In an interview with Pucará Defensa, Rear Admiral Carlos María Allievi, Chief of the General Staff of the Argentine Navy, confirmed that the Argentine Navy is considering the acquisition of Landing Platform Docks (LPDs) and Landing Ship Tanks (LSTs).
Rear Admiral Allievi highlighted the Navy’s interest in two specific LPD designs: the Makassar-class and the VARD 7 313 design.
These vessels are seen as critical components in enhancing the operational capabilities of the Argentine Navy, particularly in amphibious operations and disaster response scenarios.
Allievi noted, “We have been thinking about an LPD, it can be the Makassar class or the 7313 from Fincantieri, which can carry up to 8 light or medium helicopters, a great air transport capacity, which in the event of a catastrophe, if land access or airports are collapsed, as happened in the south of Brazil, allows the direct support on the affected areas.”
In an interview with @PucaraD, the Rear Admiral Allievi confirmed that the @Armada_Arg (🇦🇷) is in fact looking at LPDs & LSTs.
Regarding LPDs, he confirmed interest in the Makassar design, but also the VARD 7 313 design. pic.twitter.com/hdjYieON6j
— SA Defensa (@SA_Defensa) June 14, 2024
The interview also shed light on the broader context in which these acquisitions are being considered. The Argentine Navy faces significant challenges related to the ageing of its operational assets, with the average age of its fleet over 40 years. This includes the need for modernisation across all components of the Navy, such as Naval Aviation, the Marine Corps, and the Submarine Force.
Discussing the amphibious capabilities, Rear Admiral Allievi explained the need for both LPDs and LSTs. The LST, similar to the ARA Cabo San Antonio used in the Falklands War, is crucial for direct beach landings. In contrast, the LPD is much larger and capable of carrying more helicopters and equipment, providing significant logistical and operational support.
Allievi elaborated, “In the Navy, the average age of our operational assets is over 40 years old. Although they are in service today, the vast majority have technology dating back to the 1970s or 1960s. This applies to all components of integrated naval power, which are the Naval Aviation, the Marine Corps, the Submarine Force and the Navy. We have to think about a renewal that we must have in the medium or long term. Everything that is naval construction or development involves an engineering and design process of at least seven years.”
The interview also touched on the importance of training and maintenance to ensure operational readiness. The Navy is actively seeking ways to acquire used submarines to train personnel and maintain operational capabilities.
Allievi stated, “We are analysing whether any European power has any programme to discontinue submarines and that we can sit down and negotiate. A navy that has an operational submarine does not sell it; it operates it until it is put into reserve when it already has a replacement submarine in the slipway.”
Rear Admiral Allievi highlighted the strategic importance of the South Atlantic, not only for its resources and maritime routes but also for its growing relevance in global maritime security. The Argentine Navy, he said, is committed to maintaining a strong presence in the region, which includes patrols and international collaborations to safeguard national interests.
“Our main mission is in the South Atlantic maritime area. Within this South Atlantic we see that there are new protagonists, new challenges. These new protagonists want greater participation or influence in the decisions made in an area that historically did not have great relevance. The South Atlantic, with these new challenges, takes on a much more relevant importance,” he explained.
The Argentine Navy’s interest in LPDs and LSTs is part of a broader strategy to modernise and enhance its operational capabilities.
Looks like Argentina is rearming, and unlike previous Argie politicians, Milei is not a Peronist imbecile who will keep their economy in the doldrums.
I don’t anticipate Milei will himself pose a military threat, but if he rebuild their military, it will be a useful tool for some future president when they need to start with the nationalist tub thumping again.
Have they not already started with the talk of invading the Falklands, it would be a perfect opportunity for them if we are suddenly confronted with a conflict with China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and the rest of the new axis of evil!?
The Royal Navy continues to shrink and try to operate with substandard ships and equipment, and at a time when we face significant threats around the globe. NATO isn’t going to get onboard to fight over the Falklands, so then what are we going to do if the Argies do get ballsy?
The UK didn’t used to have tomahawks or storm shadow in 82. Argentine airbases or anything else on the mainland would not be safe if they wanted to go for round 2. The conflict would be much closer to home.
And ehat substandard ships are the RN operating in your mind?
