Korean War - firearms

cyclone

cyclone

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
379   0   0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
.
I've been reading a bunch about the Canadian contingent in the Korean War, and two things that seem to come up again & again are:


(1) the refrain/mantra of "the lower rate of fire but better reliability in the cold" of the Lee-Enfield vs. the M-1 Garand and the M-1 Carbine;

and

(2) that more than a few Canadian soldiers equipped themselves with American firearms whenever they could, apparently often with the unspoken consent of their officers.


Are there any detailed studies, papers, descriptions or accounts about the small arm use and preferences of Canadians who fired (as oppose to those who may have just carried) their personal weapons in Korea? So far, I've really just come across short anecdotal snippets.


Thanks as always!
 
Send you query to Wheaty. If anyone can verify this it will be him.

I've spoken to Korean vets that were told not to use any equipment but what was issued and it was sternly enforced. One of those fellows told me that they used to trade for US revolvers and ammo and would take any 45acp they could get their hands on, no questions asked. The one firearm they tried very hard to pick up and not a negative word was said by anyone were Thompson M1A1s and of course the ubiquitous Grease Gun M3A1. They were never issued enough of them and the Americans, Koreans and even the Chinese/North Koreans issued them, if they had them.

Others I've spoken with said they were allowed to carry what suited them best, when they were in the field, as long as ammunition was plentiful, but when they were rotated out, they had to have issue weapons. He told me they would leave the stuff they had collected, under their cots and in the armories for the next group that came in.

One fellow told me he much preferred the Chinese/N.Korean grenades to the types they were supplied with.

He much preferred to have to physically arm the grenade with the pull cord in the throwing handle and he liked that the handle allowed him to throw the grenade much further.
 
Chail-li, The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Museum online has a few in theatre photos Canadian infantry with M1 carbines.

Breakout, the book on Chosin reservoir. USMC would sometimes trade M1 carbines and on occassion machine guns with allied troops, but never M1 rifles or BARs.
It was noted both these two later ones were very reliable in the cold with proper maintenance. Only the M1 and M2 carbines suffered poorer functioning in lower temps.

These Marines did note the 303 rifles seemingly had longer effective range than thier Garands. Especially noted in Commonwealth sniper rifles.
 
Last edited:
I have a Chinese PPSH41 from Korea. Crude gun, but it works.

A fellow I worked with was a Canadian Artillery officer in Korea. When his father died, he was sent home of companionate leave. His batman packed his bags, and included his guns. A Remington Rand US issue 1911 and a m1 Carbine in a paratrooper stock. I bought them from him, but never asked how or why he had American weapons.
 
korean-war-canadian-army-a-a-south-korea-shutterstock-editorial-7355881a.jpg
 
You would use the weapons you are issued. Once you used up your ammo fighting the Chinese human wave attacks your weapon becomes a pike. So to stay in the fight you need to use the weapon and ammunition you are issued.
 
Many of these American weapons were used in Commonwealth night fighting patrols. Where UN troops chose the ground and short engagement where thier close range firepower was of higher value than a bolt action rifle from WW2.
Canadians weren't the only ones. British Royal Marines were issued M1 Garand rifles when they put to shore to set demolition charges along NK railways on short raids.
 
Brutus said:
Chail-li, The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Museum online has a few in theatre photos Canadian infantry with M1 carbines.

Breakout, the book on Chosin reservoir. USMC would sometimes trade M1 carbines and on occassion machine guns with allied troops, but never M1 rifles or BARs.
It was noted both these two later ones were very reliable in the cold with proper maintenance. Only the M1 and M2 carbines suffered poorer functioning in lower temps.

These Marines did note the 303 rifles seemingly had longer effective range than thier Garands. Especially noted in Commonwealth sniper rifles.
Click to expand...

This I found powerful and arresting.

 
From Find the Dragon, the Canadian Army in Korea.

