Forums at The Military Horse

Pat Holscher wrote:

Tom Muller wrote:Hi Roy,

we were talking about all sorts of things, but what came to my mind was one thing: when coming back from partol or ops, what was the daily routine for man and trooper like? Were there any medical checks done on the horses, who looked after the tack, who cared for the horses (when the men were on leave for example), rest periods and training periods all sorts of things. I guess that would be a interesting point to talk about.

Tom

Tom, what were the practices of your unit in regards to this sort of thing?

Pat,

we did not have that much personel as we only had 80 troops, NCO's and officers in the end. Some civilian staff was employed as well. We had one vet and some stable boys. When coming back from patrol we had to look after the tack and horses ourselves. There wasn't much time for R&R, because we usually went on patrol for about 6 weeks. Follow ups were a different thing. They could last a few ours up to a week or more. When coming back from the bush the horses were looked over by the vet and had 5-7 days ofrest. Then we would deploy again.
When moving into a new operational area, we had our own staff to put up base camp, where we could either resuply after a couple of days or got supplies brought to RV's when necessary. Base camp was protected by a mobile fence or acacia branches to protect the horses from predators, especially lions seemed to love horse meat. Water was the most important thing, we tried to base up at old farms if possible like Grey's, but as we operated mainly in Ovamboland and Kaokoland there were no farms, but water holes. We also had Army water bowzers. During the rainy season water was no problem.

Tom

roy elderkin wrote:Pat

Although the FN was either,standard or automatic most Rhodesian Soldiers fired in what was referred to as double tap. Firing on auto was a waste of ammo whereas two well aimed shots was much better and less wasteful.

Roy

In the November 2009 issue or Rifle Magazine there's a really interesting article by a Zimbabwean professional hunter writing under the non de plume of "Ganyana". It's really interesting and is specifically on cartridges that he has found useful for Cape Horn Buffalo. I mention it here as he reports that in his early days as a professional hunter in Rhodesia the regular game officers tended to either carry .404 rifles or, if they were young and couldn't afford a .404, they favored the issue FN FAL. Apparently the Rhodesian government office that they worked for issued regular FALs to the game officers. Anyway, he reports: "And they always fired a double tap, almost never a single shot. As there was a war on, and people armed with AK-47s are a greater hazard than buff, using an F.N. for all hunting as well as self-defense made sense. I was intially too junior to be able to drawn an F.N.--which were in short supply, and we were issued unreliable G3s instead. . ."

Anyhow, I thought it interesting that this fellow also mentioned the double tap here, and elsewhere in his article, and mentions it as a standard technique for Rhodesian game officers inssued FNs. And, like you mentioned elsewhere in this thread, he wasn't keen on the G3.

To complete the story, the author went to a 1940s vintabe Bron 98 in 9.3x62 after the G3, as it was a stouter rifle for dangerous game, but equipped in the field with stripper clips, he could act in self defense in a fire fight if he had to. Indeed, as he likely knew how to use it, and as a 9.3x62 is a darned stout cartridge, he was no doubt well armed.

Pat Holscher wrote:

roy elderkin wrote:Pat

Although the FN was either,standard or automatic most Rhodesian Soldiers fired in what was referred to as double tap. Firing on auto was a waste of ammo whereas two well aimed shots was much better and less wasteful.

Roy

In the November 2009 issue or Rifle Magazine there's a really interesting article by a Zimbabwean professional hunter writing under the non de plume of "Ganyana". It's really interesting and is specifically on cartridges that he has found useful for Cape Horn Buffalo. I mention it here as he reports that in his early days as a professional hunter in Rhodesia the regular game officers tended to either carry .404 rifles or, if they were young and couldn't afford a .404, they favored the issue FN FAL. Apparently the Rhodesian government office that they worked for issued regular FALs to the game officers. Anyway, he reports: "And they always fired a double tap, almost never a single shot. As there was a war on, and people armed with AK-47s are a greater hazard than buff, using an F.N. for all hunting as well as self-defense made sense. I was intially too junior to be able to drawn an F.N.--which were in short supply, and we were issued unreliable G3s instead. . ."

