American Reacts to Operation Black Buck (Part 2) | Falklands War 🇬🇧✈️

[@SoGal_YT]

Thanks for watching! Like and subscribe if you enjoyed this video 👍🏻 Follow me on social media, and join my Discord & Patreon: ❤ Patreon: www.patreon.com/sogal_yt?fan_landing=true 🐕 Instagram: instagram.com/sogal.yt/ 🏀 Twitter: twitter.com/SoGal_YT ⚽ Facebook Page: facebook.com/SoGal-104043461744742 🏖 Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/238616921241608 💥 Discord: discord.gg/amWWc6jcC2 🖖 My Star Trek Podcast: www.tribblespodcast.com/

[@jeanlongsden1696]

it is better to ask 2 or 3 times, than to not ask at all. I love the fact that you want to learn history and not just your own. from what I gather, the American education system just gives you a glossed over view of American history. where as in the UK, we learn not only millennia of British history, but world history too. so it is invigorating to see you pushing yourself in the endeavour to educate yourself.

[@vinnyganzano1930]

The Dolittle raid on Tokyo after the attack on Pearl Harbor was launched from the USS HORNET and used B-25 Mitchell bombers. The first and as far as I'm aware only time bombers were used from a carrier. Keep asking stupid questions. They only seem stupid to those of us who know the subject better.

[@pendleeldnep]

watch - "The Legendary Commando Raid At St. Nazaire | The Greatest Raid Of All Time | Timeline" next. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iXSwdKVogM1kras

[@martinwyke]

Your questions are smart, for example asking why was there a lack of maps is absolutely valid.

[@imbetterthanyouis]

i must admit its annoying the amount of questions you ask that arnt simple answers , some times some backstory is needed , say the carriers for example , yes the RN had big deck carriers up untill just before the fawlkladns but budget cuts and ww2 debt dictated the uk needed to find a cheaper solution , the advent of the hawker harrier jump jet solved some problems but created others in the process , like with the american carriers the older big decks had an angled landing strip and steam catapults it also had a fighter element with the sea vixen and a separate strike and long range intercept element with the f 4 phantom , they also operate fixed wing airborne early warning and anti submarine warfare , now with the harrier they expected to do the same job with a short range strike aricraft , sure harriers can shoot other planes down it wasnt its primary job , the capabilities they lost just by not being able to use phantoms was pretty significant , if they could have operated like the old way id put it to you the wouldnt have lost as many ships as the RN did , similar to us doctrine was phantoms keep the enemy at bay , if they get past the phantoms the need to deal with the sea vixens and if they get past them then the short range ship borne air defense missiles kick in ( have a guess on how good the systems were back in those days ) ideally you dont want the enemy getting that close but because they didnt have that stand off ability the ships were needlessly put in harms way , at least with awacs you can see them coming and try to run but the RN were forced to use destroyers as early warning picket ships and because of a quirk in the design some times the air search radar ( ya know the important one ) needed to be switched off to run other things like the communications equipment , yeah didnt end well . the newer ( now retired ) carriers were much shorter and narrower than normal , the largest aricraft ever operated fro a carrier was once they landed and flew a c130 Hercules off i think it was the forrestall a conventional super carrier witch is slightly smaller than a nimitz class nuclear carrier ,,, really it was just to see if it could be done

[@michaelfoster5577]

As an instructor in the British Army the reply to someone who asked a question that some might regard as stupid was “the only stupid question is the one you don’t ask!” It is better to ask and find out the answer than to remain silent (and ignorant)!

[@vinnyganzano1930]

Heard that plenty of times😁

[@Fatherofheroesandheroines]

Pip pip and cheerio !

[@nedeast6845]

My father was as drill instructor for soldiers in the Australian Army, and that was always and forever something he taught me: "the only stupid question is the one nobody asks", or, "better to ask a dumb question and feel stupid, than not to ask and end up dead"

[@Fishy1764]

Totally agree mate👍

[@georgeprout42]

As an instructor, I'll say ask again. If you didn't understand, I'll rephrase it. FFS don't say ok if you've understood when you haven't (to save face?). I'm happy to chat about it afterwards to bring you up to speed.

[@LuciaPamela100]

Give this lady a break guys! How many US citizens would take such an interest in the U.K. let alone cover these topics!

[@mothmagic1]

I give her the credit she deserves. I am just pleased that an American historian has enough interest to try and get better informed on our history

[@robertmcghintheorca49]

Thank you! I'm British, and I adore seeing Americans marvel on what we can do when they can only dream.

[@andrewcomerford264]

There ARE no stupid questions ! Most people without prior knowledge would've asked these questions. The fact that you want to know these things instead of blindly accepting speaks volumes. "Bone Dome," is RAF slang for their - often white - flying helmets. It takes time and money to prepare maps, the previously ignored Falkland Islands were simply considered too low a priority to justify the expense for the cash-strapped RAF, until it was way too late. The V-Bombers Valiant (withdrawn from service by this time) Victor (converted to tankers) and Vulcan were all around the same size. The B-25 Mitchells of the Doolittle Raid, were among the largest aircraft flown from a carrier, and a Victor could've just about carried one. Any military aircraft landing on neutral soil will be impounded. While a safe landing in South America would be possible, refuelling wouldn't be allowed. A fighter escort would've been a great idea - but considering the effort to get a long-range bomber this distance, there's no chance a couple of fighters would've made the trip. It took 13 tankers refuelling each other in relays to get down to the Falklands, remember ?

[@richardmartin8998]

The largest aircraft ever to perform an arrested landing on an aircraft carrier was a heavily modified C-130. And it needed a lot of help to get off again. That was on a Forrestal class carrier, which were much larger than Hermes or Invincible. Vulcans were also much bigger than a C-130. The UK carrier fleet had regressed in capability by that point as well, with only subsonic Sea Harriers and short range Sidewinders to provide combat air patrol. A far cry from the US Navy's supersonic F-14 Tomcat and longer ranged Pheonix and Sparrow missiles or even the Royal Navy's F-4 Phantoms retireda couple of years prior. The bombing raid was a surprise attack designed to prevent Argentina from using Port Stanley as a fighter base (an unsinkable aircraft carrier) to hold the RN task force at bay, and in that it succeeded.

[@andrewcomerford264]

@mary carver Yup RN aircraft carries are still too small to take a Vulcan (US carriers are pretty much the same), and the RAF doesn't fly anything as big any more.

[@w0033944]

Regarding our military, the last time we had massive resources in personnel and equipment was WWII - by the time this operation took place, our armed forces were reducing in size. What we did, and still do well is do a surprising amount with not very much.

[@MercenaryPen]

I've heard it said that the only country not bankrupted by WW2 was the USA

[@davidhoward2487]

Good old British know how, and make do and mend...Using great intuition makes me so proud of all of them..My former bro. in law, a Sergeant Major,was sent to the Falklands, and made it safely there and back...

[@mariahoulihan9483]

@@MercenaryPen well, if you come late to party.....

[@MercenaryPen]

@@mariahoulihan9483 it was more that the USA was selling weapons to just about everybody and requiring cash for them rather than any sort of trade for other commodities... and between that and the arrangements for post-war economies set up at Bretton Woods in 1944, the US established economic dominance for much of the cold war and even beyond

[@tonys1636]

The fact that the entire strike force was assembled and despatatched within six weeks was a feat in itself, a strike force would normally take months to train and assemble. D Day planning and assembly took over a year. A different scale and time admittedly.

[@markwilliamson2864]

Martin Withers’ Vulcan was refuelled (more like topping up) 7 times by 4 different Victors outbound but only once on the return leg partly due to the fact that after dropping the bombs the aircraft was 21,000lbs lighter.

[@jimcook1161]

There was no friendly airstrip where the planes could divert to. However one of the later Black Buck missions went very wrong, the refuelling probe on the vulcan in question broke off mid-air. With no way of taking fuel, the pilot diverted to Rio de Janeiro. The vulcan was impounded and wasn't released until the war was over. I think the pilot was given the DFC (Distinguished Flying Cross) for his emergency landing. The mission was also embarassing for the USA as this vulcan was armed with AGM45 Shrike anti-radiation missiles (missiles that home in on radars) that had been covertly sold to the UK. Despite the age of the vulcan to describe its jamming system as industrial strength is an understatement. The jamming systems that the V-bombers carried would stop radios and TVs from even switching on!