More a case of what is not being operated. The ships that are well documented being retired as clapped out wrecks because their replacements are years too late entering service.
Oh I don’t know, we have 2 aircraft carriers that seem to struggle to leave port without breaking, and we also don’t have enough F35s to equip them with. I’m Ex Navy, so not a hater, but I am very concerned about our current combat readiness. We could also talk about the Type 45s, and the limited amount of missiles they can carry in the vertical launch system. If the current wars have taught us anything, it’s that we are unprepared to fight a near peer nation, for an extended period of time. There’s so much more to say, but… Read more »
Yes. T45. Certainly after the upgrade with 72 very capable missiles that will hit first time, every time. And they can fire multiple shots in one go. Land attack is coming with NSM. And the carrier’s have had nothing like the issues other nations carrier’s have had in the early stages of their careers. They are complex but superb vessels that will have a very high availability rate. POW could put to sea within 48hrs. They are doing regular maintenance periods to reduce the length of major refits. One will always be available 365. F35. Procurement is slow. But capability… Read more »
Hmm, I think you must be reading different reports to what I have.
I won’t go on, it’s not worth it. Bit I do hope you are correct.
It’s alright, the entire Royal Navy can depart for the Falklands, recruiting and working up as they go.
The Americans can lend us a couple of extra squadrons of F35, which we can pick up along the way.
I’m sure we can rent some RFA capacity to re-supply just in time.
Who do our disgraceful politicians think they are kidding?
Type 45 needs a 57mm gun (or 76mm) replacing the obsolete 114mm that can’t even fire in AA mode.
Otherwise will be wasting missiles against 200kph drones.
With our forces at such pitiful historic lows we’d have to deploy most of our combat strength leaving little for Europe or elsewhere. Yet Sunak still spins how he’s looked after & invested in our forces.
Argentine forces, however, are currently in a far worse condition, but we always need to watch thiem. A whole new amphibious capacity is concerning, IF they can afford it or if funded by Russia/China for the distraction value.
We have submarines that would make any Argentine old or new amphibious capacity aimed at the Falklands, sitting ducks. We are short on weapons, tanks, artilary and even men, but the Falklands are defendable.Navy assets apart, if they did manage to get on the islands, with a reenforces garrason, I believe they are not that stupid to try.
Did they ever stop talking about invading the Falklands? It’s just easy point scoring for Argentinian politicians, the same way that UK politicians make vague, meaningless promises about helping the NHS or curbing immigration.
Who is going to lead the Argentine Government the money to buy new toys?
They are broke.
They will not be broke for long, they just started fracking their large shale reserves (unlike our idiot politicians). I am not convinced the present government is to be trusted, I think we tried that before ^.^.
Maybe we should sell them the Albions and the Bays.
We tried that with T42 a while back……that blew back in our faces……
If we had not sold them the T42 they might have gone out an bought a decent destroyer through from someone else.
It was Britains plan all along to seek Argentina crappy kit.
All those 500lb bombs that failed to explode where UK made 😀
The bombs that failed to explode were fuze related – not enough rotations on the little propellor to arm them. Everyone was furious with the BBC for telling the Argentinians that as they fixed it and it cost lives.
T42 wasn’t, inherently, that bad an idea. As it was implemented in the early units it was poor. Later units such as Exeter, with improved radar, were hugely more successful.
“ Everyone was furious with the BBC for telling the Argentinians that as they fixed it and it cost lives.” This is an old trope and it keeps coming up…like the BBC warning the Argentinian’s of the attack on Goose Green… Apply some common sense… All reporting from the TF went through Navy Satellite Comms on ships, and was cleared by onboard Navy Censors and then MoD in the UK…before release… The reporting on Goose Green was the BBC reporting what MoD had said in a briefing….in London… Everyone blames the BBC reporting what they were told was ok to report…rather… Read more »
That was wasn’t the way the press system on board worked.
Navy were rather naively surprised they weren’t getting BBC WW2 style coverage.
The Goose Green thing I’m not taking about here at all. So have zero idea why you brought it up.
The fuze thing wasn’t briefed out but came out in a casual conversation on board which was then, unfortunately, repeated on air. Which was doubly stupid as the reporter could have been a victim of it too!
