Printable View
By 1944 with millions of M1 Garands and millions of M1 Carbines having been made and still in massive Wartime Production, why were Remington 03A3s still be produced so late in the War? Who were they intended to be issued to?
Here's my only 03/A3. Its a sweet firing warrior that kicks like a Mule every time I shoot it :-)
Attachment 120604Attachment 120605Attachment 120606Attachment 120607
easy answer, rear units like MP and truck drivers on the Red Ball Express plus alot of other others did not require the M1 rifle.
They were made late in the war so the could be loaned to Greece and then cause massive confusion in the collector community when they were returned and sold by the CMP.
BEAR
Were 03A3's cheaper to make? Was it because it would have cost the Govt more to build new Machinery for making more Garands than using the already older existing machinery from making 03's???
This. My father was a mechanic/truck driver and said they put one in each truck.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCS
Because the manufacturers already were tooled up from WW1 to make that action. It was very easy to put it right back into production. Made sense to the government to keep producing them as a war material.
Does anyone know how many 03A3s were made during World War II?Quote:
Originally Posted by mmppres
You had the glimmer of a couple of good questions there, but kinda spoiled it by leaping to a conclusion. It took two PhD historians who had served during the war 1700 pages in the Army's official logistics history to explain how the system worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer
How did you determine that 'millions and millions' of carbines and Garands produced by 1944 should have been enough?
To have a chance of drawing an accurate conclusion, you would need to know at a bare minimum: the total force size, how equipment was assigned, reserve requirements, loss rates, and reporting methods. On top of all that, some knowledge of lead times for production and distribution would be helpful.
As often attributed to Yogi Berra, "Predictions are hard; especially about the future." Logistics planning is dependent on predictions about the future, so Yogi would have been right at home.
I won't attempt to give you a lesson in the basics of WWII logistics, you'll have to do that yourself, but I'll give you some data from a 1944 OD planning document. A monthly report showing current stock status along with projected near term procurement and demand levels was created in mid-44. It was a way to help planners avoid overproducing one item while the need for others went unfilled. Classic Econ 101: efficient use of resources in the face of scarcity. Doesn't matter if their projections turned out to be right - it was their best guess at the moment using available info. These calculations were used to determine production quantities - for thousands of major items.
The earliest of these reports I have for the '03A3 (including '03 and 03A1) is dated 31 Aug 44. In the section titled 'Total Supply Less Total Demand' for the following month (in other words, 'how many over or under projected need do we have right now?) it shows 18,821 (enough, but just barely). I don't know what the status was six months earlier when '03A3 production was ended, but looks like they made a pretty accurate prediction. BTW, that same month showed carbine status as -196,300, a rather large deficit, unlike what you suggested.
As an example of how uncertainty is part of war, this Aug 44 report projects zero future need for this item for international aid (going out two years). A month later, the status report showed 200,000 would be required for international aid. So, in one month, requirements had increased from zero to 200,000. Are you beginning to see how much fun it was to be a planner in WWII and why reserve stocks were kept?
My guess is this sudden increase might relate to a decision to significantly expand the Chinese army, but it's just a guess based solely on timing. As our advance across the Pacific went faster than expected - plus giving up on building a large Chinese army as a logistical impossibility, this requirement for international aid soon dropped by about 75%.
One last point: this is an OD report. It tracks quantities in OD custody - in depots, not yet requisitioned by using units. Once shipped, OD was out of the picture (except for receiving returned items for repair and storage - at which point it would reappear in OD bean counts).
So, after all that, the answer to one of your questions is: the calculations factoring current stock, projected production, and projected issue demand shows your assumptions were wrong on 1944 supply status.
Your other question about how equipment is assigned is an important one, but I'm out of play time for today, but the anecdotes presented so far are misleading at best. Google 'WWII T/O&E' and report back with what your learn.
Wow, thank you!Quote:
Originally Posted by firstflabn
your detailed information makes me glad I didn’t have to read the two PhD Historians 1700 page Army official history report on this topic. Looks like I lucked out with just an executive summary :-)
I’m just a simple 37 year combat infantry Marine and what I think you are saying is that the War Planners in 1944 didn’t think they had enough rifles produced for the numbers they potentially may need before the war ended.
I would still like to know if there’s any data or information on how many 03A3s were made during World War II? It seems everybody tracks and knows quite a bit about Garands and M1 Carbines but not much information on the 03A3s, at least what I can find.
Also, you mentioned a report dated 31 August 1944 and then you mention that the 03A3 production had ended six months prior to that. The barrel on my Remington is dated August 44. Did you mean the 03A3 receivers had stopped being produced six months prior?