[@davidknowles3459]

Chile was very friendly with us.Special forces operating in Argentina escaped through Chile.Chile did not like Argentina at all.But they wouldn't allow a British aircraft to land as it would be Politically difficult!

[@timgosling6189]

The problem with the standard fit ECM system wasn't power, it was generating the right frequencies and waveforms to defeat those particular SAM systems. Hence the Dash-10 pod hastily hung underneath. Fortunately we had plenty of them for the RAFG Jaguars.

[@hublanderuk]

You might want to watch Mark Fenton's video about the Vulcan that went missing on the way back from a Black Buck mission. You have to remember that this was the first mission. Other Black Buck Missions had an American Anti Radar missile on the Vulcan. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJjCiWWafa-jkJY

[@davidhoward2487]

@@davidknowles3459 Yes could be an Act of War that was undeclared!

[@lawrenceglaister4364]

The Americans invited the RAF to test their anti aircraft situation along with a lot of their own aircraft simulating russian air craft and they closed ALL airports and aircraft flying , 3 Vulcan squadrons attacked from different directions and turned on their jamming radar but one aircraft from each squadron didn't and dropped low and attacked whilst the others flew away , the single aircraft were successful but the American air force couldn't understand how it happened , it was repeated a few years later with the same result , with one Vulcan landing at New York for I believe fuel to everyone's supprise at the airport

[@alanmann1731]

The role of the sea and RAF Harriers in the Falklands conflict is definatly something you should look into.

[@shaggybaggums]

There's a few interesting interviews out there about how they used VIFFing too. It must be quite disconcerting to be lining up a shot on a harrier and then the damn thing puts the brakes on before shooting you down instead.

[@shadybacon3451]

The not having a map thing and the lack of fuel was never going to change the outcome. The British have an uncanny ability to get the job done by any means necessary and with whatever resources available, no matter how limited.

[@davidhoward2487]

I guess or hope, it's in the genes of British men and women!

[@jonjakb5193]

Being British,whack the kettle on and tell me your troubles. I'll offer you solutions over a nice cup of tea. I've heard the world set too rights over a nice cup of tea plenty of times.

[@AdventuresWithTrains]

You are correct, I have read the book on the Blackbuck raid, the fueling probes were recovered from scrap yards, museums and gate guards, and a spare part was found being used as an ash tray in a crew room.

[@GSD-hd1yh]

The RAF lack of maps for the S Atlantic comes under the heading of "Why would we need them?". All the RAFs operations throughout the 20th Century were against opponents in the north, and their anticipated next opposition was expected to be Russia. Our bomber fleet was optimised for European operations and no one had anticipated requiring planes with a 10,000 mile range. However, I would expect our navy to have the necessary maps, so this is a surprising development.

[@vinnyganzano1930]

The navy did have the charts but I'm not sure how useful naval charts would be to air navigation?

[@wellingboroughanddistrictu3a]

@@vinnyganzano1930 I'm sure the Navy did, but, given the traditional rivalry between the services, I'm not sure how the Navy would have responded to a request to borrow one. Probably by saying that they were all needed by the Taskforce. I'm surprised that they only realised they didn't have a map mid-mission though. I would have thought this was something that would have come up during the planning stages with some junior officer being sent out to W H Smith's or Foyles to buy a map of the South Atlantic.

[@MattDW45]

@@vinnyganzano1930 Don’t forget about the Fleet Air Arm. It appears the RAF did.

[@b101uk]

the only reason for a map/chart of sufficiently large size to depict the entirety of your route, is for little more than plotting your position history every 15mins as a backup to your inertial navigation systems should it fail, 99.9% of the route was over water, so having a bit of paper that is to scale just makes life easy for the navigator, the content of the map matters not in this situation given the route is almost entirely over water, and once they were close to their destination scrawled on said inverted map they could then use their actual Falkland island map to see land detail.

[@timelesslordkotahi]

Chariots of fire up full bore...classic!!!

[@b101uk]

I believe the Black Buck mission, is still the longest attacks without pre-positioned refuelling carried out almost entirely over water, i.e. the longer US missions take advantage of pre-positioned tanker aircraft, given the availability of landmass for pre-positioned tankers to operate from and the much easer logistics of doing so, unlike the south Atlantic.

[@thorley1969]

Exactly. It still remains the longest range mission flown all from a single point of origin.

[@WingNuts2010]

Given the advancement in navigation equipment, GPS, modern aircraft (the list goes on), I think that the B2 sortie would be hard to compare to that of the Vulcan's.

[@davidw5629]

I'd say the B-2 wins the day. Toodle pip.

[@williamwilkes8177]

@@WingNuts2010 no......

[@williamwilkes8177]

@@davidw5629 so wrong......

[@markwilliamson2864]

At the end you simply have to stand up and applaud the quite amazing flying, navigating, bombing and planning that were the Black Buck missions.

[@guypenrose5477]

Agreed. Without considering anything else this was a supreme feat of logistics and airmanship.

[@hinckleyit]

Agreed. Are you the same Mark Williamson who had a Capri 2.8 at BZN?

[@markwilliamson2864]

@@hinckleyit No I’m not and I’ve not served in the RAF, although I do wish I had a Capri 2.8.😊

[@hinckleyit]

@@markwilliamson2864 Thanks for the reply. Yeah - a Capri 2.8 would be so cool in these days of Euroboxes and carbon-copy world cars

[@wormthatturned8737]

Well, the B52 bomber attack on Afghanistan was just a we can do better but really not even in the same league. The US B52 had many diversionary airfields it could land at all the way along its route and was supported by air to air refuelling aircraft from different airfields all along the route. The RAF Vulcans and the Victors had none! Ascension Island there and back or bust!

[@white-dragon4424]

I'd only troll you on your spelling, especially basic words like "even".

[@shaggybaggums]

I thought she was talking about the B-2's, they don't like landing them just anywhere.

[@davearbuthnut241]

The raid on the Falklands took a phenomenally complex air-to-air refuelling operation, involving AFAIR 14 Victors!

[@terangiita257]

Remember that the American's were allies of Argentina and forced the British Government to use the refuel method with the Victors because there was no help given in the mission on Stanley. RAF did what they could hindered by the lack of US Government support. The French were suppliers of ordnances and thankfully ceased support to Argentina to keep British forces safe - RIP HMS Sheffield and ARA General Belgrano and all that have survived and thrived.

[@AdventuresWithTrains]

@@terangiita257 Chillie maintained a good relationship with the British, it was chosen as a safe country to land in, if things went wrong. But, you are correct, there was no ally in the Falklands war.

[@baylessnow]

The Victors wingspan was even bigger than the Vulcans' so it would need 2 carriers, probably without towers to accomodate one. If you watch 'The Falklands, OverSimplified' you'll find out about the USA not wanting to get involved directly.

[@philmills4473]

True, they supported uk frpm the side lines. They didn't want to send argentina into a downward spiral. It would have made he BLM riots look tame.

[@steve55sogood16]

I don't think there's a carrier long enough, anywhere, to accommodate a large bomber of any type, as the take off distance is much further than a fighter type aircraft!

[@SIXITHS]

@@philmills4473 That is a strange way of saying they were allied to the dictatorship that 'disappeared' people on a daily basis... The USA wanted the Argentinian junta to survive. Reagan asked Thatcher to negotiate ovr the islands fate.

[@SeanSenior-f8b]

Ronald Ragan phoned Margaret Thatcher begging her not to attack the Argentinan mainland. She said we will do what we want. She even said if the Argentinans didn't surrender we would nuke them.

[@oldgitsknowstuff]

The Black Buck Vulcan bomber remains to this very day on a ramp at RAF Waddington on the A15. You can see it if you zoom in on Google Earth. Britain had an aircraft carrier big enough to land a Vulcan, its called Ascension Island. Our American friends said that retaking the Falkland Islands could not be possible as it required a landing force of some 40,000 troops ! Oh !

[@T0NYD1CK]

Our American Friends do have a similar "aircraft carrier" situation for Europe. It is called the UK!