“Repeated on Air” Exactly how did that happen??? Use your common sense…. There were no live broadcasts of sound or video from the TF. All written words communicated via limited satellite channels was cleared by MoD censors onboard, then typed out on RN terminals by ratings, transmitted to UK MoD before being cleared by MoD for release to news orgs. All recordings of sound and video (on 16mm stock) were sent via ship to Ascension, then flown to UK, cleared by MoD sensors before being released to news orgs…most took at least 1 week…. There was no way of any… Read more »
There isn’t any point in engaging with this.
The audio broadcasters were not censored.
I suggest you toddle down to TNA and have a look at the files.
I’ve saw some of the files years ago before they were declassified so I’m sure of what know.
As anyone with nous knows, the BBC sees itself generally above the UK’s interests and consider themselves supranational. They are there to be even handed and impartial right? Meaning they are the mouthpiece of the UN world view.
By any standard they should be classed as suspect and a potential security risk to the UK in any future national emergency.
It was the BBC idiot on the World Service who announced that 2 Para were about to attack Darwin and Goose Green. That mistake alone killed British troops.
I highly suspect if the BBC were aware of it then Argentina were also. They weren’t stupid they must have seen their bombs not exploding and had engineers on the case to figure out why.
BBC talked directly to a member of a disposal team.
Bear in mind the Argentinians just had film sight cameras and nothing else to go on. This was a pre digital camera age.
So they had no idea if the bombs made contact, penetrated/bounced off, exploded/were duds.
Quite a few bombs didn’t penetrate for various reasons.
I can’t imagine their scientists couldn’t have figured it out, after it was just a simple thing of them using them below their operating height.
I guess the truth must be out there by now, a lot of info has been declassified on the Argentina side in the last decade or so.
Jim Did you ever serve in a T42? I did and although the smallest size ship to deploy the seadate system they did a great job during their service and spent more time at sea that the rubbish we have at present and until HMS Diamon downing a few drones, actually downed and intercepted missiles and aircraft in real wars.
One country on planet earth was luck enough to have shale formations that could be tracked and it wasn’t the UK.
Everyone has tried only the USA has succeeded. Shale is irrelevant to Argentina.
There absolutely is shale oil in the UK that can be fracked, they just don’t because it gives the greenies a panic attack.
I’d prefer to focuses on getting North Sea up to volume again.
Plenty of viable projects there.
Agree. Voices bemoaning the idea based on environmental grounds need to look at Norway though. They did not sell off all their oil and gas, kept it state owned. Ergo one of the richest countries in the world with a sovereign wealth fund +£2 trillion. This fund is growing rapidly as Norway is now the number 1 supplier of oil and gas to the EU. That could or should be the UK. If we are regenerating north sea reserves that’s fine by me but all profits should be pumped back into the UK PLC not lining some petrochemical conglomerates companies… Read more »
The idea that nobody would invest in North Sea oil/gas if it wasn’t open market traded is for the birds.
All you need is a strike price (as with electricity) for times of national emergency (such as Mad Vlad) rest of the time trade it.
That way the producer is guaranteed a a sensible price (I believe in sensible profits) but can’t go to the casino when things are out of whack.
Yes, and thank goodness Labour have included such a plan in their manifesto. Norway is a fine example of what can be done, a balance of capitalism and socialist policies. The UK has literally been sold out from beneath our feet! It’s time for the nations wealth to be used to make life better for everyone, and it’s not like we need the money, what with the great idea that was Brexit. But I digress….
Unrestricted foreign takeovers often paid for with debt sends billions out the country. After dinner speaking by David Cameron is £120,000 an hour , are they buying access and influence ?
Definitely, that’s what crony capitalism is all about. The selling of the UK’s assets to foreign wealth funds, for me, should be seen as treasonous acts. The Tories deserve to wiped out in the general election, and then made to answer for what they gave done. I don’t say this as a left leaning voter, but as a veteran that thinks the UK population deserves better, and things need to change. In regards to our military and ability to protect ourselves, we’ve been left exposed and with an armed forces that aren’t fit for purpose. I’m ranting, but I’m so… Read more »
you do know labour was just as bad.
you do know the last labour PM charges x3 times that for charity event speaking?
Labour in their last stint running the country we responsible for exactly the same corruption and chaos. We will get no better till re get rid of the 2 parties that rule us. Labour leadership worth millions and behaving like tories used to. All the same
The problem is the definition of investment…..
