Pistol standard issue?

[PLM]

I'm curious if anyone knows to what extent regular soldeirs carried pistols in addition to their primary weapon. I know the Germans didnt issue everybody a parabellum, thats rediculous. For support roles and heavy weapon crews I can see it.

Did American troops have pistols in addition to their primary weapon? It doesnt make sense to me, why not just give them more primary ammo? Now maybe at very close range it would be an advantage, particularly when carrying a bolt action rifle but I dont think they'd go to such lengths in producing all those pistols to give each soldier one or did they?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by PLM:

I'm curious if anyone knows to what extent regular soldeirs carried pistols in addition to their primary weapon. I know the Germans didnt issue everybody a parabellum, thats rediculous. For support roles and heavy weapon crews I can see it.

Did American troops have pistols in addition to their primary weapon? It doesnt make sense to me, why not just give them more primary ammo? Now maybe at very close range it would be an advantage, particularly when carrying a bolt action rifle but I dont think they'd go to such lengths in producing all those pistols to give each soldier one or did they?

Paratroopers in the US were issued pistols for sidearms. Midway through the war, the M1 carbine officially replaced the pistol as the sidearm for weapons crews, officers, etc.

Pistols were very rare in the Commonwealth; many officers in CW infantry companies carried rifles or SMGs into action to avoid being singled out by snipers. They also found the pistol was useless in action.

Pistols were used in CW vehicle crews, though each vehicle also had a variety of automatic weapons.

It was not uncommon for pistol armed soldiers and officers to augment their official issue with scrounged, stolen or captured weaponry. There is no general trend to this however. A look at the photos in the South Alberta Regiment history show a variety of armament for tank crews - they were actually more interested in procuring binoculars as the official scale of issue was less than one per man, and the tank crews preferred four or five sets per tank.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Midway through the war, the M1 carbine officially replaced the pistol as the sidearm for weapons crews, officers, etc.

It should be noted however that this was not universally observed. I believe I have seen late war photos of MG and mortar crews where the men who carried the heaviest loads (the gunner and asst. gunner usually) were only armed with pistols. I think most officers of the rank of Lt. Colonel and above also tended to hang onto their pistols. Interestingly, Maj. General James Gavin claims to have carried a Garand.

A look at the photos in the South Alberta Regiment history show a variety of armament for tank crews - they were actually more interested in procuring binoculars as the official scale of issue was less than one per man, and the tank crews preferred four or five sets per tank.

Good lord! Whatever for? Planning to open a shop after demob?

I was under the impression—perhaps mistaken—that in the case of the US Army, the TC got one and there might have been one for each of the other turret crew, but that was it.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Good lord! Whatever for? Planning to open a shop after demob?

I was under the impression—perhaps mistaken—that in the case of the US Army, the TC got one and there might have been one for each of the other turret crew, but that was it.

Spotting targets when stopped or dismounted, I would guess. May have been just a fad, too. German optics were almost as enticing as Lugers and motorcycles to those guys as far as souvenirs/fun toys go.

[Battlefront.com]

Germans issued tons and tons of pistols. In fact, they issued so many as part of standard TO&E that they had to employ huge numbers of captured pistols. All officers were issued a pistol, as were AFV crewmen, some other types of vehicle crewmen, artillerymen, and certain members of heavy weapons teams. A pistol was issued to the MG gunner of a Rifle Squad, which adds up to a heck of a lot right there. Then of course you had all the rear services dotted with pistols as well.

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Germans had more pistols issued than any other nation. Looking at the above list, it isn't hard to believe it!

Steve

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Germans issued tons and tons of pistols. In fact, they issued so many as part of standard TO&E that they had to employ huge numbers of captured pistols. All officers were issued a pistol, as were AFV crewmen, some other types of vehicle crewmen, artillerymen, and certain members of heavy weapons teams. A pistol was issued to the MG gunner of a Rifle Squad, which adds up to a heck of a lot right there. Then of course you had all the rear services dotted with pistols as well.

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Germans had more pistols issued than any other nation. Looking at the above list, it isn't hard to believe it!

