Printable View
Just found a book entitled "40 Thieves in Saipan" about a group of Marine Scout Snipers. It was written by the son of their leader. Looks interesting-- has anyone read it? Here's some photos of the unit with their 03A1 rifles and an individual member. I think he's holding my rifle!
Gregg I pre-ordered my copy when it came out and read it in a day. It's a good book, well worth owning, but focuses very little on any actual "sniping." It won't scratch that itch, but it will introduce you to a lot of characters from one of the very few organized USMC scout sniper platoons of WWII, and for that reason I found the book invaluable.
It's not a glamorous story. Many of these men meet particularly violent deaths, and the survivors all relate stories of dealing with decades of haunting PTSD. It's an important reminder to those of us who obsess over the minutia and details of these rifles, that real boys carried them in war, and many of them didn't come home.
I'm sure you've seen this picture from Peter Senich's book. They're both main characters in this book, and I found it refreshing to finally put a name to these two guys (Cpl Don Evans and Sgt Bill Knuppel.) I can't think of a more iconic WWII USMC photo, and they're both heavily featured in this book.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DWZvnHil-1.jpg
And I think one of those is my rifle ;)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...oebGg3fl-1.jpg
What a great book! During the lockdowns I started a book review thread somewhere, and this was on it.
If I'm remembering the book correctly, they used these 1903A1's successfully for a day. When they awoke the next morning to go out for a hunt, the lenses were heavily fogged over inside and they didn't use them anymore.
When you read the syllabus of sniper school during WWII, most of the school was on scouting or reconnaissance. Very little was about shooting. The role we think of snipers today is not what they were back during WWII.
About 3 years ago I talked to a 95 yr old graduate of sniper school in 1944 who served on Iwo Jima as a company runner. He was put in the school not because he volunteered, but because he was the top shooter in his company in boot camp. So they sent him to Scout Sniper School.
He said he shot very little at the school, and most of was learning to patrol and read maps and all the normal scouting stuff. He said they learned a lot on how to maneuver behind enemy lines.
---------- Post added at 11:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:03 PM ----------
almost every island after action report stated the telescopic equipped m1903 was not useful with the terraign and the way the Japanese fought.
So that is why they really didn't use a lot of sniper rifles in the Pacific and also why the contract to build more rifles was cancelled.
The only islands where they were used and praised were Saipan and Okinawa. Everywhere else they stated a regular m1 was more effective as a rifle for the school trained sniper.
Thanks for the responses. Sounds like a worthwhile book to read-- I'll have to get a copy.
Read it a a while back. The platoon's duty was mostly intelligence gathering. I wonder if the replacements for the next campaign were as intensively trained? There may be a sequel coming out.
When Neil and I were helping the author, he told me over the phone he did it specifically for his father. He said he had no idea what his father did until his funeral. So he was doing it for his father and fellow Marines he served with. Very admirable project. Joe is top notch and very nice guy.
Here's a review I did on the book on Amazon. I was "underwhelmed" by some of the tall tales.
An interesting memoir by the son of the commander of the unit. However, I question just how true some of it was. What put it over the edge for me was a brief stop by a few of the men at Pololu on the Big Island, where they claimed the Japanese had been put there to isolate them, that they had secret radios and that the garbage they found was left by Japanese submarines putting in there. That the Hawaiians were secretly rooting for the Japanese had had Japanese flags flying. One too many old "war stories", methinks.
I think your 95 year old Marine was BS'ing you. Company runners were found to be a lousy way to communicate during WWI, and were replaced with field phones and radios long before WWII and Iwo Jima. Unlike the other services, the Marines combine the scout and sniper duties in a single man, thus the scouting stuff, but every USMC sniper school ,of which I am aware, placed shooting ability above all else. If you were a bad shot, you couldn't even get into a USMC sniper school as far back as WWI. I believe if you check the manpower schedules, the Marines had as many, or more, snipers per unit than WWI or RVN.Quote:
Originally Posted by cplstevennorton
A Company Runner was extremely common in WWII. If you pull up any Divisional diaries from the Archives, almost all unit diaries list a company runner. Also when you pull the corresponding service book, it also details in their service records that they were a company messenger/runner. When I pulled this School trained Sniper records, he was listed as a Sniper and Company Runner on Iwo. Exactly as he said. He was like most snipers who never saw a scoped M1903 after he left Sniper School. He carried a M1.