[@oldgitsknowstuff]

@@T0NYD1CK Ha ha ! Nice one...wish I'd thought not that. Respects from UK Yorkshire bomber country.

[@matty6848]

@@T0NYD1CK yep that’s where their B52’s took off to bomb Afghanistan. I remember working down in Gloucester where they took off from thinking 6/7 hours from now they’ll be dropping bombs on some Taliban in those mountain region they were hiding in.

[@oldgitsknowstuff]

@@matty6848 And the take off point when the Yanks bombed Libya across the 'Line of death ' very dramatic. In fact the Yanks have bombed lots of places from bases here in the UK. We are also the outpost of early warning of incoming enemy aircraft in the northern hemisphere. RAF Fylingdales picks up the Bogeyman, contacts QRI response who scrambles the Tornados from the Black Dog command centre at RAF Scampton.

[@matty6848]

@@oldgitsknowstuff really? Thanks I didn’t know that. So when bombing Libya they were actually taking off from the U.K? Well apart from being a remote airbase for the yanks what Else is Britain these days? But of that keeps them on our side then so be it?!

[@tonym480]

Something to understand about the British military at the time of the Falklands war is that for the previous 30 years there had been a process of cut backs in capability in the form of manpower and equipment. By 1982 they were only a shadow of the power they had at the end of WW2. The Navy, with the exception of the Nuclear Missile submarines, had become mostly an anti submarine force. Successive governments had insisted that they would never need to fight outside of NATO and that capabilities that had been lost, such as airborne early warning aircraft on the carriers, would be provided by either RAF/NATO AWACS aircraft or US Navy Hawkeye carrier aircraft. The result was that the Task Force lacked early warning of incoming Argentinian air attacks other than what could be provided by forward deployed Destroyer RADAR pickets (which ships were vulnerable to attack, and one was indeed lost early in the fight to an Argentinian missile attack) . I could give further examples but I'm sure that other people will add similar info. Bonedome = crash helmet (also known as a Skid Lid amongst the UK motorcycling fraternity 🥴 ) The nearest thing to a friendly country in South America would have been Chile. In order to reach it the bombers would have had to overfly Argentina. Later during the conflict a Vulcan did have to make an emergency landing in Brazil after its refueling probe was damaged. The Brazilians impounded the aircraft, and when it was allowed to leave the Brazilians kept the anti radar missiles it had been carrying. 2 ways in which the US helped was by the provision of satellite photos of the Falklands and related areas, and by providing the RN with the latest version of the Sidewinder air to air missile for use by the Sea Harrier fighters with the Task Force.

[@cogidubnus1953]

Been looking forward to this Sarah! Dave Edit - PS - Please keep asking the questions...most of us understand where you're coming from!

[@markdavies9636]

The Victors tankers where also Nuclear bombers converted to tankers and to large for aircraft carriers. Also a fantastic aircraft for its time !

[@shaggybaggums]

Looked amazing too.

[@MC-nb6jx]

Even more “futuristic” than the wonderful Vulcan👍🏻👍🏻

[@comfeycushion7944]

Probably the most sinister looking Aircraft ever too,I have happy memories as an RAF brat watching them doing circuits and bumps (we'd found a hole in the perimitter fence and got a good view)

[@robertmcghintheorca49]

The Handley Page Victors were the third and final of the V bombers, following the Vickers-Armstrong Valiant and the Avro Vulcan of course.

[@b101uk]

regarding maps, you are flying over water, maps for the most part are redundant, so any map of the ocean in the northern hemposphear inverted for the southern hemposphear with scrawled markings in the correct place to mimic your departure point and destination etc is good enough, given once at the destination area, you can then use the the Falkland island map to see detail.

[@araptorofnote5938]

Plain paper (preferably blue), would work equally well.

[@richardmartin8998]

Yeah that said you could use Mercatorial plotting sheets (like maritime navigators do) or even a chart of the Atlantic. All you need is the ability to fly the bearing from Ascension to the Falklands (and back). It would have been safer than "turning the map upside down"

[@catherinewilkins2760]

You should watch the video by Jeremy Clarkson The raid on St.Nazaire, it's about an hour but worth a watch also interview's personnel who took part.

[@henrytudor7058]

Yes a great testiment to why you shouldnt take on the British because you'll lose.

[@icycoldfrost]

And clarksons Victoria cross documentary..... fantastic

[@warbo3611]

Both of the Jeremy Clarkson videos are required viewing for those interested in WW2. They are brilliant

[@cliffsinclair4900]

very little is worth a watch if it includes Clarkson

[@richieb7692]

@@cliffsinclair4900 You would be surprised at this one, It's really good, well researched and presented in a way that keeps the information, without swamping you with dry facts.

[@johnlathwell7667]

If you think 300 feet is low, check out anything related to the Dambusters operation in 1943, they had to fly at 60 feet at night over the dam lakes which were surrounded by hills and whilst getting shot at!

[@WingNuts2010]

Buccaneers participating in Red Flag. The American radar operators all but gave up trying to spot the British bombers as they flew so low.

[@stephenwalker6823]

@@WingNuts2010 There's a video of an ex-Bucanneer crewman talking about Red Flag and how the Buccaneers, at 550 knots, were raising dust trails, so they had to climb ... from 10 feet to 20 feet!!!!

[@GSD-hd1yh]

Talking of low, there's a video on YT of a Buccaneer taking off by retracting its wheels while powering down the runway. 6 or 7 feet? kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3rUm357opuhabM&ab_channel=LeeGibson

[@PeDr0.UY131]

5:28 ""At the moment that people stop asking questions, it is not because they have gained the knowledge, it is because they have lost interest in discovering answers"".😉😉😉

[@skinheadjon901]

My grandad served on The Falkland Islands with The Royal Signals during WW2 & my uncle (Flt. Lt. Garth Hawkins) was the only person in the R.A.F. to die in the 80's Falklands Conflict. Thanks for posting this,the Vulcan was a great bit of kit - we had one as a museum piece at our local airport. 🤩👍

[@dinger40]

GPS, at the time there were 5 or 6 satellites and you needed 3 satellites with in 10 mins to get a reliable fix, this happened only 2 or 3 times a day.

[@abarratt8869]

GPS still wasn't fully operational in the First Gulf War, if I remember correctly, and receivers were pretty rare things.

[@wbertie2604]

Bone dome: protects your head bone. Very important.

[@nick7076]

The whole point of the mission was to take out the runway before the task force arrived. Regardless of if it was possible to launch a bomber from a carrier, once the carrier is close enough for the plane to attack it is also close enough to be attacked. By taking out the runway b4 the fleet arrived, the Argies could only attack from the mainland, meaning less time to attack the fleet before they had to return for fuel.

[@liberate72000]

Th UK. Carries at the time of the Falklands war, were small and had no catapults fitted, they could only use helicopters and Harriers who could take off with a short runway and land vertically. Additionally to do this meant that the Harriers were good fighters but had a very limited range and could only carry one 1000lb bomb, the harriers were also needed to defend the fleet. The Vulcan could carry 21 1000 lb bombs so had a better chance of wrecking the runway they were attacking. By the way , love your sunglasses and top gun jacket, but I think you should seriously consider getting a flight suit as well, you would seriously look the part. Love your channel.

[@gazza7uk646]

The Victor was originally one of the 3 V bombers turned into a tanker and was much larger than the Vulcan

[@Steelbackuk]

strangely more capable as well with longer range ,big load of iron bombs and it was the first super sonic bomber aircraft

[@soddof7972]

Had an issue with wing flex though i think

[@martinwyke]

The Victor is even bigger than the Vulcan. Chile & Brazil were officially neutral, but Chile was friendly to the UK and Brazil friendly with Argentina. One Vulcan returning from a later Black Buck mission did an emergency landing in Brazil when the refuelling probe failed and was impounded for the duration. The US was officially neutral, having alliances with both Argentina and the UK. However it did provide the UK with a lot of logistics back up. All the fuel for Black Buck missions came from a USN tanker sent to Ascension Islands. That freed up all the Royal Navy tankers to travel with the Task Force. The US provided AIM 9 sidewinders for the Harriers on the carriers and HARM anti-radar missiles used in later Black Buck missions as well as Spy Satellite photos.

