A-4 Skyhawk Vs AV-8B Harrier Falklands War Dogfight | DCS |
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2020
- General Store: teespring.com/stores/growling...
F-14 Tomcat "Cat Person" Hoodies: teespring.com/f-14-tomcat-cat...
F-14 Tomcat "Cat Person" T-Shirt: teespring.com/f-14-tomcat-cat...
F-16 Viper HUD Hoodie: teespring.com/classic-hoodie-...
If You'd like to Support the Channel on Patreon:
/ growlingsidewinder
Longshot's Channel: / @longshotchannel
Check out the Merch Store: teespring.com/stores/growling...
Link to join Discord: / discord
Amazon Links for the products I use if you're interested:
_________________________________________________________
Link for Thrustmaster 16000M: amzn.to/3mA3HMa
Link for Trackir 5: amzn.to/33E07bh
Link for Warthog throttle/stick: amzn.to/2Vbfhyp
Social Media
________________________________________________________
Twitter: / growlingaim9
Facebook: / growlingaim9
Contact me:
GrowlingSidewinder@hotmail.com
My Computer Specs Including Head Tracking and HOTAS Throttle/Joystick:
HP OMEN 880-130 - Windows 10
Intel Core i7-8700K
2TB HDD / 1TB SSD
32GB DDR4 RAM
GTX 1080 Ti
HeadTracker: Trackir5
Thrustmaster F/A-18C Hornet stick and Warthog Throttle.
Satellite Images used in the Tacview are provided by the Sentinel-2 under the European Commission’s Copernicus Program.
If you enjoy war thunder or are looking forward to Microsoft flight simulator 2020, consider getting yourself into Digital Combat Simulator by Eagle Dynamics, the Combat side of Aviation with the BVR and Dogfights really provides a different and interesting perspective on aviation. You can fly all kinds of combat aircraft including the F-16, F-15, F-14, JF-17, Su-27, Mig-29, Mirage and the F-18 Hornet along with many other aircraft and helicopters like the Ka-50 and Mi-8.
In this video we explore the possibilities of the dogfights that could have gone down during the Falkland's War. We take an Argentinean A-4 Skyhawk and we are Dogfighting a British AV-8B Harrier, in an attempt to see how this kind of engagement could have gone down during those times, Both sides fought bravely and these were truly brave them strapping themselves into these machines and fighting to the bitter end often there were no chutes or ejections. - เกม
![[Vowel]물고기는 물에서 살아야 해🐟🤣Fish have to live in the water #funny](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3G9MH063Cx4/mqdefault.jpg)
General Store: teespring.com/stores/growling-sidewinder-store
F-16 Viper HUD Hoodie: teespring.com/classic-hoodie-f-16-viper-vs-m?pid=212&cid=5819
F-14 Tomcat "Cat Person" Hoodies: teespring.com/f-14-tomcat-cat-person-premi?pid=227&cid=2664
F-14 Tomcat "Cat Person" T-Shirt: teespring.com/f-14-tomcat-cat-person-class?pid=2&cid=2397
F-18 Murder Hornet: teespring.com/new-american-murder-hornet-f-a?tsmac=store&tsmic=growling-sidewinder-store&pid=2&cid=2397
F-15 Eagle T-Shirt....
...
...
...
Dude been loving your new videos love the format keep making great stuff please do some more missions
Mate, thanks for making this scenario! Was a great exhibition match-up.
Malvinas Argentinas
hey GS can you give the mig-21 some love?
3:35
Harrier: *shoots misile*
A4: “my countermeasures are beyond your understanding”
The a4 did not have chaff or master missile or anything only the eggs of the Argentine pilots
@Felipe Martínez Saravia Maybe.. They still got their asses kicked. They didn't shoot down a single harrier! xD
@Felipe Martínez Saravia Lol, touché my friend. touché. ;)
@@b.elzebub9252 in fact, Britain naval losses are way more important than Argentina losses btw
@@Nicolas-zw5ex you say that, but Britain held the Falklands
I love how you give a little history lesson before hand. I think you should do more history lessons!!
thank you man, deff wherever possible I will do it.
I agree.
@@GrowlingSidewinder I just sent to my mate saying nice history intro's now
@@GrowlingSidewinder you've got the fuel issue completely wrong, there was no shortage of fuel in the Argentine Air Force, the problem was the range of the Mirages and Skyhawks. The Mirages didn't have IFR probes, so even with supersonic fuel drop tanks, they were at the very edge of their range, with less than 15 mins of loiter time. The Skyhawks did have probes, but even so, they didn't have AA missiles, they were mostly intercepted AFTER they did their bombing runs, returning unarmed and without any RWR or countermeasures like chaff or flares.
Watch the oversimplified video on the falklands
There actually was one instance where an A-4 had dropped its ordnance and positioned itself behind a Harrier for a gun kill, but it's 20mm cannons had jammed. The Argentines A-4's had older versions of the Colt 20mm cannons that were notorious for jamming solid if the aircraft pulled more than a few G at any time. Coming off their bomb runs often jammed their cannons solid, so they basically were totally defenseless against the Harriers without even cannon. They also had poor RWR, and often had to be told about the presence of Harriers by the GCI radar sites at Stanley. They really didn't have a chance against the Harriers. In Sharkey Ward's book on the subject his squadron chose to fly at the lower altitudes because that's where the Skyhawks flew. The other squadron on the other carrier flew at high altitudes and thus never scored many kills because one, they were told to turn off their radars by the CO who believed their radars were garbage, and two, because the A-4s were down low. It was this command of turning off the radars and flying high that allowed the Etendards to fly in under the CAP undetected and sink the Sheffield with Exocets. So half the Harriers flew up high in the Northern sector, while the Southern squadron flew at lower altitudes and racked up the majority of the kills.
harrier does not have a radar so rwr would be pointless for finding them
This version of the Harrier(NOT an AV-8B the US Marines Version) was actually a SEA Harrier a dedicated Carrier DEFENCE Version - it DID have a Radar the "Blue Fox" version..........