Steve

I believe the Company First Sergeant was also pistol armed - so every panzer, infantry, mountain, cavalry etc. company also had an NCO armed with a pistol. Buchner lists quite a lot of them - 44 pistols in an infantry company (1939) - see p.27 of GERMAN INFANTRY HANDBOOK.

By comparison, a Canadian infantry company would have a company commander and three platoon commanders armed with pistols, probably the CSM and possibly the CQMS - so less than 10.

[Tiredboots]

Interesting bit in Farley Mowat's book "& no bird sang" about him cheerfuly trading his Webley pistol for a M1 carbin with a US paratrooper. Seems like among axis:pistol=status, among allies: pistol=trade.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

German optics were almost as enticing as Lugers and motorcycles to those guys as far as souvenirs/fun toys go.

That's surely true. And I've read that they were a hot item among platoon and squad leaders in the US Army because the German items were smaller and lighter than the American ones.

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

German optics were almost as enticing as Lugers and motorcycles to those guys as far as souvenirs/fun toys go.

That's surely true. And I've read that they were a hot item among platoon and squad leaders in the US Army because the German items were smaller and lighter than the American ones.

Michael </font>

[PLM]

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The difference is amazing - I've owned a pair of German dienstglas 6x30 binos and currently have a set of British 6x30 - the German ones weigh about half as much.

The standard issue in the US services was 7X50, which was even heavier. The Navy also used some 20X? that were still heavier and also had some so big they had to be used with fixed mountings. But you can believe they weren't banging through the jungles with those!

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by PLM:

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

I noticed that most of the frontline troops during OIF were wearing pistols in addition to their regular personal weapon. They were also carrying a ton of other gear. Must have been a real workout just getting around when they were on foot.

As for wartime production of pistols, it was up in the tens of millions. Probably in excess of a hundred million if you take all the various nations into account.

Michael

[Skolman]

Sorry, what is OIF ?

[LongLeftFlank]

While I haven't seen explicit reference to this subject, I had always assumed that the primary function of sidearms, at least for officers, in European armies -- particularly the German -- was as a badge of authority rather than a combat weapon.

This function might be:

a. purely symbolic (i.e. the descendant of the swords which officers carried into action as late as 1900)

b. actually used in delivering military justice upon (unarmed) troops, e.g. coup de grace and even summary execution. Hence, the references in some surrender discussions to "officers being allowed to retain their sidearms".

c. a compact self-protective weapon useful in the kinds of paramilitary policing and colonial missions faced by pre 1940s armies.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by LongLeftFlank:

While I haven't seen explicit reference to this subject, I had always assumed that the primary function of sidearms, at least for officers, in European armies -- particularly the German -- was as a badge of authority rather than a combat weapon.

This function might be:

a. purely symbolic (i.e. the descendant of the swords which officers carried into action as late as 1900)

b. actually used in delivering military justice upon (unarmed) troops, e.g. coup de grace and even summary execution. Hence, the references in some surrender discussions to "officers being allowed to retain their sidearms".

c. a compact self-protective weapon useful in the kinds of paramilitary policing and colonial missions faced by pre 1940s armies.

German officers tended to look elsewhere for badges of authority - the brown leather belt, for example, was highly prized, even after orders during the war to blacken belts so as not to stand out. The brown leather was seen as a sign of authority. Given the number of NCOs in troop leadership roles (the majority of platoon commanders in German infantry units were NCOs, not officers) and the number of NCOs issued pistols as a matter of course (as noted, lMG gunners received them), I doubt the pistol was seen as such. Or at least, not the issue P08 and P38s. Possibly Berettas, Walthers, etc. were, but I've not read of such.

German officers tended to be more familial with their men and so the threat of shooting them probably wasn't there. Certainly the Germans had an extensive network of field police, military police, and even in the last year of the war the Feldjäger whose job it was to hunt down deserters and institute flying courts martial or even summary executions - but I don't think that was part of the culture of the German officer within an infantry company, armoured squadron, artillery battery, etc. And the Hauptfeldwebel was also pistol armed and just as involved in summary justice IIRC within subunits. As authoritarian as life was within the Third Reich, the picture of the company commander shooting one of his own men summarily is fictional.

