Mirage III vs Sea Harrier (Pt2) - The First Dogfight (01 May 1982, Falklands)
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 10. 2023
- After the initial inconclusive engagements between British Sea Harriers and Argentine Mirages and Daggers, Argentine leadership launched a major effort against what they believed was an amphibious landing in the East Falkland. Strike aircraft were escorted by Mirage III and Dagger fighters. The 'Dardo' flight flown by capitán García Cuerva and primer teniente Carlos Perona arrived over the islands first. They were directed to engage the northern Sea Harrier combat air patrol flown by Flt Lt Paul Barton and Lt Steve Thomas. This would lead to the first dogfight of the 1982 war.
Main sources:
- Douglas C. Dildy and Pablo Calcaterra - Sea Harrier FRS 1 vs Mirage III/Dagger: South Atlantic 1982
amzn.to/3EXYetb
- Jeffrey Ethell - Air War South Atlantic
amzn.to/3sW0pe6
- Rowland White - Harrier 809: Britain’s Legendary Jump Jet and the Untold Story of the Falklands War
- Carlos Perona, la historia del primer piloto derribado en Malvinas
www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/...
Support the channel on Patreon:
/ showtime112
Donate via Paypal:
www.paypal.com/paypalme/showt...
Join our Discord server:
/ discord
Audio mastering by Don Solaris:
• Catalog Entry 101: Kha...
"Hiding Your Reality" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
#militaryaviation #militaryaviationhistory #royalnavy #harrier #falklandswar - Věda a technologie
Not all the assets used in this video are 100% historically accurate. Sea Harriers are represented here by AV-8B Harriers, Mirage III is used for Dagger as well as for Mirage III itself. Three British warships that shelled Port Stanley are represented here by frigates of Leander class. There are not mistakes but rather approximations as accurate models are not available in the platform used for this reenactment. There's no need to comment on that. Thank you for your understanding.
@showtime112 thanks for sharing this stories. As argentinian, thank you. Great work. And please, we all know that there is no simulator with all the historical vehicles for an extremely good historical accurate representation for this events, so please don t be shame if this isn t 100%. Excelente trabajo y suerte 💪💪
Imagine trying to find a game/ simulator where you could find a good representación of an argentinian ITB (Instrumento de tiro berreta) or a tractor with a zuni rocket launcher 😂😂😂. Well maybe the last one in war thunder, i don t know 😅😂
😢
@@juanpablosuarez4910 War Thunder actually has airplanes closer to those involved here, Sea Harrier, A-4B ad Nesher/Dagger. But on the other hand, DCS has the proper map (I love doing video when I have the exact map of the location), and also modern warships.Thanks for the comment and support!
@@showtime112 mirage 3 pilot could have lowered landing gear early to indicate not hostile ?
As an Argie I want to thank you for the great work you make. Such a needless conflict. May the soldiers and their sacrifices on both sides never be forgotten.
Thank you for the feedback! I believe conflicts such as this one should be remembered.
It was a terrible waste of young life.
🤠🙏🇬🇧
So true. A senseless loss of life on both sides (as most wars are)
@@liamhegarty3220 War is a RACKET
As an Argentine, I appreciate your work in putting into images episodes of a war that, due to its characteristics, is technically atypical and captivating for what is the study of a modern air-naval war. There were very interesting episodes that you perfectly recreated for those of us who have read on the subject, for which we are very grateful. You will surely appreciate this interest in the topic in the number of views and interactions. I congratulate you!!! Saludos desde Buenos Aires!
Thank you for the detailed feedback! This is a very unique conflict indeed and it seems to attract plenty of viewers. In the last couple of months, all of my videos that achieved any success are about this war.
I fully agree with you. I was born and raised in the U.K., although I moved away many years ago. I was a teenager at the time of the conflict and witnessed at first hand and via the television the strength of emotions on both sides that seemed to propel the 2 nations towards war. I always felt that it was so tragic and needless, much like the current conflict centred around Gaza, yet once the first rock had been thrown, so to speak, further conflict was sadly inevitable.
The great irony was that Britain and Argentina had a rich history and were previously close both culturally and economically. Even more ironically, much of Argentina’s navy at the time was sourced from the U.K.
