PDA

View Full Version : Argentinian Military



Pages : [1] 2

Sturmtruppen
04-24-2005, 02:51 PM
Here some argentinian condecorations

Argentinian order of military merit:
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/MMerit/MmeritIS.jpg

Argentinian orders of naval merit:
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/NM/NMI.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/NM/NMIrev.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/NM/NMIS.jpg

Argentinian orders of merit:
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritI.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritI2.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritI1.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritI3.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritI3rev.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritIS.jpg
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/Merit/MeritIV.jpg


my favourite is:
Argentinian order of military merit:
http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Argentina/MMerit/MmeritIS.jpg

Sturmtruppen
04-24-2005, 03:14 PM
Here is the tank TAM,the standart argentinian light tank:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/TAM%20%20JMB_jpg.jpg
http://arms.host.sk/tanks/tam.jpg
http://rt002ycj.eresmas.net/prueba2/tam.jpg
http://www.ifrance.com/ArmyReco/Amerique_du_sud/Argentine/vehicules_lourds/TAM/TAM_argentine_01.jpg

TAM TANK INFO:

The development contract of the TAM Light Tank, was signed between the German "Thyssen Henschel" company and Argentine government at the beginning of 70-ties.

STATISTICS:
Entered service in 1979
Crew 4
Dimensions and weight
Total weight in combat order 30 t
Overall length 8 230 mm
Chassis length 6 775 mm
Overall width 3 120 mm
Overall height 2 420 mm
Armament
Main gun L7A2 105-mm Rifled Gun
Machine guns 2 x 7.62-mm
Traverse range 360 degrees
Combat load
Main gun 50 rounds
Machine guns 6 000 cartridges
Mobility
Engine power 720 hp.
Maximum road speed 75 km/h
Autonomy on roads 550 km (1 000 km with additional fuel tanks)
Maneuverability
Slope 60°
Vertical step 0.9 m
Trench 2.9 m
Ford unprepared 1.4 m
Ford with preparation 4 m



the VCA is the argentinian standart artillery vehicle
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/SINPRODE2002/images/SINPRODE21.JPG
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/VCA%20155mm%20(1)%20JMB_jpg.jpg

(I can`t find vca info :( )[/img]

Sturmtruppen
04-24-2005, 07:25 PM
ARGENTINIAN SOLDIERS PHOTOS:

Argentinian Marines:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/ARA/images/Soldados%20(2)%20JMB_jpg.jpg

RSB-70 on AM-35A3:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/ARA/images/RSB-70%20JMB_jpg.jpg

Camouflaged Soldiers:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Una%20seccion%20de%20asalto%20mostrando%20parte%20 de%20su%20armamento_jpg.jpg

M72 Prepared to shoot:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Disparando%20el%20M72_jpg.jpg

M72 shooting!:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Entrenando%20con%20LAW_jpg.jpg

Team including a M72 and a Mortar:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Equipos%20con%20M-72_jpg.jpg

Arming FM of 120 MM:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Armando%20un%20FM%20de%20120%20mm_jpg.jpg

Team:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/casco%20CABAL%20chalecos%20Montana%20y%20SEM%2052S _jpg.jpg

Mortar Team:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/practicas%20con%20Mortero%20FM%20Cal%2060%20mm%20C OMMANDO%20FMk2%20Mod_0_jpg.jpg

Gen. Sandworm
04-25-2005, 01:06 AM
Im going to calll you E.S.A for the moment coz its easy. I love your post about the present Argentinaian military. Some really good picks. Im sure you know why this is in off topic. I hope others will post about current military's in there countries. Maybe i should start one about the US but I dont think i know enough. Are there any US soliders out there that can help???

Sturmtruppen
04-25-2005, 12:08 PM
Im going to calll you E.S.A for the moment coz its easy. I love your post about the present Argentinaian military. Some really good picks. Im sure you know why this is in off topic. I hope others will post about current military's in there countries. Maybe i should start one about the US but I dont think i know enough. Are there any US soliders out there that can help???


search in the us military page,like i did with argentinian military in this post.
:wink:

Sturmtruppen
04-25-2005, 01:59 PM
Argentinian Aircrafts:

T-34C-1 Turbo Mentor:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAPI04/images/CDSCI0138_JPG.jpg

T-34C-1:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAPI04/images/CDSCI0140_JPG.jpg

1-A-407:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAPI04/images/CDSCI0147_JPG.jpg

IAI Mirage Finger IIIA:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/mirge_3_jpg.jpg

A-4AR:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/DSCN0160_JPG.jpg

PAMPA:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/DSCN0157_JPG.jpg

FW-190 Pilot
05-02-2005, 03:52 PM
i hope your pics are from mesuem, not the current aircraft they are having now, if those are the current planes argentina is using, they are so screwed
if you want to have some chance to win against british, your government should be going for at least F-14 and F-16 (or simuliar type of aircraft)
however, those are really good pics, i like it

Sturmtruppen
05-02-2005, 06:14 PM
i hope your pics are from mesuem, not the current aircraft they are having now, if those are the current planes argentina is using, they are so screwed
if you want to have some chance to win against british, your government should be going for at least F-14 and F-16 (or simuliar type of aircraft)
however, those are really good pics, i like it

they`re planes used in malvinas,and of old abandoned hangars,i took some of them!!! :) (using imageshack help).

i don`t know what planes do we use now. :roll:

Sturmtruppen
05-15-2005, 09:41 AM
HEAVY ARMOURED VCA:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA04/images/BArt40_JPG.jpg

VTCM:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA04/images/Mor01_JPG.jpg

INFANTRY OF THE ARGENTINIAN ARMY ARMY:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Infanteria%20EA%20JMB_jpg.jpg

EHNANCED AML-90
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/AML%2090%20F1%20(2)%20JMB_jpg.jpg

Ca NBQ of B Ing 601
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Ca%20NBQ%20del%20B%20Ing%20601%20JMB_jpg.jpg

CITER:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Artilleria%20155mm%20JMB_jpg.jpg

TRUCK SEMI-SLUG:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Semioruga%20repotenciado_JPG.jpg

M-548A1:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/M-548A1%20JMB_jpg.jpg

M113A2:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/M113A2_jpg.jpg

UNIMOG:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Unimog_jpg.jpg

Gen. Sandworm
05-15-2005, 12:34 PM
Good pics...........however i have to say F**K riding that AML-90 into battle. Looks like someone took a recon vehicle and stuck a tank turret on top. I think you will find that will attract alot of heavy fire from tanks and planes. Which is bad for the people riding in it. In well concealed areas such as forests im sure it would be great but out in the open seems like it would be nothing more than a death trap. :|

Sturmtruppen
05-15-2005, 04:30 PM
Good pics...........however i have to say F**K riding that AML-90 into battle. Looks like someone took a recon vehicle and stuck a tank turret on top. I think you will find that will attract alot of heavy fire from tanks and planes. Which is bad for the people riding in it. In well concealed areas such as forests im sure it would be great but out in the open seems like it would be nothing more than a death trap. :|

yes!,the most light vehicle in argentinian army,AML-90 works as explorer,but now,that vehicle is replaced by the hummer,or humvee (it`s good writed??)
but it`s still in military desfiles (desfile is when the army shows their units to the people in the city).

,some photos here are old,for ex,aircraft from malvinas war (1982),and other are new for ex:heavy armoured VCA.

Sturmtruppen
05-18-2005, 04:47 PM
MORE PHOTOS:

SK-105
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/SanMiguel2002/images/SM020077.JPG

M52A2
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/SanMiguel2002/images/SM020080.JPG

Mirage IIIEA
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/9738_13.jpg

M-IIIEA
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/7373_05.jpg

Argentinian mirage pilots with their aircraft
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/23.jpg

M-IIIEA
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/47.jpg

new photos are coming!.

Edited by Gen. Sandworm. No more pics or post about the Falklands/Malvinas. :evil: .
-OK

Sturmtruppen
05-19-2005, 12:05 PM
More:

FAP (heavy automatic rifle):
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/FAP_JPG.jpg (this weapon was for the soldiers addapting the docrine "change technology and easy use for heavy fire power and automatic capacity"

FM 81 mm Liv (mortar)
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/FM%2081%20mm_JPG.jpg

The argentinian army has in use,lots of M-16,but the prefered is the FAL,because it has a long history in our armed forces:
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/fusiles%20y%20carabinas%20M-16%20de%20la%20Cia%20de%20Cdo(s)%20601_JPG.jpg

M2HB (really nice mg)
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/M2HB_JPG.jpg

MAG 7.62 and Instalaza
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/MAG%20e%20Instalaza%20300_JPG.jpg

Regminton R700 M24 ( :) )
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Regminton%20R700%20M24_JPG.jpg

Argentine model of colt:
http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/Argentine_Army_Colt_Model_1927_serial_close_up.jpg

Steyr AUG FAA and FAL (our predilected rifle)
http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Steyr%20AUG%20FAA%20y%20FAL%20de%20la%20Ca%20Cdos( s)%20601_JPG.jpg

Bluffcove
05-19-2005, 01:59 PM
if the Second mirage from the bottom is still in service it sure looks like it could do with a lick of paint!

Where is the respect? infact the 81mm MORTAR and MAG 7.62 all look a bit chipped and beaten up! "display peices?" bit gnarly, to me!

Sturmtruppen
05-19-2005, 03:00 PM
Where is the respect? infact the 81mm MORTAR and MAG 7.62 all look a bit chipped and beaten up! "display peices?" bit gnarly, to me!

the 81mm mortar and mag 7.62 are in service today,but in the photo,those have more than 15 years,that`s why they look chipped,they are for showing to the people,the photos are from a exposition in buenos aires of our army.



if the Second mirage from the bottom is still in service it sure looks like it could do with a lick of paint!

what mirage are you talking about?,sorry,don`t understand your comment,my english sucks
did you talk about this:http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/9738_13.jpg

some of them aren`t in service,this photos aren`t all in service now,the chipped and little destroyed units are from the exposition or hangar,the new and brightly units are new.

Bluffcove
05-19-2005, 08:45 PM
The one below the aircraft you showed looks like its been decommsioned for about 20 years, its got rain marks, chipped paint and scabby artwork.

Being 15 years old is no excuse to look rough, you can still maintain your weapons especially if they are display models what sort of message do you give to the world stage as an armed force when your gear is in rag order!

Cuts
05-19-2005, 10:19 PM
......

Argentine model of colt:
http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/Argentine_Army_Colt_Model_1927_serial_close_up.jpg

......

The pistol in the close-up looks like it has a 1911 style trig. although the proximity does not indicate if it was a Colt or Rosario manufactured item.
The serial number could be from either.

However most of those retrieved from the Argentine Military's last adventure were the Ballester-Molina.
This is similar to the 1911A1 in some ways, but mechanically bears more resemblance to the Star Model B, (and of course the Model P,)
from which I believe it was copied by the Hispano factory, (HAFDASA,) albeit in 45 ACP.

This is the Ballester-Molina:
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/ballester_molina_350.jpg
1911 buffs will immediately notice differences even before it's been stripped.

By the way about twenty-three years back the officers in the POW pen were allowed to keep them for self defence after they'd jacked, as so
many of their troops had lost the plot and wanted to slot them !

Sturmtruppen
05-25-2005, 10:03 AM
http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/Argentine_Army_Colt_Model_1927_serial_close_up.jpg

this is the 1927 mod,that`s the unique i found.

Bluffcove
05-25-2005, 10:15 AM
its says 8327 by the looks of it and as ManofStoat says, this is more likely the serial number, than a date of manufacture, I wait to be corrected though as I cannot be sure.

Sturmtruppen
05-25-2005, 10:40 AM
its says 8327 by the looks of it and as ManofStoat says, this is more likely the serial number, than a date of manufacture, I wait to be corrected though as I cannot be sure.

the date of this pistol is 1927 ,the same year of the model

Bluffcove
05-25-2005, 10:52 AM
Seen

My bad,

All apologies.

Sturmtruppen
05-25-2005, 10:55 AM
Seen

My bad,

All apologies.

no prob mate :wink:

Sturmtruppen
05-25-2005, 08:57 PM
FMK-3
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/ENU/images/Inf%20fmk3%20via%20EU_jpg.jpg
http://www.prexis.com/sten/parts_kit.JPG
The FMK-3 submachine gun was developed by Fabricaciones Militares company of Argentina circa 1974 and is being manufactured by Small Arms factory of Domingo Matheu. It is used by Army and Police of Argentina, and also, in semi-automatic version is sold to civilians under the name of FMK-5.

FMK-3 is a blowback-operated, selective fire submachine gun. It uses telescoped bolt, that sleeves around the rear part of the barrel when closed. Double stak magazine is inserted into the pistol grip. Receiver and pistol grip is made from steel stampings, safety/fire selector switch is located at the left side of the weapon above the pistol grip. There also is an automated grip safety at the rear of the pistol grip. The sights are of flip-up type with "L"-shaped rear sight blade, marked for range of 50 and 100 meters. The retractable buttstock is made from steel wire.

It is said that FMK-3 is quite comfortable to use and accurate in full-auto, putting all hits into 125 mm (5 inches) groups when firing offhand at 50 meters (short bursts, obviously).

(this weapon isn`t in service,but civilians can use it,obviousty,buying a weapon license and training for use weapons.)

FABRICATED BY :http://www.fab-militares.gov.ar/images/fm.jpg
Fabricaciones militares (FM)(military fabrications)

the creator of FM:http://www.fapolex.com.ar/images/savio2.jpg manuel nicolas savio.




the investigation works by: http://www.srt.gov.ar/nvaweb/publicaciones/NoticiaSRT/91/CITEFA.gif

citefa made this missile:

AS-25k
http://www.machtres.com/citefa_1.jpg
http://www.machtres.com/citefa_2.jpg.

Sturmtruppen
06-13-2005, 05:13 PM
Argentinian air force (who has the honour of having the best pilots in the world)

Main Marking
http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/americas/arg/argrdl1.gif


im going to find some info about faa (fuerza aerea argentina/argentinian air force).

festamus
06-13-2005, 06:33 PM
Ahhhhhhh. Skyhawk! What a classic!

Notice - an aircraft so bloody compact and neatly done at inception that later in life they had to give it a hump-back just to fit more avionics kit in!

Walther
06-13-2005, 07:05 PM
if the Second mirage from the bottom is still in service it sure looks like it could do with a lick of paint!

Where is the respect? infact the 81mm MORTAR and MAG 7.62 all look a bit chipped and beaten up! "display peices?" bit gnarly, to me!

I remember the last open door day of the British forces in RAF Gatow in West Berlin in 1994, just before the Allies withdrew. They had a very dirty Chieftain MBT for display, and when I went inside, I discovered that it was full of live ammo.
I talked to the squaddy, who was explaining the tank, and he told me that they had one tank especially cleaned for the display, but due to some reason, it caught fire the day before the display, so they had to take a tank from their ready unit... :shock:

Jan

Sturmtruppen
06-16-2005, 12:09 PM
ARGENTINIAN ARMY PHOTOS:
Lohr and Heavy Mor FM Liv Ref of 120 mm
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Lohr%20y%20Mor%20Pes%20FM%20Liv%20Ref%20de%20120%2 0mm_jpg.jpg
Vela
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/VELA%20subiendo%20una%20loma_jpg.jpg
Infantry with a lohr
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Infantes%20y%20Lohr_jpg.jpg
Grenadiers
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Granadas%20de%2060%20mm%20explotando_jpg.jpg
Assault team
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Asalto%20con%20equipo%20NBQ_jpg.jpg
Boat
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/SINPRODE2002/images/SINPRODE22.JPG
VCA with thunder direction
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/SINPRODE04/images/A_1DSCN9448_jpg.jpg

Sturmtruppen
06-16-2005, 03:02 PM
ARGENTINIANS UNIFORMS DURING WW2
they were based in the german uniforms,because,the half part of the officers and a big part of soldiers and sub-officers were germans emigrated before great war (WW1),some of them usually used the nazi uniform.
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argvick.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/arg16.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/arg3516f.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argpalom.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argperro.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/arg1836f.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/arg3838a.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argart35.jpg

all of the troops are argentinian,the uniform too!,and helmets are made in switzerland.

Iron Yeoman
06-16-2005, 03:51 PM
¿Qué es el tamaño actual del ejército argentino?

Sturmtruppen
06-16-2005, 04:03 PM
¿Qué es el tamaño actual del ejército argentino?
what´s the actual size of argentinian army?,i don´t know,but,if you´re reffering to number of troops,it´s really small,we have good equipments - or + modern ,our troops are very well trained (much better than 1982!!!),and actually the morale is high.but you can´t compare this army with the army of usa or germany,because we have a small number of troops.
we have too gendarmeria defending limits of argentina,if there is a war,the gendarmeria has permission to kill everybody in the enemy side to protect our security.

Iron Yeoman
06-16-2005, 04:05 PM
if there is a war,the gendarmeria has permission to kill everybody in the enemy side to protect our security.

¡Debo esperar tan!

Iron Yeoman
06-16-2005, 04:10 PM
Encontré un sitio web que tiene los números para el ejército de Argentina

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/argentina/army.htm

Sturmtruppen
06-16-2005, 05:35 PM
Encontré un sitio web que tiene los números para el ejército de Argentina

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/argentina/army.htm
muchas gracias,me son muy utiles!

Sturmtruppen
06-16-2005, 05:37 PM
if there is a war,the gendarmeria has permission to kill everybody in the enemy side to protect our security.

¡Debo esperar tan!

excuse me,i don´t understand,it´s bad translated,it says, i must wait!...

can you say it in english please

Iron Yeoman
06-17-2005, 09:41 AM
I meant to say 'i should think so'

Sturmtruppen
06-20-2005, 10:26 PM
Argentinian Military Ranks:
http://img158.echo.cx/img158/1512/argentinianmilitaryranks4rs.jpg

Sturmtruppen
06-29-2005, 05:01 PM
Argentinian Army
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/Inicio/Imagenes/slide7.gifhttp://www.ejercito.mil.ar/Inicio/Imagenes/slide5.gifhttp://www.ejercito.mil.ar/Inicio/Imagenes/slide6.gif

pdf27
06-29-2005, 05:12 PM
Argentinian Army
Errr... Argentine private hiding behind a polar bear in a snowstorm on a glacier? All I see is a white rectangle!

Edit: dammit, it's appeared now :evil:

Sturmtruppen
06-29-2005, 05:15 PM
Argentinian Army
Errr... Argentine private hiding behind a polar bear in a snowstorm on a glacier? All I see is a white rectangle!

Edit: dammit, it's appeared now :evil:
What???

i never put insults in the british military topic.

Crab_to_be
06-29-2005, 05:27 PM
Ay! Ay! Calm down Erwin. He's not being rude about the Argentinians.

All he could see is a white square, so he suggested that any Argentine military presence was behind a white object, against a white background. Evidently the comment translated rather badly.

Sturmtruppen
06-29-2005, 05:29 PM
sorry,thanks for help crab,i had a bad translation,but i use the best translator, http://translation.langenberg.com/

South African Military
06-29-2005, 08:40 PM
eehhh, I dont get it? :?

Sturmtruppen
06-30-2005, 11:29 AM
eehhh, I dont get it? :?

you have more than 6 tipes of translator there,i used one of them,i think you used another,and i translate to spanish latin america :( .

South African Military
06-30-2005, 10:09 PM
eehhh, I dont get it? :?

you have more than 6 tipes of translator there,i used one of them,i think you used another,and i translate to spanish latin america :( .

No I dont use a translater, I just plainly dont get it...But you know, in different places of the world, theres different cultures/customs, and they produce jokes, for themselves, not for foriegners to understand. So there must be something British that I dont get... Any help?

BDL
07-01-2005, 03:23 AM
eehhh, I dont get it? :?

you have more than 6 tipes of translator there,i used one of them,i think you used another,and i translate to spanish latin america :( .

No I dont use a translater, I just plainly dont get it...But you know, in different places of the world, theres different cultures/customs, and they produce jokes, for themselves, not for foriegners to understand. So there must be something British that I dont get... Any help?

All he could see was a white square, so he asked if it was a picture of an Argentinian soldier hiding behind a (white) polar bear in a (white) snow storm on a (white) glacier

South African Military
07-01-2005, 08:15 AM
eehhh, I dont get it? :?

you have more than 6 tipes of translator there,i used one of them,i think you used another,and i translate to spanish latin america :( .

No I dont use a translater, I just plainly dont get it...But you know, in different places of the world, theres different cultures/customs, and they produce jokes, for themselves, not for foriegners to understand. So there must be something British that I dont get... Any help?

