Cpl. Hicks
Sergeant
Unofficial Flaggrantly Wrong Weapons Policeman
Posts: 1,425
|
Post by Cpl. Hicks on May 19, 2007 17:39:52 GMT -5
It could also be private purchase, or something "acquired". (aka given, stolen, traded, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on May 19, 2007 20:28:08 GMT -5
Paratroopers were know for procuring a side arm. Dont go over board, but it wasn't uncommon to see troopers with a side arm of some sorts. Though 1911's WERE indeed issued only to Non Coms and up, Enlisted men had their ways of getting them, be it a revolver (Floyd Talbert actually did carry one)a colt 45 from back home ( Don Burgett carried a Nickel Plated 45 his dad sent him) Or what ever else they could find ( Have heard about guys trading items for British Webelys) The reason they did this was for really one reason. When you dropped usually you were supposed to have your M1 in a Griswold bag, or it would be in somewhere where it isnt easy to get at ( in your straps or a leg bag). Well since they were going to be dropping into hostile area they decided they should have something to grab in a jiffy, hence the side arm, and the plethora of combat knives they carried. Also, they wanted all the firepower they could carry in terms of small arms. -Cary
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on May 20, 2007 1:05:50 GMT -5
An airborne Division was authorized only 8,505 men in 1942 which was about 7,000 short of a normal Infantry Division. By Normandy (1944) it was authorized 12,979 men of all ranks showing 505 pistols in each of it's Parachute and Glider Battalions. Each battalion had a designed strength of 706 men. As you can see there was a much high percentage of pistols available. Certainly well beyond officers and NCOs. A .45 pistol was authorized for every member of an Airborne squad of 12 men as well as every officer and NCO. Therefore an airborne trooper without a pistol would have been the exception. There was a significantly higher percentage of Thompson SMGs in the Airborne ranks then the regular Infantry which in turn had a much higher percentage of BARs. In a parachute battalion there were nearly as many 30 Cal MGs as Thompsons with 5 30 Cals per platoon and an extra 8 in the HQ Co. Essentially one Thompson and one 30 Cal per squad of 12 men!*
*US Army Handbook TO&E (Tables of Organization) 1942- 1944
I was surprised to see in the early war TO&E, 15 M1903 Springfield sniper rifles per battalion (Way less then in a regular Infantry Battalion where you had one assigned to every squad) but after 1944 9 Garand M1Cs are shown as standard issue in each battalion. Whether or not that actually happened is doubtful but they were technically authorized. My understanding was none saw action during the war? Similarly the early Airborne Divisons showed no BARs. Post 1944 showed 27 per Battalion after that. Seldom see pictures of airborne troopers with BARs but it obviously was done. Hmmm 27 out of 700 troopers kinda makes sense you wouldn't see many pictures. The Garand was probably the single most popular weapon for the Airborne trooper but there were nearly as many carbines issued (Mostly to the supporting troops and officers)as Garands.
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on May 20, 2007 9:42:17 GMT -5
lol, oh terrific, another installment of the infamous "airborne-sidearm war". although my great uncle wasnt in the airborne (he was in the 26th inf. div.) he got his hands on a 1911A1 during the bulge off a wounded tanker who sold it to him while he was moving to the rear. So during most of the duration of the bulge he carried his 1911 in a shoulder holster (again, from the tanker) until he sold it for $50. oddly enough he turned that $50 into $1400 in a craps game. with that $1400 he made the first downpayment on the family business thats been in our family since then. sorry to drift off but imo anybody can make a story/excuse/reason for carrying a sidearm but they need to take in mind all the reasons a gi couldnt get his hands on one. Basically guys only try to do what best represents your unit because ww2 airsofting/reenacting has nowhere near enough guys to let such a large proportion carry sidearms. Theres my 2 cents.
|
|
Russian
Corporal
Magician
Posts: 923
|
Post by Russian on May 20, 2007 12:56:45 GMT -5
I like to avoid sidearms in general, even though I represent a Sgt, and thus would have been alloted one. In nearly all of my impressions, unless it's necesary, or I'm representing someone specificaly, the sidearm just seems unnecesary. Why not just cary more ammunition for your main rifle?
|
|
|
Post by wade on May 20, 2007 15:28:25 GMT -5
Side arms arn't necesary, but it gives you a little more confidence of protection and extra fire power in the middle of a fight, or if your main doesn't work. In 1944, the Army passed a regulation stating that sidearms were optional, however most kept their sidearms anyway, and as for the Airborne, they always were looking for ways to get more ammunition; these guys would be dropped behind enemy lines with no other support, so they needed as much ammo as they could squeeze, and anywhere they could squeeze it.
|
|
Red
Private
All-Americans All the Way!
