Argentine mirage 2000 purchase
- Thread starter jaffo4011
- Start date
One coment, the ships deployed at this time in the South Atlantic Patrol Task, are the destroyer HMS Edinburgh (Type 42 Batch III) and the fleet oiler RFA Gold Rover. The OPV detached in the Falkland is the HMS Dumbarton Castle. The Polar Survey ship HMS Endurance is in the Antartic.
About the Falklands's RAF Rapier Sqn:
About the Falklands's RAF Rapier Sqn:
The landing was opposed in 1982, & (as has been said), the resident garrison then was much smaller than now.
In 1982, Argentina had an LST, which was retired in the 1990s without being replaced. That landed the initial invasion force & its AFVs, followed up by transports which docked once the harbour had been secured. Without that ship, they can't unload any heavy equipment unless they could seize a wharf. All they could land to start with would be infantry, who'd be outgunned by the garrison. Exactly the opposite of the 1982 situation, in fact.
(edited to mention the transports used in 1982)
Last edited:
I dont think the Argentinians actually threaten to invade but with political feeling back home they perhaps have to do something. That means flex what weak muscles they have, sound off at the UN or gain S. Amercian support for the cause.
They wouldnt win any conflict. Pre positioned equipment, better weapos such as tomahawk would see us through. The only interesting thought on action was a work of fiction by John Nichol, the gulf war veteran who suggested a limited special forces operation to disrupt the runway long enough for troops to land. (but as they dont have anything to land with it would be a one way mission)
Politically British politicians (except a few on the left) could not return the islands after 257 servicemen paid with their lives, it would create a public backlash back home.
But the commitments are a drain on an already strained defence budget.
Its all very well noting that an SSN is always in the area but our force level is planned to be 8 SSN or even as few as 7. Even maintaining the South Atlantic patrol from a stretched fleet is a drain.
There are something like 1100 personnel on the islands including 500 from the army.
All the argentines need to do is increase the military pressure on the theatre and the UK will need to up the commitments and up the £-spend. If UK politicians are willing to boost the spend on the Falklands then thats not a problem.
Gladius maybe correct in saying that the Mirage 2000 deal wont go ahead, we will just have to revisit this thread if it does. I dont think they would cost a lot, sources on here say the Brazilians paid 60 million euros for theirs and France would be prepared to link the sale to other defence equipment. I suspect they will have to do something as Chile and other neighbours are trying to modernise.
The Etendards, even if half are in storage are still a threat depending on the weapons that can be purchased for them.
If the argentine forces can get the level of equipment to carry out regular exercises then the UK will need to increase the spend.
I believe the argentinian ecomony bounced back since 2005 and politicians are stupid enough to blow the odd billion on defence equipment. Venezuela has done very nicely out of wheeling and dealing with the Russians and it would appear that Venezuela has bought out a large chunk of argentinian debt. Political alliances might increase the verbal exchanges. If the Mirage deal is a non starter then Im sure the russians would step in.
Atfer the conflict the RAF had 12 F4J-UK's to defend the islands, the cost of which over the last 25 years has been vast. But 4 aircraft seems too few even if top of the line. In many ways the large open spaces of the falklands have been underused, they would have been ideal low level training areas but fortunately the end of the cold war reduced the need.
The only chance that Argentina has of getting even partial dual control of soverignity is in my mind to price the UK out of the theatre. More likley the islanders will want independence, whether the UK would keep 1100 troops there then long term is debatable.
They wouldnt win any conflict. Pre positioned equipment, better weapos such as tomahawk would see us through. The only interesting thought on action was a work of fiction by John Nichol, the gulf war veteran who suggested a limited special forces operation to disrupt the runway long enough for troops to land. (but as they dont have anything to land with it would be a one way mission)
Politically British politicians (except a few on the left) could not return the islands after 257 servicemen paid with their lives, it would create a public backlash back home.
But the commitments are a drain on an already strained defence budget.
Its all very well noting that an SSN is always in the area but our force level is planned to be 8 SSN or even as few as 7. Even maintaining the South Atlantic patrol from a stretched fleet is a drain.
There are something like 1100 personnel on the islands including 500 from the army.
All the argentines need to do is increase the military pressure on the theatre and the UK will need to up the commitments and up the £-spend. If UK politicians are willing to boost the spend on the Falklands then thats not a problem.