All he could see was a white square, so he asked if it was a picture of an Argentinian soldier hiding behind a (white) polar bear in a (white) snow storm on a (white) glacier

:D :D k, i think i got it :D thnx

Sturmtruppen
07-01-2005, 11:27 AM
danke :D

Sturmtruppen
07-08-2005, 07:39 PM
i previous posted about the argentinian army during 1938,they had the helmet m-18
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/arg3516f.jpg

photo:argentinian cavalry.

we had other uniforms,and now,im going to talk about the other old helmet.

the paratroopers helmet M-I (from argentina):
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argpar44.jpg
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argpaf4.jpg

and the m1 for army:

http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/ea44m1.jpg
argentinian veteran from falklands with that helmet:
http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argm1sel.jpg
and in 1970:

http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argfaa.jpg

Sturmtruppen
07-14-2005, 09:23 PM
The argentinian army is considered a normal army,of a country of south america.
But you will find a PROFFESSIONAL ARMY,difference with the conscription in the 82 and other years,with experience,in peace missions (like haiti) and you will find the best pilots in the World!.But,it´s very small,it hasn´t a good number of money,and,the people is against the army nowadays,(WHEN YOU SEE DOCUMENTS ABOUT THE DISSAPEAREDS,YOU THINK THE MILITARY WAS ONLY KILLING CIVILIANS,BUT THE PEOPLE WANTED THEM TO CONTROL THE SECURITY,BECAUSE,OUTSIDE,THE THINGS WEREN´T GOOD,AND THE GUERRILLEROS WERE ****ING TERRORISTS,WHO KILLED CIVILIANS WITH BOMBS,COWARDS!)note that we always tried to research weapons,misiles and other stuff about military,but USA blocked us in various chases,Im going to give an example now:






THE CONDOR

The “Dirección General de Desarrollos Espaciales” was the organization depending of “Fuerza Aérea Argentina” in charge of developing the CONDOR PROJECT.



Technical Data of The Condor I:

Aproximate length: 8 m.
Fuselage maximum diameter: 0,80 m.
Phases: One
Fuel: solid, made up of HTPB compounds (Hydoxil Terminated Poly Butadiene, the same one used in the boosters of the Thiokol of the Space Shuttle).- This fuel was manufactured at the Falda del Carmen plant.
Fixed canon, made of compound materials (probably molybdenum epoxy-trioxide resine).
Ogive made of epoxy resine.-
Gear system: inercial-aerodinamic, by means of flaps or dependant on the launching angle flight. It did not have any intelligent gear system.

The Condor I was meant for developing a rocket engine and to probably use this rocket for future atmospheric research, with a peak of 300 Km and a pay load of about 400-500 Kg.

The first static tests of the engine were carried out apparently in the mid 1983’s and it was planned to launch the first Condor I towards the late 1985, this never took place.





Details of The Alacran (Condor I-A III):


http://www.machtres.com/condor2.gif



The second phase of this project consisted of the development of the Condor II, but in order to be able to test the technology in flight they developed the Alacran (its code number was: Condor IA-III). It had a length of 6,50 m. And a diameter of 0,56 m. This vector could carry a load of 250 kg., and would reach 115 Km.- The ogive of Alacran made of compound materials could carry a war head made up of a cluster bomb, which had 1000 grenades CAM-1, with a dispersal spoke of 2 blocks of houses.

This missile used the same fuel and had the same building characteristics as the Condor I, but actually it was an artillery tactic missile, of the chilenean RAYO, though more powerful and with greater reach. The Alacran was shot several times since 1988, including once by the former President Carlos Menem in The Chamical, La Rioja; it was even tested as a head of war with an ogive carrying submunitios.

In an article issued in the Air and Space magazine “Aeroespacio”, jan-feb 1990, that dealt about Fuerza Aérea and about the weapon systems that were being tested at the time, it mentions the Alacran’s compound-material ogive and of the head of war made up of a cluster bomb inserted in the ogive which carried 1000 grenades type CAM-1 . In the text it explains that the earth to earth rocket VT-561 (ex ALACRAN) was being introduced under the project name FAS-320.

It specifies that the full weight is 1532 Kg, with a 400 Kg load capacity and that at the end of combustion weighs 788 Kg (that means that it carried 744 Kg of propellant) and that it has a horizontal reach 120 with a peak of 40 Km.


Technical Data of Condor II:


CONDOR II, was a two phase vehicle, with a thrust vector control system that worked through levelling canon in each phase, aerodynamic areas to control the rolling in each phase, as web. A cold gas sensor package to control the altitude and a final speed control system. This is all controlled through connected-integrated computers.


http://www.machtres.com/condor2.jpg




The complete height of the rocket would be of 16 m. with a diameter of 0.80 m. The pay load would be of 500 Kg and a 1000 Km reach was predicted.

Although this was the military version of Condor II, it also was planned to make a modified version to orbit stall satellites adding another rocket in the third phase.

Apparently other examples of Condor II were completed, but were never tested in flight.

One reason for cancelling this project was a budget one, and it came to an end due to international pressure.

An important part (not all) of the equipment for developing the rocket was disassembled and sent to USA to be destroyed in 1993, in accordance to the agreements signed between both governments at that time.

Since then up to now adays there haven’t been any other official projects related to the development of rockets in Argentina. So all the technological achievements for peaceful projects has been wasted.



http://www.machtres.com/condorx.htm

Sturmtruppen
07-17-2005, 12:47 PM
note that there is more info but its a secret of the government.

Sturmtruppen
07-26-2005, 10:36 AM
This photo is the tam,i already put it,but i like it,so,i put it again :lol: :
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/TAM%20%20JMB_jpg.jpg

AIR FORCE PICS
One of the three operative dagger with the opened cockpit:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/G6C/images/A29.jpg
a guarani 2 on the andes:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/Guarani%20II%20sobre%20los%20Andes_jpg.jpg
BAE Camberra
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/Canberra_jpg.jpg
C130
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/FAA/images/C-130_jpg.jpg.

Sturmtruppen
07-31-2005, 05:54 PM
(Glorioso regimiento de granaderos a caballo) Glorius regiment of cavalry grenadiers (they aren´t always riding horse,note that).They are the presidential guard too.
letter of the cavalry grenadiers http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/argentin/argenb/argreco2.jpg

http://www.argentour.com/images/granaderos.jpg
http://www.tradiciongaucha.com.ar/Argentina/granaderos2.JPG
http://www.soygaucho.com/espanol/noticias/2003/agosto/granaderos/interior1.jpg
http://gardiens.traditions.free.fr/Monde/Argentine/granadero-02.JPG

Sturmtruppen
07-31-2005, 06:00 PM
San Martín (Don Jose de San Martín):

Thanks to this man,southern south america isn´t now a spanish colony.
He left all he had,a secure life,and a long time to spend with his family for our freedom.

http://www.adonde.com/historia/images/1821san_martin_ar.jpg

Sturmtruppen
08-03-2005, 06:58 PM
The following is a list of Argentine Army regiments and other elements, organized by corps and brigades to which they are attached. This list contains only combat units, and excludes combat support and combat service support.

Second Army Corps (HQ Rosario, Santa Fe Province)

2nd Armored Brigade (HQ Paraná, Entre Ríos Province)
1st "Coronel Brandsen" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Villaguay, Entre Ríos Province)
6th "Blandengues" Tank Cavalry Regiment-Training (Gualeguaychú, Entre Ríos Province)
7th "Coraceros Coronel Ramón Estomba" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Chajarí, Entre Ríos Province)
12th "Duque de Caxias" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Gualeguaychú, Entre Ríos Province)
5th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Villaguay, Entre Ríos Province)
2nd Armored Artillery Group (Rosario del Tala, Entre Ríos Province)
12th Jungle Brigade (HQ Posadas, Misiones Province)
30th Jungle Regiment (Apóstoles, Misiones Province)
9th Jungle Infantry Regiment (Puerto Iguazú, Misiones Province)
9th Jungle Troopers Company (Bernardo de Irigoyen, Misiones Province)
12th Jungle Troopers Company (Training) (San Javier, Misiones Province)
29th "Coronel Ignacio José Javier Warnes" Jungle Infantry Regiment (Formosa, Formosa Province)
Third Army Corps (HQ Córdoba, Córdoba Province)

4th Paratroopers Brigade (HQ Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
2nd "General Balcarce" Paratroopers Regiment (Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
14th Paratroopers Regiment (Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
4th Paratrooper Cavalry Exploration Squadron (Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
4th Paratrooper Artillery Group (Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
5th Mechanized Infantry Brigade (HQ Salta, Salta Province
15th "General Francisco Ortiz de Ocampo" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (La Rioja, La Rioja Province
20th "Cazadores de Los Andes" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (San Salvador de Jujuy, Jujuy Province)
28th "Teniente Coronel Juana Azurduy" Jungle Infantry Regiment (Tartagal, Salta Province)
5th "General Güemes" Light Cavalry Regiment (Salta, Salta Province)
5th "Capitán Felipe Antonio Pereyra de Lucena" Artillery Group (San Salvador de Jujuy, Jujuy Province)
15th "Coronel Francisco Bolognesi" Artillery Group (Salta, Salta Province)
8th Mountain Brigade (HQ Mendoza, Mendoza Province)
11th "General Las Heras" Mountain Infantry Regiment (Tupungato, Mendoza Province)
16th "Cazadores de Los Andes" Mountain Infantry Regiment (Uspallata, Mendoza Province)
22nd "Teniente Coronel Juan Manuel Cabot" Mountain Infantry Regiment (El Marquesado, San Juan Province)
8th "Teniente 1ro Ibañez" High Mountain Troopers Company (Puente del Inca, Mendoza Province)
15th "Libertador Simón Bolívar" Light Cavalry Regiment (Campo de los Andes, Mendoza Province)
8th "Coronel Regalado de la Plaza" Mountain Artillery Group (Uspallata, Mendoza Province)
7th Artillery Group (San Luis, San Luis Province)
Fifth Army Corps (HQ Bahía Blanca, Buenos Aires Province)

1st Armored Brigade (HQ Tandil, Buenos Aires Province)
2nd "Lanceros General Paz" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Olavarría, Buenos Aires Province)
8th "Cazadores General Necochea" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Magdalena, Buenos Aires Province)
10th "Húsares de Pueyrredón" Tank Cavalry Regiment (Azul, Buenos Aires Province)
7th "Coronel Conde" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Arana, Buenos Aires Province)
1st Armored Cavalry Scout Squadron (Arana, Buenos Aires Province)
1st "Coronel Chilavert" Armored Artillery Group (Azul, Buenos Aires Province)
6th Mountain Brigade (HQ Neuquén, Neuquén Province
10th "Teniente General Racedo" Mountain Infantry Regiment (Zapala, Neuquén Province)
21st "Teniente General Rufino Ortega" Mountain Infantry Regiment (Las Lajas, Neuquen)
26th "Coronel Benjamín Moritán" Mountain Infantry Regiment (Junín de los Andes, Neuquén Province)
6th Mountain Troopers Company (Primeros Pinos, Neuquén Province)
4th "Coraceros General Lavalle" Mountain Cavalry Regiment (San Martín de los Andes, Neuquén Province)
6th Mountain Artillery Group (Junín de los Andes, Neuquén Province)
16th Artillery Group (Zapala, Neuquén Province)
9th Mechanized Infantry Brigade (HQ Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut Province
8th "General O'Higgins" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut Province)
25th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Colonia Sarmiento, Chubut Province)
9th "General José Gervasio Artigas Tank Cavalry Regiment (Puerto Deseado, Santa Cruz Province)
3rd "Coraceros General Pacheco" Light Cavalry Regiment (Esquel, Chubut Province)
9th Armored Artillery Group (Colonia Sarmiento, Chubut Province)
10th Mechanized Infantry Brigade (HQ Santa Rosa, La Pampa Province)
3rd "General Belgrano" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Pigue, La Pampa Province)
6th "General Viamonte" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Toay, La Pampa Province)
12th "General Arenales" Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Toay, La Pampa Province)
13th "Teniente General Juan Esteban Pedernera" Light Cavalry Regiment (General Pico, La Pampa Province)
10th "Teniente General Bartolomé Mitre" Artillery Group (Junín, Buenos Aires Province)
11th Mechanized Infantry Brigade (HQ Río Gallegos, Santa Cruz Province)
24th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Río Gallegos, Santa Cruz Province)
35th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Rospentek, Santa Cruz Province)
11th Tank Cavalry Regiment (Puerto Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz Province)
11th "Coronel Juan Pascual Pringles" Armored Cavalry Scout Squadron (Rospentek, Santa Cruz Province)
11th Artillery Group (Comandante Luis Py, Santa Cruz Province)
601st Anti-Aircraft Artillery Force (HQ Camet-Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires Province)
601st "Teniente General Pablo Riccheri" Anti-Aircraft Group (Camet-Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires Province)
602nd Mixed Anti-Aircraft Group (Camet-Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires Province)
Buenos Aires Garrison (HQ City of Buenos Aires)

1st "Patricios" Infantry Regiment (City of Buenos Aires)
"General San Martín" Mounted Grenadiers Regiment (City of Buenos Aires)
1st "Brigadier General Iriarte" Artillery Group (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
Army Aviation Command (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)

601st Army Aviation Force (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
601st Assault Helicopter Battalion (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
602nd Attack/Scout Aviation Squadron (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
601st Intelligence Support Aviation Squadron (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
603rd General Support Aviation Squadron (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
604th Support Aviation Squadron (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
Rapid Deployment Force (FDR) (HQ City of Buenos Aires)

601st Air Assault Regiment (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
601st Commando Company (Campo de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province)
602nd Commando Company (Córdoba, Córdoba Province)
(Units from the 4th Paratroopers Brigade may fall under FDR command)
Training Units

4th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (Training) (Monte Caseros, Corrientes Province



with the art of wikipedia!!! (i give the font,then you don´t shout :P) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Argentine_Army_Regiments

Bluffcove
08-03-2005, 07:30 PM
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/images/Equipos%20con%20M-72_jpg.jpg
Are South American AT devices different to the rest of the world, or do the guys at the back jsut really wnat to scorch their chestnuts?

Sturmtruppen
08-04-2005, 07:12 PM
ARGENTINE TANKS THE YEARS OF WW2

Vickers M1934:

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Vickers-Mod34-Argentina.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-VickersMkVI.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Vickers1934.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Vick&Nahuel.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-VickersModel1934-1.JPG

Medium Tank Nahuel D.L. 43:

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/nahuel.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/nahuel-1.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-2.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-DL43.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-3.JPG
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nathuel-Life.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel6.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-1.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-a.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-4.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-5.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-July9-1945Parade.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel1944expo-1.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel1944Expo.jpg
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-Andre.jpg

Dani
09-11-2005, 07:52 AM
Thread reopened.

Found this:
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/BAA/fotos%20regimiento%20asalto%20aereo%20601.htm
and http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/fotos%20ejercito%20argentino.htm
Hope that you'll enjoy the pics!

Anyway, this site http://www.saorbats.com.ar/saorbats_frameset.htm have a lot of pics about South American armies (including Chile, Erwin!)

Eagle
09-12-2005, 07:23 PM
As Dani showed, the page SAORBATS is one of the best argentine military pages. You can find a lot of oficial information there.

Pics from Saorbats:

ARGENTINE ARMY

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/fotos/uh-1Hvuelo.jpg
Bell UH-1 Huey. This model is being modernized to the standard Huey II

http://saorbats.com.ar/fotos/SINPRODE2002-09-29_069.JPG
Armoured vehicle from the Argentine Army Infantry.

http://saorbats.com.ar/fotos/SINPRODE2002-09-29_048.JPG
Argentine-made tank. The TAM is the first tank made in Latin America.

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Roland_jpg.jpg
SAM system Roland, propulsed by a Mercedes Benz truck.

http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/antartico/base_esperan/Fotos_Varios/images/superpuma_jpg.jpg
Super Puma used by the Antarctic missions, specially at the Marambio Base.



Thes ear only from the Army, I'll send more from the Navy and the Air Force.

Sturmtruppen
09-28-2005, 08:49 PM
AUTORITIES:

The Head of the General Staff of the Argentine Army

General Roberto Bendini
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/_noticia/Imagenes/Bendini1.jpg

HEAD OF THE COMBINED HEADQUARTERS

Brigadier General D Jorge Alberto Chevalier
http://www.fuerzas-armadas.mil.ar/imagenes/JefeEmco.jpg

Admiral Jorge Omar Godoy Head of the General staff of the Navy


Brigadier Major Eduardo Augusto Schiaffino

Sturmtruppen
09-29-2005, 12:08 PM
The argentine made TAM Tank:

http://armyreco.ifrance.com/amerique_du_sud/argentine/vehicules_lourds/tam/tam_argentine_03.jpg
http://www.enemyforces.com/tanks/tam.jpg
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/amerique_du_sud/argentine/vehicules_lourds/tam/tam_argentine_19.jpg
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/amerique_du_sud/argentine/vehicules_lourds/tam/tam_argentine_01.jpg
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/amerique_du_sud/argentine/vehicules_lourds/tam/tam_decoupe.gif
http://worldweapon.ru/images/tank/tam/tam_02.jpg
http://worldweapon.ru/images/tank/tam/tam_03.jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito12(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito21(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito17(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito32(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito28(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito31(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito33(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/ejercito34(1).jpg

Sturmtruppen
09-29-2005, 12:12 PM
Buzo tacticos or tactical divers are elitè units who have a great trainment, and they had a great involvement in the falklands/malvinas conflict.
here pics:


http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/malvinas2(1).jpg
http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/malvinas10(1).jpg

sorry for the photos (they are from that war)
i put them because they are the only that i could found,apologies,this is not to flame war.

Sturmtruppen
09-29-2005, 12:18 PM
Member of the Company 602 of Commandos with the uniform for Urban Combat and M-4 carbine
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/CORDOBA05/images/foto2_jpg.jpg


Member of the Company of Commandos 602 with desert or patagónico uniform of summer and FAL PARA
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/CORDOBA05/images/foto7_jpg.jpg
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/CORDOBA05/images/foto8_jpg.jpg

Sturmtruppen
09-29-2005, 12:21 PM
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/ARA/images/Tanque%20JMB_jpg.jpg
VCR-TT with heavy machinegun

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 11:34 AM
The Regiment of Patricios in a representation of the English Invasions of 1806 (and 1807)
here is the photo:
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/_Noticia/Imagenes/diaEA_02.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 11:34 AM
here are more patricios:
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/_noticia/Imagenes/patricios.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 12:40 PM
photos of Malvinas/Falklands war 1982:
Infantry regiment 25

Section Boat of the Mechanized regiment 25
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotosri25/ri2500040002.jpg

Formacion of a section of Compania C of the Regiment of Infanteria 25 which combatio San Carlos, Darwin and prairie of the Ganso
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotosri25/ri25002.jpg

Monsignor Bonamin visits Regiment 25
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotosri25/Ri25015.jpg

More of the Infantry regiment 25
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotosri25/ri25008.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 12:44 PM
More of 1982:
Buzos Tacticos (Anphibious Commandos):

http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralanexos4/Fotos/fotos25/anfibios.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralanexos4/Fotos/fotos25/Hospital2.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralanexos4/Fotos/fotos25/anfibios2.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralanexos4/Fotos/fotos25/santafe.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralanexos4/Fotos/fotos25/anfibios3.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 12:46 PM
Malvinas - Argentinian Positions - 1982

http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos8/012-deguardia.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos8/M134.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos8/SanCarlos2.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 12:51 PM
Argentine Soldiers in Falklands - Malvinas:

http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/foto02.jpg
Note that they were all very young:
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/030-porlascalles.jpg.
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/arm1f23.jpeg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/Soldado3001.jpg
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/127mm.jpg

Rear admiral IM D. Carlos Busser
GeneralOsaldo Garcia Rear
admiral Walter O. Allara:
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos4/Oficiales.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 12:55 PM
2 of April of 1982 the disembarkation

Vehiculos Amphibious of the Infanteria de Marina (AOV) in beaches of the Malvinashttp://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos1/Desembarco1.jpg

Troops with their Flag
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos1/2a.jpg

Galtieri communicating the invasion to the malvinas:
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos1/galtieri2.jpg

Argentine troops looking for weapons in the british prisoners:
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos1/Cacheo.jpg

Argentine Periodist looking at british prisoners,Argentine soldiers in the background:
http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/images/fotos/fotos1/pric001.jpg

King_Nothing
10-06-2005, 03:14 PM
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/4893/f8ea.jpg

Sturmtruppen
10-06-2005, 05:08 PM
oh,yahoo geocities :oops: ,thanks for the advice crab,and thanks for the photo king nothing

Sturmtruppen
10-12-2005, 08:28 PM
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/wallpapers/wallpapers/640x480_08.jpg

1000ydstare
10-14-2005, 09:26 AM
The picy in Erwins post. What/who is he? If he is a sniper he will make a lot of noise (reletevly) because he has a sling fitted. Also he will give lots of reflection from his sight.

