Green Berets React to Danger Close
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- Green Berets reacting Danger Close!
Want to be Special Forces?! We created the best training tool on the market. Check it out now at www.thefngacad... they sell out fast so sign up for our email list!
Our Patreon - / fngacademy
www.instagram....
Leave a review of my book Rising Above if you enjoyed it!
www.amazon.com...
Disclaimer:
Our content is NOT intended as professional advice. We are not medical or legal professionals, any advice received and or acted upon from this channel should be done so at your own risk. We do not encourage anyone to emulate the food challenges we conduct or the consumption of alcohol. The FNG Academy LLC insists that no one recreate or reenact any stunts, or challenges seen on this channel
Opinion Disclaimer. The views and opinions expressed by The FNG Academy TH-cam Channel, including all program participants, are solely their own current opinions regarding events and are based on their own perspective and opinion - it is the opinion and perspective of the interviewees. Such views, opinions, and/or perspectives are intended to convey a life story, are based on recollections about events in their lives on which conflicting memories may exist, and are not intended to malign any individual, religion, ethnic group, or company.
The owen smg (the weird gun with the magazine untop) was an ANZAC gun developed for jungle fighting in ww2. It was designed by an australian kidd at home who built it from scrapp at home in cal 22. He joined the army and the gun was found by his neighbour, who went to the army and proposed to develope it. The ANZAC said no, they were waiting to recieve Sten guns from England, so, what's the need. The need came when Germany invaded France and the battle of brittan strarted, they made it in 9 mm. It is well balanced, The ejection port is in the bottom so it doesnt get dirt. Its quite accurate and in the history of ANZAC it is one of the best regarded guns,.
Almost unstoppable you can pore mud and sand into it and it keeps going .
Don't forget the value of the Owen was that it's magazine was up, meaning you could fire it whilst on the ground.
Stop calling it an ANZAC gun. It was an Australian gun. And by the way, Australian is written with a capital letter. Not 'australian' as you wrote it.
Thompson stopped manufacturing in 45 the Owen kept being made to about 75-indications it was a better gun
Ian at Forgotten Weapons has done a few videos on the Owen
This movie is based on the battle of Long Tan it is an interpretation of the battle which no doubt came from the memories of those who were involved. It is not an exact replication of how every one would have behaved during the battle there is a fair bit of artistic licence used. . . D company (105 men + 3 NZ observers) from the 6RAR were ambushed when on patrol in a rubber plantation by a force of Vietnamese estimated to number between 1500 qnd 2500. They held them off and ended up defeating them with fire support from NZ, Aussie and US Artillary batteries. The APCs arrived just in time delivering fire power and ammunition which had almost been exhausted. Guys dont underestimate the ability of Australian troops when it comes. to jungle fighting the Japanese learned that lesson in New Guinea. The Owen gun was developed in Australian during WW2 they were virtually indestuctable under any condition - whats the point in having a fancy gun if it doesnt work. US troops loved to get their hands on Owen guns and would practically trade anthing to get one. There are world class training facilties near Townsville in Queensland where the US often send troops for jungle warfare trainng like the US Marines who are here during their Northern Australia rotations. D company was later awarded a Presidential Citation For Gallantry by Lyndon B Johnson for their action at Long Tan. You may not realise this but between 1962 and 1973 more than 60,000 Australians served in the Vietnam War in support of their US allies which was quite a few more than some of your other so called close allies provided..
A very good synopsis mate ! Btw my Dad was A Company 6 RAR he was there retired as the RP Sgt of 8/9 RAR and was awarded the BEM years later. He did 2 tours.
In a way I am glad he never saw the movie as he would have been very critical of the 'hollywood' aspect of it. As a kid I met most of those blokes including Reyne Simpson VC.
It's funny listening to the banter about the Owen gun, if these operators were in the jungle it would end up their preferred weapon. It makes an AK look unreliable, magazine doesn't get caught up on the vegetation, won't foul with mud or sand. There's a great WW2 film about it, they pulled it apart threw the parts in mud then drove a jeep over it, pulled the dripping parts out and reassembled it and proceeded to fire magazine after magazine without any issues. I know this as my grandmother built them and my grandfather used them during the war. It's actually a great story about how the government was forced to accept it.
For context boys, and I say this in the nicest way possible as I'm an Aussie war history buff and I enjoy your vids! But at 18:40, the trooper is solo as he's taken initiative to break contact and attempt to link two separated units on the battlefield which has occurred due to the chaos of close-quarters combat, weather, officers killed etc. He knows the location of the other group and is looking to link them up and hence take back the initiative. He's utilising his own initiative and it comes across pretty good in the movie. The depiction of the women VC fighters I thought was also good as that is exactly what was happening in the war. Aussies in Vietnam did not take to the field to rack up body counts.
After a magazine article was published in the US about the Australian troops in Vietnam that made the US troops look bad in comparison (after all thanks to both WW2 and the Malay Emergency we had much more institutional experience with both jungle warfare and counter-insurgency operations), the US State Department sent diplomatic telegrams to Australia complaining that our body counts totals (both for and against) were unacceptable to them. In other words, for domestic political reasons, they were actually asking us to take more casualties. [And the reason why our enemy body count was so low is that we generally required confirmation of an enemy casualty, and that we in engaged in aggressive patrolling to suppress VC irregular movement through the area of operations.] The US did object to the mandatory declassification (after 30 years) of those telegrams btw on "security grounds."
@@reverance_pavane the other reason, not stated was the VC hated fighting the Australians, our SAS terrified them more than the american special forces. phantoms of the jungle was a term of respect. Our regular soldiers were also incredibly effective. Aus was given a province to patrol in the war and after a few skirmishes the VC head command actually issued a cease and desist order preventing any VC from fighting the Australians. We also were really good at hearts and minds. where a village needed to be taken the aussies would surround the village under cover of dark, then at sunrise a medic and a couple of soldiers would enter the village visibly. The vc seeing them coming would do the runner, straight into the waiting soldiers outside the village. The medic would then set up and treat the villagers whilst interpretors or language speakers would talk to the village elders about providing any help they needed. effectively turning the population against the enemy. also not mentioned is that recently Major Smith managed to arrange a meeting between himself and the commander of the VC forces during that fateful battle at the cross set up in the plantation. Afterwards they sat and had tea and talked. no malice just mutual respect between soldiers who had fought for their respective countries.
