HMS Medway carried out live machine gun firings at the edge of the Falkland Islands Conservation Zone during a four-day patrol at the end of July, British Forces South Atlantic Islands stated.
The patrol, designated Operation Southern Vigilance, ran from 26 to 29 July. The ship’s company fired mounted machine guns and worked through a man overboard exercise alongside an RAF A400M Atlas transport aircraft, work the command describes as maintaining operational readiness.
According to BFSAI, the deployment demonstrated the UK’s enduring commitment to the Falkland Islands by maintaining a visible presence and a capable force, helping to deter potential adversaries.
The Falkland Islands Conservation Zone extends 150 nautical miles from the centre of the archipelago and was established in 1990 to manage fish stocks, principally squid, which underpin a large share of the islands’ economy. Licensing and enforcement within it fall to the Falkland Islands Government, with the Royal Navy providing the deterrent presence and the fisheries patrol vessel Lilibet carrying out routine inspection work.
HMS Medway is a River-class offshore patrol vessel commissioned in 2019 and took over the South Atlantic Patrol Task from HMS Forth, which held the role for several years after replacing HMS Clyde. The class displaces around 2,000 tonnes and carries a 30mm gun, machine guns and a flight deck able to take a Merlin, with an endurance suited to long independent patrols in remote waters.
The ship is the only Royal Navy vessel permanently assigned to the region. British Forces South Atlantic Islands also operates Typhoon fighters and A400M and Voyager aircraft from RAF Mount Pleasant on East Falkland, alongside an infantry company, Rapier’s successor Sky Sabre air defence and a radar station on Mount Byron.
Argentina continues to claim the islands, which it calls the Malvinas, and raises the question annually at the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonisation. The British position rests on the 2013 referendum in which islanders voted by 1,513 votes to three to remain a British Overseas Territory.
Photography from the patrol was taken by Corporal Braithwaite.
Editor’s note: we have had an email asking us to explain this headline. I approved it and I’ll explain why.
BFSAI puts the live firing under training serials and applies the deterrence line to Operation Southern Vigilance as a whole. It is my view that the gunnery was highlighted precisely as part of the overall presence and deterrence point. Nobody publicises machine gun drills for the sake of it. A patrol vessel deters by being present and visibly able to do something about it, and a crew that has not fired its weapons in months is neither. Leaving that out would report the operation less accurately than the command described it.
On Argentina, BFSAI says “potential adversaries” and stops. There is one country with a standing claim to the islands. Writing around that would be coy.
Do we need to deter the ArgyBargies. Aside from the thuggery the national football team practices (poor losers AGAIN), I don’t think we (the rightful owners) need worry.
A nation of buffoons.
Reminds everyone we are still keeping an eye on the place as is our duty.
It sends the message that we are all over the place promoting peace and tranquility.
Plus we continue to train. I’m sure we are overdue for a carrier group to visit the region.
Mark, why would a Carrier group visit the region? Never done so before. We have airpower down there already.
A CVBG visiting the Falklands whilst underway to the Middle East or returning from there would be a big bugger-off to the Argies and a reminder that the RN has CVs and they do not.
Pretty certain a planning exercise has been done to test the scenario. Not sure how they would ramp up a strike group at the moment due to the shortage of operational ships.
Not sure that would be problematic. Most T45s will be ready soon plus we have a T26 just going into sea trials soon. T31 in the next 18 months – 2 years. Plus we have a brand new Astute boat ready for a decent run out. I also expect additional Astute boats to be drifting back into service over the next year or two. Plus obviously T23 is not completely dead.
Well, there was this one time a carrier group went there!
Argentina is pondering the purchase of aircraft at some point. I’m guessing at some point they might succeed.
Exercises around the islands designed to show the futility of putting say F16s up against Typhoons and/or F35s and the aggressive positions which T45s might be able to command might make a point.
It will also demonstrate the UK’s determination to defend it’s overseas territories.
