Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Siege of Jadotville & The Sniper Bren - Is The Bren More Accurate than a Sniper Rifle?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2021
- If you're familiar with the film Siege of Jadotville you will remember a scene in which the Irish company’s sniper takes on a long range shot... with a Bren.
The sniper exchanges his scoped Rifle No.4(T) for a Bren and single loads a round with the magazine removed. We teamed up with our friend Rich of @vickersmg to see how realistic this exciting and interesting scene is!
Be sure to check out our accompanying article for this video which has more data, information and photos from the range here -
armourersbench...
If you enjoy our work please consider supporting us via Patreon, TAB is a viewer supported channel and any help is very much appreciated! We have some great new perks, check out our Patreon page here: / thearmourersbench
You can also now support us with one-time donations via ko-fi.com/armo...
Ever wished all the best gun history content creators were gathered in one place? Check out - surplused.com - we're on there!
Where to find TAB:
armourersbench...
/ armourersbench
ko-fi.com/armo...
/ thearmourersbench
/ armourersbench
utreon.com/c/A...
imgur.com/user...
/ discord
![L1A1 🇬🇧 SLR [British FN FAL - Iron Sights] to 600yds (Feat. Bloke on the Range) Practical Accuracy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q0j3AAfte2w/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for watching guys check out the accompanying blog for this video for more information, the raw data and photos - armourersbench.com/2021/10/03/siege-of-jadotville-the-sniper-bren-is-the-bren-more-accurate/
That was something that bugged me in the film. Thankyou!!!
Show me any solid evidence you have access to the proves this event ever even happened..
Why it's a scene from a movie?
I'm not sure quite what the 'myth' is to which you are referring. If it's "The Bren is more accurate", then that's one thing, if it's "He would take the Bren in preference to the 4T for that shot", that's another matter entirely. I must be one of the last folks to have been trained on the .303 Bren by the Army (Ireland never re-bored them to 7.62, and even in the 1990s, brand new guns purchased 1957 were still being issued from stores), and at that point, the Bren had an almost mythical reputation for accuracy in the Irish military, to the point that for the suppressive fire role, 'worn' barrels designated for operations, and new barrels for the inter-unit shooting contests. Indeed, the rules for the contest were such that in order to encourage the use of the gun in burst (i.e. the purpose of the gun in the first place), and stop people just firing two-round bursts into the same hole (There legitimately were arguments over such possible occurrences), the magazines were loaded with an odd number of rounds.
Further, the rooftop the man is on in the film seems to have a raised rim. It is possible a steadier aim and follow-through can be taken by pressing the gun forward with the bipod backstopped by the solid 'wall' than might be achieved with a sandbag rest and the rifle. You are also undoubtedly familiar with the very odd 'recoil' of the Bren also which tends to draw the gun forward, which may have an effect on the first round accuracy, especially combined with the heavier gun. I have never tried it, I've never had a Bren and a Lee Enfield at the same time as you have. (And we changed to the FN-MAG almost immediately after getting trained on the Bren).
Finally, there is the most obvious argument: It's such an odd thing to see in the movie, one can't imagine a scriptwriter came up with it out of his arse. It's to be noted that the veterans of the siege were all present at the premiere, and while there were comments like "Our Vickers weren't on Jeeps, they were on tripods" (Excepting the two on the Ford armoured cars not in the movie at all), there seems to have been none of them who commented on the sniper using the Bren as being out of place.
There is no accounting for the 'human factor' which need not necessarily follow science. For all we know, maybe he was a Bren gunner before being given the 4T, and was just inherently comfortable with the weapon (maybe he was made company sniper because he won the shooting contest the year before with the Bren!).
Unless someone who was at Jadotville actively comes out and says "this didn't happen", I would rate the scene as eminently plausible, no matter how rational or irrational it may seem to a viewer. That said, why he wanted to shoot without the magazine, I couldn't tell you. But I won't say it didn't happen.
Thanks for watching! In short both!
It's very interesting to hear about the worn barrels being preferred operationally, we will have to try and track down some armourers from the period to get their thoughts on this. It certainly seems that by the time you were serving the Bren had a long held reputation, which a couple of other former Irish servicemen have noted but not quite in as much detail as your comment above.
Would I be right in thinking the rules of these contests would have been recorded somewhere? They'd make fascinating reading in this context.
I would be surprised if the 2 rounds in one whole in burst were actually a reality, the very nature of a Bren on automatic would mean the fire would have to be right on top of the target to achieve this.
Your note about the bipod and wall as a backstop is interesting. Perhaps this is seething we could collaborate on and test! We're already looking at other aspects that can be explored at the range.
As for veteran recollections, that's very interesting and may lend some support to it but also the majority of the soldiers would have seen the Vickers tripods, walked past them daily, seen the set up etc but fewer would have seen marksman exchange his Rifle for a Bren and then single load it. We've looked through several of the books on the battle and the recent Irish ministry of defence report and haven't seen a direct reference to this (not to say it doesn't exist and hasn't been overlooked).
But all the same if I was a marksman and as you say I felt the Bren superior and had had excellent groupings in automatic in service competions and training exercises then I think I would have left the magazine on and given him a burst - at least with the magazine present you could walk fire onto the target quickly if you missed your first shot.
I think the scene may simply have been the director, advisor and armourer discussing how they could give the sniper an interesting, cinematic, 'hero' scene.
But anyway, as we said in the video the experiment raised just as many questions as it answered and it was a lot of fun to think about. Thanks so much for taking the time to watch and share your thoughts which have added a few more questions to our list!
No argument with your statement about the magazine and firing a burst in that circumstance. It's what I would have done, but then, I was never a company sniper...
I also share your skepticism about putting two rounds into the same hole, but remember the issue of 'choice' is as much about perception as reality. For example, the two-rounds-one-hole thing is mentioned by two different gunners on a thread on an Irish board. I'll have to email you the link, RUclips doesn't seem to like my putting it on here.
Whether or not they actually put two rounds through one hole is irrelevant to the belief that they did.
I have no idea if the rules are still retained (and knowing the Irish military, if they are, they're probably still classified). As the Bren had such a slow rate of fire, it was very easy to single-tap and double-tap rounds. Thus they had to make it more 'machinegunny.' As a result, the rule said 'fire in bursts', and by putting 15 rounds in the magazine, it ensured that if the shooter did nothing but two-round-bursts, they'd be disqualified after seven bursts. The graders wouldn't even need to wait for that last single round...
