Jacques! Ze Americain just harshed de armee again!Originally Posted by Dick Hosmer
Wonder if it had to do with balance based on the pig sticker's added weight in an awkward location.
Senior Member
Jacques! Ze Americain just harshed de armee again!
Wonder if it had to do with balance based on the pig sticker's added weight in an awkward location.
Very Senior Member - OFC
No, Pierre, it has to do with wobbling (something they are good at however) on a hard, relatively smaller diameter surface, with the point of control well above the axis of rotation. In a proper RSA position, the arm (especially without bayonet) will very nearly balance and rest naturally on the shoulder with minimal effort/fatigue - as pictured, not so much.
Senior Member
At one time Eisenhower had an on-going issue with DeGaulle as the Frenchman wanted their '17's replaced with M1's. Ike didn't have enough at the time to issue his own people.
"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe, while Congress is in session." Mark Twain
Senior Member
DeGaulle should have been happy Ike didn't supply his units with rolling blocks.
jn
Senior Member
Chucky was wrong and Chucky was right. More right than wrong.
The Frogs adopted a new bolt action rifle right before the war. They didn't adopt a semi-automatic until after the war ended. Thus demanding something beyond what they themselves had selected was getting a bit peacocky. Additionally, as the Frogs had taught us during War One, the main battle rifle is really secondary to the squad automatic. We gave them BARs which was our own primary weapon so they were good there. If it bugged them they could have asked us to turn over all captured MG42s and K98s and armed themselves that way.
They were right though. More right than wrong. In 1917 when we showed up we had a miserable excuse of a target rifle, no machine guns, no tanks, and no artillery of any usefulness. Of modern aircraft we had some drawings and not much more. The Frogs went out of their way to provide us with everything we needed and ensured it was the latest they had.
Ike deserved a humiliating kick in the crotch. Administered by all the doughs who had benefited from the Froggy generosity of 1917-1918.
Very Senior Member - OFC
I REALLY shouldn't get into this, but will make a couple of observations:
(1) Not sure Ike should be personally blamed for the shortage of M1s
(2) Not sure anyone deserves thanks for handing out Chauchats
Senior Member
Is the book by 5MadFarmers still available and if so where.
And for the new guys amongst us, what's the title?
TY
Senior Member
Um, what shortage of M1s? I'm not aware of any. Probably because there really wasn't one.
The Great Rifle Shortage of WW1 affected them greatly. They were ready in WW2. Three types of rifles are really wanted:
1) Main battle rifle.
2) Handy wee rifle for mounted troops.
3) Functional rifle for people who like to carry one but really won't be using it. Except on parade. Where they like to hold them in a funny pose.
1) The number of "Infantryman" is limited. Those are the men that want the main battle rifle. There were more than enough M1 rifles for them. 3 million made by that point.
2) The M1 carbine satisfied this need nicely. 6 million were made.
3) The M-1903A3s were used for this. MPs and such. Over a million made.
The production of M-1903A3s was stopped in 1944 off the top of my head. If they really wanted more M1s they'd have had RA and SC switch over to making them. SA could have provided the jigs. RA and SC already had the machinery to make rifles.
No shortage. None. WW1 was a lesson they learned.
Why not? You still believe that nonsense about the Chauchat not being a good gun right? Received wisdom from the decades. Why nobody actually goes back and reviews it for validity is a mystery.(2) Not sure anyone deserves thanks for handing out Chauchats
Ever notice that, right after WW2, the Brits started bad mouthing the M4 tank? Quite badly. Why? Because the Brit tanks sucked so bad. Awful. If they held a design competition for "design and build the worst tank you can" nobody would beat the Brits and they weren't even attempting that. So what did they do? Bad mouth the M4. Why? Because when you suck really bad at something you blame somebody else. Try to tear them down.
Strangely, reading the period accounts of the men using the Chauchats doesn't show any negatives. So who was harshing it? Two guesses and the first doesn't count. The Ordnance Department was so incredibly bad that they did the only thing they could: try to tear down everyone else. Exact same thing as the Brits harshing the M4. It's a sign that you suck greatly when you try to cover your own ineptness by harshing others.
Strange data point: when the divisions were arriving in the summer/fall of 1918 with their BARs, the AEF had them taken away and they were given Chauchats instead. When quizzed over that Congress was told that it was "due to fear that the Germans would capture a BAR." That's as much bunk as it appears. If the Chauchat was so bad why were they issued instead of BARs? If they were so bad they would not have been.
The Ordnance Department. Trying to tear the others down to cover for their incredible ineptness.
The Chauchat was the right gun at the right place at the right time. Nobody can take that away from it.
Search the operational accounts. Try to find combat soldiers bad mouthing it. You will not find that. I know as I looked for it.
Super Moderator
I always thought the British tanks were awful (I've even heard Brits say that!) Them and French Firearms.
I believe there WAS an M1 Garand shortage in the early years. By the end of the war, like you said, 3 million M1s and counting. On the other hand, there were more M1 Garands being used than people thought. Most people thought the troops in the Philippines only had M1903s and M1917s; not true - over 7,000 M1s by the start of war.
"We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."
--C.S. Lewis
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote