I was educated in an Irish school where honour was instilled in me.Tell the truth even if it costs you your life…..these are the principles which governs my life ….thank you Edmund Rice!
The Irish Republic's FAL were identical to the early South African R1 contract, walnut stock, non bipod cut handguard, and standard metric pattern. So, the rifles being used in the film were actually correct.
Thank you! I did wonder. Well there's actually a photo of the real Pat Quinlan with a FAL and it looks very much like the pattern in the film. Thanks for listening.
156 Irish soldiers versus between 2,000 and 3,000 rebels that included former French Foreign Legion and Belgian Para Commandos. They suffered some casualties, but no KIA.
I've never used the .303 version of the bren, but I was a section gunner with the 7.62 mm L4 version in the 80,s . It was surprisingly accurate on single shot at long range even though they fire from an open bolt . On the range at 600 yds the usual drill was to fire 3 to 5 round bursts at triple figure 11 targets ,but it was possible to get a reasonable clump of rounds in the centre figure 11,s general area on single shot ! So I wouldn't discount them using a bren in this way ,although the no.4 t would definitely have been the better choice. 🙂
Thanks for the insights John, always welcome. I suspected it was definitely possible having fired a Bren myself, out to about 300, but as you say the No.4 would have been a better choice!
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle.
The Irish Carl Gustaf SMG's were unique being modified to take the Lee-Enfield No.4 bayonet which makes me think those were actual ex-Irish Gustafs being used in the film. The Irish FN FAL rifles were metric Belgian made by FN Herstal and select fire, some were upgraded and put back into service a few years ago as sniper support weapons.
As an ex irish soilder and how have called some of the jadotville tiger's comrades. Thanks very much for getting there story out there . Just in relation to the bren ad the irish army. Part of the range qualification was to fire it in single shot and good gunners had no problem in single shooting a target at 700m . And the irish army FNs could fire full automatic
Another exceptional analysis! As the film itself, although it has its problems, I absolutely love it and I went into it w/only knowledge of the real engagement. Richie Smyth needs to do a film on the Battle of Koh-Tang, the Aden Emergency, and/or Lima Site 85. Btw, “BBE” is going to be my new catch phrase, lmao.
In regards to the scene where they flip the Land Rover on its side, that was actually done during the actual siege. The reason was they had a Ford Mk VI armored car, which had a Vickers Mk I mounted in a turret, and the range of elevation was only suitable for engaging ground targets. So they had to flip the car on its side in order to get the gun pointed into the sky to get fire on the attacking fighter-bomber. This video goes into good detail about the Ford Mk VI and other armored vehicles used by the Irish Defense Forces during the Congo peacekeeping mission. ruclips.net/video/LHD2x4bDgdk/видео.html
Thanks for this episode, guys! Finally I did watch the film and heck of a lot like about it! Simple structure, actors, accents, brilliant bar scene (dat burn, lol), overall production quality and real story behind is fascinating.
Great review guys. I found this a well done movie and fairly realistic. That Bren sniper scene- there’s got to be some factual basis for it. I can’t think of any other reason for them making a point in showing this very unique scene.
I found this very informative pertaining to the operations of military affairs in general. By showing the before and after of their deployment it gives a more complete depiction of how "only those who were there" know what war is like.
Seeing the FN was the main reason I wanted to watch this film. I trained with the FN C1A1 back in the 80's and it has a special place in my memories. The fact that the movie was good was a bonus. Although I questioned the use of the Bren over the FAL for the long distance shot. I know the FN can easily hit out to 800 meters. no experience with the Bren but some with the .303 Enfield mk4.
@21:21 In the Irish army before we moved over to camo officers wore the pips on the shoulder, other ranks used a brassard with the rank on it which could be slipped off the shirt over the wooly or jacket, for over seas they wore them to denote the country, I'm guessing the 3 star private ones were more numerous and so he got one, I doubt the costume dep went out of their way for the detail, they probably got a stack of them from the QM in Athlone
@@TheArmourersBench Friend of mine has mentioned that the real trick was to make sure that the matchstick or paper clip was removed before an inspection. 😀 I have read the book, but don’t remember the mention of the Bren shot. But, I’d need to read it again to be sure.
Having an F-4 Phantom shoot down the UN Secretary General’s plane is an odd inclusion. As it was shot down in a location well beyond the range of a Phantom flying from a carrier. I suppose it would have been possible to maybe air refuel it, but it’s unlikely.
@@MontytheHorse the cause of the crash is still not known but given that in 1961 the F4 was still very new and going through it's initial acceptance trials into US Navy service the use of it in the film is certainly an anachronism.