@@TheArmourersBench Could you do an interview with the scriptwriter or armorer? For finding out if they made it upor if they heard it from a veteran...
Yes! Been trying to reach the director actually.
We were the last in the Irish reserves in 89 to drill and fire the .303 Lee Enfield, switched to FN-FAL in 1990.
Even if the Bren was mechanically more accurate, firing from an open bolt surely would make most shooters choose the closed bolt option.
Exactly! The movement and harmonics are going to be detrimental!
For sure
The Bren has a weird ‘double bounce’ when firing repetition too which makes it feel strange when firing.
Totally! I have experience of the FN MAG, Carl Gustaf M/45 and the HK G3 and the notion that a gun firing from an open bolt would be better than one firing from a closed one would be better for PRACTICAL accuracy seems strange.
Fact:Jadotville is now known as Likasi in D.R Congo
Great video guys and love your work. I was the military action coordinator on the movie back in 2015. Trained and ran all the battles and gun play etc. Our armourer (rest in peace)came up with the fun and entertaining story point for the director who loved it. He served in Rhodesia. I totally understand the points made and agree of course. Interesting fact for you is we used blanks in all scenes with dozens of weapons and various platforms. Rarely done today. Our excellent armourers from Johannesburg (Hire Arms) kept all these platforms running very smoothly and even brought serial numbered weapons that actually served in this battle. Hip firing the browning was a challenge.
I look forward to more videos.
Regards Dan
Thanks Dan, fantastic extra detail. You guys did a great job on the film (and gave us lots to talk about!).
I particularly loved training the cast on the Vickers and of course the R1 (FAL). Out of all the gunfire on the entire movie, literally thousands of blanks fired with many new to the game before boot camp we had no ND's. A mixture of discipline and respect built into boot camp and tough drills made sure of that. Chuffed. I loved this working on this movie and it's definitely one of my favourites along with Blood Diamond and Generation Kill.
The movie took liberties, I served with soldiers who fought at Jadotville & the Irish Army had no Lee Enfields at Jadotville. The FN FAL replaced the No 4 a year before. There were marksmen at Jadotville, armed with FN's. If you watch you will also see there is no fore sight in the clip when the guy gets shot.
Ahh did you! They definitely did take liberties didn't they. Thanks for sharing!
The film at least told a story that might otherwise be less widely known or even forgotten and showed the mens heroic defence .
My Irish mate (ex British Army and ex Irish Army) told me he spoke to Irish veterans who were there and they said the same. FN FAL'S no Lee Enfields.
Well that's a load of bollocks for a start. The FN only started to be introduced towards the end of the congo, and even then the 303 remained the sniper rifle for years after that. They are also talking bollocks, during the congo the bren was still using the 303 it hadn't yet been converted for 7.62. Of course the film makers used it for drama but how dare they snigger about the bravery of that day. despite all the mercenaries the Irish killed not one Irish soldier died that day, despite being up against air power and hung out to dry once again by the UN and the Yanks playing politics, and by the way they weren't shooting at paper targets, like you ass holes.
This is an interesting video. My late father (born 1933) was an unusually gifted marksman. He recalled using the Bren Gun, when in the cadets, with high praise for the weapon. They were trained to shoot 3 shot bursts, the first of shot of which he claimed would take out a matchbox at 100 yards, and if you were shooting well, it was near good enough to hit a single match.
One of the things that he said in relation to the Bren, and something that I've never understood, is that you had to shoot it like an air rifle. "Posture, poise, breathe, squeeze and follow through". I'll never forget those words. He always claimed that the Bren was vastly underrated in the context of accuracy because people didn't understand how to shoot them. I wish he were alive today not just because I miss the old bugger, but to clarify his thoughts in the context of this video. A Bren gun, like an air rifle? It doesn't make sense. But boy, could he hit a target.
The Bren was a very good light machine gun. The Enfield 4(T) was an okay to good sniper rifle. But comparing the two is like putting a good off-road car against a sports car. They are designed to perform different tasks in totally different environments.
Firing from an open bolt, a Bren will have a relatively slow lock time, as will also a spring powered air rifle, like a Webley Mk III or an HW 35 (many other makes and models are available).
On the air rifle, the spring and pistol must travel forward for a while before the pellet will even start to move.
On the Bren, the working parts have to move forward into battery before the primer is struck and the bullet will start to move.
Shooters trained on spring/air air rifles will learn the importance of a good "follow through" and those same skills should help when shooting open bolt firearms like a Bren.
Great vid chaps! As a young recruit and private in the FCA ( Irish Reserve Defense Forces) in the late 70s I fired the No4 and Bren out to 300 and 600yds. At no time did any of our NCO/officer instructors mention single-loading a Bren.... 'cos you don't.... great movie though. The Irish Defence Forces were only using Bren Mk3s by the early 60s .
Thank you Mick! It does seem pretty outlandish doesn't it.
The real hero here is the sound, the crack of the working parts! *chef kiss*
Truth. The only ASMR I can stand.
I fired the modern version of the Bren, the LMG on single shot out to 600 meters. I got a 5 inch group in the chest of a figure 11 target.
Love the 7.62 Brens, amazing guns.
My Dad was a Bren gunner in the Aussie Army in the 1950s. Loves the Bren and still gets excited talking about it. I fired a converted Bren in the 1980s in Aussie Army when a small arms instructor with recruit training. It had been converted to 7.62mm NATO. For some of the commenters, keep in mind, Bren is designed as a squad machine gun and primary purpose is to lay a field of fire, lobbing projectiles into the 'beaten zone', squad machine guns are not primarily designed for accurate rifle fire. That is the job of the SMLE/L1A1 SLR of that era.
The bren was used to support counter sniping in the ruins of Monte Casino at much shorter range than you discussed. With a spotter, a full mag, on single shot, you could pepper the sniper's hide with well aimed shots and support the sniper with the No4T. Lt Col Blair Mayne SAS DSO*** also preferred the bren as a semi auto rifle to LMG mode. I used to owned a Mk 1 on FAC pre Michael Ryan; great fun but it would never out shoot a No4T at 400 yards. Don Smith.
my father was in the grenadier guards at Cassino. he once said that there was a shout out that the enemy were in some ruins closeby. Artillery were called up and the end result was that a soldier popped out of the ruins and started running down the street. his mate was the platoon bren gunner who was next to him, he fired a single shot with the Bren and hit him; dad estimated it was at least 400 yards.