Gordon Brown ‘invested’ in pay rises and unfunded pension promises…..
If investment was in physical things like roads, fibre comms and defence assets I’d have less of an issue.
Obvs the capital needs to be ring fenced otherwise it will be dipped into everyone the NHS has a winter/spring/summer (insert random something) crisis.
Norwegian oil is not all state owned, but all oil and gas production is subject to royalty payments as it is in the UK. Issue is what the royalties get spent on !
Yes, I’d go with that too. And, I’m one of those crazy ‘greenies’, just one with an interest in this countries long-term future. The last thing we need in a time of global uncertainty, is to be importing our fuel from foreign powers. We can decarbonise and exploit our gas deposits at the same time, we are going to need gas as a source of energy for the foreseeable future. It just takes a government that isn’t full of self serving morons, and cares more about the future of the UK, than wealth creation for themselves.
The way to decarbonise is to make low carbon electricity economically more attractive then sit back and let the market work. The missing part of the puzzle is getting enough solar onto industrial buildings. A lot of that it to do with the network companies not accepting feeds into the grid rather than solar panel economics. I wanted to put more panels on some warehouse I own part of and it didn’t make sense as we couldn’t export the excess. So we got round that by getting a bakery as a tenant and sold them cheap electricity. Basically they are… Read more »
I agree with everything you have said, I really do. Insulation is a major issue in the UK, and would make a huge difference to our energy requirements. It seems making money for the few, is far more important than anything else. I’m not a far left numpty, but I do believe it’s time to spend the countries wealth on its citizens well being. After all, it’s not like we need money for our NHS, infrastructure, military, local councils, and so much more. And don’t even let me get started on the mess caused by Brexit, and leaving the single… Read more »
The formations in the UK are different to the US, there is also the fact that the UK is one of the densest countries in the world.
Yes, it’s well known that the Tories take a great amount of notice of what the ’greenies’ have to say!? Oh, and Brexit wasn’t Brexity enough, another load of claptrap and pathetic reasoning for why the Tories have utterly ruined the UK’s prospects! Forget shale, we should use our North sea and North Atlantic gas deposits, instead of buying LPG in from foreign countries such as the US. Roll on the Labour government, it’s not long to go now.
Anyway, back to the military stuff…
Energy security is a critical part of defence security……?
Not sure what you are asking. But yes, energy independence is critical to UK defence.
It isn’t really a question…..it is a polite way of saying who would question that as we might struggle to move a CH3 or QEC without fuel….
There is also no way to extract using fracking that doesn’t put drinking water and near by properties at risk. Just look at what happened in the US and they have way bigger gaps between oil fields and houses thanks to land mass. If you were to live near a fracking site would you want them to take the risk with your health and property?
Not true my friend. Fracing into shallow targets can cause issues if not well managed but fracing that is well regulated and targeting deep shale will not affect drinking water etc. Deep shale is typically 12-20 000 feet below the surface.. early days fracing in usa was generally poorly regulated and after shallow targets using diesel as a fluid. Best practice fracing regulations these days call for use of water and either ceramics or washed sand…both inert.
The government produced scientific research which stated no safe way to do it, which is why even the Conservatives banned it, a party that would sell their mother if it meant getting a handout.
Every state in Australia has imparted moratoriums on fracing pending reviews conting millions in fees and expenses usually paid to universities etc, at the end of which, the scientific conclusion has been, if its well regulated its safe. The issue is the political stigma. ‘Fracing’ doesn’t generally get votes. I’ve posted a couple of links that are pending approval. But going back to root issue….if Argentinian govt has political will to allow fracing of deep shale, it will work and it will generate $billions.
https://climatenewsaustralia.com/fracking-in-australia-in-2021-infographic/#:~:text=This%20includes%20Queensland%2C%20New%20South,and%20Victoria%20have%20banned%20fracking.
143 recommendation for prudent regulation.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-03/nt-government-fracking-decision-beetaloo-basin-gas/102295762
just like other goverment reports that said it was quite safe when the started the tests
All the report said is that there is no way to predict tremors which freaked the public out so the stopped
Who knows I’m not a scientist but can guarantee the Conservative government would have done it if they thought they could get away with it.
fracking tested in UK didnt use the toxic chemicals used in the US
Er not in my back yard please, the north was ruined with heavy industry without adding another.