16:06 In case you're wondering why it splashed white liquid, they're in a rubber plantation, and that's what raw rubber sap looks like. The tappers make diagonal cuts in the bark of the rubber tree and the liquid flows into those little cups.
like milking a poppy pod right
surprised how many dont know that
My Dad was in A Company 6RAR , his platoon patrolled the rubber plantation the night before the NVA attack. He told me years later that they had patrolled right through the NVA and had no idea they were massing.
The platoon also cleared the battle field after the fight.
Most of the Aussies were conscripts and you had to be 21 to serve.
Jack Kirby the Company Sgt Major ( who I met as a kid) was later killed by friendly fire and some say CSM Kirby should have received at least the Military Medal MM for his actions. The RSM George Chinn organised the ammo re-supply and was in one of the choppers.
Sgt Paddy Todd who I also met was indeed shot through the ankles and crawled back to his postion.
The Australian battle rifle of that day was our varient of the FN FAL or in our nomenclature SLR which is 20 rnds 7.62 144 grain bullets.
Aussies never used the 5.56 although there were a few exceptions.
RIP Sgt M.Holland BEM and to all of those who served.
LEST WE FORGET.
We did use the 5.56, the M16 was issued as a service weapon but only in limited numbers to a platoon. Back in the 70’s I was issued both the SLR and the M16, both capable weapons and effective if used in the correct scenario. The M16 was light and accurate but lacked the sheer stopping power of the SLR.
7.62 NATO is 150gr, not 144.
@@k2svpete so wrong its not even funny ! Do your reasearch!.
P80/1 AP 151.2grs Belgium
C21 Ball 146.6grs Canada
F4 144grs AUSTRALIA
Canadian Sniper 168/175 grs.
And that does not even cover the differences in bullet weight of tracer rounds and AP ( Armour Piercing)
I remember a WO telling us that when they went to the UK for marksmanship competitions they weren’t allowed to take Australian ammunition. That was about ‘87.
Also remember those who served in that campaign discussing the pros and cons of 7.62 vs 5.56. One was lighter, one could shoot through some of the trees.
@@VonDutch68 F4 ball is 145gr champ.
M61 was the initial 7.62 NATO standard at 150.5gr.
So yes, you're so very wrong.
As others have pointed out this film is based on a real event. The Australian company was sent outside the wire to investigate what they thought were a few VC soldiers. Turns out it was both NVA and VC in at least regiment strength. Key to the survival was the indirect fire provided by the artillery and the work of Morrie Standley the Kiwi FO and Bombardiers Willie Walker and Murray Broomhall. How he managed to coordinate the fire of multiple batteries with a map, compass and mk1 eyeballs while on the move in a rubber plantation during a monsoon rainstorm defines belief.
Aw, yeah! I've been waiting to see if ANYONE was going to react and review this one! Respect for our ANZAC allies!
The reason in the first gun fight with the 6vc and the one Australian. He said in an interview that he was unsure if it was a friendly unit or not cause it was darker and a little bit rainy in the real battle, he shot atleast 3 rounds killing one and the whole team didn't open up because of a potential blue on blue but when they started running he saw the AK and knew it was contact not a slow response time
Most of the things that you had negative things to say about in regards to how the soldiers and officers did things and reacted to different situations were mostly made up. The actual reality of what happened that day was not really what is in the movie. The soldiers were, in fact, some very capable people. Their training was excellent. Moral excellent. Soldiers didn't drink beers while on guard duty. They didn't sneak off during the battle to find another way to the lost platoon. The company was led by a commando trained officer who, in turn, trained his company to commando standards. His 108 men encountered what is believed to be a fully reinforced VC regiment that was harbouring just a couple of kilometres from the Australian taskforce base for what is now believed to be a planned attack on the base. But those 108 Australian and New Zealand soldiers found them. Engaged them with small arms and artillery. A solo US aircraft dropped a single payload of napalm. Thanks. And for just over 3 hours, the VC manoeuvred around the rubber plantation trying to pindown the exact location of a force they couldn't exactly tell how big or where exactly they were. Every time they moved, they were attacked on their flank by forces that they didn't know were there. Only for those forces to withdraw and move shortly afterwards only to reappear on another units flank soon after. So heavy were the losses inflicted against the Vietnamese that day D Company was awarded the Presidential Unit Situation. The highest award that can be given to any military units by the American President. But for some reason, the makers of this movie wanted to make the soldiers look like a mixture of professional soldiers and clowns in uniforms. Why they would do this, I have no idea.
The Owen has a simple blowback design, firing from an open bolt. It was designed to be fired either from the shoulder or the hip. It is easily recognisable, owing to its unconventional appearance, including the top-mounted magazine, and the side-mounted sight required to allow the firer to aim past it. The placement of the magazine allows gravity to assist the magazine spring in pushing cartridges down to the breech, which improves feeding reliability. Another unusual feature is the separate compartment inside the receiver, which isolates the small-diameter bolt from its retracting handle by means of a small bulkhead. This prevents dirt and mud from jamming the bolt, and makes the Owen a highly reliable weapon. The top-mounted magazine meant that if mud entered the weapon, it would either fall out on its own, or be pushed out by the magazine spring. When tested, the Owen gun was able to continue firing despite being dipped in mud and drenched with sand, while a Sten gun and a Thompson also tested stopped functioning at once. In jungle warfare, where both mud and sand were frequent problems, the Owen gun was highly regarded by the soldiers.