Even if the BREN was more mechanically accurate it wouldn't make sense to give up using optics at that range for iron sights. At that distance the target is likely to be completely obscured by the front sight post. It might make more sense if the BREN fired a cartridge that had a significant performance increase over the Enfield but it doesn't. It did make for good drama (for people who are not in the know and believe machineguns are necessarily more powerful than rifles) and I suspect that was the point.
I think you're spot on there Landric!
Exactly... not to even mention open vs. closed bolt =/
Why is it more mechanically accurate? It has a heavier barrel that's it. Which likey would have been shot alot more therfore more warn out.
Don't see why the target would be obscured by the front sight. Bren has a rear sight adjustable for elevation for range.
what was the sight picture with the Lee scope though?
To me, it's preposterous to even consider that a Bren could be more accurate than a #4T. The delay of the bolt closing alone would make it nearly impossible, nevermind the inertia. Movie nonsense is movie nonsense.
I think the director had been playing Call of Duty and thought “bipods make a weapon more accurate”. Only explanation I can think of!
Brens sights are adjustable to longer distance than a NO4T scope
No32 scope dose have calibrated range adjustment on the elevation turret.
Yes but not to the same range as a Bren, The Bren sight goes to 1800m from memory
@@kathlindon The Bren is also a machine gun and it's an aperture sight. You'll have no problem hitting a building or hillside with automatic fire at those ranges but anything smaller is going to take a lot of rounds sent downrange, whereas the T in No. 4(T) stands for Telescopic. It's not marked to those distances because anyone mentally deficient enough to try making accurate single shots out there isn't allowed to handle guns.
@@chaimafaghet7343 the Bren is surprisingly accurate and aperture sights that allow you to set the range compared to a scope with a thick post that completely obscures the target pushes things back in the Brens favour a bit. I dont get the point of single loading but if it was me trying to hit a target beyond the adjustment range for a no 4t, taking into account that the post completely obscures the target I would go with the Bren and single aimed shots. Yes ive shot both and if the No 4T had an optic that that didnt obscure the target it would be preferable.
He would have shot even better if he used on of the M45 Carl Gustav’s as a “sniper rifle” and single loaded it 😂
Pulls a Browning High Power out, set sights at 400m
@@Nathan-jh1ho *fits stock, single loads*
My Dad was a Bren Gunner with the 34th Battalion in the Congo. They were the Battalion before the Jadotville boys.
Oh wow!
Hiya all. Saw this thread, I represented Au in mil comp in the 80s' with a Bren, love em but the accuracy myth is just that, very accurate for a machine gun, no sniper rifle though, though I can only comment on the 7.62 version I used. We selected 6 out of a batch of 20/40 barrels, the best being around 2MOA, 50mm groups at 100m under perfect conditions, the worst around 10 MOA.
Great result for a LMG but pretty ordinary compared to a Sniper grade rifle.
The Bren fires from the open Breech and this takes a little practice to overcome and still shoot accurately but is sweet to shoot, the position with the bipod is very stable and comfortable.
The Bren is a LMG and not a GPMG, different purpose, different strengths and weaknesses. in a LMG accuracy is definitely an asset.
Cheers all.
Absolutely Brett, definitely agree. Thanks for sharing your insights!
That's remarkable. I really wasn't expecting those results.
I thought the open bolt mechanism and not having consistent, all around lockup would make the BREN mechanically unfriendly to accuracy.
Great work, guys. Must admit that I am green with envy - you have one of the best jobs in the world. Especially when considering how incredibly strict UK gun laws are - it's much appreciated that you bring so much hands-on testing to the channel!
Great video and was super fun taking part in this. Brilliant day on the range. Looking forward to busting more myths with you guys.
Having fired thousands of rounds both in .303 and the modified 7.62mm versions I can honestly say the ,303 version up to 300 meters was remarkably accurate in both single shot and small bursts of 2-3shots
I was told by an armourer that they made the 7.62 barrel a tad looser fit to increase the spread down range.
Magic.... Great coal-face analysis gents. Great subject.
Thanks Rob and thank you for the FoM video and spreadsheet, it was invaluable! We watched it as we tried to figure it all out!
Cheers Rob. Hopefully our use of the FoM met your standards. We were a bit rough and ready compared to the vids you do though. More to come!
For the record, in American films there is a rule that all French and Belgian badguy kingpins must wear a white suit. I refer you to "René Emile Belloq" should you care to differ.
Great movie! I assumed it was ergonomics that led him to choose the Bren. . .couldn't understand how it could be more accurate than an Enfield. Thanks for an utterly fascinating video!
So glad you enjoyed it, thanks for watching!
The Lee Enfield is not as accurate as it's made out to be, unless it's been accurised ( the barrel freed up). My Mosin Nagant out shot 4 Enfield MK4's in a contest at 300 meters. But I must admit that I was using handloads.
No recoil from the Bren,hence there was no flinch, sight and squeese.
@@geordiegeorge9041 No. 4(T). None of the guys you were shooting with had one of those and they weren't free floated either, just selected actions and centre bedded. You don't free float an SMLE barrel unless you really know what you're doing.
The obvious question is if Brens were genuinely more accurate then then why weren't snipers issued with them in the first place? The reasons are many.
There may have been a situational reason to use a Bren for that shot. The physical elevation provided by the bipod might be why.
Interesting Matthew, I can certainly understand a stability argument for the bipod and elevation is an interesting point too. Thanks for watching!
Have you shot a Bren in combat or on a range?
For an LMG, fired on single shot, it’s not too inaccurate. But for a sniper to abandon his scope-equipped, bolt-action rifle for a weapon that fires from an open bolt, is ludicrous. Just done to make the film exiting for uninformed people.
Ahhh the old story from the irish army I've heard it so many times in so many different ways... One goes about the machine gunner who was so good he could tap off single shots while on full auto and was deadly accurate I've heard it told about Vickers bren and gpmg . The only time id take the bren for a shot like that would be if i hadn't a hope with the rifle stick it on a tripod and dump a few mags and hope for the best 😂😂😂😂😂
I may have met this man several years ago I was privileged to meet an old solder who was a sniper and who actually got a marksman certification on a Bren gun.
He told me that he developed such a light fast touch on the trigger that he could fire single rounds from the Bren with a full mag fitted. The range master was not happy but he argued that the Bren was full automatic and he got the hits so they had to give him his marksman rating with its pay bonus.