He seems to have a cover on hs helmet, possibly for goggles. And is useing a SLR derivifitve weapon.

Also the flag is a bit bright.

Eagle
10-14-2005, 09:52 AM
Is only a demostation picture, 1000ydstare.

Of course this is not his equipment, but you if you want to make some propaganda, you'll need to keep the flag and the designation EJERCITO ARGENTINO. Of course the sling makes stronger to the weapon saw by a "normal" eye.

1000ydstare
10-15-2005, 10:14 AM
What a lot of posts!!!!

I think Eagle was trying to say that the sling would help support the weapon whilst aiming Cuts.

Although I'm not sure this particular sling could be used in taht way.

Is the weapon a heavy barreled FN FAL? The Isralies use a heavy barreled Galil, which is the basically same weapon that their soldiers use, for sharpshooters.

Sturmtruppen
10-15-2005, 10:33 AM
What a lot of posts!!!!

I think Eagle was trying to say that the sling would help support the weapon whilst aiming Cuts.

Although I'm not sure this particular sling could be used in taht way.

Is the weapon a heavy barreled FN FAL? The Isralies use a heavy barreled Galil, which is the basically same weapon that their soldiers use, for sharpshooters.
FN FAL is the standart rifle for the argentina army,but there are every day more steyr augs,m16s and other weapons bought for our army so maybe it is replaced later.

Fuchs66
10-15-2005, 10:38 AM
Although I'm not sure this particular sling could be used in taht way.


Oh yes it can there are several ways a simple sling can be used to help support a rifle the easiest way being to wrap the sling around the left forearm. Speaking from my days in the ACF .303 Lee Enfield and regular army SLR both having similair simple strap type slings.

1000ydstare
10-15-2005, 10:51 AM
Yes it could be used like that, but the sling is not in any way dampend. Which could cause the snipers biggest worry - sound. Specific slings are usually used ie double loop for this sort of work.

Maybe this guy is just a sharpshooter rather than a sniper. True snipers generally don't use automatic weapons.

This would explain the heavy barrel of an otherwise standard infantry weapon. Little extra training would need to be given to the plt/coy gifted shooter and if he were in someway incapacitated any person could use the weapon.

Fuchs66
10-15-2005, 11:03 AM
1000ys I'll go along with that, more probably sharpshooter, in my opinion a useful comprimise between rifleman and sniper and a valuable section asset.

Cuts
10-15-2005, 11:55 AM
What a lot of posts!!!!

I think Eagle was trying to say that the sling would help support the weapon whilst aiming Cuts.

Although I'm not sure this particular sling could be used in taht way.

Is the weapon a heavy barreled FN FAL? The Isralies use a heavy barreled Galil, which is the basically same weapon that their soldiers use, for sharpshooters.

Cheers for that 1000, I had assumed that was what he meant, but we all know what happens when one assumes, eh ?

It is a carry sling rather than a shooting aid, and although most of this type can be hastily adapted as a support, they are nowhere near as effective as a properly mounted shooting sling. The SA80 is an example of those which cannot.

Bbl mounted slings, (or bipods,) have an inclination to move the POI due to flexing the bbl, however that on the FAL and SLR are fairly sturdy and it doesn't have too much effect on man sized tgts at normal battle ranges.
When shooting at longer ranges or on smaller tgts I personally would be inclined to use a different means of sp.

The wpn in the pic is the std Argentine FAL, they also fielded the FAL PARA and the heavy bbl version, (which looks quite different,) known locally as the FAP.
The Aussies and Canucks also used the light support version - the L2A1 and C2 respectively.
The handguards on the pictured FAL are relieved for a bipod, (as used on the Austrian StG58,) but as far as I know it was never issued with one.

Topor
10-15-2005, 03:09 PM
I found that using the sling on the SLR polled the POI off by about 2" at 100yds - not conducive to accurate shooting!

Cuts
10-15-2005, 05:05 PM
I found that using the sling on the SLR polled the POI off by about 2" at 100yds - not conducive to accurate shooting!

Aye - enough to take the rds off a Fig 11 at 200 yds at least.
Although some rifles will be more affected than others, sifting through wpns until the 'right' one is found is not a luxury afforded to Toms.

PR shooters found better ways of mounting a sling so it could be used as a shooting aid, but the sport was emasculated in the UK in '88 so many of the useful items are hard to find these days.
Webbing loops around the aft end of the handguards can work well.

Sturmtruppen
10-15-2005, 07:04 PM
The wpn in the pic is the std Argentine FAL, they also fielded the FAL PARA and the heavy bbl version, (which looks quite different,) known locally as the FAP.
right!,i did not know that the foreigners know what are our weapons and how we call them,the FAL PARA is another model,the FAP is the heavy version,and it finishes with P for pesado (heavy) the meaning (at least known here is) FAL here for "fusil automatico liviano" (light automatic rifle) and FAP for "fusil automatico pesado" (heavy automatic rifle) both them are from the same basis,the FAL,we have a few modifications of weapons such as an argentine colt 1911,the FAL is by far the most used rifle in the entire argentina.Excuse my english but i cannot understand your discussion because i do not know what is a sharpshooter,isn't sniper the same word? (direct translation for sniper is rifle de francotirador that is sniper rifle) and sharpshooter hasn't a translation for my translator.

greetings.

Topor
10-15-2005, 08:39 PM
I found that using the sling on the SLR polled the POI off by about 2" at 100yds - not conducive to accurate shooting!

Aye - enough to take the rds off a Fig 11 at 200 yds at least.
Although some rifles will be more affected than others, sifting through wpns until the 'right' one is found is not a luxury afforded to Toms.

PR shooters found better ways of mounting a sling so it could be used as a shooting aid, but the sport was emasculated in the UK in '88 so many of the useful items are hard to find these days.
Webbing loops around the aft end of the handguards can work well.

There are some very nice full-float handguards available too, which make one Hell of a difference :wink:

Cuts
10-15-2005, 08:40 PM
The wpn in the pic is the std Argentine FAL, they also fielded the FAL PARA and the heavy bbl version, (which looks quite different,) known locally as the FAP.
right!,i did not know that the foreigners know what are our weapons and how we call them,the FAL PARA is another model,the FAP is the heavy version,and it finishes with P for pesado (heavy) the meaning (at least known here is) FAL here for "fusil automatico liviano" (light automatic rifle) and FAP for "fusil automatico pesado" (heavy automatic rifle) both them are from the same basis,the FAL,we have a few modifications of weapons such as an argentine colt 1911,the FAL is by far the most used rifle in the entire argentina.Excuse my english but i cannot understand your discussion because i do not know what is a sharpshooter,isn't sniper the same word? (direct translation for sniper is rifle de francotirador that is sniper rifle) and sharpshooter hasn't a translation for my translator.

greetings.

I posted some gen on the Ballister Molina some months back, can't remember which thread it was in nor can I find it in the search engine, perhaps it has been deleted.


In the British Army a sharpshooter is an infantryman that has undergone training to enable him to select and engage targets at greater ranges than other soldiers.

A sniper is a soldier that has honed the basic infantry skills to the n-th degree.
He will have passed one of the most difficult courses in the army.
When Brit snipers are in-role they generally use one of the AI wpns, otherwise they're stuck with the sack of kak everyone else has.


In some countries sharpshooters will use a scoped issue rifle, (eg Argentina,) some permanently arm them with a specialist wpn, (Russia,) and in others they will use the issue rifle until the tactical situation dictates they be used as sharpshooters. (UK)

Cuts
10-15-2005, 08:42 PM
There are some very nice full-float handguards available too, which make one Hell of a difference :wink:

You wouldn't happen to have a spare one kicking about, would you ?
(Said Dougal hopefully...)

Sturmtruppen
10-15-2005, 08:43 PM
ah!!!,the tiradores de primero (shooters of 1st),those are the sharpshooters,i know well what is a sniper.thankyou,i think it is still there your post of the ballester molina.

Topor
10-15-2005, 08:45 PM
The wpn in the pic is the std Argentine FAL, they also fielded the FAL PARA and the heavy bbl version, (which looks quite different,) known locally as the FAP.
right!,i did not know that the foreigners know what are our weapons and how we call them,the FAL PARA is another model,the FAP is the heavy version,and it finishes with P for pesado (heavy) the meaning (at least known here is) FAL here for "fusil automatico liviano" (light automatic rifle) and FAP for "fusil automatico pesado" (heavy automatic rifle) both them are from the same basis,the FAL,we have a few modifications of weapons such as an argentine colt 1911,the FAL is by far the most used rifle in the entire argentina.Excuse my english but i cannot understand your discussion because i do not know what is a sharpshooter,isn't sniper the same word? (direct translation for sniper is rifle de francotirador that is sniper rifle) and sharpshooter hasn't a translation for my translator.

greetings.

The UK never went for the FN in HB - the 7.62x51 version of the BREN filled the role admirably & more accurately.
The Aussies, Canadians & Israelis went with the FN HB, which IMO was an error - too heavy for an IW & too light for an LMG.


Note: Edited by Dani. Please use the [/quote] tag properly!

Sturmtruppen
10-15-2005, 08:47 PM
huh?,enough fun topo :?

Dani
10-15-2005, 08:51 PM
huh?,enough fun topo :?

Topor just placed the [/quote] tag in a wrong place. That's all. Check his post now.

Sturmtruppen
10-15-2005, 10:17 PM
huh?,enough fun topo :?

Topor just placed the "/quote" tag in a wrong place. That's all. Check his post now.
thanks


filled the role admirably & more accurately.

wrong,us were failing,but if they were well cared fn fals,they would have done a good work,greetings

1000ydstare
10-16-2005, 01:50 AM
Why would foreigners not know about your countrys weapons Erwin?

Are your designations in Spanish?

I think in Belgium, where the design comes from, FN FAL is Fabric Nationale Fusil Automatic Ledger

Edit to add, spelling might be a bit off.

The word Sniper comes from the Snipe, a bird that was extremely difficult to shoot. Only the best shots coud bag one. Hence the sport of Sniping.

The art of Sniping was originally derided as "not proper" within the British Army at first especially during the late 1800's.

The idea that a common soldier (ie a Rifleman in the 95th Rifles) could shoot and kill an officer at great distance was seen as distastefull and rude. The officer should meet his equal on the field and fight them.

Then again submarines didn't take of with the Royal Navy at first either.

Bloody Col blimps.

Sturmtruppen
10-16-2005, 04:06 PM
Why would foreigners not know about your countrys weapons Erwin?

Are your designations in Spanish?

I think in Belgium, where the design comes from, FN FAL is Fabric Nationale Fusil Automatic Ledger.

yes mate,but you told that you do not have this weapon in the royal army,right?

Bladensburg
10-16-2005, 05:05 PM
There is no "Royal Army" Erwin.
However the British Army used the FAL (in semi-auto only form) as the L1A1 SLR (self loading rifle) from the late fifties until the late eighties.

Sturmtruppen
10-16-2005, 05:26 PM
There is no "Royal Army" Erwin.
However the British Army used the FAL (in semi-auto only form) as the L1A1 SLR (self loading rifle) from the late fifties until the late eighties.
oh,i thought they also were royal! :oops: .
topor said:
.....The UK never went for the FN......

BDL
10-16-2005, 05:32 PM
The British Army never used the light machine gun version of the FN FAL Erwin, we did use the rifle version though.

Sturmtruppen
10-16-2005, 06:38 PM
The British Army never used the light machine gun version of the FN FAL Erwin, we did use the rifle version though.
ok,then topor was wrong.
thanks.

Bladensburg
10-16-2005, 06:48 PM
The British Army never used the light machine gun version of the FN FAL Erwin, we did use the rifle version though.
ok,then topor was wrong.
thanks.

Not Quite, he said:

The UK never went for the FN in HB. The "HB" probably means "Heavy Barrel" which is another name for the Light Machine Gun variant. At the time Britain was using a combination of WWII Brens adapted for 7.62NATO (the LMG) and belt-fed GPMGs (the FN MAG).



Edited to add a ) .

Sturmtruppen
10-16-2005, 06:56 PM
The British Army never used the light machine gun version of the FN FAL Erwin, we did use the rifle version though.
ok,then topor was wrong.
thanks.

Not Quite, he said:

The UK never went for the FN in HB. The "HB" probably means "Heavy Barrel" which is another name for the Light Machine Gun variant. At the time Britain was using a combination of WWII Brens adapted for 7.62NATO (the LMG) and belt-fed GPMGs (the FN MAG).



Edited to add a ) .

we also used 7.62,and also,the standart isn't a light machinegun,and ours had a great involvement for internal conflicts (the army vs the army,army vs terrorists,terrorists who stolen army weapons vs army,you know).
and im sure it would have a great involvement in the fal*lands w*r if it was well cared,we should take more care of our weapons,thanks for the definition,i didn't know that hb was heavy barrel.

Topor
10-16-2005, 07:25 PM
Sorry for the confusion; "HB" did indeed refer to the heavy barrel variant of the FN-FAL :oops:
The modified BREN stayed in service right through to the first Gulf War & may still be in service with some units (I'm a bit out of touch these days).

The BREN is a far more stable platform for automatic fire than the Heavy Barrel FN, which is too light to be controllable even on the bipod - "spray & pray" comes to mind :wink:

Sturmtruppen
10-16-2005, 07:45 PM
Sorry for the confusion; "HB" did indeed refer to the heavy barrel variant of the FN-FAL :oops:
The modified BREN stayed in service right through to the first Gulf War & may still be in service with some units (I'm a bit out of touch these days).

The BREN is a far more stable platform for automatic fire than the Heavy Barrel FN, which is too light to be controllable even on the bipod - "spray & pray" comes to mind :wink:

No problem,im also sorry for the bad understanding from my part.

Bren is a good weapon,but isn't it a little older than the FN FAL?

BDL
10-17-2005, 12:11 AM
No problem,im also sorry for the bad understanding from my part.

Bren is a good weapon,but isn't it a little older than the FN FAL?

It is, but as Torpor says it is a far better MG because the FN FAL is too light to control properly during automatic fire.

Age doesn't matter for weapons like that anyway, the Danes in Iraq were driving round with modified MG42s mounted on their little Mercedes jeeps and I think the German Army still uses it as well - the MG3.

Sturmtruppen
10-17-2005, 07:25 AM
No problem,im also sorry for the bad understanding from my part.

Bren is a good weapon,but isn't it a little older than the FN FAL?

It is, but as Torpor says it is a far better MG because the FN FAL is too light to control properly during automatic fire.

Age doesn't matter for weapons like that anyway, the Danes in Iraq were driving round with modified MG42s mounted on their little Mercedes jeeps and I think the German Army still uses it as well - the MG3.

yes it is,we use the MAG (7.62) for MG,instead of the FAL,but im afraid FAL also has that option,however,i think it has the job of multipurpose,as the standart weapon of our army.

MG42 :shock: ,the war changed since ww2!,still in use?.

Dani
10-17-2005, 07:58 AM
MG42 :shock: ,the war changed since ww2!,still in use?.

A little bit off-topic as a reply for Erwin.

Quoted from: http://world.guns.ru/machine/mg08-e.htm

MG3 is one of the most popular universal MGs in the World. In fact, MG3 is modified version of the MG42, German WW2 era machinegun, adopted to fire 7.62mm NATO rounds instead of the 7.92mm Mauser rounds. MG42 was worlds first truly "universal" machinegun, designed for use as both light MG on bipods or as heavy MG on tripod or AA or pintle mount. MG3 started as MG42/59 in 1959, and since 1968 MG3 itself is in mass production.
MG3 is exported to Chile, Denmark, Italy, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Norway, Austria, Portuguese and Turkey. MG3 clones are built in Yugoslavia and other countries.


As for Danish soldiers in Iraq:

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/2609/aal8am.jpg

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/9506/aai4mp.jpg

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/3038/danishmedina15dd.jpg

Bladensburg
10-17-2005, 08:04 AM
MG42 still in use? Yes. Different calibres but effectively the same weapon, I believe some newer versions have a slower rate of fire to save ammo for the infantry role.
Th thing about the 7.62 LMG was that they were Brens manufactured during and immediately after WWII and just adapted to fire 7.62!

Sturmtruppen
10-17-2005, 08:07 AM
MG3 is one of the most popular universal MGs in the World. In fact, MG3 is modified version of the MG42, German WW2 era machinegun, adopted to fire 7.62mm NATO rounds instead of the 7.92mm Mauser rounds. MG42 was worlds first truly "universal" machinegun, designed for use as both light MG on bipods or as heavy MG on tripod or AA or pintle mount. MG3 started as MG42/59 in 1959, and since 1968 MG3 itself is in mass production......

thankyou!,very informative post!,but at least they modified the ww2 era mg,the 7.62 nato is by far better than the 7.92,that's why it is more used in the modern days.
It is a good weapon,but i prefer new fashioned weapons :) .

Dani
10-17-2005, 08:12 AM
...but i prefer new fashioned weapons :) .

You mean with a new layout? :D

Sturmtruppen
10-17-2005, 08:15 AM
...but i prefer new fashioned weapons :) .

You mean with a new layout? :D
right,i was thinking about old fashioned :oops: ,thanks :D

Man of Stoat
10-17-2005, 03:46 PM
thankyou!,very informative post!,but at least they modified the ww2 era mg,the 7.62 nato is by far better than the 7.92,that's why it is more used in the modern days.
It is a good weapon,but i prefer new fashioned weapons :) .

Two words: NATO standardisation. 7.62x39 is even more used than either and it's fairly crap ballistically.

In any case, Erwin, the FAL is from the 1950s, so is hardly "new-fashioned."

FluffyBunnyGB
10-17-2005, 03:51 PM
It could be argued that when you have an excellent design, such as the BREN, 9mm Browning Hi Power or MG 42, for a machine that isn't actually that complex, there is no real need to change it, beyond changing the ammo to use NATO standard rounds.

Long, long ago (back in 1982 IIRC) I started my military career as an LMG gunner, (LMG being a rechambered BREN). I still remember the feeling of quality in the build of that weapon. A quality I found in the SMLE rifle I had, that was slipping in the SLR (FN FAL) and SMG, and had finally left the building with the SA 80.

Cuts
10-17-2005, 04:52 PM
It could be argued that when you have an excellent design, such as the BREN, 9mm Browning Hi Power or MG 42, for a machine that isn't actually that complex, there is no real need to change it, beyond changing the ammo to use NATO standard rounds.

Long, long ago (back in 1982 IIRC) I started my military career as an LMG gunner, (LMG being a rechambered BREN). I still remember the feeling of quality in the build of that weapon. A quality I found in the SMLE rifle I had, that was slipping in the SLR (FN FAL) and SMG, and had finally left the building with the SA 80.

Ain't that the truth !

I would take exception to the BHP though, while a cam is less likley to wear than a swinging link I still prefer the 1911A1.
However we can't choose what we're issued - that's decided by 'greater' minds than ours. :roll:

Lately it's been decided by politicos, and they much more likely to know what we need and want. :evil:

Sturmtruppen
10-17-2005, 05:18 PM
thankyou!,very informative post!,but at least they modified the ww2 era mg,the 7.62 nato is by far better than the 7.92,that's why it is more used in the modern days.
It is a good weapon,but i prefer new fashioned weapons :) .

Two words: NATO standardisation. 7.62x39 is even more used than either and it's fairly crap ballistically.

In any case, Erwin, the FAL is from the 1950s, so is hardly "new-fashioned."
The modified FAL's are and look more new-fashioned than an mg42:

FAL
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EAjul02/images/Inf%20basal.JPG
(ignore the M-72 LAW)

and the MG:
http://files2.turbosquid.com/Preview/Content_on_11_30_2002_07_20_32/mg42.jpg6BE1C831-D72A-4527-B7752B47829795CE.jpgLarge.jpg

any diference?

Cuts
10-17-2005, 05:38 PM
FAL
http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EAjul02/images/Inf%20basal.JPG
(ignore the M-72 LAW)



The rifle looks surprisingly like a std FAL with a retro fitted Para kit.