Posts: 254
|
Post by Red on May 20, 2007 19:23:33 GMT -5
..... what the heck are you talking about!!! If i am not mistaken! Each company or battalion i forgot which one had 11 m1911s!!! not that many people had a freaking .45... to many people want to justify that .45s were common to look cool and have a .45.... It was mostly issued to higher up officers and a few NCO's here and there... mostly the senior NCO's like 1sgts etc...
Doc Butzen
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on May 20, 2007 20:16:15 GMT -5
Butzen, even though they were issued to only those men, many more obtained their own. -Cary
|
|
Red
Private
All-Americans All the Way!
Posts: 254
|
Post by Red on May 20, 2007 20:37:36 GMT -5
Still not at all that common, I've seen very few pictures of people with holsters of any kind. I would be more worried about picking up ammunition then picking up a pistol (except for a luger). It still is not at all that common to be carried, most Rifleman only carried their rifle, a few pistols or revolvers here and there... they were not all 45s, there were .38 S & W's and other weapons...
Doc Butzen
|
|
azeeze
Private 1st Class
Posts: 622
|
Post by azeeze on May 20, 2007 20:43:26 GMT -5
I have yet to seen a photo of an airborne trooper with a holster that isn't an officer. So far all of the photos I see of paratroopers with a holsters are all high ranking officers. And for infantry, most guys with holsters are NCO's, Heavy Weapons personal, photographers or high ranking officers. I'm not saying that it didn't happen but not as common as airsofters and reenactors make it. That's just my 2 cents. -Nick
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on May 20, 2007 22:03:59 GMT -5
Gee I guess no one wants to believe the official Table of Organization for Airborne units of WW2. T/07-35 17 February 1942 and 24 Feb 1944. "Every squad member in the combat elements rifle squad of a Infantry Parachute Battalion will be issued a .45 ACP. Or the comments of Airborne vets (Most of whom said they had a pistol!) Photographic evidence is a great resource but clearly not without challenges. In reviewing pictures you're right I don't see alot of holsters and certainly very,vey few shoulder holsters
As a retired Infantry Officer I an assure you, when you sign for a platoon or company you sign for all it's appointed equipment or clearly noted that which wasn't present and in use. If you were authorized a pistol I can assure you, you would gladly haul it. Especially I can asure you as an airborne soldier where odds are you were going to be fighting in isolation for at least part of your time on the line.
For the regular Infantry units, pistols were far less common especially with the introduction of the M1 Carbine which technically was designed to replace the service pistol. Guys such as mortar men and assistant MG gunners, ammo bearers and such that would normally have a pistol were issued carbines. Officers technically were supposed to be issued a carbine Some ended up with both. Most pretty much had their pick of weapons to carry dring a campaign. Many chose Garands, Thompsons or Grease guns. For straight leg Infantry, by 1943 pistols were fairly few and far between. Tankers had a lot of them relatively speaking.
I am fine with seeing lots of airborne troopers with pistols, less fine with seeing lots of legs with them but frankly am not going to get my panties in a bunch either way.
|
|
|
Post by Jager.Drü on May 21, 2007 0:37:46 GMT -5
Just because someone didn't have a holester doesn't mean they can't have a pistol. There are always pockets or stick in the web gear.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on May 21, 2007 1:30:05 GMT -5
A .45 was a heavy and awkward som bich so I sure wouldn't lug it outside a holster.
|
|
|
Post by Gordak on May 28, 2007 20:43:49 GMT -5
Airbornenoncom502, Mud! very cool! good work!
|
|
|
Post by 101steasykid on May 28, 2007 21:28:55 GMT -5
Yes. Looks all pretty good. I wouldn't post the shots were all you can see is the marking on your helmet though. Whats with the extra webgear and helmet. Did your buddy lose them in the jump, haha. Other than the really dark photos. It looks really good. I like the fuzzy one, shows like an in action type of situation.