The Blue Fox Radar was optimised for Air to Air combat over water.......
@@bevlawton1488 did not know that...interesting...was it a good radar?
@@willl7780 Not really. It’s actual detection range was less than 20 miles without clutter. The next version of the Sea Harrier had a much better radar, and was the first NATO aircraft capable of firing the AMRAAM. I flew with Sharky Wards son for a short while as a civilian.
"it's 20mm cannons had jammed" ahhh, good ol' Argentine armed forces
4:00 has got to be the coolest scene of 2020
Dude that’s some Ace Combat shit right there bruv.
The A4 has never looked so majestic.
Indeed)
that was pretty extreme indeed
I want that in a movie now...
The A4 Skyhawk is a formidable aircraft in the right hands. In New Zealand our A4's had the early block F-16 radar and a glass coctpit. We carried sidewinders and mavericks as well as laser guided bombs and had a modern Feranti Head Up Display. We did a simulated attack against an Australian base called RAAF Tindal back in the 90's. We put 5 skyhawks against the base and the Aussies put 4 hornets in the air. We managed to fight our way into their airspace and shoot down all 4 hornets without a skyhawk loss. With the right avionics the right training and weapons the skyhawk is lethal.
The hallmark of the kiwi defense force is doing amazing things on an absolute shoestring budget
Which makes their retirement look even more stupid
Here in Argentina ours a4 have the F16 upgrade but not in the year 82, it was a late upgrade.
🇳🇿
Well it was 5 vs 4.
So he hit the turn, shot your missile with his missile, laid down some gun fire and avoided you by a mere few feet, all within like 2 seconds?
Get this man some recognition.
The Sea Harrier was smaller and lighter than the AV-8 and most importantly had radar
AIM-9 Sidewinders*
And... rwr, aim9 L"...
Indeed mate! the Blue Fox multi mode radar
@@moncho5080 FRS1 used in Falklands didn't have RWR, or chaff or flare dispensers. The used to jam bundles of chaff into the airbrake.
@@Aeronaut1975 That's just so British. Bless 'em.
3:50 god damn that was straight outta Ace Combat!
yo buddy, still alive?
@@x9lt231
@@quarol732
I got chills when I saw both missiles destroy each other and the A-4 coming out of the explosion
Yeah that was freaking awesome
Yeah bro that was awesome!
*Yeah* that was awesome, I heard Angus Dei from Ace Combat 4 when that happened.
Could hitting a flare have done the same thing?
That miraculous appearance of the Skyhawk emerging from the fireball of the 2 missiles colliding - one of my all time favorite DCS images!
Priceless!
Absolutely love these documentary style commentaries and historic engagements, Growling's channel is so underrated
thank you man very kind of you.
Ikr
Agreed!!
I'm a sci-fi novelist, a friend asked me if DCS inspired any of the aerial dogfights in my stories or if I gamed. I told him no,. I didn't know what DCS was, though I've watched my son and grandson game other such. So I've come looking. Now, what do I see four minutes in? DAMMN!!
Whre do i buy your book
@@palomaelegante Amazon. 'Shatrujeet!', 'Conquest!' by G.W. Morgan.
So like all conflicts its hard to find articles and accurate numbers to support what really happened the Argentinians dismiss British claims and the British dismiss Argentina's claims, Such is the nature of these conflicts but one thing is for sure, the Men who climbed into these aircraft whether they were British or Argentinian all struggled to fit their massive balls into the cockpits of these aircraft. Much Respect to all troops and pilots etc who had to be a part of this conflict. Hope you guys enjoyed the video and thank you all for watching. Take care and stay safe.
A-4s attacked British ships with iron BOMBS. that's definitely some brass ones. Can you imagine low level bombing a ship with a CIWS gun?
@@SVSky I'm pretty sure most of our ships did not have CIWS. It was very new at the time and had not been fitted in time for the Falklands. The only reliable point defence weapons that were equipped handheld Browning machine guns and whatever guns crewmen could lay their hands on.
@@SVSky No British ships had Ciws and the anti air armament was so bad the type 42 destroyer HMS Coventry ( Anti air warfare ship) had to have an escort of a type 22 frigate (sea wolf) but still got sunk.
The Argie pilots were very brave but misguided if they had targeted the troopships not the warships they would probably won.
(Assisted by the British press who told them their bombs were not exploding because the fuses didn't arm because of the low altitude drops.)
@@willmorrell488 GPMG's not Brownings. You're right, we didn't have anything CIWS other than the SeaWolf missile system.
Sharkey Wards book "Sea Harrier Over the Falklands" is a good read GS. Of course it doesn't put the Argentine AF point of view...
I attended a lecture by a Harrier squadron commander who served in the Falkland at the Air & Space Museum in the late ‘80s. He had a very interesting response to an audience member who said something like “Bet you wish you’d had one of our big American carriers.” He replied that weather conditions were such that Harriers could land in conditions that would have precluded USN flight ops, describing how they could fly low and slow in misty conditions, find the wake of their carrier, and steer to a landing in very low visibility conditions.
I have no personal opinion in the matter. Merely reporting what the man said.
They wouldn't have gotten a carrier, but the US was prepared to lend the Brits the USS Iwo Jima LPH-2 (Helicopter carrier/amphibious assault ship)
If we'd had a big carrier (not even a US super carrier, a smaller fleet carrier like the planned CVA01 or the retired Phantom/Buccaneer Ark Royal would have been enough) the Falklands conflict wouldn't have happened in the first place. The Argentine Junta had calculated that the UK lacked the capability to respond to their invasion which is why they risked it instead of starting a conflict with Chile over the disputed Beagle channel islands. If we'd maintained our carrier and amphibious fleet they wouldn't have dared try it.