To facilitate cleaning, the ejector was built into the magazine, rather than the body of the gun. This allowed the barrel to be removed rapidly, by pulling up a spring-loaded plunger in front of the magazine housing. After removing the barrel, the bolt and return spring are removed in a forward direction, completely dismantling the gun. It was issued to scouts. Later supplemented by F1 SMG (not so popular as it was not so reliable under adverse conditions because it lacked the seperate bulkhead of Owen which made it reliable) and by M16 for those specific units. Why they are carrying both Owen's and M16 might be because their might be not enough of them, while nobody wants F1. So they kept Owen's and M16. Beside that 7.62Nato and 9mm parabellum were already in their logistics for quite a long time while M16 with its 5.56 ammo was just introduced.
Thanks for explaining that! I had forgotten about the bloody Owens gun
The Owen gun has a facscinating history - The is or was a TH-cam short about it. Basically it was a guy inventing it in his back shed and taking it to the Aussie Army... who hated it - until it beat the Sten and the Thompson in a trial. Even the Grease Gun (Forget the M number) was seen as not as reliable.
Similar to the Gease Gun
@@adamchristian1868 Yeah very similar. When it comes to reliability it's the best. MP40 probably the best looking also sharing the feature of isolated spring like Owen.
@@brantleyhester6641 It the Owen gun is now cosiddered the best SMG bomb WW2 . It's almost unstoppable. The top mounted mag is designed so as to allow laying prone & because its in line with the body it will not snag anything like shrubs and greenery as your passing it.
So where is the actual reaction to the movie? All I hear is a lot of in the U.S. we do this, we do that making it seem we Aussies know nothing. Go to a rubber plantation and see what it is like. Go to our Jungle Warfare School in Tully.
Worst movie reaction EVER.... 27mins of bagging out their tactics, weapons etc - comparing to their 55+ years of improved USA tactics. D-
They'd have no idea where Tully is! They have no idea that the tunnel rats in Vietnam were trained just outside of Sydney, they have no idea that Australia was attacked 111 during WW2 and the battle of Darwin was Japans second Pearl Harbour. They just really have no idea about anything living in their bubble.
In Fact, Group used to go to LCBS at Tully as it is one of the best (or was) Jungle Warfare Training centres in the world. I know quite a few from Group, although old school Group, who still bitch about their time at Tully.
@FNGACADEMY Take Note lads. You do yourselves a huge disservice when you end up with comments like this.
I’ll support what’s already been said by others.
I was taught by Laurie Drinkwater when I was a recruit. He was one of the section commanders during the battle of long tan. A quiet man, who knew how to get the lesson across to his trainees.
As I read on at least two other comments, this has been the worst movie reaction of seen….wont be watching anymore from this pair.
Almost like they’re talking about actors in a movie and not criticizing the actual ANZACs…
Love this movie. Its refreshingly not just a freedom eagle flag waver. It tells not just an American story but a story of allies working together. American air support, NZ artillerymen supporting Australian diggers. I love the m113 scene, amazing that it has to be the most manufactured armoured vehicle of all time yet gets zero screen time in most movies. This movie is pretty accurate on alot of the story apart from the odd obligatory hollywood moment. It is well worth looking up the radio recording of the soldiers calling in the artillery ontop of themselves. Its bone chilling stuff to hear a young probably teenage aussie soldier cool calm and collected stating that if they dont do it they will all be dead, with the roar of the battle in the back ground.
Plenty of Americans have no idea Australian and New Zealand troops were in Vietnam.
Stupid ones, yes.
@@striker1553I found this out yesterday it’s really not talked about
I always remember how one former VC commander once said they didn't fear the Americans despite their weapons and jets, but they did fear the Aussies that did what they did, but better.
Makes me proud to be an Aussie, I was in a cadet unit when I was younger and our RSM was a veteran from Vietnam, he told us all kinds of stuff from back then and I have utmost respect for him.
@@Donte.M because the aftermath is a national disgrace. none of the soldiers invovled were awarded any medals for the action. yet officers who weren't even close the battle somehow managed to get medals for the action. Major Smith spent most of his life trying to redress this shameful act by defence and after decades of fighting finally got the families and survivors the medals they richly deserved. I believe it took finally a PM to tell defence to get its shit together. hell even the American President knew of the battle and awarded them a unit citation. Yet our glorious leaders in our military just shut them out. hence why it was a national disgrace.
NZ should never have have been in a war fighting for US empire. Or now either.
That gun you guys were asking about is called the Owen submachine gun. It was Australian domestically produced during world war 2.
Best smg of WW2, but quite outdated by Vietnam. Last conflict we used them for, so far as I'm aware.
The sights are on the side, on a 45 degree angle. The reason the magazine is on the top, was to stop feed jams and avoid getting the magazine caught in jungle foliage. The basically looked at the original Sterling SMG and modified it for jungle warfare.
@@twrampage it wasn't outdated, but it got a reputation for not dropping the enemy. People I know who were there reckoned the 9mm ammo they were given was WW2 vintage and 'weak'. So possibly the ammo was the cause not the smg.
@@clasdauskas Interesting, and it does make sense, now that I think about it.
The Owen in the Jungle was better for laying down suppressive fire. This allowed the gun and rifle groups to maneuver into position and engage. So the Owen did not need hitting power but just get rounds down range. I got to fire one years ago and at close range was very easy to hit the target and had minimum barrel lift being 9mm.
Fun fact, many of the extras were from the Australian army. The gun crews were from my unit.
It’s a decent movie doesn’t try and dress anything up. Tries to recreate what happened warts and all. Some things are goofy probably due to budget constraints.
It’s a heck of a tale a company of mostly conscripts disrupting a VC brigade assembling to attack the nearby firebase. Held their own under terrible conditions and miraculously low casualties. Oh yeah and it was in a rubber plantation so the trees exploded with white rubber sap.
The Owen gun was a ww2 left over super reliable and many liked how low you could get with the mag on top.
The F1 sucks balls though
What unit Dig? My last posting was Starlight 'A' Fd Bty, Airborne Gunners. I have a soft spot for the special needs kids from The Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery. 😁😉😆
@@1lighthorse Battle of Long Tan August 1966, introduction of the F1, 1971.