Anyhow, I thought it interesting that this fellow also mentioned the double tap here, and elsewhere in his article, and mentions it as a standard technique for Rhodesian game officers inssued FNs. And, like you mentioned elsewhere in this thread, he wasn't keen on the G3.

To complete the story, the author went to a 1940s vintabe Bron 98 in 9.3x62 after the G3, as it was a stouter rifle for dangerous game, but equipped in the field with stripper clips, he could act in self defense in a fire fight if he had to. Indeed, as he likely knew how to use it, and as a 9.3x62 is a darned stout cartridge, he was no doubt well armed.

The most recent issue of Rifle has another article by "Ganyana". It isn't on military topics, but the war in Rhodesia was again mentioned. In this instance, he notes that the Rhodesian army had captured some Dragonov Soviet sniper rifles. The article relates the Rhodesian army tested them, and didn't like them, favoring instead the Enfield Envoy. The Rhodesian Army, the article claims, then turned them over to the game department, which wasn't too keen on them either. At that point, the author relates that the US CIA became interested in them and basically bought some of them by providing game wardens with things they'd rather have.

Enfield Envoy, we used those as training and sporting rifles, but the preferred service weapon was The Enfield Enforcer, my favorite rifle, you would have to go a long way to beat it. Basically the same rifle but with Parker Hale furniture. Double tapping is fine but if you have the time you will never beat the "single aimed shot of a trained rifleman".

Sadly when ours were eventually 'shot out' SAF Enfield declined the invitation to make a few for us, I am sure that all British Police Forces would have bought a few thus it must have been worth their while to make a limited run. We ended up buying Austrian SSG's. Fortunately my old department now use Accuracy International's, initially 7.62mm (.308) but now also .338 Lapua Magnum, a nice accurate stopping round.

Roy

I was recently reading some commentary on the Browning Hi Power, which I like quite a bit, in which all the commenters were full of praise for it. As the US went with the M9, and there's always been some unhappiness about that (although the unhappines is really with the 9mm, more than the M9), I wondered how somebody with field experience with the Browning Hi Power found it. I also wondered how the Rhodesian forces found it in comparison to the Walther P38, which I think the Rhodesian Army might also have acquired later on.

Pat Holscher wrote:Roy

I was recently reading some commentary on the Browning Hi Power, which I like quite a bit, in which all the commenters were full of praise for it. As the US went with the M9, and there's always been some unhappiness about that (although the unhappines is really with the 9mm, more than the M9), I wondered how somebody with field experience with the Browning Hi Power found it. I also wondered how the Rhodesian forces found it in comparison to the Walther P38, which I think the Rhodesian Army might also have acquired later on.

The U.S. Army had specified a double-action pistol, which the Hi Power is not, so that left it out of the competition. I have used a Hi Power a little and found it to be rugged and reliable. Some of the best are the Canadian made ones (Inglis?); as good or better than the Belgian ones. However, even the externally-crude Chinese copies have a good reputation for reliability.

Thanks to Couvi, I once handled the Hi Power that Saddam's cousin used to execute lots of people. Kind of gruesome, but apparently he found it reliable. I bet they don't use that bit of history in their ads, though...

Kelton Oliver wrote:

Pat Holscher wrote:Roy

I was recently reading some commentary on the Browning Hi Power, which I like quite a bit, in which all the commenters were full of praise for it. As the US went with the M9, and there's always been some unhappiness about that (although the unhappines is really with the 9mm, more than the M9), I wondered how somebody with field experience with the Browning Hi Power found it. I also wondered how the Rhodesian forces found it in comparison to the Walther P38, which I think the Rhodesian Army might also have acquired later on.

The U.S. Army had specified a double-action pistol, which the Hi Power is not, so that left it out of the competition. I have used a Hi Power a little and found it to be rugged and reliable. Some of the best are the Canadian made ones (Inglis?); as good or better than the Belgian ones. However, even the externally-crude Chinese copies have a good reputation for reliability.

