"Increased SMG issue to US 2nd Infantry Division" Topic

Hi
Does anyone have details of the increased SMG issue to the US 2nd Division in France 1944?
Thanks
andy

Hi Andy

"By the morning of June 17, the soldiers of the 1st Battalion of the 23rd Infantry Regiment received 87 additional automatic weapons. In the wake of a bloody engagement on June 8 against German paratroopers, Major Henry G. Spencer (commanding the 1st Batt., 23rd Inf. Regt.) called together his surviving officers to discuss what had taken place. One of their chief complaints centered on the relatively low number of automatic weapons in the infantry platoon. Whenever an American fired his M1 rifle, German paratroopers replied with a withering barrage from automatic weapons. In open terrain US soldiers would have had a distinct advantage with their longer ranged rifles, but the hedgerows frequently permitted German paratroopers armed with short-range automatic weapons to approach within yards of an American position without being detected. After pondering the situation, Major Spencer asked the Regiment's Logistics Officer, Major William R. Hinsch Jr., to procure Thompson .45-caliber submachine guns from antiaircraft units protecting Omaha beach. On June 17, Major Hinsch arranged 87 Thompsons for the Battalion's soldiers. Major Spencer observed that "no longer would our scouts have to go out with M1s or carbines to protect themselves…with these additional automatic weapons we would give even the German parachutists a run for their money" . Other units were also complaining that the German Schmiezer machine pistol was better than anything they had. It fired so fast it sounded like someone tearing a piece of cloth. It could fire 30 rounds in the time it takes to say "burp" and that is the kind of a sound it made. To even things up somewhat other units like the 2nd Battalion of the 23rd Infantry Regiment were also issued Thompson submachine guns. They didn't fire as fast as the "burp gun" but they did give the GIs some automatic small arms fire. They got two per squad. Then someone came up with an idea to help the carbine. Officers were issued a 30 caliber carbine instead of the old .45 Colt automatic. It had a clip that held 15 rounds and someone had the smart idea to tape two clips together side by side so that when one clip was empty all you had to do was turn it over and insert the other end and keep on firing. That saved a lot time when the soldiers were in a hurry. The carbine had a little switch on it you could turn for single shots or semi-automatic fire. Most guys always left them on semi-automatic so that all you had to do was keep pulling the trigger. Some of the guys were able to work on the sears a little bit and make them fully automatic (this was dangerous, though, because they would go off accidentally if dropped)."

Cheers
Mark

That's some really good information, Mark! But I am a little confused by the part about the carbines and the "switch on it you could turn for single shots or semi-automatic fire." That makes no sense. A semi-automatic weapon fires one shot every time you pull the trigger. Pull the trigger once you get a single shot. Pull it multiple times and you get multiple shots. I've got an M1 Carbine hanging on the wall above me as I write this and I can assure you there is no selector switch on it to go from single shot to semi-automatic. :)

OTOH, the part about some guys modifying their carbines to fire fully automatic is entirely plausible. The M2 carbine, which was identical to the M1 in most respects, had a selector switch on it to go from semi-automatic to full automatic and was introduced right at the end of WWII and was used extensively after that.

BTW, where did you find the quote you had in your post?

BTW, where did you find the quote you had in your post?

Through the magic of Google his post would appear to be from:
link

There is also my post on a similar thread a year ago which has roughly the same information:
TMP link

That's it! The website is well researched and has his sources at the bottom which largely match my own.

Cheers
Mark

Thanks all had actually visited that website but missed the quote!
Thanks again
Andy

After pondering the situation, Major Spencer asked the Regiment's Logistics Officer, Major William R. Hinsch Jr., to procure Thompson .45-caliber submachine guns from antiaircraft units protecting Omaha beach.

Interesting, I would not have expected to see AA-units packing Thompsons. Anybody having an idea on what was small arms assignmnet for such units?

I don't think they'd have had many Thompson SMGs – but they may have had one or two per vehicle if an AAht. I guess they must have had some or the story is in error.

link has one per M16 AAht and 3 per M7 Priest (though an SPArt not AA) It does give an indication that SMGs were kicking about in rear areas though.

I also wonder if some of the 'Thompsons' collected were in fact Grease guns. Cheaper and less reliable so apt to be found issued in non-infantry units. Thompsons were scarce and expensive, or so I thought.

An m16 half track had a Thompson and some carbines as personal weapons for the crew.
link

Don't know what small arms a 90mm aa gun crew would have but I would guess somewhat similar.