As a 32yr Veteran, you guys should show some respect, to the ANZACs, as they fought as a group, I was trained by CPLs and CSM, who fought in Vietnam, and taught us jungle warfare. And I respect these guys, my father rest his soul, he fought in Korea and Borneo, and he was just too old to go to Vietnam. I joined up in 1979 till 2011. Seen lots in my career, but I have not bagged any Yank units, not Dig, cheers.
Worst movie reaction EVER.... 27mins of bagging out their tactics, weapons etc - comparing to their 55+ years of improved USA tactics. D-
Much respect to the ANZAC vetrans, one lives around the corner from my mother... lovely chap, but he has a distant look in his eyes & he still carries the mental scars of what he + his mates went through in Vietnam.
@@markhormann i agree "When i was a seal serving for another nation 30-40 years later we did this not that so its stupid." straight up fuckwits if you ask me.
Fun fact
The M113 used as the Troop Leader’s vehicle in the film was the actual Troop Leader’s vehicle during the battle.
The others are M113AS4 mortar variants with some basic changes to try to make them look like older variants.
108 Australian's defeat 2500 VC with only 18 deaths, to this day Vietnam still will not tell true numbers except their records show the Battalion was so heavily damaged it took months to be built back to strength.
Was USA and Australian artillery units involed also. not sure why everyone said was only a New Zealand regiment.
Also Ausies found dead were prone facing the enemy with and guns in their hands, showing the discipline to the Aussies military.
Also was true of the band visiting Nui Dat during the battle and rushed away, they tell the story of hearing the battle take place.
Initially only the NZ artillery battery (6guns) were assigned to the battle. Later on when the situation worsened Australian 105"s and American 155"s joined in giving the FO 18 Guns at his disposal. At one stage of the battle the NZ battery took 2 lightning strikes to their position hindering communications to the Guns.
@@billfairless6256 Yea nice, the 3 NZ forward observers did a tremendous job with putting those rounds at danger close almost on top of the Aussies and was crucial.
Yea guess some stories make it out like all batteries were there from start. in end was 1 NZ batterie and 2 Australian batteries and 2 US Batteries.
@@micksmith-vt5yi Only one US battery.
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers of 161 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of New Zealand Artillery (RNZA)
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers of 103 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery (RAA)
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers 105 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery (RAA)
6 x M109 Self Propelled 155mm guns of A Battery, 2/35th Artillery Regiment, US Army
It was an encounter engagement between a company of Australians and a regiment ( brigade ) of VC. The Aussies were outnumbered by more than 20-1 and not only held but absolutely mauled the VC.
With the help of our ( Kiwi ) artillery ,other wise they wouldn't have made it ..
@@ruanui29 we will always work better as a team. ANZACs always.
@ruanui29 there was only 1 battery of nz artillery compared to 2 Australian batteries. Stop trying to claim Australian victories and focus on your own. Oh wait
@@SamO-ik2cm there was only one force of ANZACs.
And the odd Kiwi.
The field craft mistakes you see in the film don’t often represent the real behaviour of the troops in the field. The Aussies entered Vietnam with four years of jungle warfare experience against the Imperial Japanese Army and another 5 plus years of jungle based counter insurgency experience from the Malayan Emergency and the Indonesian Confrontation. Many of the senior NCOs of the Australian infantry units in the early years of the Vietnam War were veterans of Malaya and Borneo; even the Korean War.
Apparently during WW2 some American soldiers tried to get Owen guns because they performed well in the conditions found in the jungle compared to the Thompson.
USMC (only foreign ordered SMG) ordered 22,000 of them but Lysaght couldn't supply them. Thompson was an over-machined pos.
Anyone who likes this movie should check out a documentary on the event called "The Battle of Long Tan," I'm pretty sure it's on youtube. It's a must watch.
Yep, done by the same team that did the film.
100%
Have these two wombats ever done a day in the J???
The Owen was the best personal jungle weapon of the Second World War.
It is completely based in reality and it was an Australian unit, New Zealand had no infantry in Vietnam until 1967 when they attached two companies to Australian battalions.
The New Zealanders in this film are the artillery and the three forward observers on the ground. Australia was supported by Aus, US and NZ artillery in this battle
New Zealand Unit is correct. 161 Field Battery. That’s an Owen gun, an Aussie design from ‘38, short for jungle use. 9mm, same as their pistols, Browning Hi Power. Ya could have shown the arty team...🙂
Wasn't that the one designed by a kid? Trying to remember my Forgotten Weapons
Think it was derived from the british Bren light machine gun. It was specifically designed for walking fire from trench to trench WW1. Better reload spead. It had some superior aspects of it compared to the Browning B.A.R.......Some.
@@jefffaulkner2875 jungle warfare as opposed to trenches. Was in use until 1971 ..
@@jefffaulkner2875 No, not at all. The BREN was an LMG, the Owen was a SMG.
@user-vv6sy2ox4q With that logic you're saying the M14 and the Mini 14 are completely different. The only thing that changed was the cartridge. This discussion was all about the design.
The Owen had a good reputation when it came to reliability. The Aussie’s used it during WW2 where it established that reputation. The British used it during the Malayan Emergency too, together with the Sten, until newer weapons like the SLR and Sterling SMG appeared.
It's not an Owen it is an F1 SMG
@@anthonykelly5352 F1 replaced the Owen in 1971, Battle of Long Tan was 1966 and scouts used the Owen until later.
I was reading an article on reducing the infantry fighting load a while ago that referenced this battle. Apparently, the standard ammo load was just 3 mags for the rifles (60rds per man). That's probably why they weren't unloading into every target and ran out of ammo at one point.
You should learn more about this battle and why the ANZACs were never attacked in force again. The enemy leant their lesson well.
Try FSBs Coral/Balmoral
You guy's should check out "The Lighthorsemen", "Breaker Morant" "Kokoda" or "Gallipoli"
Beneath Hill 60
@@Rusty_Gold85 yep another great movie, I cannot imagine doing what those guys did!
