USMC small arms in the Korean War

Just finished reading "The Last Stand of Fox Company" about a USMC rifle company at the Chosin reservior. Fox company was surrounded and under attack for several days in weather that never went above -20F during the whole battle. From the book which used historical records and first person interviews with the survivors I gleaned the following information on the weapons carried by the Marines, at least at this time during the war. As you would expect M1 rifles and M1 carbines were standard issue. 1911A1s seemed to be in plentiful supply but no submachine guns were mentioned as being issued to the Marines although several Thompsons and one M3 were taken from dead ChiComs and used by the Marines. 1919A4s and from the description at least one 1919A6 was on issue. Also attached were two 1917A1 HMGs. Initially one froze and was useless during the first night's battle. The next night and the rest of the battle both of these performed flawlessly. They were even used for reverse slope firing to clear out enemy troop concentrations. Two 'bazookas' were carried and only fired once. The severe cold seemed to reduce the range considerably and the Marines decided they weren't worth the effort to use. Two or three 60mm mortars and two 81mm mortars were with the company. BARs were on issue, some had the same problem as the M1s - they were so sluggish that many had to be worked by hand, they would not fire semi auto (M1) or full auto (BAR). There were no scoped rifles with the company which put them at a disadvantage to the Chinese who apparently had some sniper rifles as many Marines were shot at considerable distance by daytime enemy firing. the Marines were unable to locate most of these snipers. Scoped M1s or 03s would have been lifesavers. One of the airdrops to the Marines had a load of 03 rifles and clipped ammunition for the rifles. The authors wrote that the Marines were dumbfounded to see the rifles and ammunition for them. hand grenades had problems with the spoon freezing to the body and not releasing when the pin was pulled. At first the Marines thought the grenades were duds. Someone finally figured out what was going on. One Marine 1919A4 was captured by the Chinese after overrunning the Marine crew and then recaptured by the Marines the following day. The Marines also captured and used a Browning Automatic rifle, A Nambu MG, many Mauser rifles, Thompsons, an M3, and many stick grenades.

I highly recommend this book for its gritty realism.

I forgot to mention that the Marines still had the 15 round magazines for their carbines while the Army had the 30 round magazines (and presumably M2 carbines). A 1LT in the Marine company met his brother (an Army LT) somewhere in Korea before the battle at Chosin. The Army LT handed over a couple 30 round magazines to his brother who commented that the Marines didn't have any of the 30 rounders. Also, after the first night the Marines pulled all of the tracers from their MG belts since the tracers enabled the Chinese to concentrate their fire on the Marine MG teams. The heavy combat happened at night, sniping during the day.

" BARs were on issue, some had the same problem as the M1s - they were so sluggish that many had to be worked by hand, they would not fire semi auto (M1) or full auto (BAR)."

Could they have been talking about M1 carbines? I have read that the carbines were sluggish and and the M1s performed reasonably well in that cold weather.

The carbine has a relativley weak recoil spring and I can see where the bolt may not have enough forward momentum to fully close under some conditions.

The M1 Garands in general performed as advertised, with only an occasional malfunction. Some of the "non-issued" firearms, that were captured from the Chicoms, were ones that were lost in battle by the Armys' "Task Force Faith", which had gone up the East side of the Reservoir, when they were overrun by Chicoms.

Task Force Faith had followed their orders and disbursed into company and battalion sized units, with far too much distance between them and the adjacent units. The Chicoms were trained to swarm over units as small as battalion in size, so the company sized Army units were absolutely no match.



`

some smallarms, notably BARs, had been overhauled in Japan using native labor. Springs were cleaned but not replaced. The inspection regimen was also native Japanese, and was technically weak. The 2/38th Infantry had so many failures with these reconditioned BARs that they lost confidence in the weapon.

I believe that our Marine BAR's were maintained by Marine Corps personnel, as the standard operating procedure says. I kind of see it the same as packing our own parachutes, if you maintain them yourself, you have nobody to blame for malfunctions. Besides the US Marine Corps has been short of funds since its beginnings and always has to make do with what we had.

During the 1950's when I was in the Corps, we ate C-rations, or K-rations the second half of each month in our mess-halls. I understand that the C-rations and K-rations were surplus US Army lefftovers from WWII, but when you are hungry, they are very good! They had Green Label Lucky Strike cigarettes, and Brown Label Phillip Morris cigarettes; If you lit one, you had better not inhale, because you would suck fire into your mouth (talk bout dried out tobacco).

