K98k or M1 Garand

Note that it's from an official army site. I think the list is a TOE list of the equipment in a standard US Infantry Division of the time. It doesn't include all the attached units and or Corp or Army support units that would in combat functionally be part of the unit.

 

4.2-in. motars are corps assets organized in "chemical mortars" battalions, usually Chemical for short.

2-3 times the authorized strength in BARs? Got a source for that? We all know late war US Infantry Divisions are highly likely to have 2 BARs per squad but that actually is authorized. Battalions recieved extra unassigned BARs enough to distribute 2/3 of its rifle squads to beef up their automatic firepower, so what does it mean to have automatic weapons far beyond the authorized strength mean?

In an Ardeness small unit fight brought up on this forum earlier, one US platoon of 18 men from the 99th Div. dispatched 400-500 German paratroopers of the 3d Parachute Division. That platoon had 2 air-cooled 30 cal. MGs and one 50 cal. HMG in addition to its BARs.

Are we looking at unofficial BAR numbers at the scale of US Marines or what?

 

I've heard that German records only state 50 or so men lost that day to the I & R platoon.

 

I was guessing that was the case. Thanks for the confirmation.

I said 2 times the authorized not 3. I'm assuming that it was prior to the 2 per platoon being authorized.

There was and is an unofficial supply system that works throughout the US military. Items would be swapped/lifted and "lost" or "damaged" and replacements required. At some level they could also just be requested/requisitioned. An OT story from a buddy of mine who served in Vietnam. They officially were suppose to have one or two radios however they had enough problems with them and they were important enough that his vehicle (a Sheridan) typically had 5 or 6.

Again it's my impression from a dated memory that yes for some units that may be the case. However it was probably far from uniform. The updating of the authorized number of BARs may have simply been an official recognition that the unofficial increase was a good idea. The US had a tendency to do that.

Or I may be all wet on this one.

 

With 2 x more BARs, one can assume that their requirements for ammunition and bar magazines would increase. I'm assuming that this would go easy with the supply people?

 

The ammo was the same as used in the Garand, Springfield, and 30 cal Browing. I doubt it would be a big deal. Similarly the number of magazines produced and shipped would probably be scaled for the number of guns. At the squad/platoon level it would require humping more rounds but that's why the US had an impressive log system.

 

I think it is safe to assume that 2 BAR for every rifle squad was to be expected from veteran divisions. There might be even more. 30. cals I imagine would also be something that veteran rifle battalions hoard, along with other goodies like bazooka and captured Panzerfauste. Actually, I recall that Gavin almost captured enough to equip his whole 82d ABN Div with fausts... Certainly this destandardization of equipment and modified MoD should be common in WWII Armys.

 

Some US units had amazing numbers of weapons in their inventory. For example I have read an after action report by a cavalry squardron in the Ardennes (not the 14th Cavalry Group) on Eisenborn Ridge that had their frontage wired and mined and covered by 99 .30 and .50 machineguns along with 27 60mm and 6 81mm mortars as intrinsic dismounted equipment. This apparently did not include armament on M8 armored cars, M5 light tanks, or M8 MGC (typically employed as artillery). The report states they stopped cold a VG division repeatedly attempting to assault their position frontally with massive casualties.

 

What was the approx. strength in men and armored material of this group?

 

Its about 750 men, 40 M8 Armored cars, 6 (later 8) M8 MGC and 17 M5 light tanks. Basically, for this unit to have what was listed above dismounted and manned everybody not operating some armored vehicle in the unit was manning a mortar or a machinegun.
For small arms the unit had 202 SMG (not including vehicle equipment), 434 M1 carbines and 90 M1 rilfes. There were 31 bazookas per TO&E 27 60mm and 3 81mm mortars.
Note, that all those 37mm guns could and did have and shot cannister among other rounds.

 

That's 63 armored vehicles X 4 men each =252 men.

99 30/50 cal. machineguns and 33 mortars manned by 500 infantrymen is pretty impressive. It's unit composed completely of medium/heavy MG and mortar teams.

And all that armored car/light tank support must have been very useful. Not to mention the wiring and the mines.

Do you know approx. how many casualties the VG division suffered compared to the US defenders?

 

Jesus. No wonder they used mechanized cavalry groups to plug holes. Anyone without substantial infusions of armor against this kind of firepower would be butchered. And a 37mm AP round can still KO a StuG type armored fighting vehicle with a shot from the side or rear at medium range.

 

A few weeks ago,I got my first chance to fire an M-1 Garand,at a military funeral that my American Legion post did.Unfortunately,the rifles that gunny got for us were in pretty sad shape,and we had LOTS of mis-fires.I've suggested returning to our '03 Springfields

 

nah thats no good that is fully automatic versus semi auto

 

the k-98 had more power but the m-1 had a greater rate of fire and a bigger clip.

 

fire power is better for surppression so in that case the garand would be alot better

 

The 30-06 has significantly more muzzle energy than the 7.92mm. So the 30-06 is in fact more powerful.

 

They make the K98 more powerful in videogames to balance out the gameplay. The Garand has to score 2 hits to kill a Nazi while the K98 needs only 1.

 

in medal of honor heroes 2 if you make a head shot it only takes one shot to kill nazis

 

The M1 Garand....high rate of fire, greater capacity, powerful round, and accurate.