misión operativa, es decir, muy pocos días antes habían finalizado sus periodos de instrucción e inspecciones correspondientes, por lo que el Comandante de Aeronave dispuso que el 1er. piloto volara en el asiento izquierdo, a cargo de los comandos de vuelo. Ello le permitiría al Comandante, dedicarse más libremente a la operación del equipamiento electrónico y al control general de la misión.
Hora: 09:52 ( LT) . Radar: On (Control de una vuelta de antena). Radar: Off. Transponder: ON (Control de señales luminosas) Transponder: Off . Condiciones de vuelo: FL hacia la zona de búsqueda, estimando ingresar a la misma a las 10:38 (LT), operando en silencio electrónico y con los sistemas de radio en pasivo, haciendo escucha en las frecuencias conocidas de operación de la flota británica.
A las 10:17 horas local (LT), las luces de control del Transponder, titilan levemente y traen la primera señal de presencia de radares de superficie activados y en modo búsqueda.
Instantes después, la primera vuelta de antena del radar de abordo, muestra claramente la presencia de un eco múltiple sobre la superficie del mar y de elevada energía reflejada. El azar, siempre presente en las contingencias de la vida, hizo que por un claro importante en el manto de nubes que se extendía debajo del TC-92, se visualizaran de 4 a 5 buques, (destructores y/o ragatas) que escoltaban un transporte de carga de importante eslora, de color negro y cubierta blanca. Durante los segundos que duró el contacto visual, los buques escoltas, cambiaban rápidamente su posición, acercándose al carguero.
-Registre la posición del INS (Inertial Navegation System), ordena el Comandante al copiloto. Y continúa: –Radiooperador, transmita al Comando de la FAS, el contacto registrado. Continuamos con nuestra tarea de Exploración y Reconocimiento. Posteriormente regresaremos para el control del contacto.
Todos los involucrados circunstanciales, sabían perfectamente, tanto los tripulantes del TC-92 como los integrantes del Grupo Bristol ( Denominación del convoy, según información posterior proveniente de fuentes de la Royal Navy) que partiendo de la posición registrada del convoy etectado, era prácticamente imposible que el mismo escapara a las tareas de control, dado la diferencia de velocidades relativas, a menos que se protegiera con Chaff o engañara a la tripulación de abordo generando ecos falsos en los radares del TC-92, capacidades reales de Guerra Electrónica de la mayoría de los destructores británicos.
Este primer contacto visual y electrónico con el Grupo Bristol, sirvió para incentivar aun más el espíritu de lucha de la tripulación, al comprobarse que las características del contacto y las maniobras de los escoltas, hablaban por sí solas de la importancia del mismo. Por otra parte corroboraba la información de inteligencia disponible y en conocimiento del Comandante de Aeronave.
10:41 hs. (LT). Al ingresar a la zona asignada para EYR, se inició un descenso para FL 100 y seredujo la velocidad a 250 Kts.
- Parámetros ajustados, presiones y temperaturas normales.
La voz del 1er. mecánico, sonaba segura, calma, pero algo tensa, presagiando lo que vendría. Su experiencia le decía ya que la tarea que les esperaba pondría a prueba todo el temple de la tripulación. 11:02 hs. (LT). Manteniendo rumbo general 020º aproximadamente, se detecta un buque navegando con rumbo general al teatro de operaciones, a 80 nm (millas náuticas) de la presente posición.
11:03 hs. (LT). -Descenso para 1.500 pies … .Velocidad indicada 220 Kts.
11:12 hs. (LT). -¡Contacto visual!. Se dejó el buque a la izquierda del avión. Significativamente, la nave sobrevolada, redujo su velocidad de navegación hasta quedar detenida y desde su puente de mando, las luces de un destellador, en código Morse, decían de su función sanitaria. El color blanco del mismo y una cruz roja en su popa, ratificaban su actividad.
11:14 hs. (LT). -…Ascenso a nivel 100…ajuste de velocidad. Control de consumo.
La actividad en la cabina era la de una clásica rutina. Se sucedieron así varios contactos más entre petroleros y algunos buques de carga.
11:43 hs. (LT). La autonomía remanente determinaba que la EYR en el área de búsqueda asignada, llegaba a su fin.
El Comandante de aeronave dice: -Señores..., vamos a ingresar en el INS N° 1, la posición egistrada del blanco a reconocer y volaremos hacia él. Descenso para 1.500 pies, Velocidad 220 Kts…Rumbo 175º….