The Falklands/Malvinas issue is one for which there is no solution that will suit both ‘sides’, but sadly it is far from unique and such conflicts will, I fear, persist until humans can fully control their tribal instincts, which I doubt will happen any time soon.
Returning to this video, I would like to make one further observation, which is that the British pilots unanimously praised the Argentine airmen for their skill, bravery and professionalism throughout the conflict. The respect that they earned left a strong impression on me. May all those who died as a result of the conflict rest in peace. I hope that we will one day find a better way to resolve our differences.
Argentina and Britain has to be friends as both countries can help each other.
This channel is so well done. Great name pronunciations, excellent diagnostics of the tactics, great recreations of the events.
Thanks, I appreciate your positive feedback!
Fantastic! It was a lot of fun flying with you to help make this video!
Hey, thanks again and I'm glad you liked it! We can try another one in the future.
Buenísimo. No puedo esperar para ver la tercera parte.
Muchas gracias
Thank you very much! Part three coming out next Saturday.
Crazy that the Argentine AA killed their own plane, expecially considering that the Brits didn't have any delta-winged aircraft in the fight an the Argentine AF had at least 2 types of planes of that description. It seems so difficult to have a plane within visual range enough to target with guns and still not ID it properly. Rip to the pilot.
There were some suggestions that Cuerva dropped his fuel tanks and the gunners confused it with bombs but his tanks had been dropped much earlier. The mistake must be a mix of tension after the morning Harrier raid and perhaps poor recognition training.
Well..., there was the Avro Vulcan....
But yes, the Mirage/Dagger has a very distinctive shape.
The early bombing of the base left it in high alert. Cuerva talked with the BAM malvinas control for landing but the 35 mm gun stations were on automatic and when the radar detected the plane, they fired. All those event happened on the last seconds of before landing and practically at no altitude for nothing
Argentinians had very poor discipline in almost every aspect
@@juanpablosuarez4910 whaaaaaaaat they had just automatic Air Defense guns on a frontline AF with friendly aircraft around??? That's insane
Pretty cool seeing s recreation of this engagement, great work as always.
Another great episode! Please give us more.
Thanks! Part three coming next weekend!
Please continue producing these awesome videos. Thank you!
More is coming, thank you for the feedback!
A very interesting and detailed explanation of this encounter, one that set the tone for others to come. Thank you.
Thank you for watching and appreciating the content!
Fascinating video.
Wonderfully told and animated, imho.
Thank you.
☮
Thank you very much for the positive feedback!
EXCELLENT DESCRIPTION. THANKS !!!
Thanks Pablo for another comment!
Thanks for another great video telling the rest of the story !
Thanks for the feedback!
Amo seus vídeos. Que trabalho digno de elogios. Abordagens variadas, inclusive de certas batalhas que eu não conhecia. Parabéns!!!!!!!!!!
I'm glad you enjoyed the videos, thank you!
ENG please!
Excellent video as usual. Congrats
Thank you very much for the positive feedback!
Great video. Very informative.
I'm happy to hear you think so, thanks!
Awesome vid, can’t wait for the rest
I'm glad to hear it, part three coming out next weekend.
What a brilliant video - extremely moving.
Thank you very much for this positive comment!
Excellent video!
Thank you for the comment!
Simply brilliant Stuff Showtime! I have read about these engagements over the years but you really bring the tension and high stakes to life.
Awesome ... looking forward to part 3....and maybe even a part 4👍
Very well done! Congrats! Both Naval Air Squadrons had their own preferences about aerial combat against Argentine aircraft. 801 Naval Air Squadron (NAS) used the Split fighter and hook maneuvere, while within the 800 NAS it was advised to enter combat as fighting section and maintain section integrity throughout.
Thank you for contributing information!
EXCELENTE 👏👏👏👏👏👏
Parabéns mais uma vez👏👏👏🙏🇧🇷
Thanks a lot, obrigado!
Great video. Will you be doing more of the Falklands conflict?
The additional map and info graphic content was a good idea... well done 112 👍
Thanks for the opinion! I try to introduce such elements whenever possible.
