What did smaller soldiers do?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am 5'7. Served plenty of time carrying an M16A2 or A4. Both are just about 4 inches shorter than the venerable M1 Garand. When the M4 came along, my short arms were quiet pleased. But for qualifying, I still pulled the buttstock all the way out. Being short, the biggest hamper on my military service was my leg length. I had to shuffle my legs faster to catch up on ruck marches and runs compared to the 6 foot plus guys.
 
As a distant aside, I recall some TV show mentioning that baseball legend Ted Williams belly-landed his F9F Panther in Korea instead of ejecting due to his height (6'3") -- he was concerned about damaging his knees if he punched out, and figured it would be better to risk getting killed trying to land his triple-A damaged jet than ruin his future in baseball.
 
At the time the Air Force wasn't a separate branch. They needed small guys to work as gunners on bombers.

Funny that you mention that, but my grandfather was 6’-0” and served as a waist gunner on the B-17 and subsequently the B-29 (waist position with remotely operated turrets). Not a ball turret by any means, but still quite cramped.

That said, the LOP of a Garand is quite short by modern standards, and it easily handled by short statured folks. It’s weight is a benefit for small folks as well when firing, as it’s quite a soft-shooting rifle for its caliber.
 
It’s weight is a benefit for small folks as well when firing, as it’s quite a soft-shooting rifle for its caliber.
Is it the weight or the auto load that reduced the kick. It's been one heck of a long time since I shot both a Garand and a Springfield.
I felt like the Springfield would eventually turn my shoulder into hamburger. Not so much with the Garand
 
Lacking the military history knowledge or personal service record being shared by others, I can still share my own experience with the Garand as a “small man” at the time. I started shooting the Garand the spring and summer between 8th grade and Freshman year, when I was 5’5” and 130lbs. I recall it as hefty, compared to my bolt action hunting rifles, but the weight was manageable, and I hiked it afield after deer and pigs several times. I don’t recall any issue manipulating or managing the rifle due to my stature at the time - although I’ll concede the weight would have been far less of a concern at the time than could have been the size, considering my physique.

Honestly, I had far more issue later in High School when I began shooting M16A2 clones for Service Rifle. I would have been 5’8” at the time, but with broad shoulders and a VERY short neck, I struggled considerably to extend my neck towards the charging handle. Even today, fully grown at 5’10” (finishing out my upward journey between ages 19-21), I would struggle considerably if I tried to force my nose to the charger on an A2. But the Garand was never “too big” when I was “small”.
 
My father had a picture, from Korea, of where his house boy was carrying his M1 Garrand, as my father's preference was for the M3 grease gun. The rifle was almost as large as the boy carrying it
 
Is it the weight or the auto load that reduced the kick. It's been one heck of a long time since I shot both a Garand and a Springfield.
I felt like the Springfield would eventually turn my shoulder into hamburger. Not so much with the Garand
Weight can help, but its more about how you shoulder and hold the rifle than anything else. The rifle can only "kick" you, if you let it. :thumbup:

Another issue in this respect is shooting off a bench vs shooting from field positions. Shooting from a bench doesn't allow you to become "one with the rifle" and you tend to get beat up because of it.

Shooting from field positions is a lot more comfortable and you react with the rifle as one and move with things, instead of being the "recoil stop".

I think a lot of things changed as we moved through the 60's and 70's, both in how people were taught to shoot and how the guns themselves are built.

If you learn to properly shoulder the rifle, life is usually a lot more pleasant, and you can normally shoot all day in a tee shirt, and that's with a rifle with a steel butt plate.

Rifles in the past were built with low mounted iron sights and stocks meant to shoot with them and a shorter LOP, with a steel butt plate, meant more for field work than bench or rest type shooting. Getting a scope on one was a bit more of a chore and often required a gunsmith. The rifles usually shouldered quickly and naturally too, something I don't see a lot of anymore, at least for me anyway.