Las condiciones meteorológicas en el área comprendida entre el limite sur de la zona de EYR y la posición estimada del Grupo Bristol, eran las siguientes: 6 a 8 octavos de Cúmulos humilis a 300/400 metros, con precipitaciones aisladas y visibilidad reducida en la zona de chubascos. Por encima, 8 octavos de Stratocúmulos y Nimbostratus. Los Cúmulus humilis, sobre el mar se saturan de agua y cristales de sal, que producen en los radares meteorológicos, muchísimos ecos en pantalla y de elevado brillo y en este caso saturando la PPI del radar.
Pasaban los minutos y la búsqueda electrónica se hacia ahora con radar en forma contínua, a pesar del peligro que ello entrañaba. Los operadores de los sistemas de GE (Guerra Electrónica)de los buques, recibían información permanente de la posición, rumbo, altura y velocidad del TC-92.
El Comandante de Aeronave trabajaba intensamente en el radar y con la ayuda del resto de los tripulantes en la cabina, trataba de realizar algún contacto visual. Sabían perfectamente que las naves, estaban en un círculo no mayor de las 20 nm. En momentos en que el Comandante advierte que la razón de no detectarlos, se debía también a un intenso lanzamiento de Chaff que saturaba la pantalla y limitaba el contacto radar, ordena:
-Vamos arriba, necesitamos más horizonte radar …Potencia de ascenso …
Esta orden y la feliz circunstancia de contar con hombres concentrados en su tarea, salvaron la aeronave y su tripulación de ser derribados, como veremos.A 4.000 pies de altura aproximadamente, el TC-92 ingresa en una densa masa nubosa de Nimbostratus, con turbulencia moderada y quiso Dios ese día, que nuevamente hicieran contacto visual a través de unos 13.000 pies y entre dos capas de nubes, la inferior y otra de Altostratus muy por encima.
También dispuso Dios que en esos instantes, el 2do. mecánico de abordo, levantara la vista de los instrumentos de control del avión y por la ventanilla derecha, a través del pequeño espacio que queda entre el asiento del Comandante y su tablero de instrumentos, ve, saliendo de nubes una estela de humo color negro e informa:
-Señor,... por la derecha, ¡estela de un avión!...
12:17" hs. (LT). Este contacto visual no hubiera ocurrido, de encontrarse el avión, como unos egundos antes, dentro de nubes y por lo tanto tampoco se hubieran podido realizar maniobras defensivas.
El Comandante de Aeronave, me contó en alguna oportunidad, que ya antes había recibido fuego y múltiples impactos de armas de superficie, en otro tipo de avión y en circunstancias que ya no deseaba recordar. Me dijo también que en esas dos oportunidades y en otras dos más, en sendos choques en vuelo entre aviones, que culminaron en un caso con la muerte de un piloto y en el otro con un avión seriamente dañado, las sensaciones fueron las mismas:
… el tiempo se congeló y los segundos parecían días…ello me permitía pensar calmadamente acerca de cómo y cuando actuar… pero en este caso la situación era distinta… Estábamos en un enorme avión, a muy alta velocidad y sin ninguna defensa como para sobrevivir y yo no estaba solo… También supe instantáneamente, que la negra estela que avanzaba directamente hacia el motor N° 4, era producida por el quemado de un booster de lanzamiento de un misil Sea Dart y no la blanca estela de condensación de algún avión.
-¿Estela de un avión, o de un misil?...exclamó el Comandante, quien al girar nuevamente su mirada hacia el mismo, ve pasar a muy pocos metros de la raíz del plano derecho, otros dos nuevos misiles, que ascendiendo raudamente y por encima del nivel de vuelo del avión, comienzan instantes después una curva de persecución. Sólo quedaban algunos segundos para decidir y obrar.
-…Mío el avión…Fue lo que dijo de improviso el Comandante y haciéndose rápidamente cargo de los controles de vuelo, inició un rápido viraje escarpado de máxima inclinación y muy cerrado,hacia el lado del primer misil, con el objeto de reducir el radio de viraje de aquél , aumentar las aceleraciones y tratar de lograr con ello desprenderlo del guiado electrónico, a la vez que extraía los frenos de vuelo e iniciaba con un medio tonel descendente un descenso de emergencia de máxima perfomance.