@@Akm72 Arguably it was a positive thing for Britain overall though. It was a boost for national pride and a display of British long range capability on the global stage.
@@MrEsphoenix Possibly, though you could also argue that spending the extra money on maintaining our military capability would have achieved the same objective with less blood split.
growling sidewinder be like: let's do some dog fights with the ground attack aircrafts
A10 vs AV8B
Viggen vs AV8B
@@willmorrell488 viggen Vs Harrier COULD be interesting. we'll have to see.
@@GrowlingSidewinder A10 vs Su25?
they where used this way in falklands so can't argue
@@SteviePonder123 Su25 wins because of speed mostly
loved the historical bit, nice to see some attention on my country. This was the only modern conflict we fought and our air force was so far behind. The british pilots did great too, lots of training makes a big difference. Keep it up
Some cool stuff argentinian A-4 pilots did: due to having unguided bombs and having to get close to the target, and the anti air capabilities of the british ships being so good, the argentinian A-4s flew so close to the water the glass of the cockpit would get full of salt. Ground crew hated the added maintinance but this allowed the pilots to get right up to the ships
They were very brave men. Nearly everything was against them.
we had some balls, very smart people back then. all that is lost due to these idiots in government
Shame these "brave men" served a murderous murdering military junta that invaded a peaceful country causing the death of one of the civilians and several hundred British troops. I ain't praising them any more than I would praise a Luftwaffe ace of WW2.
At 3:20 my mouth dropped. Not only in shock but pure love for this game. Dogfights like this on DCS is what makes this game for me. You don't expect it to turn out like that.
As a DCS Harrier pilot. (My first and main airframe) I find it very effective to put flaps into stol so they extend to 25 degrees to improve turn rate then retract them to auto to regain energy. Also another thing to note is when I fly on the cold war servers where the harrier is guns only and your fighting mig 21's mostly, the harrier can climb with a mig 21 for quite some time, sometimes even leading to the kill.
Royal Navy Pilots have said they were not afraid of the F series jets but the Mirage 2000 was hailed as 'fruity'. Saying that, an FA2 is a very different beast to an AV8B. Mind you, Royal Navy Pilots are very different beasts. Because. 1 RN ethos 'Find, close with and destroy the enemy at first contact' 2. RN Aircrew are the best In the British Military. 3. Harriers were brutally overpowered.
That A4 held on really well
he fought valiantly
I'm Argentinian, an i'm very proud that we could give fight with outdated planes, vs the state-of-the-art Harrier!
Cheers!
It is nice to see an iconic plane from my homeland featured in this channel, Amazing duel! Greetings from Argentina Growling
cerra el orto boeee re wachin
You lost lol
Also the plane isn’t from your homeland it’s from America, it was good in the 60s and you guys used it 20 years later...
@@mcbinks5006 yes, the thing is we don't care about that lol. we just need to defend our frontier
@@mcbinks5006 AMERICA IS A CONTINENT!!!
For those who who want to know more about the Falklands War, particularly the aerial angle, the following books are recommended (sorry for the repetitive names):
"Air War: South Atlantic" by Jeffrey Ethel, a general overview of the conflict's air operations on both sides
The memoirs of the Royal Navy's two Sea Harrier squadron commanders during the war: "Hostile Skies: The Battle for the Falklands" by Cmd. David Morgan and "Sea Harriers Over the Falklands: The Black Death" by Cmd. Nigel "Sharkey" Ward
"Skyhawks over the South Atlantic: Argentine Skyhawks in the Malvinas/Falklands War" by Santiago Rivas, obviously focused on the Skyhawk pilots and their missions
"RAF Harrier Ground Attack: Falklands" by Jerry Pook, a look at the lesser known but still crucial role that Royal Air Force Harrier GR3s played in the war
"Vulcan 607" by Rowland White, a look a the role that the UK's Vulcan strategic bomber played in the war and what was at the time the longest distance bombing raid ever attempted
And for helicopter aficionados, "Down South: A Falklands War Diary" by Chris Parry, the memoirs of a Royal Navy Wessex pilot who took part in both troop transport and anti-submarine ops during the conflict
Good call on those titles. Particularly the helicopter focussed one. The rotors weren’t half busy during that conflict.
Harrier 809, also by Rowland White
As other's have mentioned it was a sea harrier in the Falklands conflict which was different to the AV-8B. The AV-8B was Harrier 2 while Sea Harrier was Harrier 1 with improved Air to Air capabilities. The US supplied the UK with AIM9L sidewinders which included stripping their operational squadrons of them. They were a difference maker and performed far better than in the videos.
I believe the AIM-9L came from Nato stocks stored in the UK.
In the early 1990’s, I was on 75Sqn, RNZAF and we were on exercise in Thailand and Singapore. Our A4’s were modernised with F-16A radar and Aim-9L. We exercised against the Harriers on HMS Invincible and the combination of good pilots and equivalent missiles had us come away with a superior K/D ratio. Our pilots said the main drawback for the Harrier was it just bled energy in turns. That, combined with the fast roll rate of the A4 (~720 deg/sec) made it very hard for the RN pilots to win a dogfight.
I’m glad you made that point👍🏻
Take it you ain't read Sea harrier over the Falklands. And how before this war started the Harrier was put against F15 , F5 , Tom cat ....and beat them convincingly in dogfighting.
I can only go with what I experienced, which was that when flown by our pilots, who did a lot of dogfight training, with equivalent missiles (both aircraft had the 9 Lima), the A4K was more than capable of outperforming the Shar.
Not only did they have to deal with Harriers and Sea Harriers with up to date Sidewinders, the Argentinians also had half a dozen Sea Dart launchers pointed at them.