Topor
10-17-2005, 08:18 PM
Not a retro kit, it's a genuine FAL para 50.63.
Rear sight & folding stock "knuckle" are original & it has the 20" barrel.
Image intensifier comes as an optional extra :wink:

Cuts
10-17-2005, 09:37 PM
You could well be right Torpor, although I thought the 50-63 was available in two quite short bbl lengths.
http://world.guns.ru/assault/fal_para.jpg

Cuts
10-17-2005, 10:36 PM
I think the gods of the keyboard inflicted a typo on you earlier, I've had a check and the Para models break down as follows:

50-61 = 533mm bbl - Steel lower
50-62 = Unconfirmed designation of 458mm bbl version
50-63 = 458mm OR 436 mm bbl (aka 'Super-short')
50-64 = 533mm bbl - Alloy lower

The one in Erwin's pic is a 50-61, as all the Argentine ones used steel lowers.

I stuffed up royally, as I'd actually forgotten about the Para models with std length bbl. Dammit ! I must stop eating out of aluminium mess ti..., er, what are they called ?

Panzerknacker
10-18-2005, 08:09 AM
In the 90s was also in production a a version of the FAL named "Commando" with only 307 mmm barrel and a large muzzle brake/flash cover.

A little info about a Historic plane.

FMA-IA-58 Part 1

http://img439.imageshack.us/img439/9281/16jq.jpg

The Command-in-Chief of the Argentine Air Force officially presented at the beginning of 1968 the requirements to the Cordoba Material Area for the project and construction of the FMA IA-58 Pucará. The construction of the first prototype began in September of the same year, and made its first flight the 16 of August of 1969. The first prototype was equipped with two turboprops Garret TPE 331 of 904 HP, but soon for the series airplanes the Turbomeca Astazou XVI-G was selected, of 1.021 HP, that drive variables three-blade propellers. The Pucará is the only plane produced by the Military Factory of Airplanes that entered into combat, since it was used by the Argentine Air Force in the conflict of the Malvinas Islands. It is a two-seater ground-attack and tactical support airplane of entirely metallic construction, and their general characteristics are:

Width 14.50 ms; Length 14.25 ms; Height 5.36 ms; wing area 30.30 m2; Empty weight 3,985 kg; Maximum weight in take-off 6,625 kg; Maximum weight in landing 5,800 kg; Payload 2,640 kg; Speed at 3,000 ms of altitude, 520 km/h; Speed in deep 750 km/h; Cruise speed 485 km/h; Rate of climb at sea level 18 m/s; Take-off distance 420 ms; Landing distance 230 ms; Normal range 1,400 km; Ferry flying range, 3,400 km.

It count with two Martin-Baker Mk.6 zero-zero ejection seats. The fixed armament consisted of four FN Browning 7.62 mm machine guns located in both sides of the fuselage, and two HS 804 20 mm cannons in the inferior part of the nose.
The cannons contains 270 rpg and a ciclic rate of 850 rpm. The MGs had 900 rpg and shoot at 1000 rpm.

http://img439.imageshack.us/img439/560/plano15fn.jpg

Has in addition three pylons to transport external loads by a gross weight of 1,500 kg, being able to take bombs, rockets or napalm tanks. In the time of the 1982 conflict tests for the launch of torpedoes were made, but did not prosper.

Pucará with the more common camouflage scheme used in the Malvinas-Falkland conflict

http://www.choiquehobbies.com.ar/revista/notas/pucara/perfil1.jpg

An example present in the South Atlantic armed with a ventral container of an additional cannon

http://www.choiquehobbies.com.ar/revista/notas/pucara/perfil2.jpg

Cuts
10-18-2005, 11:47 AM
Panzerknacker, was the Commando produced by FN, under licence or by a commercial firm ?

1000ydstare
10-18-2005, 12:55 PM
From what i've heard the Pucara was a devestatingly effective ground attack aircraft, although a bit weak in air to air.

The Brits saw it as such a threat in the Falklands that the Pebble Island base of the Pucaras were bestowed the rare honour of having a whole SAS squadron (D Sqn i think) and assorted extras such as the NGO parties of 29 Cdo RA "visit" them one night to ensure they wouldn't pose a threat to the British ground forces.

As far as i can recall there were no human casualties, as the SAS ran around the airfield blowing up aircraft with bombs just as they had done in the desert in WW2 at their formation.

A few interesting pictures, (not meant to wind you up Erwin).

http://www.smb.nu/images/pos/0111_elitstyrka_sas_3.jpg

This one was obviously destroyed by either bombs, rockets or gun fire.

http://www.pelagic.co.uk/newsinfo/chronpressrels/images/02pebbleisland01.jpg

This one is strange, it looks to me like some one has tipped it up on end!! Maybe the raiding party ran out of ammo!!!!

http://www.directart.co.uk/mall/images/dhm864.jpg

This is the description for the above painting...


D squadron 22 SAS, made their way to the Argentinian landing strip where they proceeded to destroy 11 enemy aircraft with demolition charges, 66mm rockets and small arms. The destruction of these enemy aircraft, among them Paccaras, most certainly saved many lives among the Task Force and proved a valuable morale booster at the same time.

Panzerknacker
10-18-2005, 02:07 PM
Panzerknacker, was the Commando produced by FN, under licence or by a commercial firm ?

It was produced by FM, the goverment firearms factory.

Topor
10-18-2005, 02:40 PM
I think the gods of the keyboard inflicted a typo on you earlier, I've had a check and the Para models break down as follows:

50-61 = 533mm bbl - Steel lower
50-62 = Unconfirmed designation of 458mm bbl version
50-63 = 458mm OR 436 mm bbl (aka 'Super-short')
50-64 = 533mm bbl - Alloy lower

The one in Erwin's pic is a 50-61, as all the Argentine ones used steel lowers.

I stuffed up royally, as I'd actually forgotten about the Para models with std length bbl. Dammit ! I must stop eating out of aluminium mess ti..., er, what are they called ?

Not keyboard - brain fart(Mine, not you :P ).
The rear sight on the 50.63 is different as well with a sloped back, rather than matching the ears on the front sight.

Sturmtruppen
10-18-2005, 07:06 PM
Not a retro kit, it's a genuine FAL para 50.63.
Rear sight & folding stock "knuckle" are original & it has the 20" barrel.
Image intensifier comes as an optional extra :wink:
Good shot Topor,thanks :D

A few interesting pictures, (not meant to wind you up Erwin).
lol,ok.

The pucara for me wasn't a great plane,apart from unneffective,it also wasn't the most used plane during the falklands/malvinas war.

Panzerknacker
10-18-2005, 07:18 PM
The IA-58 was a very good plane...doing his business, wich is not a frontal attack against a Task force of misilistic warships.

Even a torpedo armed version was tested.

Eagle
10-18-2005, 10:37 PM
The Pucará was only a good plane at the COIN role, as it was made for. It wasn't apt to be used as CAS fighting against to one of the most powerfull armed forces from all over the world. No one of the 24 Pucarás moved to the Malvinas came back to the continent.

The Pucará hadn't the proper technologies and weapons to be a potential CAS aircraft. Neither have its now, in 2005. The Pucará must be sustituted now, as the most of the air force aircrafts.

The Pucará with Torpedos was tried tu put in practice in order to use it agaisnt the improvised pier and ships on San Carlos. The non-deep waters of San Carlos and the little space to maneuver made the IA-58 an special plane to be used from the islands, its low speed could be better than a quickly attack from the IAI Mirage V "Daggers" or the A-4 Skyhawks.
The project finished with the war, the last days of June 1982.

Panzerknacker
10-19-2005, 11:01 AM
The Pucará hadn't the proper technologies and weapons to be a potential CAS aircraft. Neither have its now, in 2005. The Pucará must be sustituted now, as the most of the air force aircrafts.

Well...yeah, I have to agree with you , but I think there is still a gap for this nice aircraft for CAS in the low intensity conflicts.

--------------------

Improved versions:


IA-58B:

This aircraft used two Defa 553 30 mm gun instead the 20 mm HS-804.
As result the lower fuselage presented a very prominent bulge to allow the chamber of this revolver-cannon.
3 aircraft completed.

IA-58C

Very improved version, single place ( the front cockpit was eliminated).
Increased pilot and fuel armor. The nose added a single 30 mm Defa 553 gun

http://www.hangardigital.com.ar/articulos/a-58/charlie.jpg

The fixed weaponry now is : 4 x 7,62 mm with 900 rpg, 2x 20 mm with 270 prg and 1 x 30mm with 170 rpg. The total rate of fire is around 7000 rpm.

http://www.hangardigital.com.ar/articulos/a-58/charlie_corte.gif
Equipped with ECM, HUD and marginal pilons for Matra Magic AAM and Martin Pescador air to ground missiles.

http://www.aviationart.com.ar/galerias/perfiles/pucara/Puca3.jpg

http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/attack/ia58c/ia58c-1.jpg

1000ydstare
10-19-2005, 11:11 AM
A plan that is good at COIN is actually a good ground attack aircraft, as that is what a COIN aircraft would mainly do.

The real problem is when the insurgents have anti aircraft capabilities!!!!

Eagle
10-19-2005, 06:18 PM
I repeat, the IA-58 never had a real capability as a CAS aircraft.

Only the IA-58C would was a considerable weapon (although its horrible appearence), with the possibility of using smart missiles, AA Magic and AS Martín Pescador argentine-made.


Now the variable IA-58D is practically an overhaull to the fleet near of 30 of IA-58A of the Argentine Air Force. At first, the IA-58D would was a fantastic upgrade, with new avionics, new equipments, digitalized screens, smart weapons (aa AIM-9 Sidewinder, as AS-25 argentine-made, laser guided bombs FAS-850 argentine made), rwr/jamming/chaff/flare joint system... but all of we know what happens here with this left-ideas government...




http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/thumbnails/D6_A-582_jpg.jpg
There's a little pic from Lockheed Argentina, where the Pucarás are being overhaulled/upgraded (take the word as you like...)

festamus
10-20-2005, 03:34 PM
I repeat, the IA-58 never had a real capability as a CAS aircraft.

What is a "real" capability as a CAS aircraft???

Bear in mind, CAS = Close Air Support.

Doesn't specify how or for what! :)

I don't see why the Pucara couldn't fill that role perfectly in a low-intensity battlefield. Armoured warfare and you're probably going to find too many threats for it to operate safely. But the same is true of many CAS aircraft. But against light infantry formations, something like that is probably going to do as good a job as a CAS helicopter, say.

The two seater will also be useful as a FAC aircraft, I shouldn't wonder, providing support to the troops on the ground by calling in strikes by fast-jets for those harder targets that need PGM.

Imagine if they had been able to be used properly in the Falklands. Yes, going up against targets around San Carlos would have been suicide, but I think a lot of the battles would have been fought away from any Rapier batteries, and the most you'd have to worry about would be GPMG and SLR fire, and employing the right tactics would mitigate that somewhat.

Imagine how different the battle would be if they'd used those Pucaras with their dumb bombs and/or rockets, and machine guns, to making swipes at UK artillery and mortar positions? There weren't enough Sea Harriers to cover everywhere at once, and I somehow don't see how they had sufficient helicopter lift or suitable land routes to get Rapiers to everywhere the troops were an. Someone might know better, but I just can't see it somehow.

In short - the conditions were as good as they'd ever be for an aircraft like the Pucara to operate in the CAS role, and the British clearly felt so too and went after them at their base rather than take their chances with them over the troops heads.

Firefly
10-20-2005, 03:44 PM
Almost any offensive ac can do CAS, and as Festy pointed out the Pucara, in the right circumstances could and can do CAS. Theres not really much call for airborne FAC today as ground FAC can laser designate etc, but its not a bad premise.

I would think that in a low intensity, low AA threat environment the Pucara would still be a good choice, lower speed, longer loiter etc...

festamus
10-20-2005, 03:57 PM
Airborne FAC are surely more replaced by avionics on the fast jets themselves rather than simply ground FAC's with designators. After all, from the ground you need line of sight to designate targets. I guess GPS, AWACS, JSTARS (or soon ASTOR if you're British), rapid processing of recce data, and of course the dreaded network centric warfare, all play a large role in doing away with the airborne FAC role.

And as for prop planes doing CAS.... *Has the sudden urge to go and try sticking things on the Tucano's at work to try it out....*


(before you say, I KNOW the Brazilian's are selling armed Tucanos ;) )

Firefly
10-20-2005, 04:06 PM
Thats for sure, but modern targets are finiky, especially in Iraq (unless you are US), so a man on the ground saying - third building from the right of the Mosque, the one with the red windows, is much better than blowing away the School down the road.

But you are right, and its not just ASTOR, look to the Mighty Hunter as well. Even AWACS has a role. Or an RPV etc.....

festamus
10-20-2005, 04:22 PM
Speaking of aforementioned Mighty Hunter, have you seen/heard this talk of seeing if they can squeeze what is nearly a heavy bomber out of MRA4??? "How many Storm Shadow can you fit in a Mini... errrr, on a Nimrod?"

Eagle
10-20-2005, 06:23 PM
Festamus you are right in all, I didn't specified that the Pucará isn't a real CAS possibility in the actual battlefield, if we are talking about CAS agaisnt a regular army, normally equiped.

Topor
10-20-2005, 07:22 PM
The Pucara is well suited for what it was designed for: COIN & low intensity warfare.
It was never indended for use in a high threat environment, though its survival rate might be better than expected, due to use of ULL flight patterns & modern armies' anti air being fast jet oriented.

Panzerknacker
10-20-2005, 08:31 PM
The Pucara is well suited for what it was designed for: COIN & low intensity warfare.
It was never indended for use in a high threat environment, though its survival rate might be better than expected, due to use of ULL flight patterns & modern armies' anti air being fast jet oriented

Exactly, that is what I am triying to say.

More info about the IA-58 Delta.

IA-58D:

Basically a IA-58A but completely refurbished.

Amongst the most salient characteristics of this airplane, it is worth mentioning ( as Eagle previusly posted) the widespread use of composite materials in the fuselage, they have contributed to increasing the machine's useful life span.

Some pics of the work done in LMAASA ( Lockheed Martin Argentina Sociedad Anonima, Formerly FMA), in July 2004.

http://img41.echo.cx/img41/5882/d2a577jpg2lr.jpg

http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/images/D3_A-534_jpg.jpg

The new elements includes a new electric wiring and fuel/hidraulic pipes.
Also the proppeller blades and some engine components are replaced for more modern ones.

The more noticeable differences took place inside the cabin, at the controls, mainly in the instrument panel, where instruments were replaced to indicate measures in feet, instead of in meters. For this purpose, Collins VHF 22B, CTL 22 and 32, VIR 32 and RMI 30, as well as a Garmin GPS 150 XL and a Litton HSI.

A factory fresh IA-58 Delta, note the low visibility grey, more suitable for air superiority than the low level attack arena , usual in the Pucara.

http://saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/images/D1_A-524_jpg.jpg

This photo was took in he LMAASA "Flugplatz", just at 15 km where I am writing this. :wink:

Another atemp of an early modernization of this particular plane:

IA-66:

This version made his maiden flight in 1986.
It was equipped with 2 four blade, 1100shp, Garret turboprops, that boosted the performace to more than 600 km/h and increase the payload to 2000 kg.

http://img62.echo.cx/img62/892/ia664nc.jpg

Also carry 4 x 12,7 mm M3, instead the 30 caliber MGs.
Despite the good caracteristics of this plane, the weapons ( and engines) embargo aplied to Argentina in the post Falkland-Malvinas conflict crippled the logistic for the Garret TP.

1000ydstare
10-20-2005, 11:53 PM
I suppose the question on everybodies lips during this topic is...

are the argies a credible fighting force now?

Edit to add, have they swung a way from insurgent fighting and dissappearing people to a proficient fighting force that could fight and win battles? The mountain troops were always pretty good, but what of the general army?

Firefly
10-21-2005, 02:05 AM
Speaking of aforementioned Mighty Hunter, have you seen/heard this talk of seeing if they can squeeze what is nearly a heavy bomber out of MRA4??? "How many Storm Shadow can you fit in a Mini... errrr, on a Nimrod?"

Having spent a wee whiles with the aforesaid, youd be surprised, certainly as much if not more ordnance than a GR4 and with a much greater loiter time, plus the ability to eat a pie every 15 minutes I think.

Panzerknacker
10-21-2005, 09:36 AM
I suppose the question on everybodies lips during this topic is...

are the argies a credible fighting force now?

Edit to add, have they swung a way from insurgent fighting and dissappearing people to a proficient fighting force that could fight and win battles? The mountain troops were always pretty good, but what of the general army?

Well....considering the losses of the sustain by the Britons I think they are.

I dont have any sympaty with the military goverment, I just give my opinion.

Anyway I read the Mod saying "No more Falklands.Malvinas threads"...so I stop right here :roll:

1000ydstare
10-21-2005, 01:07 PM
This isn't a Falklands thread. This is about the Argentine military is it not?

What does this mean?


Well....considering the losses of the sustain by the Britons I think they are.

Any losses sustained by the Argie military by the Brits were 23+ years ago!!! Surely these losses have long been made good.

I know the Argie forces have been used on Cyprus and in the Balkans in peacekeeper roles. (Have they done anything else?)

Are the Argie forces capable of operating independantly of UN, or similar, frameworks? In either Passive or Aggressive roles?

Are they only able to operate inside the sphere of infulence of the Argentine mainland. Or is Argentina able to project power?

This isn't a question on the lines of could you take the Falklands, just what state your forces are in.

What is pay like in your forces?

Morale of troops?

Standard and quantity of equipment?

Workload?

Working conditions?

Are they all pro's or do you still have conscripts going through?

Firefly
10-21-2005, 03:35 PM
I suppose the question on everybodies lips during this topic is...

are the argies a credible fighting force now?

Edit to add, have they swung a way from insurgent fighting and dissappearing people to a proficient fighting force that could fight and win battles? The mountain troops were always pretty good, but what of the general army?

Well....considering the losses of the sustain by the Britons I think they are.

I dont have any sympaty with the military goverment, I just give my opinion.

Anyway I read the Mod saying "No more Falklands.Malvinas threads"...so I stop right here :roll:

Do you have any idea of the British Armed forces overall strength in 1982? A tiny proportion of the Army was involved, a bigger proportion of the RAF was involved, but not that much, and a significant proportion of the Navy was involved, but again, a lot stayed at home.

The British Amy in Germany (BAOR) had 3 full Divisions.

So to say the British sufferred losses that could not be easily replaced is a bit far off the mark.

1000ydstare
10-21-2005, 03:50 PM
Was he referring to the Brit losses?

If so he is so far off the mark it's unreal. Argie losses were massive compared to Brit losses, but I digress.

Any chance of a confirmation of what you meant Panzerknacker?

Panzerknacker
10-21-2005, 07:08 PM
This isn't a Falklands thread. This is about the Argentine military is it not?

What does this mean?


Well....considering the losses of the sustain by the Britons I think they are.

Any losses sustained by the Argie military by the Brits were 23+ years ago!!! Surely these losses have long been made good.

I know the Argie forces have been used on Cyprus and in the Balkans in peacekeeper roles. (Have they done anything else?)

Are the Argie forces capable of operating independantly of UN, or similar, frameworks? In either Passive or Aggressive roles?

Are they only able to operate inside the sphere of infulence of the Argentine mainland. Or is Argentina able to project power?

This isn't a question on the lines of could you take the Falklands, just what state your forces are in.

What is pay like in your forces?

Morale of troops?

Standard and quantity of equipment?

Workload?

Working conditions?

Are they all pro's or do you still have conscripts going through?


Well...as you was talking about insurgents, and desapearing people I assume that you are talking about the Malvinas-Falkland conflict.

And I am sorry , but I am an aviation related guy, and dont have all the information you asked me. :roll:

The only that I can tell you is the army dont see any combat since, and as you say in employed in the UN peace enforcing Task. Actually I know that they are in Cyprus , Haiti and some country in the Balkans ( not sure wich one)

Thanks god the concription sistem was eliminated in 1994 by the president Menem and the actual Army/ Armada/ Air Force is an corps of entire professional staff.

In my opinion is a very good combat force , his mayor defect...The small size.


If so he is so far off the mark it's unreal. Argie losses were massive compared to Brit losses, but I digress.

Probably yes if you talking about personal, the equipment losses are more equilibrated. Off course, the captured Argentine material was big.

It wasnt my intention to restart the 1982 topic.

1000ydstare
10-21-2005, 08:18 PM
you was talking about insurgents, and desapearing people I assume that you are talking about the Malvinas-Falkland conflict

To my knowledge nobody was disappeared on the Falklands so no i was not on about that little spat.

Are there any new planes in service with the Argie air force?

Panzerknacker
10-21-2005, 08:28 PM
Are there any new planes in service with the Argie air force?

I have no information about these, I only know about the Fuerza Aerea Argentina = Argentine Air Force..

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 05:28 AM
Riiigghhhttt. :shock:

OK then, moving swiftly on. :?