There's an article in American Rifleman that says Remington made 707,629 and Smith-Corona made 234,580 03A3 in WWII
The planners didn't even have a good idea of how long the war was going to last. The 'Home by Christmas' optimism after D-day was knocked into a cocked hat in the Ardennes. Then there was the prospect of invading the Home Islands of Japan. Planners feared the fighting might last until at least 1947. Among all the "beans and bullets" needed for the invasion they ordered Purple Hearts. They expected so many casualties that 75 years later, Purple Hearts made for an invasion of Japan are still being awardedQuote:
Originally Posted by Hammer
The crazy part is how many items made for the war are still in government stores. logged into government books an rolls. Been told by vets that to this day machine guns from that time are still being used. Not sure if in combat or just for training.
Certainly machine guns from WW2 and earlier are still in use. Most of the M2 cal 50 machine guns in use are still WW2 vintage. Of the 167 known manufacturers only SACO Defense and RAMO are post war, and those contracts weren't let until the Eighties.
During WW2, in addition to the government arsenals at Springfield and Rock Island, gun makers like Colt, Savage, and High Standard, many commercial firms were producing Browning machine guns. GM alone had three divisions, AC spark plug, Browne Lipe Chapin, and Frigidaire building guns. Kelsey Hayes Wheel Co., IBM (International Business Machines), Saco-Lowell and Wayne Pump were also making machine guns.
Now guns in service you will also see ANAD stamped on receivers for rebuilds done at Anniston Army Depot. In fact S/N 324 arrived in Alabama for rebuild to M2A1 configuration not long ago..
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...jpg88071-1.jpg
[/IMG]https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ning_sem-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...jpeg1075-1.jpg
Also, early on, the M1 rifle had "growing pains" and it had not been "battle proven"......... thus Remington and SC were given contracts to produce the M1903 just in case the M1 developed problems in the heat of battle.
I have read that there was always a shortage of .30-06 rifles in WWII. If you think about the real numbers needed plus "wastage". A term used in the Great War on combat losses. If you take one end item that uses a weapon and figures in combat losses the numbers are unbelievable. Just take the B-17. In WWII 4,735 planes were lost in combat. Each plane had 13 .50 caliber AN/M2 machine guns each. That would mean that 61,555 guns were lost in combat and that just for the B-17. On the human side that would be an average of 10 crew member per aircraft which means that 47,350 crew members were KIA, POWs or MIA. or if each is carrying a pistol that's 47,350 Model 1911 pistols.
I just read that outstanding article that Bruce Canfield did some years ago. His article says Remington stopped making 03A3s in February 1944, but my Remington barrel is marked August 1944?Quote:
Originally Posted by Durango56
Remington received a contract to make replacement parts including barrels. Most of the replacement barrels were dated later in 1944.
You're asking the right questions and show the ability to tell broad questions from narrow ones. That puts you way ahead of most. Stay at it - and ask for evidence. Several good examples in this thread of briefly describing their source (not long rambles like mine). If someone fails to at least give a nod at a source, you probably know more than they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer
They had a system to calculate future demand (so production and distribution decisions could be made). Set up the formula, then feed in data. The answer comes out the other end. Not as easy as it seems. Long lags in getting updated numbers from the field increased uncertainty as, of course, did the changing fortunes of war. Remember, the WD is doing this for thousands of items. Early on, loss rate data from WWI records was used - they couldn't sit on their hands until current data started rolling in from overseas. Loss data only starts to become a major factor to planners after everybody receives initial issue. That's why production was cut back early in '44 on many items - the Army was close to being totally mobilized - for small arms, monthly loss rates were mostly single digit percentages. One thing about planning, a perfect estimate is not necessary for success - get in the neighborhood and your adjustments can be smaller and, thus, more manageable.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Army tracked all types of '03s (excepting the '03A4) as a single line item, so no way to know where '03A3s in particular went. If you want another confusion factor: from scattered examples, in early 1945, service forces requirements seem to be replacing '03s with Garands (implementing this change is impossible to track, long delays would come as no surprise - several thousand company size service units served in the ETO alone whose records would have to be looked at).
The forms kept evolving, making it difficult to track quantities month to month, but I'll mention one point in time. In the first four months of 1945, the '03 report shows about 60k as 'Returned Stock - After Repair.' I don't know the date, but there was a late war parts contract (presumably including your barrel). With production long over, that's probably where your date mismatch comes from.
As I am extremely dubious that any significant quantities of small arms were returned stateside during the war, I would suggest yours stayed at home and was used for training during '43 when carbines and Garands were both short of requirements.