Todas las alarmas se activaron, el TC-92 crujía por efecto de la velocidad y las aceleraciones, cuando escucharon la explosión del primer misil. Durante el vertiginoso descenso, otro misil Sea Dart, cruzó la línea de vuelo, muy próximo al parabrisas del avión, frío y letal como una cobra. También se vieron otros dos misiles explotar contra el mar, por el lado izquierdo del avión.
...Recuerdo que lo primero que hice, cuando escuché la explosión, fue controlar la presión del sistema hidráulico, imaginando que podríamos haber perdido el control del timón de dirección y ernos envueltos en un nuevo problema… Nada de ello pasó y con el Mach Airspeed Warning y el Ground Proximity Warning System que no dejaban de sonar y ya muy próximos al agua, entregué nuevamente los controles al 1er.Oficial, agregó en aquella conversación el Comandante de Aeronave.
Ahora sí, con el radar y el transponder encendidos y los turborreactores rugiendo a la máxima potencia permitida , levantando sobre las olas, blancas estelas de espuma, agua y sal, buscaban el rumbo de escape que los alejara de la flota. Cada vez que pretendían ascender algunos metros, el transponder usado como único medio de alerta de radares en superficie, titilaba locamente, activado por las señales de interrogación provenientes de los sensores de navegación y búsqueda y los radares de onda continua de las centrales de tiro de las unidades navales enemigas. Algunos años después un suboficial de la Royal Navy, que se encontraba a bordo de uno de los destructores, como mecánico de helicópteros, contaba que al pasar el avión entre dos de los buques, separados por algunos centenares de metros, la estela de agua que levantaban los chorros de escape de los turborreactores, era de casi el doble de la longitud del avión.
Volaron a ras de las olas por espacio de interminables 25 minutos, hasta que fuera ya del contacto de los radares de la flota, pudieron iniciar el ascenso. También durante esos minutos, se cursaron las comunicaciones de rigor, al Comando de la FAS, informando la situación encontrada y se dispuso el regreso a El Palomar.
-… Señor..., la autonomía remanente en estos instantes, sólo nos permitiría llegar ajustadamente a Río de Janeiro... El informe del 1er. mecánico, reflejaba a las claras el grado de incertidumbre en que se encontraban estos hombres. Se dispusieron nuevos ajustes a la navegación y controles complementarios sobre todos los sistemas del avión, dadas las extraordinarias exigencias a las que había sido sometido. A las 17:43 horas (LT) , es decir 11 horas y 13 minutos después del despegue de Ezeiza, el TC-92 aterrizó en El Palomar.
He conversado con el Comandante de Aeronave varias veces, acerca de las decisiones adoptadas antes y durante el vuelo, con relación a esta misión. Siempre me remarcó el grado de autocontrol y disciplina, puestos de manifiesto por cada uno de los tripulantes, en particular en los momentos mas graves de la misión, es decir cuando se encontraban bajo fuego enemigo y durante las maniobras de evasión y escape. También me expresó en reiteradas oportunidades la rustración que le causó, por un lado los instantes que perdió en determinar que el Grupo Bristol, se encontraba bajo nubes protectoras de Chaff, segundos que pudieron haber costado el derribo del avión y además que las maniobras de evasión, también le imposibilitaron el registro fotográfico, en especial del buque porta contenedores, que probablemente haya sido el Atlantic Conveyor y que tres días después fuera hundido por aeronaves de la Armada Argentina, con importantísimos pertrechos militares abordo.
Estas simples líneas, que solo pretenden reflejar una de las tantas circunstancias en que se vieron envueltas las tripulaciones de la Ira. Br.Ae, están dedicadas completamente a la memoria de cada uno de los tripulantes del C-130 TC-63, muertos heroicamente el día 1 de junio de 1982, en tareas de EYR. El Palomar, 15 de Abril de 2003.
Resumen de la Orden de Operaciones del B-707 TC-92
EyR (Visual y Fotográfico)
Objetivo: Componentes Flota Británica, navegando zona WP
A: S 16º 00’ W 22º 00’ B: S 16º 00’ W 15º 00’ C: S 22º 00’ W 22º 00’ D: S 22º 00’ W 15º 00’
Despegue: de El Palomar 220500 May 1982 de Ezeiza 220630 May 1982 Aterrizaje: en El Palomar 221743 May 1982 Tiempo de vuelo: 11:13 horas.