It appears that certain headbangers get there knickers in a twist when certain things are mentioned. No matter. I will continue with my pursuit for information. But will ensure that no insult is implied within the content.

If I want to insult someone on this site I will do it like this...


(name here), you're a mentalist!

For example. :twisted:

Back to my questions. I will re ask a question which will be highly specific about the Argentine military.

The question will, unfortunatly, have a small reference to the Falklands and mention of previous activities carried out by the Argentine military that may upset some of the loons from down south but this is a. neccesary and b. only a reference not an invite for some kind of arguement.

Hopefully some of the more saner persona from down south will be able to answer the following...

As we know Argentina had a conscript army, however in the time of the Junta this army was also used extensivly in various counter insurgency operations and in various roles defending the borders of the country.

The military were also used in various darker roles such as the murdering of their fellow countrymen and women who dared to say that the Junta might not be a good government.

This has now been changed in the last few years. Conscripts are no longer pressed in to service. But are there any still serving their time?

I can't remember exactly but the conscripts did either one or two years in the army, with a further 1 year or so on reserve just in case, so although the conscription has ceased what happened to those already serving?

What were the general opionions of the populace on conscription? Did they support it or did they oppose it? Did this change after the Falklands, when many conscripts lives were, essentially, wasted?

Obviously we know that conscripts were used in the Falklands but was this an exception or a rule? Were conscripts used for other war fighting roles such as COIN or border security?

Are the conscripts used for anything else? For example in Tunisia the Tunisian conscripts are used for labour, they carry out various construction projects such as the maintainence of varoious desert roads. The volunteer/professional side of the army handles any border security issues, etc.

Has the size of the military decreased drastically? Obviously to maintain the size of the force with out conscription would require massive recruitment drives bordering on conscription!!!

What of the young lads who aren't going to be conscripted? We know Erwin missed the draught but he joined anyway, is this normal? Is it seen as correct that you join the army anyway and serve your country. Is there any stigma against those who do not choose to join?

What is life like in the Argentine forces? Again, Erwin has supplied us with various hints such as getting beaten but is this an exception or the rule? Has it changed much since the conscript side has been dropped?

I am aware of one or two incidents during the Falklands when the the regular professional troops used, shall we say, the more robust motivational techniques to get the conscripts to fight. Was this standard practice or just merely because they were at war and it was going slightly worse than expected?

Any sane responses greatfully appreciated.

If you are foaming at the mouth whilst typeing please don't press the submit button. :D

Cuts
10-22-2005, 05:53 AM
1000yds, on the constitutional side I've found this:

1 Conscription

conscription not enforced

Conscription is enshrined in art. 21 of the Argentine constitution which states: "Every Argentine citizen is obliged to bear arms in defence of his country and of this Constitution". Yet, there has been no compulsory military service since 1994. However, in the event of armed conflict or a national emergency, conscription may be re-introduced. The 5 January 1995 Law on Voluntary Military Service (Law no. 24.429 Servicio Militar Voluntario) regulates military service. According to this law, military service is performed by volunteers. But, if insufficient volunteers present themselves for enlistment in the armed forces, art. 19 of Law 24.429 allows the government to introduce compulsory military service. Such decision must be approved by the National Congress. In that case 18-year-old men may be called up for up to a year's military service under the terms set out by the previous Law 17.531 on Compulsory Military Service. [6] [8] [11]

recruitment

All men and women aged 18 to 24 may volunteer for performing military service. [3]


2 Conscientious objection

legal right

In case the government decides to introduce conscription, all conscripts have a right to conscientious objection. Art. 20 of Law 24.429 states that individuals who, for "profound religious, philosophical, or moral reasons," are unable to perform their compulsory military service will be required to perform a substitute social service. This may be performed in such areas as public health and environmental projects, but in wartime it must consist of activities to do with civil protection and defence. [4] [6]

procedure and practice

How this right is exercised in practice is not known, as from 1995 onwards conscription has not been enforced.

It is neither clear whether those serving voluntarily are entitled to be released from the armed forces should they become COs.


3 Draft evasion and desertion

penalties

Deserters are tried by military courts, but the punishment for desertion is not known. When desertion is regarded as treason, the Code of Military Justice permits the death sentence.

practice

From 1987 on all military court verdicts have had to be reviewed by the civilian federal court of appeals. [9]

When the 1995 Law on Voluntary Military Service was passed, all deserters and draft evaders were amnestied. [3]


5 History
Up to 1995 there was compulsory military service. Young men were registered as conscripts when they were 17 and were called up to perform military service at 18. In the years before 1995 only 10 percent of conscripts actually served. Approximately 90 percent were exempted - either by lot, or because of physical disability or by paying a sum of money. [5]

President Menem decided to abolish compulsory military service on 13 June 1994 and the Law on Voluntary Military Service was passed in January 1995. This surprisingly swift achievement of abolition was partly due to the public backlash over the beating to death of Omar Carrasco, a young army recruit, on 6 March 1994. Although there had been many cases of conscripts suffering human rights violations, this time the family denounced the incident and received enormous public support over their demand for justice. Two conscripts, a sergeant and one lieutenant, accused to have participated in the death of Carrasco, are in jail but all claim they are not guilty. A trial is going on to judge those who tried to cover up the case, but sofar no military has been found guilty. [2] [10]

Before the 1995 law was passed there was no legal provision for conscientious objection. Refusal to perform military service was punishable by up to four years' imprisonment. Several Jehovah's Witnesses have served three to four year prison sentences in the Campo the Mayo, the largest military base in Argentine. In the past COs have also been sentenced to perform a year's non-combatant service in the armed forces.

Ever since 1984, following the Falkland/Malvinas War, FOSMO (Frente Opositor al Servicio Militar Obligatorio - Front Opposing Compulsory Military Service) has campaigned both for the right to conscientious objection and for the abolition of compulsory military service. [1] [5] [7]


6 Annual statistics

The armed forces comprise 73,000 troops, which is about 0.21 percent of the population. There is a 375,000 strong reserve force. [12]

In the final years of conscription only some 16,000 conscripts served annually, that is 10 percent of the total number of conscripts. But when conscription was abolished, the military said they required 26,500 volunteers. In 1994 there were more than 200 COs. [3]

Sources

[1] Amnesty International 1991. Conscientious objection to military service. AI, London, UK. [2] Wandelaer, Juan de 1994. Letter to WRI-office 16 June 1994 [3] Wandelaer, Juan de 1994. Argentina: voluntary military service? Letter to Peace News, 30 August 1994. [4] Boletin Official No. 28.057, 10 January 1995. Ley No. 24.429 Servicio Militar Voluntario. [5] ROLC 1994. Informe del taller de formacion para la objecion de consciencia i encuentro latinoamericano de objecion de consciencia. Serpaj, Asuncion, Paraguay. [6] Toney, R.J. 1996. Military Service, Alternative Social Service, and Conscientious Objection in the Americas: A Brief Survey of Selected Countries. NISBCO, Washington DC, USA. [7] UN Commission on Human Rights, 1991. Report of the Secretary-General prepared pursuant to Commission resolution 1989/59. United Nations, Geneva. [8] UN Commission on Human Rights, 1997. The question of conscientious objection to military service, report of the Secretary-General prepared pursuant to Commission resolution 1995/83. United Nations, Geneva. [9] Amnesty International 1989. When The State Kills... The Death Penalty: A Human Rights Issue. AI, USA, New York. [10] US State Department 1995. Human rights practices for the year 1994. Country reports. USA, New York. [11] Wandelaer, Juan de 1997. Corrections to the draft report. Acci--n Directa No-violenta, Buenos Aires, Argentine. [12] Institute for Strategic Studies 1997. Military Balance 1997/98. ISS, London, UK.
http://www.wri-irg.org/co/rtba/argentina.htm

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 06:16 AM
Quite interesting Cuts!!!

Couldn't remember if it was one year or two in service.

Should have remembered really. Read somewhere there was uproar in the forces reference the descision not to extend the 1981 intakes service so they could go to the Falklands instead of the 82 intake.

I believe conscripts are supposed to turn up early in first January of their 18th year but some are still coming in during February. It takes all year pretty much to train them, so by April they are still pretty green. They only get trained on support weapons towards the end of their service, by the time of the war few of them could even carry out effective section attacks!!!

Anyone in ARGCON serve as a conscript? or know anyone that did?

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 10:55 AM
What is life like in the Argentine forces? Again, Erwin has supplied us with various hints such as getting beaten but is this an exception or the rule?

hey!,it wasn't conscription or what the **** it is called,it is the army.you join to the army,you do bad,they kick you,you join to the army,you don't like,you abandon.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:01 AM
I think you'll find I have mentioned that you service was not forced upon you as a conscript earlier on.

What is life like in the Argetine army?

What time do you wake up? what do you do for PT?

Crab_to_be
10-22-2005, 11:02 AM
Calm down Erwin. There's nothing here to get worked up about.

Firefly
10-22-2005, 11:10 AM
I can give you my experience of life in the RAF. We wake up about ten and our Sergeants bring us tea and biscuits. Then its a slow ramble to work, dressed in what comes to hand. Elevenses at eleven, lunch 1130 till 1330. Then afternoon tea break 2-3 and finish at 4 and off to the Mess for a six course Dinner, before supper, when again the nice Sergeant will bring more teas and a scone. It is hell, but someone has to do it!

Note, this may vary between airforces, but not by much in my experience.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:11 AM
Agreed the RAF do tend to have it down pat!!!!

pdf27
10-22-2005, 11:13 AM
I can give you my experience of life in the RAF. We wake up about ten and our Sergeants bring us tea and biscuits. Then its a slow ramble to work, dressed in what comes to hand. Elevenses at eleven, lunch 1130 till 1330. Then afternoon tea break 2-3 and finish at 4 and off to the Mess for a six course Dinner, before supper, when again the nice Sergeant will bring more teas and a scone. It is hell, but someone has to do it!

Note, this may vary between airforces, but not by much in my experience.

This has to be a tissue of lies. No mention of Golf in it anywhere!

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:17 AM
Calm down Erwin. There's nothing here to get worked up about.
sorry :oops:

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:22 AM
Do you not think that the British Army has also been similarly targeted by terrorists over the last 20+ years? We have had similar things happen to us.

Where has anything been written that anyone on this site has any support for this type of thing by or against anybody?


I said one day japs to 4 american japaneses and they kicked my arse with their ****ing karate.

But you see the thing is Erwin, you didn't did you?

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:23 AM
I think you'll find I have mentioned that you service was not forced upon you as a conscript earlier on.

What is life like in the Argetine army?

What time do you wake up? what do you do for PT?

Cleaning rifles,a lot of beds in the same place,taking showers in a community shower (for more than one person),trainment,special trainment (i told you a bit of the special),physical exercise (also sports),at the hour of walking you can walk more than 100km in one day,but that isn't every day,eat shitty guisos (i don't know the name in spanish),the worst food in the world must be our army's food,we had the chernobyl chickens here to eat them,ARRRGHHH!!! (at least i never tried one of them because that is in the past).
too much physical,the officers and sub officers "dance" the people with lower grade (dance means that they make you do whatever they want,for example,sit down on that cactus or make me a coffee).

in fact,the argentine army is for men that like having a not nice life.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:26 AM
Do you not think that the British Army has also been similarly targeted by terrorists over the last 20+ years? We have had similar things happen to us.

Where has anything been written that anyone on this site has any support for this type of thing by or against anybody?


I said one day japs to 4 american japaneses and they kicked my arse with their ****ing karate.

But you see the thing is Erwin, you didn't did you?

why you quoted that part of my post?,it hasn't nothing with terrorism.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:27 AM
Erwin wrote:

the officers and sub officers "dance" the people with lower grade (dance means that they make you do whatever they want,for example,sit down on that cactus or make me a coffee).

I have heard about this sort of thing. I have also heard that the Argentine army officers have a tendency to be very aloof or arogant towards their juniors.

It is things like this, though, that I am trying to find out about. You may not think it, but this affects the Operational Effectiveness of an army. A disliked SNCO or officer can wreck the fighting spirit of a whole platoon or company. In the case of officers in your army they could wreck a whole regiment.

This is what I mean by a credible fighting force.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:30 AM
Erwin wrote:

the officers and sub officers "dance" the people with lower grade (dance means that they make you do whatever they want,for example,sit down on that cactus or make me a coffee).

I have heard about this sort of thing. I have also heard that the Argentine army officers have a tendency to be very aloof or arogant towards their juniors.

It is things like this, though, that I am trying to find out about. You may not think it, but this affects the Operational Effectiveness of an army. A disliked SNCO or officer can wreck the fighting spirit of a whole platoon or company. In the case of officers in your army they could wreck a whole regiment.

This is what I mean by a credible fighting force.

we are a credible force,we have weapons,we have an army,we have uniforms,we have a doctrine,we have a trainment,we have balls,we have enough numbers for a south american country and we are the best army of latin america (in quality,because brazil has by far bigget numbers).

about the officers,they arrogant,of course!,the generals think they are god with their brilliant uniforms,and their comfortable handguns (and we have the fal!!!!).

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:35 AM
I don't think you understand what it is I am driving at.

Yes, you have all these things. (Although traffic wardens also have uniforms and they are not a credible fighting force at all are they :wink: ) but this attitude within your officer corps is, I am led to believe, wrecking the synergy of your army.

You can have all the best weapons in the world, but without this vital ingredient you will fail.

Edit to add, I wake up at 06:30 and go for a 5 mile run in my own time. We go to work about 08:15.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:39 AM
I don't think you understand what it is I am driving at.

Yes, you have all these things. (Although traffic wardens also have uniforms and they are not a credible fighting force at all are they :wink: ) but this attitude within your officer corps is, I am led to believe, wrecking the synergy of your army.

You can have all the best weapons in the world, but without this vital ingredient you will fail.
but the morale is still high,and this of the officer also gives to the soldier respect for the officers,im agree,i didn't like it,but when it is more difficult,it is better,but i would prefer start with the easyier first.

if in your army,they give you hugs and kisses,then you will finish as a lady,you have to feel bad like in a war every day,and then you will not suffer too much difference.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:48 AM
Three hours of lectures a week!!!

It's worse than being a student!!! :D

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erwin you say


and this of the officer also gives to the soldier respect for the officers

WHat ever it is you are talking about I doubt it is respect.


if in your army,they give you hugs and kisses,then you will finish as a lady,you have to feel bad like in a war every day,and then you will not suffer too much difference.

In our army we have a saying train hard, fight easy. Our training is ardous, but we've never had to sit on cactuses.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:50 AM
sit down on cactus is an example,they can order even worse things.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 11:51 AM
I have no doubt, but does this in anyway improve your martial skillset?

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 11:56 AM
I have no doubt, but does this in anyway improve your martial skillset?
that's what i was going to say,yes!,but the problem is that the officers will not improve a shit,indeed,they will get lazy,and too much arrogant,and that's bad.Maybe it is unnecesary,but im sure that don't makes us a worst army

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 12:10 PM
Why is everything so black and white? I have never said that you are the worst army!!!

If you read the qestions I am asking it is to improve my knowledge on your country and forces. THey are not there to insult you.

However your officers do seem to be the problem in your army.

If your men do not respect their leaders they will not fight as effectively as they should.

The Para battalion at goose green, for example, fought a long, hard and close run battle against superior numbers across the worst terreign imaginable in a battle that it would be more accurate to say it happened than was actually orchestrated!!!

The CO personally took his command element forward as an infantry section to clear trenchs. It was more a battle of small groups of men than the whole battalion.

They succeded for a variety of reasons but their respect for their officers and NCOs is right up there. When a superior says "get out of cover and clear that trench with cold steal" it is leadership, and the soldier should want to do it for reasons other than the superior is nothing more than a bully who makes people sit on cactuss!!!

(it is because this battle is studied at Sandhurst and West Point that I use this example, the fact it was during the Falklands is coincidental.)

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 12:18 PM
Why is everything so black and white? I have never said that you are the worst army!!!

If you read the qestions I am asking it is to improve my knowledge on your country and forces. THey are not there to insult you.

However your officers do seem to be the problem in your army.

If your men do not respect their leaders they will not fight as effectively as they should.

The Para battalion at goose green, for example, fought a long, hard and close run battle against superior numbers across the worst terreign imaginable in a battle that it would be more accurate to say it happened than was actually orchestrated!!!

The CO personally took his command element forward as an infantry section to clear trenchs. It was more a battle of small groups of men than the whole battalion.

They succeded for a variety of reasons but their respect for their officers and NCOs is right up there. When a superior says "get out of cover and clear that trench with cold steal" it is leadership, and the soldier should want to do it for reasons other than the superior is nothing more than a bully who makes people sit on cactuss!!!

(it is because this battle is studied at Sandhurst and West Point that I use this example, the fact it was during the Falklands is coincidental.)

I got confussed,not worst,i meant worse.
our men respect the leaders!!!,of coursE!,because they think they are god.
you are talking about malvin** inside,i request the inmediate banning of 1000ydstare.
and if you watched just the bbc video,it wasn't that much of argentines,i don't remember how many but they lied you.

the officers orders you to sit on the cactus when you aren't at war.

if you are on war,the orders are "follow me!" ("seguirme" words of the lt. estevez,national hero of the war of malvi***),he wasn't a bad officer,we have both tipes,bad and good.

i avoided the topic malvin**. you get more inside,i hope mods will act.

1000ydstare
10-22-2005, 12:22 PM
Ok, this is going no where what about this question?


Are the conscripts used for anything else? For example in Tunisia the Tunisian conscripts are used for labour, they carry out various construction projects such as the maintainence of varoious desert roads. The volunteer/professional side of the army handles any border security issues, etc.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 12:24 PM
Ok, this is going no where what about this question?


Are the conscripts used for anything else? For example in Tunisia the Tunisian conscripts are used for labour, they carry out various construction projects such as the maintainence of varoious desert roads. The volunteer/professional side of the army handles any border security issues, etc.

now there are no conscripts,i don't know what are they user for,now they are prodessionals,and they do have the work of any professional soldiers.


brb,it's 2pm and i will have lunch.

Crab_to_be
10-22-2005, 12:27 PM
I will warn 1000yd stare for his single mention of the Falklands War on one condition. That you receive a one warning for each of your mentions of the Falklands/Malvinas. Having starred out some of the letters is no defence, any more than advocating child abuse by writing about ch*ld m*lesting would be acceptable. In the interests of fairness, I will also award myself a warning for mentioning the forbidden subject in my post.

Summary: I will warn 1000yd once, if you agree to the same terms being applied to others, including myself and yourself.

Sturmtruppen
10-22-2005, 12:37 PM
I will warn 1000yd stare for his single mention of the Falklands War on one condition. That you receive a one warning for each of your mentions of the Falklands/Malvinas. Having starred out some of the letters is no defence, any more than advocating child abuse by writing about ch*ld m*lesting would be acceptable. In the interests of fairness, I will also award myself a warning for mentioning the forbidden subject in my post.

Summary: I will warn 1000yd once, if you agree to the same terms being applied to others, including myself and yourself.

but i didn't give a full mention,i censored the name malvin**,and you not,and also i named it (With censoring) just to reply 1000ydstare because i needed to deffend myself and my country.

you,I and others don't have to receibe a warning because they weren't talking an entire post with the malvin** war and i we didn't talk about battles or regiments of that war!!!,he already said a lot,i could have a better reply.

i suggest to give him a warning,but us not,i was just replying,and i didn't talked it as the centre of a post since the rule,but it seems that you are at a side.

Panzerknacker
10-22-2005, 08:13 PM
LMAASA AT-63:

With a fully upgraded cockpit and modern avionics suite, the new AT-63 under production in Argentina is setting a new standard for low-cost basic through advanced trainer and light attack aircraft. On June 19, 2001, Lockheed Martin presented this new aircraft during the Paris Air Show and is now offering it to customers worldwide.

The Argentine Air Force signed an agreement with Military Planes Manufacturer of Cordoba for the purchase of 12 Pampa AT-63 pilot trainers. The fabrication of this planes is underway and 2 has been delivered to the EVC test wing before his final aceptation for the AAF.

The aircraft worth 6 million dollars is being offered to Colombia, Greece and Venezuela

The new AT-63 features:

-A Honeywell TFE-731-2C turbofan engine with 3,500 pounds of thrust.

-A state-of-the-art avionics suite with a Digital 1553B MIL STD data bus, full systems redundancy, a glass cockpit, laser ring INS/GPS NAV, a mission computer and an integrated weapons system.

-Fully pressurized dual control cabin with a one-piece canopy that can be electrically fragilized in the event of ground emergency.

-The ejection sequence for the two zero-zero seats can be pre-selected.
-Four underwing plus one under fuselage weapons stations enabling air-to-air and air-to-ground light attack capability.