[@wrorchestra1]

The Victor bomber is roughly equivalent in size to the Boeing 737-800. Maximum take-off weights are roughly similar (Victor has a higher mtow). Although they are of different designs and eras, the 737 requires about 6,200 ft of runway. The runway on the Centaur class aircraft carrier is just over 700ft in length (including the ramp).

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

8:10 this did come up more times then you think, for example the invasion at Gallipoli the British had maps dated to the Crimean war or not at all so they had to have artist on ships just off the land drawing what they could see to help plan the landings.

[@brownbess8185]

They also had the HMS Ark Royal at Gallipoli. HMS Ark Royal was an aircraft carrier and its aircraft were used for aerial recognisance.

[@baylessnow]

Is anybody elso looking at the ring light in her glasses and thinking, "This is the voice of the Mysterons"?

[@highpath4776]

Wonder if SoGal has seen the Anderson Series ?!

[@baylessnow]

@@highpath4776 Yeah, some new videos for SoGal to watch. Thunderbirds, Stingray, Joe 90 and Captain Scarlet. Not forgetting UFO (great intro music), Terrahawks and Space Precinct. Let's not mention the new CGI Thunderbirds garbage.

[@Ayns.L14A]

The Vulcan bomber was an analog controlled Strategic Bomber it had no digital instruments unlike the B2, the fighters were on the carriers well out of range from the Falklands,

[@highpath4776]

apparently analogue due to nuke blast knocking out electronics

[@Ayns.L14A]

@@highpath4776 yep

[@brownbess8185]

@@Ayns.L14A Or it could be due to the fact that at the time the Vulcan bomber was being designed and built, a computer was the size of a building, required a massive power supply, only operated within a limited temperature range, would shake itself to bits if operated in an high vibration environment of an aircraft, weighed many tonnes and was incredibly unreliable. We know how to protect electronics from Nuclear ElectroMagnetic Pulses (NEMP)

[@afpwebworks]

Also the US couldn't give overt help to the British to attack another US ally Argentina is a US ally. So the US sending a carrier to the south Atlantic would compromise their relationship with Argentina. All the American assistance had to be low key and covert. Remember this was while Haig was darting back and forth betwen London and Buenos Aires trying to broker a peace deal.

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

The US did fly small Medium bombers off a Carrier in World War Two for the Doolittle raid, but their was no way the planes could land back on the carrier and even getting the planes off the carrier was hard enough and no ones ever tied again. The Vulcan is what would be called a heavy bombers and is much bigger.

[@vinnyganzano1930]

Yeah the B-25 Mitchell and the plan called for them to try and reach China, which for the most part they did. Gave the Japanese a hell of a fright.

[@nickwalters5380]

I could be wrong, but I think they only lost 3 guys on that raid. Sadly the Chinese folk that lead them to safety after they bailed out lost thousands to Japanese reprisals. An amazing example of US bravery

[@ianwebster3544]

Your asking question which helps people like me unerstand what is going on - thanks Sogal & keep asking questions.

[@PtangPtangBiscuitBarrelSmith]

The one thing I wish you could do Is to Hear first hand a Vulcan Bomber.. the sound literally shook the ground, they made a howling noise as they went over. its a sound that is impossible to understand without experiencing it in real life.

[@nigelleyland166]

I was lucky enough to witness the last flight of the vulcan with my grandson in my arms, the sound is undescribable and on a slow fly past at low level it seems to defy gravity while being as agile as a fihter!

[@PtangPtangBiscuitBarrelSmith]

@@nigelleyland166 You and me both I saw the last flight over Yorkshire, such a shame the next generation dont get the chance to "feel" the Vulcan going over..

[@tonym480]

see this ; kzbin.info/www/bejne/bojInqytYpqWsLc During the mid/late 1960's where I lived was on a route used by Vulcan's for low level flight training. They would come over in pairs, about 1 or 2 seconds apart at what seemed like roof top height. It was possible to clearly see the Blue Steel missiles carried semi externally. You never heard them coming, they were just there, but you certainly heard them going !

[@cliffsinclair4900]

a beautiful aircraft and yes, the sound is something to hear

[@fredbloggs3358]

The last flight flew over my house rattled everything was totally awesome felt so blessed had never seen one before..

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

23:35 Yes Bombers usually do have fighter escorts, however for missions like this that require suprise you have to do without, this is because if you have fighters you have more planes and more planes mean more chance of being detected either by radar or by people on the ground, also like in this mission fighters might not have the range to reach the target.

[@cliffsinclair4900]

and somewhere to fly them from / to

[@timgosling6189]

Logistics aside, they didn't have a fighter escort because there was no way the Argentinians could have arranged an interception from their bases on the mainland. The threat was all surface-to-air.

[@chrisaskin6144]

SoGal, ask all you want. It's an honour that you're so interested in we the British as a nation, and in particular our Armed Forces and their achievements. Long may it continue.

[@shaggybaggums]

Well said.

[@andrewclayton4181]

I was 28 when all this was taking place and followed the news reports daily. It was quite exciting! Argentina was being run by a dictator called Galtieri at the time. He was unpopular and having domestic troubles, so he invaded the Falkland's as a distraction. The dictator of Chile was an equally unpleasant fellow called Pinochet, but as he loathed Galtieri, we had some covert support from him. He wouldn't have connived at us using his airbases though. I don't think maps of vast tracks of the earth / oceans are routinely held, just the ones that are conceivably useful. When the invasion took place production of maps and other needed items was put in hand immediately, but it takes time to get this stuff available to the guys in the front line. The putting together of a response, which included a naval task force was a rather rushed affair, there was a fair amount of make do, seat of the pants stuff going on.

[@davidhoward2487]

Absolutely!

[@mariahoulihan9483]

I had a brother and a cousin in the Royal Navy,both on standby to go.. they ended up being used as shore based staff instead, much to my brother's shagrin. He lost a lot of friends he had joined up with, and was standing over a teleprinter in a unit staff ships being rushed throufh dry dock refits because he was on a course when the war happened. He was a Marine Engineer so not usually office based. Mh cousin was taken off Hermes jus tbefore she sailed.. or was it Invincible? one of the carriers because he was kept back to work out family allowances for Sailors families.. he was office based as a Writer. My brther certainly didn;t found it exciting. He was and is quite a tough character yet he phoned my Mum that Sunday, crying about the four lads he had been in initial training with whose names were in the killed list one Sunday afternoon, in a message from the South Atlantic. I and my contempories never found one thing about it exciting. It made me cry on several occasions.. the young loss of life.

[@clemstevenson]

The Avro Vulcan looked really good at the time of Operation Sky Shield in 1960. But technology had marched on substantially by the time of the Vulcan's retirement. And the technology has continued to march on in the 40 years since Operation Black Buck. For instance, at the time of Operation Black Buck, the IBM PC Model 5150 was on sale, with a starting price of 1,565 US dollars. The IBM 5150 had an Intel 8088 4.77mhz processor (yes, that is 0.00477 gigahertz), and the user RAM could be fitted in the range of 16 kilobytes to 640 kilobytes.

[@wbertie2604]

300ft was pretty much standard for Vulcan low level penetration training, so the crews would have been used to it. Over water, it was probably easier than what they would have trained for - 300ft over land and hills, etc.

[@vinnyganzano1930]

Flying over water at low level is extremely hazardous and pilots prefer not to do it.

[@cazadon]

And the Vulcans use to be the cover for the bucanners who flew under at 20 feet because flying at 10 feet create to much to dust

[@wbertie2604]

@@cazadon There is video of Buccaneers doing lunatic things to react to, I am sure.

[@wbertie2604]

@@vinnyganzano1930 They were trained to do it in a war and being over 300ft meant being shot down, which pilots also prefer not to go through. The pilots in Vulcans at least had ejector seats, but not the other three crew. They'd like being shot down even less.

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

The British Lost 7 ships sunk and lots more damaged during the war all to Argentine aircraft coming from Argentina, but with the runway at Port Stanly out of action the Argentine aircraft had further to go which meant a longer turn around time which meant fewer attacks and gave the British more time to be detected and intercepted.