Firing a machine gun! Wow!
Click bait headline.
Bolt some NSM on the boat and provide a camcopter (with martlet) for over-the-horizon targeting and THEN talk about deterence.
Or not.
AA
I don’t agree, the headline is drawn from how BFSAI framed the operation itself. Southern Vigilance is described by the command as demonstrating the UK’s commitment to the islands by maintaining a visible presence and a capable force, “helping to deter potential adversaries.” The live firing is listed within that same operation, not as a separate activity that happened to coincide with it.
The distinction between “training” and “deterring” is less clean than it looks. Deterrence by presence only works if the presence is credibly capable, and capability that is never exercised is not credible. A patrol vessel that has not fired its weapons in months is not a deterrent, it’s a hull. The serials are what keep the crew and the ship at the standard that makes the presence mean anything, which is precisely why the command publicises them rather than keeping them quiet.
As for who is being deterred, BFSAI says “potential adversaries” and leaves it there. There is one state with a standing territorial claim over the islands, and it isn’t Chile. Writing around that would be coy rather than accurate.
Thank you George for putting me right
Perhaps click bait from a lesser journal or the Telegraph.
AA
I think the significance of them publishing it alongside the deterrence line is being missed by many.
Nobody thinks a GPMG is what holds Argentina off, or that it’s the sole purpose for the firing. The point is who wrote the post and why. BFSAI chose to put the gunnery in, in the same breath as saying the operation maintained a visible presence and a capable force to deter potential adversaries. That is a command deciding what to show and what message it goes with, and they put a picture of a weapon being fired on the front of it. If they had wanted the story to be a routine training update they could have written one. I know first hand that this kind of thing is the point.
Presence deters when it is visibly capable and visibly practised and the serials are what stops the presence being decorative. Publishing them is part of the same exercise imo.
Real question is whether HMS Medway is capable of deterring anything with her machine gun or not. I’m really not convinced. An invasion may be considered unlikely but it’s not out of the question and a similar situation existed in 1982. Millei is certainly nationalist and possibly crazy enough to try it. I’m no longer convinced that 4 Tranche 1 Eurofighters are capable of defending against 16 F16s. Similarly whilst the Argentine Navy is innit in a great state the RN would struggle to produce a carrier a single T23 and a single T45…. Amphibious capability has disappeared into MOD never never land woth the MRSS cancelled after 26 years or so of provarication/planning and supposedly awarding contracts… leaving the ancient Bays…
Good points well made
You claim 4 Tranche 1 Eurofighters, 4 is the number with 100% servicability
2 is a more likely scenario , based on scheduled maintenance and continually operating in a salt laden environment , just a thought !
Yep exactly
Never give them the opportunity to try again it must be fortress Falklands. With a proper warship down there.
The piece says the Typhoons are FGR4s. But that is a catch all that covers all the Typhoons in RAF service. If they are Tranche 1s they can’t be down there much longer, as they will have less and less spares for maintenance. The thing is the Falklands is an ideal training environment, as there are very few flight restrictions, one of which is low flying over penguin colonies. But they are aloud to fly supersonic pretty much unrestricted, something they can’t do in the UK. With that in mind, perhaps increasing the number from 4 to 6 or even 8 would be prudent, based on the rhetoric coming out of Buenos Aires currently.
Your thinking is faultless in my opinion
4 aircraft doesn’t mean 4 aircraft just as 8 doesn’t mean 8 , full Squadron serviceabilty is a myth
Deployable assets is and always has been a numbers game
If as you suggest 8 being the total aircraft on station ideally, then your Deployable average may reach 5 out of 8 which would be far more desirable
People very often forget the 3 Cs of deterrence, just having something is not a deterrent.
Capability is one thing, but you then have to show credibility ( the willingness and ability to use it) and communication ( actually show it off and show the credibility )…
Essentially the 3 Cs only work if you run exercises…
An OPV – Argentina must be crapping itself at the power we possess!