It shows, the set pieces are fantastic, great action and highlighting a largely forgotten battle. Drop us an email fightingonfilm@gmail.com, our listeners would love to hear about your work.
You can leave them in the comments here or head to fightingonfilm.com and enter it in the suggestion form. Patreon supporters get to vote on the too, like in this episode.
Before I even watch the video, what I found a bit strange in this movie are the katangese mercenaries’ outfits as I I have recently done a bit of research on Congo merc kit and I am pretty sure I saw a few of them wearing US woodland and other pretty modern camo patterns which I think weren’t around in the early 60’s… Dunno might be my mistake
Its a fasinating scene. As i understand it: the Bren had mag removed as it adds weight, firing one manually inserted round removes additional movement from parts cycling (may not be correct) another round after the shot, bipod useful up on roof for stability and keeping on target for follow up shots, barrel length similar to lee enfield mk4 (lee around 24" , bren around 22". models vary). Odd bit in scene but some logic to it. I forget if it is true (or said to be) and dont recall you stating it is.
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle. As for the single round, that doesn't make much sense, it would feed and fire the same set to semi and fed from the magazine. The bolt is still going to go forward, then cycle either way. Perhaps it slightly reduced the chance of a miss feed, but that's not exactly common with a bren.
@nzgunnie yes I wasn't sure of the reason for any of it, especially as the barrel lengths are similar and just posted as its so fascinating. Good topic for conversation.
Hi Guys, thanks for doing this movie. FYI Irish contract FALs were Metric Pattern from Belgium. They had a safe, semi, auto fire group. Some have been refurbished and are still in use as sniper support weapons/DMR.
Hi Tony, thank you! That's interesting, Jonathan shared an IDF manual with me that was for an Inch pattern. Because it was something that was bugging me in the prep and I couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere. But metric certainly makes sense.
@@TheArmourersBench I joined Irish Army Reserve in the mid 2000s and I just missed out on the FAL, it had only been replaced by the AUG in reserve service. The organisational memory and fondness for the weapon was still strong however! Someone like Nick Moran who used it during his FCÁ service would be able to definitively confirm it. It was always referred to as the ‘FN’ rather than the SLR and there were many anecdotal stories regarding its uncontrollability in full auto.
@@tonyfahey8442 I think it makes more sense that it was Metric and as you say it was said to be select fire capable. I've never seen any mention of Ireland getting SLRs either but the here's the manual Jonathan mentioned. www.smallarmsreview.com/archive/detail.arc.entry.cfm?arcid=4070
@@TheArmourersBench wow, thanks for sharing that, as an Irish speaker I can clear that up for you… on page 33 there is a section concerning ‘Méarlamhach’ . This is the Irish word for rapid fire. It mentions moving the selector switch into the position A. Interestingly it also mentions that such fire should only be used ‘le linn éigindála amhain’ or ‘only in emergencies’.
Good or bad.... Both sides can be candidates for both. Hoare and Denhard were around this area during this time. Not sure why they didn't have proper clothing or web gear in the movie. You'll die in an hour if u don't have a hat in Africa
It isn't strictly a war film but we haven't ruled out doing some limited non-war film runs/spinoffs/seasons to do some fun stuff like that! Someone was asking if we'd cover Heat, and I have a hard time saying a definitive no haha.
I find it hard to believe that the enemy force persisted with a full frontal assault 3 times across open, dead ground with no cover inspite of the perfect high ground to the south and were not mown down by bren and vickers immediately.
The film falls down there. One thing I regret not mentioning is that really odd tactical choice made, especially given they're led by former French Foreign Legion paras...
I would have put my bren, vickers, sniper and 60mm on the hill with a section of rifles to guard their flanks. Then i'd have almost everyone else on the roof tops of those perfect buildings in the camp. I'd probably have left a section or two on the ground to distribute ammo to the roof tops. The attacking force would have lost all of their mobility and HMG in the first wave and would have been forced to back off or flank. If at all possible, i would have made an effort to recover some of the enemy firepower during the lull's and used it against them from the roof tops. If it really went down like it did in the film then perhaps this explains the reluctance to recognise this action until recently. I may read the book to see what really happened one day.
I suspect the simple, full frontal attacks were due to the mismatched level of training of the force. Trying flanking moves, fire support elements from the flank, etc might have been judged a little too complex for them to pull off. Besides, when you've got 1,000+ people and a 10-1 or greater advantage not to mention mortar and air support...