Ryan4314 ( talk) 20:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
That chap wasn't being funny, he was using the French national flag of the period before the revolution, that of the drapau blanc or however they say it. What we have ATM is the French royal personal standard. Personally I think we should go with the blue field with 3 fleur de lis in gold, as was normally used by French colonies (And is /far/ more recognisable) Narson ( talk) 11:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello :) I'm considering setting up a Falklands war task force on wikipedia and noticed you've edited the subject quite a bit. Would you consider joining the group if I go ahead and create it? Thanks, -- Tefalstar ( talk) 19:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The block thing I only mentioned because you have to expect the partisan warriors will bring it up (And I'm fairly sure the task force, if it gets going, will be a big target). If you wanted to lead you know I'd be more than happy to back you. :) Oh, and kudos on reintroducing Major Bonkers contrib to falklands, was just about to go searching for it myself after he mentioned it on my page. Narson ( talk) 11:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Interested in the Falklands War? | ||
Interested in the Falklands War? Have you ever considered joining a military history " Task Force"? The South American military history task force has a number of users involved in editing Falklands articles and is a great place for us to discuss the direction of the project. |
The
April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Thought you might be interested, there's a discussion about VK's potential unblocking AN/I at the moment. Pfainuk talk 18:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Major Bonkers wanted me to pass on thanks for going to the trouble of restoring his edit. I'm like some kind of love doctor for British editors. Now to set Ryan up on a date with ALR! Narson ( talk) 21:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin. The header in the article about GADA 601 using the name Puerto Argentino instead of Port Stanley is not PoV, nor an offense to the Islanders; it just reflects the context of May-June 1982.
Its hard to believe that the Argentinians were defending "Stanley", their people or the interest of its people against the British; they were fighting for the military garrison they called "Puerto Argentino". I think a header "Defense of Port Stanley" would be more appropiate for a situation of British or Islander forces facing an invasion from the mainland. I will modify the section's title in a salomonic way, replacing Puerto Argentino or Port Stanley by "the Capital". Regards-- Darius ( talk) 16:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Could you please add a reference or two for the changes that you made to this article? Much obliged,
Dove1950 (
talk) 20:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean "see PINK"? The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 23:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The
May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I was taking a little break in my work to make some edits and I just found your message. I guess your concern is about the Roland crew picture, the Argentine law makes clear that the image must have been published in order to be copyright-free. I haven't found any source where this pic in particular was reproduced before the 20 years deadline, thus I choose the "fair-use" tag. Thanks for cleaning up another section of "GADA 601". I have some questions for you, but later man, I'am the boss here, but I must "give the example" as we use to say in Argentina ;). Cheers.-- Darius ( talk) 13:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
So you really thing it is him? I would have figured he would have signed in using the Alex name...he seemed so cocksure of himself, I can't see him believing he has to hide. Narson ( talk) 21:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I am loving the Falkland Wars montage. Narson ( talk) 16:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
This chap is taking the piss now. Now he is removing a similar catagory from forces used for soviet occupations and replacing it with Soviet armed forces deployments. He is quacking, walking and looking alot like a POV warrior. Narson ( talk) 19:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin A Kuntz. You do know that I wrote "unintelligible" and not "unintelligent"? I just didn't expect such a lousy argument from you :-) See you at Talk:Falklands War#Fixed-wing aircraft in the Info box --Regards, Necessary Evil ( talk) 12:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin? The events article...why the heck /are/ there spanish names all over it? It is not the main article or the article on the islands...seems silly to have them. Not that I'd push to remove them, but can't say I'd revert if someone else took them out. Narson ( talk) 11:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
.... no I hadn't noticed - I can be so hopeless sometimes. Thanks for reverting, much appreciated. nancy (talk) 09:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm impressed. Ryan has certainly come along in leaps and bounds since he first appeared. Good on the kiddo. Narson ( talk) 21:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I've added a comment to your note on Uti possidetis at Talk:History_of_the_Falkland_Islands Dab14763 ( talk) 16:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Woah bloody hell! How did that happen!? Good thing I got back when I did, oddly enough I had actually planned to try n get her up once I returned. Did anyone suggest her, or did Raul just decide it? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate, just in case you didn't know, I added a list of Falkands books that I have/read on my userpage, let me know what you think? Ryan4314 ( talk) 00:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
(Undent) Hi Justin, I have time to reply in earnest now to your responses. The book was "Razor's Edge by Hugh Bicheno, he's Argentine. I think the book has gathered some praise in the Falklands community, as it's told from the Argentine side and is apparently quite neutral (although it's got a big fuck off picture of Maggie Thatcher wearing an eye patch on the front!?) I was only asking if you had it, because I was flicking through a copy in a book store the whilst waiting for a friend the other day, and it mentioned a new bit of information for me (Cardiff's position during the Invincible raid, nothing major I know, but might be nice for the article).
