il.bill
Member
Hey guys - please keep posting.
I have nothing that I can add to this discussion, but it makes for fascinating reading. Thank you!
I have nothing that I can add to this discussion, but it makes for fascinating reading. Thank you!
WW II British tanker's assessment of their small arms
- Thread starter 4v50 Gary
- Start date
- Status
lysanderxiii
Member
Not entirely. The bolt handle can slip out of the safety slot under the right conditions.
That's why the MP-40 and the Russian submachine guns have a latch that locks the bolt in position, rather than just a "J" slot of earlier designs. (note the MP-38 vs. the MP-38/40)
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
The owner of my LGS started as an M46 driver, just post Korea. Apparently, they had labeled clips about the inside of the turret for the M3, but when he asked his commander why they didn't actually have any in the tank, the TC growled, "Aww, you'll just end up shooting yerself with it, kid."
Later as a M47 commander, he gave that same answer every time a new crew member came aboard and asked the same question.
Update: So I told him about this thread today and he gave me a little more background: apparently his first TC had a loader experience an unintentional discharge with an M3 which injured the bow gunner during the war. Ever since then he had forbade Grease guns in his tank, a practice my friend continued when he got his own command. They ran with 1911s and hand grenades.
"If I couldn't handle it with my 90, we were probably screwed anyway," he chuckled.
Later as a M47 commander, he gave that same answer every time a new crew member came aboard and asked the same question.
Update: So I told him about this thread today and he gave me a little more background: apparently his first TC had a loader experience an unintentional discharge with an M3 which injured the bow gunner during the war. Ever since then he had forbade Grease guns in his tank, a practice my friend continued when he got his own command. They ran with 1911s and hand grenades.
"If I couldn't handle it with my 90, we were probably screwed anyway," he chuckled.
Last edited:
Deanimator
Member
During the '80s, my tanker friends had their M3A1s replaced by M16A1s... which kept getting caught in the turret rings and bent up.
The Mk.IV cocking handle which did this seems to have appeared in late 43 or early '44. As this was only held locked by spring tension of the recoil spring it was not entirely satisfactory and the Mk.V handle which positively locked it soon replaced it as an Urgent Work Modification (it also looks distinctly different). Few unmodified guns are encountered today.
kBob
Member
When I was back in Germany (FRG/BRD) in 1982 I was stationed at Hanau then the largest American community outside the US we were told. I was in 3rd Armored and this time commissioned as a Field Artillery Officer rather than an Enlisted Infantryman......see some of us DID use the GI Bill for something other than house loans.
The tankers and some of the artillery ammo carriers had M3A1 Grease guns, but they mainly stayed in the arms room unless there was an alert requiring the Division forward. Usually this meant a pointless convoy to initial rally points not more than half an hour out, but on occasion we block traffic in the outer lanes on the Autobahns towards the east for hours. In Third Armored there was a Grease gun for the driver and one for the loader. At one point we were having some sort of open house and one of the Cannon Battery NCOs brought a M3A1 over to put on a display table. He was shocked that a 2LT picked it up and stripped it and put it back together. He had never seen anyone cock one of them without sticking his finger in the bolt cocking slot. He freaked when I showed some of my guys how to use the wire butt stock as a mag loader and appearently he thought that knurled bolt on the pistol grip somehow held things together until I pointed out the oiler it closed was dry as a bone.
I had my first M3A1 training in Enlisted Basic Training at Ft. Knox. It was not part of the regular training, but while on a range a class of Advanced Armor School troopies took the next line over. They had grease guns and I had nothing to do for an hour or so, but possibly make work, so I asked one of the Drill Sargents if I might join their class for a bit. He walked me over to one of the other units Smokey the Bear hatted instructors and they growled at one another a bit and I found myself in a "mechanical" class, learning what was what on the guns and learning to strip them. Then we walked out to the range firing line and I got to put a couple of mags through one of the M3A1s. That was the sum total of my M3A1 training in the Regular Army-O. I found it easy to pop off single shots or "two to four round bursts" In those modes I found it not difficult to control or use.
My Dad loved them in the early to mid 1950s.....his job was not hunting people and involved going and coming from a five ton truck based office. I think he mainly liked the compactness and the fact that it was an SMG rather than a rifle like everyone else had to deal with and made him feel special.