After the war he became a prison officer and got on rather well with the Kray Twins, they liked him because he told them about all the Germans he killed.
@@paintedblue1791 friend of mine was a gong gunner in the Irish army going to the Lebanon for a tour of duty 6 months we had a going away party for him in the local pub And 5 days later he was back sitting in the pub . The story goes that hisbollah or whoeverbollah knew when the new boys were changing over on tour so the used drop a few mortars a few 100 yds from the base just to let them know the weren't on holiday but nobody told Cecil that when the first one hit he could see two more in the air and where they were being fired from He Record 8-900yds he had fired nearly 300 Rds before some officer twisted the belt in the gun he made Shite of the mortar and the three lads were found terrified behind a boulder .back on the plane home for you bucko discharged😂😂😂.true story
Either or, dakka dakka 😉
Why take a single shot when you can send him a nice burst?
Blair Mayne (Col. Paddy, SAS) in WW2 would only suffer a Bren to be fired on single shot.
It’s a precision instrument.
Of course, all of this doesn't mean that the guy on the scene didn't actually do what was shown. What really matters is what that guy believes and decided to do. Some half crazed sun-baked sniper doing something as nuts as asking for the machine gun to make a long range shot would be exactly the kind of unusual story that would give this myth legs. Especially if he did it successfully.
It wasnt hard to get off a single shot with the Bren. As for accuracy, I had no trouble cutting the target poles- which cost me a bit of running around with a Bren over my head 😅
Yes been there done that. It was possible with the MAG58 too, the hold and position was important but once you had mastered it both were accurate at long range
Even if the bren and no4t could produce exactly the same accuracy (and say both had iron sights or both scope) the sights/scope being over the bore on the no4t is going to be a better choice for hitting targets at an unconfirmed distance. The convergent zero on the bren means if you are off on your range estimation you could be off to the side as the bullet shoots right of sight line before your zero distance and left of sightline past your zero distance.
Absolutely Ryan, definitely one of the myriad of advantages the No.4(T) had. Thanks for watching!
I learned to shoot in Royal Marine cadets with that same Lee Enfield. It'll definitely put holes in something easily out to 800 yards. I've never shot a Bren but I can't see why you would bother. If he was a sniper of any worth he would have a dope sheet for the ranges that were relevant to the location he's shooting from anyway.
There is a saying in the Irish army."If you report a mouse in Collins Barracks[Cork city] at breakfast Its an elephant by the time it gets to the Curragh[Co Kildare Main HQ of the Irish army] by lunch.Going by the stories and legends that grown up around Jadotville at the time. This possibly happened that maybe one of the Bren gunners scored a lucky hit on single and it has grown into a legend that made it into the movie by now. Its evident too with the Fouga Magister jet that attacked them too. To this day it is a belief that this jet is in the army museum in Ireland and that it was inducted into the Irish Air Corps which did fly Fougas for many years as Ireland's main combat aircraft. It never happened, but it just shows the power of a minor incident becoming a legend.esp in Ireland!
I think the issue here is more a misinterpretation of the Brens use by snipers and sharp shooters who did utilizing brens over their scoped weapons though some of these accounts are inspired by the Japanese sharpshooters use of their top feed LMG which did have a scope as a sniper. The bren was very much meant as a LMG auto rifles hybrid and a lot of the logic of the orignial semi auto support auto rifle was to give stead slowish accurate rapid fire to suppress at range (much like the m27 today) and i think some snipers with it using long burst to try and shot gun effect targets out past accurate ranges with the beaten zone. The think is the Bren has that nice heavy and thus accuratish barrel.
The 7.62 LMG (Bren) was my personal weapon in the army and it was seriously good at 300 yards. We never fired it over 300 yards. Also only ever fired it with the mag on, cannot see why you would need to load 1 shot with no mag? never seen it done. Also the sights are in yards and army ranges in meters so you have to raise the sights. It is more than capable of shooting further but I have never tried it. I would take the Bren over the rifle every time especially off to war.
Having fired the Bren and LMG version great weapon always hit the target
I remember being astounded how accurate the 7.62 LMG (Bren) could be on a range, even at distances out to 600-800 yards. What I think really made a big difference were the ergonomics of the weapon, one of the most comfortable and intuitive firearms I ever came across.
The L4 Bren is extremely impressive. Very much enjoyed shooting it.
I shot once on a 800m range with a bren, like a laser pointer walking up to the target is instinctive.
Not if you're left-handed. As much as I admire the BREN, its top mounted magazine requires offset placement of the sights which favor only the dextral when aiming. Sinistral shooters are completely ignored. In a similar way, the right side mounted bolt handle of the Lee-Enfield rifle also favors right-handers, though the sights remain ambidextrous. I pity any southpaws who were in that battle unless they were manning the Vickers MG or using a Swedish K at close quarters.
@@Paladin1873As most of the population is RH it makes sense to build weapons to accommodate them. All British army weapons are RH biased, the L2A3 Sterling was RH only, as was its predecessor, the Sten gun. The L1A1, whilst could be fired LH was awkward with the safety lever and had a habit of spittng the occasional hot shell casing on your arm. All British rifles/mgs with a pistol grip have clocking handles on the left. Because of the force needed to cock a weapon with 7.62 x 51mm rounds is too much to use a top mounted cocking lever a la M16.
@@jonkelly7908 I respectfully disagree. It makes more sense to build firearms that are ambidextrous and accommodate every shooter. It isn't hard to do and was done in the past. The M1 and M14 rifles are ambidextrous, and it is a common feature in the newest generation of small arms. Not every feature needs to be ambidextrous, but the manual safety and the ejection pattern should be. It not only helps left-handed shooters, but aids all shooters because sometimes you are in a position where shouldering the rifle from the weak side is safer than using your dominant side.
A technical question regarding single-load...
If the cartridge is chambered by hand, as in the film, wouldn't this make the bolt drop quicker than if it fed the cartridge from the magazine?
There is some amount of friction in the mag and some in the feed ramp. So, by chambering the round by hand you would reduce the amount of friction the bolt needs to overcome, but it also doesn't need to overcome the weight of the cartridge.
This would reduce the time it takes from the pull of the trigger, to the bullet being fired, by a fraction.
Does this make a difference?
It is the only reason I can think of, to why they would fire the gun like this.
Btw, I don't believe for a second that this would make the bren more accurate than a bolt-action rifle. It makes no sence.