[@StephenBoothUK]

Yes, due not not being able to use Port Stanley runway the Argentine planes had to fly from the mainland so literally had minutes of endurance in theatre before they had to return to base or risk ditching. Also they were limited in the number of missions a day as they spent a lot of time just flying back and forth The British forces, largely Sea Harriers operating from the through deck cruisers, could fly multiple missions a day and endure much longer in theatre. On top of that, the Harrier was one of the most agile craft of it’s time. It requires a highly skilled pilot but can virtually stop in mid-air and/or turn, climb or dive very sharply. Very handy tricks when line of sight dog fighting was still a common form of fighter combat. I’ve seen demos of a manoeuvre where another plane attempts the classic attack from behind on a Harrier, the Harrier dumped velocity, the other plane overshot and the Harrier was able to accelerate and instantly be in perfect position to carry out an attack on the tail of the attacking aircraft.

[@guypenrose5477]

The runway at Stanley was never out of use - Argentine C130s were using it right up to their surrender. It is impossible to overstate what a fantastic feat of logistics and airmanship this raid represented but it seems very easily to overstate its operational significance.

[@StephenBoothUK]

@@guypenrose5477 hmmmm, believe the people who were actually there and took Port Stanley, or believe some rando on the internet, whatever shall I do?

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

@@guypenrose5477 Even if their were 130's there (I can only find a wikipedia artical on the matter) no fighter jets where there, which was the point of the raid force the Argentines to pull the fighter bombers back (Either from fear or runway distruction) so the Argentine airforce would have a harder time attacking the Royal Navy and the Royal Navy would have an easier time, so its not really over stating its significance, the jets were moved back and that made the British's task easier and saved a lot of lives.

[@StephenBoothUK]

@@guypenrose5477 as I said, people who were actually there, not held back at Bluff Cove for indirectly causing the deaths of 48 Welsh Guards and injury of many others.

[@davearbuthnut241]

To answer one of your questions: The Victor, Valiant and Vulcan were the 3 cold-war era nuclear bombers, collectively known as the V-Bombers. The Victor and Valiant were recognised as the superior aircraft, but the Vulcan was loved by the public for its sheer beauty and bone-melting sound. I saw one at an air-show when I was a lot younger than now(74). It came in very low, stood on its tail, and just disappeared into the clouds. It was art, and I cry when I think of it.

[@stephenwalker6823]

All three aircraft had their strengths and weaknesses. They were intended as high-level bombers, but the development of surface to air missiles capable of reaching their height forced a switch to low-level missions. The switch to the buffetting of low-level flight meant that the Valiants rapidly suffered severe metal fatigue and were taken out of service. The Victors were similarly affected, although less so and were switched to tanker duties. The massively strong and rigid Vulcan wings proved extremely resistant to such fatigue problems and so they ended up as the only ones remaining in that role - although the ride was apparently very bumpy for the crew, due to that very rigidity of the wings.

[@davearbuthnut241]

@@stephenwalker6823 ty, I remember the switch to low-level ("hedge-hopper") missions, but wasn't aware of the metal fatigue problems.

[@cuthalin4976]

Important bit of Carrier info for you SoGal, since before the Falklands war NO British Carrier has had either Arrestor Wires or Catapults, so unless a plane was VSTOL ( Sea Harrier, Harrier and the new F35B ) it could not land or take off from one. All of them have been fitted with the "Ski Ramp " front deck to assist with take off, but even so the range and payload is reduced. To land they fly along side the carrier, hover and slowly slip sideways over the deck before finally landing on to it, very impressive to see.

[@highpath4776]

During WW2 were not most of carrier aircraft the Fairey Swordfish type ?

[@catherinewilkins2760]

Remember these are the aircraft that nukes America twice, they had tricks up their sleeves. The film had to add some tension, we were told it would never succeed. She's not bad for a geriatric.

[@matty6848]

What aircraft nukes America twice?!?

[@paulashwin247]

@@matty6848 'nuked' in wargames, I beleive SoGal here has a video on it.

[@catherinewilkins2760]

@@matty6848 the Avro Vulcan, playing war games with the USA, they wanted to test their defences.

[@phillee2814]

It is still the longest bombing raid ever conducted entirely from a single fixed base - the longer US missions used tankers pre-positioned at bases around the world. Every ounce of fuel used on that entire mission went through the fuel browsers at Wideawake Airfield, Ascension Island, and all aircraft also had to return there. The tanking out and back was conducted from there. One refueling to get back, four to get out, supported by more tankers for the tankers and even more tankers for the tankers for the tankers! It goes to show how much difference 21,000lbs of load makes. The RAF never expected to be operating their V-force bombers in the South Atlantic - hence they had no maps or the region. These are aircrew who have studied ingress and exit routes to the USSR ever since becoming Vulcan pilots, and could probably have drawn those maps from memory. So specialists, but sadly not in that part of the world. Of course, it is likely that generalists could not have pulled it off at all. And at the time, only the Victor Tanker was able to act as both tanker and receiver, which made this relay possible - the US soon followed suit and equipped their tankers to be able to receive. The Victors are even bigger than the Vulcan! Longer, needing longer runways, greater wingspan, and heavier. Think 10,000ft runways, with clamshell aerodynamic brakes and a parachute to stop. Ascension was the closest friendly base to conduct operations from. The one Vulcan which broke a refuelling probe and was unable to take fuel in the air (in a later raid), had to make a mayday approach into Buenos Aires, unfortunately with a jammed and live fully armed shrike anti-radar missile hanging under one wing - while painting right at air traffic control! Luckily it stayed hung up on the aircraft while it was disarmed by telephone instructions. Landing in a neutral country meant internment, but an agreement was reached with the Brazilian government that the aircraft could be returned if it was not used any further in the conflict. This was all before GPS - even FINDING the islands was a serious feat of navigation over that distance without any fixed reference. The whole air-to-air refuelling capability of the RAF was used to get that single bomber to the target - no fuel for any accompanying fighter escort, even if a suitable one could be found (anyone fancy 7500 nautical miles non-stop in a single-seater? Didn't think so!). It has been said that air to air refilling is the craziest thing you can do - I mean, first you arrange, deliberately, a mid-air collision, then you pump highly combustible fuel through the collision point. And the very height of madness - doing it in severe turbulence caused by a tropical lightning storm, with St Elmo's fire dancing around both aircraft.

[@danielw5850]

One omission, Phil, you failed to mention the hospitality of the Brazilian Air Force; rumour has it the RAF crew had quite a good time in Rio !

[@phillee2814]

@@danielw5850 Any aircrew that found themselves stranded in Rio De Janeiro during wartime operations and failed to take full advantage of the fact would not have been upholding the traditional values expected of the Royal Air Force! Being just one aircrew, they failed to drink the place dry, but it was not for lack of trying! As per usual practice, they also loaded up the aircraft with local produce before departing on their release to return home (their release was on condition that neither crew nor aircraft takes any further part in bombing raids, but they still had to transition via Wideawake airfield on Ascension Island for refuelling and crew rest - required as they were now non-combatant and had to comply with peacetime crew rest regulations). The other crews on Ascension were delighted with their return cargo. The vast tent city of logistical operations that had multiplied the island's population by several times was getting a bit fed up with perfectly adequate but rather unimaginative rations by that time, and there simply wasn't enough local produce to supplement rations by much.

[@keithmcgarrigle8921]

Sorry about last comment the vulcan was the aircraft used in the 007 film called thunderball loaded with nuclear bombs stolen by a bad organisation

[@charlestaylor3027]

Prince Andrew was a helicopter pilot in the Falklands and he said the peak of adrenalin was the few seconds between his instruments saying "You have been acquired by a Sea Wolf radar" and "IFF recognised".

[@JJBushfan]

Thanks for posting this, Sarah. I was glued to the TV throughout the Falklands business but I never knew about this. The bit I liked best was the skipper playing Chariots of Fire when they knew they were safe. Pretty neat, that.

[@musicbruv]

If you think 300 ft is low then look up the WW2 dambuster raids. those Lancasters had to drop their bomb from 60 ft at night over water. BTW the Lancaster is an older sibling of the Vulcan.

