Squad level firepower comparisons

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Freikorps, Reichswehr, Austrian Bundesheer, Heer, Waffen-SS, Volkssturm and Fallschirmjäger and the other Luftwaffe ground forces. Hosted by Christoph Awender.
Post Reply
Brady
Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 10 Jul 2008, 23:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#136

Post by Brady » 28 Aug 2018, 00:34

I had thought no British use of the M1 Garand in combate took place ?

Gary Kennedy
Member
Posts: 1001
Joined: 28 Mar 2012, 19:56

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#137

Post by Gary Kennedy » 28 Aug 2018, 01:17

The Commandos are the only units I've heard of as having M1 rifles, if only for a short period. There are a few photos of individual British and Canadian soldiers with them, including one of a Welsh Guardsman on another forums I looked back on, some discussion as to whether it was a 'dressed' photo.

As an aside, if the invasion of Japan had gone ahead the Canadian element were scheduled to be organised and equipped as a standard US Inf Div, so they would have had M1 rifles and BARs rather than No.4s and Brens.

Gary


User avatar
yantaylor
Member
Posts: 1086
Joined: 20 Mar 2011, 15:53
Location: Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#138

Post by yantaylor » 28 Aug 2018, 21:47

Could you chamber the BAR to fire the standard 7.7mm British round?

The Bren would be my LMG of choice over the BAR, which I don't think was a true LMG and probably why the Americans themselves, call it an automatic rifle, the real LMG was the M1919A4 and that is how it was classed by the US Army.

Yan.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#139

Post by Cult Icon » 06 Sep 2018, 21:53

On pg. 69 of "The German Army on the Eastern Front: An inner view of the Ostheer's experiences of war" there is a post 1943 report that highlights something I've noticed myself. A central theme of the book is the "Infantry crisis of 43-45" and the struggles to keep combat power from dropping.

-poorly trained infantrymen and replacements. Marksman training is poor.
-The rifle declined relative to the MG and heavy weapons. The riflemen fire their weapons too little.
-There is an urgent demand for rifles with scopes.
-example given: A SS commander got 300 sniper rifles direct from Himmler and distributed it among the infantry battalions, leading to creation of sniper teams that have been successful with some snipers with over 30 kills.
-The "cry for the sniper rifle" is stronger than the semi-automatic rifle. Captured Soviet SVT rifles fail in cold temperatures.
-Captured Soviet sniper sights are detached from captured Soviet rifles and re-allocated to German rifles.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#140

Post by Cult Icon » 06 Sep 2018, 22:15

1st Infantry division report filed in Autumn 1944:

-The use of snipers are most effective if they are concentrated in the "SMG company".
-Use of snipers to screen the "area of main effort" of the frontline.
-Deployment of individual sniper groups is a failure, as this results in only sentry service.
-Deployment of sniper groups must be mobile. In the attack, the sniper groups are attached to the company commanders for deployment.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#141

Post by Cult Icon » 06 Sep 2018, 22:27

From the same report:

-The MG group and rifle grenade groups were merged together to overwatch the advancing SMG groups. When facing tough resistance, the unit shifted to defense and the MGs took over as the SMG groups were frequently low on ammo at this point.

-The rifle grenade groups lobbed grenades from cover and were in close proximity to infantry carts, which eased ammo resupply relative if rifle grenadiers were spread out.

-best practices: the commander of the MG and riflegrenade groups should be the deputy platoon leader.

-SMG group has "proven itself" and is more agile than rifle groups in the counterattack. It is also good in the defense.

Also, an interesting report on ammo consumption of the STG-44: Ammo consumption in companies were flat as the MGs decreased their firing with the presence of STG-44.

Brady
Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 10 Jul 2008, 23:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#142

Post by Brady » 07 Sep 2018, 01:33

Ok- So hears a new one:

Tank Crews, I have read that American Crews late war had grease guns, and side arms, and prior to that idk, and idk how many of each were allotted.

German tank crews I thought had two MP 40's and the rest of the crew had Pistols ?

British, I have no idea...