As far as Sniper School. When you pull the docs, in WWII they were selected for Sniper school because they were already top shooters. Many early guys were team shooters. Later they started to select top company shooters from boot camp. At this time you did select what you wanted to do in the Marines, they selected it for you. So their thought was the guys going into Sniper School were already top shooters. So the focus on the training was on the scouting side more so than actual trigger time.
I have the 36 day syllabus that details every day in Sniper School and what they did. When I asked this Marine what his memory was of the school, it was spot on to Walter Walsh's syllabus. They just spent very little time shooting. When they did shoot it was usually 40 to 60rds and they shot other USMC weapons than the telescopic equipped M1903. Such as shotguns or .22 rifles.
In WWII Sniper School, they actually spent more time on scouting training such as map reading, arm signaling, aerial photograph study, camouflage, gathering intelligence, calling in artillery, patrolling, and reconnaissance.
All Marine scout snipers are volunteers and have been since day one in WWI. MOS 8541 (now MOS 0317 I believe) is a secondary MOS, not a primary assigned MOS like the MOS assigned to you out of Boot Camp. Also, you have seen Division "diaries" that list Marines by MOS? They don't even do that on a company level (rosters). Marines are listed by name, rank, and serial number with a notation of WIA, KIA, or UA if applicable, with a notation if transferred.
Your 95 yr old friend had to have some rank before he volunteered as a SS. If you look at the USMC description of a SS, it is all about an individual capable of placing accurate long range fire to disrupt enemy actions, and if my memory serves me correctly, doesn't even mention the scouting side of the duties. If you read presentations from guys like Eric England (98 CK), Carlos Hathcock (93 CK), and McElhinney (103 CK). not one of them ever mentions scouting duties at all.
There were 3 sniper schools in WWII, Camp Pendleton, Camp Lejeune, and Quantico. When you say New River, I assume you are referring to Stoney Point. Technically, New River is an Air Station. In WWII, Eric England commanded Stoney Point for a couple of years before he went to the Pacific. I suspect Eric England knew very little about scouting. Recruits were not sent to sniper school if they were the best shots in the company. There was a list of qualifications that had to be met, and no one went to sniper school straight out of Boot Training. But...of those that volunteered, being a great shot was obviously the best way to get into the school. As for your statement, "He was like most snipers who never saw a scoped M1903 after he left Sniper School", I cannot comprehend how you would know that. It is complete BS.
I think your posts do a disservice to the brave men who worked their butts off doing a very dangerous job. By the way, how did you get a living Marine's service records?
I did a bit of research, and I must admit I was surprised to discover that the TO&E allowed for company messengers in the D, E, and F Series of the Battle Order. That covers WWII and Vietnam. I also discovered that, on the company level, recon was performed by two privates in the rifle squads. The Sniper Platoon was attached to Regimental HQ (as it was in WWI). We had the same number of snipers per regiment from the beginning of WWI through RVN. The F Series covered the last year of WWII through RVN.
Your 95 yr old legend would have been listed as a messenger or a sniper, but not both. Once he earned his MOS 8541, he would be a sniper. The fact that he claimed to be a messenger makes his story a bit suspect.
Jim,
Since we last talked, I have found substantial new amounts of research from National Archive Locations.
There is a lot that has changed.
What I am saying is correct. I have the actual unpublished Headquarters Marine documents and service record books.
History does not change, only our perception of it changes.
There is a reason the daily roster is done on a company level. A couple of clerks can wade through 300 or so data points and still get the record out in a timely basis, but there were 15,000 men in a division. It would be physically impossible to gather data on 15,000 men and get it out to HQ in a single day. That just did not happen.
