Darren Baker takes a look at the Big Set of figures from Blackdog titled ''British Marines & Argentine Soldier Falklands 1982''.

Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

Call me ignorant, but I don't recall the British using M-16's. I was under the impression they used FN's.

That is why I believe these figures represent the SBS or SAS as our special forces could pick and choose their weapons.

The SAS did indeed use the M16 in the Falklands. But my real comment is about the "Argentine soldier." Call me crazy, but he looks like a good basis for a cold was US soldier several folks have been asking for lately. Without going up to my attic to dig out my old OD field jacket, it sure likes like he's hearing something similar - with the hood that comes out of the zipper pocket in the collar.

That was my first thought exactly when I saw that figure a few weeks ago...albeit converted into a Canadian Cold War soldier.

Both SAS and SBS had free range of the equipment used and many chose the M-16's as they have selective fire. The SLR was only individual fire.

To continue, the marines would be wearing Norwegian hiking/climbing boots as they were far better than the DMS or NI boots issued by the MOD.

Thank you for the info as I did not know that Royal Marines usually buy their own boots during that period.

Regarding the Argentine soldier he is most likely wearing old US uniform.

These figures are impressive as regards fit and general detail.

The Argentine uniforms for the most part were locally made...The combat jackets were the 1967 Combat Jacket or Model 67. They were based on the U.S. M43, M51, M65 jackets and the French M64 jacket. There were some U.S. jackets used as well.

The cold weather windproof parka as depicted on the figure is likely the Israeli Dubon.

I'd have much preferred to have had some basic infantry which could have represented any of the troops involved in the conflict.

Not a set I'll be buying.

Al

There was a hood for the DPM jacket - I went and looked at my old one in the garage, that's why there are three buttons under the collar. I don't remember having one for mine ( be fair, it was 35 years ago), so may not have been on general issue.
Figure 3 looks like he's wearing IS boots to me, but may be wrong it's quite hard to tell from the pictures. The other Marines look as though they are wearing some sort of civvy mountaineering gaiters, they are readily available from camping/climbing shops.
As the others have said, SBS/SAS could and can choose their own weapons, strangely they seldom seem to choose standard issue British kit, either the SLR or the SA80!
I don't think you could carry a Gimpy like that for long, it's too bloody heavy! However it can be carried if you put the butt under your arm and the left hand further down nearer the bipod. This pose featured is really more appropriate to a rifle.

I know I am only making observations based on pictures and not the actual items, but the British figures really do not stand out as Royal Marines or Falklands related. As many have previously pointed out, special operations units do have a wide latitude in picking out kit and weapons so most of the irregularities in dress and weapons can be attributed to this (personally, I think they represent Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre troops based on their dress and weapons). Even so, the pictures I have seen of M-16s used by British forces were early versions with 3-prong flash suppressors, no forward assist assembly on the right side and usually only had 20 round mags, not 30 round. I have seen the short carbine version with either SBS or 148 FOU troops,but it also had 20 round mags. The parkas are also very non British looking. One of the hoods appears to have fur trim, which I believe was on the earlier Olive Drab parka of the 60s but not on any DPM items. The only fur trimmed jackets in the Falklands I have seen were among the British troops captured at the beginning of the war (they were on Olive drab jackets), either with NP8901 or the Falklands Defence Force; they are very visible in the pictures of the British forces that were made to lie down in the street while being searched. One is also wearing a Denison smock,so anything is possible. Overall, the figures are also too "trim" looking and poses are stiff; with the layers of clothes worn, shouldn't they have a more bulky, baggy appearance? Even the Bergens look very nicely packed. The trousers especially look pretty close-fitting. I do like the Argentine figure and would also like to see more in combat attire. He also looks a bit too trim and neat--maybe he was stationed in Stanley? Of the set, only the Argentine figure offers anything Falklands- specific related.

I did have an artic DPM jacket in the 80's and the one I had did have a fur trim and was wired so that the area of exposed face could be controlled. The only issue I have is that the jacket length seems shorter than I remember for an artic DPM jacket as they also had a crouch flap so that it did not ride up when doing daft things like jumping out of planes. I do accept that these are not typical figures for the Falklands conflict, but I am hoping that these are just the start of a line as I am impressed with them over all.

Thank you all for your replies.

The first two British figures appear to wearing the "smock windproof" more commonly referred to as a SAS smock which was not only worn by members of the SAS but sometimes as a personal purchase item in infantry line regiments as it was of a superior design and quality to the issue combat jacket The alternative is the Arctic windproof smock which is essentially the same smock. The only differences are it has a deeper hood which has stiff wire in the edge and also has rank slides to front and rear. There is no other difference between either as they are both smocks I am very familiar with them having worn them both in the field. Lengthwise they are right. Smocks come in different lengths according to height. Weaponwise I would say either SAS, SBS or Mountain and Arctic Warfare cadre as someone else mentioned. All three had freedom of choice as a personal weapon and carrying a 66 (LAW) was pretty much standard. The third figures smock is not any sort of British issue smock I am aware of and it's lack of front pockets and furry hood leads me to believe it is a private purchase item. Someone mentioned a crotch riser. The only smock used now and in the past by the British army that had this feature was/is the Denison/Para Smock and that looks completely different. The DPM arctic parka is a knee length garment. I hope that's of some help.

Actually, the Argentine Army bought its cold weather jackets from an Israeli manufacturer (who may have been inspired by old US designs). These were not especially effective in the conditions found in the Falklands, and the Argentine troops suffered badly in the cold.

A question for the 'Bundeswehr' specialists: could the Argentinan figure be used as a 1980-ies Faun SLT driver?

The British troops uniform was not really up to task either and resulted in troops purchasing their own pieces of kit to various degrees. From memory and assuming I remember correctly our troops even suffered trench foot issues.