EDIT-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha, Looks like I've posted in the wrong thread. I guess Gordak and Cary did too? Hrmm, well any mods looking to move our comments to the Stitch Not See thread please do so. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on May 28, 2007 21:55:19 GMT -5
The extra gear was my buddies... he.. um.. was.... off.... umm.... hell he was taking the pics.. and i took some pics of him and just left his gear lol Also i didn't realize there were some really dark ones, my comps brightness is pretty high. -Cary
|
|
twombly
Private
Teufelhunden
Posts: 56
|
Post by twombly on Jun 9, 2007 17:37:45 GMT -5
Guitarmaster, keep working on it, you got a lot of work in front of you If you want to look like a marine on Iwo, you need to change your army straps for a marine one. Also, the mussete bag wasn't used by marines in late of war. And M1 Garand ammunition belt in combination with M1921 Thompson is not very good combination (btw. you should get an M1928 Thompson)... Keep working on it
|
|
guitarmaster
Corporal
And at this range, I'm a real Frederick Zoller
Posts: 954
|
Post by guitarmaster on Jun 9, 2007 17:43:00 GMT -5
Yea i know about the gun and belt but im gonna get an m1 or springfield. Im in the process of gettyng marine straps and helmet cover.
|
|
twombly
Private
Teufelhunden
Posts: 56
|
Post by twombly on Jun 9, 2007 17:55:19 GMT -5
Also - springfield isn't right choice for 1943-up impression
|
|
|
Post by Gordak on Jun 9, 2007 22:47:50 GMT -5
guitarmaster Congradulations on the kit! and Great story, I love the picture of you and the Vetran. Your kit looks really good to me, but I know very little about the USMC, Im sure Twombly posted some great advice. Keep it up! -Gordak
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Jun 10, 2007 15:09:14 GMT -5
looks good. Twombly nailed most of the things down but if you plan on keeping the belt and getting an m1 I'd suggest getting a 10 pocket belt instead of a 9 pocket (especially if you dont have a sidearm)
|
|
guitarmaster
Corporal
And at this range, I'm a real Frederick Zoller
Posts: 954
|
Post by guitarmaster on Jun 10, 2007 16:05:28 GMT -5
Im probably gonna get a pistol so i'll keep the belt but yea the gun needs to change.
|
|
twombly
Private
Teufelhunden
Posts: 56
|
Post by twombly on Jun 10, 2007 16:21:06 GMT -5
And are you aware that pistol was issued only to officers, corpsmans and machine gunners?
|
|
guitarmaster
Corporal
And at this range, I'm a real Frederick Zoller
Posts: 954
|
Post by guitarmaster on Jun 10, 2007 16:27:49 GMT -5
yes and NCO's
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Jun 10, 2007 17:27:03 GMT -5
another good point twombly. I'm lucky enough to avoid the problamitic pistol situations by being a machine gunner.
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on Jun 11, 2007 19:42:09 GMT -5
Im a Paratrooper... and an NCO... Pistol for me -Cary
|
|
TommyGunner
Staff Sgt.
Hackjob Mauro
1st Marine Division, 1942
Posts: 2,265
|
Post by TommyGunner on Jun 12, 2007 8:38:20 GMT -5
Hey Guitarmaster
Twombly brought up some good points but dont get too bent out of shape about not having the corect set of suspenders, I have a book that consits entirley of pics form Iwo, its a pictoral history and there are atleast two pics of two different guys with M36 suspenders and I have seen some pics too with Musset bags. While these items were very uncomon you can use them until you get the far more common USMC suspenders.
I just bought an entire late 43-44 USMC gear set up to put the USMC stitch nazis at peace (god forbid they accept the use of WW1 and WW2 army gear early in the war like on Guadel Cannal) Talk to Dirtybrownboy on the forums here he has a set of USMC suspenders you can buy form him.
If you do a Thompson gunners impression though I would make it early war and keep the M36 suspenders, the USMC ones really dig into your shoulders with all that weight.
Oh and do change the belt, but I have seen alot of pics of USMC and Army Thompson gunners with M1910 or M1923 belts for some strange reason.
TommyGunner
|
|
azeeze
Private 1st Class
Posts: 622
|
Post by azeeze on Jun 12, 2007 10:46:35 GMT -5
AWESOME Marine and Commando Impression! -Nick
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Jun 12, 2007 14:16:23 GMT -5
very very nice glenlivet. That thompson looks absolutely stunning.
|
|
|
Post by theriseandfall on Jun 12, 2007 14:24:28 GMT -5
wow glenlivet love the Brit Commandos! The marines are very cool as well. Too bad they dont like it where your from. You're more than welcome here though
|
|