It can certainly be debated, but in my view the service's requirement for a double action was a mistake. Not that a double action is bad, but it excluded some very proven designs, including the Hi Power.

Indeed, at least at one time the Hi Power was the most widely adopted service pistol in the world. I'd take the M1911 over it, but in 9mms, it was a global standard. Had we adopted it, it would have put us in line with several of our allies at that time. And the pistol we did adopt, the Baretta M9, is no better than the Hi Power in my view.

roy elderkin wrote:To continue we also put the water bottles and cups onto the vest this gave us a complete package, so thank you USA for the vest that we adapted for our use. No rifle buckets were used, rifles were either slung or carried. Up until 1978 the FN was the standard rifle of the Rhodesian forces, after this date the G3 was introduced so a mix of FM and G3 was carried, standard side arm was the 9mm FM automatic or Berreta.

I was looking for this reference earlier, and just found it. I note that Roy indicates that Rhodesia used the Hi Power or the Beretta. I had thought the other sidearms was the P38, but I must have been in error.

What Beretta sidearm was this?

Pat

Just to clarify the standard issue of sidearm was the FN, the Berretta's that were sent to us was a limited supply for user trials, we were having trouble replacing the FN . They were sent to other special forces units, on user trials I have never used one so I cannot comment on them. The FN was still used but when they could no longer be obtained, the Star a replica of the FN manufacured in SA was introduced.

The P38 was used by the BSAP, and was standard issue to them. I found the FN a reliable and well manufactured weapon, unlike the South African made Star which looked a little cruder in finish an manufacture. I have not used the P38 so I cannott comment on it, although my wife has used it and said that she liked it being reliable and easy to handle, she found the FN a little bulky.

I am not rearly a weapons person, if it was reliable easy to keep clean and did its job that was fine by me. And if it hit something and it stayed hit even better.

Roy

Pat

My wife has reminded me that her issue weapon was the P1, policewomen had a holster built into their handbags to take the P1, she has used the FN but her other issue weapon was the Uzzi.

Roy

I carried a Browning GP 35 as a back up for most of my service, and it never failed me. When we changed to Glock 19's I grimly held on to mine as long as I could before it was taken from me for use as a training weapon. Some years after I retired, eventually shot out, it was presented to me, cut in half lengthways and mounted on a wood plinth. It will always remain one of my fondest possessions.

roy elderkin wrote:Pat

Just to clarify the standard issue of sidearm was the FN, the Berretta's that were sent to us was a limited supply for user trials, we were having trouble replacing the FN . They were sent to other special forces units, on user trials I have never used one so I cannot comment on them. The FN was still used but when they could no longer be obtained, the Star a replica of the FN manufacured in SA was introduced.

The P38 was used by the BSAP, and was standard issue to them. I found the FN a reliable and well manufactured weapon, unlike the South African made Star which looked a little cruder in finish an manufacture. I have not used the P38 so I cannott comment on it, although my wife has used it and said that she liked it being reliable and easy to handle, she found the FN a little bulky.

I am not rearly a weapons person, if it was reliable easy to keep clean and did its job that was fine by me. And if it hit something and it stayed hit even better.

Roy

Roy, thanks for that. I think you set that out in the thread earlier, but I missed it in looking back through it.

Do you know off hand which Baretta variant the Rhodesian Army tested?

One of the cited advantages of the Baretta is the one that Kelton notes above, that being that they're double actions. I've always been skeptical of that, as military sidearms are carried loaded anyhow, so unless Baretta's are carried loaded, with the safety off, which I doubt, I doubt there's any real advantage to the. The Hi Power is a very tested design, and very robust. As you note, given the large magazine capacity, it is somewhat bulky however, and can be a bit of a chore for people with small hands.

roy elderkin wrote:Pat

My wife has reminded me that her issue weapon was the P1, policewomen had a holster built into their handbags to take the P1, she has used the FN but her other issue weapon was the Uzzi.

Roy

Was Vera a policewoman? I don't know if you've mentioned that before.

