Myths & mistakes of the Falklands War: We ask Commander ‘Sharkey’ Ward
Commander Nigel David ‘Sharkey’ Ward, DSC, AFC is a retired British Royal Navy officer who commanded 801 Naval Air Squadron during the Falklands War. We asked him his view on British air operations during the 1982 war in which he fought.
If you could have changed one thing about British air operations in the Falklands what would it have been?
“There are two subjects that continue to leave a bad taste in my mouth.
One is the completely disingenuous propaganda campaign conducted by the Royal Air Force immediately after the war which sadly persuaded the gullible British public that they, the RAF alone, had won the air war over the Falklands. The full story of this deception and attempt to rewrite history is told in detail in my new book, soon to be published.
Suffice it to say here that the Sea Harriers of the Fleet Air Arm conducted 1,500 war missions over the Islands. The small detachment of RAF ground attack Harriers in HMS Hermes flew about 150 sorties of which less than half were combat oriented. All the air to air combat kills were achieved by naval aircraft (indeed, it is worthy of note that all air to air kills by British forces since 1948 have been achieved by naval aircraft – not one by RAF aircraft – and yet they claim they won the air war in Operation Corporate, the Falklands war).
Adding insult to injury, the propaganda campaign glorified the small but extremely expensive part that RAF Vulcan bombers played in the conflict. The real facts are that of the 63 bombs dropped by the Vulcan in three missions against Port Stanley runway, only one bomb was on target and that only damaged the side of the runway which was repaired on the same day. The four other Vulcan missions delivering anti-radar missiles only managed to hit one small radar emitter, that of a radar-controlled anti-aircraft gun on the outskirts of Port Stanley. These seven missions had no material effect whatsoever on the course of the Falklands conflict. To claim otherwise is wishful thinking.
The suggestion that the Nimrod aircraft played any effective part at all in or near the combat zone is also facetious propaganda.
The second ‘bad taste’ is an in-house naval affair.
HMS invincible had been formally given the responsibility of Anti-Air Warfare Control (AAWC) ship which principally meant having full and direct control over all Sea Harrier assets, including those in HMS Hermes, for Combat Air Patrol (CAP) duties on the outer ring of Task Force air defence. The AAWC established three permanent CAP Stations to the South-West, the West and the North-West of the San Carlos beachhead. Invincible’s instructions to the Sea Harrier air groups onboard each carrier were very clear. Each station had to be manned by a pair of Sea Harriers who would have to conduct their patrol at low level, thereby providing an up-threat barrier against incoming Argentine attack aircraft. HMS Hermes, the flagship, had 50% more Sea Harriers than Invincible and these were needed to ensure a complete and secure barrier against incoming threat aircraft.
What happened? Without informing Invincible, the Flagship ignored the AAWC and instructed their Sea Harrier CAP aircraft to station themselves directly above San Carlos Water at 20,000 feet.
This provided no deterrence at all to attacking aircraft. Low-level CAP Stations were left empty and through these empty stations came the enemy fighter bombers and delivered their attacks against beachhead units and forces. As a direct result, several warships were attacked and disabled or sunk: including HMS Ardent and HMS Coventry. After releasing their weapons and as they left the beachhead area, more than a few Argentine aircraft were destroyed by the overhead CAP aircraft – but it was “after the horse had bolted” and at the unnecessary cost of many brave lives and several ships. The loss of HMS Sheffield in the open ocean was also a direct result of the Flagship re-tasking CAP aircraft from the air defence barrier to search for surface contacts, again without any ‘by your leave’ to Invincible. An Étendard aircraft penetrated the empty CAP station and delivered its deadly Exocet attack.
Despite all this Flagship interference, 801 Squadron low-level CAP aircraft managed to turn away more than 450 Argentine attack missions. Without this success, the war could well have been lost.”
What was the biggest mistake of the Royal Navy?
“Bearing in mind that this round of Hush-Kit interviews relates to Operation Corporate and retaking the Falkland Islands, I find this question rather odd and misleading.
When Argentina invaded South Georgia and the Falklands, the firm response (to Maggie Thatcher in the hastily convened War Room) from the Chief of the Air Staff and the Chief of the General Staff was that the Air Force and the Army were powerless to intervene. The then Defence Secretary, John Nott, who was a rabid critic of maritime power (about which he knew nothing) immediately tried to prevent the Prime Minister from listening to the Chief of the Naval Staff and First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Henry Leach. Nott was overruled and Sir Henry informed Mrs Thatcher, “Yes, Prime Minister. I can assemble a Task Force forthwith and retake the Falklands.” Delighted, she told Sir Henry to make it so.