Most of today's rifles are set up just the opposite, meant first and foremost to have a scope or some other optic (fairly easily) mounted, with a high comb stock that requires irons, if they even have them, to sit higher on the gun as well. They usually come with a recoil pad too, which just makes the LOP all wrong for natural, field type shooting, but helps with the bench and the "kick" issues associated with it.

Im starting to think this is becoming one of those generational things and as time goes on, things get lost and forgotten.

Ive seen couple of videos recently that blatantly show how old we (or some of us anyway :)) are getting. One was a guy what looked to be late teens, early 20's, whos mom was trying to show him how to use a rotary wall phone. He was completely lost, and I couldn't believe he was really that dumb, but he was doing a great job at doing that. :eek:

The other was a kid in his later teens that was handed a cassette tape and they had no idea as to what it was, was having great difficulty just getting it out of the case, and when told it was "music", he put it up to their ear and tried to listen. Damn Im old! :p

And its the same sort of thing you see when you hand younger people a stripper with 06 in it and tell them to load the 03. As Commander Cody used to say.....Lost in the Ozone! :)

ETA: It just glanced on me, I had Lost in the Ozone on LP, 8 track, cassette, CD, and now download. Damn Im old! :D
 
ETA: It just glanced on me, I had Lost in the Ozone on LP, 8 track, cassette, CD, and now download. Damn Im old!
:) I go back to 78's
As I said it was a heck of a long time ago (~60 yrs). I was shooting from my least favorite position. Prone.
I do think that the auto load components relieve a bit of the recoil as some of the expanding gases are bled off. Only my opinion,someone more versed in the physics involved is welcomed to set me straight.
 
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)
My Grandfather was 5'5". He served as a forward observer for the 82 airborne.
He never mentioned anything about the weapons that he used.
He didn't like to talk about war.
His preference was telling hunting and fishing stories.
There was a time when people just sucked it up and made do with what they were given.
 
The weight would've been a pig to carry, but I am 5'7" and the LOP of the Garand, Carbine, and most of your other rifles from the world-war era (Mausers, Mosins, Enfields, etc) fit me just fine. Often even better than the rifles of today.

The A1 buttstock on an AR15 fits great too, and is exactly the same length that I adjust a normal 6-position buttstock to. The A2 is too long. I guess 1965-1985 is when people started getting bigger.
 
I have collected almost every rifle used in WWII by all participants as well as the bayonets issued with them. The Arasaka Type 99 Rifle with the proper bayonet was at least a foot longer than the average Japanese soldier was tall so I don't think most military's were concerned with the size of the soldier, just the number.
 
Maybe you'd get a .30 carbine instead!

My uncle is about 5' 7", thin, and just turned 76. The .30 M1Jr. is hands down his mainstay and favorite gun on the face of the earth...and he's had A LOT of guns. With that said, I ought to mention also that in the Army in the early 60's he was issued the M14. He never really talked much about it for good or ill and I don't think he's ever owned one. What he does own and also likes almost as much as his 30 carbines is a shortened "tanker" version Garand. You might want to Google that.
 
The oldest son of a friend went into the Navy and became a Seal. About 5' 6" and maybe 130lbs. His youngest son 6' 3" 245 lbs went into Army military intelligence.


A German cousin of mine was fully trained in radio repair when he joined the military there (West Germany at the time). So they made him drive tanks. Today he's a full blown electronics engineer who specializes in reducing EMI in X-Ray machines. Its great to see a military put a man's best attributes to work.
 
"More PT, Drill Sergeant !" As noted , WWII soldiers were a lot leaner and for many of them Army chow was a big improvement over grits and gruel. Then there's Rifle PT.
 
"What did smaller soldiers do?"

Two friends and i enlisted in the US Army on the "buddy plan". Don became a dental tech and i became an EOD guy. Ron, who weighed <120 pounds soaking wet, became an infantry man and lugged a BAR around for three years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top