That's an interesting point and the only conceivable reason I could think for him doing that!
Yes probably would make it drop quicker but I’d also imagine inertia would be increased grant it it would fire immediately once it was slammed but the reverberations could still have a negative impact on accuracy. And if that wasn’t the case it’s still an open bolt with a comparatively much much longer delay in firing for the shooter to hold after trigger pull. I think they just did the single load because other movies shows snipers single loading bolt actions.
That looks to be a nice range.
It's so long since I have shot and am Jealous that you got to fire all those marks of Bren
Huge range complex but the stones are as sharp as hell.
My dad once told me that during his National Service abroad, his comrades would terrorise the locals by chasing them with aimed fire from a bren, so confident were they in its accuracy that they knew they would not accidentally hit them. (This could well have been tripod mounted, as I saw one in some of his old photos ).
innocent locals?
What about ricochets?
Well done to your dad and his "comrades" .. you must be proud.
Its possible the “no mag, single load” was written by someone who knew the sights were offset on the Bren due to the topload mag and maybe thought they could move the sights over the bore for single load.... or maybe im overthinking it.
Hmm I see the thought process. Surely if they knew they are off-set you'd think they'd know they can't be moved.
For the sniper role the enfield requires 2 sandbags. The Brengun has a bipod rest and thus is a more stable platform.
Also it fires a round with a heavier charge giving it a longer effective range .
If a tactical mistake is made in the film it is that a two round burst is not fired. The firing of the second round will not effect the accuracy of the first round and it increases the chances of a hit.
My father got his marksman patch's in the RAF. He liked the lee Enfield. But he liked the Bren more. He always said how accurate it was.
that was something i talked to you guys about during the podcast and i thought it was kinda insane that the bren was more accurate then a scoped enfield
i seem to recall someone in comments ridiculing me for saying bren was more accurate turns out no
@@joemorganeatmyshortschannel you could say something like 1+1=2 and be sure someone in the coments will ridicule you ecentually.
the simple fact the BREN is open bolt vs. the closed bolt makes the case in and of it's self... let alone the optics and a million other painfully obvious rhings. =)
It did jar when i saw that scene as Why ??? I wonder who came up with the idea forthe filming and why
I used the 303 Bren in the cadets and the 7.62mm LMG in the TA in the late 80s early 90s and for a Machine gun its was very accurate (to accurrate in some cases with no spread for area targets) .
There is no reason for a trained sniper to put his personal issue sniper rifle hes trained with and knows works to one side to single shot a machine gun . yes if he wanted to fire an acurate burst at range to give more chance of a hit or more damage on target then yes but not a single bullet
My dad had marksman status in his squad in WW2 - he reckoned his bren was just as accurate as his Enfield
Oh what a lovely video, gentlemen thank you so much.
Hi, looks like the Bren in the film is a Mark 4 from the sights, the main problem with the Bren Guns initially was they were so accurate, which was a big problem, also the sniper wasn't going for any particular shoot just trying to kill him, he was the mine owner which explains as a civy he was in white. A better test would have been to but a target of a full grown man at 400 Yards then shoot at the middle of the body then see what you hit.. As for loading single rounds I/we used to do this a lot on the ranges at Lowestoft when i was in the army cadets. Think it was a trust issue... lol As for why change from a sniper rifle to a Bren the only reason i can think of is the bipod on the Bren
Great video, glad you’ve had a good week and made a few quid.
Have to get you and your 68 DPM in the next one.
Thanks for this test. Have run into this myth a few times in the past, and being trained as a sniper/DM on various weapons, and had the chance to fire a couple of Brens while on exchange with the British, it never made any sense, at all. This is not to say that the Bren can't be considered "accurate", but that would IMHO only apply compared to other LMGs, not to any designated sniper/marksman rifle...
Absolutely Ralf. I totally agree with your last point, compared to others yes but compared to a scoped rifle no!
The most flagrant abuse of accuracy for this demonstration is most likely the trigger travel time involved with shooting the Bren from an open bolt. It would probably be on the level of a muzzle loaded flintlock rifled firearm.
Not a bad comparison, 'lock time' as they say.
A great mate of mine was in the NZ Army, said the Bren was fantastic apart from all the bullets going through the same hole. RIP Pete
Yes, my uncle told me that the Brens he used in the war had been modified to increase the spread. Only takes one bullet....more going through the same hole is wasteful!
We still had them in the 80's but the GPMG was what we carried in the bush.
It seems the Chieftain and Forgotten Weapons are debating about this particular situation.
Perhaps they need your input.
They've both seen the video, Ian even kindly linked to it in his recent video and Chieftain commented on this vid when it went up originally so this scene has definitely captured all of our attention haha! It's essential a bit of filmmakers license that doesn't completely make sense but adds a bit of drama and gives us 'gun people' something to debate at least haha. Thanks for watching!
It would have made far more sense if he wanted to fire a burst, or being uncertain of the range,wanted to walk his fire in on the target.
Or - and stop me if this is dangerous thinking now - he could have used it as a machine gun and saturated his chosen beaten zone with fire and driven the enemy off.
Your not trying to drive him off, your doing your level best to kill him.
@@leighrate Stop talking bollocks. If the enemy start taking enough casualties they will break contact and withdraw - you have driven them off, that is the aim when fighting in defence. The Irish soldiers did not survive the siege because they simply put out rounds. They survived because they used communication and fire control. If you think that blazing away in a blind hate will save the day you have some thinking to do about being a macho moron.
Some Kurds believe the PKM is a long range sniper/precision gun and will use it to try and fire single shots by feathering the trigger. Seem like a situation like this, people believe weird things
They also believe that pressing the forward assist while taking a shot with an M4/M16 will make it shoot "harder"/"more accurate". They call it the sniper button. Insurgents all over the world put the sights on their AK's on 1,000meters, because they think it makes it hit harder. People believe some crazy stuff. At least with the PKM, it's a larger caliber than their AK's. Lots of people use the M2.50 cal for long range shooting, with Carlos Hathcock even supposedly mounting a scope to one.
@@ripley4601ya Ive heard that and other ridiculous things about the kurds. At least the M2 is closed bolt and there is a way to make it fire single shots where you have to charge it everytime, in korea they also took a 14.5mm PTRD and rebarreled it with an M2 barrel and put on a scope
@@brasstard7.627 The Kurds did the same. They took these large caliber weapons and made them into anti material rifles. Forgotten Weapons has a video on them.