That was how Operation Corporate was born.
Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse, Commander-in-Chief Fleet was appointed Task Force Commander and Royal Marine Major-General Jeremy Moore was appointed Land Forces Commander. He in turn appointed Brigadier-General Julian Thompson as Amphibious Brigade Commander. Sir John Fieldhouse appointed Rear-Admiral Sandy Woodward, then Flag Officer Mediterranean, as Commander Carrier Battle Group and Commodore Mike Clapp as Commander Amphibious Group. The Naval Service therefore provided all the Commanders of the Task Force elements (the Royal Marines, of course, being part of that Naval Service). By their own admission, the RAF could not provide any combat aircraft in support of the Task Force.
Support Hush-Kit with our high quality aviation themed merchandise here
In four short days, the Naval Task Force was gathered, provisioned, armed and the Carrier Battle Group with 20 Sea Harriers embarked in HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible set sail for the South Atlantic amidst huge patriotic fervour. Two days before sailing, Air Vice Marshal “Blue Rinse” Menaul appeared on public television and stated categorically that the Task Force would fail ‘because it had no fighter air defence capability’! How wrong he was!
In relation to the Falklands War, the Royal Navy made no big mistake. They and the Amphibious Brigade land forces contrived and achieved a remarkable victory against all odds. The only major failure was that of the Royal Air Force who, despite their earlier outrageous claims to Ministers, were unable to provide the Task Force with any air defence or antisubmarine capability en route to the conflict or during combat operations. They have not yet been held accountable for this abysmal failure.
My new book attempts to rectify this.”
What is the greatest myth about air combat in the Falklands?
“Without banging the drum too much, the greatest myth about air combat in the Falklands is that generated by the RAF propaganda campaign post the conflict. They proclaimed loudly and strongly to the British public that the Royal Air Force had won the air war over the Islands and, thanks to the extraordinary silence of the Naval Staff, they were allowed to get away with it.
They managed to convince the British public through disingenuous inference and innuendo that the fighter combat that took place over the Islands was at the hands of the RAF. The very existence of the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm and Carrier air power was neither mentioned nor alluded to. And yet, clearly, it was carrier-borne Sea Harrier fighter aircraft and Royal Navy surface warships which won the day.
This was a disgraceful attempt to rewrite history and, because it was believed by gullible ministers and civil servants, resulted in a severe and misguided decline in investment in true maritime/Fleet power that may well come to haunt us in the near future. China’s claims over the South China Sea, through which much of our trade passes, will soon reach critical mass. We and our allies need to be able to contain China’s territorial aggrandizement. If we do not wish to become embroiled in a fighting war, we and our allies need to be able to deter this emerging military giant.
Our other interviews with Sharkey Ward are here and here
Deterrence through visible strength is the key to maintaining an acceptable peace.
And so the media, the Secretary of State, the House of Commons Defence Committee and our politicians should now be asking the question:
‘Following the investment of hundreds of billions of pounds sterling in land-based combat aircraft and supporting units over the past four decades, what can the RAF do in the South China Sea to deter the power grab by China?’
One or two Typhoon fighters supported by a £1 billion Voyager tanker flying out of Singapore on short range missions cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered an effective 24/7 show of force. Only well-armed fleets at sea can deter or effectively counter this sinister Chinese initiative.”
This book can only happen with your support. Preorder your copy today here.
From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.
The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:
“the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.
The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.
FEATURING
- Interviews with pilots of the F-14 Tomcat, Mirage, Typhoon, MiG-25, MiG-27, English Electric Lighting, Harrier, F-15, B-52 and many more.
- Engaging Top (and bottom) 10s including: Greatest fighter aircraft of World War II, Worst British aircraft, Worst Soviet aircraft and many more insanely specific ones.
- Expert analysis of weapons, tactics and technology.
- A look into art and culture’s love affair with the aeroplane.
- Bizarre moments in aviation history.
- Fascinating insights into exceptionally obscure warplanes.
The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.
Fairchild AU-23A Armed Pilatus Turbo-Porter 72-3 Janes – Sufficient put into service to not be relevant.
*Pave Coin Beech A36 Bonanza Janes 72-3. Other aircraft included the Piper PE1 Enforcer (turbine Mustang) – Janes 81-2, AU-23 and 24 (above), Cessna O-1, U-17 and O-2 and Cessna A-37.
SAAB-MFI-17 (only 300kg external load capability) 72-3 Janes
This book can only happen with your support. Preorder your copy today here.