Gary Kennedy
Member
Posts: 1001
Joined: 28 Mar 2012, 19:56

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#143

Post by Gary Kennedy » 07 Sep 2018, 16:35

Interesting comments on the use of various small arms there, and the criticism of the capability of newly arrived replacements. The latter chimes quite closely with similar comments from 1945 era USMC reports I've seen for example on their replacement drafts.

I've not heard the term SMG Company as applied to German units before, though they were a fixture of the Red Army from very early on. I wonder if it references a concentration of automatic weapons in a single Rifle Company per Battalion rather than in say one Platoon per Rifle Company, which again was another Red Army development? The later period KStN do show a grouping of 'sharpshooters' at Rifle Company level. Also interesting to see the references to rifle grenades, I know they were very widely issued and there were multiple variants, especially for anti-tank usage, but I've never been sure how effective they were or how frequently they were used. Allied accounts of fire received very much revolve around mortars and MGs.

Gary

Gary Kennedy
Member
Posts: 1001
Joined: 28 Mar 2012, 19:56

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#144

Post by Gary Kennedy » 07 Sep 2018, 16:48

Brady wrote:
07 Sep 2018, 01:33
Ok- So hears a new one:

Tank Crews, I have read that American Crews late war had grease guns, and side arms, and prior to that idk, and idk how many of each were allotted.

German tank crews I thought had two MP 40's and the rest of the crew had Pistols ?

British, I have no idea...
The official figures for US crews is one SMG per light tank and two per medium tank, remainder pistols, for 1942-43. That then became all SMGs for both light and medium tank crews from late 1943 onwards. In theory the Platoon commander switched to a carbine from June 1944; no idea why and even less as to how many actually made the change.

German crews were all pistols, with at least one MP on the tank. By 1944 the driver was supposed to be armed with the on board MP instead of a pistol.

British tank crews were initially all to have pistols, the driver latterly swapping to a Sten from 1943-ish. Canadian crews I seem to recall had two Stens and the rest pistols for 1944-45.

Gary

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#145

Post by Cult Icon » 07 Sep 2018, 19:23

Gary Kennedy wrote:
07 Sep 2018, 16:35
I've not heard the term SMG Company as applied to German units before, though they were a fixture of the Red Army from very early on. I wonder if it references a concentration of automatic weapons in a single Rifle Company per Battalion rather than in say one Platoon per Rifle Company, which again was another Red Army development? The later period KStN do show a grouping of 'sharpshooters' at Rifle Company level. Also interesting to see the references to rifle grenades, I know they were very widely issued and there were multiple variants, especially for anti-tank usage, but I've never been sure how effective they were or how frequently they were used. Allied accounts of fire received very much revolve around mortars and MGs.

Gary
I will check it later again but I think the report is about the Assault rifle equipped company (assault company). They were referred as MPis.

Another one from VI.AK commanding General Hans Jordan at Rzhev salient (1942)

-concentrated charges of 6-7 grenades ineffective against tanks.

-SMGs highly effective in the defense. Each SMG needs 1,000 rounds and should be put in the frontline rather than being the personal weapons of leaders.

Brady
Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 10 Jul 2008, 23:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#146

Post by Brady » 06 Dec 2018, 18:40

From above we were mainly looking at late war comparisons, and I was wondering if some light could be shed on the early war period with a look at the:

German

Italian

British

Typical Rifle Squad composition, from what I read it would seam they were fairly comparable for a 40/41 time frame ?

User avatar
yantaylor
Member
Posts: 1086
Joined: 20 Mar 2011, 15:53
Location: Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#147

Post by yantaylor » 06 Dec 2018, 22:38

Hi Brady, the German Rifle squad started the war in 1939, with a slightly larger squad of 13 all ranks;
https://www.quartermastersection.com/ge ... any1939-40
But by 1940, this was changed to 10.

Regards
Yan.

