A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Naval discussions covering the latter half of the 20th Century.
User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by tameraire01 » Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:05 pm

We cannot change history no matter how much we want too.
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by tameraire01 » Thu Jun 12, 2014 4:13 pm

would they wait till kgv was in mothballs to invade?
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by tameraire01 » Thu Jun 12, 2014 4:35 pm

As she could have been in 82 is she was still around.
Attachments
HMS King George V 1979.jpg
HMS King George V 1979.jpg (139.71 KiB) Viewed 3497 times
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7528
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by RF » Fri Jun 13, 2014 10:09 am

tameraire01 wrote:would they wait till kgv was in mothballs to invade?
The reasons for the invasion were to do with Galtieri and the military in Argentina wanting to preserve their position, against a background of a failing protectionist economy.

Galtieri launched the invasion in the belief that Britain, in having a woman Prime Minister (Margaret Thatcher), would accept Argentine annexation and make no military counter measures. The gamble failed and it brought down the military junta.

The prospect of a strong resolute British defence would have made an invasion by the junta unthinkable.

Logically in reality all the junta had to do was to wait for HMS Endurance to be scrapped, with no replacement, and for the other British defence cuts to be made.
However the junta wasn't in a position to wait - their weakening position forced the issue, they had to act when they did.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by tameraire01 » Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:26 pm

Which ended badly for them. There will be another war in the south Atlantic soon which would be a great shame when there president is being idiotic.
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7528
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by RF » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:49 am

Another war in the South Atlantic - on what evidence?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by tameraire01 » Tue Aug 05, 2014 7:03 pm

She keeps shouting about the falklands. She has tried to get allies to help invade them again.
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7528
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by RF » Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:08 am

Shouting about the Falklands isn't the same thing as what Galtieri did.

The shouting is for internal consumption, to boost her image as the economy falters. Argentina does not have the naval forces and full logistics to mount an invasion with the force that would be required to seize and hold them. Not even the threat of having an aircraft carrier. And any build up of force would be detected before it could strike.

I doubt that there would be any stomach in Argentina for another war over the Falklands and their president knows it. Shouting is all she has.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

BobDonnald
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 9:44 am

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by BobDonnald » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:54 am

What is the launcher behind KGV's "B" turret? SAM or SSM?

Bob

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by Paul L » Sat Mar 07, 2015 8:46 pm

They look like Exocet SSM launchers.

More to the point, if RN was stupid enough to keep KGV into the late 1970s they would never have left the secondaries as 8 twin 5.25" guns. The only real purpose of secondaries in such a role would be to make up for desperately poor AAA. The four SEACAT GWS 22 would help, but long before that- they should have dumped the 5.25" guns for Mk IV twin 4.5" guns or even the Mk 6 Twin 3"L70 AAA.
"Eine mal is kein mal"

Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by Steve Crandell » Sun Mar 08, 2015 1:16 am

Paul L wrote:They look like Exocet SSM launchers.

More to the point, if RN was stupid enough to keep KGV into the late 1970s they would never have left the secondaries as 8 twin 5.25" guns. The only real purpose of secondaries in such a role would be to make up for desperately poor AAA. The four SEACAT GWS 22 would help, but long before that- they should have dumped the 5.25" guns for Mk IV twin 4.5" guns or even the Mk 6 Twin 3"L70 AAA.
The reason you would retain the 5.25" guns is for shore bombardment, the reason the ship is still around. The US battleships fired many thousands of rounds of 5" ammo in that role.

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by Paul L » Sun Mar 08, 2015 7:16 pm

Steve Crandell wrote:
Paul L wrote:They look like Exocet SSM launchers.

More to the point, if RN was stupid enough to keep KGV into the late 1970s they would never have left the secondaries as 8 twin 5.25" guns. The only real purpose of secondaries in such a role would be to make up for desperately poor AAA. The four SEACAT GWS 22 would help, but long before that- they should have dumped the 5.25" guns for Mk IV twin 4.5" guns or even the Mk 6 Twin 3"L70 AAA.
The reason you would retain the 5.25" guns is for shore bombardment, the reason the ship is still around. The US battleships fired many thousands of rounds of 5" ammo in that role.

The reason you would keep the 14" guns would be for shore bombardment at standoff distance. The 4.5" gun can put more lb. per minute - down range than the 5.25"; which makes it better AAA, better anti shipping and better shore bombardment.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_45-45_mk5.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_525-50_mk1.htm

5.25" = 7-8 x 80lb = 560-640 lb/minute down range to 21km
4.5" = 12-24 x 55lb = 660-1320 lb/minute down range to 19km

There is no role for such a large and expensive warship to fill in RN anyway so they would not have had BB last that long. Much more to the point to have Lion or Tiger last until early 1980s and be sent down.
"Eine mal is kein mal"

Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by Steve Crandell » Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:29 pm

I'm aware that the RN didn't have justification for retaining a KGV in service. The hypothesis was "what if there was one?".

Note that the USN didn't replace the 5"/38s on the Iowas with 5"/54s because there wasn't enough financial justification to do that. The mounts and everything below them would all have to be replaced at great expense. Same thing with going from 5.25" to 4.5".

paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by paul.mercer » Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:28 pm

Gentlemen,
Obviously the Belgrano v a KGv would be no contest, but what if HMS Belfast was both seaworthy and battleworthy, would the better trained RN ship and crew prevail?

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7528
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: A KGV in the south atlantic 1982 ?

Post by RF » Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:14 am

I would think they would, however there were two smaller escort ships accompanying Belgrano and they would have to be reckoned with as well.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Post Reply