Where are all the Allied SMGs?

[Michael Dorosh]

Simon has made a lot of unsubstantiated generalities in this thread that I don't agree with on instinct but am in no position to disprove.

I think perhaps he has lost any semblance of credibility with his new "ANZAC" rating for CM troops....

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Fox:

Who said they threw them away?

That was your assumption not mine.

Best not to make giant leaps of extrapolation from one army to another, don't you think?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You were talking about ANZAC troops, so I felt it was a safe assumption that they did not carry the old toys when they found new ones in the desert. And filling out a property card requires one to know how to spell their names.

Seriously though, I am not sure that the cult of the rifle, which made adoption of assault rifles so tough in the US, did extend to other western nations. I am completely serious here. In US forces a rifleman was exactly that, SMG troopers were supporting cast, the rifleman was god. If the weapon looked like a rifle it made it in the Army, if it did not it was relegated to tank drivers. This extended to some of the severe penalties extracted for loosing a rifle in any other way than outright having it blown out of your hands.

The reason I mention this is because Patton, a true US tight ass and martinet, ruled no captured weapons, no weapons outside of MOS, no non standard weaopns, all weapon loss reports generate a potential court martial or administrative court. Of course he was the worst when it came to strict and sometimes baffling rules, but he was a product of the cult of the rifle and opposed even the SMG before the war for armored infantry.

[ASL Veteran]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JasonC:

As for finding the figure of 900K MPs low, take it up with the folks at the Panzerfaust site. "Total production of MP 38 and MP 40 combined was 908,317". Rather more specific than "over 1 million", isn't it? I suspect the 1 million comment is an approximation of all real MPs and the "alone" means "not counting the MP44 assault rifles".[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm, let me see. Who do I believe, Ian Hogg, the most respected and well known authority on weapons in the English language or 'the guys at the Panzerfaust website'? I'm sure they are swell guys over there, but I think I'm sticking with Ian Hogg. The number I gave you was my recollection, but why don't we just see exactly what Mr Hogg had to say so you can decide for yourself what he meant:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This became the MP38, later the MP40, the familiar 'Schmeisser' (a misnomer) without which no film portrayal of the German soldier is complete. Undoubtedly it is one of the classic weapon designs of all time; absolutely functional, without an ounce of ornamentation or excess material on it, the first weapon to be laid out for mass production by methods far removed from traditional gunsmithing techniques. It is uncertain how many MP38s were made, but it is known that Production of the MP40 amounted to 1,047,000 - over 700 a day for four years..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think Mr Hogg is very clear that he is referring to the MP40 and only the MP40 and that he is not including the MP38. He is also not including the MP44 Because the MP44 is not a Sub Machine Gun as everyone knows, so I'm not sure why you keep including it in the discussion.

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JasonC:

Two, everybody knows that men going into combat carry not standard loads but all the ammo they can carry. If not more for their small arm, they carry more rounds for the squad MG, or grenades. Nobody wastes ability to carry before a firefight.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This might be common sense, and it's cetainly how I'd go into combat if I ever had to, but it's demonstrably not true.

the last occasion I can recall of specifically was in VietNam, where an Australian patrol ran into a big bunch of VC/NVA. The Australians weer operating under rules & reg's they'd inhereted from the Malaya emergency where long firefigths were very rare, and individual mobiliy was desireable.

Hence they carried only half of the standard "war" load for their weapons.

Needless to say they ran very short of ammo, got into quite a pickle, and the official ammo load got increased shortly thereafter!

[Michael Dorosh]

The cult of the rifle extends to Britain - see my earlier comments on magazine cutoffs in SMLEs in World War One. The FN was not adopted til the late 1950s because of the same feeling that rifle marksmanship was important. The British and Canadians were just as reluctant to adopt "assault" rifles.

We went through the same heartache when the FN was retired after 30 years service in favour of the automatic firing 5.56 C7 (a Canadian built M16). A lot of old sweats bemoaned the C7's adoption for many reasons other than the rifle cult, such as the feeling that the wooden butt stock of the FN was better for crushing skulls with...

As for the "guys at the Panzerfaust site" - I thought it was Markus Hofbauer's baby. Were there others involved with the site?

I have caught Markus on a number of historical points on the forum

so I would think Hogg is just as reliable....