[@paulknox999]

The B52 did not have to rely on refuelling planes that took the same journey, the refuelling planes took off from airports along the B52's path to meet it to refuel. The Victors had to follow the vulcan, some victors were used to refuel the vulcans but some victors had to refuel other victors so they could also fly further

[@Fishy1764]

just listened to your comments on why they didn't launch Vulcan from a carrier. basically if you don't ask you wont know . its nice to see someone genuinely interested in this stuff.

[@philipbrooks402]

SoGal, if you are interested in the mission there is a very good book by Rowland White called 'Vulcan 607' which explains the raid in detail. Driving past Waddington on the A15 towards Lincoln, 607 is there for all to see. Or was, I think that it has been temporarily moved for some maintenance.

[@gazza7uk646]

you have to remember the B2 flight was 30 odd years later lessons learnt

[@cliffsinclair4900]

and 60 years of technological advancement

[@GSD-hd1yh]

Another case of the Brits teaching someone else how to do it was the torpedo bomber attack on the Italian fleet at Taranto. in November 1940. Unfortunately it was extensively studied by the Japanese before they attacked Pearl Harbour.

[@grahamwalker2312]

Hi Sarah, no maps of the South Atlantic - yes a problem, but a quick fix applied. I suppose that still the days of the Cold War, the RAF expected the Vulcans to be predominantly deployed and in action in the northern hemisphere and in particular Northern Europe,

[@craniusdominus8234]

I will also add that the kind of maps you would need for aerial navigation aren't the same as you would need for sailing a ship. I'm sure they had a lot of the maps they would need to help sail their ships through the South Atlantic. But the Vulcans weren't supposed to operate there, so they never bothered to have those maps in the first place. Which is fair enough. If they ever needed to have aircraft in the South Atlantic, the logical assumption was that they would normally have based either on a carrier, or in the Falklands in the first place.

[@davidduncan6889]

Unfortunately, the secret submersible aircraft carrier, capable of handling the Vulcan bombers , hadn’t quite been completed in time!

[@pjmoseley243]

I remember having a discussion with an Australian during the Falklands war. When the first Royal Navy ship was sunk an I talian friend of his punched the air and jumped for joy the other Australians grabbed him and told him he was out of order cheering the lost of an RN ship, the I talian friend said but you hate the British whats your problem? The Aussie said thats between us and the Brits its nothing to do with you. Interesting incident from a long way off!

[@dallassukerkin6878]

:chuckles: As with the Welsh and the Scots, the Aussies are like cousins - we'll fight each other at the drop of a hat ... but someone else threaten one of us and you'll be fighting us all :D

[@theoraclerules5056]

The Italians could never understand it, but they don’t play cricket 🏏, you see, so what else could you expect?!!😂

[@vinnyganzano1930]

The Vulcans needed tons of refuelling aircraft, fighters with less range could never have done it. The Vulcans successfully carried out simulated nuclear attacks on the USA in a pair of exercises which gave the US air defences a huge advantage. It didn't help them.

[@steveclarke6257]

The truth is that Tornado GR1 with the same tanker support did have the range to do the operation, but Vulcan's have one thing that a 2 seat Tornado doesn't..... a toilet. The length of the mission was beyond the personal endurance of the crew.

[@WJS774]

@@steveclarke6257 Makes me wonder what the point of building such a small plane with such a long range is. In what circumstances are you ever going to use it if the pilots can't last that long?

[@steveclarke6257]

@@WJS774 it's mid air refueling which creates the endurance for long flights, so any aircraft with the capability can do it. However in the case of Tornado whilst the capability for extended flight is there it's not practical operationally. Vulcans as originally envisioned were required to undertake 8 hr missions, over the Soviet union for nuclear strike so were equiped to do that, whilst Tornado was the Vulcans replacement, there operational perimeter for the missions to be undertakedn had changed. Vulcans extended endurance was not needed and the range at which strikes were to happen were shorter, as the nuclear strike role had been taken over by Polaris, so was less important to the RAF in the 1970s when Tornado was designed.

[@brianlopez8855]

I love your interest and enthusiasm for wanting to know more SoGal !

[@tonywatson7988]

I was an RAF pilot until 1980 and I can see that you are, quite understandably viewing this whole enterprise from a 2022 perspective but, impressive as the Victor and Vulcan bombers were, especially for those times, navigation at that time was primitive by comparison with nowadays. You briefly mention that they didn't have GPS which of course was true there was no satellite navigation system in existence and even those radio navigation systems we did have were far less accurate than is taken for granted now.

[@Payne2view]

Just a note about Aircraft Carriers. In 1982, we had 2 of them with a 3rd in the process of being completed. They were about half the size of US Navy carriers and ran on diesel, not nuclear reactors. We did not have enough ships to have them stationed all around the world, within range of possible flashpoints. The only help we had was unofficial help from Chilie, who let us use an island in the Pacific for long range airborne early warning aircraft which, secretly flying over Chilen airspace, gave some advance warning when Argentinian jets were talking off from the Argentinian mainland. The rest of South America were against the UK. In fact, one Vulcan had a damaged refuelling probe, had to make an emergency landing in Brazil and was impounded there for the duration of the conflict. Even so, Argentinian aircraft did sink a few of our ships with missiles and bombed troup transport ships, killing many. Our 2 Aircraft Carriers (one very old) had small, short range, Sea Harrier jets, which were used for air defence / air superiority roles & shot down a number of Argentine Airforce jets. If the Black Buck raid hadn't kept the Argentine jets off the Falklands themselves, it may have not been possible to give the soldiers air cover to re-take our island. The Argentine's had American made Douglas Skyhawk and French made Mirage & Super Etendard jets, all of which were 1960s era designes. Remember, this was 40 years ago, only 37 years after the end of WWII. We were in the middle of the Cold War, with our attention on the USSR, not really in any position to re-take an island in the Southern Hemisphere but we did. By the way, The Vulcan did have a conventional bomb bay before 1982, after the Navy took over the nuclear missile role at least 10 years before. Also, Marthin Withers, the Black Buck Pilot flew the last airworthy Vulcan (XH558), in private hands, before it was eventually grounded in 2015.

[@neilmacleod7882]

Would love to see you react to the Falkland War

[@GSD-hd1yh]

As an example, if you were flying from LA to New York and needed refuelling, you would calculate the flying time and put a tanker in a holding pattern somewhere near Kansas City, just past halfway to your destination, shortly before your plane was due in the area.. By comparison, the Victor tankers had a similar range to the Vulcan, and they were always over open ocean, hence the need for so many Victors to be refueled alongside the Vulcan so they could get far enough south to pass on enough fuel to complete the run. It's also worth remembering that the design of the Vulcan was started in the late 1940's and entered service in the early 1950's, well before satellites, GPS and electronic warfare became available, never mind the norm.

[@highpath4776]

Was that the complete Victor Fleet used up ?

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

14:17 You mentioned using a carrier to have Victor on it, but Britian didn't have a massive number of carriers at the time, they only had two carriers during the Falklands war and both were in the taks force sailing to the Falklands, in fact they were even talking about borrowing a US carrier at one point, (An ironic point given the US had to borrow a British Carrier the HMS Victorius which got named USS Robin), so sadly even if your idea was possible the Royal Navy didn't have a carrier available for the task

[@robinford4037]

I think there were 7 vulcan air raids during the Falklands war. The crew who turned back due to mechanical failure, attacked the Falklands on the second air raid, also one vulcan bomber landed in South America due to complications but was allowed to leave weeks later

[@highpath4776]

Seven planned , two canx due to weather , 1 canx aircraft problem. so two conventional, (2nd one overshot runway with bombs but prevented an easy extention of runway, and of course kept the pressure up on the Argentine Govt etc, two with shrike missiles, one went a big wrong on the way back with two unused shrikes, one of which dropped into sea, other would not release and a nice prezzie for Brazil to copy (such are the spoils of war).

[@samb1123]

I was working on ships in the Canadian Arctic at that time. We had a primitive form of GPS called Sat Nav that you would have to wait an hour or so between fixes.

[@cliffsinclair4900]

possibly due to that being the flyover times of the satellite?

[@lady38155]

It was actually called Transit, the satellites were not stationary and relied on doppler effect, replaced by GPS system.

