• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

THE BATTLE FOR WIRELESS RIDGE – 13/14TH JUNE 1982

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,172
Points
910
THE BATTLE FOR WIRELESS RIDGE – 13/14TH JUNE 1982

By David Chaundler

On the 10th June 1982 2 Para were flown-up from Fitzroy onto the West slope of Mount Kent.  Our orders were to follow-up behind 3 Para and RV with them next morning after they had captured Mount Longdon.  The RV was to be at Furze Bush Pass behind Longdon.  Meanwhile, to the south, 45 Commando were to capture Two Sisters and 42 Commando Mount Harriett.

We moved out at midnight.  I must say something about timings.  We worked on Greenwich Mean Time (Zulu Time).  Dusk was at about eight in the evening and dawn came rather slowly between ten and eleven in the morning.

We left the Mortars behind on Mount Kent with a considerable amount of ammunition as the 81mm mortar is too heavy to carry with a reasonable amount of ammunition.  We also left the Blowpipe Detachment behind as the Blowpipe is a cumbersome weapon to carry any distance.  Besides, the air threat against the infantry is not great provided they are well dispersed.  Also the Blowpipes would be more effective protecting the more static target of the Mortars.  I intended to use helicopters to move the Mortars forward once I knew our objective and could select a mortar line.

Our bergans were also left behind to be flow forward after we had captured our objective.  Not that we knew yet what our objective was to be.

 

Attachments

  • THE BATTLE FOR WIRELESS RIDGE.docx
    373.1 KB · Views: 57

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
104
Points
680
"3 Para claimed to have a company on D Company’s first objective.  I was sure it was an Argentinean company at that grid reference.  We still had not got clarification from 3 Para when D Company attacked it.  However, we had comprehensively shelled it and 3 Para had not complained, so it seemed safe to assume it was an Argentinean position."

I legitimately Laughed Out Loud.

:)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,172
Points
910
NavyShooter said:
"3 Para claimed to have a company on D Company’s first objective.  I was sure it was an Argentinean company at that grid reference.  We still had not got clarification from 3 Para when D Company attacked it.  However, we had comprehensively shelled it and 3 Para had not complained, so it seemed safe to assume it was an Argentinean position."

I legitimately Laughed Out Loud.

:)

The two battalions got along famously in the pubs in Aldershot.... not :)
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
104
Points
680
I sent this out in an email to all of my troops this afternoon.  It seemed worthy of sharing.
 
Top