Division diaries are postbellum. Those writing them generally do not have access to individual's MOS's. So how did you verify the old man's MOS's?
That "Documents, I got documents" routine is getting a bit old.
Jim,
By pulling his Service Record book. This info is even available online if you know where to look. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Tarleton
Jim,
You are saying a lot of info here, but unfortunately you are confusing a lot of data. You are sort of taking different eras of the Marine Scout Sniper program and combining them into one confused mash up. Otherwise you are not breaking down each era into the correct individual era, which it was. Each war was completely different for the program. Actually it changed every few months during the wars.
Even the most basic info you are stating above I'm sorry to say is not correct. Such as you saying the MOS numbers for a Scout Sniper in WWII. A WWII Marine Scout Sniper was not a MOS 8541.
They were a MOS 761.
The rest of the info on how the program worked, how records were kept, how data is listed, I'm sorry to say nearly everything you stated above is just not correct.
There are substantial new amounts of research available. Even if someone can't get to the Archives, Andrew, Tim, and myself have posted thousands of documents online since you have been gone and you can find many with a simple google search.
I got my information from the Marine Corps. Where did you get yours? And I did break down the information by era as anyone who checks will discover. As for you retrieving a living Marine's service record, anyone who has ever tried knows that is BS. Anyone reading this can check the website for themselves. Before you go too far guys, the Marines used the same MOS Codes as did the Army until halfway through 1945. That "Sniper" MOS 761 he's throwing against the wall is the 1945 Army code for "Scout" - not "Sniper".
U.S. Marine Rifle Company (1944-1945) (The Battle Order didn't change from 1944 through RVN)
Marine Corps MOS List | MOSDb
Everyone else is wrong but you, because you have "documents". What I posted came directly from the Marine Corps website. If you have any document that refutes what they say, let's see it.
You are playing to the crowd now. That ploy might work with the younger guys, but the older guys know better. OK, I stand by every word I posted. If you have ANY document that proves me wrong, throw it out there for all to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Tarleton
Jim again you are confusing the Marine Corps Eras and combining them into one big confused mesh. The MOS info you are posting is current, not what it was back in WWII. On the chart you just posted an Infantry Rifleman is a 0311. Back in WWII it was a 745. A Machine Gunner today is a 0331, back in WWII it was a 746.
I don't need to post the docs on this,because this is very basic info that is easily accessible and very widely known by even entry level Marine Researchers.
USMC MOS Codes, WWII Era - The Military Yearbook Project
As far as Service Record books again you are not correct. They do not go by if the Marine is living, they go by the year they served. Any Marines personal records are easily accessible as long as he served by the mid 50's. You just have to walk into St Louis and use a simple pull card with the name and service number. Anything after the mid 50's is still accessible it just requires more paperwork and you have to File a Freedom of info request to be able to view it.
As I said Jim, there is a substantial amount of new info out there because everything has changed.
Good luck in your research.
Nice try. It is you who is confused. You erroneously claimed MOS 761 was the WWII USMC MOS for a sniper. When I pointed out your obvious error, you are avoiding confronting your DA error by babbling about riflemen MOS, etc. What happened? Were you surprised I would know the Marines used Army MOS's in early war years? Or were you just confused? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cplstevennorton
Does that mean you don't even understand the basics of WWII Marine Corps? At the least, you admit it! The reason you don't post any documents is that you have no document that refutes anything I posted.Quote:
I don't even need to post the docs on this, because anyone who understands even the basics of WWII Marine Corps already knows this. This info is also readily available online. You can literally google "WWII MArine MOS" and you find master lists of this. This info is correct, I have the docs that back it up. :)
I invite anyone reading this to try to retrieve the service records of a living Marine not related to you. Find out for yourself.Quote:
As far as Service Record books again you are not correct. They do not go by if the Marine is living, they go by the year they served. Any Marines personal records are easily accessible as long as he served by the mid 50's. You just have to walk into St Louis and use a simple pull card with the name and service number. Anything after the mid 50's is still accessible it just requires more paperwork and you have to File a Freedom of info request.