Don’t know where you got your fracking information from. Franking currently used in USA China and Canada on a large scale. Many other countries have fracked successfully. Ourselves included in the North Sea along with the Norwegians. In the 1980s we fracked around 200 on shore wells in the UK. Many in Lincolnshhire. Wikipedia a good start for you possibly not the source of all truths. In this case though they do list a few countries that have Fracked.
The thing is, Cuadzilla tried and failed. The reasons that the UK is unsuitable for shore based fracking, are many fold. But, there is no reason that we can’t drill in the North Atlantic and North sea, and exploit those gas reserves.
You talk garbage on this blog every time you post. Cuadrilla did not fail. The UK is NOT unsuitable for fracking. Also this subject is more than important for our military, it is essential in unlocking the wealth needed to finance our military.
IF Cuadrilla failed why did the Chinese buy Cuadrilla??
The Bowland shale dwarfs any US shale play.
What? You obviously didn’t read my replies. Do one.
My last post was ALL about your replies and how rubbish they were
I have no idea what you are going on about, I really don’t! I think it’s best if I leave you to argue with yourself.
It seems one of my replies is missing. So perhaps you might want to go and argue with the LSE. Maybe check your inaccuracies.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-potential-reserves-of-shale-gas-are-there-in-the-uk/
You may get this information eventually.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-potential-reserves-of-shale-gas-are-there-in-the-uk/
I suppose the LSE is wrong too? Perhaps try reading someone’s replies, before assuming you know best. That’s just a bit of helpful guidance for you.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-potential-reserves-of-shale-gas-are-there-in-the-uk/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20British%20Geological,Valley%20hosts%201.4%E2%80%933.8%20tcm.
Listen up Mr Bradley (although I now think your real name probably ends with ‘ang’) My information on the Bowland shale originally came from A J LUCAS annual reports. You can still read them on the Australian Stock exchange. A J Lucas bought Cuadrllla this was the old established Australian mining company BEFORE it was bought by the Chinese National Offshore Mining Company through its wholly owned investment fund called Kerogen. The British Geological Society Survey echoed the A J Lucas annual reports. You have recently rubbished the Royal Navy as having sub standard ships and rubbished our shale gas… Read more »
Yes Argentina has huge rare earth deposits of Lithium. That’s what this is all about. The Chinese have bought up much of it as they try to corner the market. Oil they say is so yesterday but I don’t buy that. The Falklands could be a target for a lot of trouble in the crazy times ahead in a contest for scarce resources and a deal of fragile egos. I agree; I dont trust the Conservatives or the FCO nowadays when either the Falklands or Gibraltar are concerned. Just look at Cameron’s recent wibbling on both. We need a top… Read more »
Nope shale based hydrocarbons have been successfully tested to surface in multiple locations including Northern territory and in South Australia. Issue is now identifying customers willing to buy the gas and the pipeline economics given distances involved….but the code is broken.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2016-10-13/origin-energy-resources-flaring-exploratory-gas-well/7929540
Agreed , Argentina is doing what uk should be doing and simply balancing tge books so tac receipts match govtvspending . And with fracking on the cards Argentina will become a successful economy veryvfast , this time next year I think Argentina will be very admired . And again political talk is pointless without a mikitairy to back up the claims. Uk should take note on its terrible militairy demise
Debt projected to rise to 600 billion by 2029 !
Hasn’t stopped North Korea.
Broke do not mean necessarily without money or resources. It just means they don’t pay to those they borrowed from.
In the 20s they were one of the richest and up and coming Countries in the World with considerable resources so yes but for total incompetence, corruption and greed they could be again. Thankfully there is as yet little signs of that happening, you even hear despair about the railways and how they ran better when the British ran them.
Actually in the past 6 months Melei has turned the deficit to a small surplus. They still have a debt mountain to climb but if they carry on in the direction they’re going they could well better of than us in future.
I very much doubt that we will overtake Germany by 2028 due to their pension crisis, which is about to explode. So they would have to over take, Spain, Italy, Canada, France and Germany, before they overtake us! No chance for at least the next 50 years, and by then I’ll be unlike to still be around to prove it!