Thanks!
Thank you very much for your donation!
Should have done it long ago. These episodes are so good. @@showtime112
Excelente trabajo, gran descripción. Un saludo desde España.
Thanks for the video !!!!
Thank you for the comment!
Another excellent video. Nice one
Nice to hear it, thank you!
Great video 👍👍
Thanks a lot, I appreciate your positive comment!
A pleasant speaker to listen to.
Thank you very much for this feedback!
Excelente trabajo! Saludos desde Argentina
Thank you for your positive feedback!
Nice video 👍
Thanks!
Excellent!
Thanks a lot!
Oh yes an another great vid about Falklands !!!!!!
Thanks for the positive comment!
I love the Mirage III. Such a beautiful aircraft. Great video
Plenty of people would agree! Thanks for the comment!
AWESOME vid 🙏🇬🇧🤠
Thank you very much!
I used to work with Barton and Thomas. Very respectable men who were the epitome of British Officers.
Thank you for sharing your experience!
Excellent presentation! Good job!
Thanks, I'm happy that you appreciated it!
Gripping stuff! Nice recreations too. It is a shame DCS is so limited in terms of air-frame options.
Thanks! Such is the nature of DCS, it will never have everything.
Argentine aircraft simply didn't have the fuel to do real air to air sorties.
True, the margin was extremely narrow.
Interesting, do you have a video about rhe Cenepa war 1995?
Thanks! There is one video czcams.com/video/vX1EtvaHB9k/video.html
A minor pronunciation correction, lieutenants in British service are pronounced ‘leff-tenant’. Aside from that, another excellent video. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the comment! I am aware of the pronunciation but I just can't make myself say the 'f' sound when there's no f letter anywhere 😁
@@showtime112go on, give it a try, it’s quite good fun! ;)
Ah, yes, the imaginary 'f' syndrome.
@@georgej.dorner3262it makes up for all the words we have that feature letters that we don’t pronounce, words like knife, knee and gnat!
A very accurate description of the battle of May 1, 1982, congratulations. Cases of friendly fire in war are more frequent than you think, the Argentines hit at least one Mirage III and a Skyhawk, while the British shot down a Gazelle helicopter with a missile launched from a destroyer. Curiously, Lt. Perona who survived the shooting down of his Mirage believed he had collided in flight with his opponent's Sea Harrier, and therefore the Argentine press claims a Sea Harrier shot down in air-to-air combat. Also note the total uselessness of the bright yellow stripes applied by the Argentines to the wings and tails of their planes, to prevent the anti-aircraft gun crews from mistaking them for enemy planes.
Thanks for the comment! Friendly fire is quite common in warfare, that is true. Regarding the colored stripes, the Mirage III actually didn't have any of those. They were applied to Daggers and Skyhawks.
Excelent .i knew the historical facts but the reconstruction is excelent
Thank you for the feedback! That is exactly the point of the videos, even if you know about a particular historical event, you probably haven't seen it like that.
It was just before I graduated college, didn’t believe it! Went to professional school and forgot about it. Shallow fellow back then.
Thank you for commenting
At both sides, we can see brave pilots! Congrats for this video!
Thank you for the positive comment!
there's a channel here on You tube called '' Belgian voices of the sky '' were a former Belgian Mirage 5 pilot tells a story in Flemish how the British Harriers at Gutersloh (Germany) practiced air combat wirh the Belgian Mirages to understand the flight characteristics of the plane, because the Argentinian air force flew with the same type of aircraft as the Belgian air force . Shortly after the British pilots left Gutersloh goeing for the Falklands but that was top secret at the time . My respect for all the pilots on both sides who did their job in the conflict .
Only the Argentine pilots were truly brave men. They displayed impressive resilience and determination in the face of challenging circumstances, as they valiantly fought with equipment and aircraft that lagged behind their British counterparts by at least a couple of generations. Mirages III was designed in the mid-1950s and first deployed in 1962.
@@DohuuVi The Harrier was also a child of the 1950's/60's, the Sea Harrier was a later development about the same age as the Daggers. Pretty equal in technology but the Harrier was by no means the ideal airframe for air to air work, it was what's available that could be made work.