(...and of course Markus has caught me out on occasion too, I just couldn't resist - I still relish telling two German speakers what the protocols for addressing superiors were...and the usage of German military terminology...heehee)

[Mr. Johnson--]

Ouch that sucks Michael Dorosh...a Canadian M-16!!!

Poor bastards, why not get the Enfield? Too expensive? Although the FN (I assume FN-FAL) was a great battle rifle if a little heavy.

[ASL Veteran]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JasonC:

1.1 million Springfield bolt action

3.8 million M-1 semi auto rifles

6.2 million M-1 semi auto carbines

1.2 million Thompson SMG

0.6 million M3 Grease SMG

0.4 million BAR

0.5 million air cooled 30 cal

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Peter Chamberlain has 5,500,000 M1 semi auto rifles, 6,332,000 M1 and M1A1 Carbines, 606,694 M3 Grease Guns, well over 1,000,000 Thompsons (not as specific on those), 43,479 M1919A6 air cooled 30 cal, and 53,854 M1917 A1 along with 68,389 built before WW2. Most of the numbers are pretty close, but your numbers on the Garand are off by quite a bit.

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr. Johnson-<THC>-:

Ouch that sucks Michael Dorosh...a Canadian M-16!!!

Poor bastards, why not get the Enfield? Too expensive? Although the FN (I assume FN-FAL) was a great battle rifle if a little heavy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A lot of Canadian infantrymen agree with you (we used the Canadian made FN C1A1, very similar to Britain's L1. You could not fire it automatic (the squad automatic was the FN C2, a FN with heavy barrel and bipod - very similar to the American BAR, really - and a step backward from the Bren.)

I couldn't hit a damn thing with the FN, but can shoot like Annie Oakley with the C7. Most would prefer the stopping power of the 7.62 NATO round the FN fired in an actual fight.

Armies love to reinvent the wheel. We are stuck right now with the Iltis (same vehicle the Germans use) which has absolutely no advantages over the Willy's jeep as far as I can tell - except that we pay Canadians to build them and have to replace them very often (which keeps the defence contractors happy.)

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The cult of the rifle extends to Britain - see my earlier comments on magazine cutoffs in SMLEs in World War One. The FN was not adopted til the late 1950s because of the same feeling that rifle marksmanship was important. The British and Canadians were just as reluctant to adopt "assault" rifles.

We went through the same heartache when the FN was retired after 30 years service in favour of the automatic firing 5.56 C7 (a Canadian built M16). A lot of old sweats bemoaned the C7's adoption for many reasons other than the rifle cult, such as the feeling that the wooden butt stock of the FN was better for crushing skulls with...

As for the "guys at the Panzerfaust site" - I thought it was Markus Hofbauer's baby. Were there others involved with the site?

I have caught Markus on a number of historical points on the forum

so I would think Hogg is just as reliable....

(...and of course Markus has caught me out on occasion too, I just couldn't resist - I still relish telling two German speakers what the protocols for addressing superiors were...and the usage of German military terminology...heehee)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny Mike, I read the Commonwealth discussion when they adopted the FAL, and a complaint at the time was that it made a poor self defense weapon since wood did not run its entire length. I also presume they were mad that they could no longer use their rifles as cricket paddles and thus bore the enemy to death.

[ 06-29-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASL Veteran:

Peter Chamberlain has 5,500,000 M1 semi auto rifles, 6,332,000 M1 and M1A1 Carbines, 606,694 M3 Grease Guns, well over 1,000,000 Thompsons (not as specific on those), 43,479 M1919A6 air cooled 30 cal, and 53,854 M1917 A1 along with 68,389 built before WW2. Most of the numbers are pretty close, but your numbers on the Garand are off by quite a bit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Garand production continued (with one interruption) until 1953, and was started up again for small runs several times. According to Ezell, the 6 millionth rifle was made sometime in 1950 accounting for the different figures, how many were made in World War Two, and how many were made.

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Funny Mike, I read the Commonwealth discussion when the adopted the FAL, and a complaint at the time was that it bade a poor self defense weapon since wood did not run its entire length. I also presume they were mad that they could no longer use their rifles as cricket paddles and thus bore the enemy to death.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is Simon is done being smarmy, maybe he can explain why the Aussies in Vietnam didn't use the FN universally - didn't a lot of their troops use the M-16 outside their normal scale of issue?

Never mind Britain's enemies, their allies could never figure out cricket, either.