I enjoyed the film. But there is one particular scene that I really can't stand. It's when the sniper needs to shoot a particular person from a very long distance. And he stupidly puts down his scoped bolt action rifle, gets on the Bren open bolt LMG takes for what ever reason the magazine out, loads a single cartridge and shoots his target. This is about the worst decision you could make when you're in a firefight and need to take out a high priority target. It's an unnecessary waste of time to choose a worse weapon for the job in a plain stupid manner. He should have just shot that high priority target with his Enfield.
@@TheArmourersBench As I understand it was done because it happened in RL. And it happened in RL because the Defence Forces had a view that the LE even when scoped was inferior over range than the Bren. Don't know why, but it pops up in DF stuff over that time period.
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle. Why you'd bother taking off the magazine and loading a single round, rather than simply selecting it to single shot I'm not so sure. Or firing a controlled burst of to make sure of the job.
One of the few actually good Netflix films.
Exactly! It really surprised me when they brought this out.
I was educated in an Irish school where honour was instilled in me.Tell the truth even if it costs you your life…..these are the principles which governs my life ….thank you Edmund Rice!
Only if it were held in higher regard nowadays, but take what ya can get.
The Irish Republic's FAL were identical to the early South African R1 contract, walnut stock, non bipod cut handguard, and standard metric pattern. So, the rifles being used in the film were actually correct.
Thank you! I did wonder. Well there's actually a photo of the real Pat Quinlan with a FAL and it looks very much like the pattern in the film. Thanks for listening.
156 Irish soldiers versus between 2,000 and 3,000 rebels that included former French Foreign Legion and Belgian Para Commandos. They suffered some casualties, but no KIA.
I've never used the .303 version of the bren, but I was a section gunner with the 7.62 mm L4 version in the 80,s . It was surprisingly accurate on single shot at long range even though they fire from an open bolt . On the range at 600 yds the usual drill was to fire 3 to 5 round bursts at triple figure 11 targets ,but it was possible to get a reasonable clump of rounds in the centre figure 11,s general area on single shot ! So I wouldn't discount them using a bren in this way ,although the no.4 t would definitely have been the better choice. 🙂
Thanks for the insights John, always welcome. I suspected it was definitely possible having fired a Bren myself, out to about 300, but as you say the No.4 would have been a better choice!
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle.
The Irish Carl Gustaf SMG's were unique being modified to take the Lee-Enfield No.4 bayonet which makes me think those were actual ex-Irish Gustafs being used in the film.
The Irish FN FAL rifles were metric Belgian made by FN Herstal and select fire, some were upgraded and put back into service a few years ago as sniper support weapons.
As an ex irish soilder and how have called some of the jadotville tiger's comrades. Thanks very much for getting there story out there . Just in relation to the bren ad the irish army. Part of the range qualification was to fire it in single shot and good gunners had no problem in single shooting a target at 700m . And the irish army FNs could fire full automatic
Thanks John, definitely confirming what a couple of other Irish veterans have noted. I can see what it's coming from. Thanks for listening!
Another exceptional analysis! As the film itself, although it has its problems, I absolutely love it and I went into it w/only knowledge of the real engagement. Richie Smyth needs to do a film on the Battle of Koh-Tang, the Aden Emergency, and/or Lima Site 85. Btw, “BBE” is going to be my new catch phrase, lmao.
In regards to the scene where they flip the Land Rover on its side, that was actually done during the actual siege. The reason was they had a Ford Mk VI armored car, which had a Vickers Mk I mounted in a turret, and the range of elevation was only suitable for engaging ground targets. So they had to flip the car on its side in order to get the gun pointed into the sky to get fire on the attacking fighter-bomber. This video goes into good detail about the Ford Mk VI and other armored vehicles used by the Irish Defense Forces during the Congo peacekeeping mission.
ruclips.net/video/LHD2x4bDgdk/видео.html
Ahhh flipping an armoured car makes a little more sense but that must have been a hell of a job!
Added to my watch later list - looking forward to this one!
Thanks for this episode, guys! Finally I did watch the film and heck of a lot like about it! Simple structure, actors, accents, brilliant bar scene (dat burn, lol), overall production quality and real story behind is fascinating.
Glad you enjoyed it, it's a great little film! Thanks for listening.
I remember watching this randomly on a late night alone. Was so positively surprised.
Great review guys. I found this a well done movie and fairly realistic. That Bren sniper scene- there’s got to be some factual basis for it. I can’t think of any other reason for them making a point in showing this very unique scene.
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it. I'd love to know where it came from, and I really want to test it!
The Bren scene is very strange. Film makers bollocks in my opinion.
Think you're right on that one Jimmy.
I am so glad that the Irish government honoured these brave men. Thank you Goevernment of Ireland
I found this very informative pertaining to the operations of military affairs in general. By showing the before and after of their deployment it gives a more complete depiction of how "only those who were there" know what war is like.