And it turned out that Sea Dart was really effective.
with the newer radar set
@@farmerned6
Just a shame not all of the destroyers had that radar.
Fixed after Falklands, they were deadly in the Gulf.
Seawolf was also very effective.
In truly "the missile knows where it is" fashion, the Harrier's gun pipper is positioned based on how you're manoeuvring such that if you manoeuvre to keep the enemy aircraft on the pipper, the pipper is where the rounds will hit the aircraft. It knows where the enemy aircraft is based on how you're manoeuvring to put the aircraft in front of the pipper. It then adjusts the pipper so that you put the aircraft in the right place to score a hit. Err...
It works, and it's way more useful than that awful snake thing in the Mirage. Just how much wine and strong cheese was consumed during the design of that thing?
A-4 Skyhawks only had access to obsolete AIM-9Bs, whereas RN Harriers had the latest all-aspect-attack AIM-9L.
Growling Sidewinder thanks for uploading this air combat simulation. I am Argentine and as you say, the A4 were not armed for such air combat missions. It should be added that the A4 had no anti-missile countermeasures, no chaff or warning radar. Without a doubt, the one that made the difference was the AIM-9L Sidewinder air-to-air missile, which was 80% effective in kills. A big greeting to all who pass through your channel
Also A4 has no radar warning
Los A-4C de la fuerza aérea y los A-4Q del COAN tenían capacidad para lanzar misiles aire-aire...es mas, el 1 de Mayo salieron 2 o 3 escuadrillas de A-4C armados con Shafrir II (los mismos que usaban los Mirage V Dagger) en misiones de sombrilla aérea.
If one missile could of won the war why didn't Argentina win ?? They had the Exocet-one missile alone could (and did) destroy a ship.
@@styles2000bc You're stupid.
@Meanie Panini As I Remember (being involved) the French continued to supply the Argentinians with support during the campaign.French weapon manufacturers and government just saw Sales opportunities and thought nothing of supplying weapons and secure NATO information to Argentina. I would trust an Argentinian at my side in battle much more than a Frenchman!
3:36 Well now we have something bigger to put next to the exhibit of the 2 bullets that collided mid air
Which video was the bullet?
@@deepalperera4592 not a video, I believe it’s something that actually happened irl
@@samw3891 Oh I see, thanks!
the most accepted list of harriers losses in the conflict is this:
1.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat ZA174
Lost on May 29 when he was getting ready to take off from the Invincible aircraft carrier. At the moment of taking off the ship hit a large wave, which caused the plane to slide down the wet platform to fall from it into the sea. The moment it fell, its pilot ejected successfully.
2.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat ZA192
Lost on May 23, after having taken off from the aircraft carrier Hermes , while advancing towards the islands to carry out an attack mission, it was seen to explode about 10 miles from the ship, its pilot passing away. (This version was always questioned by the Argentine position, which assumes that in this way the British tried to hide with an accident a possible downing by their forces).
3.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat XZ450
Shot down by Argentine anti-aircraft artillery with 35mm guns in Puerto Darwin on May 4 when he carried out bombing missions on the area. Unfortunately, the pilot called Nick Taylor died. His remains were buried by the defense forces with full honors.
4.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat XZ452
On May 6 on a Combat Air Patrol mission following an echo at very low altitude his section went into a low cloud or a fog bank, and collided with his wingman, the XZ453. Both pilots died. (This is another of the official statements of which the Argentine position doubts, since it could be a cover-up of possible Argentine downing).
5.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat XZ453
On May 6, on a Combat Air Patrol mission following an echo at very low altitude, his section went into a low cloud or a fog bank, and collided with his wingman, the XZ452. Both pilots died.
6.Sea Harrier FRS.1 mat XZ456
Downed on June 1 by the Argentine forces with the use of a Roland missile when the plane carried out offensive actions against the airport of Puerto Argentino. The pilot ejected and fell into the sea near Puerto Argentino. Several helicopters in CSAR missions went out in search without result. That same night the pilot was rescued by British Sea King helicopters that had taken off from the Invincible aircraft carrier.
7.Harrier GR.3 mat XZ963
Knocked down on May 30 by light anti-aircraft fire, which reached him over Puerto Argentino, causing damage to the machine, which was taken by his pilot up to 30 miles from the aircraft carrier Hermes, where he was ejected and then rescued by a Sea King from same ship.
8.Harrier GR.3 mat XZ972
Shot down on May 21 by anti-aircraft fire and a portable Blowpipe missile launched by the Argentine special forces in Port Howard, Gran Malvina.
9.Harrier GR.3 mat XZ988
Downed by 35mm AA artillery on May 27 on Goose Greene, where he made close air support to the forces of PARA-2 that were already beginning their offensive against the Argentine garrison there. His pilot successfully ejected himself extremely close to the Argentine positions (about 10km from Pradera del Ganso), where he managed to hide until being rescued by a Gazelle helicopter.
10.Harrier GR.3 mat XZ989
Lost in an accident on June 8 when he was preparing to land in VL configuration (Vertical Landing) on the improvised airfield of Puerto San Carlos. When it was already in static flight soon to land, the Pegasus engine suffered a failure and consequent loss of power, falling and hitting hard against the ground, remaining half-destroyed, its components being used as a source of spare parts. The pilot did not eject, although he suffered no injuries.
Puerto Argentino, crikey that's ominous.
@@mostevil1082 Stanley is the real name of the place.
Puerto Argentino is a grocery store in Italy... are you sure about that? You mean Port Stanley. And Puerto San Carlos is in Mexico. It wasn't a world war!