Gyrene OFC

semper fi

`

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gyrene

The M1 Garands in general performed as advertised, with only an occasional malfunction. Some of the "non-issued" firearms, that were captured from the Chicoms, were ones that were lost in battle by the Armys' "Task Force Faith", which had gone up the East side of the Reservoir, when they were overrun by Chicoms.

Task Force Faith had followed their orders and disbursed into company and battalion sized units, with far too much distance between them and the adjacent units. The Chicoms were trained to swarm over units as small as battalion in size, so the company sized Army units were absolutely no match.



`

---

How did the country get along without the USMC? Did we establish ourselves as a republic of former Marines, or as a United States of America. The United States Army has and will defend the Constitution of the United States of America, Regardless! You Can have you're Corps. I'll Take America!

Armorkav, wow you must have a pretty thin skin.
He aint blasting the Army.
He basically just said that the chinks got any M1's they had when they overran the Army by pure numbers and any unit, Battalion or smaller, would get creamed by the pure mass of unwashed commie body's.
Not much to get upset about over that.

Dan

Armorcav - Some of those "Task Force Faith" soldiers (7th Army) found us and became pretty good "Marines" on our walk out of Chosin Reservoir. The philosophies of the US Army and US Marine Corps are quite different, and we need both.

Task Force Faith was run by a pretty good officer (Col Faith), who unfortunately was killed in the Chicom attacks. The communications between units was poor because of the radios of the day, the terrrain, and they were spread out very thin. Had the Army units been closer together, they would have been better able to defend themselves.

We had been capturing or killing Chicoms for several days and General Smith notified the Army General (Almond) who was in charge of the Corps area. The word came down from MacArthur that there were no Chicoms in Korea, so we were ordered to continue our advance. General Smith and some of our senior officers felt that we should deal with what we were finding, not what some rear echelons were saying. As a result we (Marines) were able to deal with the Chicoms better than the Task Force Faith troops, who were following their orders to disperse into the smaller units.

Gyrene OFC

semper fi

Many of the Marine's M1 rifles failed to function and in some cases fire. The book describes an incident where a Marine was laying on his back trying to push the oprod open with his feet when the Company Commander came along and saw the struggle. The Marine was doing this under fire. Some of the M1 rifles would work as straight pull rifles and some wouldn't even fire a cartridge due to the mechanism being frozen. It seemed that only the Browning MGs and 1911A1s functioned pretty much all the time. The weapons captured from the Chinese were mostly foreign except for Thompson SMGs which were most likely military aid to the Nationalist Chinese. Some of the Chinese prisoners were ex-Nationalist Chinese soldiers and not all that enthusiastic about fighting the U.S. forces.

smle-man - There may have been cases where the rifles failed to function, but only a few of the ones I saw fit into that category, and most of those were greased or oiled too heavily (the ones run almost without lube were performing as advertised). Mine was lubed with pencil lead, and never failed me.

Gyrene OFC

semper fi

`

The book said that a fair number of the men in the company were reservists that had never been to boot camp prior to shipping out. Maybe they didn't know any better on cold weather weapons lubing.

I haven't read this book, but some of what you report sounds questionable to me. I have read numerous works (there are many) regarding the Marines at the Chosin, served with survivors of the Frozen Chosin in RVN during the '60's and know Gyrene personally as well. Not everything that gets written is accurate.

Why are Army and Navy personnel often so irate at the mere mention of the USMC? Poor self image? You cannot change the facts of history, be it the Army collapse in Korea or the Navy disappearing at Guadalcanal. You just have to own it, like we own Chapultepec, Bellaeu Wood, Iwo Jima, Khe Sahn, et. al.

Gyrene, what days you on this week?

Semper Fi
OFC
When are

Iceman66 - Wednesday10 to 4 -- Friday 12 to 4 -- Saturday and Sunday 8 AM to 4 PM. I sometimes drift in on Thursday, but not to be counted on that day.

Accuracy of what is printed is in the eyes of the author, and proof readers.

Of course I know you know that, in war two guys fighting side by side have different experiences. Many of us see and feel the same things, but still we fought in different battlles, though they were in the same place and same time.

