did some soldiers actually prefer inferior ww2 weapons during vietnam wars? if so, was it because of the nostalgia?
>>27939747
Who says they are "inferior"?
>>27939747
>Nostalgia
Are you talking out of your ass? Most soldiers in Vietnam were not WW2 vets.
They probably wanted SMG's from experience with close range engagements in the jungle.
>>27939747
Nigger, do they LOOK like they're in their 40's?
>>27939747
The military takes a long time to throw things away. Just because they have new gear doesn't mean everybody gets it or gets material (bullets) for it. If you're unit has a fuckload of .45 in the ASP and very little of a different caliber, yer probably getting somethin chambered in .45.
Also, when the US got into Vietnam initially, they were still commonly using WW2 weapons as the standard anyway.
I read a book awhile back about a Marine sniper early in Nam' who took a thompson on patrol (with his sniper rifle) because lol they didnt get 1911's.
Basically summed it up to heavy as all hell and beat his ass (granted hes carrying tons of gear compared to a ww2 grunt).
He switched to the M14 after that and used it until M16's came in and his unit got 1911's
>>27939747
Bless you heart
>>27939804
>Thompson
>~10.6lbs empty
>M14
>~9.2lbs empty
special forces used a lot of grease guns and swedish k's. most engagements in the jungle are well within the effective range of a sub gun, and with the unreliability of m16's early on it was an obvious choice if they could get their hands on them.
If true, I'm surprised the U.S. didn't use the Korean war to dump off their stock of WWII gear.
>>27939857
I was in a unit in 2008 that still had an M79. I've seen units later than that using M16A1 uppers.
In 2003, guys invading Iraq were still using stuff like Colt 3.2x scopes. In early Iraq and Afghanistan, people were being issued vintage M14s right out of the box as a stopgap until ERBs were developed.
The military always keeps old shit. Probably especially true in early Vietnam since M14s were fullsized, making SMGs still relevant. Even after getting M16s, SMGs were still relevant to people looking for compact weapons who did get issued a special short barrel AR. If you're in a tank, would you take an M16A1 or M3 SMG if those were your two choices?
>>27939913
*didn't get issued a short barreled AR
>>27939747
Larry Thorne used a Springfield because he had used bolt actions for so long in the Winter War and WW2
Tfw you'll never be riding in an Abrams with a grease gun in Afghanistan listening to Jimi Hendrix wondering who you are and why you couldn't even get your own soundtrack at the very least.
US still uses M2 .50 Cal which is solidly WW2 era because it's the best, not for nostalgia. Also keep in mind when m16's were first issued they were not maintained properly so had high failure rates. Lots of soldiers didn't trust them and stuck with what was there before.
I know a retired sheriff's deputy who carried a Reising in his squad car up through ''97-'98 or something like that.
>>27939964
Larry Thorns real name was Lauri Törni ;)
>>27939820
But he had to take the Thompson along with his rifle, whereas he only needed the m14 on its own
>>27939747
>if so, was it because of the nostalgia?
It's because memes are stronger than facts.
>>27939762
This. In the book "Dead Center", about Marine snipers, the author talks about choosing to take Tommy guns on recon patrols, because the bush they were in was too thick to get long-range shots and their sniper rifles (Win. mod 70s) were next to useless in a sub 100m engagement. When M-16s and CAR-15s became available, they took those. Some LRRPs and other SOF preferred the "Swedish-K" 9mm.
looks like a thompson without the stock. a still from my old mans videos from his time in country. III corp 65.
same deal
>>27942083
>some LRRP's and SOF preferred Swedish K
That's because it was an integrally suppressed, high ROF subgun that was actually pretty fucking quiet while still being controllable.
>>27939747
>inferior
Did you get choked by you umbilical cord during childbirth?
>>27939964
>Finnish NCO
You're fucking retarded. He carried a KP-31. Look at any photos of him on SA-Kuva and you will notice that he has a KP-31
>>27942470
shit thats cool. post more pls
>>27942525
Guy I know was in LRRPS (68-69) and he and carried CAR15s. He only mentioned those and M60s being with him never any mention of any subgun.
They were probably trying to get away from hearing "IT AINT ME" every time they shot their weapon
>>27942560
Which Vietnam era weapons are inferior to the Thompson?
