Still manufacturing Springfields late in war?

[dandhan]

I have a 1903 Springfield built by Remington in 1943. I understand that there weren't enough Garands to issue to all infantrymen at the beginning of WWII, but why were they still manufacturing '03s so late in the war?

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Rick the Librarian]

The last M1903A3s were manufactured about February, 1944 and some M1903A4s as late as mid-1944. Obviously parts production continued at least through early 1945. While M1903/A3s were not being used by many infantrymen (except as grenade launchers and a couple of other specialized tasks) there was still enough specialized demand for them, if nothing else, by support units.

However, the Army wasted no time in "obsoleting" them once WWII was over, especially the M1903s.

[firstflabn]

WWII procurement is a complex subject. The starting point is the Army Supply Program, an attempt at developing an overall procurement plan. Started in Apr 42, seven reports were generated by Oct 44 - or roughly one every six months. Requirements were constantly changing as conditions changed and data from the field was gathered.

Every procurement program starts with assessing requirements: how many of what item do you need and when do you need it. The army first determined the size and composition of the force, then how each type of unit would be equipped, then the schedule for unit activation. After all that, estimated attrition rates and needs for the other services and Lend Lease requirements had to be included. Only then could production be scheduled.

I have a copy of the first ASP report from Apr 42 and was surprised to see a total requirement for 4.8 million '03s with 3.5 million of that total for Lend Lease (and other foreign aid) and none for the navy. Not sure what country that massive number of '03s was intended for unless it was China, but it's a minor point since this first ASP was quickly set aside as U.S. production capacity could not possibly meet the astronomical demands it calculated. It did serve as a starting point, however, in allocating resources. As they say, the first step in solving a problem is in defining it. Gotta get your arms around the question first.

My guess is that the Aug 43 edition of the ASP would show you what the current state of affairs was when plans were being finalized for production of your rifle. If you'd like to request that report from NARA, PM me and I'll send you the file location (NARA troopies seem to respond quicker when they can go right to a document - has to help their beancount). Depending on their mood, the report will cost you either $0 or $20 (the latter being their stated minimum charge - often waived for small orders).

An example of changing requirements is seen in the Army Service Forces Annual Report for 1943 (FY43, not calendar, I believe). It mentions changing T/O&Es in '43 to equip 25% of service forces EMs with '03s - astoundingly for AA use. That would serve to increase demand, presumably while L/L demand was falling. I have a few 1942 T/O&Es for service units - it's a mixed bag - some already have approx 25% '03s and others have approx 100% carbines. In one or two cases where I have both a '42 and a later T/O&E for the same unit type, they show no '03s in the early version and 25% '03s in the later one, seemingly consistent with the ASF annual report's description.

[Rick the Librarian]

Wartime demands did change - as I recall, the original plan was for something like 216 divisions and something like 35-40 armored divisions. Only 91 divisions were raised, IIRC.

One thing I forgot to mention in my post is the power of "inertia" - sometimes, it look awhile to slow down the production of a certain item. I think that was true of M1903s.

[Calif-Steve]

Fairly certain the 03's ended up in Basic Training posts. The US Navy got a pile of Remington M1903's early on. But a buddy of mine was a SeaBee and he carried an M1 Carbine. I think the Army was disposing of M1917's even before the war ended in 1945. By the end of the war there excess everything in the inventory.

[Rick the Librarian]

As I recall, M1917s were declared surplus in Nov., 1944 - I think the M1903s shortly before or after the end of the war. M1903A3s were still being overhauled at Springfield after WWII.

[firstflabn]

By the time 03A3 production began, the army's troop basis had been reduced to 100 divisions - fairly close to the number at war's end. Personnel strength fell in about the same proportion, though service units total strength actually went up by about 500k as the army learned it took a lot more support than expected. Still, army service unit EMs only totaled 1.5 million in 1945.

The navy officially said they got 330k '03s (of all types) through the procurement process - though this figure likely did not include in-theater requisitions (which probably wouldn't have accounted for a huge number). This navy figure excluded USMC rifles. Since the USMC had 50k Springfields in 1941, it's unlikely they got a huge additional quantity.

That's the procurement side. On the distribution side, all I can offer is in Jan 45, the ETO reported about 270k '03s (all types except 03A4) which included almost 40k in the hands of French forces. ETO had about 60% of the army's overseas forces, so 400k would probably be a decent estimate of '03s overseas with army forces.

In 1945, ETO and MTO used an estimated attrition rate of 2% per month for '03s. The SW Pacific used an 8% monthly rate and even the ZI (stateside) used 0.5%. Not huge quantities, but losses do whittle away at total supply. Reserve stocks really eat into supply. The Pacific used 90 days of reserves for a good part of the war. So, at the SWP's 8% per month attrition rate, a 90 day supply would mean a reserve of 24% of numbers in the hands of troops would be required.

Though the picture is far from complete, I'm becoming suspicious that the army might have disposed of its '03s overseas after the war ended and shipped none home (except those with ETO/MTO troops redeploying to the Pacific).

[Rick the Librarian]

I read one statement that many of the USMC M1903s were handed over to the Navy, when M1s were issued in large quantity.

[Ex Crab]

In March this year a bunch of M1903 A3s surfaced here in Germany. I wasted no time in buying one. Looks brand new and was made in Sep 43 by Remington. I thought it was a bit strange to make rifles and not use them, but weapons procurement is a strange business and I'm not complaining about my "new" Springfield.

[Bob Womack]

As a point of reference, at the beginning of 1944, my late father qualified as a Sharpshooter with the M1 Garand, top in his training company, at Great Lakes Naval Induction Center.

Bob