Years later a Buddy got a "civilian" M3A1 that had some sort of extruded aluminum body I think rather than the general motors two halves welded together. I thought it was OK but even Uglier than the Service M3A1s I saw and used.
Whatever "Delta" was called at the time had some M3A1 guns with Mitch Warrbell's Sonic type suppressors on them rather than the WWII suppressors. I was told but can not say for certain that the suppressors were quieter than the WWII wire screen and baffles designs BUT that the action of the M3A1 made such a clatter that many felt the suppressor, of any kind, pointless.
While in Germany both trips, the German Leopard crews had a couple or three UZI SMG on board with the pantograph type stock. I liked that they had a selector for semi fire as their higher rate and trigger pulls made single shots when on auto harder. And speaking of tank hatches I was told they used the 24 round magazine for initial use as in getting out of the tank and the longer 32 round magazines once dismounted. I also understood that they could dismount the MG3 GPMG on the commanders position for use by the gunner once dismounted. As an Enlisted Infantryman in an odd little unit, my unit trained with foreign weapons when possible and so fired at various times the UZI, G3, P-1, and Various MG42 series guns (from a marked MG42 made in the war that was converted to 7.62 NATO to purpose built MG3s) We also trained briefly with the French suite of small arms (pre Le Claron) and the Commonwealth guns. We also got mechanical training with out live fire on the AKM (actually MPiK of East German make) and PPSh-41 for some reason.....like because that was what was available.
Later while with 3rd Armored as an Artillery Officer I found that the Division's Infantry got mechanical training on the Rumanian version of the AK with that weird forward pistol grip. A small group of the guns would be issued to a rifle platoon for a day or two and everyone was to get some training on their use and upkeep. I tried to conveince Division Training to saw off the grips or replace the lower handguards with standard ones from another nation as when ask a few of the gunts about it they pointed out the forward pistol grip as a positive identifier of an AK rather than the feature of one small Warsaw Pact Army's AK.
Just thought folks might be interested.
-kBob
The tankers and some of the artillery ammo carriers had M3A1 Grease guns, but they mainly stayed in the arms room unless there was an alert requiring the Division forward. Usually this meant a pointless convoy to initial rally points not more than half an hour out, but on occasion we block traffic in the outer lanes on the Autobahns towards the east for hours. In Third Armored there was a Grease gun for the driver and one for the loader. At one point we were having some sort of open house and one of the Cannon Battery NCOs brought a M3A1 over to put on a display table. He was shocked that a 2LT picked it up and stripped it and put it back together. He had never seen anyone cock one of them without sticking his finger in the bolt cocking slot. He freaked when I showed some of my guys how to use the wire butt stock as a mag loader and appearently he thought that knurled bolt on the pistol grip somehow held things together until I pointed out the oiler it closed was dry as a bone.
I had my first M3A1 training in Enlisted Basic Training at Ft. Knox. It was not part of the regular training, but while on a range a class of Advanced Armor School troopies took the next line over. They had grease guns and I had nothing to do for an hour or so, but possibly make work, so I asked one of the Drill Sargents if I might join their class for a bit. He walked me over to one of the other units Smokey the Bear hatted instructors and they growled at one another a bit and I found myself in a "mechanical" class, learning what was what on the guns and learning to strip them. Then we walked out to the range firing line and I got to put a couple of mags through one of the M3A1s. That was the sum total of my M3A1 training in the Regular Army-O. I found it easy to pop off single shots or "two to four round bursts" In those modes I found it not difficult to control or use.
My Dad loved them in the early to mid 1950s.....his job was not hunting people and involved going and coming from a five ton truck based office. I think he mainly liked the compactness and the fact that it was an SMG rather than a rifle like everyone else had to deal with and made him feel special.
Years later a Buddy got a "civilian" M3A1 that had some sort of extruded aluminum body I think rather than the general motors two halves welded together. I thought it was OK but even Uglier than the Service M3A1s I saw and used.
Whatever "Delta" was called at the time had some M3A1 guns with Mitch Warrbell's Sonic type suppressors on them rather than the WWII suppressors. I was told but can not say for certain that the suppressors were quieter than the WWII wire screen and baffles designs BUT that the action of the M3A1 made such a clatter that many felt the suppressor, of any kind, pointless.