Some internal shots still in factory.

http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/~cazador/Screenshots/Film-4702/AT-63_Pampa_Film-4702_00a_1024x686.jpg

AT-63 Characteristics

Weight:
Empty
6,217 lb
2,820 kg

Internal Fuel
2,380 lb
1,080 kg

Max TOGW
11,038 lb
5,000 kg

Wing Area
168.3 sq.ft.
(15.63 m2)

Horizontal Tail Area
46.8 sq.ft.
(4.35 m2)

Aspect Ratio
6.0

Leading-Edge Sweep
5.4 deg

Service Life
8,000 hours

Engine Thrust
3,500 lb class
1,560 daN

Performance

Max Level Speed @ 26,200 ft
440 KTAS
825 km/hr

Cruise Speed @ 30,000 ft (Clean)
350 KTAS
650 km/hr

Stall Speed- Flap-Down
82 KCAS
152 km/hr

Maximum Operational Mach
0.8

Design Load Factor
+6g -3g

Take-Off Run (ISA-S/L-Normal Fuel-8,300 lb)
1,410 ft
430 m

Maximum War load
1510 Kg.
Landing Run (ISA-S/L-7,710 lb)
1,510 ft
460 m

Ceiling
42,300 ft
12,900 m

Maximum Climb Rate (8,300 lb)
5,120 ft/min
1,560 m/min

Range
1,140 n miles
2,100 km

Roll rate
200° /sec

Work in the Factory.

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/images/C2_EX-03_jpg.jpg

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/images/C1B_partes+pampa_jpg.jpg

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/LMAASA04/images/C7_mock+up_jpg.jpg

Perversely, the new "all glass"avionics installed in the AT-63 trainer is far much better that some combat aircraft still used by the AAF like the prehistorics Mirage III/V/IAI Nesher, only machted by the LMASAA A-4AR Fightigh Hawks.

Nice shot of an old series IA-63.

http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/attack/ia63/ia63-5.jpg

Eagle
10-22-2005, 10:31 PM
I had the luck of entering to the factory the last month.

1000ydstare
10-23-2005, 01:08 AM
Panzerknacker, interesting posts mate, but any chance of a bit of input from you?

They appear to be cut and pastes from another site. What would you like to see, in your opinion, on the aircraft? Is there a better engine that was considered but rejected due to cost constraints?

PS. Interesting name, in Britain knacker means a vareity of things!!!

For example "knackers" are your balls in plural, or "knacker" in singlular. As in "I've just been kicked in the knackers!!!"

Knacker also means tired or broken as in, "I'm knackered by that run" or "my TV is knackered"

It has long been associated with scrap heaps ie "send the car to the knackers yard"

A "Fat Knacker" is a fat person, possibley lazy.

What does it mean in Argentina?

PPS I am a tech too. I install, maintain and repair communications equipment.

Jason.

Bladensburg
10-23-2005, 07:46 AM
"Knackers" (yard) is an Old English word for slaughterhouse specifically one that deals with fallen stock and dispatches injured animals - not for human consumption.

However IIRC "Panzerknacker" is from the German but the only refeence I can remember to it is in one of the early Playsation Medal of Honour games where it was used to describe an imaginary German robotic soldier.

1000ydstare
10-23-2005, 07:55 AM
"Knackers" (yard) is an Old English word for slaughterhouse specifically one that deals with fallen stock and dispatches injured animals - not for human consumption.

Forgot about that bladensburg, thanks for the clarification.

There's a few hits on google for panzerknacker generally relating to some kind of anti tank action. But I'm sure the man himself will explain better.

Panzerknacker
10-23-2005, 11:40 AM
Panzerknacker, interesting posts mate, but any chance of a bit of input from you?

They appear to be cut and pastes from another site. What would you like to see, in your opinion, on the aircraft? Is there a better engine that was considered but rejected due to cost constraints?

Actually is a post of mine that I made in anothe english language forum, the credits for the pictures are:

www.saorbats.com, external shots of the AT-63.

My friend Edgardo "Cazador" Alessio, wich share his picture of inside the cockpit. I should put this before...my mistake :oops:


PS. Interesting name, in Britain knacker means a vareity of things!!!

A "Fat Knacker" is a fat person, possibley lazy.

What does it mean in Argentina?

I am quiet amaze by this cuestion....I tough that that you probably know it already... :?

In Argentina dont mean nothing due this is german composite word Panzer= Armored, and Knacker= cracker, crasher, destroyer....so Panzerknacker is Tank cracker, tank destroyer, a sinonimuos for antitank.

http://usmbooks.com/images/Panzerk1.jpg

In Argentina as you probably know, we use the spanish that was spoken in the province of Castilla, Spain, thats is called "Castellano".


PPS I am a tech too. I install, maintain and repair communications equipment.

Jason

Good for you 8)

Panzerknacker
10-23-2005, 02:26 PM
What would you like to see, in your opinion, on the aircraft? Is there a better engine that was considered but rejected due to cost constraints?

The engine is fine, the aircraft probably sustain some more Mach but is limited by the Dornier supercritical profile wing, wich gave to it a very good handling and aerobatic capabilities at low speed, but is nor designed for high Mach numbers.

Remember that is a advanced trainer, and even is advertized as a attack aircraft , is more like a transitional combat jet.

Something that would be nice to see is the naval AT-63, but still is in drawings boards ( or computer boars ) the contract is not released yet.

Navy AT-63.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/9179/at63nav1yb.jpg

Panzerknacker
10-23-2005, 08:09 PM
Some of the weapons that carry the AT-63.

The central gunpod is a 30 mm gun Giat-Defa 554:

http://img41.echo.cx/img41/6671/canondefa5535rr.jpg


Bombs and missiles:

Should use some of the local made especial purpose bombs alredy in service with the AAF.

FAS-280

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/4566/fasparapost8yd.jpg

High explosive 34 Kg fragmentation bomb, the blast effect is increased with the adittion of 3500 9 mm diameter steel balls with are capable to penetrate 10 to 20 mm of armour in a 100 meters radius.

FAS-800

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8104/fas87qv.jpg

250 kg anti Anti personal bomb, it use a proximity fuze with detonate the bomb about 20 -30 meters over the ground delivering 38.000 steel balls at supersonic speed, also caused a very nasty effect againt parked aircrafts and unarmoured vehicles. There is a 125 kg model called FAS-800B.

FAS-250
http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/86/fas2509hz.jpg

Parachute drag retarded bomb, it can be dropped safely even to altitudes of 30 meters to 0,95 Mach.

FAS-300

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/9674/fas30001ex.jpg

This is a very adaptable cluster bomb, it can be filled with 220 bomblets, or 88 mines. The mines can cover 58.500 square metes and his delayed time fuse could be set from 0,5 seconds to 54 hours.

FAS-850

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/1507/fas8501kq.jpg

Stand-Off bomb. It is rocket assisted and it can reach a 20 km range dropped from a 35000 feet altitude at 0,8 mach.

CITEFA Martin Pescador:

http://www.hangardigital.com.ar/articulos/a-58/misiles.jpg

Air-to-ground subsonic missile, it carry a 7,5 kilogram shaped charge warhead and could be equipped with a IR or laser guidance.

festamus
10-24-2005, 02:49 PM
What would you like to see, in your opinion, on the aircraft? Is there a better engine that was considered but rejected due to cost constraints?

The engine is fine, the aircraft probably sustain some more Mach but is limited by the Dornier supercritical profile wing, wich gave to it a very good handling and aerobatic capabilities at low speed, but is nor designed for high Mach numbers.

Remember that is a advanced trainer, and even is advertized as a attack aircraft , is more like a transitional combat jet.

Something that would be nice to see is the naval AT-63, but still is in drawings boards ( or computer boars ) the contract is not released yet.

Navy AT-63.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/9179/at63nav1yb.jpg

Very interesting.

Isn't "Navalizing" usually a very hefty job, though? Will they ever afford it? Aside from the obvious corrosion protection, deck landings are harsher than the normal. I also suspect that you'd need to do some redesign to ensure a good load path into the structure for that arrestor hook... unless of course it already had one on the non-Naval version for RHAG?

Any idea how much componentry etc of a Pampa is common with the Alpha Jet? I know it's not a mere derivative, but it is most definitely inspired by, and developed using, the Alpha Jet design. I was just wondering if they use common parts in those areas possible?

Panzerknacker
10-24-2005, 06:38 PM
Isn't "Navalizing" usually a very hefty job, though? Will they ever afford it? Aside from the obvious corrosion protection, deck landings are harsher than the normal. I also suspect that you'd need to do some redesign to ensure a good load path into the structure for that arrestor hook... unless of course it already had one on the non-Naval version for RHAG?

Sure, it needs general reiforcements, is planed to introduce vortex generators in he wing to give better sustentation at low speed, the engine is more potent that the land based Pampa. ( 3500 pounds versus 4250 pounds)


Any idea how much componentry etc of a Pampa is common with the Alpha Jet? I know it's not a mere derivative, but it is most definitely inspired by, and developed using, the Alpha Jet design. I was just wondering if they use common parts in those areas possible?

The only parts interchangeable are some few componentes of the nose and elevators, off course it share the wing profile and the general fuselage layout but those and different in shape and measures ( remember that the Alpha is twin engined and swept wing, the Pampa single engine and have standar wing) so the vast majority of the parts are not interchangeable.

http://www.segurancaedefesa.com/DSC_0009.jpg

Panzerknacker
10-28-2005, 10:58 AM
Interesting pics of some Argentine Navy aircraft in carrier operatios...Any one recognize this carrier ?.......Yes is the CVN-76 Ronald Reagan.

Super Etendar:

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-9319H-762%20copia.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-8213G-154%20copia.jpg

S-2T: ( tracker refurbished by IAI industries)

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-9319H-798%20copia.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-8213G-113%20copia.jpg

Eagle
10-28-2005, 08:23 PM
Some of the weapons that carry the AT-63.

Bombs and missiles:

Should use some of the local made especial purpose bombs alredy in service with the AAF.

FAS-280

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/4566/fasparapost8yd.jpg

High explosive 34 Kg fragmentation bomb, the blast effect is increased with the adittion of 3500 9 mm diameter steel balls with are capable to penetrate 10 to 20 mm of armour in a 100 meters radius.

FAS-800

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8104/fas87qv.jpg

250 kg anti Anti personal bomb, it use a proximity fuze with detonate the bomb about 20 -30 meters over the ground delivering 38.000 steel balls at supersonic speed, also caused a very nasty effect againt parked aircrafts and unarmoured vehicles. There is a 125 kg model called FAS-800B.

FAS-250
http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/86/fas2509hz.jpg

Parachute drag retarded bomb, it can be dropped safely even to altitudes of 30 meters to 0,95 Mach.

FAS-300

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/9674/fas30001ex.jpg

This is a very adaptable cluster bomb, it can be filled with 220 bomblets, or 88 mines. The mines can cover 58.500 square metes and his delayed time fuse could be set from 0,5 seconds to 54 hours.

FAS-850

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/1507/fas8501kq.jpg

Stand-Off bomb. It is rocket assisted and it can reach a 20 km range dropped from a 35000 feet altitude at 0,8 mach.

CITEFA Martin Pescador:

http://www.hangardigital.com.ar/articulos/a-58/misiles.jpg

Air-to-ground subsonic missile, it carry a 7,5 kilogram shaped charge warhead and could be equipped with a IR or laser guidance.[/quote]


First, most of these models are only projects from INVAP and CITEFA.

What's more, the MP-1000 Martín Pescador was cancelled years ago, and now INVAP is working in other missile project, the AS-25K.

Eagle
10-28-2005, 08:30 PM
Interesting pics of some Argentine Navy aircraft in carrier operatios...Any one recognize this carrier ?.......Yes is the CVN-76 Ronald Reagan.

Super Etendar:

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-9319H-762%20copia.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-8213G-154%20copia.jpg

S-2T: ( tracker refurbished by IAI industries)

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-9319H-798%20copia.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/240604_2/040617-N-8213G-113%20copia.jpg


Super Etendards and Turbo Trackers are usually used from the aircraft carrier MB Sao Paulo (from the Brazilian Navy).

Panzerknacker
10-28-2005, 11:00 PM
What's more, the MP-1000 Martín Pescador was cancelled years ago, and now INVAP is working in other missile project, the AS-25K.

All right thanks for your data. :oops:

Eagle
11-01-2005, 08:46 PM
Here are some pics of the citefa AS-25K.

http://www.machtres.com/citefa_1.jpg

http://www.machtres.com/citefa_2.jpg

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/fotos/AS-25K%20y%20MP.jpg

Sturmtruppen
11-04-2005, 10:10 AM
I already posted those pictures eagle.

http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/liceomilitar/30junio/076.JPG
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/liceomilitar/30junio/007.JPG

Liceo Militar Argentino

The boys to the army.

1000ydstare
11-04-2005, 12:32 PM
Don't they all look young!!!!

Which one are you Erwin?

The tents look a bit naff though, nowt wrong with a good old fashioned basha.

PS Should you really have that commando thing in your signature mate?

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/3313/images4gf.jpg

Sturmtruppen
11-06-2005, 07:23 PM
Don't they all look young!!!!

Which one are you Erwin?

The tents look a bit naff though, nowt wrong with a good old fashioned basha.

PS Should you really have that commando thing in your signature mate?

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/3313/images4gf.jpg

lmao :lol: ,im no one of them,im young,but not that young!,and there are obviously adults cordinating the liceo,it can't be only boys' institute driven by them.

old fashioned?,this isn't the bahamas,this is argentina,and that is deluxe comparing to sleeping in misiones forest where the best thing that can happen to you is getting asma!.

and i should have the signature that i do want,i choose it if i want,should you have that signature mate?

Eagle
11-07-2005, 12:31 PM
1000, a liceo is a high school, to teenagers from 13 to 18 years old. Here in Argentina you have, besides the basic subjects (as maths, spanish, english, physics, etc) different "carreers" to start at high schools, all high schools have once at least.

At my high school, there are three "carreers", Mechanics, Design & Art and Economic sciences. (I am studying the mechanics "carreer").

If you want, you have three schools with military subject-carreers, where the student learn the live and the job of a military person, and you don't have to be a military if you don't want to although you frequented your high school in that military schools, but, if you want to be a military person, you'll have a lot of benefits studing there. That three military schools are the Military Lyceum (from the Army), the Aeronautic Lyceum (from the Air Force) and the Naval Lyceum (from the Navy).
The pictures are from the Military Lyceum.

You have anothers, it depends from the school and the location (for example, in my zone, it's more common to find schools with that subject-carreers related with farm & country activities, because here predominates the farm works. In other places, as Cordoba, where the aeronautic activity is well managed, you will find a lot of schools with subjects about aviation.

Panzerknacker
11-10-2005, 06:28 PM
Super Etendar walkaround.

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/290505_3/IMG_0288.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/290505_3/IMG_0261.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/290505_3/IMG_0169.jpg

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/290505_3/IMG_0168.jpg


Pod Vinten 360:

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/fotos_news_2004/290505_3/IMG_0176.jpg

http://img272.imageshack.us/img272/3813/3604mf.jpg


http://www.aviationart.com.ar/galerias/militar/Super.jpg

Eagle
11-10-2005, 10:36 PM
Info to support:

Super Etendard, Argentine Navy.

Units:
*11

Weapons:
*Air-Air: Matra R-550 "Magic"
*Air-Surface: silly bombs, cluster bombs and rockets
*Air-Sea: Aerospatiale AM-39 "Exocet"

Base:
*Aeronaval base "Comandante Espora", Bahia Blanca (Province of Buenos Aires)

Aircraft carriers used by argentine Super Etendards:
*ARA 25 de Mayo (Argentine Navy)
*MB Sao Paulo (Brazilian Navy)
*Charles de Gaulle (French Navy)
*Foch (French Navy. This aircraft carrier is now the brazilian SAO PAULO)
*Different USS nuclear aircraft carriers (United States Navy)

Dani
12-18-2005, 04:07 AM
sorry, my fellows but this is not a forum to offer a politics. please, continue with the forum in discussion, I respect you, but this is not a
site for that discussion.
Any of you know about the FARA 83, a project of a argentine assault
rifle? 8)

Thanks to cpl condor I splitted some posts making a new topc in Off-topic General: Argentinean Politics.

Meantime you all are asked to post strictly on-topic.
Thanks!

Dani
12-18-2005, 04:16 AM
And as a reply to cpl condor, FARA 83 was more than a project. At least 1193 rifles were manufactured.

http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/2400/2442.htm

http://www.instructoritb.com.ar/Fara%2083.htm (in Spanish)

From last link I post a picture:
http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/7957/fara83p4nw.jpg

Panzerknacker
12-18-2005, 01:01 PM
The FARA compared with the Steyr AUG and the FAL:

http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/EA/images/Steyr%20AUG%20FAA%20y%20FAL%20de%20la%20Ca%20Cdos( s)%20601_JPG.jpg


And this is dedicated to Eagle...check this Argentina had some powerful military equipement before Peron.....amazing . :shock: .... :lol:

Battleship "Rivadavia"

Builder: Fore River, Quincy

Laid down: 25.5.1910

Launched: 26.8.1911

Commissioned: 27.8.1914

Rivadavia at her builders' yard, shortly before trials, ca. 1914. Note she is still under US flag.

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/7995/rivadavia061yf.jpg

Rivadavia on trials, ca. 1914.
http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/7010/rivadavia066aq.jpg

The Rivadavia class was authorised in 1908 primarily as a response to the Minas Gerais class being constructed in Brazil. An intense internal debate took place in Argentina concerning the need to purchase two such expensive dreadnoughts, costing £2.2 million each. Argentina's recent border Controversies with Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay helped win the day for those in favour.

The Argentine method for acquiring the best possible design stirred controversy among the building nations. In 1908 Rear-Admiral Onofre Betbeder set up office in London and requested all interested patties to submit plans for the construction of two dreadnoughts with the option to build a third. The guidelines were sketchy to allow the bidders to develop the best possible plans. Fifteen companies submitted plans. The Argentinians reviewed the submissions, chose the best features from each and gave the revised guidelines to the competing firms. This process was then repeated. The competitors were in a furore and considered this as a looting of their trade secrets.

The contract was awarded to Fore River Shipbuilding Corporation of Quincy, Massachusetts, at a saving of over £224.000 per ship over the nearest competitor. European builders were shocked because the United States, which then lagged far behind Great Britain and Germany in the dreadnought race, was not considered to be a serious competitor.

The Rivadavia class closely paralleled American battleships in appearance and design. The machinery was placed amidships with the boilers grouped in separate rooms equally forward and abaft the engine room. This arrangement reduced trimming problems and separated machinery vitals into three separate compartments.

The 'en echelon' 12in amidships turrets could in theory fire on a 180-degree arc on the side of the ship were located and 100 degrees on the opposite side. The secondary 6in guns were mounted on the upper deck behind 6in armour. The 16 x 4in QF guns were for protection against torpedo attack; 8 of these guns were mounted in the between decks, 4 on the gun deck aft, and 4 on the upper deck forward. The 8 remaining guns were located on the-weather deck 6 on the superstructure deck and 2 on the upper deck aft. The 4in guns were not protected by armour. Two submerged side-loading TT were located in the torpedo room forward, firing broadside. The ships' magazines stowed 120 rounds of 12in shell per gun, 300 rounds for each 6in, 350 rounds per 4in gun and 16 Whitehead torpedoes.

The ships were initially fitted with two 15ft Barr & Stroud rangefinders mounted in revolving armoured towers above the forward and after CT for controlling the 12in guns. Two 9ft Barr & Stroud were mounted on the platform on top of the king posts for the boat booms.

Typical of American-built dreadnoughts, protection received special attention. The main belt was 12in amidships tapering to 5in and 4in at the stem and stern respectively. The belt extended 5ft above and 6ft below the normal waterline. The turret armour was 12in on the face, 9in on the sides, 9.5in on the rear and 4in on the top. The forward and aft CT were 12 and 9in respectively. The protective deck extended the ship's length 24in above the waterline amidships, sloping down to the lower edge of the main belt armour. The protective deck varied from 20lb medium steel to 80lb of nickel steel. The inner bottom extended most of the length of the ships. An inner skin was fitted around the magazines, boilers, and machinery. This was for added protection against mines and torpedoes.

The electrical plant consisted of 4375kW turbogenerators located under the midship magazines forward and aft of the engine rooms. Two 75kW generators run off of diesel engines provided electricity when the boilers were cold. An 8kW Telefunken radio had an optimum range of 1500km.

The USN Board of Inspection and Survey for Ships made the following observations concerning Rivadavia on 21 October 1913. "On the high speed runs the vessel made the exact contract speed, 22,5 knots; but it is believed that she can do a little better She . . . handles remarkably well . . . The Board prefers our adopted centerline arrangement of turrets [Wyoming class]. While theoretically the Rivadavia has an ahead and asteru fire of six guns, this is not so in reality, as it is almost certain that the blast from the walst turret guns would dish in the smokepipes and damage the uptakes... The Bethlehem Steel Company designed and made special [12in guns] breech-blocks, all of which were rejected and the regular US Navy type of breech-block was finally made and installed. With comparatively minor modifications the vessel would practically meet the requirements of our own vessels."

A third dreadnought was authorised in 1912 in response to Brazil's third dreadnought, the Rio de Janeiro. Since neither this ship nor the Brazilian Riachuelo ever materialised, Argentina's third dreadnought was never laid down.

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/1053/rivadavia066aw.jpg


Rivadavia in 1935.

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/8503/rivadavia066cy.jpg

Battleship Moreno:

Same class as Rivadavia; 23.000 tn 12 x 12 inch guns (305mm) and 12 inch belt armour.

In 1918

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/2472/moreno018dm.jpg

In 1937.

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/9308/moreno017rm.jpg


In 1942.

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/8/moreno013vz.jpg

cpl condor
12-18-2005, 03:16 PM
thank you, Danni and Panzerknacker, but in this land I still looking for
see one of these, everybody tell me this is a great weapon, it's a pitty
we can't count with it before. 8)

Eagle
12-18-2005, 09:02 PM
My partner Panzer, there are excellent and giant ships, I know that... but... they are north american and italian ships. If we could enter to a war where Italy or the United States would be allies of our enemy, those ships wouldn't had aroppiate supplies, and that could cause the retreat of our "Flota de Mar" of a war.
That happened in the Malvinas war with the supplies to our north-american aircrafts (F-86, A-4B and A-4C) and our french aircrafts (Mirages and Super Etendards). They were on the british side, and we couldn't receive supplies for them.

I am not obssesed with Peron my partner, I know that before him our forces were the best of the region, but he was the only person in the power that thought that if we could be a power nation, we would need our own industries to not depend on anyone.


Saludos che... espero q vengas pronto para tus pagos de nuevo y poder hablar.

Panzerknacker
12-19-2005, 05:05 PM
If we could enter to a war where Italy or the United States would be allies of our enemy, those ships wouldn't had aroppiate supplies, and that could cause the retreat of our "Flota de Mar" of a war.

I am not obssesed with Peron my partner, I know that before him our forces were the best of the region, but he was the only person in the power that thought that if we could be a power nation, we would need our own industries to not depend on anyone.

No, no...you are confused again, in regard of the hipotetic war with USA or Italy, I tell you Why?...How?...where? :shock:

In the beginnig of the XX century the relations with USA was very good and with Italy it simply could not be better, take care about this data: in 1914 the 42 % of the argentine population was foreigner and the 21 % was ITALIAN. Even the King of Italy delayed the commision of two of this own cruser in early 1900 in favour to deliver them to Argentina.

The most likely oposition for Argentina in that time was Chile or Brasil not an European power or the US.

The hurry in to buy large warships to the US is pretty clear for anyone that know a little history, in that time the Brasilian navy had already received his two first Dreadnaughts the Minas Gerais Class ( Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo), and Chile had ordered two powerful battleships to the UK, the Almirante Latorre class ( Almirante Latorre & Lord Cochrane)

The Minas Gerais can put together 24 x 305 mm guns, and the Latorres 20 x 343 mm guns. So without the solid Oposition of the neat Rivadavia Class any "trigger happy" Brasilian or Chilean admiral could put those ship in range and wiped out any coastal Argentine City.

But no... you want to wait until you have a shipyard capable of build this 190 meters and 29.000 tons ships? Those shipyard dont materialize until 1960.

And again you fall in the mistake to say that Peron was the mastermind of the arming and the national weapons independence....completely false.

Fray Luis Beltran was making guns for the Liberation Army in the 1800s, General Ricchieri do all the planing for the military equipmente and production in the late 1800s and General Savio was the first to put in production the high grade steel mills to manufacturing goverment small arms and large calibre guns in 1930.

With this steel where made the Sistema colt 1927:

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/Sistema1927.jpg

And the FM M1935 rifle.

http://www.fullaventura.com.ar/sitios/gunsmith/fotos/gunsmith5_116(1).jpg

Not to mention others good weapons made by private enterprises like HAFDASA with his beautiful Ballester Molina .45:

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/ballester-molina_2.jpg

By the way HAFDASA also produced cars, trucks and Diesel engines since 1933. look this 6x6 tractor made in 1939 and used by the Army:

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-HAFDASA6x6.jpg

In the aircraft industries side The FMA as founded in 1927 not 1947 like many love to think.

The FMA had already make good quality aircraft like the Ae Mb 1:

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Lateral_Izquierda.jpg

..and the IA-22 DL with his locally produced 9 cilinder radial.

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Dl22_3.jpg

...even so if Peron really was that protector of the national industry....Why decimate the Pulqui I an II programs ??....Why he bought Gloster Meteors and North American Sabres instead?

And other good argentine weapon the Nahuel Tank designed by Teniente Coronel (Lt. Colonel) Alfredo Baisi and build by Arsenal Esteban de Luca ( another private enterprise)

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-Andre.jpg

Argentine weapon made with argentine steel and by argentines..Why Peron choose to bought Shermans instead....??

Hmmmm seems that the father Peron wasnt so good after all :?

Firefly
12-19-2005, 05:16 PM
I'd llike to pick up on the Dreadnought thing.

Yet again I have a book in a box all about HMS Agincourt ( I think).

The Dreadnought was OK for Germany, the UK, the US and maybe Japan, but in 1904-12 it was a symbol for other countries.

I have always found it amazing that the UK could continue its 2-1 policy and also build these ships for most of the worlds aspiring nations at the same time.

South America got sucked into the Dreadnought super weapon myth, none of the S American countries even had a cause for conflict, but as soon as one of them bought one, they all wanted one.

These things cost an absolute fortune for no reason.

Fair dues to the British shipyards though, who turned them out to order.

We built them for Japan, Chile, Brasil, Turkey and some others...

This was a trully interesting time. Some of the British shipyards could lay down and launch within 7 months.

Yet again I wil have to dig the books out.....

Bladensburg
12-19-2005, 06:30 PM
Just how much use would one or two Dreadnaughts be anyway? Unless you have enough to make at least one squadron they are of limited use in combat because the enemy will throw everything at it until it is sunk. It might serve as a distraction but it's a damned expensive one and you could get a lot more destroyers or cruisers for the price and crew of one Dread, and because they can manoevre independently they are more likely to survive long anough to do damage.
Unless of course, you pick a fight with someone who actually has a squadron of battleships, in which case you are always shagged.

cpl condor
12-19-2005, 08:00 PM
If we could enter to a war where Italy or the United States would be allies of our enemy, those ships wouldn't had aroppiate supplies, and that could cause the retreat of our "Flota de Mar" of a war.

I am not obssesed with Peron my partner, I know that before him our forces were the best of the region, but he was the only person in the power that thought that if we could be a power nation, we would need our own industries to not depend on anyone.

No, no...you are confused again, in regard of the hipotetic war with USA or Italy, I tell you Why?...How?...where? :shock:

In the beginnig of the XX century the relations with USA was very good and with Italy it simply could not be better, take care about this data: in 1914 the 42 % of the argentine population was foreigner and the 21 % was ITALIAN. Even the King of Italy delayed the commision of two of this own cruser in early 1900 in favour to deliver them to Argentina.

The most likely oposition for Argentina in that time was Chile or Brasil not an European power or the US.

The hurry in to buy large warships to the US is pretty clear for anyone that know a little history, in that time the Brasilian navy had already received his two first Dreadnaughts the Minas Gerais Class ( Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo), and Chile had ordered two powerful battleships to the UK, the Almirante Latorre class ( Almirante Latorre & Lord Cochrane)

The Minas Gerais can put together 24 x 305 mm guns, and the Latorres 20 x 343 mm guns. So without the solid Oposition of the neat Rivadavia Class any "trigger happy" Brasilian or Chilean admiral could put those ship in range and wiped out any coastal Argentine City.

But no... you want to wait until you have a shipyard capable of build this 190 meters and 29.000 tons ships? Those shipyard dont materialize until 1960.

And again you fall in the mistake to say that Peron was the mastermind of the arming and the national weapons independence....completely false.

Fray Luis Beltran was making guns for the Liberation Army in the 1800s, General Ricchieri do all the planing for the military equipmente and production in the late 1800s and General Savio was the first to put in production the high grade steel mills to manufacturing goverment small arms and large calibre guns in 1930.

With this steel where made the Sistema colt 1927:

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/Sistema1927.jpg

And the FM M1935 rifle.

http://www.fullaventura.com.ar/sitios/gunsmith/fotos/gunsmith5_116(1).jpg

Not to mention others good weapons made by private enterprises like HAFDASA with his beautiful Ballester Molina .45:

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/ballester-molina_2.jpg

By the way HAFDASA also produced cars, trucks and Diesel engines since 1933. look this 6x6 tractor made in 1939 and used by the Army:

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-HAFDASA6x6.jpg

In the aircraft industries side The FMA as founded in 1927 not 1947 like many love to think.

The FMA had already make good quality aircraft like the Ae Mb 1:

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Lateral_Izquierda.jpg

..and the IA-22 DL with his locally produced 9 cilinder radial.

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Dl22_3.jpg

...even so if Peron really was that protector of the national industry....Why decimate the Pulqui I an II programs ??....Why he bought Gloster Meteors and North American Sabres instead?

And other good argentine weapon the Nahuel Tank designed by Teniente Coronel (Lt. Colonel) Alfredo Baisi and build by Arsenal Esteban de Luca ( another private enterprise)

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/argentina/Arg-Nahuel-Andre.jpg

Argentine weapon made with argentine steel and by argentines..Why Peron choose to bought Shermans instead....??

Hmmmm seems that the father Peron wasnt so good after all :?
A tip: the "Arsenal Esteban de Luca" it's a unit to maintenance and repotentiation of trucks, (GM), the M113 carrier, and research to improve
all the army material. the military unit name is B Ars 601.
And its side is the TAM (Tanque Argentino Mediano) assembly plant. I don't know if this unit was a
private enterprise before. I'm going to investigate it. 8)
Peron chooses the M4 Sherman because the war was over, and USA
selling it a half of a price to produce the Nahuel. Another mistake to non
produce its own design.

Eagle
12-19-2005, 10:47 PM
No, no...you are confused again, in regard of the hipotetic war with USA or Italy, I tell you Why?...How?...where? :shock:

I wasn't talking about a direct war between Argentina and Italy or the US. I was talking about a war where Italy or the US could be on our enemy's side, as happened in 1982.




The most likely oposition for Argentina in that time was Chile or Brasil not an European power or the US.

I am not in disagree with this.


The hurry in to buy large warships to the US is pretty clear for anyone that know a little history, in that time the Brasilian navy had already received his two first Dreadnaughts the Minas Gerais Class ( Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo), and Chile had ordered two powerful battleships to the UK, the Almirante Latorre class ( Almirante Latorre & Lord Cochrane)

The Minas Gerais can put together 24 x 305 mm guns, and the Latorres 20 x 343 mm guns. So without the solid Oposition of the neat Rivadavia Class any "trigger happy" Brasilian or Chilean admiral could put those ship in range and wiped out any coastal Argentine City.
But no... you want to wait until you have a shipyard capable of build this 190 meters and 29.000 tons ships? Those shipyard dont materialize until 1960.

In agree again. But as long as we were using those foreign weapons, we could be producing own weapons.


And again you fall in the mistake to say that Peron was the mastermind of the arming and the national weapons independence....completely false.
Fray Luis Beltran was making guns for the Liberation Army in the 1800s, General Ricchieri do all the planing for the military equipmente and production in the late 1800s and General Savio was the first to put in production the high grade steel mills to manufacturing goverment small arms and large calibre guns in 1930.

I wasn't saying that Peron was the pioneer of our arming. I said that Peron was the pioneer of heavy industries ideas on our country, millitary factories and civilian factories.
The producers of millitary weapons that were before Peron, were only simple weapons. Peron prefered to carry to the top to our factories, to compete over the world with the powerfull factories.


In the aircraft industries side The FMA as founded in 1927 not 1947 like many love to think.
The FMA had already make good quality aircraft like the Ae Mb 1:
http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Lateral_Izquierda.jpg

..and the IA-22 DL with his locally produced 9 cilinder radial.

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Dl22_3.jpg

...even so if Peron really was that protector of the national industry....Why decimate the Pulqui I an II programs ??....Why he bought Gloster Meteors and North American Sabres instead?

First, the AeMb1 Bombi was an awfull aircraft, it only could carry one bomb, and it was so difficult to operate that was so strange to see it flying. The IA-22 "Diente de León" was the first armed airplane of Argentina, but that aircraft was designed after the US asked to Argentina to reinforce itself with armed airplanes... we had to be asked by another country to produce our own armed planes.

The Pulquis were supported in all time by Peron. The story is that when the prototype of Pulqui I was finished, the United Kingdom offered as medium of paid a good number of aircraft Gloster Meteor and Avro Lincoln to pay the large debt that country had with Argentina.
The Meteor was by far a better plane than the IA-29, and they were free-paid. It was a good decision because Peron ordered to produce an aircraft that could exceed the performances of the Meteor in a short-time period, starting the IA-33 Pulqui II to reinforce the Argentine Air Force in 5 years.
When the prototypes of the Pulqui II were actives, the Armed Forces removed the democratic power and then, they cancelled the Pulqui II and bought the F-86 Sabre (it wasn't peron who bought those aircraft).

As I said, Peron wanted to have first-line products, to compete with all the world powers...

The IA-22DL wasn't an aircraft that could compete with the best aircraft in the world. The IA-33 was (it had a lot of requests from different nations, those nations leaded by Egypt that requested 200 aircrafts).
The weapons that were produced in Argentina before Peron couldn't compete with the best factories' products. The weapons of peron's era could.

Panzerknacker
12-20-2005, 10:11 AM
First, the AeMb1 Bombi was an awfull aircraft, it only could carry one bomb, and it was so difficult to operate that was so strange to see it flying. The IA-22 "Diente de León" was the first armed airplane of Argentina, but that aircraft was designed after the US asked to Argentina to reinforce itself with armed airplanes... we had to be asked by another country to produce our own armed planes.

I dont have any info related to this incident.


The Pulquis were supported in all time by Peron. The story is that when the prototype of Pulqui I was finished, the United Kingdom offered as medium of paid a good number of aircraft Gloster Meteor and Avro Lincoln to pay the large debt that country had with Argentina.
The Meteor was by far a better plane than the IA-29, and they were free-paid. It was a good decision because Peron ordered to produce an aircraft that could exceed the performances of the Meteor in a short-time period, starting the IA-33 Pulqui II to reinforce the Argentine Air Force in 5 years.
When the prototypes of the Pulqui II were actives, the Armed Forces removed the democratic power and then, they cancelled the Pulqui II and bought the F-86 Sabre (it wasn't peron who bought those aircraft).


I know that, but if REALLY had the full support of Peron....why then the proyect delayed so long..? The first prototipe of Pulqui II flew in 1950...for 1955 it could be in production very easily, so there is my point if was such concerned for the natinal industries it should put in mass production looooong before the bloody coup of 1955. And he DID NOT. :evil:


And its side is the TAM (Tanque Argentino Mediano) assembly plant. I don't know if this unit was a
private enterprise before. I'm going to investigate it.

No it was not, is a goverment factory



Peron chooses the M4 Sherman because the war was over, and USA
selling it a half of a price to produce the Nahuel

I know that thanks, I just want to opening the eyes of Eagle, to show him that Peron not always choose the "argentine work" :?


We built them for Japan, Chile, Brasil, Turkey and some others...

Actually the only minor navies that had REAL Dreadnaughts where Spain ( tree relative small ships of 16.000 tons) Brasil, Argentina, and Chile.

The brasilian Minas gerais was a 20.000 tons ship but it had a piston engines instead turbines, so it was very slow compared with the Rivadavias. Also the main artillery was L/45 compared with the greater muzzle velocity L/50 than carried the Argentine Battleships. The max armour was 10 inch thick compared with the 12 inch thick Harvey-Nickel-steel of the argentines dreadnaughts.

Aware of that the Brasilian Navy ordered two more powerful ships, that was the "Rio de Janeiro " and the "Riachuelo" with steam turbines and a heavy 14 x 12 inchs guns. They never was deliver because the beginning of WWI, the Royal Navy take over the first and renames "HMS Agincourt", the second was eventually converted in the carrier HMS Eagle.

Turkey suffered similar fate with his "Reshadie" never was delivered and entered in service with the Royal Navy in 1915,...I think under the name of HMS Erin.

And at last but no at list the chileans had his Almirante Latorre also seized by the British name in 1914 under the name of HMS Canada, but it was finally delivered to Chile in 1920 and entered in service.

The conclutions is that in the period 1914-1920 is no doubt that the couple of Rivadavias where the most powerful ships in the South Atlantic.

cpl condor
12-20-2005, 04:03 PM
Anybody knows the final destiny of the "25 de Mayo" carrier? :arrow:

Eagle
12-20-2005, 09:47 PM
About the Pulquis II, were delayed because two of the five prototypes fell down without reasons, so the program was reexamined since zero.


About the "Diente de Leon" and the "Bombi", I must to go now, but I am going to write the story about how the United States asked to Argentina to produce an armed aircraft.

Firefly
12-21-2005, 04:32 AM
Just how much use would one or two Dreadnaughts be anyway? Unless you have enough to make at least one squadron they are of limited use in combat because the enemy will throw everything at it until it is sunk. It might serve as a distraction but it's a damned expensive one and you could get a lot more destroyers or cruisers for the price and crew of one Dread, and because they can manoevre independently they are more likely to survive long anough to do damage.
Unless of course, you pick a fight with someone who actually has a squadron of battleships, in which case you are always shagged.

National pride I suppose. Brasil gets 1 the Argentinians want 1, Chile then gets 1, Brasil gets 2. These things cost so much that the whole country sufferred to pay for them. In the end the Brazilians were skint and had to sell one to Turkey, the Agincourt (http://www.worldwar1.co.uk/battleship/hms-agincourt.html) .

cpl condor
12-21-2005, 03:34 PM
It is that called "military balanced zone" 8)

Panzerknacker
12-21-2005, 05:07 PM
Anybody knows the final destiny of the "25 de Mayo" carrier? :arrow:

Condor...check this site:

http://www.histarmar.com.ar/Portaaviones/25deMayo.htm

http://www.histarmar.com.ar/Armada%20Argentina/Portaaviones/25deMayo/13-25deMayox400.jpg

cpl condor
12-21-2005, 09:27 PM
thank you, Panzerknacker. Really it could be a shame than the ARA
haven't a carrier.
With the modernization, it coudn't be operable for this times?
8)

Panzerknacker
12-22-2005, 07:30 PM
No...it is too old. :?

I would prefer one of the"Clemenceau" French carriers that was put out the service by the Aeronavale.

Brasil bought one and now it is the A-12 "Sao Paulo".

Eagle
12-23-2005, 05:37 PM
The Clamenceu class aircraft carriers, as the Sao Paulo, is not the best solution to Argentina. These kinds of ships are too expensive to have in service.

The 25 de Mayo was dismantled in 1999, in India.

Now, the best posibility of having an aircraft carrier is producing one, in national shipyards, as Domeq Garcia, or in spanish shipyards, as IZAR. Argentina has a fluent relationship with IZAR, and they can do excellent ships.

As far I know, the Argentine Navy asked to IZAR for a new design of convencional aircraft carrier, to operate with convencional aircrafts, as Rafales or Hornets. And of course, that kind of carriers could operate, in a future, with the F-35 JSF, which is very possible to have in our forces in the next tweenty or thirty years.

BDL
12-23-2005, 05:41 PM
Can Argentina afford that kind of defence spending at the minute though Eagle (considering that the new carriers Britain are currently ordering are going to cost several billion pounds and the air complement a couple of billion more)?

Panzerknacker
12-23-2005, 05:48 PM
Thats why I think the used Clemenceau with good refurbishing would be the best option.

cpl condor
12-23-2005, 07:04 PM
don't forget the aircraft, it have to be of other generation, the
A4 now is for a museum, even modernize that.
Even if there are a few F 14 (with their years), I think it could be fine. 8)

Firefly
12-24-2005, 05:37 AM
don't forget the aircraft, it have to be of other generation, the
A4 now is for a museum, even modernize that.
Even if there are a few F 14 (with their years), I think it could be fine. 8)

As the US Navy is binning the F-14, you could get a good deal on them I suppose. They would still be expensive to operate though.

