Why did the US produce so many submachineguns?

"the three basic military models of Thompson in about five years the government procured from only two companies a total of 1,397,133 45-caliber submachine guns. "

" 300,000 supplied to allies in the form of lend-lease aid. "

So that leaves more than a million Thompson submachineguns. Where did they go? Were most just stockpiled in WW2 with no use? These short ranged weapons were used only sparingly by US forces in WW2. They weren't even standard equipment for most US ground forces.

In contrast to the German and Soviet Armies (who issued them on a very large scale), SMGs weren't even standard issue for officers and NCOs but rather placed into small weapon pools and issued in special situations.

And this is not including the hundreds of thousands of M3 Greaseguns.

 

You forgot the Reising (sp?). I think the motivation was trying to keep up with the world wide trend. The Brits fielded quite a few Stens and Sterlings, The Russians had the Ppsh21, Japanese had type 100's and the Germans with the MP 38,39,40.

I don't think the American SMG's really caught on because they were chambered in .45 which is not the best cartridge. All the others countries used someting in the neighborhood of the 9mm which was a much easier to handle round, when fired in full auto, and more accurate in most conditions. Making them more effective.

I would hazard to say that providing for "Lend Lease" sales and the desire to get more lead on the battlefield is what fueld the production numbers; however, it just didn't have an effective niche on the battlefield.

Why make them duck at 50 yards when you can put holes in them at 300 with a BAR that is chambered in the same caliber as the Garand? Accutate well aimed fire at a distance is very beneficial.

Brad

 

Yea, that's why I don't see a reason for the US to adopt so many submachineguns- they built and issued millions of M1 carbines for that role (often instead of submachineguns like the British , the Russians, or the Germans).

 

Come to think of it, what was more effective in most situations- a M1 carbine or a 9mm /~7 mm submachinegun like the PPSH or the MP-40?

 

Are you really sure about this? My impression is the Thompson was both relativly accurate and fairly easy to control and the 45 certainly had more stopping power.

 

The M1 Carbine's design was influenced by the shortcommings of the thompson and was largely issued to people whose main job did not require, or made the garand impractical, ie: Assistant machine gunners, Tankers, truck drivers, platoon leaders etc. Even though the folding stock carbines were fielded in airborne units and the "Jungle Carbine" in the Pacific I think they were discarded, at the first oppurtunity, in favor of a Garand. I have shot both the Garand and Carbine and favor the accuracy and range of the Garand. While the Carbine is more accurate at longer distances than the Thompson it's bullet lacks the punch past 200 yards. I would like to have seen a folding stock Garand with a selector switch.

It is my die hard belief that the 30-o6 is the most ballistically perfect round ever.

 

I looked at the infantry company chart for US infantry in the Korean War, and there is still no standard issue thompson.

 

Tank crews, drivers, military police... you name it.

 

The M1 carbine was more common to those personnel (save the tank crews).

 

I am pretty confident with that assesment. There is no arguing that a 230gr bullet, .45 1911, has a greater stopping power than the 124 gr 9MM Para. The benefits lie in the muzzle velocity and rate of fire.

The M1 Thompson had a cyclic rate of 700 RPM and had a muzzle velocity of approx. 910 fps and spit out a 230gr bullet. Bullet drop is 0" at 25 yrds, 3" @ 50yds, 8" @100yds. The rate of fire of the thompson would also cause the muzzle to rise during automatic fire. The recoil of the short barrel and heavy bullet combination also makes staying on target more difficult. IF the barrel on the thompson was longer it would be more accurate.

MP 40 had a cyclic rate of 500rpm a muzzle velocity of 1250fps and shot a 124gr bullet. Bullet drop 0" @25 yds, 1" @50, 4" @100. The rate of fire was 2/3ds the thompson and did not suffer from the same ammount of muzzle rise in full auto fire. The light recoil and barrel length made well aimed fire attainable thus allowing for more bullets to impact the target in close proximity.

I used "memory math" so I will bow to anyone who actually has the ballistic tables for the compared rounds.

The M3A1 "Grease Gun" was actually fielded in greater numbers due to the simplified operating system, reduced manufacturing requirements (Stamped and not machined), and it had a reduced rate of fire (400rpm) which made it easier to control and thus more accurate.

Brad

 

Military Police I think are primarily armed with Thompsons, makes sense with what they do. They received specialist training in the use of SMGs... I think I gleamed that off some other forum, but in so far as I can remember, references to the security detachments escorting American generals often described the guards as armed with M1 Thompsons.

The fully automatic M2 carbine though would be quite the close combat weapon. The 30. cal pistol cartridge was more powerful then the 7.62mm Tokarev and the American carbine was more accurate.