>>27942626
i'll try to soon
>>27939913
Lots of "retro" stuff came back during Iraq, like the resurrection of the M72 LAW and M79. The reason this happened was that the M203 grenade launcher was notorious for be hard to shoot accurately with, so it was replaced with a M79. The AT-4 rocket was to bulky for a foot patrol and redundant considering a SMAW gunner carried a better rocket, where every 3 guy could carry a LAW and use it effectively.
It wasn't that these older weapons where better then their replacements, but the situation in Iraq and AF was better confronted with these weapons.
>inferior
Eh but to be fair a fully loaded Thompson (stick mags) is so retardedly heavy I can't wrap my mind around it. Granted mines the semi auto rifle version but still.
>>27942601
You're fucking retarded. He was obviously referring to Thorne's time in the US military.
Kind of odd that with the apparent usefulness in the jungle and length of time in the war the Army never sought a lighter more modern replacement.
>>27939747
The US gave loads of WW2 era weapons to the South. They probably were forced to use the same weapons as the people they were training or something.
>>27942980
They actually issued a contract for a couple thousand brand spanking new M72s a couple years back as well as busting out old ones. Apparently they are perfect for MOUT operations. Also M3 Grease Guns and M1897 shotguns were issued to tank crews and some reserve and National Guard units in the Gulf War. I am told, though I cannot prove anything, that there is all kinds of old shit lying around National Guard armories and forgotten in warehouses all over the place. M1919 machine guns, 1903 Springfields, Garands, M1 Carbines, M14s, all of it either refurbished or even brand spanking new packed in grease and original shipping boxes.
There were no 97's in the gulf war. Most of those guns were sold or scrapped after WW-II, along with the '37's, 520-30's etc.
There were no 1919's left either, as there's no belted '06 in the pipleline to feed them. The Republic of South Vietnam probably got the last of them.
The M-3 grease gun was issued up into the 1970's to places like Air Force Security Police.
The last of the US Carbines went to the RVN and some Central American countries.
>>27939747
>inferior ww2 weapons
>implying the M2 Carbine was better than the M1 Carbine
>implying political corruption kept the XM16E3 out of soldiers' hands
>implying Ithaca 37 doesn't show up in combat today
>implying you are a fucking retard
>implying this is /k/
>where the retards are
>>27943239
But how would he have "used a bolt action for so long" in WW2 if his issued weapon was a KP-31?
A weapon he was known to use in Vietnam too.
>>27939747
It was a mix of stock and availability and reliability.
At this point, say 1967, WW2 was only 22 years over. Note that is like saying a weapon fielded in to he gulf war is so obsolete it wouldn't be effective in 2010, a blatantly wrong statement. Are you telling me you wouldn't use a gun that was twenty years old? Fun fact, the m3 grease gun .45 SMG remained in the us inventory for tank crews until at least the gulf war, and m2 .50 cal "ma deuce" has been in service for basically a century.
It takes a military a long time to get rid of that stockpile from a world war, we still have a cache here and there of old shit. It still works, so why not use it?
Some people also just trusted them more. The Vietcong certainly trusted ww2 guns over the then infamous m16 when it first came out.
So to recap:
1- huge surplus of ww2 gear
2- soldier trust
3- it was all still relatively new then, and a lot of it was basically new in box due to said surplus.
The British still used the Sterling in Afghanistan and Irag.
>>27943667
>The M-3 grease gun was issued up into the 1970's to places like Air Force Security Police.
Tank crews got them up into the late 80's.
>>27943836
I would too if my other option was a L-85.
>>27939747
I remember reading a book in high school called The Things They Carried, about a squad in Vietnam.
There was one chapter in the book (said chapter was also called the The Things They Carried) that was entirely about... well the things they carried and much how much they weighed (both figuratively and literally).
Shit was crazy, apparently grenadiers were carrying over 50 rounds of 40mm plus a rifle and ammo and the M79, standard riflemen were carrying 400 rounds at a time, flak vest + backpacks weighted in at 120 pounds. But the strangest part was that the grunts kept just about any gun that they could get their hands on, the narrator talked about keeping SKS, Uzis, M1911s, a bunch of different revolvers and pocket pistols, AKMs, Tokarevs, all types of pump shotguns, trench knifes, switchblades, KABARs (it was a army conscript unit btw), knuckledusters, and a metric shit-ton of grenades and other explosives.
Literally any gun that grunts could get their hands on in Vietnam, weather it be captured or bought off the blackmarket, they fucking carried it and used it.
