Garandimal
member
Audie Murphy - when he enlisted in the Army at 17 - was listed as 65-1/2" (5'-5-1/2") tall, and 112 lbs.
He carried an M1 rifle.
GR
He carried an M1 rifle.
GR
5'5" would be a good height for a tank crewman. I have a vague memory of some authority (maybe the Chieftan on YT) mentioning that the Soviets selected smaller-statured men to crew the rather cramped T34.
My thanks to all the vets reading or replying to this thread for their service.
I saw ARVNs with Garands. Not big people.I am 5' 5" and have little hands. Had I been in WWII instead of being a Viet Nam era serviceman (never went there to be clear) I do not think I could have wielded an M-1 Garand very well at all. So, did they make accommodation with other equipment or did the GI just have to tough it out and deal with an oversized arm for his size? (I suspect that this is probably the case)
They’d have made you a tanker and given you an M1 carbine lolI am 5' 5" and have little hands. Had I been in WWII instead of being a Viet Nam era serviceman (never went there to be clear) I do not think I could have wielded an M-1 Garand very well at all. So, did they make accommodation with other equipment or did the GI just have to tough it out and deal with an oversized arm for his size? (I suspect that this is probably the case)
You would have done just fine.I am 5' 5" and have little hands. Had I been in WWII instead of being a Viet Nam era serviceman (never went there to be clear) I do not think I could have wielded an M-1 Garand very well at all. So, did they make accommodation with other equipment or did the GI just have to tough it out and deal with an oversized arm for his size? (I suspect that this is probably the case)
Got to the Nam and was issued a POS AR, I hated it!
Yeah but he was from Texas and they have a different measuring system in Texas right?You would have done just fine.
Audie Murphy was
5'5"
Mu dad was USN and he was 5'8 and maybe 135“During World War II, the average body measurements of the over six million male inductees into the U.S. Army was found to be 5 feet, 8 inches tall and 144 pounds in weight...”
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistori...ere_infantrymen_smaller_and_less_muscular_in/
Yes. I can assure you that Wally Schirra was not seven feet tall.Have you ever met one of the original astronauts?
Like Woody? I'm 6'1" and I don' t think Woody is more than 5'3 or 4. Yes, that is the CMH he's wearing. Above and beyond the call on Iwo Jima.Some great soldiers were small.
GR
Mu dad was USN and he was 5'8 and maybe 135
Frank Borman was not seven feet tall, either; although he had about as much presence as if he had been.Yes. I can assure you that Wally Schirra was not seven feet tall.
I came in at 5'6", about 150. By 1987 (when I enlisted) Infantry and other combat arms were expected to move further, faster, and carry more weight than our WW2 counterparts. Sure, the weapons and ammo weighed less than they did in the 40's, so we just carried more of it. Not to mention the improvements in communications abilities (that required more stuff) the eventual addition of body armor, and various other items (100 pounds of lightweight gear) added to the ruck. As more improvements filtered down to the individual soldier, that soldier's load has increased over time. Once weight was "shed' by streamlining or eliminating 1 item, more "space" or "carrying capacity" became "available" to stack more junk in the trunk. And the VA still can't figure out why all of us are still breaking.Guessing that if you were 5'5", and thin as a bean pole, that unless you were were a real bad a@@, you weren't in a front line infantry unit in WW2. As a result, you would have probably been issued an M1 Carbine.
I was 6'3" and 210 lbs. in my prime, and ended up humping "the pig", an M60 MG, as part of the QRF while serving in the ROK.
Audie Murphy was 5'5" and seamed to do very well during WW II
Frank Borman was not seven feet tall, either; although he had about as much presence as if he had been.