If he is allowed to keep reforming and dismantling the kleptocracy Argentina could have a very bright future.
The budget is now balanced and inflation is tracking downwards.
They have plenty of good stuff to export and a lonely country too.
So I hope that the fact that they will shortly have real money to invest in education and health will make the rest of his reforms start to work.
Lol projected to rise to $600 billion by 2029
Look at the facts. Covid and our response to it has ruined the economy with debt. Immigration is a further drag unless you raise the education requirements of the immigrants. Cheap labour and alien culture benefits no one in the end.
Sounds like the UK government
Makassar-class LPDs are cheap, LSTs even cheaper. They can probably get the whole fleet for less than what Brazil paid for HMS Ocean.
The main pitch is for disaster relief too. Will probably be much easier to free up funds.
they’d never get it to sea. it’ll be scrap metal soon after they got it
Looks like we need to station an Astute around the Falklands, since the patrol boat that is there has no fire power. Is it a couple of Typhoons stationed there. HMS Conqueror became the world’s first Nuclear Attack Submarine to sink a enemy surface ship that act kept the rest of the Argentinain navy within there territorial waters. We may have to use the same tactics again. Plus HMS Conqueror was not as advanced or heavily armed as a Astute imagine what damage an Astute could inflict with it’s heavy torpedoes and it’s Tomahawk missiles.
We don’t have enough subs to dedicated one to the Falklands and currently aregenina are not a realistic threat. Maybe that will change in a decade but not today.
I would hope the astute work better, don’t forget hms conquerer managed to lose the argentine fleet multiple times before the order was given.
That is the same thinking that has got into this position where we depleted our capabilities beyond belief. I accept your premise on the decade before Argentina could have credible amphibious force. Given that we have not enough Astutes to meet the requirement to send one south now. We should be placing an order now with Barrow for a new class of SSN. This time a bigger order. Given the design and build lead in time the first boat may just be operational in a decade. We are playing a dangerous game in defence thinking. Kicking the can down the… Read more »
Well that’s a bigger topic. I don’t think Argentina is the most likely threat on the horizon, but whatever the threat we won’t have the numbers to deal with it. Whether it’s afgan mk2 or falklands mk2.
My guess of why we are were we are is partially due to the military not knowing what fight it’s gearing for and so wasting huge amounts of money swinging between different aims.
We need at least 12 SSNs and 8 Uboats.
Be realistic, maybe 9 SSNs & a couple of Anglified foreign SSKs for local patrol, or 10 SSNs maybe. At Most !
We need also 100000 army Troops, 500 Challengers , 25 Navy escorts , 2 Carriers with 30 R.N. fighters each and 300 RAF fighters, this IS the minimal number to be a credible military power.
Yes, I know that with these traitor politicians It,s impossible.
Typhoon launched JSM needed against any LPD and escorts, and Wildcat launched Sea Venom against and LCU/LCVP. Cheaper than putting an Astute on station. Of course we gave to wait until they’re inside the 12 mile limit.
Typhoon might get Fcasw. But certainly not JSM
FCASW is not here now. The clue is in the name. So sod it, and give Typhoon JSM and the the RN and RAF can have (almost) commonality. Useful for UK QRA too.
And these LPDs aren’t here now either.
By the time Argentina are able to pose a credible invasion risk Typhoons will be extremely well equipped for anti-shipping.
By the time they managed to get that on typhoons fcasw would’ve already arrived.
I’d also point put that commonality is pointless as the navy doesn’t plan to expand their use of NSM beyond a minimum purchase.
Do Astutes have Thomahawk VLS or only torpedo tube launched?
I ask because torpedo tube launched model are not manufactured anymore. And that is a big problem if don’t have VLS.
The Astutes don’t have VLS, thought more tube launched ones were bought before the line closed?
I don’t know. But it is an issue if things get bad.
Time to get that line reopened?
I wasn’t aware there was a massive difference, both have to “swim” to the surface, vertical or horizontal makes little difference ?
Not sure, i have read that the Dutch are unable to put them in their new subs because they are not build anymore.
yes the tube launched model isnt made as the US have vertical launch on all there subs and destroyers
Astutes have TTL Tomahawk and Spearfish. We currently have approx 50-60 Tomahawks left. The recent Tomahawk system/missile upgrades converts out Blk IV stock to Blk V missiles. There was no mention of any new purchases or indeed ig any were being converted to either A or B variants, so suspect that they are all going to be standard Blk V versions.