>>27943956
Apparently standard gear for grunts was pretty damn inadequate on its own, and only officers were given pistols standard issue. However the armory or whatever would gladly give you ammo for whatever you were carrying on you, with no questions asked to how you got it.
My dad has a friend at work who is a survivor of the Tet offensive, got to meet him once. Said he had this shotgun he picked off a dead vietcong that he kept as a panic weapon, and that it saved his life more than everything else he carried combined.
>>27942083
my dad always talks about how awesome the swedish k was
>>27943836
We did not use the Sterling in Afghanistan. We had it in rotation for ear echelon during the Gulf War back in the 1990s. The only Sterlings that haven even remained in service with the armed Forces are the suppressed L34s, and we don't even use those anymore, we just keep them in reserve just in case.
>>27943865
By the time we were in Afghanstan we had the L85A2
Not by any means a bad rifle.
>>27939913
bullshit, the M3's never made it past the 1990's
>>27943956
that book was entirely fictional and was intended to serve as a universal outlet for the people who fought in the war. Yes it its true that soldiers occasionally carried weird shit during Vietnam however anything that you can't reliably get ammo or spar parts for is not going to be practical, especially in harsh jungle combat.
>>27943580
I believe it, kinda a-shame, knowing all that good stuff sitting there collecting dust. Wonder how much money gov can make going through and selling all those weapons as surplus?
>>27940027
It's also well documented that many of them failed despite meticulous cleaning. The early ones weren't properly built to withstand the jungle environment.
>>27943076
I've fired an original one, and yes, they are mind-blowingly heavy.
>>27939762
You can feel nostalgia for a time you weren't a part off.
anemoia - n. nostalgia for a time you’ve never known
http://youtu.be/wH6ZCIRjI14
>>27942470
>>27942485
Very cool. You should upload the video.
>>27945268
>>27943076
According to wikipedia they are only about 3 lbs heavier than an AK47. Maybe do some curls or something at the gym so you aren't a weak little shit.
>>27945316
The AK-47 is an assault rifle that fires intermediate powered rifle cartridges, while the Thompson is an SMG firing pistol cartridges. The latter should not be 3lbs heavier than the former.
>>27945316
Have you gone hiking?
Hiking through the woods with gear on your back is no different than humping through the forest with a rifle and gear on your back.
Ounces matter.
>>27945316
>a bloo bloo bah
Fuck carrying anymore weight than necessary.
You're an idiot.
>>27943956
American education, ladies and gentlemen.
>>27945083
>Not by any means a bad rifle.
Try firing it around a corner from your left shoulder.
>>27945359
Nice Meme reply, faggot. Jesus. you people are the most insufferable of all. the 'muh ounces' crowd.
>>27945349
No shit, it's from the early 1900's. Also thanks for educating everyone on the board what rounds come from SMGs, and what come from assault rifles.
>>27945567
That's a problem any righthanded shooter has. You can do it, you just have to be aware of the ejection port.
>>27945575
Not the guy you're replying to, but after being the water mule for an 8 man crew when we hit two dry camps in a row, shit sucks. What you don't have to carry matters quite a bit.
>>27943667
>>27943844
Not just up to late 80's some tank crews went into Iraq in '03 carrying grease guns. Better than nothing you know?
>>27945083
You're right. The Malaysian also kept the suppressed and standard Sterling SMG in reserve status. (Pic taken in 2012).
The gear available to troops changed rapidly across the Vietnam war.
First it was all WW2 & Korea type stuff, Thompsons, M1/M2 carbines, etc.
Then came the M14 issued in fairly decent numbers.
Then came the M16 issued in extremely large numbers.
A lot of the old stuff was simply given to the South Vietnamese.
Things I found interesting from reading primary source material:
Ranger LRRPs did not take M60s until the very end of the war. Their 5 man sticks used M16s and M14s. While the pig's weight would be a problem, I'd think that you'd really want that firepower when you got spotted or when you sprung your ambush. They universally did bounding retreats with the first guy in line magdumping. Normal combat load for a ranger with an M16 was 32 to 42 20-round mags. Due to being overweight with their radio, medkit, ammo, etc, they rarely carried more than 1 liter of water into their 5 day deployment. This meant they had to drink whatever water they found...
LRRPs relied on silence & not being spotted. Most frequently, they only covered 5 kilometers in 5 days.
MAC-V SOG on the other hand used a lot of MGs. They often did very similar things to the Ranger LRRPs, but their equipment was pretty distinct. They went for volume of fire.