Gladius maybe correct in saying that the Mirage 2000 deal wont go ahead, we will just have to revisit this thread if it does. I dont think they would cost a lot, sources on here say the Brazilians paid 60 million euros for theirs and France would be prepared to link the sale to other defence equipment. I suspect they will have to do something as Chile and other neighbours are trying to modernise.
The Etendards, even if half are in storage are still a threat depending on the weapons that can be purchased for them.
If the argentine forces can get the level of equipment to carry out regular exercises then the UK will need to increase the spend.
I believe the argentinian ecomony bounced back since 2005 and politicians are stupid enough to blow the odd billion on defence equipment. Venezuela has done very nicely out of wheeling and dealing with the Russians and it would appear that Venezuela has bought out a large chunk of argentinian debt. Political alliances might increase the verbal exchanges. If the Mirage deal is a non starter then Im sure the russians would step in.
Atfer the conflict the RAF had 12 F4J-UK's to defend the islands, the cost of which over the last 25 years has been vast. But 4 aircraft seems too few even if top of the line. In many ways the large open spaces of the falklands have been underused, they would have been ideal low level training areas but fortunately the end of the cold war reduced the need.
The only chance that Argentina has of getting even partial dual control of soverignity is in my mind to price the UK out of the theatre. More likley the islanders will want independence, whether the UK would keep 1100 troops there then long term is debatable.
Independence isn't an option & never has been. The resident population in 2001 was 2379, plus 112 Falklanders temporarily absent, total 2479. The headline figure was 2913, but that includes civilian residents at Mt. Pleasant, few if any of who would opt for the Falklands in case of independence. So, fewer than 2500 Falklanders . . . . .
http://www.falklands.gov.fk/9ca.htm
http://www.falklands.gov.fk/people.php
Another major contributing factor is competency. Since 82 the UK armed forces, particularly the army / marines, have gained a tremendous amount of combat experience (Iraq, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone etc.), which has led to improved tactics, equipment and weapons systems. Plus the military training academies (Sandhurst, Brecon, Warminster) have endeavored to introduce lessons learnt gleaned on the field of conflict to all levels of the military (Commissioned and Noncommissioned ranks alike). There are very few personnel serving today who have not experienced or operated in a war-zone. Compare this to the Argentine armed forces, when was the last time they were involved in a combined arms conflict? How many of their officers and NCO's have commanded under fire or in difficult hostile conditions, very few I suspect. Experience brings a tremendous competitive edge to the field of play, particularly when in defence.
Apart from a bit of chasing a few not very competent guerillas in NW Argentina in the mid-1970s, the Argentinean army didn't fight anyone between the War of the Triple Alliance, 1864-70, & the Falklands, 1982, & it showed.
Wow, that discussion is a very good and professional one. Keep going, guys. I've learned a lot.
After all I read here it doesn't seem to me that a bunch of used Mirage 2000s would make a huge difference.
It seems to me that despite budget pressure the British forces are well prepared, equipped and trained. And given that developments in the region are watched carefully (and I think they will be after the 1982 incident), Britain will be able to quickly build up a massive deterrence force.
I wouldn't mind Argentine sabre-rattling during election times anyway...
It seems that the Castle class will soon be replaced:
After all I read here it doesn't seem to me that a bunch of used Mirage 2000s would make a huge difference.
It seems to me that despite budget pressure the British forces are well prepared, equipped and trained. And given that developments in the region are watched carefully (and I think they will be after the 1982 incident), Britain will be able to quickly build up a massive deterrence force.
I wouldn't mind Argentine sabre-rattling during election times anyway...
It seems that the Castle class will soon be replaced:
from: http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/river_class/@www.naval-technology said:
Actually self determination may well come up. The Islanders have their own judicial system and apart from defence costs, are pretty self sufficient thanks to revenue from fishing rights. They have more control over their own affairs than many of us in the UK. The security needs will mean that a break off is doubtfull if not impossible and they do well from the present system. The F.O recognizes the status of the islanders as remaining British for as long as they want to.
Part of the signal of UK abandonment that triggered the war was the late 1970's decision by the F.O to limit the citizen status of the Falkland islanders under the British Nationality Act, at the time that created resentment.
