Use of the L42 in the Falklands Conflict

I'll be speaking to Jerry to put this thing to bed, and as a Trustee at our Museum I will check when I am next in, but don't think that sort of point would be recorded!!

Addition: I have just checked through the L42 lists of rifles, and the only one earmarked as a potential right off during the Falklands War, is the one I hold which was rebuilt. There are no other entries to say that a rifle was lost, but a couple that were damaged a few years earlier than the war of 82.
Donnington was clearly the disposal location, but there is no mention of Royal Marines at all on the lists, so I have to assume (probably wrongly) that they have their own as mentioned earlier.
Simon might like to corroberate that.

I have received a reply directly from Martin Pegler which was very quick. In due consideration I have asked him to confirm that he is comfortable with me posting this which I will do as soon as I can....

Oh I don't know Gil, merging the Para's and the Marines might be a good idea?

After all you might finally be able to go toe to toe with the RAF Regiment. :madsmile:

:lol::lol::lol: Simon, I have ALWAYS rated the "Rock Apes", (for those not aware, named thereafter because they spent too much time in Gibralter in days gone by, where it is swamped with monkees) not RMP either :lol:

SFSG at St Athen as you know are formed from 1 PARA/Royal Marines Company and one of the RAF Regiment Company strength. They now work non stop in the sand, and not every married man's cup of tea!!

Here is the reply I received from Martin Pegler and include here with his permission

"An interesting question, I assume Vince is no longer here to answer for himself ? Well, allowing for the passage of 14 years all I can recall is that I was showing him the L42’s and other sniping rifles in the collection at the Royal Armouries, and musing over how effective they were, when he piped up with the story about getting so sick of his not working that he dumped it. I thought it worth including in the book because it was such an unusual tale, but I’m afraid I can’t elaborate on it. He said he used an Argentinian folding-stock SLR to good effect though it was not a long range rifle, but I never thought to ask how he explained away the loss of his L42 ! I can see that as a sniper, lugging a useless rifle around in those conditions would have been pointless, perhaps circumstances dictated he could do nothing else with it. He did after all, need a working rifle.

He had several other stories regarding Argentinian snipers that I was sworn to secrecy about and I’d have loved to have been able to tape my interview, but I could only make notes at the time. I doubt that this sheds more light on the question, but thank you for taking the trouble to contact me about it. I’m amazed that the story has caused such a debate !"

There are some other things that we may wish to consider before drawing a conclusion:

1. Vince Bramley is not without controversy in his writing. It also includes 2 other rumours that have been widely investigated but not proven. One is that American mercenaries were used as snipers by the Argentinians (this seems very unlikely). The second being that these men or perhaps others that were captured were summarily executed. This was investigated by the British Police but no proof found. However others have contended that this story is true.

2. After the Falkands conflict Bramley transferred to the Royal Army Ordnance Corp. He was convicted of possession of pyrotechnics and sentenced to 3 year's imprisonment during which he wrote Excursion to Hell.

3. It is interesting to speculate where the story originated and who may have dumped his L42. In Two Sides of Hell Bramley names 5 of the presumably 6 snipers with 3 Para and draws heavily from interviews with Jerry Phillips. Phillips was badly wounded in the arm and Richard Absolon (another sniper named) was killed by Argentinian shell fire the day after the battle of Mount Longdon. Bramley himself was a GPMG gunner and not a sniper which makes the use of "I" in the original quote from Pegler's book troublesome.

4. It is interesting to speculate when this incident happened. Access to a replacement Argentinian weapon is most likely to have occurred during/after the Battle of Mount Longdon. Though it is just possible that it happened on the march up. The battle itself occurred on the night of 11 June and the war ended shortly after.

5. Most stories get bigger in the telling. Perhaps elements of it are true. Perhaps one of the L42s did become unserviceable in the cold, wet and rugged battlefield conditions. It has been well documented that Argentinian weapons were captured and used and were also acquired as souvenirs. Perhaps this occurred and the owner wished that he was able to dump his useless L42 rather than carry 2 weapons. I have been in a similar situation myself on exercise here in Canada when one of my fellow soldiers was medically evacuated. Having to carry 2 C7 rifles and other gear was very taxing to say the least.

There is a valuable lesson here in that even fairly recent history from a well documented war contains many anomalies that will likely never be fully resolved. We should maintain a healthy discourse and research as carefully as we can from as many different sources as we can in all circumstances.

55Recce,
Thanks for the answer and your efforts which are appreciated............which leaves me in the same point of view.
As I said, there are non missing in Army hands, having checked the lengthy list several times. Several damaged that had been ridden over and the 2 SCOTS one on Mt Tumbledown which recieved a direct hit. I am going to put this down to one man's rant!! nothing more I'm afraid.

I know for a fact in Afghanistan a L115A2 .338 was badly damaged in an explosion at Kajaki. The rifle was in bits, and in many experienced Small Arms Corps views easier to write off. It came back and was returned to service soon after. I know it isn't a fluid battle like the Falklands, but the comment from the sniper when I told him the L42 tale, he said it would have been looked at as "Disgraceful" and the individual would have never lived it down, let alone hold a rifle again, and would definitely in PARA Reg been sent for a holiday to the Army Corrective Training Centre on his return. Thats how serious it would have been viewed.
Still waiting for Jerry to give me a ring and will feed back his view!

Added later:

Most snipers had a Sterling to hand most of the time!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 55recce

It also includes 2 other rumours that have been widely investigated but not proven. One is that American mercenaries were used as snipers by the Argentinians (this seems very unlikely). The second being that these men or perhaps others that were captured were summarily executed. This was investigated by the British Police but no proof found. However others have contended that this story is true.

---

I first heard that rumour/story around Christmas 1982 firsthand direct from a Rockape who was out there with the Rapier missile squadron.

To my understanding a sniper would have been a trained shooter and as their task would have been longer range interdiction, the 27-1/2" barrel and longer sight radious and better sights of the L42 would have resulted in the use of the L42 with open sights.

GeeRam,
The mercenary story, started as a recce of sniper trained Paras crawled forward on Longdon as close as they could get, and heard some lads talking in broken U.S twang Argentinian nothing more than that, like most kids who have spent anytime in the States sound.
Nothing more to that other than lots of embelishment by those who weren't there I'm afraid after the event making a good tale.

There's another photo that was taken in front of Govt House when the RM's surrendered to the Buzo T with one of the RM L42's laid down in front of two of the RM snipers, one of which, Terry Pares is wearing an old '59 Patt Denison smock.