The website with the commissioning books is great, does ever ship have a "commissioning book" then? Shame Cardiff's isn't on there, know where I could track it down??? Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
What's the deal with IP guy? Someone wiki user u pissed off from another account? Seems all his edits are reverts of your stuff. You know any admins u can defer him too? Ryan4314 ( talk) 22:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
(undent) That's a good point, we could be construed as "feeding" him. On an entirely different matter, I just joined SATF, in the nieve hope it'll encourage u and Narson to come over. There's not much to be done there, but we could add some cool resources to the list, in particular I want to add the AAF's official website timeline. Ryan4314 ( talk) 22:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
You do seem to attract these people Justin! On a more serious note, you should let people know, rather than skirting to the edge of 3RR. All it takes it an admin to get the wrong end of a stick and you are cast into the abyss for a day. These days I've started stopping at 2 reversions on a page, or trying to. Narson ( talk) 17:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Yea and we all know what happened to the last poor bunch of foreign fuckers who came to Glasgow airport! ;) Ryan4314 ( talk) 23:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Because consensus isn't about numbers, it's about arguments. Clearly this wasn't an easy one, which is why no other admin had closed it earlier and it was 10 days overdue. There seemed a genuine division of opinion on whether the category could ever be used properly, at whatever name was chosen, which is why I called it as no consensus. Narson was a "weak delete" saying that it had potential if used correctly: that's an argument about use, not existence, of the category, and I gave that delete call less weight. There were some calls for a rename, which counted in favour of retention of the category in some form, but no consensus that this was the way forward. Hence, overall, no consensus but with closing comments that I thought we'd be back here again in due course - because I'm sure someone will initiate a wider discussion at some point. Regards, Bencherlite Talk 08:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I've pruned out the occupation of japan, it was US led and rarely ever regarded as a British occupation but an American one or at worst an allied one. I've also removed the British Occupation Force, it is a formation not an occupation, and a formation subservient to a US occupation. Narson ( talk) 09:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
(undent) quick question for you both; Falklands, approx 7,000 British troops, sounds about right? Ryan4314 ( talk) 21:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I know there are other British occupations, we must have had more of them...grr. Well, Suez is a good add I think, on reflection. Still a bit bare. Now I am going to go and fume over the ICC decision to award Pakistan a draw. Narson ( talk) 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I want to know your opinion about an article on the "own goals" incidents regarding the Falklands War. We have the "Cardiff" incident, the two FF kills of GADA 601 and the shooting down of a Gendarmerie's chopper on 30 June by a blow-pipe, this one never undisclosed by Argentine authorities. There was also a blue-blue clash between SBS an SAS units on June 1st. British AAA also killed at least one marine at San Carlos bay while fighting off an A-4 strike and there was another case during the battle of Wireless Ridge. Is there ground for an article or not?.-- Darius ( talk) 23:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion would be to let the DRV finish, see what else is said, then see what happens with the category in further use. If there's still a problem or a rename still feels like a good idea, bring it back to CFD. A "no consensus" decision doesn't rule out further debate, whereas (e.g.) it's usually seen as inappropriate to relist at CFD too quickly after a "keep" decision. I'll just let the DRV run its course now, as I didn't (and don't) see consensus for a rename – this time round, anyway. Regards, Bencherlite Talk 14:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
YEp, true I am new to that part of Wikipedia, but was asked by a friend to help find a suitable link-in location to the Orphaned article on the 'Anglo-Ottoman Treaty'. I didn't want to disrupt the flow of the article, but the treaty is a case in point of the 19th British treaty policy of creating asymmetrical trade treaties that would lead to the eventual de-facto rule. I would be grateful for any indications on how to include this treaty in a more acceptable way. --BirgittaHo (talk) 19:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I added the reference as a see as example. I hope it meets with your approval. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BirgittaHo ( talk • contribs) 10:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed your of British Empire with the comment "Undid revision 222138487 by BirgittaHo (talk) wikipedia doesn't reference itself". I have wondered sometimes whether footnotes referring to another article in a footnote are appropriate but have not seen any. I have reviewed WP:FN, MOS:LINK and WP:CS and found no answer to this question. References to other articles seem to be made either as links in the text or under something like a See Also head. Neither of those would work well for something like this (ie: For an example see ...) Your comment has me wondering, is there some policy about this? I am not familiar with the subject of this article at the level of detail being dealt with here, but looking at the article with the footnote, it seems to be a useful way to refer to an example without cluttering the text with a link in brackets. My initial reaction was that the note should not be pitched. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this. -- KenWalker | Talk 20:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting the edits of "Generalmesse"'s sockpuppet. I know you are aware he asked me to rewrite the article about Operation Agreement from the Italian side. I smelled PoV, so I kept myself silent. I'am glad his case is now under the scrutiny of admins.-- Darius ( talk) 23:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thought you might be interested in this CFD on categories related to Tierra del Fuego Province in Argentina. Cheers, Pfainuk talk 10:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
