www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/9D8947AC-D8DC-4BE7-8DCC-C9C623539BCF/0/boi_hms_sheffield.pdf

Try not to shit in this thread… I knew some of the guys that died on her…

ANdy

I never knew the warhead didn't detonate. I guess that goes to show how dangerous fire is on a vessel.

I was really interested to know why chaff was not fired, but the report seems not to disclose that answer.

Quoted: I was really interested to know why chaff was not fired, but the report seems not to disclose that answer.

AAW radar was offline as they were using their satellite uplink… ESM should have detected the missile as it went active but someone had 'forgot' to tell it to treat Exocets as hostile, (The RN used Exocets at the time, immidiately after the attack all ESM's were updated. The Exocets were taken out of service after the war), effectively she was electronically blind and deaf so it fell back to the Mk 1 eyeball.  The Upper deck lookouts saw the missile 4 seconds from impact… too late to do anything.

ANdy

I met some of the Sailors on the Sheffield in Kenya in 1982, tied up in front of them in Mombasa. The Sheffield was there with a frigate, I forget the name. I was on the .S.S. Oldendorf (DD-972). Some of us met up with some of them in the now gone Florida Casino. They were a great bunch of guys! We partied with them for 2 days. On the morning of the third day there, they left for the Falklands. I can say my life was enriched having met them, and getting to know them a little.
Thanks for the sitrep, from one squid to another, and may God rest there souls.

Thank you, Andy. This was important to some of us.

Is the rumor that it had a nuke true?  I can't open the link (*.pdf problem with this PC - IT notified).

Thanks,

Merlin

Quoted: Is the rumor that it had a nuke true?  I can't open the link (*.pdf problem with this PC - IT notified). Thanks, Merlin

No it didn't…

Ful details here.

www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4625B8A4-C533-4DAD-9FA5-0BFEE58F8D69/0/op_corporate1982_nuclear_weapons.pdf

ANdy

Good investigation report.  Pretty typical info too.  I suspect that had the ship been American, the results might have been very close.  I have personally seen many of the same problems manifest in our Navy...before this war.  After the losses of Sheffield, and the near loss of Stark due to combat and the near loss of USS Tattnal due to a huge fire, we undertook major changes in our fire fighting/damage control training and equipment.

I know of at least two other occasions where an Exocet warhead failed to detonate.  Clearly many of the AM 39s of that period were deficient.  Warhead technology is always a very esoteric and tricky science.

BTW...met up with the OPS from Conventry many years ago.  He told a great yarn about how his ship was sunk and how he barely survived.

Many brave souls were lost at sea in that short but violent little war.

Thanks for the report.

Oh...and finally, chances are that had Sheffield been at Action Stations and done everything possible right; detected the missile in a timely manner and successfully engaged it with both hard and soft kill weapons, she most likely would have still be struck just exactly as she was.

Vito, that was intersting.

I suspect that the Exocet missle warhead, was designed to delay exploding upon htting the target until it penetrated into the interior.  It was fortunate that the warhead didn't explode at all, otherwise the lives lost would've been more extensive.

Years ago, from news reports, one of the factors in the forcosity of the fire was fed by aluminum.  Al is not flammable, but once ingnited though, Al burns fiercely.

tag for later

Hard lessons, those written in blood...    

You know there is some Blue Jacket standing watch right now that just doesn't understand why he is doing certain specific "bullshit" tasks.  I hope the RN and USN leaders are taking the time to explain why things are done the way they are.  

Gentlemen, to the brave sailors of HMS Sheffield...

Quoted: Vito, that was intersting. I suspect that the Exocet missle warhead, was designed to delay exploding upon htting the target until it penetrated into the interior.  It was fortunate that the warhead didn't explode at all, otherwise the lives lost would've been more extensive. Years ago, from news reports, one of the factors in the forcosity of the fire was fed by aluminum.  Al is not flammable, but once ingnited though, Al burns fiercely.

Actually it would have been better if the warhead HAD exploded… An explosion would have blown out some hull plating and vented any fire/smoke to atmosphere. Instead what happened is the missile punched a neat hole in the hull and the rocket motor carried on burning and filled the area with thick, black, highy toxic smoke and started a raging fire that made damage control effectively impossible. The burning motor provided a very high pressure in the compartment it was burning in and that forced the smoke under pressure throughout the ventilation system.


Aluminium…

There was actually no aluminium in the Type 42's structures, only in the Type 21 Frigates and the LSL's. There was a lot of hysteria in the press at the time about aluminium, but in reality, a small 3,000 ton FFG hit by  2 x 1,000lb and 3 x 500lb bombs is going to be lost anyway and the aluminium in the Ardent and Antelope made no significant contribution to their loss.

ANdy

Sorry, I still can't open a *.pdf file:  Can someone tell me how many men died and survived?