As a runner/courier (the radios were almost non-functonal, except from hilltop to hilltop), I spent my time, alone, carrying messages between units (companies/battalions/regiments). I fought in a war vastly different from those who were in conventional combat. I started with the 1st Marines H&S Company; then stuck (at the Chosin) after carrying messages to the 7th Marines, and spent the rest of the time running between the 7th Marines and the 5th Marines and their various battalions and companies.

Gyrene OFC

semper fi

`

Great history and great stories, Guys. Keep 'em coming.

I recall a little bit of what went on at Parris Island and had not read much of history prior to enlisting. I remember that I was amazed when our instructors covered Marine Corps history. We WON so many battles, and even their stories of Korea, they said that our guys were always saving the Army's butt. Even the brutal training we went through, it was to counter the term "Give-up-itis". It was how they described the Korean POW camps.

Ok, I am fairly intelligent, I eventually realized that they were preaching to us from someone who had actually "been there, done that". All branches have their heroes and pride and today I totally respect that. In war, it takes many everyday Soldiers, Sailors, and Marines to become heroes and we should all have pride in our service.

Today I wish that I could go back and say "Thank You" to everyone of them who served, did the dirty work, in WWII and Korea.

Ya see, I can be humble, as well as mean, too.

S.L.A. Marshall's work on weapons performance in Korea comments that "the troops proceed empirically as if no procedures for cold-weather lubrication had ever been given them. Each unit adopts whatever has worked for them, even if it is the opposite of what another is doing. It is as if no cold weather research had ever been done by the DoD, or recommendations made" (I am paraphrasing somewhat here)

These are a few of the views I took of the Korean War Memorial in Philadelphia on a sunny autumn afternoon.

It is close to the waterfront tourist area; sadly I was the only person there.
Regards,
Louis of PA


https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...4/Slide8-1.jpg




https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../Slide13-1.jpg[/font]





[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][IMG]http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g84/LouisofPA/Korean%20war%20memorial%20Aug%2025%202007/Slide14.jpg[/IMG][/font]

The Chinese army was equipped with a hodgepodge of weapons, and among them were US-made small arms which were sent to Nationalist China at the end of WWII, and retained by the PRC. Chief among these weapons were Thompsons, and these certainly were the ones the Marines mistakenly assumed came from army units. Many accounts of the Korean War mention these Thompsons.

In fact several Thompsons were likewise captured from the Chinese by members of RCT 31 (colloquially referred to post-war as "Task Force Faith").

It's also unlikely that army weapons, if captured, would have made it over to F/7's positions, due to terrain.

I'm reading the book now, and one reason I found this discussion was my questioning of some of weapons-related comments in the book. They made my eyebrows go up in the very beginning by saying that MSR meant Main Service Road.

I spent a year (in the 50's, after the war) along the DMZ (Army-26 years), with an M-2 Carbine. Used the same weapon other places. Korea is cold. I know about the "lack of power" of the Carbine, but not to the extent they tell it. At close range, it'll put a hole in your jeans. It is a little more powerful and a lot more accurate than a PPSh, also .30. And it works OK in the cold. That's enough for a first post here.

My Dad's Reserve company was called up. Dad went to boot camp as he was fresh out of high school. The ones that were WW2 vets and had been to a certain number of meetings or summer deployments were given a short training refresher. One Marine had been to several meetings and a couple of summer camps. He was sent put with the group that had experience and was deployed. He was at Chosin and made it out. After his tour the Corps realized he had never been to boot camp so he was sent after his return to the US. Needless to say he was less than pleased and was not into the training. The DI pointed it out that he was trying to save his sorry butt when he went to Korea. When the DI found out he had already been there things changed.
This came from a great little book "Unexpected Journey" by Randy Mills. Lots of first hand stories are shared in this book.

Gyrene.. You guys didn't finish those 'C' and 'D' and 'K' rats off... We had them, complete with green Luckys, at Amarillo AFB, TX in 1956! ! ! My weapon was a M1 carbine, never saw a M2, and it worked both times I fired it in familiarization in three years!..

I haven't had a chance to finish the book yet, but I've read enough to reach some conclusions:

1. It is a very good book. I highly recommend it. (I'm just one of those a**holes who hates to see technical details messed up in something that is supposed to be history...)

2. The authors don't have a lot of military background (maybe Air Force or Navy, but not Infantry, for sure.) They're telling a story based on anecdotal information in the form of war stories from people who were there a long time ago. And not all of the people who were there were professional marines. A lot of technical details are bound to get messed up.