Not counting "Soapy" Watson's Harrier? He was the pilot who got lost, and landed on a Spanish container ship. Had he simply stayed in the cab, the British would have easily got it back, unfortunately he left the cockpit, and the Spanish ship claimed salvage rights! I believe he didn't get court-martialled, but his career took a hit. I knew the guy about a decade later - and he was what is known as a Pen-15
@@chumleyk puerto argentino namr is more old than Port Stanley... Just say
Both A-4 and F5E are great budget planes; it would be nice to see you fly them vs contemporary fighters (or near enough).
One A-4 did manage to get in position go shoot a Sea Harrier with guns - he pulled the trigger and the gun jammed. I've forgotten the name, the two pilots met after the war and became friends. No harrier was lost air to air in the conflict. VIFFing is great for loosing speed but the problem is that just like any vectored thrust it costs you a huge amount of energy.
Never seen two missiles hit at 4:00, what is this epicness!
Love your channel @Growlingsidewinder
100k!!! Congratulations man, you deserve em. You got me into DCS and I've put 60 hours into it in like a week lol. Keep it up :)
Time for education to leave the chat
thank you brother couldnt have done it without the support of subs like yourself. much love.
It gets better and better with each video. I love the new intro and the animations with the beginning of a new round 😊
I witnessed a harrier bring down an Argentine plane around San Carlos bay. The harrier pilots were top notch and we always felt secure when we had air cover from them.
That missile on missile explosion with the Skyhawk coming out of it was awesome! Bet you couldn't pull that off on purpose if you tried (although if you could, that would be truly epic).
The biggest winner on that island that I can remember was the sheep.
Spoken like a true Scotsman🐑+💂♂️=💖
I love how you give a little history lesson before hand. I think you should do more history lessons!!
Sadly not... to this day they are still being taken out by landmines.
@@chumleyk Hmm..I think you'll find the islands are (in News last 3 months) now considered very recently demined in total..ofc there will be random mines missed just like WW2 bombs still being found but overall it was one of longest largest demining operations ever undertaken..Meanwhile children in Asia still die from landmines planted in 1950s but our sheep are okay................
I'm loving this channel. I was watching different DCs videos and it was basically the pilot getting annoyed with people the whole time. This is much more relaxing.
Sir Tom Sopwith, whose aircraft played a huge role in WW1, founded the Hawker Aircraft Company, and lived to see the triumph of the Hawker Siddeley Harriers in the Falklands War.
This was one of the best dogfights I've seen on this channel
Good effort to keep us entertained, but historically so wide of the mark. The UK was using 2 versions of the Harrier for this war, the GR3 (RAF Ground Attack) and the FRS1 (RN Air Defence). The cockpits and aerodynamics were nothing like what was represented here, nor, do I firmly believe, were flares and chaff dispensed during the air conflicts. The avionics in the British Harriers were way inferior to that displayed here, but the human factor is also misrepresented. The Argentine flyers were indeed supremely brave and skilled, and have been widely applauded for that. The British, in addition to bravery and skill, underwent specific training not widely acknowledged. For instance, the British did extended DACT with the French AF on the Mirage 3, to learn it's weaknesses etc. We aquired the Sidewinder AIM-9L, which at that time, was the latest and best version, and we had chance to fire the weapon over the fleet to get used to the sounds and smells of war. These are the undocumented factors of the war.
I've seen a A-4 Skyhawk from the brazilian navy do some manouvers over the ocean when I was at the beach once, it was one of the most badass things I've ever seen.
You missed out three very other important considerations for the British victory: better training, years of combat experience learning and communication vectoring to the target.
Awesome history lesson before the battle!
0:00 History Info
2:26 Flight Start
Yeah fair bit of what got the Brits their kills was training and tactics. The British pilots as far as I have read respected the Argentine airmen, considering them brave and professional.
and the helpf of all nations around argentina, even the US
Niseini - shut up, stop with the 30 year old salt. We were there alone fighting you on your doorstep and you lost, fair as.
@@Crazed-oi3bs Yeah, with your whole proffesional veteran fleet against 30 year old planes that barely had fuel, undertrained troops comprised of teenagers; and in the midst of an economic crisis and brutal dictatorship that cost the lives of about 30.000 citizens. If you didn't win that war then i'd be worried, also no salt. It was a stupid and senseless war as a last ditch effort for the government to gain traction, and they(and in turn we) lost. The doorstep argument has no relevance when you carry a gun in a knife fight, look at the middle east; it's roughly the same.
@@Crazed-oi3bs But here you are stirring a 30 year old teapot, if anyone is salty that someone is actually showing respect towards us is you. Get a life
@@GranadaFelish You typed up a whole ass paragraph and are telling me to get a life? The amount of salt reeking off of you is immense. You got done in, end of.
Those missiles targeting and detonating each other is the coolest shit, man
3:50 That was the coolest shit I've ever seen.
God, imagine if DCS had dynamic smoke.
Would love to see DCS World put in Gr3 Harriers and FRS1 Harriers - more historical for this Cold War period.
that would deff be cool. In general I'd like to see different variants of some of the aircraft we have, especially from WW2.
Sorry for being a little late; I believe they are going to add them at some point - along with a South Atlantic map, they announced it on their website.
I don't know about the GR.3, but they did say the FRS.1, Mirage III, SuE and the Pucara would be added at some point.
@@vr64life90 Yeah I heard the same. I'm pretty sure they wanted essentially a "Falklands War set" which I am totally down for.
@@sgtrpcommand3778 +1
The Harrier was so successful because they faced the retreating Skyhawks after attacking the Royal Navy ships, also by the AIM-9L, plus the Skyhawks were at the limit of their combat radius, they simply did not have the necessary fuel to face even if it is with cannons against Sea Harriers, on the other hand the Sea Harriers operated close to their aircraft carriers and with antiaircraft cover, there were very few "real" air combat with Mirages and Daggers (neshers) also with the same disadvantages as the Skyhawks
Also The daggers (neshers) unlike the A-4B/C did not count with an aerial refueling drogue , this gave them exactly 6 mins of fuel with afrerburner above 10000ft with 2 "small" drop tanks for A-A combat.