In 1945, the Army history division recorded the history of all weapon platforms so the history of how it happened would be recorded for all future generations. So they basically did a field report on everything you can possibly think of that was made during the war weapon wise. These were top secret till recently.
So this is what I'm seeing when I look at the 1903/A3/A4 field report from 1941 to 1944.
Ordnance basically had to order enough rifles in numbers that would be worth it for these manufacturers to actually gear up to build the rifles. Otherwise the cost incurred by Remington and LC Smith Corona was substantial enough that that they had to produce at least so many rifles to be economically worth the investment to set up the tooling to manufacture them.
So the orders were usually in 100,000 or 200,000 in number.
Just a few of the first contracts, a time line. Though there were more contracts in 1943 that I didn't take the time to include them below. But just a few contracts to show how it went down.
11 Sept 1941 208,000 rifles to Remington
24 Nov 1941 74,000 rifles from Remington
13 Dec 1941 100,000 rifles from Remington
March 1942 100,000 rifles from LC Smith Corona
Dec 1942 Orders are authorized to ship either M1903 or O3A3
Nov 43, 175,000 to Remington
Nov 43, 56,274 to LC Smith Corona
23 Nov 1943 Remington and LC Smith are notified that they are nearing the end of their allotted contracts and because there isn't an need for anymore they will cease production on completed rifles at the end of Feb 1944.
Remington is ordered at the end of Feb 1944 to start on spare parts production for any and all parts that will be needed for the foreseeable future. The spare parts order was massive and was called the "all time buy" or "end buy." So anything built after Feb 1944 at Remington was intended as spare parts.
LC Smith never made spare parts and ceased all production at the end of Feb 1944. Their production line was tore down, tooling and equipment was distributed to facilities that needed the equipment for the war effort.
In this 1941 to 45 field report by Army Ordnance they also break down spreadsheets off all production of rifles during the war by month and year.
So I'm just going to detail it by year.
1941
Remington 1,273
1942
Remington 337,399 (it details 1903 and 03A3)
LC Smith 5,540
1943
Remington 658,457 (03A3)
LC Smith 209,958
Remington 17,045 (03A4)
1944
Remington 59,147 (03A3)
LC Smith 18,500
Remington 9,608 (03A4)
These counts counter what I have seen other places, but these were are done by the Small Arms Branch- Industrial Division and they break it down literally by each and every month of the war. So I think this would be the most accurate as it details production all 12 months of each year, then tallies it up for each year.
I sincerely appreciate everybody’s information and education. This all may be long known news for y’all, but it’s all new to me and it’s fascinating information for me.
I purchased this Remington in 1990 from an Army officer who said he had bought it years earlier from a national guard armory sales to military members transfer type program if I remember correctly.
So it looks like the receiver was made in late 42 or early 43 and then it got one of the replacement barrels that was made in August 1944. Of course now I wonder why they had to replace the barrel? Either it was used stateside for training and its original Barrel just got worn out from firing so many rounds at training ranges, or it was damaged or worn out from use overseas in wartime use. I think it was probably the former, but will never know.
About 707,000 Remingtons, 234,000 Smith-Coronas and about 28,000 M1903A4 sniper rifles. (Plus another @ 348,000 Remington M1903s).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer
---------- Post added at 05:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:16 AM ----------
If you can give us at least the first few digits of the serial number, we can get the date of manufacture significantly closer than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer
It’s shown in one of the pictures in the beginning of the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick the Librarian
3781886
Serialization date would probably be in the June/July, 1943 time frame.
Rick, could you give me an approximate serialization date for Remington 4089889 with a 10-43 dated barrel? Thanks! - Bob
Awesome! Thank youQuote:
Originally Posted by Rick the Librarian
Somewhere in the Nov/Dec., 1943 timeframe. The barrel is almost certainly the original one.Quote:
Originally Posted by USGI
Thank You, Sir! I had it listed in my records as 1943, but wasn't certain. - Bob
When did S/N 3426973 leave Remington?
About March, 1943. It isn't a M1903A4, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by old tanker
In 1942-43 it was expected that the war would last at least until 1949. This is why they sent so many GI's to college in 1943; to make techs and flight engineers for the air war going on in 1947-8-9. These were the men pulled out of college and sent to the Ardennes without basic training to fill the manpower void due to the Bulge. My best friends FIL was one of those men.
I agree - production wasn't like a water spigot, where you can just shut it off.