[ July 31, 2005, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[PLM]

I always looked at is as something that showed you were important, if you weren't 'important' you'd be on the frontline with a rifle or SMG just like anyone else. An officer doesnt need to lug around a large weapon because his primary role isnt to actually engage the enemy himself.

I remember those leaflets they dropped in Iraq with instructions on how to surrender safely, placing your vehicles in squares and standing several hundred meters away in some formation, also officers could keep their sidearms. I think its kind of a control thing even if it doesnt get used often, its still there just in case, easy to carry around and doesnt leave officers defensless

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by PLM:

I always looked at is as something that showed you were important, if you weren't 'important' you'd be on the frontline with a rifle or SMG just like anyone else. An officer doesnt need to lug around a large weapon because his primary role isnt to actually engage the enemy himself.

Most frontline officers carried rifles or SMGs to avoid detection by snipers; still do. I suspect many of them regarded the pistol as simply a tool. Especially if 44 people in your infantry company had one, and only three of them were officers. Not a badge of rank at all, but will defer to someone who wants to quote a German officer "who was there."

The retaining of sidearms by officers is symbolic only; as symbolic as rendering hand salutes to enemy officers. Since ammunition was always abandoned or surrendered in such cases, what good is the pistol?

It may also recognize the fact that officers in the first half of the 20th Century had to pay for their own clothes, and in some cases their weapons and equipment. That trend was declining by 1939, at least as far as personal sidearms went, though clothing was still an item officers in most armies bought with their own money, not received on general issue. That being the case, it brings us back once again to the idea that uniform components made an officer stand out from the herd, not a service pistol that was general issue.

[Egbert]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

The standard issue in the US services was 7X50, which was even heavier. The Navy also used some 20X? that were still heavier and also had some so big they had to be used with fixed mountings. But you can believe they weren't banging through the jungles with those!

Michael

U.S. Navy still uses hard mount binoculars nicknamed "Big Eyes" by Navy men.

I have some nice photos of a volcano erupting at dawn in the Philipine Islands at about a range of 10 miles by successive attempts at shooting various shutter speeds using a Canon SLR and various lenses.

Edited because I had the pictures shot with a cannon rather than a Canon. Just as fun to shoot but the first wouldn't have the same desired effect.

[ July 31, 2005, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Egbert ]

[Sergei]

Originally posted by PLM:

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

Not only that, but every trooper also carried a sniper rifle, flamethrower, 8 handgrenades, 10kg of TNT, a Panzerschreck and a Minigun.

[Egbert]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by PLM:

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

Not only that, but every trooper also carried a sniper rifle, flamethrower, 8 handgrenades, 10kg of TNT, a Panzerschreck and a Minigun. </font>

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by PLM:

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

Not only that, but every trooper also carried a sniper rifle, flamethrower, 8 handgrenades, 10kg of TNT, a Panzerschreck and a Minigun. </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Skolman:

Sorry, what is OIF ?

"Operation Iraqi Freedom". The PR-laden name for that little fracas that took place a couple of years ago.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by LongLeftFlank:

b. actually used in delivering military justice upon (unarmed) troops, e.g. coup de grace and even summary execution. Hence, the references in some surrender discussions to "officers being allowed to retain their sidearms".

I have seen accounts of this being done in the Soviet army, but I cannot vouch for their reliability. The practice appears to have been exceedingly rare—if practiced at all—in other armies.

Michael

[roqf77]

he he. well in the books ive read. uk tanks crew were issued with either stens or thompsons.

hey emrys i wonder if you would call it a little fraca if you were there?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by roqf77:

he he. well in the books ive read. uk tanks crew were issued with either stens or thompsons.

Were they actually issued to the crews, or were they part of vehicle kit? I suspect it was the latter. The SAR history talks a lot about the issue of pistols (.38 calibre revolvers) as personal weapons. My understanding is that the automatic weapons would have stayed with the vehicles, not the crews.