So not a lot of time giving air cover to the skyhawks and other daggers escaping to the fleet SAMs...
The Skyhawks getting shot down on egress was a failure by the Harriers.
They should have gotten them on INgress.
But the Blue Fox was poorly understood by the Hermess 800sqdn Harriers.. They flew high cap, and saw nothig on radar.. then when they detected them, they could not get low fast enough to intercept on ingress. They had more kills, but only after they had to disengage as the enemy entered the Air defences.. bombed.. and then 800sqdn could pick em off at egress.
Either way, Mission failure because they got to the enemy on egress.. prevented nothing
801sqdn had less kills, but , they flew LOW cap, managed to pick up the enemy on their Blue FOX
they bounced the argies on Ingress, they jettisoned and either got shot down or RTB'd.
Less kills, but higher mission success
@@stijnvandamme76 Good point, most of our planes were shot down exiting the fleet after dropping the bombs, so you could say it's a failed mission for the CAP.
But also keep in mind that flying under the radar envelope denied the possibility of detection by the ships before the attack, so Harriers couldn't be vectored to incoming aircraft and had to rely on their radars.
Greetings
All down to Sandy Woodward who basically thought Naval Air power was a thing of the past and ignored the recommendations of the more experienced Harrier commander on the Invincible. If he had swallowed his pride there would have been a lot less British and perhaps fewer Argentinian casualties overall but a lot more Argentinian planes downed.
Never have I seen two AAM collide and detonate. Moments to savour. That's like one in a million, dude. So glad you caught it on vid.
It'd be very interesting to know if it was purely the proximity lasers that triggered the explosion, or a direct impact that high ordered the whole thingumebob.
I seem to remember the advantage the harriers had was two fold. The US supplied the new sidewinders that could lock on the A4's from the front whereas the A4's had to be behind the Harriers. The second advantage was if they did get behind, the harriers popped a little vertical lift, the A4's passed by under, the the harrier popped off a sidewinder.
None of the British sidewinder kills were from the front aspect. The Sea Harriers had many other advantages. Blue Fix radar, better trained pilots in dog fighting, better tactics and psychological warfare... The pilots used to tell the enemy Black Death is coming down the radio!
Awesome! This is the second time I've spotted a missile hitting another missile in DCS which is strange considering DCS multiplayer disables proximity fuses.
Why does it do that?
Harrier: *shoots missile at A4*
A4 : *don't insult my intelligence*
also A4: *pops a USSR magic maneuver but is a US plane*
4:00 THIS. IS. SO. EPIC.
i joined HMS Antrim when she came back from down south. There was a plate on the flight deck where a 500Kg bomb had been dropped by an A4, entered the ship, bounced off the Seaslug deep magazine and ended up in the aft heads (which I ended up having to clean for Skippers rounds) without denotating. This was before the BBC told the world the reason that the bombs didn't go boom was the fusing was set wrong, we lost ships after that. After the Falklands Antrim was West Indies Guard Ship and stood by Grenada while the US invaded. I have loads of pictures of us on the flight desk with the US Navy in the background looking for a few Cubans. Got bounced by two Tomcats while I was sunbathing on the upper deck, they were not happy we where there. USS Independence, Iwo Jima and several landing ships/escorts etc. Saved us having to go to Belize although the Falklands Vets were less than impressed with closing up to action stations..
I was under the impression that the Sea Harrier, as opposed to the RAF Harrier GR. 1 & 3, did have Radar. They also did only have two miisiles, before they modified the launch rails shortly after the war.
Yeah sea harrier had a radar
You ought do the attack on the HMS Coventry and HMS Broadsword. A sailor on Broadsword took a picture where 2 A-4s were very low before the attack.
Omg that slow mo and music was so perfect for the first shot attempt.
speaking as someone who went down to the Falklands just after the conflict i was there in1983. The pilots who were there on the British side spoke highly of the the Argentinian pilots they fought bravely and pressed home their attacks even when they were outmatched. looking at the ground war realistically if the Argentinians had better leadership then it would have been a lot harder for the British. speaking with some of the Argentinians who had been there they said a lot of their company officers chose to fight from well behind the the battle front abandoning the troops to fend for themselves. but at the end of the day the British were the more experienced force since a lot of the Argentine forces were undertrained conscripts
"alright ladies next round ' *crosses legs*
lold
That first fight looked (and sounded) like a forgone conclusion but the Skyhawk drew it out a lot longer than I thought it would.
I went to a ceremony for the installation of an A-4 at our local Navy museum. They had a lot of "old guys" (former pilots) come up and talk about the aircraft. I learned that the aircraft was considered to do nuclear bombing of enemy ships. The thing had an insane power-to-weight ratio, so the idea was to climb and loft the bomb, and then bug out as fast as possible to escape the blast. Another guy around here owns and flies an old Sea Harrier for air shows. The FAA granted him a clearance, but warned him that if any air traffic controller caught him "hot rodding," they would ground his ass. I hope those guys see this video.
The Harriers victories were certainly enabled by the tactics described at the start of the video. But the real winner was RADAR. The UK had radar coverage from fleet as well as airborne early warning from AWACS helicopters. This allowed a relatively small number of Harriers to be vectored away from threats and onto the vulnerable ground attack aircraft.
The UK did not have helicopter AWACS during the conflict.
Nope NO AWACS
Gannet AEW's were lost along with the old HMS Ark Royal in 1979
Less ships would have (possibly) been lost to Exocet attacks if the RN had got AEW
Argentina had got BETTER Situational awareness than the British As they had Both Russian And American Satellite info
along with using Escuadrón Fénix flights, recce with civilian aircraft - Which nearly resulted in Harrier's shooting down an Actual civilian Passenger jet
Un saludo de Argentina, and thank you!