Thanks,

Merlin

Quoted: Sorry, I still can't open a *.pdf file:  Can someone tell me how many men died and survived? Thanks, Merlin

HMS Sheffield’s loss “an expensive warning”


HMS Sheffield might not have been lost in the Falklands “if the right reactions had been taken” by her crew according to official papers released into her sinking.

‘Shiny Sheff’ became the first RN victim of the 1982 conflict when she was struck by an Exocet missile on May 4.

The destroyer burned for two days and finally sank six days later, taking 20 of her crew of 270 with her.

Some campaigners and former crew have argued that the ship could – and should – have defended herself better.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, the Board of Inquiry papers into the tragedy have now been released in edited form.

The board began its investigation in June 1982 in Portsmouth, interviewing former Sheffield crew, plus sailors from sister ships HMS Glasgow Coventry (the latter was also lost during the campaign) and poring over reports, signals and other documents relating to the fateful day.

It also considered whether there were inherent flaws in the design of the Type 42 class and its weapons systems.

The board’s report says that the Operation Corporate task force was dogged by false alarms of incoming enemy air attacks; Sheffield feared attack by submarine more than attack by air, for example.

On May 4, Glasgow picked up the Argentine Super Etendard jets making their run and took evasive action, firing chaff decoys. HMS Invincible also picked up contacts on its radar but dismissed them.

About 15 miles from Glasgow, the aircraft turned and headed towards Sheffield, subsequently firing their missiles at the destroyer – which did not take any action to avoid the onslaught.

One Exocet struck Shiny Sheff between the galley and forward auxiliary machinery room; it did not explode but caused flames which caused acrid black smoke to quickly fill the ship.

The fire main was also knocked out which made tackling the blaze almost impossible.

The smoke, flames and lack of water contributed, says the report, to a lack of cohesion in dealing with the aftermath of the missile attack.

The board praised weapon engineer officer Lt Cdr John Woodhead and PO(MEM) David Briggs for their efforts to save the ship; both men were posthumously honoured.

The report concludes that by the time of the attack, most of the crew were tense, and some were bored and “a little frustrated by the inactivity”.

It continues: “If all the right reactions had been taken, very quickly indeed, and if chaff had been fired, it might just have been possible to frustrate this determined and very professional attack.”

The board found there were flaws in the Type 42’s design. Lack of a jammer and “point defence system” – a close-in weapons system such as the RN has today with Phalanx – plus realistic simulator training contributed to Sheffield’s downfall.

A covering letter from the office of the then Commander-in-Chief, Fleet, Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse, states:

“She had been lulled into a false sense of security by the ineffectiveness of previous Argentine air attacks. Her loss was an expensive warning and a foretaste of the real Argentine capability.

Kind of a strange irony/twist of fate regarding the Type 42 DDGs and CIWS. While criticized for not having such point-defense systems (Phalanx, Goalkeeper, etc) and "only" the longer range SeaDart SAMs, that type of missile was successfully used specifically against an anti-ship missile roughly 10 years after the Falklands war. During Desert Strorm, HMS Gloucester successfully engaged and destroyed an inbound Silkworm missile (that was targeting USS Missouri). Close by, USS Jarret DID attempt to engage the Silkworm with it's Phalanx CIWS but it locked on to the Missouri's chaff instead, spraying the Battleship with a burst (very minor damage). Was cool to sea the 30 years old Sea Dart succeed where the much touted Phalanx failed.

I lost an A school buddy on the Stark.  I presume that the FFG 7's might have had some DC improvements based upon the Sheffield loss.  Stark took two Excocet hits, neither of which exploded.  The Roberts struck a mine and nearly split in two, but the crews were able to save both.  I have to believe that we learned some lessons from the Sheffield.  

After the Stark we had to go thru all of the passageways on my ship and replace all the plastic cable ties with steel bands.  That was a PITA, but the guys on the Stark found out the hard way that fires will melt the tie wraps. The cables fell or draped down into the passageways making it difficult and dangerous to get through.  

I hope all Allied nations can take these lessons to heart and drill DC into their folks and their ships designs.  With all the bad news about Iran, I suspect we'll see more of this in the years to come.  I pray our defense systems are up to the challenge.  

thanks for the info

height=8

Quoted: I lost an A school buddy on the Stark.  I presume that the FFG 7's might have had some DC improvements based upon the Sheffield loss.  Stark took two Excocet hits, neither of which exploded.  The Roberts struck a mine and nearly split in two, but the crews were able to save both.  I have to believe that we learned some lessons from the Sheffield.   After the Stark we had to go thru all of the passageways on my ship and replace all the plastic cable ties with steel bands.  That was a PITA, but the guys on the Stark found out the hard way that fires will melt the tie wraps. The cables fell or draped down into the passageways making it difficult and dangerous to get through.   I hope all Allied nations can take these lessons to heart and drill DC into their folks and their ships designs.  With all the bad news about Iran, I suspect we'll see more of this in the years to come.  I pray our defense systems are up to the challenge.   thanks for the info

If I may ask, who was the buddy you knew on the Stark? There was a shipmate from my bootcamp company who was killed that day: Kelly Quick. I was on the Benjamin Stoddert (DDG-22)- we were relieved on-station by the Stark (I still have a buch of photos of that day). Strange times.