@@brasstard7.627 If you have used an M2 they have a trigger and a paddle. One drops the bolt and chambers a round and the other fires the weapon. You hold them both down for automatic fire. You engage them separately in sequence for single rounds from the closed bolt. You don't have to keep cocking it.
If it's comparing in 7.62x39 AKs it makes some sense. But this is the equivalent of choosing a PKM over a SVD
I'm wondering now that it's coming up to 2 years since this video and both of you's having an interest in coming back to this are you planning to test this out again in the future? and if so why not invite an Irish vet who's fired the Bren and maybe even at marksman competions and won maybe? As I do believe that someone with more experience shooting with a Bren (or any weapon) would be more comfortable and more accuratly represent the data you's gather. Also that's not doubting your shooting guys :)
I certainly used the Bren for more accurate aimed single shot fire than rifles could produce in Rhodesia. My unit were from a second line force with African troops armed with German H&K G3 rifles. We got South African .303 Brens as our first section support weapons early in 1979. In encounter actions they had not prepared themselves (i.e. vehicle ambushes, or revving farms), the Terrs often tended to open inaccurate fire at extreme ranges at which our return rifle fire was also not very accurate. Assuming that we could identify well where the fire came from, I therefore used the Bren, which was more steady on its bipod, initially to keep the Terrs' heads down with single aimed shots at specific targets while we skirmished up. Only being issued four mags per Bren and having to recharge them also led us not to be too liberal with our fire. However, as the Terrs invariably gapped it before we reached their positions I can't swear to the effectiveness of the Bren in this role. This wasn't exactly sniping and was only due to the limitations of our training and the rifles themselves as we had no scoped rifles. Such bloodless actions tended to favour us, as the Terrs had to walk their ammunition in from Moczambique and it could take weeks for them to get resupply, leaving them passive for a similar period. They also tended to leave bits of kit, particularly AK magazines, behind as they gapped it. The best haul included a Tokarev pistol.
The bipod has to give an immediate increase in accuracy.
My grandfather won interservice cups and medals for sharpshooting with both the bren and lewis k guns! Though this was just pre-ww2 1938 I believe. Cups and medals are in the Sherwood Foresters museum!
Quite apart from all the logical inconsistencies, the biggest issue is that the Bren shoots from an open bolt. There's a huge amount of metal (the bolt) whanging forward just before the round is detonated and disrupting the aim. If you're looking for it, ou actually see this in the movie but it can be mixed up with the recoil. It is far better demonstrated when the guys use the DP Bren. There without any recoil you can see there is considerable movement induced that would disrupt the shooter's aim unnecessarily and definitely far worse than that which would be experienced using a rifle, firing from a closed boot, like an Enfield 4(T). In the 4(T) the only movement would come from the firing pin travelling forward and I know shooters who change issue firing pins with lighter titanium ones to reduce that effect.
Looks like Lydd or Hythe local to me. Nice vid. I recently watched the film and really enjoyed it.
I suspect the myth may stem from different facts one is that as mg's were expected to have further reach than a rifle .303 MG's typically used MG ammo which was hotter than .303 rifle ammo so had a flatter trajectory, these rounds were forbidden to be used in rifles except in an emergency, as it can damage the rifling, but obviously it was fine to put rifle ammo through an MG, another fun fact the No. 32 scope was originally designed for the bren, then it was later adapted as a sniper scope, then there is that tight group from an expertly trained gun team. another urban legend is that worn out barrels were sometimes used to deliberately reduce its accuracy, personally I would rather have the accuracy and put the rounds where I needed them as the weapon is so controllable anyway. if it was me taking that shot, I would have gone for the No.4T to do the job, but back in my day with the L42 roughly 700m or so was about the maximum you could see well enough to hit with it in field conditions if the weather wasnt too bad and the light was good, the No.32 scope I used was the same WW2 item just upgraded with better seals and reworked into meters instead of yards, but we still were using them up until 1990-91.
Its been a long time since I used a bren, and later the L4a1, although it wasn't common in infantry sections in my time, we did use it in some circumstances, despite the weight of the moving parts they are very accurate for an 'area' weapon, the cone of fire is quite tight, so the rounds dont spread out as much compared to the more commonly issued 'Jimpy' but it also allowed you to put your rounds exactly where you wanted which is handy for for laying down fire into in to narrow arc's such as down narrow paths and into windows.
For the Bren and L4a1 I was taught to grasp the weapon and rest the cheek on the back of the hand to get the correct clearance for the offset sights putting your hand in front of your face would earn a you wallop back in the day, the other thing is you rock slightly back and fore on your toes with your heels together and if the sights dont move dead vertical above and below the target, then the shots will string diagonally, remediation was by lifting the front of the weapon slightly and bringing it to rest before rocking again, am not going to make claims but if you can control the weapon proficiently and use it on 'R' without disturbing your position you will get some surprising good groups for a weapon of its type and vintage.
The Bren is actually very accurate. The main issue I have with it being used for sniping is that is is an open bolt design, meaning that after the action is cocked, the bolt remains opne (to the rear) until the trigger is squeezed, then the bolt flies forward and chamber and fires a round (or multiple rounds if the trigger remains depressed). That movement of a relatively heavy bolt flying forward will tend to creat muzzle movement and therefore inaccuracy (certainly as compared to a sniper rifle). That said, I 400 - 600 yard shot with iron sights would be impressive, given that the forso of a man is half the size of the foresight blade at 600 yds. All that said, the Bren was never designed with accuracy in mind as it is of necessity and 'area weapon', required to create a beaten zone to suppress the enemy, deny observation and movement, etc. When I joined the British Army in 1981 we were using both GPMGs (MAG 58s) and Brens. The Brens had been converted to 7.62mm NATO and I was told at the time that they were atually too acurate when the first came out and did not produce the required beaten zones, so had to be de-accuraized slightly.
Yeah, the myth was perpetuated in the British Army for a long time. The range tables don't concur with your statement. It wasn't as accurate as a Vickers OR a Lewis.
Just to ad something more, 400m is well within lethal small arms range for all the rifles pictured , any SLR (7.62 FN made in australia) would shoot sub 12 inch groups (300mm) at 300m all day.