And we fired a machine gun!
They should do, they won’t have half the capability of a whole host of assets and capabilities that HM possess that zi can list if needed.
Is the RN “crapping itself after their SSK sank and their ship turned turtle in its own harbour?
That won’t deter a penguin.
If Argentina wants to they can take back the islands, I could have taken mpa down with a single platoon.
Once it’s gone, we cannot take it back.
Four typhoons l, an RFA vessel and 120 infantry is not a deterrent
Sky Sabre is also based there.
Our military is a mess but Argentinas is much worse. Milei is only whining bout the Falklands cause his currency collapsed.
A single sky sabre and 4 Eurofighters versus 16 F16s?
Yes but the closest Argentinian airforce base is 800kms from the Falklands.. that’s a long mission with a light load for an F16..
They were able to get there with A4s in 1982 so it would seem possible.
Single? Who says?
Fire Groups have 2 to 4.
As long as the Sky Sabre Troop is protected from any pre-emptive covert action by the “Argies” the system can quite easily take down any number of approaching F16s, and with a number of fire units there is at least a little bit of redundancy in the system. Although the gist of your post is I presume that we have let our defences reduce to an almost negligible capability, across the board, to which I do agree.
Good point Sky Sabre is a fine Air defence system, but let’s face it if Argentina were wanting to take the Falklands back. Surely the Argentine top brass would relies that taking out sky sabre is at the top of the Battle plan so they F16s can over welem the four Typhoons.
4 Typhoons.
1 Atlas.
1 Voyager ( might have moved )
1 EAW of RAF personnel.
303 Signals Unit.
RRH at 3 locations.
CRC Griffon.
HQ BFSAI.
1 Infantry Company.
FIDF.
GBAD Battery ( rouled from 16RA )
Joint Support Units encompassing RS, RE, EOD, REME, RLC, AGC, RMP, MWD.
JSSU ( FI ) ( Have a look at what that is. )
River 2 OPV.
Port Troop RLC.
Then you have the infrastructure built up since 82.
MPA, built with flat open terrain all around, and I’d bet my house on there being plenty of covert passive ISTAR around it. Plenty of SSA and dispersals for a couple of Sqns that can be flown in on warning. What it lacks are proper HAS.
DHFCS Radio sites and Bush Rincon and Mocho Pond.
Mare Harbour Port.
3 RRH and the CRC.
“Remote site”
JSSU site.
HQ BFSAI site.
I’m writing this from memory, I’m not infront of my PC with my data base with a full listing, so no doubt I’m missing stuff.
Point is there is more than just an infantry company and a few Typhoons, it takes presence, infrastructure, training, and intent to detter, as well as firepower.
The key is MPA and garrison. Hold that and we reinforce.
Then you have Ascension to the north, bristling with antenna, and AUS and NZ who under 5 Eyes UKUSA sharing agreements also provide data on any planned invasion.
Our embassy in Argentina is no doubt full of antenna and GCHQ staff s well, as will be the SIS Station there.
We are not blind, David, we have an awful lot more capabilty to see them coming now than in 82. And in 82 we saw them coming as well, but the mandarins in the FCO dithered.
HM Forces are at a low ebb for sure, but far from open against Argentina.
Hi folks, Daniele hope all is well.
Very well put Daniele, and the difference pre 1982 and now is the quite formidable force the UK has if if required to defend the islands. Even with the couple dozen old F16s Argentina is acquiring would prove difficult for them to mount an attempt and attack of the islands. I gather the F-16s would require to be fuelled on route and return safely back to Argentina. So I suspect the first job of our military would be to take out the tankers. I gather Argentina are also to aquire a couple of fuel tankers? Maybe you experts can advise on this.
Cheers George
I don’t know about Argie capabilities, and I don’t really care.
But experts in DI at the MoD do, and advise accordingly. It’s their job.