[ASL Veteran]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

[QB]The cult of the rifle extends to Britain - see my earlier comments on magazine cutoffs in SMLEs in World War One. The FN was not adopted til the late 1950s because of the same feeling that rifle marksmanship was important. The British and Canadians were just as reluctant to adopt "assault" rifles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, the Japanese put a bayonet on the end of their SMG. I'm not really sure what kind of a cult that is, but it is certainly a cult of some kind

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASL Veteran:

Well, the Japanese put a bayonet on the end of their SMG. I'm not really sure what kind of a cult that is, but it is certainly a cult of some kind <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The British did also. I have a pictiure of a tricked out STEN with a little spike bayonet. Must be the same cult.

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Simon has made a lot of unsubstantiated generalities in this thread that I don't agree with on instinct but am in no position to disprove.

I think perhaps he has lost any semblance of credibility with his new "ANZAC" rating for CM troops....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Stinking sermoniser!

Just stick to whether the somfink or other division wore their shiny little patches on their left or right buttocks you horrible little uniform grog. I addition to unsubstantiated generalities I've got a mountain of statistics on my side (aka JasonC) and all you've got is "instincts". I fink I'd rather go with my generalities than the instincts of some bloke who spends half his time dressing soldier dolls.

As for slappy, "cricket paddles", sheesh!

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Is Simon is done being smarmy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope!

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Fox:

Stinking sermoniser!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I had my truck sermonized last week, looks real nice.

I just found an advertisement in Shooter's Digest for surplus Australian rifles. The Ad says in the second line descriptionL

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Aussie WWII bolt action "Crocodile Dundee" Paul Hogan model Enfields. Slight cricket ball damage to rear wood, sights bent when thrown away in panic, poorly cared for, but a real fixer upper. Recovered by Tasmanian soldiers fighting rear guard for fleeing main landers and returned at great effort to Army depots during the darkest hours of World War Two. Own this peice of Australian history. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[ 06-29-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]

[Gyrene]

I see lots of comments about US troops "discarding" their rifles in favor of SMG's, if they did unoficially adopt a new weapon, it would have been with the blessing of the platoon leader who would either welcome the additional firepower or deny the request.

If the request was accepted, the exra rifle would then placed in the company armory and not "discarded".

Unfortunatly my military bias and knowledge leans very heavily towards the history of the USMC, and I know as well as anyone that the US Army way of doing things & the USMC way are often two very different things, but I have read many accounts of Marines being issued different weapons for specific missions and widespread semi-official scrounging, some examples:

In Guadalcanal many Marines had a craving for their own M1 to replace their M1903's and would not think twice to "re-appropriate" one from a Soldier.

In the island campaigns any fallen BAR was picked up, it was not unusual for entire squads to be all BAR equipped towards the end of a battle.

In the jungle campaigns patrols were issued all Thompsons/M3's/BAR's and also shotguns (REAL close range firepower that is missing in CM) the rifles left at home. The SMG's & Shotguns were Company community property and issued out at need. This pratice was also common in late war Korea, and included the issue of flak vests/ diapers (nick name for the flak shorts) to assault squads.

During Iwo Jima a particular Marine was renowned for carrying a modified A/C belt fed machine gun he scrounged off a crashed aircraft, he adapted it for single man use and was instrumental in the first hours of the invasion at the base of Suribachi. He had used his "Stinger" as he called in previous campaigns, in other words: The entire Company knew he carried the thing, and even welcomed it.

Towards the end of the war and the Okinawa campaign, squads were boosted beyond their TOE by adding one or two BAR men and thompsons, this was done at platoon/squad level if the extra weapons were available and Company/Bat. HQ usually did not object, and if they did object it was usually to hoarding.

During the Chosin Campaign in the Korean War (A little outside the scope, but close enough in doctrine & equipment to WWII) M1 carbines were abandoned in mass by US Marines & Soldiers in favor of much more cold weather reliable M1's & Chinese PPshk's. Trust me, no one told those frozen soldiers & Marines that "they were issued an M1 carbine, you will use and M1 Carbine"

Crews should be able to defend themselves, especially frontline mortar crews. Remember that these guys were trained as infantry also.

The total lack of variety in Allied squads compared to the virtual buffett of available German squads paints a wrong picture of the true variety that existed in the Allied side in the War.

Gyrene

[Simon Fox]

But Gyrene, since Slappy doesn't have any pictures of that in his mega collection then it can't have happened.