I imagine the upgraded Tomohawk stock is another interim until either we get VLS Tomohawk with Aukus or some version of Fcasw.
The upgrade is part of the system modernisation and re-capitalisation of the kit. The US had to do the same in 2018ish.
Not sure if Tomahawk will still be around in another 12-15 years when SSN(A) will be coming out of Barrow. Suspect it may well be a variant of FCASM or indeed another missile altogether.
I wish the US would sort out sub launched (VLS or Tube) AGM-158s, now your talking 🙂
Paveway would probably be effective against the Argentinian navy.
Four Typhoons stationed in Falklands- Faith, Hope, Charity and Desperation
Of course the Argentine are going to have another crack at the Falklands: defeat is like a hot iron, burning away at their soul. If UK defence don’t understand that simple fact, then they deserve everything they get.
Even if UK defence thought defences needed increased, which they currently don’t. They don’t have the assets to spare.
I have been eying Monica Bellucci for quite a while ….
I’m looking at Sonita Henry
Look at what has happened to the Russian navies landing ships, this type of ship will never get near a beach. They are obsolete against modern rockets and drones.
If you have them deployed then yes.
Seriously? This country is in the knackers yard with raging inflation! Assault ships! Invading Chile are they??
A battery of anti ship missiles should solve any likely problems. We do not want to underestimate them .
Yeah, it is the least expensive option, but needs to be hidden and mobile.
👍Agreed.
I thought that, but realised air launched is both and easier to add to currently deployed kit. Typhoon should have JSM anyway.
The RAF/MoD are looking at a missile that fits between Spear-3 and Storm Shadow/FCASW. MBDA has just released details of a weapon that might fit the bill. It’s called RCM2 and basically does what the Spear-3 variants do, but in a larger package.
I expect any Argentinian attack will deal with Typhoon while on the airbase. So consider combating against an invasion without it.
A container full of cheap drones, rapidly flying Typhoons down to reinforce the flight there to a full squadron, airlifting a battalion+ to reinforce the garison, despatching a frigate if intelligence whiffs an invasion likely; sholud nip it in the bud. But Arg is a long way from being capable.
In 1982 we had forces ready for WW3 but today few ever imagined ours would ever get so tiny. The sheer cheek of Sunak to ask to be judged by his “support” for our forces.
He does support the our armed forces. Just from a distance. 😏
Not too worried about them rearming for a 2nd falklands war cause first in a few years LPDs will be obsolete compared to multi role support ships second the vehicles the argentine military can put on those LPDs wont be very capable since their military mainly consists of old discarded and broken equipment like their fleet of super etendard aircraft
When they can’t afford to replace core units, this is just a fantasy.
Yeah this is only going to increase the British government’s distrust of the Argentine Government
And how long before Argentina have another go at the falklands
Yeah right. Argentina a country absolutely stone broke is going to rebuild an amphibious capability for “disaster relief”.
If this doesn’t change the defence posture on the Falklands don’t know what will.
We will need to reroute an SSN there regularly. Oh wait a minute then damn Tories have cut our fleet of SSNs to just 6.
Never mind maybe a frigate or destroyer could be based there…oh wait a minute then damn Tories have cut the fleet to just 15 available of which likely only 7 are ready for active service at any one time.
Great state of affairs.
Its okay, UK has soft power!
“Our main mission is in the South Atlantic maritime area. Within this South Atlantic we see that there are new protagonists, new challenges”. The Chinese?
UK CSG 2025 will have 24 F-35s for it’s Indo-Pacific tour.
There’s 0 point for Argentinian hypotheticals. The gap in forces is even bigger and continuing to get bigger.
Good gear for attacking the Falklands. We need long to medium missiles to take them out and of course a 300 mile exclusion zone. Plus the radar to support it. It will happen as no government in the UK will fight back. They have all been emasculated.
NATO will not help. They did not help last time. Belgium refused to supply us with ammo, the French helped the Argies and the Germans sued Rolls Royce as they were building war ships for the Argies and RR refused to deliver the engines.