Part of the signal of UK abandonment that triggered the war was the late 1970's decision by the F.O to limit the citizen status of the Falkland islanders under the British Nationality Act, at the time that created resentment.
contedicavour
New Member
What about the rumours on oil being present close to the Falklands ? That could add a new dimension to this geopolitical discussion. If in some time the islands can pay for the costs of defending them, then a permanent presence of more Typhoons and FFGs could spell the end of any Argentine hope.
cheers
cheers
Has there been anyword about numbers of M2K-5 for Argentina? My guess is that they would struggle with more than 12-14....
Welcome all. Quick question about France offering M2000 to Argentina and selling them to Brazil-it looks like per wikipedia they still have 3 squadrons of F1 in service. They get about 15 or so new Rafale for their Air Force each year. Why would they even be offering M2000 until all the F1 are out of service?
My thoughts-as a lead in to future Rafale sales, possible in Brazil, but not likely in Argentina.
My thoughts-as a lead in to future Rafale sales, possible in Brazil, but not likely in Argentina.
Probably because that's what customers want. Though if I had the choice between an early Mirage 2000C or a Mirage F.1 with the Moroccan upgrade, I think I'd take the F.1. Can fire Mica, for a start.
I believe there are some sound Mirage F.1s in storage which could be refurbished & upgraded to the Moroccan standard for about what Brazil is paying for its M2Ks. Would be a good buy for a country like Argentina, maybe some others, & as you say, might be a lead-in to future Rafale sales.
contedicavour
New Member
The French F1s are mostly in reconnaissance squadrons and are not used as fighters anymore. Rafales are replacing already deleted Jaguars and the older 2000s in fighterbomber roles. Air defence Rafales are less urgently needed as the 2000-5s are excellent air defence birds with Mica (radar & IR) and the latest radars.
So it does make sense that the older 2000s are the first offered to potential customers of Rafales to try to keep the market open and stop F16, F18, Typhoon, Gripen and SU27/30 sales.
cheers
Turk,
Im not sure what you are getting at?
Are you referring to the actual war in 1982 and the exocet matter? France is a European ally of the UK. The UK asked France not to supply the next order of Exocet during the conflict. This left the Argentinians with 5 exocets rather than the 14 on order. France obliged because she is our close neighbour, part of the EU and a "sort" of NATO member. (The Cold War was also on at that time, it wasnt in the interests of European defence against the WARPAC for the RN to be down south too long getting sunk by exocets).
Argentina scoured the world for exocets and the Brtish Spy network went to work stopping them.
Just because France stopped selling exocet is no reason that 25 years later Argentina wouldnt buy their weapons. Thats just the way the arms trade works. The Argentinians used many UK weapons such as Type 42/Seadart, Tigercat SAM. The British army trained a lot of Argentinian troops prior to hostilities.
The US gave us the 9L sidewinder, access to satellite reconaissance and other military asssitance as well as political support in 1982. That hasnt prevented the US from helping the Argentines since.
Argentina will buy weapons that it needs in context of its position, its relations with neighbours and what it can afford.
Im not sure what you are getting at?
Are you referring to the actual war in 1982 and the exocet matter? France is a European ally of the UK. The UK asked France not to supply the next order of Exocet during the conflict. This left the Argentinians with 5 exocets rather than the 14 on order. France obliged because she is our close neighbour, part of the EU and a "sort" of NATO member. (The Cold War was also on at that time, it wasnt in the interests of European defence against the WARPAC for the RN to be down south too long getting sunk by exocets).
Argentina scoured the world for exocets and the Brtish Spy network went to work stopping them.
Just because France stopped selling exocet is no reason that 25 years later Argentina wouldnt buy their weapons. Thats just the way the arms trade works. The Argentinians used many UK weapons such as Type 42/Seadart, Tigercat SAM. The British army trained a lot of Argentinian troops prior to hostilities.
The US gave us the 9L sidewinder, access to satellite reconaissance and other military asssitance as well as political support in 1982. That hasnt prevented the US from helping the Argentines since.
Argentina will buy weapons that it needs in context of its position, its relations with neighbours and what it can afford.
f16 are considered more expensive even for an old MLU one and Chile situation was different as they economy was in much better shape. unlike the Argentina which suffered badly.
the Mirage are going to be much cheaper as they are well used and the French are getting rid of them
contedicavour
New Member
Right, but I woudn't expect the US to offer anything offensive to today's leftist Argentinian administration. May be old ex ANG F16s, but not Harpoons or ASMs that could be used against the Falklands... besides, the Argentinian navy and air force already operate Exocets and they are incompatible with F16s.
cheers