U.S. Weapons in Europe

[David Wilma]

The American Rifleman magazine has a feature
commemorating D-Day at 70 years. This is online
at http://www.americanrifleman.org/galleries/d-day-gallery.

The captions seem to be quite well researched
with commentary on the uniforms and particularly
the weapons. One thing that struck me was the fair
number of M-1903 Springfields that went ashore. I
would think that this would have generated some
supply problems in that although the Springfield used
the same round as the Garand, it used a different
clip to load.

I am surprised that the U.S. did not have enough
M-1 Garands for what what perhaps the most
important battle of the war.

Any insights? Any other comments on the feature?

[Don Phillipson]

. . . http://www.americanrifleman.org/galleries/d-day-gallery.
The captions seem to be quite well researched
with commentary on the uniforms and particularly
the weapons. One thing that struck me was the fair
number of M-1903 Springfields that went ashore. I
would think that this would have generated some
supply problems in that although the Springfield used
the same round as the Garand, it used a different
clip to load.
I am surprised that the U.S. did not have enough
M-1 Garands for what what perhaps the most
important battle of the war.

That particular web page does not suggest any large
number of Springfields went to North Africa or Britain
or Normandy. The actual number can probably be
found in the official history of the US Army Ordnance Corps.
Personal histories suggest US Army basic training used
only Garands from 1942 onwards (while the US Navy
including USMC retained many Springfields.)

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Don Phillipson

. . . http://www.americanrifleman.org/galleries/d-day-gallery.
The captions seem to be quite well researched
with commentary on the uniforms and particularly
the weapons. One thing that struck me was the fair
number of M-1903 Springfields that went ashore. I
would think that this would have generated some
supply problems in that although the Springfield used
the same round as the Garand, it used a different
clip to load.
I am surprised that the U.S. did not have enough
M-1 Garands for what what perhaps the most
important battle of the war.

That particular web page does not suggest any large
number of Springfields went to North Africa or Britain
or Normandy. The actual number can probably be
found in the official history of the US Army Ordnance Corps.
Personal histories suggest US Army basic training used
only Garands from 1942 onwards (while the US Navy
including USMC retained many Springfields.)

Note that the only photo of a rack of Springfields on the
web page cited shows the armourer in a gob hat, which
suggests they were in a USN (or USMC) armoury.

[Michael Emrys]

I am surprised that the U.S. did not have enough M-1 Garands for what
what perhaps the most important battle of the war.

I think you might find that the bulk of the Springfields were scoped
rifles issued to designated marksmen. Some of the others might have been
designated grenadiers firing rifle grenades. There were plenty of
Garands to go around, and indeed as combat progressed some of the
soldiers who were originally issued Springfields subsequently were able
to swap them for Garands.

Michael

[GFH]

Post by David Wilma
One thing that struck me was the fair
number of M-1903 Springfields that went
ashore.

The only major force which routinely used
M-1903 Springfields was the marines, who
were armed with them in the early Pacific
battles. The marines (themselves, not a
comment on the brass) did all they could
to 'upgrade' to a Garand.

Upgrading was not all that unusual. I knew
a man who was in the Battle of the Bulge.
He said that by the time relief arrived
all of the surviving men in his squad had
'upgraded' to BARs. (BTW, he was a grunt.)

GFH

[Chris Morton]

In article <cb7ac717-eea7-4ade-a002-***@googlegroups.com>, David Wilma
says...

Post by David Wilma
I am surprised that the U.S. did not have enough
M-1 Garands for what what perhaps the most
important battle of the war.
Any insights? Any other comments on the feature?

I believe that they mostly went to second line troops and those with lower
priority.

I seem to recall a lot of them going to segregated Black units, but don't have a
source to cite at this time.

The O3A3 was a stopgap until M-1 production could be farmed out to additional
producers. It was made as cheaply as was possible without descending to
"Volksgewehr" and "(Japanese) last ditch" levels of quality.

Quite a few M1917s were also issued, especially in the Philippines.