@@nickbreen287 Semi-agreed. The Mirage III flew for the first time in 1956 while the P.1127, the fore-runner of the Sea Harrier, flew for the first time in 1960 which suggests a technological gap of only about 4 years. However the gap is probably a bit wider than that as the Sea Harrier had entirely 1970s avionics. Even the radar is based on the Seaspray surface search radar which, while not ideal for the air to air role, still uses 1970s computer technology. The Mirage IIIEA was using avionics from, at best, the mid 1960s and some it was older than that.
Thanks for sharing! Yes, the British pilots had one great advantage in this respect. They had opportunities to practice against various types flown by NATO nations while Argentine pilots couldn't do that.
@@showtime112 thank you for making those videos , very well made , top entertaining !
Please..¿can You make a video about ...figth betwen IA-58 vs. Scout helucoptes¿?
Thanks
There are no Scouts in DCS, they could be approximated with Gazelles. I plan to cover the Pucara operations in this conflict so it will include the encounter you mention.
what software do you use for the simulation / image generation?
In this case, DCS World.
Looks good
:)
Glad you liked it!
Those passes by the Leads turned out good.@@showtime112
@@showtime112after the war Paul Barton was interviewed about this engagment and when he was told the Argentine pilot ejected safley (he didn't know at the time) he said he was delighted to hear it as he did NOT want to kill him,only to destroy his aircraft.
@@jaws666 Thanks for sharing the info!
@@showtime112 most welcome,my friend
Exact show like in my book. Was not aware that one mirage cannot jettison his right tank. Other mirage was hit by 35mm AAA .
My book said it was also damaged by sidewinder. Waiting part3✌️🙋♂️
Thanks for another comment! Some older sources said that Garcia Cuerva's Mirage was damaged by Thomas' missile but newer ones say that the airframe was recovered from shallow water and it showed no trace of Sidewinder damage. Part 3 coming out next Saturday!
@@showtime112sée you Next saturday 🙋👍
The Mirage III pilot trying to land at Ft Stanly most likely was either seriously wounded, or out right killed by the air ports AAA. You would think that he would have called in his intent to land and the Argi's at the tower would have told the AAA gunners, also you would think that the AAA gunners would have known the difference between a Sea Harrier and a Mirage III.
Argentinians had very poor discipline
Most of the Argentine soldiers deployed to the Falklands on the ground were poorly prepared/equipped conscripts IIRC
several things here. the attempt to land was called in, but that was still a no go zone and there was a lot of people in between to relate the message to. also the story goes the plane dropped fuel tanks (or tank) and that act was confused as bombs being dropped. visual identification of a plane moving that fast is a bad idea by the time you know what it is, it has already passed by. there was no friend or foe electronic system to prevent this. also the fire control system was inside a van close by, inside which the operator was located watching a screen, holding a joystick and receiving radio messages. at that time the system had only a small black and white screen (size of a medium sized ipad) super low definition, and you only had a few seconds to press the trigger or the target would be gone.
His radio was working because he was communicating with his wingman during the combat with Harriers. He was probably also communicating with the tower but maybe the tower to AAA wasn't too good. And those guys were probably on the edge after the morning raid by Sea Harriers. Disaster usually requires several ingredients.
@@showtime112 Yeah, I can imagine they would be on edge. Can you imagine wearing gear that people were wearing during the Incheon landings getting strafed by aircraft with night vision and basically having to just shoot at sound? Terrifying.
From all the comments, very rare answers we understood that taking off from the continent, and returning without tanker planes leaves barely 10 minutes of combat, and for reasons of fuel economy the Mirages / Daggers only flew subsonic, it was madness on the part of the Argentine general staff to engage in totally unequal combat!!
Yes, Argentine aircraft operated on the edge of their fuel endurance which indeed was a big disadvantage. On the other hand, Harriers couldn't afford to stay in the combat zone for too long either. At least not before a forward operating base was established on the Islands.
I just have to say, this is a great simulation, but those old four fives on the Leander didn’t fire in quick succession like that. One round every 2 and a half-odd seconds from alternating barrels. For 2 years I called an Australian type 12(River class mod-DE) home. I’ve seen them and heard them many, many times on the upper decks, from my bunk down aft(3Pport), and in the ops room as an RP.