Hush-Kit 
How do I order
Ganaron!? Más de mil muertos, más de media flota hundida o seriamente averiada… Estar en un territorio ilegalmente… Solo los piratas británicos se permiten esos hechos 😁😁
‘They won!? More than a thousand dead, more than half a fleet sunk or seriously damaged … Being in territory illegally … Only British pirates allow those facts 😁’
The islands are governed by the consent of the Islanders. The re-taking of the islands thousands of miles from any land base is widely regraded as a remarkable achievement. The other result was that Argentina was returned to is own people and now has had decades of democratic rule. The British people as a whole want better relations with Argentina based upon the rule of law and self determination.
ja ja el eterno sueño de los argentos pero año tras año y década tras década y siglo tras siglo siguen siendo territorio británico.
Y el Invencible!? Brits won the war?
Sorry GISTAVO/GUSTAVO ?,
We did not leave with our hands up in the air.
BILL.
Brits WON that war in just the manner like how hitler’s Luftwaffe won its war against the Poles in Sept 1939.
Nothing more. (patently lobsided and terribly unfair).
Jamás tocaron el Invincible. Pero hay quienes viven de sueños y defaults. Argentina perdió la guerra en cuestión de semanas, che.
Commander Ward forgets that a number of RAF personnel were among the Sea Harrier pilots who flew on his own squadron and on 800 on Hermes. He also forgets that he broke the rules by trying to radio the Vulcan that flew the first Black Buck mission. He also forgets that the Royal Navy made a number of mistakes during the war, such as not updating its electronic warfare database to classify Exocet as hostile. Just ask anyone on Atlantic Conveyor or HMS Sheffield about that ‘not-a-mistake’.
“…a ‘number’ of RAF personnel…”.
Not quite a “number”.
Big Myth in my opinion?
“801 Squadron low-level CAP aircraft managed to turn away more than 450 Argentine attack missions”
This doesn’t make any sense at all.
I can’t get to that number even counting C-130 flights to BAM Malvinas aborted and the deception flights of LearJets pretending to be fighters.
Talking about that.I would like to know the reasons of the failure to intercept any cargo mission.
I presume the figure refers to individual aircraft not sorties. It does seem rather high. The C 130 flights and those by another type were considered to be possible medical evacuation flights and therefore spared. A Lear jet was shot down when it strayed into Falkland airspace on a suspected reconnaissance mission. Given the disparity of the air assets deployed, the air campaign was a disaster for the Argentine air force and the loss of many brave men for no purpose. The Falkland Islands were never an issue until after Argentina lost its claim against Chile over the Beagle Channel. Loss of democracy and government by generals always ends badly all over the world. One out come from this conflict frequently overlooked is that today Argentina is a democracy governed by the will of its people.
Even saying individual aircraft is pretty much not realistic. Even counting transports and deception flights it’s a lot.To the point I won’t even bother to open a book to get exact figures.
Transport flight spared? Source for that please. Sound like an excuse
Talking about excuses: “The loss of HMS Sheffield in the open ocean was also a direct result of the Flagship re-tasking CAP aircraft from the air defence barrier to search for surface contacts”
There were 2 other exocet attacks in open ocean and at least 2 attacks on “Type 64”. Not mentioned by Ward, all after the Shefflied.
The Lear jet shot down was not in a reccon mission. Was a deception mission. Nav mistake made them too east. And was not shot down by Harries.
“Given the disparity of the air assets deployed, the air campaign was a disaster for the Argentine air force and the loss of many brave men for no purpose.”
And I can say given the disparity of technology and budget and even assets deployed the air campaign was a lot better than expected and… no wait.
Someone said it before….. mmmmmm Wood something….. and maybe a Moore? Bad memory….
The final politics stuff I won’t reply as you are wrong in various points and I’m not interested in discussing here. Planes is the topic.
“…’any’ cargo mission…”?
That’s not true.
‘Following the investment of hundreds of billions of pounds sterling in land-based combat aircraft and supporting units over the past four decades, what can the RAF do in the South China Sea to deter the power grab by China?’
Ummmm….. Since Britain (like the US) can’t seem to competently manage 14th Century quarantine technology, maybe the notion of keeping the South China Sea British is a little ambitious?
And apart from that, did Sharkey have anything to say about the RAF?
The RAF did their bit to win the war I have never heard the RAF say they won it on their own. We all know about Black Buck ops but the thing is the Argies moved their back to the mainland because of the Vulcan bombings because they thought the RAF would bomb the mainland next. I like him a lot but I also disagree with him.