[@scientiautverum]

Ascension Island is near the Equator - approximately half way between the UK and the Falkland Islands.

[@thomasamakin]

Hey SoGal, if you want a firmer grasp on this operation, I really recommend Vulcan 607 by Rowland White, most of your questions around the raid, and the build-up is covered in the book. Also tid-bits on how The US & even the Russians helped!

[@wessexdruid7598]

Here in Britain, we've grown up on stories of 'derring do' against the odds - so much that it's part of our psyche. There are so many in our long history.

[@BlameThande]

Don't be afraid to ask questions, that's the only way to learn and people shouldn't be snippy about it - they've never tried to be on camera while doing their research! Also glad if my comment on the last video helped. 8:21 This is one of those military things that is a surprise when you first learn about it, but in the days before Google Maps etc., military-level maps of a place did not exist if there had never been a reason to make them. The last time Britain had fought a major battle in the South Pacific had been in WW1, before there even was a branch of the military that used aircraft - so there were no maps suitable for aircraft. Even today, it's surprising how incomplete maps can be - according to "A History of the World in 12 Maps", Google Earth still copies over some nonexistent islands that were recorded in error on 18th century maps and haven't got around to correcting! 14:26 Yes, pretty much every bomber is way too big for an aircraft carrier. One reason why few countries now have dedicated bombers (preferring 'ground attack aircraft', basically a fighter that can drop bombs, more or less) is because they only want to use aircraft that can fly off carriers. 16:02 I must have misremembered this, as looking it up I am wrong, but I thought these missions landed in Chile, which was an enemy of Argentina and therefore an ally of convenience of the UK. (This got controversial later in British politics, because their dictatorship under General Pinochet was just as nasty as Argentina's). I must have been thinking of something else. 23:38 There's no fighter in the world then or now that would have the range to accompany the Vulcan as an escort. As I said above, most forces have since moved away from the idea of dedicated bombers at all, so the situation doesn't arise anyway, the same aircraft can act as both fighters and substitute for bombers. 27:18 I believe they are just using 'refuelling tanker' to mean the same Victors that refuelled them on the way out, though I can see why them changing terminology may have made you think of a ship. 33:26 Funny you should say that, there's a BBC documentary done in a similar style to this one (mixing real radio recordings with actors playing the crew) for Apollo 11, which is worth watching - it talks about all sorts of problems they had to deal with mid-flight which are never brought up now.

[@davidjones3767]

Chile assisted some SAS missions that had to land in their country after the SAS's helicopters got into difficulties. I think they also provided radar intelligence of Argentinian air space.

[@TheXeroid]

An excellent video, you should read Vulcan 607, it goes into greater details of the mission.

[@JEFF-ft6qm]

Iirk, black buck is still the longest bombing raid from a single point. With the American longest run, re-fuelling aircraft took off from a mid point.

[@davidwright7193]

Yep the US to Afghanistan raids could have been forward based much closer to target.

[@pauloliver8130]

Keep asking questions. You're here to learn after all. Loved the video

[@Gassit]

During the Falklands war we only had 2 aircraft carriers, Hermes and Invincible, and they were both in the taskforce heading for the Falklands.

[@briankeniry219]

The Falklands War was amazing in the sense that it shouldn't have been possible because of the scale of the logistical effort that was required and the very fast response of the British. The invasion occurred on the 2nd of April and the first vessel left 2 days later while the 2 aircraft carrier 1 days after that. UK forces, with no prior notice, put together a task force of 120 (Royal Navy, Royal Fleet Auxillery ie specialist supply ships, and merchant) ships and a Division of troops within in a space of days. It's worthwhile reading this section from wikipedia. "The British government had no contingency plan for an invasion of the islands, and the task force was rapidly put together from whatever vessels were available.[53] The nuclear-powered submarine Conqueror set sail from Faslane on 4 April. The two aircraft carriers Invincible and Hermes and their escort vessels left Portsmouth only a day later.[33] On its return to Southampton from a world cruise on 7 April, the ocean liner SS Canberra was requisitioned and set sail two days later with 3 Commando Brigade aboard.[33] The ocean liner Queen Elizabeth 2 was also requisitioned and left Southampton on 12 May with 5th Infantry Brigade on board.[33] The whole task force eventually comprised 127 ships: 43 Royal Navy vessels, 22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships, and 62 merchant ships.[53] The retaking of the Falkland Islands was considered extremely difficult. The chances of a British counter-invasion succeeding were assessed by the US Navy, according to historian Arthur L. Herman, as "a military impossibility".[54] Firstly, the British were significantly constrained by the disparity in deployable air cover.[55] The British had 42 aircraft (28 Sea Harriers and 14 Harrier GR.3s) available for air combat operations,[56] against approximately 122 serviceable jet fighters, of which about 50 were used as air superiority fighters and the remainder as strike aircraft, in Argentina's air forces during the war.[57] Crucially, the British lacked airborne early warning and control (AEW) aircraft. Planning also considered the Argentine surface fleet and the threat posed by Exocet-equipped vessels or the two Type 209 submarines.[58]"

[@guypenrose5477]

That is a pretty reasonable summary.

[@1951woodygeo]

It amazes me how they could refuel in the dark, it is hard enough in daylight never mind night time, the Vickers are like Jumbo Jets with massive fuel tanks onboard they could not land or take off an Aircraft Carrier, they could not land in a foreign Country as it could have started a war in South America between Argentina and any country who let them land .

[@larryfroot]

Avro went straight from producing the Lancaster bomber of WW2 to the Vulcan . I can't think of a greater step up in design and manufacturing. I saw the Vulcan a few times at air shows. I will never forget Dawlish. The Vulcan flew offshore for perhaps a mile or so...and then pointed upward. For long seconds she stood there, seemingly (and impossibly) motionless, on her tail. And then the pilot opened the throttle on four Rolls Royce Olympus engines and the Vulcan didn't just rise straight up into the sky. She accellerated. That huge mass flew like a fighter. The howl of those engines and the vibration are unforgettable.

[@iainmalcolm9583]

I can relate to the tension created by commentary of the video (and many others). Plenty of 'Oh no, were all doomed' & 'It's worse than that, he's dead Jim'. However as they are speaking to the pilots & crew for the documentary we could guess that they survived the mission. The story of the SAS mission on the Fortuna Glacier in South Georgia is worth looking into. Freezing conditions, 100 mph winds and two out of three of the helicopters crashed. That's another nail biter story.

[@susanletissier9729]

His bone dome is his helmet which has a microphone in and oxygen mask attached !

[@davidribeiro1064]

The largest carrier borne aircraft were the US A-3 and the A-5. Both are significantly smaller than the Vulcan and the Victor.

[@philippahusain7778]

Great video. I love that you have questions, and as you pointed out, the flight crews themselves found all the information overwhelming. What is there to learn if you already have all the answers? Keep up the good work. 👍👏💖

[@InquisitiveBaldMan]

The big difference between this and the b2 run would have been that the b2 and the tanker were custom designed for exactly that.... The Vulcan bombed at a range about 3/4 times its intended range. This run is 12000km and its range is 4000km i think. The Victor was also designed as a bomber and converted to a tanker. Parts had to be taken from a museum to get it going, being designed at the end of the 1940s. The UK had moved away from bombers because it believed intercontinental missiles were the future... The reality is logistically nothing was prepared for war in the south Atlantic. It wasn't considered an area of likely conflict, hence no maps or carriers stationed in the area. Logistically, ships are massively slow to move compared to planes which certainly couldn't take off from them then. Today a bomber can be refueled from an aircraft carrier because of the development of refueling drones. Technology has just come a long way from 1950.

[@cliffsinclair4900]

if I recall one item of avionics was being used as an ashtray in the common room?

[@Markus-zb5zd]

Also the tankers for the B2 don't start from the same base, they are predeployed

[@stephenwalker6823]

@@cliffsinclair4900 It's a long time since I read the book, but wasn't it the test connector for the fuel probes?