Thank you very much for the info. Unfortunately, they are AI controlled only and I guess their shooting algorithm is defined the way it is. I might post something on Razbam discord, perhaps they'll change it.
i'm gonna leave my 2 cents here. the attempt to land was called in, but that was still a no go zone and there was a lot of people in between to relate the message to. also the story goes the plane dropped fuel tanks (or tank) and that act was confused as bombs being dropped, so the radio orders were disobeyed. visual identification of a plane moving that fast is a bad idea by the time you know what it is, it has already passed by. there was no friend or foe electronic system to prevent this. also the fire control system was inside a van close by, inside which the operator was located watching a screen, holding a joystick and receiving radio messages. at that time the system had only a small black and white screen (size of a medium sized ipad) super low definition, and you only had a few seconds to press the trigger or the target would be gone.
There was obviously some confusion there. Some sources say that Cuerva dropped his fuel tanks and that caused the gunners believe they were bombs. But this is probably not true as the two Mirages had dropped their tanks just before the fight with the Harriers. Perona clearly explains how only one of his tanks dropped and he was fighting with the other still hung under the wing.
This art recreation historic work is accurate and immersive AF hat off from a Argentine die hard of this war
A little know fact is before England send the harrier to the Falkland they practice air combat with French Air Force mirage..
So they had a knowledge of what could work against that aircraft…
Yes, British pilots had the advantage of practicing against various types, including those that Argentine pilots flew.
@@showtime112 was anything stopping Argentine pilots from training with other airforce?
@@BigDaddyButthead90 Well, geographical distance for one thing. Political reasons too. When you are a NATO member, something like that is a lot easier.
@@showtime112 Argentina has lots of neighbours, RAF has to fly across the Atlantic to train with the US, otherside of the world with Australia, that's no excuse
The Argies took one hell of a beating by our brave soldiers, sailors and airmen
Informate mas, porque esa fragata en el video es una Clase Leander, o Rothesay, y las que estaban eran la correcto la Alacrty y la Arrow pero son fragatas Clase Amazon tipo 21, y no era el Glamorgan era el Sheffield, te recomiendo que veas la informacion de Malvinas la Guerra Inaudita I y II ... Los vides Excelentes mis felicitaciones ...
Thank you for the comment! As for the ship type, unfortunately the Leander class is the only British ship from that era that we have in DCS World which is used as the platform. The map developer, Razbam originally announced pretty much all the naval assets used in the 1982 war but eventually, they only released some of them. So, Leander class stands in for other British types.
Major advantage for the brits was the latest version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder for the Sea Harriers.
It was, and it allowed certain tactics such as the hook. But in the end, I think all the kills were achieved from the rear hemisphere so perhaps it wasn't decisive after all.
The big advantage of the argentine pilots is that they were above their soil at the date of the first may. So the pilots can be rescued if a drama happened. Unfortunatly in the second case the argentine AAA shot down one of their plane. The disadvantage for the argentine pilots is that the MIRAGE or the DAGGER couldn't be refueled on flight, so their time on the battlefield is limited.
It was not the case for the A-4 Skyhawk or the Super Etendard which could be refueled by Hercules C-130 above the South Atlantic.
KC130H exactement. Je la regarde dès que possible ainsi que chapitre 13 Rhubarb.Aujourd'hui journée trop chargée👎 . Toujours pas ton information sur F1CR
It was apparently a mixed bag. You could be rescued by friendly forces but also shot down by them. And those KC-130s were really, really busy during the war. Thanks for another comment!
Vidéo conforme au récit de mon livre. Par contre pas au courant du problème largage bidon droit. Le pilote a été récupéré par les soldats et évacuer sur continent.
L'autre à été endommagé par sidewinder et touché ensuite par du 35mm AA
@@dominiqueroudier9401
Super pour le premier.
Le deuxième n'a pas eu de chance, se faire descendre par sa propre DCA.
Il aurait pu se poser sur l'aéroport, du moins faire une tentative.