Seeing the FN was the main reason I wanted to watch this film. I trained with the FN C1A1 back in the 80's and it has a special place in my memories. The fact that the movie was good was a bonus. Although I questioned the use of the Bren over the FAL for the long distance shot. I know the FN can easily hit out to 800 meters. no experience with the Bren but some with the .303 Enfield mk4.
@21:21 In the Irish army before we moved over to camo officers wore the pips on the shoulder, other ranks used a brassard with the rank on it which could be slipped off the shirt over the wooly or jacket, for over seas they wore them to denote the country, I'm guessing the 3 star private ones were more numerous and so he got one, I doubt the costume dep went out of their way for the detail, they probably got a stack of them from the QM in Athlone
Absolutely agree with you comment about this as a war movie: great actors, great direction and a true story that most people don't know about
Planning on doing Six Days?
Yeah I think we will, it's on our ever growing list.
Perhaps Quinlan knew about the ‘matchstick’ trick for the FAL? 😉
Hahaha, maybe so. Seems like the sort of chap who would have know.
@@TheArmourersBench Friend of mine has mentioned that the real trick was to make sure that the matchstick or paper clip was removed before an inspection. 😀
I have read the book, but don’t remember the mention of the Bren shot. But, I’d need to read it again to be sure.
Having an F-4 Phantom shoot down the UN Secretary General’s plane is an odd inclusion. As it was shot down in a location well beyond the range of a Phantom flying from a carrier. I suppose it would have been possible to maybe air refuel it, but it’s unlikely.
@@MontytheHorse the cause of the crash is still not known but given that in 1961 the F4 was still very new and going through it's initial acceptance trials into US Navy service the use of it in the film is certainly an anachronism.
@@TarnishUK Apparently the South Africans downed the aircraft and killed all on aboard. I doubt the Yanks would've been directly involved.
41:02 - There is an interesting 2019 docu called "Cold Case: Hammerskjold" which explores what may have really happened to that plane.
Great video guys. I put this action together and designed the battles plus all the bootcamp etc. Lovely to hear such an enthusiastic review.
Bloody hell Dan! Top job. We'd love to have you on the show for a chat if you're up for it.
@@TheArmourersBench sure man. Your video brought back great memories of all the work we put in on the movie. One of my favourite jobs.
It shows, the set pieces are fantastic, great action and highlighting a largely forgotten battle. Drop us an email fightingonfilm@gmail.com, our listeners would love to hear about your work.
This movie features big Bren energy
Spades of it!
@@TheArmourersBench 50 Spades of it
Where can I nominate a movie to reivew?
You can leave them in the comments here or head to fightingonfilm.com and enter it in the suggestion form. Patreon supporters get to vote on the too, like in this episode.
Before I even watch the video, what I found a bit strange in this movie are the katangese mercenaries’ outfits as I I have recently done a bit of research on Congo merc kit and I am pretty sure I saw a few of them wearing US woodland and other pretty modern camo patterns which I think weren’t around in the early 60’s… Dunno might be my mistake
There's definitely a few scenes we're they're wearing Woodland which is definitely anachronistic.
Its a fasinating scene. As i understand it: the Bren had mag removed as it adds weight, firing one manually inserted round removes additional movement from parts cycling (may not be correct) another round after the shot, bipod useful up on roof for stability and keeping on target for follow up shots, barrel length similar to lee enfield mk4 (lee around 24" , bren around 22". models vary). Odd bit in scene but some logic to it. I forget if it is true (or said to be) and dont recall you stating it is.
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle.
As for the single round, that doesn't make much sense, it would feed and fire the same set to semi and fed from the magazine. The bolt is still going to go forward, then cycle either way. Perhaps it slightly reduced the chance of a miss feed, but that's not exactly common with a bren.
@nzgunnie yes I wasn't sure of the reason for any of it, especially as the barrel lengths are similar and just posted as its so fascinating. Good topic for conversation.
Hi Guys, thanks for doing this movie. FYI Irish contract FALs were Metric Pattern from Belgium. They had a safe, semi, auto fire group. Some have been refurbished and are still in use as sniper support weapons/DMR.
Hi Tony, thank you! That's interesting, Jonathan shared an IDF manual with me that was for an Inch pattern. Because it was something that was bugging me in the prep and I couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere. But metric certainly makes sense.
@@TheArmourersBench I joined Irish Army Reserve in the mid 2000s and I just missed out on the FAL, it had only been replaced by the AUG in reserve service. The organisational memory and fondness for the weapon was still strong however! Someone like Nick Moran who used it during his FCÁ service would be able to definitively confirm it. It was always referred to as the ‘FN’ rather than the SLR and there were many anecdotal stories regarding its uncontrollability in full auto.