The SMG in question is the WW2 Aussie Owen Gun in 9mm. Sights are offset because of the magazine, top feeding magazines have gravity aiding them so they tend to be very reliable weapons. Read a lot of accounts of soldiers who used the Owen Gun really liking it.
The Odd Angry Shot. Is a good movie about Australian SAS in Vietnam.
They were just regular army. Why does everybody think it's always SAS or SASR !! Edit: I was incorrect. They were in fact SAS .
@@brin57 Because they wear sand coloured berets with a winged Excalibur on the cap badge.
They were SAS
@@kenfowler1980 Yes, I was wrong. My bad
@@evillabrador1 Yes, I was wrong. My bad
Thank you for your review. With respect, to answer some of your questions like 'why didn't he xyz?' Most of the time it is because of the limitations due to the fact it is a movie representation of what really happened. For example, it was raining heavily during the battle and everyone was covered in mud and it was chaos with people all over the place and often people couldn't tell who was who. I have actually spoken with Cpl Buddy Lea (featured in the movie) and he showed me the scars from the 3 rounds that hit him. And my uncle was a member of the NZ Arty at Long Tan. The Aussies did some things right and some things wrong. The movie did pretty well to try to show this. In the end they were boys who found themselves in a meat grinder and it is amazing that any of them survived.
The Owen was general issue then while the M16 was being tested by our Infantry. The owen was replaced by 9mm F1 except in the Infantry which replaced Owens with M16A1s in 1967. The Long Tan battle was in 1966.
Up until 1990 Aussie 9 man Infantry sections ran with 1 M60 ,1 M16/203 , 2 M16s ,5 FN (FAL) SLRs
I'm a Australian if you blokes want do do this movie any justice....do a review on the documentary.....the battle of long Tan 👍🇦🇺
The magazine on an Owen sub machine gun is vertical for a reason, it was designed for jungle warfare. It's gravity fed and essentially never jams. Someone else mentioned in the comments mentioned it ejects at the bottom not the top so dirt doesn't get in. It was simple yet highly effective and reliable....easy to strip, clean and maintain.
Sounds like arm chair experts watching a football game!
Are you reviewing a movie or having a walk down bloody memory lane. This is a true event.
This is a great example of limited experience. The Owen gun was a massively well liked smg used by Australian services right through to Vietnam.
You guys have great experience in your service, but holy hell, coming from an angle of knowing what it is and how loved it was, you guys ripping on it tickles that little bit of the ego that makes you want to criticise you for it, but that's not the way.
Love your breakdowns but this remains a great example of not hero worshipping someone's profession.
The gun all tho ugly is the Owen gun the most reliable smg of ww2 especially in jungle warfare. It was issued to radio operators and other units. The ignorance about a lot of this is kinda annoying.
The Australian learned back in New Guinea during WW2, fighting the Japanese, to remove rank badges etc in combat. Vietnam was the same sort of environment. Most of the company and senior officers were WW2 vets. And the Aussie units were well-trained and familiar with everybody in their unit from Corporals on up to Battalion level.
My uncles life was saved by his rising sun badge on his slouch hat in New Guinea WW2. Not deflecting a bullet. He was a coast watcher sitting in the dark in the jungle as an arm reached around his neck and then reached up to feel the rising sun badge. He then heard a Ghurka voice say "good Aussie" and then dissapeared into the jungle .
@@brin57 Ghurkas are scary bastards
The only thing green with these two glue sniffers is combat!!!
100% Armchair warriors!!!
The Owen gun was designed to replace the piece of junk called the Thompson which is great for urban warfare but totally useless in the jungles of New Guinea. In thick undergrowth the Thompson would drop it’s magazine due to location of the release, this would leave one shot in the breach effectively leaving it’s operator defenceless. The Thompson was prone to jamming in dirty jungle conditions, and the .45 ammunition weighed double so the soldiers could carry twice as much of the 9mm Owen ammo. The top magazine was for the purpose of feeding the ammo downward and always knowing the magazine is attached- unlike the Thompson. The Owen was also jam proof.
Can you guys do Aliens? Switch it up a bit do some Syfy stuff. Even though it's old it's one of favorite movies. Love ya'll always make me lmfao👊
"... warheads on foreheads" 👌
Is that a reference to the Fat Electrician? Quack bang
Need to be on a t-shirt!
@@kimelius it is
Still plugging "Tigerland" but ill also add an old Val Kilmer movie called "Spartan".
I forgot about Tigerland! That was good movie.
I second Spartan. Such a smart film but sadly not well received, at least popularly. I always remember the scene where Kilmer enters into the house and the bad guy is watching TV and he immediately starts questioning him about why is TV on, trying to feel him out if he'll believe he's in on the kidnapping. What a great tactic to use on the spot like that.
I honestly never thought of the TV scene like that but you're right. I always thought he was just trying to be confusing, like he had special needs to make the guy reassess the situation.
@derekmcintosh6925 My first viewing of the movie was your assessment initially, that he was playing stupid. But after some thought, I figured, a plot of this magnitude, not everyone involved would know each other and his approach was to act as a member of the kidnapping and by berating the guy watching tv, seems as a superior.
"Spartan" was a hugely underrated movie. Lots of great scenes, but as an Aussie, one of my faves is where Kilmer meets up with the Australian operative/contact who supplies him with weapons & local intel, & after Kilmer checks that he hasn't "burned" him, the Aussie says: "Do you wanna talk some more, or shall we go kill some people?" - delivered with a completely straight face.😂😂
A LOT of crap was written into this movie for 'story' purposes, and it's 'cringey' for every involved and watching ... apparently it's the sacrifice we have to make in order to make movies for some reason. It's like when they add scenes of 'the women back home' into a war movie (like We Were Soldiers) ... like it's going to encourage more women to go to the movies to watch a war movie??