Yes, it is an M1903A4. It was redone by Anniston Army Depot if the cartouche on the stock is to be believed. The M82 telescope was on it when I bought it from an Army Captain on Fort Knox in 1975. The VCI paper tube was still in the bore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick the Librarian
Incorrect. The Springfield Armory had already repurposed or scrapped all tooling. Springfield did not resume production because all available capacity was dedicated to M1 Garand ramp-up and production. Rock Island tooling and some qty of finished and WIP goods were taken out of government storage and transferred to Remington Arms. This was done to take advantage of the much shorter time-to-production made essential by the downward spiraling turn of global events that made US involvement in what would become he second World War imminent! Smith Corona was contracted to tool up with the help of RA.
One factor many dont think about is that RA and SC were private sector companies and their production and cancellation thereof was based upon contract terms. The government procurement office (GAO) and the War Production Board (WPB) had to balance order cancellation to the effect on businesses and employment. Lastly the production cost and lead time to manufacture M1903A3s was less than that for the Garand.
By 1944 there were indeed hundreds of thousands if not millions of M1 Carbines and M1 Garands produced (despite the incorrect posted herein that referenced production of less than 200000 (my guess it referred to Carbines, and by 1944 that number could ONLY apply to just one of the 9 volume Carbine manufacturers), yet existing production capacity of Garands (intended as front line battle rifles) and Carbines (initially intended only as a replacement of the 1911 and Thompson M1 for rear area use) was still not enough to meet demand for both new issue and replacement of arms lost, captured, or destroyed in the theatres of war. Lastly, in 1944 the war in Europe was still far from over and the inevitable invasion of Japan was looming. The number of Garands and Carbines envisioned to be needed was still daunting. Domestic, rear area, occupation, and POW rifle demand were served well by the 1903 while demand as the Garand and Carbine were prioritized for battle troops.
Also incorrect, at least in current form as a blanket statement. They did retain some tooling, and did continue to make replacement parts for the 1903...As evidence, I have a Springfield replacement barrel on my Remington 1903, barrel is stamped 5-42.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1903Collector
Total Remington production was 1,056,276 rifles, which included about 345,000 M1903 and M1903 (modified), about 711,276 M1903A3, and just 26,653 M1903A4 (short of the 28,365 ordered). Reference http://www.remingtonsociety.org.
Smith-Corona’s production contract was cancelled on Feb. 19, 1944, by which time the firm had manufactured 234,580 M1903A3s.
The two best collector's reference books (in my opinion) by J.C. Harrison, and Poyer, provide monthly production numbers info for SA, RIA, RA & SC 1903, 1903A1, M1903, M1903 (modified), M1903A3 and M1903A4 (RA only) rifles.
Were we not talking about RIFLE production and not replacement or lateral support components? Actual rifle production capability and capacity is specifically related to receiver casting/forging and machining, Therein is the nature of the key and limiting tooling (molds, fixtures, gigs, and in some cases custom presses and machinery) and indeed the manufacturing processes (call it "recipe" for those with no mechanical technologies manufacturing knowledge).
Production of 1903 rifles for WWII had nothing to do with any degree of capability, let alone readiness of the previous manufacturers...which were government armories, not private sector manufacturers. SA and a number of second tier (sub-contract) suppliers continued or were ramped up to make replacement barrels and parts for '03s and A3s and even for new production as needed by SC and RA.
Springfield continued to make at least some parts for the M1903 until almost the end of 1944.
"The crazy part is how many items made for the war are still in government stores. logged into government books an rolls. Been told by vets that to this day machine guns from that time are still being used. Not sure if in combat or just for training."
during my 2006 tour to iraq we were using 1954 dated 50cal ammo out of our ww2 M2s
As we all know, good firearms never grow old, they wear out or are destroyed. Their dates of manufacture indicate respect.
Have been told by a few different armours that there are still items on the government rolls going back centuries. Probably pay off the government dept if they were put out to sell to collectors
One aspect that gets failed to be mention that even though production of assembled rifles may have stopped. A large part of these rifles were supplied to the Allies in WWII and Post war. Even though the weapons may be obsolete in the US inventory. The US supported these weapon systems in the hands of US Allies many years after the war by supplying spare parts.
Remember that the project to revive '03 production started as a project to supply Britain's requirements, and they got as far as making up 'several' .303 Springfields just to test the concept. Eventually Britain accepted some .30 ones, and then focussed on Savage making L-E No.4's for them instead.
U.S. Ordnance did not like US production facilities being tied up making weapons which the US armed forces had no intention of using, although some foreign types, like the 57mm a/t gun and the 20mm Oerlikon cannon, were adopted or at least modified for US use. They would rather Lend-Lease users just accepted standard US stuff.