@@tonyfahey8442 I think it makes more sense that it was Metric and as you say it was said to be select fire capable. I've never seen any mention of Ireland getting SLRs either but the here's the manual Jonathan mentioned. www.smallarmsreview.com/archive/detail.arc.entry.cfm?arcid=4070
@@TheArmourersBench wow, thanks for sharing that, as an Irish speaker I can clear that up for you… on page 33 there is a section concerning ‘Méarlamhach’ . This is the Irish word for rapid fire. It mentions moving the selector switch into the position A.
Interestingly it also mentions that such fire should only be used ‘le linn éigindála amhain’ or ‘only in emergencies’.
I thought you might! I suspect Small Arms Review have made a mistake with how they indexed it in that case. Thanks Tony!
Good or bad.... Both sides can be candidates for both. Hoare and Denhard were around this area during this time.
Not sure why they didn't have proper clothing or web gear in the movie. You'll die in an hour if u don't have a hat in Africa
Great review of a great film.
Thanks Pat, glad you enjoyed it!
I know it's not strictly a war film. But could you do The Borune Identity.. 😬
It isn't strictly a war film but we haven't ruled out doing some limited non-war film runs/spinoffs/seasons to do some fun stuff like that! Someone was asking if we'd cover Heat, and I have a hard time saying a definitive no haha.
@@TheArmourersBench well what about tropic thunder then... that's a war film about the making of a war film 😅😅 what's not to like !
A distinct possibility! We have a huge list of ideas and films to cover and Tropic Thunder is definitely in there.
I find it hard to believe that the enemy force persisted with a full frontal assault 3 times across open, dead ground with no cover inspite of the perfect high ground to the south and were not mown down by bren and vickers immediately.
The film falls down there. One thing I regret not mentioning is that really odd tactical choice made, especially given they're led by former French Foreign Legion paras...
I would have put my bren, vickers, sniper and 60mm on the hill with a section of rifles to guard their flanks. Then i'd have almost everyone else on the roof tops of those perfect buildings in the camp. I'd probably have left a section or two on the ground to distribute ammo to the roof tops.
The attacking force would have lost all of their mobility and HMG in the first wave and would have been forced to back off or flank. If at all possible, i would have made an effort to recover some of the enemy firepower during the lull's and used it against them from the roof tops.
If it really went down like it did in the film then perhaps this explains the reluctance to recognise this action until recently.
I may read the book to see what really happened one day.
I suspect the simple, full frontal attacks were due to the mismatched level of training of the force. Trying flanking moves, fire support elements from the flank, etc might have been judged a little too complex for them to pull off.
Besides, when you've got 1,000+ people and a 10-1 or greater advantage not to mention mortar and air support...
FALs and South Paws unite!!
I enjoyed the film. But there is one particular scene that I really can't stand.
It's when the sniper needs to shoot a particular person from a very long distance. And he stupidly puts down his scoped bolt action rifle, gets on the Bren open bolt LMG takes for what ever reason the magazine out, loads a single cartridge and shoots his target.
This is about the worst decision you could make when you're in a firefight and need to take out a high priority target. It's an unnecessary waste of time to choose a worse weapon for the job in a plain stupid manner.
He should have just shot that high priority target with his Enfield.
Exactly Bob, we do mention that in our discussion. It's a puzzler.
@@TheArmourersBench As I understand it was done because it happened in RL. And it happened in RL because the Defence Forces had a view that the LE even when scoped was inferior over range than the Bren. Don't know why, but it pops up in DF stuff over that time period.
Fascinating would love to see Docs on that! Thinking of writing a paper on it so seeing some documentary sources on it would be excellent.
No 32 scope fitted to the Lee Enfield No4 Mk1T was adjustable to 1000 yards, Bren's sights out to 1800. The scope's thick vertical post reticle was not well suited to holdover at long ranges as it obscured the target. That's the only reason I can think of to use the Bren in favour of the rifle.
Why you'd bother taking off the magazine and loading a single round, rather than simply selecting it to single shot I'm not so sure. Or firing a controlled burst of to make sure of the job.
i have the book i will reread it now
i have seen the film as well
I dont like this historical event. To be fair I never like when the bad side gets a heroic last stand for a bad cause.
In what way was the Irish UN-troops the bad side?
The FN FAL in Irish service was definitely metric and full auto.
Thanks Eamon, it seems the thought thst it was an Imperial-FAL came from a mid-translated manual.