Fair enough.
I’ve misunderstood the photographer’s standpoint.
The rounds in the picture are probably (all though they don’t look right) hitting the water to engage a low level aircraft. Bad aim is not going to extend to a gunner shooting in to the water, instead of the air.
As for the Gazelle, Three were shot down, two by the Argentines, and one by a Sea Dart from HMS Cardiff in a friendly fire incident.
The two shot down by the Argentines was over San Carlos by substantial Small Arms fire.
More images of the British defenses.
Bofors 40mm.
Rapier in the shore of San carlos.
Even the MAG 7,62mm were used .
My bold
That’s my problem.
Could be wind on the spray but it looks like the rounds are coming from the left of picture.
But why the big plume on the right? Very different calibre to the rest. If it’s a round.
Certainly there are WWII pictures of similarly disturbed water, but with rather more ships in the area and rather more planes attracting their fire.
While PK has presented the picture as AA fire, why isn’t it just overshoot from aircraft fire at the ships, or from aircraft out of the picture?
It just looks wrong spread all over the area unrelated to targets ships’ gunners might be firing at.
The big plume is weird. Are we sure this was Broadsword and not Coventry?
Broadsword only had medium calibre guns, Coventry also had the 4.5" gun.
Here:
http://www.hmsbroadsword.co.uk/falklands/thewar/bomb_alley_5th_day.htm
And a bigger picture for the benefit of the near sighted members.
Clik here
IMH The large splash is possibley from the ship. I reckon most of the small flashes are actually rounds coming from Carbello, in the main.
The splashes aren’t coming from the ship. Even if the gunners were having a sighting problem, aiming in to the sea and then bring them guns up, the splash patteren would be different. It would be closer together.
The only other option is that small arms were used too.
I think I’ve figure out what the big splash is. The ship is firing 20 mm cannon, could it be a shell burst, the rest of the splashes are the previous bursts?
Kimo Sabi, where have you been? I feel neglected. 
I think you are right, in part. The larger splash is that of the 4.5" gun, the others are those of lesser caliber weapons, including the Jimpie.
Kimo Sabi, where have you been? I feel neglected
Easy there.
And yes, the smalls arms were definately used…man I think if the britons had bricks in their ships they probaly used against the incoming aircrafts too.:mrgreen:
Fal vs Mirage.
( Public healt announce, the cigarrete is bad for the health)
So would you mate, if you were on the receiveing end.!!!
Probably not.
You can see a faint mist around the other splashes. They’re lower and smaller. They weren’t the same size as the big plume.
This used to be standard practice with the British forces in WW2, to keep the shell dressing (unopened, in it’s khaki cover) beneath the camouflage net on the back of the helmet for fast access. The Field Dressing was carried in a special pocket on the right hip on the Battle dress trousers.
Jan
British paras Monte Longdon
What is the the thing carried as backpack in the second man fron the right ?
Panzerknacker.
The man second right in the lower picture, appears to be carrying a Milan post. It is what the holds and then fires and controls the Milan weapon during flight.
Similar to the one in the Right hand bottom corner of the top pic. Yu can also just make out a Milan tube.
The two lads in teh top picture are undoubtedly carrying Argentine .50 cal ammo. The British at the time did not deploy a .50 cal weapon, but during the course of the war collected Argentine .50 cals and ammo.
Note the guy on the right in the top photo has his bayonet fixed.
It is a Milan firing post. Both the Marines and the Paras developed a technique to man-pack Milan in the Falklands. Even with the missiles removed from their containers for nearly 4 weeks and exposed to the conditions in the Falklands they all worked as advertised. The packs weighed close to 120 lbs though.
Was the 120 lbs when loaded, or unloaded?
The Paras, Marines and other Infantry units (Gurkhas and Guards) already knew how to man pack Milan, it was a “man portable” weapon. (Honest).
IIRC it requires 3 men to move a post (and ammo) during the Falklands, I have seen pictures recently showing 4 on the British Army website. I think extra kit has been added to the Milan post.
The reason behind this portablity was so dismounted troops could move independently of their vehices setting up tank traps on the European field of battle. The moved with something like 3-5 shots between them.
It is now more in vogue to mount these weapons on vehicles.
The 81mm Mortar also breaks down in to a 3 person lift, as does the GPMG (SF). Ammo resup is obviously a problem if man packed.
120lb is actually the average weight for a rifleman in war.
Specialists such as the Milan crews, Machine Gunners, Mortar Men, radio ops etc, often carry more.
Did you every have to carry the b*****d? The guys who carried it across the islands have my respect.
This is where we’ve lost the plot.
60 to 80 lbs carried in WWII, at least for Australians fully equipped against the Japanese.
How can we have all the air support and supply and other marvels of the modern world yet burden our riflemen with so much more weight?
Someone needs to get a grip on themselves in the planning areas.