Everyone knows the British Armed Forces are now far too small, so we cannot garrison BFSAI with a full range of assets.
But we have intelligence capability beyond most, and can reinforce where necessary appropriate to the threat.
That is key. Where is the threat right now?
That seems lost on anyone simply out to have a moan about Defence.
Yes agree why do some get all worked up over Argentina. At the moment they are not in position to have a go and retake the islands again. As you say, intelligence is more capable now than 1982. If required we could send reinforcements.
Cheers
George
Agreed. It reads like something of a modern day fortress, or could be anyway if garrisoned to full strength should intel identifying a stirring of Argentinian forces. In many ways I think that’s what gets their goat so much, they constantly whinge about our use of ‘disproportionate’ force in the South Atlantic
Back in 82 maggie was PM, and we had more naval forces. I can’t see the current revolving door at no 10 having the stomach to retake the Falklands. Deterrence is key. I’m thinking the odd beefing up exercise to the south. Fly down 4 typhoons at seemingly short notice and then back again or ship some apache helicopters there and back in C17. Show we can do it.
I like the idea of short notice deployments, again it demonstrates the willingness and capability.
David, that capability in-Theatre that you mention a nd deride has provided to be a deterrent for 44 years!
You do grasp the concept of ARMED forces don’t you? Everybody stationed down there is capable of firing those things that go bang and nasty bits come out the end and hurt people! Therefore they are more than capable of actually defending MPA if push comes to shove,how far is your argie platoon going to get do you think?
It’s not opening fire to deter Argentina. This website should be better than that.
Yes, all a bit silly really. Station another opv, ice capable opv or T31 down in that region for increased presence. Be useful for port visits, flying the flag, promoting AH140s(!) and build on relationships and even some reproachment with Argentina. Isn’t the US is selling them some F16s? Need to keep up good relations with South Africa too. Build on “sport diplomacy” with all the UKs historical rugby/cricket connections which can’t be replicated so easily by others.
I don’t agree, the headline is drawn from how BFSAI framed the operation itself. Southern Vigilance is described by the command as demonstrating the UK’s commitment to the islands by maintaining a visible presence and a capable force, “helping to deter potential adversaries.” The live firing is listed within that same operation, not as a separate activity that happened to coincide with it.
The distinction between “training” and “deterring” is less clean than it looks. Deterrence by presence only works if the presence is credibly capable, and capability that is never exercised is not credible. A patrol vessel that has not fired its weapons in months is not a deterrent, it’s a hull. The serials are what keep the crew and the ship at the standard that makes the presence mean anything, which is precisely why the command publicises them rather than keeping them quiet.
As for who is being deterred, BFSAI says “potential adversaries” and leaves it there. There is one state with a standing territorial claim over the islands, and it isn’t Chile. Writing around that would be coy rather than accurate.
Roy, the gunnery practice was to keep skills current. It surely is one component of a joint force that is down there for deterrence. The evolution showed that we have an asset that works, can deploy and can fire weapons. The Infantry company and the Typhoons similarly deploy to both keep skills current and to demonstrate the presence, alertness and effectiveness of our forces. In defending MPA and its approaches such joint assets ensure that it can be used for reinforcement of in-place forces – that is of more perhaps significance to Argentina.
Despite the recent rhetoric, I don’t think Argentina are in a position to invade The Falklands anytime soon. And if we thought for one moment they would try, I am sure we could fly in a boat load of deterrence in short order. This isn’t 1981 where it takes 2 or 3 months to get stuff there. It would take 24-48 hrs. That said, firing off a 50 cal is not something that would be considered a deterance.
Have to agree. Showing off a pop gun and pretending it’s deterrence is ridiculous. The Argentine armed forces are in a pretty ropey state and we have to hope that’s enough. If they were to make a demonstration, such as occupying West Falkland, I suspect there would be little we could do about it.