I forgot about the MEKO 140 and 360 frigate/ destroyer programmes Argentina bought in the 1980s.
Darn Germans suing us for preventing completion of warships that would be used against a NATO ally.
That’s nice of them
The French actually made sure Arg wouldn’t get any more Exocets. The UK had supplied almost as much kit as anyone else.
A very short part of funny story about a boiler for Royal Navy for Falklands War going trough France. The whole story in Samizdata.net in a comment in the topic titled “A recorded conversation about the Falklands War” (…)At the time of the charter, the Alvega, a “clean oil” tanker, (which meant it could carry anything liquid such as gasoline, and even drinking water), which was working in the Red Sea at the time of the Falklands war, was straightaway ordered to proceed towards Portsmouth, England. The MoD seemed to be interested in the water making capacity of the ship,… Read more »
A country with 400 billion of debt and projected to rise to over 600 billion dollars by 2029. In 2001 they defaulted on 132 billion of sovereign debt. Don’t know he would lend them more money with pointless rearming !
Hi folks hope all is well.
It’s going to be while before Argentina has the capability to conduct a military deployment to threaten the Falklands. Obviously, as ever you experts can advise me on this matter.
The cynical side of me thinks Labour under Starmer will instruct a cut in defence and sell our kit to Argentina to pay for all the Woke policies coming along the track.
Cheers
George
I don’t see a problem we just need to open our eyes and take care of what we want from our military.
Don’t sell them anything, remember the 1980’s and Exocet missiles
And Milei want new talk on Falklands, just few months ago. Meantime by arms,subs, ships, planes, tanks… and pensions are cut, as a people raights, people lose jobs…
We could sell them some of ours …
I expect to read the comments of those knowledgeable on here telling us not to worry and we can deal with it should they attack the Falklands. I will reply that it was usually my corps that is sent to dig the reckless, sleeping politicians out of the mire when it hits the fan. I dont care what government is in power, I end up attending funerals of comrades who needlessly get killed because of their inaction. Make no bones about it, the MOD should make a clear statement that we will station more troops, anti-air, Royal Navy and RAF… Read more »
Are you kidding me, why do the need landing ships other than to give themselves options to take the Falklands. All they need to do is keep friendly relations and never raise sovereignty issues, all plausibility and reasoning and then one day when the timing is right…
In stead of pouring billions into Ukraine, why are we the UK not investing in rebuilding our underwhelming military capability?
Why does Argentina need an amphibious capability…? Who are they going to incade?
Exactly. A few amphibious assault ships are no good without air support and destroyer/ frigate protection. Coupled with a reasonable amount of troops equipped with NLAW and so on stationed on the island. Even spread thinly. A force equipped with Javelin and NLAW would surely exact a heavy toll of any vessels withing striking distance. Then there is the resupply issue.
What’s also needed is NSM or something. Even just a few batteries?
AA
Every country needs amphibious ships for disaster relief.
This is just the Argentine Navy looking at options, they will have a wish list like every other Military but what they actually end up with will be far from what they want. Yes they are getting F16’s but these are A/B models and not anywhere near the current block. It was a smart move to allow then to have F16’s rather than allow China in with J-10’s and thus getting a foothold in South America. I’m no expert but the current British Military capability in the Falklands is well known.
You don’t buy LPDs to supply disaster relief, that’s a profoundly expensive way of doing it, and you don’t buy LSTs for anything other than amphibious landings…. If Argentina did go ahead with this the HMG would really need to update their risk assessments on the Falklands. You are not even talking about Argentina suddenly going loco and invading again, just having the presence of a reasonable amphibious force and reasonable 4th generation fighters would require the UK to react, possibly upgrading its standing forces..this increased cost could be used as part of a long term political warfare and diplomatic… Read more »
Mmmmm. Why! Why do the Arggie need Amphibs? Maybe its time to put some NSM shore based systems on the Falklands and rather than scrapping crowsnest send them down to the Falklands. Then to give a goverment warning that any Arggie ship that comes within their weapons ranges of the Islands would be seen as a threat and fired on. Somehow two full batteries of land based NSM and a full sqn of Typhoons with some Crowsnest would make the Arggies think twice. I know from experiance the ground weather conditions in the Falklands, but I do not know wind… Read more »