I'm not sure if I know which sidearm the P1 is. Who was the manufacturer of that?

John Tremelling wrote:I carried a Browning GP 35 as a back up for most of my service, and it never failed me. When we changed to Glock 19's I grimly held on to mine as long as I could before it was taken from me for use as a training weapon. Some years after I retired, eventually shot out, it was presented to me, cut in half lengthways and mounted on a wood plinth. It will always remain one of my fondest possessions.

For those not familiar with the term, the GP 35 is the Hi Power.

How did you find the Hi Power in comparison to the Glock 19?

I'm glad they gave you the retired Hi Power, but it breaks my heart to think it was cut in half. Ouch!

Pat Holscher wrote:

John Tremelling wrote:I carried a Browning GP 35 as a back up for most of my service, and it never failed me. When we changed to Glock 19's I grimly held on to mine as long as I could before it was taken from me for use as a training weapon. Some years after I retired, eventually shot out, it was presented to me, cut in half lengthways and mounted on a wood plinth. It will always remain one of my fondest possessions.

For those not familiar with the term, the GP 35 is the Hi Power.

How did you find the Hi Power in comparison to the Glock 19?

I'm glad they gave you the retired Hi Power, but it breaks my heart to think it was cut in half. Ouch!

Is the GP 35 still the regular British Army handgun?

Pat
The Berretta on trial was not one my test peices, the armourer and Infantry Instructor's were tasked with its test, as to the model I do not know. What I do remember was that it was similar to the FN perhaps a little smaller. It was not accepted, and the SA star was taken in its place.

As for the P1 I think it was Berretta, and not dissimilar to the Walther, but not sure. My wife Vera was a senior A Reserve Police Woman [ they were called senior police patrol officers of Inspector rank].

Roy

roy elderkin wrote:Pat
The Berretta on trial was not one my test peices, the armourer and Infantry Instructor's were tasked with its test, as to the model I do not know. What I do remember was that it was similar to the FN perhaps a little smaller. It was not accepted, and the SA star was taken in its place.

As for the P1 I think it was Berretta, and not dissimilar to the Walther, but not sure. My wife Vera was a senior A Reserve Police Woman [ they were called senior police patrol officers of Inspector rank].

Roy

Here, the controversy rages on about the 9mm, and whether it's a good choice for a true combat pistol. I'm a .45 ACP fan myself, but I would note that, in the hands of the Greys, the 9mm was a combat sidearm. Was there every any discussion, of which you are aware, to going to something larger, or was the pre war British standard necessary kept on?

Pat

The army kept to the British standard in both weapons and amo size, with the advent of big arms and amo cache taken during ops some SF used the AK and AKS.

The Togorov pistol was saught after, but there were no plans to increase the size of sidearms. Except for close security personnel who would carry the .375 as the prefered weapon along with wadcutter amo.

Roy

Pat, having been taken out of service my old Browning was destroyed as is the norm with ex British Police weaponry, cut lengthwise it was destroyed, and I would never had had it to hang on my wall otherwise. The Glock 19 was a comparable replacement, but as a traditionalist I could never come to terms with a predominantly plastic weapon, even the pistol case (holster) was plastic!!!!!!! British Army Special Forces use Glock 19 which is why we, and I believe most British Police Forces followed suit, our bosses being influenced. Not having a safety catch it is considered faster to bring to action, but necessarily demands a greater standard of training. Some British Army second line reserve units still have Brownings, but the main British Army sidearm is the Sig Saur P226 as evaluated by your own forces, and I believe used by USN Seals and some other Special Forces. The arguement of course always remains as to calibre, but the 9mm with soft point ammunition double tapped has never failed to do the job in police service, the same round being used in the now predominant weapon, the MP5. This weapon has achieved prominence since the need to carry weapons covertly by uniformed police has declined, the Glock carried as a backup. Regarding soft point ammo, bear in mind that Police forces are not bound by the Geneva Convention, and over penetration, whilst often a bonus in a military situation can be a problem in a police or special forces hostage environment.