AirCav Blue Teams (Quick Reaction Force) were used to either quickly reinforce units that needed help or go save downed aircrew. These went out in 21-ish man formations with at least 3 M60s. They were only officially issued one M60, but since they went to save downed aircrew, they found a lot of M60s in wrecks from door gunners, so they simply overhauled those and put them back out into the field.
AirCav Blue Teams worked from sun up to sun down. It was very rare for Blue Teams to be out in the field after sun down.
>Walk into the armory for 10th mountain at ft.polk
>We still have a rack of M14s we cant touch and a pig that gets stuck on a jeep sometimes for parades
Apparently they found a belt of ammo for the m60 and a bunch of officers took it to the range. Sexy sounding gun.
>>27946117
>continued
AirCav would use Loaches (proto-Little Birds) to fly low, and shoot at bunkers or suspect items in the jungle in the hope that someone would fire back and confirm enemy presence. When they did, Cobras would swoop in and pepper the enemy. If resistance was heavy, they'd either call in bombers or insert blue teams.
Call sign for Loaches were 'white', and Cobras were 'red'. A team of 1 Loach (bait) and 1 Cobra (support) was called a 'pink' team (for obvious reasons).
Losses to Loaches were extreme. They had no armor whatsoever and were used as bait.
>>27945567
I'm right handed so I wouldn't.
Left handed people are the scum of the earth and should be thrown in detention camps.
>>27946119
Ft. Polk is literally Vietnam tier with it's OD uniforms and Hueys flying around.
>>27946133
Sounds like you would have to be insane to be a Loach pilot.
>>27946940
And now you know why Kiowa pilots are they way they are.
>>27946855
fuck you
>>27946117
>>27946133
this is the shit I come to /k/ for....
please continue to post here, I try my best to find these diamonds in this mountain of shitposts that comprises /k/.
>>27946881
And tiger land
>>27939747
completely forgets the korea was between ww2 and vietnam
>>27946119
Nice made up story.
>>27946133
Literally used as bait you say?
>>27946954
well, thats what kiowas are. Small, light, agile, 150 mph bait
>>27942980
>AT4 rocket
>>27939820
>>27940825
No he carried both or at worse would switch the rifle out with his spotter - he was attached to a recon element his first nam tour. Most of his engagements were surprise contact/ambushes but he had alot of oppurtunities to play sniper too.
I wish I remember the name of the book, he actually saw his first combat not in Vietnam, but in Santo Domingo, Dominican republic when the US intervened in the civil war.
He was injured there - can't remember if shot or by fragmentation, but his main motivation for wanting to be a sniper was noting how effective a single peasant Dominican marksman in a building was pinning down his buddy's and he lamented not being able to shoot him with something scoped like his deer rifle.
>>27939820
Also forgot to mention his main complaint against the Thompson was weight of the gun loaded and the mags/the combat load compared to the M14 (keep in mind he was a marine so for all we know he may have had a M1928A1 or a M1 instead of an M1A1) - and it's effectiveness in combat.
He pretty much got free reign on what to carry aside from his sniper rifle, he tried the thompson and after a patrol he went back to the M14 - they didn't get 1911's until later when they were already in theater (because military BII for a sniper at that time was fucked - not that it matters, he preferred a rifle as a secondary because he got in too much contact to rely on a 30-06 model 70 and a 1911)
>>27942470
The vietnamese made copies of the M1A1 thompson and MAT-49 in workshops at the time
>>27945104
Any remaining M3's not on the open market are in national guard storage (no longer active storage in unit armories - the last confirmed report of them was from a Nat Guard tanker NCO who stated they were in unit armories circa late 90's-early 2000's but never issued/used aside from fucking around on the range - they got M4's anyway).
I've personally seen M16A1 lowers mated with A2 and A4 uppers and M79's, I've also seen other weird shit like one or two random guys in a unit inadvertently being issued an M4A1
>>27945104
>especially true in early Vietnam since M14s were fullsized, making SMGs still relevant. Even after getting M16s, SMGs were still relevant to people looking for compact weapons who did get issued a special short barrel AR. If you're in a tank, would you take an M16A1 or M3 SMG if those were your two choices?
>Especially true in Vietnam
Wow. It's like that part of the post had nothing to do with the 1990s.
It is hard to overstate how many of these fucking things we had stockpiled in armories after WWII.