@@jeannezehner9450Dapres mon livre, il a fait une tentative et averti la tour. Mais piste de 1500m donc poser et toucher des le seuil avec ouverture du parachute ( ca se poser a 280). Largage charges externes, en courte finale. Les artilleurs ont pris ca pour des BAP, et pourtant averti par la tour. Touché par du 35mm, ca pardonner pas en TBA surtout a basse vitesse et ligne droite
👍👍👍
Thank you very much for the comment!
That hook attack would concern me for a friendly fire possibility.
Harrier wingman is supposed to be in visual contact with the enemy all the time so I think the risk is minimal.
Were the Mirage III, CZ, EZ or DZ??
The Mirage III operated by Argentina had the EA designation.
Respect to the pilots.
Have you seen the video of one Argentine pilot meeting the RAF pilot who shot him down over the falklands years later? They became firm friends it’s very touching the respect they have for each other despite being on different sides of the war.
Perhaps you mean David Morgan? He met with the only surviving pilot of the four-ship of Skyhawks and I think also a son of one of the pilots he had shot down.
I remember reading about this many decades ago.
So there was gunfire as a Sea Harrier did some shooting but didnt hit anything.
The British thought the Argentine tactics were poor in this operation. Wing Welding.
The Argentine shot down was said to be hit by the Sidewinder and was landing at Port Stanley Airfield due to damage. He dropped his tanks on the run in and so was mistaken as a bomber.
The Vulcan is a delta so maybe that was mistaken for a Mirage?!
Vulcan mirage there is a size difference you guess which is very much bigger
Apparently, Paul Barton fired his guns at Perona on the first pass but this is not mentioned by several sources I found so I didn't show it. The Mirage leader was earlier believed to have been damaged by Thomas' Sidewinder but it now seems that it wasn't.
The Vulcan? I am aware. Spent an afternoon under one as an impromptu umbrella in a rain Strom.
Just because your enemy doesn't have delta aircraft doesn't mean your enemy doesn't have delta aircraft.
A few points. The cannon firing was what the Harrier pilots said they did so would expect that to be gospel.
I was not aware of the Mirage with a hung up tank.
The Shar pilots did say they thought they were fired upon by a R. 530 missile but based on your video, it seems to be the tanks dropping.
The AIM-9L was supposed to be all aspect and that was it's advantage over earlier sidewinder variant. But when the Harrier met the Mirage head on, the seeker didn't lock on. The Matra Magic didn't have all aspect so was said to be an advantage for the UK. However, one report I read said that all Sidewinder fired were tail chasers so no head on shots.
@@showtime112 Paul fired a short 1-second burst at about 1,000 yards. The bullets passed behind Perona´s Mirage. It was just guesswork, that was outside gun parameters and they were not carrying tracers. Seconds later, he fired the Sidewinder.
The Mirage was intact when reached Stanley. No it didn't drop tanks, Garcia Cuerva did that before the engagement.
There was simply miscommunication between the air base flight control and the AAA guns. Specially as the ones that shot him were from the Army and took time for the friendly aircraft incoming notice from the air force channels. There was a lot of interarms infighting, sabotage, jealousy, hidden information and a lot of awful communication channels delays.
So, lesson is don’t mess with Harriers.
Under such conditions, I agree!
Lesson...I you want to fight with harriers just lenghten the fxcking runway .
Operating from 700 km is plain stxpid if most of your jets didnt have in flight refueling..
2 very brave argie pilots there especially the 1st guy that stayed in his damaged plane not knowing when or if it would blow up
Thanks for commenting. It seems like the Mirage leader's plane wasn't damaged until he was shot down by AAA. This was determined when the airframe was recovered years later.
We did have the better plane in the Harrier. We lost only one in this uncalled-for conflict, that two leaders wanted to go head-to-head with each other. Had the Fifth of May carrier been able to put up her planes we would have seen the victory coming to the Argentinians. The Argentinians did their best, professional. Great deal of respect for them.
👍
Hvala na komentaru!