As a long time reader of military history, and some who has served with the RAF in the joint environment (particularly having served on Joint Force Harrier), I have never come across this claim that the RAF won the air war for the Falklands? . The RAF is justifiably proud of the achievement of the Black Buck raids, regardless of where you stand on their success or not, even getting them there was impressive. The activities of the GR3 force in the latter stages of the war weren’t without cost, and I struggle to understand why he would seek to portray them as a failure. Comparable to the efforts of the DCA operations mounted by 801 Sqn? Probably not, but the inference that the RAF should hang it’s head in shame is, frankly unfair, and discredits Ward’s other testimony.
Cdr (retd) Ward seems to be intent on attacking the RAF, and has been for some time. He paints a picture of an organisation lacking in professional capability which frankly, is insulting to the many men and women who are just as proud of the uniform they wear as he is in the RN ensign. His comments on the abilities of the Tornado GR4 smell of parochialism, as does his stance on Typhoon.
I have no truck with constructive criticism, however, attempts to whitewash the navy, while portraying those in a blue-grey uniform as charlatans and worthless is unacceptable.
The argies didn’t redeploy Mirages because of the Vulcans. They moved them out of theatre once they discovered they were outclassed by SHARs with AIM9L Sidewinders and competent fliers. The argies never learned air-air combat and were hopelessly outclassed. And they knew it. They also knew that the Vulcans could not hit anything and that that there was no chance of them even trying to overfly the continent. But mythology is very strong.
I have the utmost respect for Sharkey Ward, and indeed all FAA pilots. But why, so many years on, is he still spouting vitriol about the RAF? It was true that the top levels of the RAF were desperate to “get in on” the action, but they never claimed more than a very small contribution to the victory, other than the massive support given. I doubt if more than a small percentage of the public were even aware of the RAF’s no.1 Sqn presence on Hermes, let alone the probes early on by Nimrods. All credit was rightfully given to the RN, who naturally enough made LOTS of mistakes.
The RAF did indeed steal the budget for the replacement carriers of the 1980s, which the country and armed forces overall could not afford ( maybe like the two behemoths we have now). But for God’s sake RN, get over it.
As usual the Ascot fleet gets ignored. Without RAF Lyneham’s extraordinary support to the fleet through ASI the whole thing would have failed. Don’t tell Sharkey where his missiles and food came from though. Might not like it
1) There was no “propaganda campaign conducted by the Royal Air Force immediately after the war”, disingenuous or otherwise. No senior RAF officer ever claimed that the RAF alone had won the air war over the Falklands, and no “gullible British public” ever thought that the RAF had done so, since the contribution of the SHar was rightly very well highlighted in the media at the time and afterwards, and was recognised and saluted by the RAF.
2) Nigel claims that “it is worthy of note that all air to air kills by British forces since 1948 have been achieved by naval aircraft – not one by RAF aircraft.” Firstly, the date of 1948 is carefully selected, since RAF aircraft achieved kills against Israeli and Egyptian fighters in the years before that. Furthermore, he ignores the fact that the Navy’s kills were scored in two wars (Falklands and Korea) and that RAF FIGHTER AIRCRAFT had no opportunity to score kills, but that RAF pilots (flying USAF Sabres in Korea, and RN Sea Harriers in the Falklands have actually scored MORE kills since 1948 than have RN FAA pilots.
God save us from another biased and unbalanced book by Nigel Ward.
Thanks Jon, interesting points in there. “RAF pilots (flying USAF Sabres in Korea, and RN Sea Harriers in the Falklands have actually scored MORE kills since 1948 than have RN FAA pilots.” The F-86 side of things is often overlooked. Interesting link here: http://britains-smallwars.com/campaigns/korea/page.php?art_url=air-war .
Mismanagement is the word for Argentine…I flew water bombers in San Carlos de Bariloche just before the Melvina/Falkland war…The place was right full of soldiers getting ready for war…but what war? We were alongside all their officers and tried to tell what war they were all training for? Who? Planning to attack Pinochet for no reason? Chile was sure to beat Argentine…Then who? Brazil? Are they crazy?…I when around the Malvina, but nothing was special, the Argentinians were actually going to the Falkland with a F-27 everyday to the Falkland to dismantle a whale factory…I was thinking its impossible to attack Falkland since their every planes, tanks and ships were got sold by the Brits to the Argies…
Did any junior ratings serving aboard Hermes and Invincible visually spot any enemy aircraft during the conflict?
You’re wrong.
Argentina’s claims on the islands lasts for more than 100 years!
Brittish media sought to the world that this was “dictatorship related” this is false!
No mention about the fact that Argentina only had 5 Exocet missiles during the war? And that they managed to sink/ damage HMS Sheffield, Atlantic Conveyor and Glamorgan with these. Wonder what would have happened if they had some more in stock…