Statements like “occupying West Falkland and suspecting we could do nothing about it” are quite frankly bloody stupid! Please explain how you come to that conclusion and state why we couldn’t defend it and list the units etc the argies would use to take it! Looking forward with interest to your conclusions👍
Of several thousand UK personnel, there is an infantry company on the ground. The Argentine marine brigade maintains second batt. of which one to two companies are maintained at readiness, and are involved in active exercises. Their lack is amphibious transport assets, but a single OPV is not too much of a deterrent. There are appropriate merchant hulls they could use, and have done so before. The air cover would be minimal (I don’t know the status of the F16 acquisition). Butcagsinst a surprise attempt, is West Falkland garrisoned by us? The main concern would be MP and Stanley area. Other economic assets? That’s why I suggested it. It would be a piece of largely political posturing, they could not hold it but that would not be the point, if you have Argentine politicians concerned enough to make another rash decision.
All well and good but as you have admitted they can’t get there let alone support and resupply any force that did mange to get there,F 16s operating at the very maximum of their range so not able to achieve air superiority with sky sabre and typhoons giving them grief!
Now even the MOD is not complacent not to keep an eye on such things,build up,deployment and transit over 400 miles of ocean is going to be hard to conceal isn’t it? An astute submarine could be there to interdict those supply lines even if they did manage to somehow create them,that same sub could even threaten any airfield on the mainland with cruise missiles supporting the Argie airforce in ops against the FI.Storm Shadow could even be launched by the Typhoon’s on the FI against the same targets.
With the air bridge in place the FI can be reinforced very quickly unlike in 82!
A bit long winded but have I missed anything?
Plenty! But you’re on point mate.
Intelligence.
Compared to 82, we’re far more capable now.
An Argie raiding party making a point? Let em starve until they decide to leave, or maybe put holes in their RIB.
Question, why do you take such a determined position about the UK’s Falklands presence when you don’t even know about RAF Mt Alice and RAF Mount Byron?
A while back Argentina used their two TR-1700 subs to land troops clandestinely on West Falkland, almost like a right of passage for their marines. They used to either deliberately or mindlessly leave behind evidence of their landings. That were found by the RIC when doing patrols. It was possibly on the return leg of one of these missions that the Ara San Juan was lost at sea with all hands and may be the reason why Argentina didn’t want help from us locating it. The remaining sub, Santa Cruz apparently hasn’t been to sea in a very long time and remains tied up. So is it actually operational?
Argentina always publicises grand schemes on re-arming. A lot of defence contractors won’t touch them, as they always renege on their payments. The only reason they got the F16s was through a deal with the US. Basically China were cosying up to the Government with a financial bailout, with the promise of new defence equipment. which would obviously require Chinese advisors and trainers to be based in Argentina. The US did not want China in South America, so stepped in with a deal. Where they were given ex-Danish F16 A/Bs, where by 2028 they should have 24 aircraft.
This is akin to asymmetrical warfare tactics with us as the smaller force. We need just enough capability to deter invasion thoughts.
When you say ‘the smaller force’, what force do you believe Argentina could plausibly deploy in its current condition?
4 typhoons one river and promise of rapid reinforcement over long distances. Plus many in uk won’t have the will for this.
Fal
Yes I believe the headline was misleading having served with 3 Para in 82 I’m obviously interested on any information, but to see two females one with a smile on her face firing the weapon does not match the headline.
Wow, such an enormous floating magazine of capability must have the argies shaking in their boots. Once upon a time when we had a navy we could send half a dozen properly capable ships to defend a part of our territory not a bloody bathtub toy
HMS Medway is already there, no need to send it, and it is relevant to the current threat.
With warning, which we’d have with any serious Argentinian operation, we can reinforce by air.
The other month medics were dropped by Atlas on Tristan de Cunha with hours notice.
16 AA Brigade for example exists to reinforce out of area, parts on VSNTM, other parts longer.
The airfield with facilities awaits. Voyager, C17 and Atlas are all capable, just too few, as usual.