Rolls Royce against a Renault 😂
I'd have thought that the very last aircraft you'd want to be in for a dog fight would be a Harrier. Slow, cumbersome and heavy. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The Harrier had a very specific role...and it wasn't air superiority. The training of the RAF pilots was key, as was the lack of training of the Argentinian pilots in this engagement. Systems failures are the hallmark of under funded, on the cheap military units. A professional, well trained unit in any area of the military will always punch hard and make poorly trained units look like fools....
As far as I can find, the primary role of Sea Harriers was to intercept Soviet bombers such as Tu-95. It was relatively maneuverable under right conditions but it is true that pilot training was probably the dominant factor.
Argentine pilots were very well trained. The ultra maneuverability of the Harrier gave it an amazing advantage.
The Harrier was highly manoeuvrable, it just wasn’t as fast, it’s advantage was it could almost stop in flight, and let a faster fighter, overshoot it , if it got behind it and a lock on it, then it also had the advantage of sidewinder missile system….far superior to the Argentinian missiles….
Cenepa War please
There is one video about that war. Perhaps I manage to cover it some more in the future!
@@showtime112 ooh thanks
Argentine AAA firing on their own aeroplanes, flying slowly & at low level, wasn't too impressive. Excellent film, thx.
I'm glad you liked it, thanks!
the argentinians didnt had a good air to air training, mostly ww2 tactics, only 2 Dagger / Nesher pilots were trained in Israel for that role some months before the war. I think this was the only REAL doghtfight of the war. Then the next sea harrier kills belong to Skyhawks and Daggers mostly after an attack to the Royal Navy assets , but no real dogfights
Yes, this was the only 'proper' dogfight of the conflict. There was another clash that could maybe fall in that category and it will be shown in part three.
Entreterimento e conhecimento nota dez tal como todos teus videos. Estes das Malvinas estão se destacando muito. Muito obrigado!🇧🇷
Thank you very much for your comment, I'm glad you like the videos!
Mirage 3 could have lowered landing gear early to indicate friendly
What can I say, apart from brilliant.
Great video! I love it.
You're using archive footage and background music just like I asked for them, and you're getting better every time you use it.
I recommend you finish the May 1st dogfights and then make a video about the May 21st dogfights by Nigel Ward and Steve Thomas.
Here is a video of Nigel Ward explaining the dogfight at 15:19 :
m.czcams.com/video/5Lw8eWE7aQ8/video.html
Remember, your objective is to make the videos just like the Dogfights series from the History Channel. That is what you're doing: gaining experience and perfecting your knowledge and skills with each video you post.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks a lot for the feedback and suggestion. Today, the third part of the combat on 01 May will be released and after that, I'll make a small pause from this conflict. I'll return to it in the future and your suggestion is definitely a great material.
Its the missile AA that count, the Mirage as a plane is better.
Well, not under all the circumstances. It's speed and acceleration were higher but that wasn't necessarily decisive.
Its a matter of fuel.....mirages operate from 700 km bases.
Sea Harriers only carried sidewinders short range missiles and are very slow with a lousy rate of climb this was well known even before the war. The Mirages are faster and could perform diving attacks and disingage with minimun risk, they also had medium range missiles which were not used. The narration of the event shows very poor tactics for engagement by the Argentinians first violated the fighter formation rule by splitting their flight and then were busy trying to visually find targets without use of radar, both Mirages decended from their height advantage and slowed down to engage, the Harriers are more maneuverable at slow speeds. So the Argentinians gave up ALL their advantages and set themselves up for being hunted down.
Thank you for your comment! Yes, you could say that in this encounter, Argentines blinked first.
Ive read a bit on the Argentine pilots, and I consider that range was their greatest enemy. Had they been able to make high speed, higher altitude hit and run missile attacks on the Shar, history may have been very different. I read Sharky Wards book, wasnt very flattering towards the RAF bomber and tanker run. At all.
Yes, there was very little room (or rather, fuel) for actually fighting over the combat zone.
82ND AIRBORNE
5 Hours ago?? Close enough...
That's your average score I think 😁
@@showtime112
82ND AIRBORNE
I will continue to seek improvement as I watch your videos.
Jose Ardiles sadly was Osvaldo Ardiles’ (soccer great) cousin
By the footage, we can see clearly thas was a slowly Mirage III, not a Sea Harrier, over the Falklands!