I have this picture of Slappy sitting at his computer with a huge mountain of photos piled on the desk. He reads something on his screen, then frantically shuffles through the mountain until finally muttering to himself "Nope, couldn't have happened! No evidence! Against the rules! Patton wouldn't have liked that! Not one bit!". Then he types away.....

[Michael Dorosh]

I take it that when Simon gets this way, he realizes he's been proven wrong?

Perhaps we should let him win this one.

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I take it that when Simon gets this way, he realizes he's been proven wrong?

Perhaps we should let him win this one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eh? Positively undoroshlike!

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I take it that when Simon gets this way, he realizes he's been proven wrong?

Perhaps we should let him win this one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Be nice to Simon. He is a medical scientist, and likely uses himself as a test subject for female growth hormone substitute and stuff like that, leaving him a little crickity at days end. You should just nod and go, "yep Simon, sure Sime, whatever you say Simon, take you pills Simon" just like the people he works with do.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Preach it Gyrene!

Gyrene Said, "I see lots of comments about US troops "discarding" their rifles in favor of SMG's, if they did unoficially adopt a new weapon, it would have been with the blessing of the platoon leader who would either welcome the additional firepower or deny the request.

If the request was accepted, the exra rifle would then placed in the company armory and not "discarded".

Unfortunatly my military bias and knowledge leans very heavily towards the history of the USMC, and I know as well as anyone that the US Army way of doing things & the USMC way are often two very different things, but I have read many accounts of Marines being issued different weapons for specific missions and widespread semi-official scrounging, some examples:

In Guadalcanal many Marines had a craving for their own M1 to replace their M1903's and would not think twice to "re-appropriate" one from a Soldier.

In the island campaigns any fallen BAR was picked up, it was not unusual for entire squads to be all BAR equipped towards the end of a battle.

In the jungle campaigns patrols were issued all Thompsons/M3's/BAR's and also shotguns (REAL close range firepower that is missing in CM) the rifles left at home. The SMG's & Shotguns were Company community property and issued out at need. This pratice was also common in late war Korea, and included the issue of flak vests/ diapers (nick name for the flak shorts) to assault squads.

During Iwo Jima a particular Marine was renowned for carrying a modified A/C belt fed machine gun he scrounged off a crashed aircraft, he adapted it for single man use and was instrumental in the first hours of the invasion at the base of Suribachi. He had used his "Stinger" as he called in previous campaigns, in other words: The entire Company knew he carried the thing, and even welcomed it.

Towards the end of the war and the Okinawa campaign, squads were boosted beyond their TOE by adding one or two BAR men and thompsons, this was done at platoon/squad level if the extra weapons were available and Company/Bat. HQ usually did not object, and if they did object it was usually to hoarding.

During the Chosin Campaign in the Korean War (A little outside the scope, but close enough in doctrine & equipment to WWII) M1 carbines were abandoned in mass by US Marines & Soldiers in favor of much more cold weather reliable M1's & Chinese PPshk's. Trust me, no one told those frozen soldiers & Marines that "they were issued an M1 carbine, you will use and M1 Carbine"

Crews should be able to defend themselves, especially frontline mortar crews. Remember that these guys were trained as infantry also.

The total lack of variety in Allied squads compared to the virtual buffett of available German squads paints a wrong picture of the true variety that existed in the Allied side in the War.

Gyrene

A/C=Autocannon?

[Slapdragon]

I can see it now:

Squad List (continued)

>US Infantry 1944-32B

>US Infantry 1944-33

\/US Infantry 1944-34

(2) M1 SMG

(5) M1 Rifle

(2) M1 Carbine

(2) Captured MP40

(1) M1918 BAR

>US Infantry 1944-35

>US Infantry 1944-36

We could have like 300 different combinations of SMG, rifle, and carbine to choose from for the US assuming that this or that squad [icked up or dropped off this or that weapon..

[Gyrene]

Mr. Johnson, A/C = Aircraft.

Gyrene

[Andreas]

The quote at the end could go some way to explain where the Stens were

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This famous Winter War taught whole world to value of submachine guns as true instruments of warfare, not mere "emergency weapons for defense at close quarters for the personnel of specialist corps, such as motor transport drivers, spare numbers of machine-gun units, tank crews and head-quarter details." (Quotation from a British "Textbook of Automatic Pistols" by Robert Kenneth Wilson, written in 1935).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From the website dedicated to the Finnish Suomi SMG http://www.guns.connect.fi/gow/suomi1.html