[@daveymc172]

Love your admition about the Vulcan taking off from a carrier, respect gal, as always! :-)*

[@alansmithee8831]

Hello SoGal and Roger. Your questions seem to reflect what I assume you saw happen in "World at War". Other comments have answered that this was a different generation and different scale. At this time the South American attitude was in line with the anti-colonial post war sentiment you came across in the French Republic video. Some US politicians were speaking from this general line of argument too at the start of the conflict, though some were also from an Irish American anti British way of political thinking. Others did see UK as the major US ally and wanted to give support, but were not at this stage the ones getting prominent TV coverage, some of which is now on KZbin.

[@Radio478]

Love SoGal❤, your so special ❤ from England 🇬🇧

[@Glund117]

It was hard enough to get the Vulcan to the Falklands they couldn't also bring fighters especially as they are smaller and therefore carry less fuel

[@dennismason3740]

I'm glad you ask questions.

[@neilgriffiths6427]

Great reactions, love your vids. Your confusion over aircraft carriers: A heavy bomber like the Vulcan needs at least half a mile - 2600 feet - to LAND. The biggest carrier ever built - the USS Gerald Ford, Launched in 2017, 35 years after the Falklands war, is 1092 feet long. So maybe a heavy bomber could be launched by catapult from a carrier (I don't know), but not a hope of landing - and the British carriers don't use catapults anyway (oh, and you asked a great question re landing in a friendly S American country instead? The only one was Chile, the OTHER SIDE of Argentina - not an option).

[@TalesOfTheRiverBank]

Thanks for this video (and part 1). Very enjoyable. Fair play to you for being so polite when people were rude about the various questions you were asking. They were the type of questions that many people want to ask but don't because they are afraid of getting the sort of criticism that you have received. What is obvious to one person isn't to another.

[@Azphreal]

If i remember correctly the US refused any military help or allowing the US to be used as a staging area but were happy to sell weapons (guess it was too close to home for them). The only real help we recieved was from a south American country that allowed us to use RADAR in their area to monitor take offs from Argentina so the British ships knew they were coming. The Falklands showed many Brits what they so called 'special relationship' between the UK and US really was.

[@jessicapeck7224]

To be fair Reagan offered us the use of one of their carriers but Maggie said it has to be an all UK affair.

[@Hattonbank]

So why did Maggie give US Secretary of Defence Casper Weinburger an honorary knighthood for help received during that conflict?

[@stephenwalker6823]

The US provided fuel supplies via tankers arriving at Ascension - part of the agreement already in place that allowed the US to have Ascension as a base.

[@stephendavies1585]

really glad the crew got at least some recognition.that took some gutsand a big thank you to Sarah as well.

[@marksadventures3889]

There are those of us who think that spending on defense should keep us up to date, offensively as well. If you don't ask you don't learn so don't worry about the comments that criticize you. I was surprised about the maps too, it is a matter of concern. I would hope now we have maps with exhaustive detail on. Intelligence is key before any operation. If you don't have eyes on the ground you need some form of other Intelligence, thankfully satellite imagery can help, but it's not 100% accurate all the time and at the time the technology was not at current capability, if any. Those guys were real top guns. The seas down there will kill you under 5 minutes in the water they are so cold. A relief pod will give you about 78 hours in safe water without storms, tops a week.

[@Radio478]

Really appreciate your non judgemental commentary

[@michaelbarton2401]

In 1982 the anti aircraft weapons for carrier task forces both UK and USA were largely untested in combat against air launched exocet missiles etc. The task force had Sea wolf mid range and Sea dart close range missile systems alongside the typical bofors anti aircraft guns but it is much better to knock out the airfield and therefore reduce the number of sorties the Argentinians could send against the fleet. If the USA were involved instead of the UK, they too would have done something similar to knock out the airfield as it is good strategy. Basically it is the same tactic if smaller in size of Shock and Awe in Iraq. Use airpower to degrade the enemies ability to hurt you before putting your main assets at undue risk.

[@guypenrose5477]

Seawolf was a close range point defence missile system that had to be reprogrammed to include area defence (that is wider than the ship carrying seawolf) and Sea Dart was a medium range area defence system, carried by Invincible, Bristol and the type 42s.

[@michaelbarton2401]

@@guypenrose5477 yeah I got them mixed up.

[@nigels.6051]

The Vulcan was designed to drop conventional bombs, it was in the original specification, back in the 1940s. However nobody had practiced using it in that way for a very long time, it had been dedicated to the role of nuclear deterrent, with 100% success.

[@highpath4776]

Dual spec apparently (anyone know why?) Poss so that Avro could get the contract for something that worked - most of the money, (and confirmed bomb drop calc system). and if the nuke items didnt work it was only a few quid on top that Avro would miss out on ( plus I dont think the UK had masses of working nuke items anyway).

[@nigels.6051]

@@highpath4776 Its successor, the Tornado MRCA was also dual roll, capable of launching nuclear weapons (actually Multi Role Combat Aircraft), as was its predecessor the Lancaster! A UK Lancaster bomber nearly dropped the first Atomic bomb on Hiroshima! (kzbin.info/www/bejne/a4m7aqOqeLOjn80)

[@paulwright9749]

As soon as they bombed the runway it was over for the Argentinians. Thatcher had sent hunter killer nuclear submarines ahead of the main fleet and she had warned Argentina that as soon as its fleet left shore, it would be sunk. With no large ships the Argentinians could not land large amounts of troops and equipment. Without that capability it was just a matter of time. They were doomed from the start.

[@omarbradley6807]

Ehm, no, the Argentinian planes continue to land at Stanley, and there were enough forces to stop the British, so it was more a tactical war what it was waged, so there was no strategy from the British actually

[@IanDarley]

@@omarbradley6807 Hmm, and how did this lack of strangury of the pathetic British work out for Argentina?

[@omarbradley6807]

@@IanDarley Well, the answer is simple, if you read something of the Falklands War you would know who the Argentinian lack cohesion and had no strategy to defend the islands, they were hopin for a lucky shot, the British meanwhile had a lot of problems, they reached the islands but there was no strategy to follow, it was 3 weeks of recon and engagement followed by 96 hours of decisive battles, the Argentinians commited terrible mistakes, but the British won the battles who is what it mattered most. Half of the Argentinian forces weren't even engaged when they surrendered, the 25th 5th and 3rd regiments as well as the 8th and 6th regiments in the West Falkland island, who were there for "political reasons", The Argentinians only commited the 4th and 7th regiments to stop the British, despite having a 2 to 1 numerical advantage, it was nullified by the lack of comand of the Argentinian officers. But even at the end the Argentinian forces were well supplied, while the British were living of the captured Argentinian positions. Besides the Stanley runway remained operative after Black Buck and there was a constant resuply, (who was stockpiled at Stanley instead of the units themselves). The problem with the Argentinians was who they didn't do anything good. But the British lacked a serious or important sucess until the assault on Stanley, were for example at Mount Harriet the Argentinians were decieved and routed as if there was no comander,

[@guypenrose5477]

@@omarbradley6807 Generally all true , but I would argue there was a British strategy. For example, the British were very familiar with American style tactics ( the Argentine forces were largely American trained) so they knew the Argentines would expect an attack directly on Stanley and not expect an attack from over the mountainous country to the east of Stanley (where the British came from). This approach from the east is another altogether outstanding feat of arms that not many other countries would have even attempted let alone succeed in.

[@omarbradley6807]

@@guypenrose5477 Yes however after the San Carlos landing, and considering who the mountains are dominant over Stanley, the Argentinians seriously didn't do much to counter the situation with defenses at Mount Challenger Kent or even a formidable defense at Longdon

[@Red19UK]

The Operations Room did a great vid of Op Black Buck showing the refueling in much clearer detail. Worth a look.

[@alanmann1731]

Probably the greatest bombing raid of all time given the technology

[@stephenparker6362]

Hi, Sarah, another very interesting video. I too was surprised the Air Force didn't have charts for the South Atlantic. The look of surprise on your face probably matched mine.

[@graveperil2169]

they had no airfields in the South Atlantic or planes that could reach there

[@guypenrose5477]

They were very NATO focussed at that time.

[@Salfordian]

I seen some of the ships leave Liverpool for the taskforce when I was a kid and believe Ronald Reagan offered us a smaller aircraft carrier, the type the marines use but Margaret Thatcher turned it down