Quite a few SMGs for the Mobile and SP AW AAA Bns as it happens, all drivers of trucks and halftracks being authorised .45-cal SMGs (no distinction between Tommy or Grease guns being given). That would allow for over 120 for either type of Auto Wpns Bn, probably similar for a Gun Bn as well.

One of those oddities that SMGs were authorised for drivers in US Armd and Arty units, but not for Inf Regts (though there were in Armd Inf).

Gary

Interesting, I would not have expected to see AA-units packing Thompsons. Anybody having an idea on what was small arms assignmnet for such units?

I also wonder if some of the 'Thompsons' collected were in fact Grease guns. Cheaper and less reliable so apt to be found issued in non-infantry units. Thompsons were scarce and expensive, or so I thought.

T/O&E 44-25 Antiaircraft Artillery Automatic Weapons Battalion, Mobile (22 April 1944): 121 M3 submachine guns
PDF link

T/O&E 44-26 Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, Antiaircraft Artillery Automatic Weapons Battalion, Mobile (22 April 1944): 25 M3 submachine guns
PDF link

T/O&E 44-27 Antiaircraft Artillery Automatic Weapons Battery, Mobile (22 April 1944): 24 M3 submachine guns
PDF link

I was curious and looked it up at the time of the thread I posted a link to above.

PS Hey Gary, didn't notice your post while I was working on mine, so mine is a bit redundant now, but the more info the merrier! Happy New Year!

Thanks for the info, sounds like looting the rear areas could provide quite some SMGs if you could convince the folks there to part with them. That said, how many AA-battalions had managed to land in Normandy by June 17?

As for the US army, it was not alone in being reluctant to issue SMGs to front line infantry units. Also the mighty Soviet military had been reluctant before the war to adopt an SMG, though they eventually changed their opinion quite radically.

One thing to remember about 9mm and .45 cal SMGs is the pistol ammunition is not much use beyond 50-100m. Infantry were not expected to be firing at such close ranges. Even the US PIR who had extra SMGs seem to have preferred to use the M1 rifle as the best available small arm.

Wargamers tend to overrate SMGs in my opinion. Niche weapons but not a huge advantage over a rifle in typical combat.

Was it not the case that almost every driver of transport in both US and UK forces were issued with a self defence smg?

Even the lend lease stuff had theirs.

truck drivers, tank drivers, motorcycle dispatch riders, glider pilots!…

Sten guns became pretty much universal for drivers of cars, trucks and lorries, and for ORs riding motorcycles, during 1943 for British forces.

There were aa battalions landed on d-day itself.
I can't cut and paste on this tablet but if you google aa omaha there's a document available.

What i think some wargamers over estimate is common engagement ranges for small arms fire. Whilst lmg would be likely to engage at significant range, effective rifle etc engagement range was usually under 100 yards. Decisive engagement usually being below 30 yards. Which is of course why the us unit referred to wanted all those smg rather than rifles.
And why distant engagements could last all day without any casualties.

Smg were of course cheap so would be a good for rear echelon types who you might reasonably hope would not see action but would like some sort of weapon. At the back of my mind somewhere something is saying the carbine was a likely driver personal weapon. can't think why though.

Smg were of course cheap

Well, some of them were (like M3 Grease Gun and some Soviet designs), but there were also moderately costly ones. Those pricier SMGs would be less likely to be seen at the hands of the rear area troops, though.

One reason for issuing drivers with SMGs or carbines was their shorter length, thus making them handier to stove in the vehicle or carry around. Shorter range was less of an issue for self-defense use (and the drivers might not be expected to be capable of displaying much long-range marksmanship anyway, unless they happened to be in the US Marine corps).

US guns came issued as part of the vehicle's standard equipment – which explains the quite famous photo of Russian tankers posing with them on the back of an M3 Stuart.

Not only is pistol (smg) ammunition short range, it lacks sufficient penetration power to punch through cover, unlike the 30-06 round of the Garand and BAR. There was even an armor piercing variant!

According to one 29th Division vet, the Thompson was only useful "if you met a kraut in a closet"

Came across this:
link

Thanks for the info, those production costs for Thompson and Grease Gun are interesting. As is the fact that the cost of Thompson dropped quite a bit as it was placed into mass production.

The M3A1 soldiered on with the US Army as a tanker's dismount weapon until the 21st century…. remarkable piece of hardware! It would be interesting to learn just how many M3's and M3A1's made it to front line service in WWII vs the number of Thompsons. Certainly far less the the number of wargame figures that have them!

During the 2nd Gulf war a Guard transport unit was issued grease guns as not enough m 16 could be found!

view limit reach on that book can someone post those number please?