Lt Gordon Sharpe got done dirty. He was a popular young officer (due to his job before he was drafted) but he wasn't a screwup as portrayed. He was killed facing forward, radio in his hand, calling in artillery support for his men and organising a defence. Pte Large also wasn't a screwup, nor did he go out on his own and let enemy go - never happened. There was also no drinking in weapon pits on duty. It was added to invent a storyline conflict between Large and Harry Smith (Fimmel) that never happened, nor did they ever have heart-to-heart talks, nor did Harry Smith grab anyone by the throat. Bob Buick never fired one round at the group of 6 NVA that he spotted in the initial contact. He did indeed fire more than a few rounds, hitting and dropping one, the rest raced off. The rest of the platoon reacted to contact like the professionals they were. This was NOT portrayed in the movie. There was also no sniper behind them - again this was added for 'story' reasons ... The initial contact in the main battle was from the Left Front and virtually that entire Section was hit and killed by a fusillade of fire that erupted from that side.
The two soldiers you see drop at the start of the battle were the two McCormicks. They were not related, just had the same surname. They flew in and joined Delta Company that morning and were killed that afternoon. A sad sidenote to the battle.
Harry Smith never hated his unit nor was looking to get away from them. He was an Infantry Company Commander deployed to a warzone. He was exactly where he wanted to be. He was immensely proud of his unit and men, and trained them hard to the standard he wanted (he was a former Commando Officer and veteran of Malaya). He volunteered them for everything and was always going after the harder 'jobs' for his Company. Harry Smith was never abusive towards Maurie Stanley, his Kiwi FO. These were professional military men with decades of experience. We have the actual radio messages between them and 1ATF.
Of the 4 artillery battery's supporting D 6RAR only 1 was Kiwi, 3 were Australian, and then US Medium Battery joined in.
And - much like the end of We Were Soldiers, we had similar 'never happened bullshit' - Harry Smith never fired his weapon during the entire battle, the RAAF flew in during the monsoon to drop ammo during the battle. There was no massed attack or hand to hand fighting at Company Headquarters. This is the movies 'Mel Gibson' moment.
In all - an average movie ruined with typical 'Hollywood'* garbage added 'for story reasons' instead of what could have been a great movie representing an actual heroic military stand. But we tend to ignore those faults because very few Australian War movies do get made, so we have to cherish the ones that do.
*I say 'Hollywood' to represent the collective 'movie people' like directors, writers etc (of any country) who think they know what a war movie 'needs' to be successful instead of telling a faithful representation of what actually occurred and what these blokes did and experienced.
Well said mate my Dad was there, A Company as a regular, he also served in Korea and Malaya. He would have hated the movie and the way they portrayed Harry Smith and Maurie Stanley.
@VonDuti a I agree, well said and thankyou.
"only 1 was Kiwi, 3 were Australian, and then US Medium Battery joined in" equals 4?
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers of 161 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of New Zealand Artillery (RNZA)
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers of 103 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery (RAA)
6 x 105mm L5 pack howitzers 105 Field Battery, Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery (RAA)
6 x M109 Self Propelled 155mm guns of A Battery, 2/35th Artillery Regiment, US Army
yeh, thanks. ya tried, ya pissed off every australian veteran. and just laughed at the movie without brining to light the actual battle.its clear how much effort goes into these videos, every criticism you had, would have been answerd by doing some research. lost a fan here, your videos are telling people the most basic shit. after watching this movie with some of the 6 rar delta coy blokes when it came out, i assure you it wasnt funny to them that they didnt do a SLLS. seriously tho, id love to hear how much you know abnout one of the onmly countrys to come to americas aid in vietnam. probably nothing. and btw your precious green beret.... well yeh, it was actualy aussie commandos in z force that first wore the green beret and became commandos.
Funny thing I've noticed. When the US special forces do something major, you hear about it. I know from close un-official sources some of the things the Aussie SAS get up to. Big difference, it never hit's the news, accept when they get too carried away.
OMG YES! Finally you watch it!!!!!!!!!! YAY!!!!
The Owen SMG 9mm was used in WW2 and was very popular with the Australian troops in the jungles of New Guinea. This is because is could be dunked in water, sand and mud and still fire, basically good in rough conditions.
Sadly, Ragnar Lodbrok had to die not just for narrative purposes but because that's legitamately how he was killed. I agree though, after that the show lost a lot of its appeal. Wasn't bad by any means, but Ragnar was the driving force for so long that to lose him was a gutpunch to all of us.
Ragnar is a larger than life personality and a legend in his own right. Though some of what he's *actually* done is disputed, there's no denying that what he and his sons accomplished vastly affected the world.
I was trained by Vietnam vets & they confirmed the smell of the spice satchel carried by the VC often gave them away. One of my COs was the only conscript to rise to the rank of Battalion Commander in the Austrailian Army.
A couple of things piss me off about this movie, eg. the disobeying/refusing orders never happened.
Man next time do your research of the event and maybe watch the whole film.
The Owen was revered by the Aussies and was a highly sought after weapon by the US troops in Vietnam, because as silly as it looked, it was the most reliable SMG you could get. R Lee Ermey did a review on it and loved it, as have all of the other reviewers I've seen take at look at this gun. You guys should know never to judge a book by its cover.
Please react to "Ultimate Force". Its a UK drama about the SAS (like seal team but British and set in the late 90s/early 2000s).
It's hillarious! They even do an episode where they team up with Green Berets to take out an Al Queida leader. The Green Berets are so cringe worthy. I'd love to see Green Berets critique it.
When I was doing my recruit training as a nasho* in 1972, they showed us 'Zulu', '40,000 Horsemen', and a few b/w WW2 movies to inspire us. I hope the current crop of recruits are being shown this movie, or the documentary, 'The Battle of Long Tan', to show them the boots they are to fill.
*Australian Army National Service conscript.
They are 155s good sirs. 13B here..and yes they are heavy as f**k.
Nope 105s that’s 161 Btty NZ unit 😂😂😂
You guys should watch the documentary made by the same guys - "Battle of Long Tan" narrated by Sam Worthington... and its free on youtube... it gives a more factual and less dramatic account. Its a bit more 'band of brothers' style, with interviews with the actual people.