3. I wish they'd been a little less 'definite' about things they really didn't know. An early statement "the 7.92 Mauser was the standard rifle of the Chinese Army"...is flat wrong. The Chiang Kai-shek rifle was a 7.92 Mauser, and no doubt some were in the hands "volunteers" who entered Korea, but it was an obsolete Nationalist rifle. Most of the good ones went to Formosa with Chiang Kai-shek! But they weren't standard. The Chinese were more likely to have a lend-lease '03 Springfield or Thompson, or a captured Japanese rifle than a Mauser. (Russian weapons existed, but were far more common later in the war.)

4. They refer to "light machine guns" very often, and describe the weapon as having a bipod. The only LMG used by the US at that time was the 1919A6, and I don't think the Marines even had them. There weren't that many made. I could be wrong. But the normal LMG was the tripod-mounted 1919A4.

5. They describe a capturing a "Belgian-made" LMG, and then distributing it's box of ammunition- so it would have to be 30-06. In 1950. Was it a Belgian BAR? What else could it have been? They don't say.

Enough again...I'll finish the book.

I've never had to use any of the wepons that I was trained on in anger, so I was hopeing that others would answer. Yes the 1919 BLM had a butstock and a bipod that could be added.
Bob

Well the 1919A6 is more common than you think. It takes nothing to change one over to the A6 Config, all the parts were in the supply system (and are still readily available - kinda pricey though). The conversion should have been able to be done as low as the unit level since the hardest part of the conversion is bucking three rivets.

As for the "Belgian-made" LMG it could have been the FN-D (thier version of the BAR) or the FN produced 1919 variants (of which almost all parts will interchange with US versions) as they were both produced by FN in 30-06.

Dan

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sandpods-1.jpg

Quote:

---

I understand that the C-rations and K-rations were surplus US Army lefftovers from WWII, but when you are hungry, they are very good!

---

In 1969, my company, A-1/61 IN, was issued C-rations dated 1944. They were edible. The cigarettes, not so good. :-)

My brigade (1st Bde, 5th ID) was part of the 3rd Marine Division -- the second Army-Marine division in American history to see combat (the other being the 2nd Infantry Division in WWI.)

The M1919A6 was really the first US attempt at a GPMG, to counter the MG34 or the MG 42. It was generally considered to be a failure because it was still too heavy and the bipod was too weak and not very stable. (bipods were a common weak point on early LMG/GPMG attempts.) I guess it's possible that they were present during the Chosin period- I don't know-, but most units stuck with the M1919A4 config, with tripod. Far more stable and effective.

As far as the .30 Carbine, I think most of the stuff about it's "lack of stopping power" is urban legend- or old wives tales. Consider: The .357 Magnum was long rated as the top fight-stopping handgun. They used to talk about it being able to crack the block on a car. The FBI swore by it. so: .357 = 125 grain bullet, MV 1400 fps, ME 584. .30 Carbine 110 grain bullet, MV 1992 fps, ME 965!

The .357 benefits by not having to be a fmj, since it isn't an official military round. It is a tiny bit bigger around, and a tiny bit heavier. But the .30 Carbine wins, hands down, in terms of striking power. Not to mention accuracy from an 18" barrel.

No, it isn't a 300+ meter weapon. Bad bullet design for longer ranges. But under 200 meters, its intended envelope, it's plenty powerful enough not to be stopped by padded uniforms! Don't shoot me with one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumbler

As far as the .30 Carbine, I think most of the stuff about it's "lack of stopping power" is urban legend- or old wives tales. Consider: The .357 Magnum was long rated as the top fight-stopping handgun. They used to talk about it being able to crack the block on a car. The FBI swore by it. so: .357 = 125 grain bullet, MV 1400 fps, ME 584. .30 Carbine 110 grain bullet, MV 1992 fps, ME 965!

The .357 benefits by not having to be a fmj, since it isn't an official military round. It is a tiny bit bigger around, and a tiny bit heavier. But the .30 Carbine wins, hands down, in terms of striking power. Not to mention accuracy from an 18" barrel.

No, it isn't a 300+ meter weapon. Bad bullet design for longer ranges. But under 200 meters, its intended envelope, it's plenty powerful enough not to be stopped by padded uniforms! Don't shoot me with one.