No tiene ni idea sobre como fue malvinas
@@ljmaviacionfuerzasarmadasy3868 lo q dijo es verdad,los harriers evitaban los mirage, y los A4 se utilizaron para hundir/ inhabilitar buques,no tenian tiempo para un dog fight por su autonomia y tampoco contaban con radares ni misiles aire aire,la superioridad aerea era del uk,con algunas compras y actualizaciones en los Mirage hubiera sido diferente, pero no estuvo muy errado su informe.
@@marianhohberg8926 le falto aclarar que no todos los aviones tenían bengalas y que no todos los misiles funcionaban... jejeje
@@rabbitempire5114 no es un video sobre malvinas,es exclusivamente un dogfight entre dos sistemas de armas punto.
@@marianhohberg8926 sisi se, me refería a lo que dice relatando sobre las armas y combates históricos. Cuando habla de las bajas y demás.
Love the history and the footage showcasing it. Researching history is always time consuming. Editing just goes on top of it. So I appreciate the effort.
Always nice when people realize the effort that goes into these Thank you very much and Glad you enjoyed.
This video has THE best footage of all GS videos. The music score setup with that crazy missile collision and the A4 coming out of the foreboding smoke from the explosion were just too perfect.
The harrier has got to be one of my all-time favorite aircraft. I'd say the only thing I actually like more is the Legacy Hornet.
3:50 may be one of the best moments I've seen.
I do remember reading a news article at the time of the war, about how the harrier was able to out maneuver the A4’s because the Harrier would use its thrust vectoring. So I was left with the impression, at the time, that there was some dogfighting between the two
The harriers did not use thrust vectoring or viff in the Falklands. The us marines experimented with it not the royal navy pilots.
@@mstevens113 I heard the RAF did it from day 1 but tried to keep it as secret as they could because it was such an advantage?
@@mstevens113 they did. It has been proved
You ought to get my little brother to evaluate historical accuracy. He flew A-4’s then transitioned to AV8B’s, he told me all about the inside info tidbits during Falklands. (He retired as XO, VMA-311, Marine attack squadron now in FA-18’s iirc.)
Dang! I still can't get over the awesome editing you've been doing lately, keep it up man!
This was a fantastic and very interesting video, great work GS! I'd really love to see more videos like this one in the future, i.e. videos where you use DCS and/or C:MO + Tacview to record multiple runs of faithfully simulated, real historical battles. You could even record multiple runs of hypothetical, but realistic, future combat scenarios between likely (or unlikely) adversary forces and technologies.
Those two missiles colliding was the most epic fkn thing I've seen in this game!
Damn, what a great intro to set things up!!! Great stuff!!! Thanks so much for your content!!!
Man, I just discovered your channel, but this is some insanely entertaining stuff. Keep it up man! And thanks for providing such content!
British and Argentinian
Viewers :
Comment section can be whatever I want
awesome video! its cool to see some of the less dogfighty planes.
Another idea, i am not sure, how DCS can actually simulate that, but id love to see some fights in "bad conditions". Do some aircraft perform better at night or rain? could you use clouds as cover in bvr or dogfights? I think that could really add another interesting detail to your videos.
Keep up the good work
That slow motion shockwave after the sidewinders collided was awesome!
Your editing is insane, love it. So cinematic
Wow, the quality of this video is just great man. I watched this the 2nd time now, and especially the beginning of the video with the little history lesson there is of such good quality that you deserve a million subs atleast.
That Sidewinder Moment was really funny, keep it up!
Thank you man very kind of you.
You shot so many rounds that first round I was expecting you to run out of ammo😂
The important thing to note was the Harriers use of it's variable thrust to do a tactic called viffing, no need to turn like normal, they could basically turn on the spot.
That first nose to nose through the smoke was probably one of the coolest things ive ever seen on your channel
Congrats on the 100K. Following you since early 2018. Got immediately hooked and subscribed due to your pedagogical and theoretical approach that helped me a lot to improve my in game performance. You are the best DCS content creator. Hands down.
Great dog fight video. Loved that rise from the ashes shot at 4:00. Greetings from Argentina and keep them videos coming.
Hey man thank you very much for the kind words. Always grateful to have the support of subs like yourself. None of this would be possible without you guys, also if you've been around since 2018, that means you were here from pretty much the start so a special thank you to you for sticking with me as I learned how to make the videos better.
@@GrowlingSidewinder you were always top notch!
Dang, GS you shined on this swole beast of a Harrier, one of my Favorite aircraft as a kid.
thanks brother, hoping to get better with time.
@Growling Sidewinder thanks for giving us this fight we've been asking for. Great video!
my pleasure thanks for the suggestions.
Well that first engagement was the coolest thing ive ever seen happen in DCS!! awesome!
Man that missile on missile was the most amazing thing ive seen
The "what if" scenario could have come to be a reality one if the Puerto Argentino/Port Stanley airfield would had been enlarged for a limited operational usage by both Mirages and A4. If UK had waited a couple of months for the military response that would had been the case. And with Mirages in full range the Harriers would have had such a hard time. The other possible scenario would be an Aicraft Carrier battle, with 25 de Mayo A4Q's armed with AIM9-B defending from Harrier's attack who are escorted by SeaHarrier armed with AIM9-M
Nevertheless i should point that Argentine Air Force A4B weren't capable of carrying any AA missile, while A4C were able to carry IAI Shafrir missile (which was an early version of Python and kind of equal to AIM-9B). Also, any of the Air Force A4 had the APG-53A radar, due to technical troubles and spare shortage due to 1978 USA embargo, radars were removed from A4Cs and all the A4 were fitted with a TACAN system
On the Argentine Navy side, the A4Q were A4B with 2 extra pylons and were wired to carry AIM-9B. They were pretty much A4E without the radar and Engine, since Argentine Navy did tried to buy the A4E or M in order to emulate on ARA 25 de Mayo the HMAS Melbourne config. USA only allowed for "improved" A4B.