While in Germany both trips, the German Leopard crews had a couple or three UZI SMG on board with the pantograph type stock. I liked that they had a selector for semi fire as their higher rate and trigger pulls made single shots when on auto harder. And speaking of tank hatches I was told they used the 24 round magazine for initial use as in getting out of the tank and the longer 32 round magazines once dismounted. I also understood that they could dismount the MG3 GPMG on the commanders position for use by the gunner once dismounted. As an Enlisted Infantryman in an odd little unit, my unit trained with foreign weapons when possible and so fired at various times the UZI, G3, P-1, and Various MG42 series guns (from a marked MG42 made in the war that was converted to 7.62 NATO to purpose built MG3s) We also trained briefly with the French suite of small arms (pre Le Claron) and the Commonwealth guns. We also got mechanical training with out live fire on the AKM (actually MPiK of East German make) and PPSh-41 for some reason.....like because that was what was available.
Later while with 3rd Armored as an Artillery Officer I found that the Division's Infantry got mechanical training on the Rumanian version of the AK with that weird forward pistol grip. A small group of the guns would be issued to a rifle platoon for a day or two and everyone was to get some training on their use and upkeep. I tried to conveince Division Training to saw off the grips or replace the lower handguards with standard ones from another nation as when ask a few of the gunts about it they pointed out the forward pistol grip as a positive identifier of an AK rather than the feature of one small Warsaw Pact Army's AK.
Just thought folks might be interested.
-kBob
kBob
Member
Oh yeah , and thanks Mk VII.
-kBob
-kBob
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
I'd just like to say thank you to the veterans who have shared their experiences in this thread. May God bless and keep you all.
Deanimator
Member
I shot an M3A1 in Korea in '81 while I was on the DMZ. With its low rate of fire, it was VERY easy to shoot. I'm sure that Jerry Miculek can shoot a 686 faster than you can shoot an M3/M3A1.
Monac
Member
A Sten gun cost more than 5 shillings to produce. Five shilling was 1/4 of a British pound at the time, and the official exchange rate was about $4.84 to the pound at the time. Thus, 5 shillings was only about $1.20-$1.25. The figure usually quoted for the Sten is about $10 or $11: https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/a-rough-guide-of-the-costs-of-guns-during-wwii.html/2
I remember my first centerfire pistol, a Sauer 38H in 32 ACP. It also seemed to kick hard, because my only previous experience was an .22 H&R 999. Other British writers who served in WWII, like Ian Hogg, remarked on the difficulty of hitting anything with the service Enfield revolver, and the poor effectiveness on anything that did manage to get hit.
I remember my first centerfire pistol, a Sauer 38H in 32 ACP. It also seemed to kick hard, because my only previous experience was an .22 H&R 999. Other British writers who served in WWII, like Ian Hogg, remarked on the difficulty of hitting anything with the service Enfield revolver, and the poor effectiveness on anything that did manage to get hit.
TheSquire
Member
The Sten was designed and produced following the evacuation from Dunkirk where a lot of armaments were lost and needed replacing quickly and cheaply.
It was adopted mostly by the army, whereas the Royal Navy and the RAF instead opted for the Lanchester which was a direct copy of the German MP28. I had never heard of them until my late father-in-law bought a deactivated one as a reminder of the ones he had shot whilst with the Navy during the Korean War.
It was adopted mostly by the army, whereas the Royal Navy and the RAF instead opted for the Lanchester which was a direct copy of the German MP28. I had never heard of them until my late father-in-law bought a deactivated one as a reminder of the ones he had shot whilst with the Navy during the Korean War.
george29
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,670
A Brits view of small arms is like his opinion on fine dining. This is the country that had to drill with broomsticks and shovels before the US sent them massive replacements in the Lend-Lease program because 338,000 British Soldiers dumped their weapons at Dunkirk. The German high command almost died of laughter at Winston's "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!'.
"With what?" Yorkshire Pudding and Shepherds Pie.
They are a gutsy people but their knowledge of weapons never was their thing.
"With what?" Yorkshire Pudding and Shepherds Pie.
They are a gutsy people but their knowledge of weapons never was their thing.
- Status