It’s a pity that no SSN are available as well, one of those and the Argentinians might as well sit in port.
And their submarine i believe was so effective it sank with all hands?
Some capability they have…wow. I’ll take HM forces thank you. 👍
The Falklands is an interesting theatre given it it’s the only active A2AD bubble that the UK has to maintain. Drones should have a significant impact on the UK’s ability to defend the Falklands like other powers are doing in their own A2AD bubbles and should ultimately allow for a decrease in force levels over time on the island.
The UK should develop a rapid A2AD reinforcement capability along the lines of what the USMC is doing in the pacific with GBAD, Shore based ASM and drones. We should train in deploying to the Falklands, Diego Garcia, Camp Viking, Cyprus and Ascention on a regular basis as these islands and bases will become ever more important in the 21st century.
Not being a military expert knowing the practicalities of such a thing, seems like a great idea to me.
No such formation yet exists for the UK, with all those assets in it’s inventory, so it’d be taking them from other formations who are themselves already committed to other standing tasks.
As usual, not enough of anything.
We talked about labd based ASM before, a poster reminded that we had a couple of Exocet on Gibraltar once for a time.
Jim, you could say that we already train to deploy to FI in a modest way. I think that one or sometimes two AT aircraft fly there per week moving service personnel and contractors, at least one of those per month configured for freight. Periodically a Typhoon is brought back to the UK for deep maintenance/overhaul, albeit by a contractor.
Sometimes Army Reserve personnel fly down there for training. Sometimes RE airfield damage repair personnel fly down there to train. Sometimes gunners fly down there to train on Lt Gun.
I believe that the FI should get some of the Reapers (MQ-9A) being “retired” by the RAF. In principle, the Reapers shouldn’t be anywhere near the end of their airframe lives. As they don’t do aerobatics and generally fly above 20,000ft for most of the flight, meaning the airframes haven’t been highly stressed. They could still provide a useful service in the FI. Being used in the maritime surveillance role, especially as it can carry a maritime radar mounted under the wing, along with a RF sensor pod under the other wing. Meaning it could actively and passively search an area. Additionally if needed, it could still be armed with Hellfire. I believe this would add significantly improve the situational awareness in the seas around the FIs. But also act as a force multiplier for our Forces down there.
As soon as I saw the headline and the photo of a GPMG…..it was inevitable…..
An open goal asking for some of the dopey responses and they happily obliged!
One needs to take a wider view. It’s a photo FFS! If people think that alone is what is dettering I cannot help.
Daniele, agreed, and I think the significance of them publishing it alongside the deterrence line is being missed by some.
Nobody thinks a GPMG is what holds Argentina off. The point is who wrote the post and why. BFSAI chose to put the gunnery in, in the same breath as saying the operation maintained a visible presence and a capable force to deter potential adversaries. That is a command deciding what to show and what message it goes with, and they put a picture of a weapon being fired on the front of it. If they had wanted the story to be a routine training update they could have written one.
Presence deters when it is visibly capable and visibly practised.
Agreed. It is not lost on me either that most of the objecting posts are the usual “drive by shooting” types that rarely if ever post on this forum.
In other words, an agenda is underway to undermine, and no amount of constructive debate will alter their line to take.
It’s still disappointing that people will believe all the propaganda against us and not actually open their eyes and ears and research before the spout off! See Oliver Gilkes above🙄
As I suggested mate, in some cases I think it’s by design.
The image you have used here is a Browning .50 cal (M2), not a GPMG.
Who has said otherwise?
Loads of the commentators, it seems a few others have picked it up and are now applying it to you mentioning GPMG’s in your comment.
I think you will find that’s a 50 Cal.
Yes, noted the correction already by Dern yesterday. 👍
For all the “ an OPV firing a machine gun is not a deterrent comments”.
It’s worth remembering the opening moves of the Falklands war..