So... you can do an A4E vs Harrier II engagement, using AIM-9M on the Harrier and AIM-9B on the A4, and that would be quite an interesting fight, asuming the extra thrust on the "E" would be somehow compesated with the extra weight of the radar and other gear missing in the "Q"
Once the 4 or maybe 5 (no one can confirm) Royal Navy Submarines arrived on station it was game over for The Argentine Navy. The ships returned to port and their Naval aviators had to fly long range missions out to the Islands from the mainland. The subs were a game changer.
@@davefloyd9443 That's right... The Argentine Navy knew about this factor beforehand, but the operation was intended to be a military move without cassualties in order to regain control of the Islands, and not a full scale conflict. The intention was to emulate the Nasser's move on Suez.
The hole war was improvised after that due to massive and quick UK response and the very own Argentinean people that was extremely supportive of the claim and wouldn't have tolerated a "coward" withdraw from Junta.
If and only If actual war would have being considered from scratch, Argentina should have delivered 2 or 3 mobile airfields in order to have a much stronger air presence in the Islands, a factor that could have neglected the naval supremacy SSN imposed.
In Argentina the ones in charge of strategy are pretty shure in the present that MI-6 / UK set a trap to the Junta with the late 1981 Davidoff incident. UK back in the late 70s and starting 80s was pretty much cornered to negotiate Malvinas/Falklands surpass to Argentina, the idea was to "seduce" Junta to make the take by force and then after the mere presence of the Royal Navy Junta was supposed to withdraw allowing UK to retake control and suspend any negotiation. The War was the result of both Argentina and UK misscalculating the use of large intimidanting force, but at the end of the day UK had massive strategic material advantages like several SSN, AIM-9L, large supplies of night vision devices and better artillery
Indeed. A classic game of bluff and counter bluff.
Thatcher laid out her winning hand when elite fighting unit after elite fighting unit boarded the task force ships:
SAS, SBS, Royal Marines, Gurkhas, Paras and Infantry Guards Battalions.
No bluffing there......
If it came to forcing a landing everyone knew that, if succesful, the defending forces where going to get smashed.
@@davefloyd9443 I wouldn't call the elite UK units displayed as the main factor of the victory. Remember that every UK offensive was conducted with these specific conditions:
1) Massive Artillery advantage provided by both naval fire support and longer range ground Artillery with helicopters correcting fire (and since ww1 you can't conduct a ground offensive without this factor on your side)
2) air superiority (not supremacy since Argentiean planes did flew CAS missions) with constant CAS missions
3) an uncutted and far less restricted logistical chain (by no means unstretched or "kind of" unlimited like USA, but far better than a couple of C-130 a week the Argentineans could pass thru the blockade)
4) Intel superiority (provided by satellites and far better air recon)
5) strenght in numbers (since the garrisons or strategic points were attacked by 2 or 3 to 1 effective troop ratio in favor of UK)
6) far better supply of night vision devices that allowed better night-battle conditions
7) tactical weapons like Milan missiles which were used with great success against foxholes and strongpoints
8) Finally, better trained troops for night offensive who were combined with better (by that point somehow still experimental but nowadays pretty common) NATO offensive doctrines
As you can see, the "better man" and "better doctrine" can only be exploited if you have massive advantages in the other aspects
Argentineans had some but less important advantages
1) better knowledge of the terrain (which is only a partial advantage)
2) mine fields
3) well setup defensive positions
4) somehow decent ammo stock which most cases lasted for a while and/or almost the entire battle
Its no joke that UK soldiers had to work their way thru digging out Argentineans from the very rock itslef by storming machinegun nests one by one, but at the end of the day the only thing the Argentinean troops could do is to present a good fight (something they in fact did) in a helpless situation against an enemy who had naval supremacy, aerial superiority and a far better logistical chain.
Or in other words: Even with conscripts UK would have won those battles
Excellent precis analysis of the air conflict in the Falklands at the start.
The A-4 darting out of the explosion cloud intact was magnificent
Yeah xd
Longshot is a steel-eyed missile man
also, the best Falklands reenactment would be the Harrier vs. a Mirage
Mirage III though, not 2000
@@Eteokles81
I know but the III is not in-game the 2000 is, also sometimes the 2000 is considered an evolution of the III. By what I have read the Brits were dogfighting more with Dagger which is the Argentinian designation of the IAI Nasher which is a modified copy of the Mirage 5 made by Israel.
Great shot kid, that was one in a million!
The A4 is a really good aircraft. Highly underrated but in the right hands it can do work. I think it is impressive both aircraft took solid hits in the first fight and both continued to fly.
Great video has always, I'm a noob in this game and I hope you make more video with the F-16 because it's the only full fidelity I got. I'll still watch any video you make , the quality is awsome, the explanation are priceless. Keep doing your stuff, I love your style and it's amazing ! 10/10 would watch again ;)
I really like your content. In this scenario, have you tried VIFF (Vectoring In Forward Flight - aka thrust vectoring) as a tactic in dogfight combat? I think the Royal Navy and RAF pilots in the Falklands conflict became aware / learnt this tactic to their advantage - from US Marine AV-8A pilots if I'm not mistaken. Don't know whether DCS Harriers are capable of doing this but it would be interesting to find out.
Jaw dropped at 3:50, that was unreal!
Thanks, great video, even though no F-14, you did at least mention it though! Nice flying as usual. Longshot's scissor at 18:12 was textbook perfect, you had him up until then. I'm really enjoying DCS, but I have a way to go before I am at your level in the jets.
I thought that was the most erie feeling to see that ac come thru the explosion! Awsome capture!