First Battle Use of .30 US Carbine?

[bainter1212]

My granddad was in Korea, although thanks to the St Louis records fire and his own reluctance to talk about it, I don't know much about the details of his service. Two (relevant) things I do remember him saying are:



and:

My grandfather was also in Korea (24th Inf. Div.) He by far preferred the M2 carbine over other choices. He would tape 3 or 4 mags together (one up, one down etc) because he said the only thing you were afraid of during a mass attack was running out of ammo.
He claims to have "melted" the barrels on a couple of M2s. Apparently armaments weren't a problem, you just threw the old one on the ground and got another.

 

[Al Thompson]

Jay, Carl got it.

George, John, Shots Fired In Anger, (2nd ed., enlarged), Washington, D.C.: NRA Press 1981, ISBN 0-935998-42-X.

My copy's not autographed, but it ain't leaving the house, less the house is burning.

 

[armsmaster270]

My Uncle was a Glider Pilot in WW-2 European theater. He made 3 landings, D-Day, Netherlands and I forgot the third. He was issued a M-1 Carbine and told me he carried it until he saw the first dead American and then upgraded to the M-1 Rifle (Garand).




And I have this flag he & his men captured.

 

[Jim Watson]

As one veteran pointed out, Americans seldom fought alone. When your clip ejected with a Ping, Caje was only half empty, Kirby had just reloaded; and Littlejohn had the BAR, Sarge a Thompson, and the Loot a carbine. Darn poor odds for the Axis charging on the basis of a Ping, even if they heard it.

 

[kBob]

I believe SLA Mashall wrote a story about a patrol that was wiped out he believed because of the M-1 ping. On the other hand I am not sure SLA Marshall's work was much better than say the Combat TV show based on the experience of an officer that had troops interviewed by him that I knew.

This officer said Marshall did not so much question the troups as tell them what he believed happened to them and that what questions he did ask were of the type in a courtroom would have been immediately followed by opposing attourney leaping to his feet and objecting as "leading the witness"

This officer served as an enlisted Infantry man in the Phillipines and received a battlefield promotion, served in Korea as an Infantry Officer and was in some rather tight spots. He thought of the carbine as just another weapon and used one extensively. He held that if someone is shot with anything they do not go down until god is willing and you just keep shooting until he wills it so. He saw failures with Garands 1919s and M2HBs as well. One of the historical battle field films we watched in JROTC in highschool had a Nipponese soldier running by an M2 HB and after he is obviously hit he continues on several steps......I guess the M2 HB must have lacked stopping power. I don't think so......

-kBob

 

[Tommygunn]

As one veteran pointed out, Americans seldom fought alone. When your clip ejected with a Ping, Caje was only half empty, Kirby had just reloaded; and Littlejohn had the BAR, Sarge a Thompson, and the Loot a carbine. Darn poor odds for the Axis charging on the basis of a Ping, even if they heard it.

Come on; KIRBY was the squad BARman (as well as the squad wiseguy) and Littlejohn always carried a Garand.
Interestingly the actor who played Lt. Hanley was a serious gunperson; he did his own reloading and his contract with the production company allowed him much time off to hunt. He once quiped of the M-1 carbine "it couldn't kill a sick mouse." Perhaps he was a bit underwhelmed with the .30 Carbine's power compared to the BIG caliber rifle he hunted with.

Old TV shows aside I do agree the Garand "ping" was most likely a complete nonfactor in WW2 battlefield fighting, due to noise and the "fog of war."

 

[USSR]

Perhaps he was a bit underwhelmed with the .30 Carbine's power compared to the BIG caliber rifle he hunted with.

Therein lies the problem; comparison to a service rifle or hunting rifle cartridge. Since the .30 Carbine was created to put in the hands of someone who otherwise would be issued the M1911A1 in .45 ACP, you've got to ask yourself this question: would you rather have the 1911? Ah, I thought so.

Don

 

[mac66]

"What is the title of LTC George's book? "

Shots Fired in Anger"

I seem to recall that LTC. George (Army, not Marine officer) talked about cutting the 15 round carbine mags to 5 or 6 rounds so they would fit flush. That made them better in the thick jungle for fighting.

Just dug my book out and found the quote starting on the bottom of page 393-394

"The carbine turned out to be the ace weapon of this war, as far as I am concerned. It was light and handy, powerful, and reasonably accurate. If I had to make my own in hostile jungle, traveling with the lightest possible kit where I should encounter enemy at any time, the carbine is the weapon I should chose.

The little gun is okay as issued with one exception. It had a long protruding magazine, which caused no disadvantage in use, but a slight unhandiness in carrying. I trimmed one down to 6 shot capacity, shortening the follower guide in the clip so that the magazine was flush with the trigger guard. With this alteration the little gun became the neatest weapon in the world."

 

[Tommygunn]

Hmmm. Wonder what he'd have thought of the 30 round "banana" mags that were used with the M-2 variant of the carbine . . . . . .

 

[Murphy4570]

I believe SLA Mashall wrote a story about a patrol that was wiped out he believed because of the M-1 ping. On the other hand I am not sure SLA Marshall's work was much better than say the Combat TV show based on the experience of an officer that had troops interviewed by him that I knew.

This officer said Marshall did not so much question the troups as tell them what he believed happened to them and that what questions he did ask were of the type in a courtroom would have been immediately followed by opposing attourney leaping to his feet and objecting as "leading the witness"

This officer served as an enlisted Infantry man in the Phillipines and received a battlefield promotion, served in Korea as an Infantry Officer and was in some rather tight spots. He thought of the carbine as just another weapon and used one extensively. He held that if someone is shot with anything they do not go down until god is willing and you just keep shooting until he wills it so. He saw failures with Garands 1919s and M2HBs as well. One of the historical battle field films we watched in JROTC in highschool had a Nipponese soldier running by an M2 HB and after he is obviously hit he continues on several steps......I guess the M2 HB must have lacked stopping power. I don't think so......

-kBob

That reminds me of another officer who denigrated the methodology of SLA Mashall's fact-finding a whole lot as well. A fellow by the name of Colonel Hackworth, who wrote a book by the name of About Face.

 

[Al Thompson]

Hmmm. Wonder what he'd have thought of the 30 round "banana" mags that were used with the M-2 variant of the carbine . . . . . .

Tommy, LTC George served in Korea as well, so he knew about them. Apparently he only wrote the one book though.

SLA Marshall's books & "research" fell apart when subjected to some hard looks. While not my favorite O-6, Hackworth was (IMHO) the first to note that something was not quite kosher with SLA's data.

 

[Sav .250]

More complete information on google.

 

[Jim Watson]

Darn, I misremembered the TO&E on Combat.

Bad as confusing a Lewiston with a Delameter or a Standish.
And not realizing that a Mk 9 can be distinguished from a Mk 17 under concealment if you are suspicious enough.