 

Do you have the figures for the PPSH-41?

 

488m/s for the PPSh and 600m/s for the M1 carbine. Both are tiny little rounds but hey, the Germans called them machine-pistols for a good reason.

 

US infantryman fires an M3 during the Korean War

I have read that the Thompson and the M3 were both used during the Korean War. The Communist Chinese used Thompsons captured from the Chinese Nationalists during the Chinese Civil War. Captured ones were then reused by US forces .


'By the end of 1944, the Thompson had been replaced in production by the M3 and M3A1and by the time of the Korean War, the Thompson had been withdrawn from service as a standard-issue submachine gun with U.S. forces. It was replaced by the M3/M3A1 submachine gun.

Many Thompsons were distributed to Chinese armed forces as military aid before the fall of Chiang Kai-shek's government to Mao Zedong's Communist forces in 1949. During the Korean War, American troops were surprised to encounter Chinese Communist troops heavily armed with Thompsons, especially during surprise night assaults. The gun's ability to deliver large quantities of short-range automatic assault fire proved very useful in both defense and assault during the early part of the conflict. Many of these weapons were recaptured and placed back into service with American soldiers and Marines for the balance of the war."

Thompson submachine gun: Facts, Discussion Forum, and Encyclopedia Article

 

Killing me..........of course I do.

PPSh-41
Ammunition: 7.62 mm patron (7.62x39)
Barrel: 10.5 " (838mm)
Cyclic Rate: 900 RPM
Muzzle Velocity : 1600fps

I have no idea what the ballistic data would be. I could assume that it might be less accurate than the Ak-47 due to the design of the stock and the rate of fire. The bullet may also be prone to instability due to the weight and muzzle velocity; but, who cares when you have a 71 round magazine.

 

I meant the bullet drop. Does the PPSH shoot straighter than the 9mm? The 7.62 mm is a smaller bullet with great m. velocity, right?

 

I would say that the PPSh......130gr.(?) Bullet from 10.5" barrel traveling at 1600FPS is not horrible. The bullet may have a tendancy to tumble at distance and may not have the knock down power; but, I would assume it would be as accurate, if not more, than the MP40.

It sure puts out a lot of lead

 

And just to take the Use of the Thompson and M3 a little further they were used in Vietnam too.

"I was assigned as the assistant district advisor to Thuan Hoa district, Ba Xuyen province, IV CTZ (Map 2). The district headquarters village that housed the six members of Advisory Team 73 was the home base to the 566th and 567th RF companies. The popular force platoons were locally recruited volunteers responsible for village and hamlet security, were the least trained and equipped of the three army echelons, and numbered from 2535 soldiers. By the fall of 1968 most ARVN infantry units were armed with M-16 rifles, while RF companies carried World War II and Korean War vintage weapons. My two RF companies' heaviest weapons were their .30 caliber Browning Model 1919A4 air-cooled machine guns and M-29 81mm mortars, which were used mainly for defense of the district headquarters and were seldom carried on operations. Platoons counted on their .30 caliber Model 1918A2 Browning Automatic Rifles and M-19 60mm mortars for firepower. The rank and file of the companies used either .30 caliber M I Garand rifles or M1 carbines and a mix of .45 caliber M1A1 Thompson, .45 caliber M3, and .45 caliber submachine guns, and M1911 A1 pistols. The PF self defense platoons were armed mostly with .30 caliber M1 and M2 carbines."

Military Assistance Command Vietnam observations for the MiTT | Infantry Magazine | Find Articles at BNET

 

Looking at the stats and pictures in wiki for the two guns:
Thompson submachine gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MP40 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It looks like the Thompson had a longer barrel than the MP40 and weighed more (good for control not so good for hauling around). Under 50 yards I'd definitly take the Thompson. Over that well more bullet drop affects accuracy but the shoulder stock and longer barrel should help there and the 45 should be retaining it's punch better than the 9mm.

 

Not quite. the finishing of the PPSh was many times sub-standard and the construction of the gun itself didn't allow for much accuracy. neither smgs did. The Thompson wasn't really that bad. Actually, troops preferred it over the Grease gun because of it's sturdiness. The raising of the barrel you speak was somewhat offset because of the weight of the gun. And wolfy, if you went fighting inside buildings, You'd be wishing for a SMG in no time

Oh about the 30-06 being the best calibre around, not quite. The 5.56 is wieldier, allows for the troops to carry twice as much ammo and it takes a bigger toll on the enemies resources. Plus, all that power in the 7.62 is wasted at modern combat distances.




Cheers...