British Infantry identification

[keith A]

http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib/47 ... hotographs

This photo shows probably British or commonwealth troops perhaps near Arezzo in July 1944. Note the unusual uniform, at least two are wearing Italian camouflage smocks. Aldo unusual are the troops carrying an M1 and M1A1 with 30 round magazines. Can anyone identify which regiment this is?

regards

Keith

[John Hilly]

Some kind of a SAS unit?

British Army

During World War II, the British SAS used the M1 and M1A1 carbines after 1943. The weapon was taken into use simply because a decision had been taken by Allied authorities to supply .30 caliber weapons from US stocks in the weapons containers dropped to Resistance groups sponsored by an SOE, or later also Office of Strategic Services (OSS), organizer, on the assumption the groups so supplied would be operating in areas within the operational boundaries of U.S. forces committed to Operation Overlord.[citation needed] They were found to be suited to the kind of operation the two British, two French, and one Belgian Regiment carried out. It was handy enough to parachute with, and, in addition, could be easily stowed in an operational Jeep. Other specialist intelligence collection units, such as 30 Assault Unit sponsored by the Naval Intelligence Division of the British Admiralty, which operated across the entire Allied area of operations, also made use of this weapon.[citation needed]. The Carbine continued to be utilized as late as the Malayan Emergency, by the Police Field Force[60] of the Royal Malaysian Police, along with other units of the British Army,[61][62] were issued the M2 Carbine for both jungle patrols and outpost defense. The Royal Ulster Constabulary also used the M1 carbine.[63]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_carbin ... 30.2C_M1A1

With best, J-P

[Knouterer]

I think Keith was referring to the Thompsons in the photo, not carbines. Annyway, the man in front is carying a M1928A1. Early in the war, the British ordered only 20-round magazines (and 50-round drum magazines) for their Thompsons, because the 30-round mags did not fit in the 1937 pattern universal ammo pouches, and in fact the War Office and the Ministry of Supply complained loudly when they were told (on 1 April 1943) that the Americans were going to discontinue production of the shorter magazine. However, it was soon found that the new Mk. 3 ammo pouch, designed to hold Sten mags, was large enough for the 30-r. (XXX) Thompson mags as well. It is not known how many such mags the British received, not very many probably as they were changing over to the Sten anyway and the Americans kept supplying XX mags for as long as any were in stock.

Regarding the men in the picture: perhaps Italian "Co-Belligerent" troops?

[Knouterer]

Or British after all. The picture linked to above is IWM photo NA 16932; this one is NA 16966, taken on the same day, and the caption says: "Men of 1st Guards Brigade rest beside Route 71 west of Arezzo, 16 July 1944".

[keith A]

Yep. The 30-rd magazine also precluded firing from the prone position, and the weight was not popular (it was known to work itself loose). I can't see any cooling fins but there's evidence of a charging handle on top of the receiver so it's probably an M1928a1 as you say. I see your thinking on the CIL troops but the IWM does state British, and Arezzo in July 1944, whereas the Italians were re-equipped as British Infantry later in 1944 (one source states July 1944 so the timing could be pretty close). The mixed dress and wide-brimmed hat however does show some latin style although there's no evidence of unit tabs on the collar. The foto you posted on the Guards seems to confirm it. The Clark Gable lookalike at front left is wearing the camouflage cape . As you know the STEN is rarely seen in Italy (other than by partisans) although I have seen a photo of two British soldiers equipped with MkIII but their lack of webbing argues they are support troops new in theatre. The M3 grease gun also saw some limited service.

thanks, chum

[gambadier]

While special forces were different, the British Army operated on standard establishments, generally these were identical for each type of unit for all the European theatres. For infantry there was an additional consideration, once you get to platoon level the ideal is to have only weapons that fire the same type of ammunition, as any platoon commander knows this makes a bit of redistribution easy if it starts to run short.

[keith A]

Yep... however there was a considerable difference in combat. The TSMG was only seen in ETO with Commandos (and sometimes Canadian support troops) whereas it was present in both 9mm and .45 in Italy. Platoons were established with an idea of SMGs for section leaders but in ETO platoon officers/sergeants and senior commanders carried rifles in preference to STENs as personal weapons. The rifle was possibly to reduce their profile to snipers but may also have been a decision that a rifle was more useful.

American officers seem to have adopted the same reasoning although the preference for a Grand M1 over a Carbine was especially prevalent in the Pacific where close combat was more likely (Carbine with less stopping power).

On your point the BREN and SMLE used common ammunition, but the STEN was 9mm (although I think it could use German MP40 ammo). The arguments for/against the STEN ramble on without any realistic ending....except that is if you don't look after your weapon it misfires, not rocket science I agree but perhaps better training was required.

SMGS as a section/platoon weapon was new in ww2 and the requirements were greater than for a rifle. All SMGs had a subjective audience. British liked the MP40, Russians liked the MP40, Germans the PPSh41, The Germans, Rumanians and British liked the Beretta 1938, French Resistance, Italians and Germans liked the STEN.....

Special Forces choice of weapons were largely because of their mission as a largely non-combat service e.g. weight.

regards
Keith

[LineDoggie]

Yep... however there was a considerable difference in combat. The TSMG was only seen in ETO with Commandos (and sometimes Canadian support troops) whereas it was present in both 9mm and .45 in Italy.

There was no 9mm Thompson on issue in WW2.

[Alanmccoubrey]

Keith, those aren't camouflage smocks that they are wearing, rather simple "tabbards" made from Italian material.

[keith A]

Many thanks, chaps

I don't know why I assumed there was a 9mm TSMG - senior moment perhaps That would explain why the STEN was so rare in theatre (except for use by the partisans, German and Italian RSI paratroops).

The tabard idea was very clever, there seems to have been a much more liberal attitude to equipment and clothing with the British and Commonwealth troops in Italy.

[Aber]

The tabard idea was very clever, there seems to have been a much more liberal attitude to equipment and clothing with the British and Commonwealth troops in Italy.

Well it was the Eighth Army - the only dress regulation IIRC was "Top hats shall not be worn".

[Michael Dorosh]

The Thompson as noted was standard issue in Italy. There was no desire to ship both 9mm and 45cal ammo as shipping space was limited.

Not sure what the reference to Canadian "support troops" means. The Canadian Army used the Sten in NW Europe and the Thompson in Italy, unless I am missing something.

Despite the mix-up in ID earlier, just a note that M-1 carbines were a popular item - Farley Mowat talked about obtaining one (on Sicily I believe), then loaning it to the C.O. of the RCR. Probably not a great idea for front-line infantry who would be shooting it a lot, but Mowat was an I.O. and and L.O. IIRC following his stint as a platoon commander.

[Michael Dorosh]

The tabard idea was very clever, there seems to have been a much more liberal attitude to equipment and clothing with the British and Commonwealth troops in Italy.

As noted above, the 8th Army was very hands-off with regards to uniforms, save for the top hat rule which is mentioned in the history of the 48th Highlanders of Canada.

Canadian troops who redeployed to NW Europe as Operation GOLDFLAKE in early 1945 noted with dismay that the casual attitude toward dress inherent to the 8th Army was not emulated in 1st Canadian Army.