Gary Kennedy
Member
Posts: 1001
Joined: 28 Mar 2012, 19:56

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#148

Post by Gary Kennedy » 07 Dec 2018, 15:22

Pre-war the British Rifle Section was eight strong, each man with a rifle and one Bren per Section. In theory the Bren was to be used to increase the firepower of the Section in the defence, while in the attack there was expected to be liberal fire support from Vickers MMGs; in 1938 the Inf Bde was planned to have three Rifle Bns and one MG Bn, the latter allowing for 12 MMGs to support each Rifle Bn. By 1939 the MG Bns had been removed from the Divisional structure and the 1939 manual for the Bren recognised it as the principle weapon of the Rifle Section. The Section remained eight men strong until April 1940, when it suddenly jumps to 11 men. However Army instructions of the day stated the increase was a measure to allow the eight man Section to be fielded more consistently, the extra personnel being withdrawn to reserve before the Section went into action.

By 1941 the Rifle Section was ten strong, the commander now authorised a Thompson SMG where available. In the Middle East (8th Army) the Section was dropped to nine men by 1942, I think to help find in large part the personnel to form the new Battalion Anti-tank Platoon. I've also sort of formed the opinion that the Thompson was removed from the Rifle Sections in favour of the rifle in the desert campaigns, but that's just a suspicion on my part.

As Yan's noted the German Rifle Squad was 13 strong pre-war, split into a Rifle Troop (7 men) and an LMG Troop (4 men), the Squad leader moving with the LMG and the assistant leader with the Rifle Troop. That set-up looks to have been ditched at the earliest opportunity, with the 1940 model being the ten man model discussed earlier. This removed the division of rifle and LMG elements and also introduced the MP40 for the Squad leader. That remained in force until 1943, when it was officially dropped to nine men, as found in the various later war KStN.

Gary

Brady
Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 10 Jul 2008, 23:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#149

Post by Brady » 07 Dec 2018, 17:23

@yantaylor , this was posted by you above, but this does nit look like a typical Italian Rifle squad, circa 40/41,correct me if I am wrong

ITALIAN INFANTRY SQUAD:
LMG Section:
NCO/Section Leader (6.5mm M.91 Rifle)
2 x LMG Teams Each Containing;
NCO (Pistol)
Pvt/LMG Gunner (M30 LMG + Pistol)
2 x Pvts/Ammunition Bearers (6.5mm M.91 Rifles)
Rifle Section:
NCO/Assistant Leader (6.5mm M.91 Rifle)
8 x Privates (6.5mm M.91 Rifles)

User avatar
fredleander
Member
Posts: 2175
Joined: 03 Dec 2004, 21:49
Location: Stockholm
Contact:

Re: Squad level firepower comparisons

#150

Post by fredleander » 07 Dec 2018, 17:50

yantaylor wrote:
28 Aug 2018, 21:47
Could you chamber the BAR to fire the standard 7.7mm British round?
Not without rebuilding it. The .303 was a rimmed cartridge.
yantaylor wrote:
28 Aug 2018, 21:47
The Bren would be my LMG of choice over the BAR, which I don't think was a true LMG and probably why the Americans themselves, call it an automatic rifle, the real LMG was the M1919A4 and that is how it was classed by the US Army.

Yan.
The American may have called the BAR "Automatic Rifle" but its function was as a LMG. I see "BAR" more like a type name rather than anything else. It was a support weapon like the present SAW's. The advantage of the BREN was a larger magazine capacity and a changeable barrel. In the Norwegian Army the BAR was used as the squad support weapon, served by the assistant squad leader and two soldiers. I don't know how the US Army organized it in their squads.

Actually, I believe the 1919 A4 was more like a MMG - Medium Machine gun - the .50 being the HMG. Even if the 1919 could be equipped with a bipod (as could the BAR), and in that capacity perhaps designated as a LMG, its "normal" configuration was with a tripod and a TOE mechanism. It was also belt-fed. Its total weight 15 kg.+. I know, I have carried, and fired it, a lot. The 8-man MG squad fielded two tripod-mounted 1919s.

Fred
River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book about Operation Sealion:
https://www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - an eight-book series on the Pacific War:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D3 ... rw_dp_labf

Post Reply

Return to “Heer, Waffen-SS & Fallschirmjäger”