Essentially the Argentinian government was looking for an easy war.. it have 3 to choose from.. and it picked the Falklands because the UK government had failed utterly to in the 3 Cs of deterrence..
It showed zero interest in its forces in the south Atlantic, it indicated it was withdrawing a the south Atlantic patrol boat and essentially did not show any CREDIBILITY (will to fight and deploy any of it’s CAPABILITIES) or COMMUNICATE its CAPABILITIES.. therefore the Argentinian government figured it was an easy win.. if the British government had for a second put in even minimum effort to COMMUNICATE its CREDIBILITY in regards the the Falklands the Argentinian government would have probably picked a minor bunfight with chile..
So if for example the British government had even one armed Falklands patrol boat and exercised that and the marines openly practicing say fighting on South Georgia.. Communicating its intent to fully fight for the Falklands and South Atlantic.. that war would not have happened.
And if on the 19th marchs grey warfare attack when a group of Argentinian scrap merchants and some little green men raised the Argentinian flag on South Georgia as a test of will, the British government had met it with uncompromising force ( immediately openly dispatching a warship south with intent and making it clear what will happen) there is a good chance Argentine would have backed off even at that point, because if for one fleeting moment the Argentinian government thought HMG was going to throw the bulk of the RN its way there is no way it would have started that war ( it wanted an easy guaranteed victory to placate the masses, not a bloodbath).
In deterrent communication of credibility is everything.. just look at why 19c China with its outdated limited green water navy inexplicably decided it could somehow fight the greatest navy the world had ever seen.
The most hilarious point is everyone having a cry about GPMG’s, the image shows the RN practicing firing an HMG.
River-class is not armed to deter anything bigger than a fishing boat
Sorry, I disagree – A GPMG is very much the wrong impression to give the folk in Argentina. Show them something with a bit more lethality. Instead as mentioned, Show them something with CLOUT, FFS.
An aircraft carrier perhaps,what do you suggest?
No , Just NOT picture of a Marine, shooting off a GMPG, better not printing it at all. As stated, it is sending a really piss poor message. Yeah, a fucking great big nasty big shootie exercise thingy with lots of missiles, aircraft, subs ‘n drones etc, would be great. unfortunately due to past ‘defence peace dividend’ policies. No, but not a picture of a Marine shooting off a GMPG.
BTW, what would you suggest?
I would suggest you wind your neck in and look at the whole defence posture of the FL!read the multiple posts on here and you will see the islands are far from defenceless. Big and nasty things can be down there fairly sharpish if required!
Gosh sorry Jacko n Dern. Wow! that has really put me in my place. I thought this was a comment board not just a chatbox twixt armchair warriors. I have actually been to the Falklands twice & talked to the islanders.
Also I was in Argentina, just pre World Cup.I really still don’t think any of citizens in either land would be impressed by said man shooting a gun off a smallish ship.
What happens if the airfield and aircraft + radars were denied, via container launched drones? Oil has raised its ugly head and there are friends with benefits suddenly a whole lot more interested.
“Armchair Warriors” it wasn’t us calling for something with a bigger punch was it?
Now if you can’t read all the posts on the subject and realise that firing an HMG from a naval vessel is a routine occurrence and not supposed to impress anyone then there really is no hope is there?the islanders made their choice in the referendum to remain British
So be it.
As Jacko said, you where the one playing armchair warrior. I just pointed out that you clearly don’t know what you are talkikng about since you are confidently declaring a 50cal as a GPMG, a mistake nobody who tried to carry a 50 cal would make. And therefore I’m not hugely fussed about your opinion.
I’d suggest maybe learning what a GPMG is and the difference between a sailor and a marine?
Let’s have some Welly put into a visit down there… Hell, roll into a visit to the Aussies and New Zealanders as well, stopping over in Chile for allies things, then continuing around South America to drop by the Falklands.