---

Up the street from my office lives a Korean vet who served in the artillery. He isn't a gun enthusiast, although he used to hunt and carries a pistol for self defense. While speaking to my father, another Korea vet, I asked what he carried and he said a carbine. I asked if there was any truth to the lack of stopping power, not penetrating the uniforms, etc., he just looked at me and said, "I didn't find that to be the case."

I related that on the 03 board years ago and an Army Captain from Vietnam said he saw an enemy soldier shot in the magazine chest pack with one that knocked him down but did not injure him. I still wouldn't want to be shot by one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhillipM

I related that on the 03 board years ago and an Army Captain from Vietnam said he saw an enemy soldier shot in the magazine chest pack with one that knocked him down but did not injure him. I still wouldn't want to be shot by one.

---

Incidents of shootings and bullet performance are strange things. The ones that don't go as expected are the most remembered and retold (and sometimes exaggerated? no...!) I don't doubt that story. A lot has to do with factors like angle, range, etc. I've seen a few odd ones personally- like a 7.62X39 glance off a metal button (not mine)- but at an extreme angle. Left a helluva bruise.

But you can often question the "everybody knows" stuff. Like "everybody knows" the 5.56 from an M4 won't stop a man. BS! I'd rather have a 6.8, given a choice, but the M4 mostly works just fine.

So, "everybody knows" the .30 Carbine was useless against the padded Chinese. Well, maybe so, if you hit the padding and not the person. Or, if you tried to shoot him at 500 meters. But, although it wasn't as effective as a 30'06, in a straight on solid hit to near center of mass, at under 200 meters, it's a very effective weapon indeed. The authors of Fox Company, I'm convinced, were just repeating "war stories".

.30 carbine -

When we lived in Window Rock, my wife and I used to go down to for weekend or 3-day minivacations in winter, including New Years. We'd stay in fleabgs on van Buren, spend the days in city parks, the zoo, etc.

New Years, maybe '91 or '92, it was the usual scene. Bang bang! the next day I was loading up the car and saw something on the driver's seat. It was a .30 carbine fmj slug. Came straight down through the roof and headliner bt couldn't penetrate the seat upholstery.

I still have the slug!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vern Humphrey

My brigade (1st Bde, 5th ID) was part of the 3rd Marine Division -- the second Army-Marine division in American history to see combat (the other being the 2nd Infantry Division in WWI.)

---

Hello Vern, yours would be the third instance of combined Army - Marine Regiments in one Division. the 1st time as you mentioned was the 2nd Infantry Div. in WWI. But on Gualdalcanal in January 1943 General Patch created the Composite Army-Marine or CAM Division from the 147th and 182nd Army Regiments and the 6th Marines, and attached artillery components from the Americal and the 2nd Marine Divisions, with the latter also supplying the divisions headquarters elements.

Gyrene - you are about the 7th or 8th Korean War vet I have talked to that mentions using pencil lead to lubricate their weapons during the winters in Korea.

Semper Fi, Rob

Iceman, if you were referring to the "Halls of Montezuma", ie; the Mexican Military Acadamy, That objective was ACTUALY taken by the 4th U.S. Artillery, acting as infantry. But then the Marines have always had a better PR section. Now don't get in a snit, since there is one of Uncle Sams Misguided Children in my family.

Oh Yeah, I do remember those 1942 dated C-Rats, the Green lucky Strikes, the OD Pall Malls, and the O.D. matchbooks with ---_V on them. If I had had any foresight back then, I would have saved those cigarettes instead of smoking them.;)

Hi John,

I'm not sure where you are getting your history about the battle of Chapultepec (Sept. 1847), but there were many U.S. units in the battle, as well as officers Robert E. Lee, U.S. Grant, Pierre Beauregard and George Pickett, who would all lead units during our Civil War. Marines of the time were formed into ships companies and detachments.

40 Marines took point in one of two storming parties of 250 hand-picked men organized by the CG, Winfield Scott. They assaulted the walls from the Southwest side of the castle. Later, another group of Marines would move behind Mexican lines, scale a building and direct deadly volley fire onto the Mexican artillery gunners.

The red stripe on all Marine Officers and NCOs dress blue uniform trousers are known as "blood" stripes and are worn to commemorate the fact that 90% of the Marine Officers and NCOs who fought at the Halls of Montezuma were KIA.

Please have the courtesy not to attempt to minimize the Marine sacrifice nor contribution to the battle of Chapultepec Castle and Mexico City.

amen brother