Some of the stuff you picked up early on in the film was a little hammed up for the uneducated watching the movie. But also you need to understand the guys depicted are 'Nashos', that is they were conscripts recently drafted into doing national service. IMO they went a little over the top with some of the dumb soldering stuff - it's not like they were completely untrained - but the point remains the bulk of D Coy 6 RAR were not professional soldiers and western societal norms of 1967 were vastly different than today.
Have to remember this was Vietnam without the tactics that are considered normal in modern combat. They're also mostly conscripts with limited training and even if they were regular infantry prior to going to Vietnam they would still have limtied combat experience.
Very closely based on a true story. Saw a behind the scenes thing where they had the Australian and Vietnamese soldiers meet each other at the battle site decades after the fact.
You guys are commenting about current tactics, not tactics that were used in 1966, almost 60 years ago. You cannot compare the two. Maybe if you read about the battle first then watch the movie then make your comments about the movie, you make some stupid comments not knowing anything about the facts.
Now I kinda wanna watch them react to the Forgotten Weapons episode on the Owen.
Arm chair critics judging the real battle from a movie. Study the battle of Long Tan. Everybody wants to be a gangster until it's time to do gangster things.
We had a Gunnery Sergeant killed by an ND at CAX in the early 90's. We were the Coyote range controllers. At the time, we just put hiviz vests over the old flak jackets. Afterwards, we got an early version of ballistic plates from a company called Point Blank.
Owen SMG. Battle proven in. New Guinea
Borneo
Malaysia
Vietnam
It may look strange but I challenge you to find a better jungle combat SMG
A far better description of this battle is the documentary Battle of Long Tan. th-cam.com/video/8gUSq7pxux4/w-d-xo.html
Finally, I've been waiting for a reaction to this movie. Requested for it a while ago 👏
14:56 the majority of these soldiers were short term conscripts - National Service, or ‘Nashos’. Apart from basic infantry training, a short stint at the Jungle Warfare Centre at Canungra, and maybe a test exercise, they were thrown in the deep end of a conflict they didn’t even understand, with higher leadership that may not have fully grasped what was needed. This company had a CO who worked hard to improve his men’s skills, but was up against people up the tree who didn’t understand, and junior officers and men who were short on skills and maturity
America should be forbidden from having any armed forces at all. The whole world would be so much more peaceful and better.
Your joking?!
Sorry fellas but the Australian SAS-R boys , would eat your SEAL boys for breakfast
when SGT buick nailed that guy he actually let off a burst not got them on a single shot. i dont know if you have served with Australian Soldiers. but when we went to Vietnam we went there through our experience in things like the Malaysian emergency and Borneo. We fought a very different war in vietnam to to the americans. and after Long tan The vietcong and NVA were not that keen to have any more big cracks with us they tried to avoid us as a rule. there are a few docos on TH-cam from those who were there. The reason we had those 3 different guns. was because at the time we were fazing the Owen sub machine out of service during vietnam and all the way till the mid 80s we used 2 different service rifles the M16 typically carried by officers, NCOs ,scouts and signallers for a couple of reasons. since scouts as you know are on point most likely the first to spot or get shot at the idea was he had the m16 so he can simply do a mag dump as covering fire as the rest of the platoon came up with there L1A1 SLRs. signallers had the m16 due to the fact there lugging around this big radio on there back. sgts and officers had the m16 due to the fact that they were the ones that were going to initiate a ambush most of the time.
the L1A1 SLR actually had a few advantages over the M16 including being able to punch through the rubber trees that were in vietnam. the M16 couldnt do that. with that being said. i have never heard anyone ever say a bad thing about the SLR.
most of these boys had 4 to 6 weeks training green then put in the shit storm they weren't green after this
What on earth did you guys do, all I heard was a couple of blokes talking about their waries!
It's a very good movie and quite accurate, based on the accounts of those who were there. The SMG you're talking about is the Owen gun and had been around since WWII. As an SMG is really a precision aiming weapon, having the vertical magazine offered some advantages with better loading reliability and less wear on the feed mechanism. It's not as if the vertical magazine was uncommon. The BAR and the Bren both used vertical magazines.
There was a bit of a weird mish-mash of weapons in the units in the movie. Some had L1A1 SLRs, the British-made semi-auto version of the FN FAL, some had M-16s, etc., which obviously used completely different calibre of ammunition. Despite serving in light armour, with a Sterling SMG as my personal weapon, I shot the L1A1 on the ranges a number of times and it was a very effective rifle.
My uncle was 9RAR in Vietnam, he loved his SLR. Plenty of stopping power
@@aledboocker3315 Definitely. There was an incident at one of the ranges in the UK, during my service, where a stray round went over the butts and hit some poor woman in the head a mile away and killed her!
The SLRs used by the Australian army weren't made in Britain. They were made at Lithgow in NSW.
@@clasdauskas So? Under license.
@@QuicknStraight Yes. But not identical to the British version.
I'd recommend the movie the last full measure about a medal of honor investigation in the Vietnam war
It's an Owen submachine gun Australian version of sten gun
It's not an Australian version of the sten gun. The Owen SMG is Australian but the build is completely different to a sten gun.
@@Roger-d5o the Aussies used stens in ww2 they liked how cheap and simple it was but still it was prone to jamming and had accuracy issues hence the the Owen
@@rajbiswas9077 we also made and tested the austen smg a combination of the sten and the mp38 it cost more to make then the sten and it wasn't that good of a smg so we then adopted the Owen .
@highcountrydelatite maybe the later models, not the mk.2s.. and the sterlings
@@highcountrydelatite congratulation
I preferred the Battle of Long Tan documentary rather than the movie.
When y’all went off the rails, all I could hear was The Waterboy (Adam Sandler) through that. LOL
Can you guys breakdown a series called The Brave is a cool show
in the hindsight.... the year is 1966 and for them were the derived post WW2-korea military reference to how they fought, very different then to the way we think now (means the advance knowledge and science, and training 2000s to 2020s to assess and judge)..... the majority portion of numbers of field infantry that were involve in that history of long tan vietnam, were 19 to 21 years old conscripts (just barely out of teens and not groomed warriors, as most draftees were involuntary trying to get out of it, or either were grab and snatched by the police to serve, as refusal does time in jail)..... like "1st world" teens forced to be in the mids of guerilla warfare conflict combat and skirmishes in roughly around the 13 to 17 weeks total training prior to "OM" on mission tour for 12 months.... hence the fuck-ups and the volume of body bags.... and then the VC were peasant farmers equally young been forced by the commie to kill..... those are circumstances of holding on to the world far from killing..... owen is meant to be waist trigger fired to control the rapid auto gas pressure build up from a 1940s design of sudden spraying not for sniping (the aim of the gun is to take more ammo like a simple and mini GPMG for close quarter, since back in 1940s only heavy machine guns had more ammo to take on heavy enemies in thick bush), and then to also avoid the need for complex belt link ammo, the gravity drop into bullet chamber-load- eject to bottom was more effective and simple field strip for easy fix, and the along the economy/practicality/reliability (hence why still used in vietnam or about 30 years after WW2), unlike the shoulder control rifles now easily can fire accuracy...... those exec officers wants the recommend, ribbons and medals to walk-show around, and get promo rank to serve themselves, and human life for these shits are glorious death.... even this film couldn't be made before cause of defamation even though it's the truth for those still alive from this event.....
would like to see you discuss the 2024 film Land of Bad
My stepdad was Army Special Forces in Vietnam. He said a lot of the time he ate the local food, and smoked North Vietnamese cigarettes (even though they were super harsh), so he wouldn't smell like an American. To this day, he hates rice because he ate sooooo much of it over there.
If I remember correctly most of the Anzacs who served in Vietnam voluntarily went they weren’t drafted or ordered too go.
Correct.
Medic🤙
No us aussies had the draft. Most of the younger soldiers here were called national servicemen and were drafted for a 12 month tour of Vietnam. It was very unpopular here
Nah the officer that died was a nasho, only the initial 1RAR group were professional soldiers, most of 1ATF weren’t.
Ahh didn’t know that about our cousins over the ditch..
Dont ever mock the Owen sub machine gun.
The battle of Long Tan, 18Aug 1966, is an amazing feat in Australian & New Zealand military history. There are numerous documentaries and books worth checking out. This movie is poorly written and makes mockery of those involved, especially the officers. There are recorded radio transmissions from the actual battle,worth listening to, which bely the false narrative depicted here (for terrible "artistic" choices) and demonstrates the professionalism under fire shown by D Coy 6 RAR, NZ 161 Fld Bty, 1 Fld Regt RAA, 9 Sqn RAAF, 1 APC Sqn. The US 2/35 Arty Rgt, also fired 155mm in depth.
The movie was written very poorly in my opinion as an Aussie with some Australian infantry experience. I'm not sure if they went off some account of the battle and portrayed it poorly so it doesn't make sense not to keep firing at the rest of the enemy, or if it was just written by someone clueless. There are a bunch of parts of the movie that truly feel like the writers had no clue and made it up. Australian soldiers have a great reputation for being well disciplined and this movie took on a more modern American crime story feel with people arguing and thinking they're the hero of the story, when Aussie soldiers, like yourselves in the Green Berets are drummed into discipline and obedience during boot camp and are very good at following SOPs and behaving professionally.
It’s a movie, the fact is 90 Australian Infantry with Artillery support fought of what was believed to be 2000 Vietnamese. I’m sure neither of you faced those odds.
108 men.
The bloke with the sunnies on playing poker was 2LT Sharp. He was a tv cameraman prioir to serving in Vietnam
And I admired him and the way he was portrayed, because it showed the human and vulnerable side, in all of us
Most of the events are depicted as they happened but the film uses some licence (poetic/cinematic) to portray them. An excellent written account of the battle is by Lex McAuley "The Battle of Long Tan".
Spot on. The film does use some licence. I know personally several people who were there that day and they say they enjoyed the movie. They just also commented on a couple areas that ... are a little inaccurate. But make for an entertaining film.
Australia has been Allies with America in every Military Action since the first time we served together in 1914.. Under Australian Command in the trenches of World War I during the Battle of Hamel on 4 July 1918.
Where did American and Australian forces serve together in 1914?
@@thosdot6497exactly, some Americans went into the line around Hamel to make up the numbers and to get actual fighting experience.
The Owen SMG is my grail gun
@22:46 believe it or not, plugging one ear and opening your mouth is still taught in Artillery school (at least as of 2011 when I attended haha), as a sort-of last resort if you need use of a hand and you also don't have ear-pro.
Please do LAND OF BAD
I'm still waiting for you guys to do the movie Green berets and the movie siege of firebase Gloria
the 9m SMG submachine gun i joined Australian army in 1973 fired it once on the 25yard range an its ok for close contact but never seen it in 15years of service after that
For a little different aussie Vietnam movie try The odd angry shot .
Think you'll get a kick out of it
Great movie and a good laugh as well. Really showed the larrikin aussie. Graham Kennedy was so perfect for that role. Comedy genius.
Its interesting seeing the difference in tactical doctrine between US and AU soldiers, even accounting for time period.
You should watch the show Southland which is a awesome cop show in my opinion has some great lines in the show and also a great cast. I highly recommend it if anyone has not heard of it watch it it's no longer on TV but still a great show I own the entire series on DVD and watched the entire series. The show should come back would be awesome
You can smell a lot of different things. I remember reading the book Citizen Soldier by Stephen Ambrose.
In WW2 Many U.S. soldiers were able to smell German soldiers. Before they ever came in contact with each other. Part of the smell had to do with the diet, but one of the big things was sweaty leather. Many components of the German web gear in WW2 was made with leather.
That smell of body odor and sweaty leather. Was easy to smell from distance, or so I've been told.