Stay for a couple weeks, do some live fire drills with visited allies, mock air attacks, the sort, then head North but stopping off at all the British Island Territories we’ve got, saying hello to the locals, giving them something to look at and injection of Sailor cash, then heading home.
I always find it strange to read about the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonisation and its role in the past in assessing evidence from the UK and the Argentinian sides regarding respective ‘sovereignty claims’.
Since when was the Falkland Islands in reality a British colony?
A US dictionary (Merriam-Webster) defines a colony as ‘an area over which a foreign nation or state extends or maintains control’. No Falkland Islander (except perhaps for 3 bods) regards the UK as a foreign nation or state. So why do we even recognise this UN Committee as appropriate to deal with HMG on a decolonisation issue when the FI is not a colony and Britain does not act towards the Falklands as a colonial power would.
In 1982 for a few brief months Argentina was a foreign nation or state that extended or maintained control over ‘an area’. If they ever got sovereignty permanently they would of course be a colonial power by any reasonable definition.
Perhaps we should do what the US did with Hawaii to stave off accusations of colonialism and kill off the self-perceived role of this UN committee – suggest to the islanders that they vote in a referendum organised by FIG to become an integral part of the UK with their own MP etc.
I find it strange that all these armchair admirals are having a cry about GPMG’s being fired and pictures of Marines firing GPMGs, when all I see is a sailor firing a 50cal HMG.
Knew it was an OPV and its pop gun before I opened the article 🤣
Plenty armchair warriors that can’t tell the difference between a GPMG and a 50 Cal at ten paces. Yet pontificate on other much more complex issues. Not sure if anyone has noted that the second tranche of F16 have arrived six months ahead of schedule. What was to be a long protracted transfer is now on track to be completed by early next year. Infrastructure at their intended base is a stalling point but again to be completed next year. It would reasonable assumption to say they will have eight air frames available on a daily basis.. AAR is limited but they are looking to address that..
I can see a situation where probing or nuisance flights are sent towards the Falklands. The points will be buzzed as they come in range. If we try to respond 4 typhoon and one tanker will be inadequate.
Then IF the threat level is raised we will respond in kind won’t we?
With what though. If as per my scenario the Points get buzzed by F16 from northern Argentina do we deploy an extra tanker. Don’t forget it’s not an unusual thing for the Trooper flight to be cancelled in recent years for a lack of availability. Air cover for Medway if she sails west ? A four pronged two ship nuisance probe would require a Squadron to respond to. We don’t have the assets. Given Putin issued a threat to the points the other day. We will have to think about where and how we deploy them. Hartland point is around the Skagerrak I am guessing having sailed minus her AIS signal. It’s a feeble attempt to hide a ships location. Before we worry about next year in the FI, we have issues nearer to home.
Let me get this straight you don’t think that a trooper flight could be mustered if a high likelyhood of threat was detected? Pretty sure the VIP mission would be dropped and maintenance deferred. Mount Pleasant has it’s 4 Typhoons which can protect our shipping at the limit of F-16 range, but has facilities for many more, and contrary to your point we do actually have more Typhoons that can deploy to FI if needed.
The Typhoon force is stretched as is all aspects of defence. Last year on a visit to Coningsby one of the most alarming things was the lack of aircraft in the hangars and on the pan. When we needed to send a ship to Cypress earlier this year. It took a month to get there. We need to wake up.. It all looks good on paper in real world not so much.
Cypress? Never heard of that, maybe you refer to Cyprus, an Island that was behind an entire American fleet… But hey naturally 100 RAF Typhoons could never deal with 20 odd second hand f-16s if you say so.
The Falklands conflict may be 44 years ago now, but lets not forget the British maritime casualties that occurred both RN and merchant. HMS Broadsword and RFA Sir Galahad twice. This must never happen again, and therefore defending this British territory is vital.
Thanks to Cpl Braithwaite for the photos.
Keep up the good work HMS Medway.
Meanwhile, back in the English Channel …