You are a data collector. You are no researcher. There is a huge difference between the two. Life is change, but the truth of history never changes.Quote:
As I said Jim, everything has changed. There is a substantial amount of new info out there for you to research. Good luck.
Anyone who wants to see what MOS 761 is, they can just click on the link I posted above and scroll down till you find it. A 761 is a Infantry Scout Sniper.
If anyone wants to pull ANY Marine service records up to the mid 50s and can't travel to St Louis, there are several researchers who will pull them for you, for a fee.
It's usually $50 to a $100 for a researcher to pull and copy the file for you. But the files are usually 30 to 50 pages or more. You do not need to be a relative to pull these files.
You can request a copy for free online if you are a relative but they usually do a horrible job finding and copying the files. So I still recommend to have them pulled by a researcher even though it will cost you money and the other way is free. This is very much a case where you get what you pay for.
For researchers at St Louis I highly recommend Lori at Redbird Research. She pulls records for every Marine Researcher I know and she usually charges about half of the competitors. She does a very thorough job and is a great person as well. :)
These are the rosters I talked about earlier that some don't believe exist. They detail which Regiments the Marines were in at a particular time during the war. In 1944/45 it also usually lists their MOS. Now often their MOS changes on the roster depending on which roll the Marines assign them. But these give a good baseline then for you to pull their Service Records at St Louis. These are in the research room at the National Archives at College Park but also are even digitized online.
This is 3/3 an Infantry Unit. I just grabbed this screen shot at random flipping thru the files. The lines in Red are 761's which are school trained Scout Snipers. Other MOS's to point out as I stated above are 745 Infantry Rifleman and 746 which those are your BAR gunners.
The MOS charts and numbers Jim posted earlier have no bearing on WWII. This was a different era and they used different MOS Numbers.
https://imgur.com/a/Odnapea
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...0xMTjpeg-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/
I have looked at literally hundreds of Company Rosters, and this is the first one I have ever seen that included MOS's. The rosters are available on Ancestry.com for all to view.
Almost all rosters started to detail the MOS's in 1944. It continues for the rest of the series.
One of my posts just disappeared. Weird.
Who would not believe Company Rosters don't exist? What you talked about earlier was Division Diaries.Quote:
These are the rosters I talked about earlier that some don't believe exist.
Let's be clear, you started out referencing Division Diaries as a source for your information. Now it is the Company Rosters. You made that switch without catching a breathe. Which one was the source? Company Rosters, or Muster Rolls, are created when the unit is mustered-in. It is how they keep records of the location and status of individual Marines. Typically, a new Muster Roll comes out the 1st of every month.
What happened to the Division Diary source?
The Company Roster is daily function But these give a good baseline then for you to pull their Service Records at St Louis. These are in the research room at the National Archives at College Park but also are even digitized online.Quote:
They detail which Regiments the Marines were in at a particular time during the war. In 1944/45 it also usually lists their MOS. Now often their MOS changes on the roster depending on which roll the Marines assign them.
The change in MOS charts was made in 1944, not a "different era".Quote:
The MOS charts and numbers Jim posted earlier have no bearing on WWII. This was a different era and they used different MOS Numbers.
Just post the old man's Roster entry and the issue is settled. I'll admit I was wrong, if you can just do that and not go off on another tangent.
For someone who claims there weren't many snipers in WWII, you found more snipers than Messengers. Another baseless assertion down the tubes.
Post the old man's Division Diary entry that indicates more than one MOS. It is that easy. If you can do that, I lose, and you win, and I will be man enough to admit it.
I'm stepping out of this because this is honestly becoming extremely sad.
You be stepping out because you don't have any such documents. You made it all up. Now that is sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by cplstevennorton
Ok, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm exhausted ... :surrender:
I know now how it feels to watch a dog chase its tail ... :lol:
Regards,
Doug