Thanks for sharing ANdy.

Quoted: Quoted: Sorry, I still can't open a *.pdf file:  Can someone tell me how many men died and survived? Thanks, Merlin HMS Sheffield’s loss “an expensive warning” .... The destroyer burned for two days and finally sank six days later, taking 20 of her crew of 270 with her. ...

Six days!  Why did any die then?  Unless they died in the initial attack/explosion?

Thanks,

Merlin

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sorry, I still can't open a *.pdf file:  Can someone tell me how many men died and survived? Thanks, Merlin HMS Sheffield’s loss “an expensive warning” .... The destroyer burned for two days and finally sank six days later, taking 20 of her crew of 270 with her. ... Six days!  Why did any die then?  Unless they died in the initial attack/explosion? Thanks, Merlin

20 were killed in the initial attack, only one body was recovered, the remains of the other 19 rode her to the bottom.

Quoted:  Al is not flammable, but once ingnited though, Al burns fiercely.

Ok, explain to me how something that is not flammable, but once ignited , can burn fiercely.

ANdy some questions.  Sorry if the answers are obvious but that pdf was giving me a headache.

1. Where was the CAP?  Isnt there Aircraft aloft at all times?

2. If there were why did they not intercept, even after the missles were fired.

3. Did the Sheffield have the Phalanx close in defense guns?

4. Even if the Sheffield was blind and dumb shouldnt the other ships in the fleet always have their defensive systems active?

Thanks.

But you are correct ANdy.

A little boat getting smacked by a 2000lb rocket is fatal.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Six days!  Why did any die then?  Unless they died in the initial attack/explosion? Thanks, Merlin

Only a handfull were killed by the initial impact, most were killed by smoke. If you can open the .pdf you will see that the Weapons Officers and their team stayed at their post and died to a man trying to get the systems back up and running…

ANdy

Quoted: Quoted:  Al is not flammable, but once ingnited though, Al burns fiercely. Ok, explain to me how something that is not flammable, but once ignited , can burn fiercely.

Everything burns.

Aluminium can burn at around 500 degrees C. IIRC.

.

Quoted: ANdy some questions.  Sorry if the answers are obvious but that pdf was giving me a headache. 1. Where was the CAP?  Isnt there Aircraft aloft at all times? Both HMS Invincible and HMS Glasgow picked up the raid inbound, (They painted them as they popped up to do a radar search and again as they came up to launch), Glasgow went to Action Stations, deployed Chaff and called in the Raid. The CAP were vectored to the contact but saw nothing so the contact was classified as 'Spurious' by the AAWC on Invincible…there had been false alarms all morning. 2. If there were why did they not intercept, even after the missiles were fired. The Bandits were long gone when the missiles hit. 3. Did the Sheffield have the Phalanx close in defense guns? No… 4. Even if the Sheffield was blind and dumb shouldnt the other ships in the fleet always have their defensive systems active? They all did, but the systems are self defence systems. The problem with the SCOT transmitter that required Sheffield to go blind was specific to Sheffield. The other ships broadcast a warning but she couldn't receive while transmitting on the SCOT. She was the oldest of the class and due for a refit to upgrade her systems. Thanks.

ANdy

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Six days!  Why did any die then?  Unless they died in the initial attack/explosion? Thanks, Merlin Only a handfull were killed by the initial impact, most were killed by smoke. If you can open the .pdf you will see that the Weapons Officers and their team stayed at their post and died to a man trying to get the systems back up and running… ANdy

And it sounds like it still hurts.  Sorry for your loss.

Merlin

Shipboard fires suck. I once had to watch a coast guard chopper pull a friend and fellow captain's body off of his vessel after he died fighting an engine room fire at sea.

Thanks ANdy for the answers.

Shipboard fired do suck.  The clips from the Enterprise and another carrier from Vietnam shows you how bad fires on a ship can be.

Ver interesting read.  Thank you for posting this.


I do have a few questions.

What is the TEZ?  Is it the Tactical Engagement Zone?  Also, what is Chaff D?  I know what chaff is, but what does the D designate?



-K

ANdy...what was the end result of the loss of the Sheffield? How did the British Navy adapt/change?


Thanks


WBK

Once the firemain was gone, the ship was lost.  The Captain made a excellent decision to abandon the ship; it had to be a difficult decision to cut losses especially WRT the weaps folks who died at their post.