Cheers
Absolutely Brett! The only gun I wouldn't have tried it with is the Carl Gustav haha. At 600m with irons it's a hell of a lot harder.
its like a crossover and my favorite kind! wonderful content. i used to do work learning how do the semi conversions and blank firing only conversions, wanted to know if you could possibly go over the rarer l4 variants as i have a l4a3 kit which is a mk2 inglis kit remarked. very little info out there however the l4 kits are quite common now in the US. let me know, many thanks
We probably could get the guns and the information together so maybe a range day in the future.
An awful lot of people have not fired and LMG on the range and even less in combat.
I have shot in combat and the range SLR GPMG No4 and I can tell you the LMG is as accurate at 25 to 300m as a No 4.
I’ll second your comments. In 1983/84 I shot in the South East District Cadet Skill At Arms Meeting. In the first year we won the Team Light Machine Gun Match and in the second year we won the Team Shoot using the 7.62 Parker Hale Target Rifle (800m Shoot) and I won the Individual 7.62 PHTR Shoot, scoring 78 using the issue micrometer sights.
The LMG was phenomenally accurate....I actually had an ND with the gun.....we were given two “sighters” prior to the shoot and after the letting the first round go, the gentle “rock n roll” motion of the weapon made me inadvertently squeeze the trigger a second time....the triangular “shot marker” had appeared and the second round took the top of that marker clean off.....not something that I’m proud of but most folks here haven’t got a clue as to how accurate, in the right hands, that weapon is. The Competitions were held at Pirbright and on that first year (the LMG year) the Range and Butts were run by the Junior Para’s.....
The LMG Shoot was a 300m Shoot.....
I'd imagine it wouldn't have gone very differently if the Bren gunner had asked for the No4T instead of the sniper asking for the Bren. It seems to me like they just wanted to show off another weapon.
Ooo. I’m an Australian.was in the Army most of my life…joined in 89…in 2000 used a Bren in a corp competition…
Smashed the competition at 300 m all the way to 10m five Berns three medallions. “Best at rundown”. Just saying! Loved her.
I don't see how any serious movie production in the past 20 years could get it so wrong
When I saw the headline about a Bren sniper rifle, my first thought was that it would be about a rifle whose scope was mounted on the bottom of the barrell.
My No.2 shot 2 ft low single shot on a fig 11 (4 ft) at I as the No.1 shot 2 ft high at 600 yards. L & R were straight down the middle for that range... so he went for the balls and I went for the head.
Even if the Bren is as reliable as the Lee Enfield or better, its difficult to justify a soldier downing a scoped rifle for one with iron sights, even if the other gun has a bipod. The LE sniper rifles were selected from the best examples at the factory, special care and attention was given to them and turned into scoped sniper rifles.If this was a choice between a standard LE with iron sights vs a bren then certainly yes, but not with a dedicated scoped, sniper rifle.
I loved my Bren. It was way more accurate than the LE No4 M1* I was issued with.
The single load was weird as there was no reference. The weapon was not sighted for single loading which presumably would affect the point of impact.
I seen and read comments from people who used the Bren in service and whatever the actual accuracy of the gun was its service reputation was that it was very accurate. So, I could definitely imagine soldiers using it if they were improvising and didn't have anything like a dedicated sniper platform.
If you had choice been a Bren with a stable bipod or a reamed service rifle and needed a long shot with with iron sights then you might go for the bigger weapon.
My Father was trained with the Bren in the Australian Army Cadets Corp as a young man. He was given an Officer rank as well which I surmise was in the Citizen Military Force. He was quiet a good shot and when I was discussing military stuff with him I asked about the Bren and his response was he loved it and that it was fantastically accurate which was also the biggest problem with it. I was a kid at the time and could not understand how a squad Light Machine gun being to accurate was a problem, he explained beaten area for firing a machine gun and how you want the rounds to spread out a little. I was a big reader of Commando Comics at the time and when I asked about firing on the move he told me it needed a sling and was a handful. I asked how accurate and he told me 2 inch groupings which I have no info on range used. I got so much gun safety information from him and I still remember him explaining that a blank 0.303 round would take your foot off with ease. Apparently they used to demonstrate this by cutting down Gum tree saplings with a blank in a 0.303. Much of this is stuff he rarely discusses and he never had active service. I know he was not drafted either. I really enjoyed the movie and when the sniper used a Bren it made me think about my dad's comments. Then again he told me the 0.303 Lee Enfield was accurate and hitting a man sized target with iron sights at considerable range was possible. The considerable range could be anything from 400 to 1000 yards. I know his eyesight was and still is phenomenal and his Father my Grandfather was very well trained and helped establish Canungra Jungle Warfare Training centre. He was the designated stay behind and destroy radar and gun sights for the AA battery was assigned too in case the Japanese overran the position.
Had the longest trigger pull of any lmg I've used. Fun to shoot though. Shot out to 800m on the day, walked the rounds onto the target....no sniping :)
I shot the 303 think we had 50 in competition always better plus more accurate at single shot.
We dismantled the Bren in speed competition, plus rebuilt it...key was getting the slide plus handle lined up.
In closing it would force the spring to reject the inner chassis...🇬🇧
It all depends on the barrel quality and specific taylored load case in point i can and have taken a 8 moa barrel off of a gun and rebarreled withy lathe and load tested now it shoots 1/4" moa mechanical accuracy is the barrel and load first fact
kenton tuker of the big sandy machine gun shoot in Arizona has extensively tested the bren against the jap99- 1919- 24/29 =mg42=bar=dp28 and even a zb30 go figure he said they picked a barrel that was right under 2 moa and the BREN WAS THE MOST ACCURATE _ THE TEST YOUR DOING YOU MUST START AT 100 YARDS AND FIND THE MOA VALUE FIRST BECAUSE BASIC ACCURACY TESTING IS A 360 DEGREE THEN TIMES 60TH OF A DEGREE ARC = 1.047 MOA EVERY 100 YARDS SO A TRUE 1000 YARD 1 MOA GUN IS 10.47"
Great video guys!
Thanks Jack!
'Minute of man' at 4-600yds?
Yes, using 2-3 round bursts.
Bren or SMLE at that range?
Gimme the smellie (Enforcer in my case) every time.
Both in 7.62 x51
Oddest Bren I've ever fired was one chambered in 7.62x54R by the simple expedient of running that reamer into the .303 chamber.
Ejected cases(steel Russian) had an 'interesting' double shoulder & split necks but accuracy was on par with both .303 & 7.62x51 chambered versions.