Eagle
12-26-2005, 12:20 PM
Condor, the optimum aircraft would be the Rafale. Not the Tomcat, that is too expensive to mantain, and of course, is very ancient.

A group formed with 10 Super Etendard modernizeds and 18 Rafales would be a dreadful group.

Sturmtruppen
12-26-2005, 12:22 PM
Can Argentina afford that kind of defence spending at the minute though Eagle (considering that the new carriers Britain are currently ordering are going to cost several billion pounds and the air complement a couple of billion more)?

Pretty important fact, Argentina is a rich country, even in money, Argentina is rich,but the Half of the Argentine population is poor,good part of the people,but the government (that spends money in army equipment) has good money.

however kirchner,the ****ing leftist is destroying the army.

1000ydstare
12-26-2005, 12:56 PM
Why would you need an aircraft carrier? The Argentine military is not as expeditionary as other forces. Yes, they take part in UN ops such as Cyprus and the Balkans but when would a carrier be needed?

It is a very expensive type of vessel to build, maintain, operate, crew and equip. I echo previous comments, as a nation Argentina has far better things to spend their money on than a brand spanking new state of the art carrier with or without JSF (!?).

I disagree with your points about the Clemenceau class. This too would require a lot of cash to maintain. It would also be hugely out of date, the hull being 50 years old and the design being older still!!! The design was authorised in in the late 40s!!! Even if it was a snip at $16million.

Sturmtruppen
12-26-2005, 01:10 PM
Well, Chile has an scorpene submarine,if that country has something like that!,then a country like argentina must have a VERY VERY BIG carrier! :wink: .

Firefly
12-26-2005, 02:26 PM
This leads right back to 1912 doesnt it? Chile has a Dreadnought, brazil has 2, we want 1 too.

Chile has a submarine, Brazil has some too etc etc etc....

What good does it do except drain your money?

Sturmtruppen
12-26-2005, 02:37 PM
This leads right back to 1912 doesnt it? Chile has a Dreadnought, brazil has 2, we want 1 too.

Chile has a submarine, Brazil has some too etc etc etc....

What good does it do except drain your money?

Chile hasn't even a national fabrication tanks,argentinas in chase of war can put the obligatory recruitment,and compare our population to the population of chile :lol: .
apart from TAM,we have the new TAN Patagon,a modern national tank,also im afraid chile hasn't a considerable army industry,they buy everything,most of their vehicles are different so guess what would be repairing them,also in chase of war bolivia and peru claim lands stolen by chile,and want war with them,if chile declares us the war,the same happens with bolivia and peru.

And the argentine troops by far have more balls,i never have seen chile in front to a first world country in the top 3 more powerfull countries (also argentina has more resources,population,territory,culture,human level,education,infrastructure) and is by far a more considerable country than chile!.

Argentina is a great army,i think it's the best of LA but of course,after brasil that has a great army with a lot of efectives.

Greetings!.

Firefly
12-26-2005, 03:30 PM
Erwin, I have no idea about the Chilean Armed forces really. But do you think Argentina and Chile will ever go to war?

Sturmtruppen
12-26-2005, 03:35 PM
In the 78's we were going to have war,but finally it ended in peace,the argentine army thanks to the dictatorship was really powerful,even more than when falklands war,and we could destroy chile easily,there was half million of argentine troops in our south prepared for the battle,the biggest number of troops movilizated there.

also peru and bolivia hate chile and viceverza,i have to say that chile has good armed forces,specially if we compare it to peru and bolivia's army,but i think the argentine and brazilian forces are far better!.

greetings!

cpl condor
12-26-2005, 10:01 PM
In the 78's we were going to have war,but finally it ended in peace,the argentine army thanks to the dictatorship was really powerful,even more than when falklands war,and we could destroy chile easily,there was half million of argentine troops in our south prepared for the battle,the biggest number of troops movilizated there.

also peru and bolivia hate chile and viceverza,i have to say that chile has good armed forces,specially if we compare it to peru and bolivia's army,but i think the argentine and brazilian forces are far better!.

greetings!
Sorry, fellow, but we cannot do much when the Air Force does not have a decent plane. Navy is still has private preserves the spare parts of its ships and the Army also doesn't have a really combative force when the state doesn't modernize its forces.
Exists an enormous will of the officers, but for the troops is just a work.
How many units battle ready are existed now aside from the Commandos and the marines? Few, very few, and it laments much this old soldier... :arrow:

cpl condor
12-27-2005, 03:04 PM
Why would you need an aircraft carrier? The Argentine military is not as expeditionary as other forces. Yes, they take part in UN ops such as Cyprus and the Balkans but when would a carrier be needed?

It is a very expensive type of vessel to build, maintain, operate, crew and equip. I echo previous comments, as a nation Argentina has far better things to spend their money on than a brand spanking new state of the art carrier with or without JSF (!?).

I disagree with your points about the Clemenceau class. This too would require a lot of cash to maintain. It would also be hugely out of date, the hull being 50 years old and the design being older still!!! The design was authorised in in the late 40s!!! Even if it was a snip at $16million.
Yes, it is, but we have a great coast and how other countries, we have to defend it. 8)

1000ydstare
12-27-2005, 03:19 PM
In that case C_C you would probably find it a great deal more effective and cheaper to defend your borders and coastline by building losts of small runways. These can be supported by C-130 (or similar aircraft) or by ground vehicles with the combat aircraft landing as neccesary.

During the cold war both the Warsaw pact and Nato had similar airfields. There are stretches of roads which suddenly go wide and straight, these are the dispersal fields for use in the event of WWIII. Your aircraft simply fly to the base land. Get refuelled from fuel bladders, rebombed and away they go again. This would include coastal defence and allow defence of your inland borders, in which a carrier would be useless.

You also can't sink a ground based airfield. An aircraft carrier would need a substantial flotilla around it, to provide a buffer zone for incoming threats, including it's own submarine or two. At a rough guess you would need two anti-submarine vessels, one anti-aircraft vessel, one or two attack submarines aswell as a number of oilers and other support vessels. Aircraft carriers are horrendous to keep supplied for long missions.

This number would increase depending on the threat, if Chile (assuming this is your enemy) has two carriers you will need extra anti-aircraft ships to support the carrier and if you end up in a war with a nation that has superior submarines then you will need extra anti-submarine ships, remembering that even some of the diesals now a days are extremly quiet.

cpl condor
12-27-2005, 03:33 PM
you're right, for a confrontation of that kind.
In the war of today, everybody uses different factors of disuasion,
and for these places, it will be all right. :arrow:

1000ydstare
12-27-2005, 03:56 PM
Think of it as a guerrilla airforce.

Maybe not a p3nis extention like a carrier but a credible defence never the less.

cpl condor
12-27-2005, 05:03 PM
I'm talking of a WAR, guerrilla don't need a carrier, or planes like these.
We got the IA-58 Pucará for those operations. Guerrilla move in lands.
not in a cruiser, or fragate. 8)

cpl condor
12-27-2005, 05:05 PM
Think of it as a guerrilla airforce.

Maybe not a p3nis extention like a carrier but a credible defence never the less.
It passing by the sexual opinion. :arrow:

1000ydstare
12-28-2005, 01:23 AM
What I meant C_C was that they would be fast, mobile, hidden and given a higher survivablity because of this style of working, which has similarities to gurrilla tactics.

The pocket battleships Graf Spee, Bismarck and Tirpitz all operated in a guerilla fashion also.

Obviously I wasn't saying that they would be a real guerilla fighters, as in the VC or similar. They would simply be able to operate in anypart of the country, with the enemy unable to second guess where they would operate from. Also attacks could reach far out, as they could take off from A (where they were refueled and bombed up), attack and land at B. Instead of always returning to their home field.

Pucarras are completely useless now adays against anything but 4th rate armies and backward air forces. However you can invest in some descent type helicoptors, for AG work and conduct descente ops or place people on the ground. Likewise there are fast jets out there that could operate from these primitive fields. Maybe Dani could tell us if a Mig-29 Fulcrum could. But Harriers or similar definitly could. The British have landed fast jets such as Jaguar on stretches of our countries motorways.

And obviously I didn't mean real gorillas, that would just be silly and they are an endangered species.

The P3nis extentions referrs to the fact that it may be sexy or seen as good to have a whopping great carrier, but in fact it isn't always neccesary.

A carrier, in military terms, is used to project power into an area where a country needs it and may have few freindly areas to operate from. Or it is used to show the world how "great" a nation is.

Unless the Argentines are going to start fighting or invadeing places where they do not have support or friendly neighbours do they need a carrier?

A carrier is certainly not a defensive asset, as it almost becomes a burden in itself to defend.

Bladensburg
12-28-2005, 07:41 AM
Ahem, 1000yds. Do i need to remind you that there was nothing "pocket" about Bismark and Tirpitz, they were infact, full-size battleships? :oops:

Panzerknacker
12-28-2005, 07:42 AM
carrier is certainly not a defensive asset, as it almost becomes a burden in itself to defend

If the US navy had follow your military thinking in the WW2, they would be speaking japanese right now. :lol:

The reason for the carrier are simply, the Navy had it in the past, and they need to have it now.

Firefly
12-28-2005, 07:47 AM
carrier is certainly not a defensive asset, as it almost becomes a burden in itself to defend

If the US navy had follow your military thinking in the WW2, they would be speaking japanese right now. :lol:

The reason for the carrier are simply, the Navy had it in the past, and they need to have it now.

But why does Argentina need an aircraft carrier? What purpose will it serve?

Panzerknacker
12-28-2005, 08:08 AM
Urrrghhh......Is so hard to understand ?? :? , the purpose is the defense of the national soil and maritime resources and provide the Navy more range for his operations.....you start to sound like a chilean.

http://img467.imageshack.us/img467/187/orion20we.jpg

Firefly
12-28-2005, 08:16 AM
And that purpose cannot be achieved without an expensive aircraft carrier, why not just buy moders aircraft and a few modern Tankers? Then you can get multi purpose ships for the Navy.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 09:39 AM
Urrrghhh......Is so hard to understand ?? :? , the purpose is the defense of the national soil and maritime resources and provide the Navy more range for his operations.....you start to sound like a chilean.

Where were you all the time that i have been searching you!!! :D ,
Viva Panzerknacker!

1000ydstare
12-28-2005, 01:05 PM
Good point firefly, by modifying aircraft such as airbus and boeing products it is possible to have an aircraft that could carry troops, carry fuel or be permanently assigned to maritime patrol (a job that the Nimrod in UK does very well) over long distances, the full width of the Atlantic for example.

As has been pointed out it is not as simple as purchasing a carrier. It has to be defended and supplied in operation. Not to mention initial equipping costs for the airwing, etc. Unless Argentina has designs on another country not connected to it by land, and not near it. Or they wish to get in to the force projection business they don't need a carrier.

If Chile is all you are worried about, you don't need a carrier as it would in fact serve no real purpose, and be an achilles heel to your navy. It would either never leave port or tie up vital ships, that could be used else where, to defend it.

The reference to the US is flawed. The aircraft carriers at the start of WW2 weren't as active or as potent as they were later. There were only 7 or 8 fleet carriers and one escort carrier at the time of Pearl Harbour in the Pacific. In association with the flying aircraft carriers such as the USS Macon and her sister ships (that were decommisioned in the early 1930s) their aircrafts main roles were to recon, air defence, limited ground attack and attacking capital ships in support of/supported by Battleships (depending on which source you read). It was only when the CVEs were commissioned in greater numbers and the CVBs, in around 43, that the carrier, as we all know it, became what it would be in the future.

After Pearl Harbour the carriers roles, especially in the Pacific were altered to be more offensive. After seeing what an air attack carried out by carrierbourne aircraft was capable of, the attack on Pearl Harbour was seen by the Japanese as a very risky but doable operation. It is worth noting also that the Japanese were horrified by the success of their operation, as it showed how vulnerable to air attack a surface ship was, and promptly ordered the beefing up of their ships AA defences. They had expected massive losses in the attack, which is why they ordered the mission to be cancelled if Pearl Harbour showed any signs that it was pre-warned or ready for an attack - which it wasn't.

The following is about the Yamato but shows how ships Air defences were constantly being upgraded through the war, in all navies. Pearl Harbour was Dec 1941, 18 months later...


In May 1943, she returned to Kure where the two wing 15.5 cm turrets were removed and replaced by 25 mm machine guns, and Type-22 surface search radars were added. She returned to Truk on 25 December 1943, and on the way there, she was damaged by a torpedo from the submarine USS Skate, and was not fully repaired until April 1944. During these repairs, additional 12.7 cm anti-aircraft guns were installed in the place of the 15.5 cm turrets removed in May, and additional 25 mm anti-aircraft guns were added.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Yamato

Panzerknacker wrote

If the US navy had follow your military thinking in the WW2, they would be speaking japanese right now.

Even if the Americans had had no aircraft carriers at the start of the war, they would still have won. The USN was too big for the Japanese to defeat, with the vast resources of America to back it up. The Americans also had vast numbers of cruisers, destroyers and frigates to defend the carriers. With enough left over to deploy cruiser squadrons to flank the battle ship groups with assorted destroyer and frigate protection also.

Panzerknacker wrote

The reason for the carrier are simply, the Navy had it in the past, and they need to have it now.

The navy had cannons, muskets and scurvy in the past too.

Bladensburg, My bad, I confused the size of the Bismarck class with the role. All 3, Graf Spee (and her sisters), Tirpitz and Bismarck, had a similar mission which was to be an independant hunter of commerce ships in particular, although vulnerable warships were also targetted. And were equipped as such for this task. Although I admit their sizes were widely different.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 01:08 PM
worried about chile?,we can put the conscription and have 4 times his regular troops! (there is obligatory service there adn they still have low numbers),not to say that we have national fabrication waeponss (TAN PAtagon is a national tank and it's very modern,much more than the TAM),and why would we need navy to attack them if they are connected to us by land?,we have our capital far from their,they need to conquer 3 provinces to attack our capital,and argentina jumps from mendoza to santiago and...bang,we cutted their supplies,most of chile is in santiago,the rest of chile is crap.

viva argentina!

1000ydstare
12-28-2005, 01:17 PM
Erwin wrote

worried about chile?,we can put the conscription and have 4 times his regular troops! (there is obligatory service there adn they still have low numbers),not to say that we have national fabrication waeponss (TAN PAtagon is a national tank and it's very modern,much more than the TAM),and why would we need navy to attack them if they are connected to us by land?,we have our capital far from their,they need to conquer 3 provinces to attack our capital,and argentina jumps from mendoza to santiago and...bang,we cutted their supplies,most of chile is in santiago,the rest of chile is crap.

So a carrier and its associated expenses are need because.....

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 01:24 PM
So a carrier and its associated expenses are need because.....

Argentina is a big country,so its has a big sea, Argentina needs protection,as one of the richest countries in natural resources we would fear the interests of powerful expansionists countries,israel wanted to form their own country called "andinia" in the zone of the entire patagonia,that means stealing all our south and forming a big israel,the same happened when the Sas had operations to attack our south during the falkalnds conflict.thanks to our luck none of this things happened,today,argentina has more enemies than friends,and it's our responsability to keep argentina for the argentines, and defend us for countries that we consider as hostile to us.
imagine,european countries with pretty small seas have a lot of carriers,we,with a giant country,a lot of sea,and illegal fishers from first world countries stealing our fish,we need protection.

the army is very good,but politics want to destroy it, the navy is good,but it isn't adquiring nothing new or modernizing,our airforce,the best of the world in a time,now is destroyed and with aircrafts of museum!.

this country needs to get up,we have all conditions needed to be an empire,a more or less necesary amount of population,good infrastructure,natural resources,good human level culture and education,territories,good weather,cult people,what do we need?,we need to kick the corrupt politics,and to have an army,if we don't do,i wouldn't like to be in a country anexed by an expansionist world power.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 01:25 PM
about the expenses,we have a lot of money for paying it,we are going to pay the money that the IMF lent us,and we have more,if our politics make a better distribution of the resources,we would be able to grow our armed forces.

i hope one of those powerful guys do something for all this people down the stairs.

Cuts
12-28-2005, 01:47 PM
Urrrghhh......Is so hard to understand ?? :? , the purpose is the defense of the national soil and maritime resources and provide the Navy more range for his operations.....you start to sound like a chilean.

http://img467.imageshack.us/img467/187/orion20we.jpg

PzKnacker, I fully understand and applaud your patriotism but there are actually a number of members with a vast range of practical experience in military matters rather than a most praiseworthy interest in the subject.
These gentlemen have tried to explain as gently as possible that carriers are very, very expensive - not to purchase so much but to maintain.

1000' suggested an eminently workable and tested solution at a fraction of the price.
Admittedly it does not have the undoubted immediate attraction of a large flagship with it's attendant covey of support and defence ships, but one must ask what would be the purpose of such a fleet when there are other less glamorous projects which the same money could - or perhaps should - be spent.

Now, and please don't take this as a criticism, I realise that machismo is a facet of the Latin-American character and that it is important for you to have the respect of your neighbours, but the bottom line is that Argentina does not actually need a force projection capability.
(Fishery protection does not require carriers by the way Erwin.)

"Unless, you the readers, have access to other information..."

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 01:57 PM
let's see,yes,you said that carriers are expensive for us,in more words,well,ARGENTINA IS RICH,FULL OF MONEY,but argentine people don't receive it,the politics receive it.

i prefer the politics spending the money in a carrier than in their own life!,also this country is big and full of natural resources like i said,and countries with big armies and less territory,natural resources,etc woould like to invade us im afraid.

so the best thing is prevent our country from an attack that will happen,we don't know when ,but im sure there will be a war here.

in fact,we can waste the money,there are better ways to spend it,but the patriotism calls,i prefer to be a poor argentine instead of a rich foreigner.

1000ydstare
12-28-2005, 02:08 PM
we would fear the interests of powerful expansionists countries,israel wanted to form their own country called "andinia" in the zone of the entire patagonia,that means stealing all our south and forming a big israel,the same happened when the Sas had operations to attack our south during the falkalnds conflict.

Apart from a helicopter that crashed on your continent with a handfull of men (not country) during 1982 I can't recall a single SAS operation to attack your south.

Can you prove that Israel wanted/wants to form their own country called andinia? Preferably from a less rabid site than this ww..org. A full explanation how this invasion was to occur would also be nice considering in a rough estimation...

they only have 100,000 troops of which only 4 brigades are airmobile.
they have only C-130 as tpt planes, f-14, f-15 and cobras as offensive aircraft.
they have no ships large enough for the job.
they have 6 subs, 3 of which were commisioned in 1971.
they don't have an aircraft carrier either.

Your coastline is indeed vast, which is why you can't defend it with one or two carriers. You have 1656 miles of coast line of which a carrier could only defend maybe effectively 150 miles tops, with it's carrier surface group. As for the CAGs combat air patrols, even with the long endurance of F-14s, with a range of 1853 miles, this would mean that your carrier would have to sit in the middle of the countrys coastline to allow the aircraft to fly their 900 mile patrols.

So although technically possible, the defence would be sparse at best, and the fighters would not have much loitering time nor fighting time at after about 500 miles anyway. Also these aircraft have to balance the fuel they carry with the weapons they carry, otherwise they can't get off the ship. Further distance of patrol = less ordinance. Also on return the aircraft might have to dump its ordinance or fuel to land in the event of a quiet mission.

Long range maritime patrol aircraft, however, flying in race track patterns up and down the coast vectoring in ground based strike aircraft would be a lot more efficient. These aircraft could also carry more fuel and ordinance as they would take off from land.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 02:10 PM
yes sir,this proves what israel wanted with our territory,they wanted to make their own new country called "Andinia"

here you can see:

http://www.patagoniaargentina.8m.com/VIP/Patagonia-ocupada.htm

1000ydstare
12-28-2005, 02:11 PM
On subject of the rich Argentine nation but poor people, would it not be better to use the money to help the people?

I am not convinced the IMF loaned the money to you so you could buy a shiny new aircraft carrier.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 02:13 PM
but you have to take in count that the carrier would have more firepower (thanks of course to the aircrafts on it),than another kind of ship,it has of course a different purpose than a battleship,but both it and this are the most powerful ships.

also the aircrafts in the carrier would have more range of defense, the aircrafts can land in argentina instead of the sea if they want too.

Sturmtruppen
12-28-2005, 02:22 PM
how funny,fishering protection was just an example idiot,i don't want your expansionist country invading mine because you don't have tha half of the natural resources that we have,THAT IS ENOUGH FOR YOU??.