[5] Justin talk 21:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't mind, it's all right. oh, I saw that you're interested in topics about the Malvinas (Falklands) islands and geography of Argentina. Well I born here, and I'm living in Buenos Aies, in Argentina. If you've some question, just ask it. -- Gonza777 ( talk) 21:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Despite my recent comments, I notice you have re-added the tags, clearly showing you have no intention of listening (as I said with a main ref tag at top, further were are superflous, and IMDb does not say British, and the general consensus on Wikipedia (English, Scottish, Welsh rarely citied)). I suggest we get further editors involved to avoid an unpleasant edit war.-- UpDown ( talk) 08:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The
June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 19:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Justin. I've performed a clean up of the PNA article. The changes included the removal of the Argentine claim of a Sea Harrier shot down, along with the citation needed tag posted by you a month or so ago. I've also added some details about the attack on the Río Iguazú, with the proper citation. Regards. -- Darius ( talk) 13:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, pretty obvious. Just a note man, if you leave messages, just put down that you think the person may be interested, any indication that you are trying to suggest which way people should !vote and people will yell about canvassing. I'm becomming way too aware of wiki policies. I need to stab myself in the eye now. Narson ( talk) 11:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin, I will edit the quote of Brian Hanrahan on the GADA 601 article. Please, if you think that my changes are undue or PoV, feel absolutely free to revert, but go to the talk page to discuss the details. My point is that the article is written from an Argentine prospective (not PoV, just the scope of the page), thus the quotation is more appropriated for an article from a British prospective, for example an article about the Harrier/Sea Harriers campaign in the Falklands war. Hanrahan remarks are far from be 'iconic' in Argentina; I learned of them 20 years ago, when I was 18, 6 years after the war, by the translation of a British source. Recently, in my father's house, I found an Argentine magazine dating back to the first days of the conflict (May 6 or 7). Surprisely, there is some degree of sympathy toward Hanrahan work on HMS Hermes, but, for obvious reasons, no mention of his famous quote. I decided to preserve his words in the article, but as a footnote and not in the main narrative. Remember that I did the same with a small paragraph about the morale at Goose Green and the names of GADA's fallen soldiers, in the latter case as per WP:MEMORIAL. If you disagree, I insist, feel free to revert and express your opinion at the talk page. Thank you in advance.-- Darius ( talk) 01:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Cheers for the hand on SGSSI, mate. I made a note on the IP talk page and hopefully that's the end of it. The IP is Boston-based, for the record. Pfainuk talk 23:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
You are the expert ;) I know you had reverted to Fuze spelling before hence why I was thinking it was right...and it was. Huzzah. Narson ( talk) 15:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Justin? I know you, so I realise this is unfair that because of that you are the one I ask, but can you step bac from Red Hat on the Gib page? It just isn't helping you getting into it with Red Hat like that. You are getting into that 'Alex' place where bad things can happen. Narson ( talk) 16:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
As your our resident missile expert (lol amazing how many times a requirement for that post pops up amongst our circle of friends!) thought u should take a look at at sentence I'm gonna edit on the Air-to-air missile article. It literally reads;
In the Falklands War technically inferior British Harriers were able to defeat faster Argentinian opponents using AIM-9G missiles provided by the United States as the conflict began.
Minor changes first;
Now then, I've been meaning to clarify this sometime anyway, What's the full story with this US-supplied sidewinder thing? I mean, the US didn't literally give us AIM9Ls the day the war started right? We must've had some already, you can't just stick a new missile system on a plane (it needs to be integrated into the computers n all that right?) and then expect the pilots to be totally proficient in using it. Do we have any sources for this?
These "faster Argentinian opponents" were the Mirages, I don't think "being slower" makes an aircraft "technically inferior". Speed is not a measure of quality, it's all about circumstance. Ryan4314 ( talk) 17:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)