Harriers probably the best plane in a dog fight.
Este que veo no es un sea Harrier es un Harrier 2 que es mucho mas moderno en una animación digital ,fijate en los detalles
Everybody who read the pinned comment already knows that.
Harriers are such a gigachad plane
Y en conflicto no actuaron los mirage 3 sino los Dagger que no tenian radares
Wrong!
The weapons made the difference
You can't beat the Brits in the sky.
The air war with the Harriers proved speed isnt everything...
Interesting the UK forces faced French and American made fighters and a British made bomber, the Canberra. My brother was a doctor on Glamorgan but not during this conflict.
Thanks for commenting! I believe this was the only major conflict after WWII that was fought with Western weapons only.
@@showtime112
That was why the conflict was so well studied by many countries.
The Soviets were amazed at Britain's rapid response, and the inter-service cooperation - the logistics behind it all. They changed Warsaw pact strategy because of it. I recall one top US military man saying the USA could not have done it in the time frame the British did.
From all the comments, very rare answers we understood that taking off from the continent, and returning without tanker planes leaves barely 10 minutes of combat, and for reasons of fuel economy the Mirages / Daggers only flew subsonic, it was madness on the part of the Argentine general staff to engage in totally unequal combat!!
@@clouetjp769
They realized that then pulled out their navy and air force.
🇨🇱 Chile was British Allie on this time too. I 🇨🇱🤝🇬🇧
I never realized how lethal and dangerous Harriers were/are in capable hands...Even with it's slower speed compared to Mirages it made short work of them...
Is it because of its unique VTOL capacity or because it's more maneuverable than "regular" fighters ?
I thought the same but I think in this day and age it’s really ALL about the missiles. If you can acquire and track for better angles and range then you could be in a sopwith camel and come out on top!
@@geordiedog1749 That makes sense...
I don't think that V/STOL capacity had much to do with Harrier's success. Not even the AIM-9L missile. Harrier was quite maneuverable on low to medium altitude but I'd say that pilot training and tactics were probably the biggest factors. British pilots had a chance to practice dogfights against various types and pilots from other NATO nations.
In terms of it being VTOL and using that in combat, no. The Americans started doing that, calling it "Viffing", changing the angle of the jet nozzles in a turn to turn tighter. This was never officially allowed in the FAA or RAF and when Hawker- Siddley found out about it they very confused upon running simulations and finding that it shouldn't be possible. Like how a bumble bee shouldn't actually be able to fly the Harrier similarly should fall out of the sky whilst Viffing.
@@samuelwilliams3130 That's amazing...I never knew that...
I think the Brits were a bit lucky in that the Argentine Air Force etc had so many maintenance and repair problems. Their pilots were skilled but their gear was shabby.
Yes, inadequate use of weapons or poor state of equipment definitely helped the British.
Great work. Seems like just about every engagement in the conflict could have easily gone the other way!
Thanks! In wars, things often depend on nuances.
No, just, no. Sorry but when Argentina started this they had no idea what they were up against, as soon as it was logistically possible for the UK to get it's forces to the Falklands. It was game over. Why on earth the Belgrano thought they could get away with going close to the no entry zone then heading away is still beyond me. Even the initial assault on Port Stanley featured the Argentine special forces attacking the barracks of the Marines. Total obliteration with grenades and heavy gun-fire. Except there were no Marines there as they had all spilt up to defend. So from the word go there was no intel gathering by the spec forces? There were losses on the Brit side yes but as soon as troops had established a beach head, and there are plenty of vids out there about how these battles all progressed, it was a British total domination of a lower trained force used for political means which is why it was over in 2 and a half months, including the time it took to sail there initially.
@@danhodge2337 Yes, just yes. The simple act of a couple of clicks on their bomb fuses would have sent the fleet suffer huge losses. Each ship sunk reduces the AA cover etc etc. The net result would have been catastrophic. The paras, by the end, had their bandoliers full of Argentine ammo because of the little that was left was stuck back on the beach head. The conduct of the soldiers was outstanding but suggesting that a win was just a formality is way off the mark. It was a damn close run thing.