I'll be over in the US again in mid November & if things work out, will have another opportunity to fire the thing, as the owner's hoping to be at our annual meet in AL.
[Puts down a bolt-action with magnified optics]
[Picks up a Bren with iron sights to "snipe" with]
...Uh...
That said, if you put magnified optics on a relatively accurate machine gun... You can just walk the fire onto the target. I know that there were guys in Afghanistan with M240s taking shots out to 1,000 yards or more and basically having to walk the fire onto them due to them being that far out.
The No32 scope was only adjustable to 1000 yards, the Bren 1800. The bigger issue here is that the vertical post in the No32 scope was pretty thick, so would obscure the target if attempting to use holdover. Of course the same could potentially be argued for the iron sights on the Bren.
What range was the target in the movie supposed to be at? If he was significantly greater than 1000 yards, the Bren could be a better option using correctly zeroed Iron sights, but not for one round. A well aimed burst on the Bren, with the sights set to the correct range (say 1400 yards), would probably have more chance than a single shot from the No4Mk1T using the No32 scope with holdover, where you may not even be able to see the target. This would have seen the Bren employed as intended, to create a beaten zone, and not as a 'sniper' weapon, but also provide some reasoning for it's use at a very long range in preference for the No4Mk1T and the No 32 scope.
I believe the target was under 1000yd. I forget exactly. But still interesting points. Thanks for watching!
I haven’t watched the clip, but the original .303 Bren, when put on trials, was so accurate that it was demonstrated by cutting down a tree at 100 yds. The War Department thought that this was too accurate as they wanted a light field-suppression weapon and, of course, you could only fire the Bren on a fixed trajectory due to its original bipod design. At the end of the day, the barrels were de-accuratised, allowing the rounds to sweep a wider area on full auto. The War Department approved the new design at a cost of £40 per gun, I believe. Later on tripod, vehicle and anti-aircraft mounts were added to the inventory.
The first barrels had to be swapped over when they got hot, quite quickly, so a few chrome lined barrels were issued to help alleviate the problem.
This a 100% true story, except the cost to the War Office was £40.14 per gun Exc VAT, as recorded in the Admiralties record of Sea Shanties.
Most military personnel are novice shooters. Unless good enough to be assigned to an actual marksmanship team, about half the things a troop might tell about how weapons work is myth and misunderstanding.
The average machine gun in ww2 was mainly made to be used at 300 yds, the bren normal distance was meant to be 400 yds, this gun was considered to be too accurate for it's time. I would and so would many other people would consider this one of the best machine guns of all time, not as rapid rate of fire as most German gun's but rate of fire isn't everything. A rapid rate of fire means more ammo to carry, this isn't a problem now with smaller shell's but the size of ammo in ww2 it was.
Wrong barrel, the fluted end was to allow for spread of shot. I used the GPMG too and could fire single shots, during a live fire and manoeuvre was asked to fire long bursts than the up to 3 burst i was doing.
whilst I can disagree with your method, My grandfather fought in the Australian Army in WW2 in the infantry in North Africa and PNG. I remember him telling me that the Bren was sometimes used for sniping. He said that it strongly depended on the gunner but with a good gunner it was as accurate at 300meters as the Lee Enfields.
SMLEs aren't very accurate, IIRC the requirement was for 4 MOA. The sniper variants were hand selected and rebedded by bloody H&H, not just picked at random with a scope slapped on.
Good analysis - my 'commander assessment' of the situation would be the following - call the bren gunner up - get him to soak the target after the sniper has taken his first shot or to suppress to allow the sniper time for a safer second shot. You (and Ian at Forgotten Weapon and the Chieftain) all correctly assess that this is 'movie-ness' not a valid representation. Historically I believe burst fire from Brens were used successfully in the engagement with the officers in white dress uniforms during that action at Jadotville.
Maybe the whole sniper Bren scene was just for effect or artistic licence as actors say. How often do you see petrol in films being ignited by a cigarette butt but in reality it’s not possible. I’ve fired many thousands of rounds through L4A1s and the most accurate shooting is firing single rounds while the “gun” is on automatic using finger control only. I wouldn’t dream of feeding it single rounds without a magazine.
Nice to see brens out on home soil! I take it you're using them on a section 5 licence as a club/museum?
Yes indeed, we're all servants on the Section 5 license. Lucky to do this!
@@TheArmourersBench and who says you can't have guns in the UK! Only problem now is remortgaging to cover the ammo bill
@@christopherhitchens7626 or just a little regular support on patreon ;-) ;-) www.patreon.com/vickersmg or see the links for TAB above.
My Dad was a bren gunner out in the Canal Zone. He always said how accurate it was.
I do not know whether someone making the film was thinking about an SLR where the range on the BREN would beat the SLR.
Interesting how something that was done for plot reasons will probably live on in popular memory of the Bren for quite some time. A bit like some movie Tank scenes. Like the one with Tiger 131 in Fury Edit: As a youtuber myself I also like corugated metall roofes on a rainy day as a sort of relaxing Background :) Just like at the German Tank museum the one time I filmed an interview there
Load from a standing position and aiming on a downward trajectory gravity assists with seating round
Face value is : im gonna swtich my issue rifle that specialized as sniper weapon that I have trained with and know the dope and all.... to pick a random barreled heavy use LMG and single load it without any optics.....sure....that will work..............Just by the trigger pull in the scene---you can tell he would have missed it......on the opposite hand.....White Feather did that in Vietnam with an optic on a perimeter mounted M2 .50 but he mounted his scope to it to hit a guy with a bicycle and he was Hathcock----so was good for like 200 kills by then-
The LMG was super accurate!
Ok guys I get it and I agree that as a sniper I wouldn't choose an indirect fire weapon over a direct fire weapon. But here is the question, the sniper made 1 shot is a Bren capable of hitting a torso size target at 400 yards at least once? So now it becomes possibility VS probability.
How misinformed would someone have to be to think that an open bolt machinegun was as accurate or more so than a halfway descent bolt gun.
Really good video, I wish people would realise it’s just a film, it was probably made up. Going off other videos, they don’t think there was scoped Lee Enfields at the siege.
Back in early 70s I witnessed a your reserve firing a mark 4 on range and hitting 5 shots at a 1000 yds, he did the same shot s at glen of ammal iin co Wicklow a few months later, army wanted him , none the less he refused. I believe he joined the fire brigade. What a loss.
Question! If it’s so hard to load a single round, why is it so easy to insert a split case extractor?