When it came to small arms, the enemy could outshoot us any day. Our Stens were unreliable, .303 Lee Enfields fired 9 to 10 rounds per minute and the Bren only fired 500 rounds per minute. The Chinese Burp gun fired 750 rounds per minute with a 50 round drum magazine. the Canadian army had inadequate fire power in WWll, we should have changed to American weapons after the war.

Grizz
 
Tactics dictate equipment. There is a famous photo of a dog-tired RCR Private with #36 Grenades on his waist and an M1 Carbine propped up on the sandbag wall. The old patrolling manual recommended troops be allowed to dress and carry small arms which made them feel more confident.

I have blue covered Canadian Army manuals from the 1950s which show the roll over from British patterns to US models: 2 Inch and 3 Inch to 60mm and 81mm mortars; from Vickers to M1917 and M1919s and M2 .50cals; and from PIAT to 3.5 Inch Bazookas and 75mm and 106mm Recoilless Rifles. The No.4 was to be replaced by Garands, and the BREN with M1918 BARs. Not sure about submachineguns, but it probably was in the cards. The RCAF actually did switch to Garands in the 1950s before getting FN C1A1s.

For a sense of how average US line doggies felt about their own issue equipment, this is very instructive. http://thegca.org/wp-content/upload...apons-and-Equipment-in-Korea-1952-reduced.pdf
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Tactics dictate equipment. There is a famous photo of a dog-tired RCR Private with #36 Grenades on his waist and an M1 Carbine propped up on the sandbag wall. The old patrolling manual recommended troops be allowed to dress and carry small arms which made them feel more confident.

I have blue covered Canadian Army manuals from the 1950s which show the roll over from British patterns to US models: 2 Inch and 3 Inch to 60mm and 81mm mortars; from Vickers to M1917 and M1919s and M2 .50cals; and from PIAT to 3.5 Inch Bazookas and 75mm and 106mm Recoilless Rifles. The No.4 was to be replaced by Garands, and the BREN with M1918 BARs. Not sure about submachineguns, but it probably was in the cards. The RCAF actually did switch to Garands in the 1950s before getting FN C1A1s.

For a sense of how average US line doggies felt about their own issue equipment, this is very instructive. http://thegca.org/wp-content/upload...apons-and-Equipment-in-Korea-1952-reduced.pdf
Click to expand...

A interesting read on the opinions of US soldier of his equipment and weapons , interestingly there is no mention of the M1 & M2 carbine, both were used extensively in Korea , the carbine had a poor reputation for reliability in the harsh cold Korean climate , I’m wondering if that may have been the lubricant the troops were issued, not suitable for the frigid weather
 
Last edited:
maple_leaf_eh said:
Tactics dictate equipment. There is a famous photo of a dog-tired RCR Private with #36 Grenades on his waist and an M1 Carbine propped up on the sandbag wall. The old patrolling manual recommended troops be allowed to dress and carry small arms which made them feel more confident.

I have blue covered Canadian Army manuals from the 1950s which show the roll over from British patterns to US models: 2 Inch and 3 Inch to 60mm and 81mm mortars; from Vickers to M1917 and M1919s and M2 .50cals; and from PIAT to 3.5 Inch Bazookas and 75mm and 106mm Recoilless Rifles. The No.4 was to be replaced by Garands, and the BREN with M1918 BARs. Not sure about submachineguns, but it probably was in the cards. The RCAF actually did switch to Garands in the 1950s before getting FN C1A1s.

For a sense of how average US line doggies felt about their own issue equipment, this is very instructive. http://thegca.org/wp-content/upload...apons-and-Equipment-in-Korea-1952-reduced.pdf
Click to expand...

Yes and no to RCAF and Garands (BARs as well) For a few years in the 1950s RCAF airfields and radar stations in Europe were issued these two American small arms until the FN was issued.
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Tactics dictate equipment. There is a famous photo of a dog-tired RCR Private with #36 Grenades on his waist and an M1 Carbine propped up on the sandbag wall. The old patrolling manual recommended troops be allowed to dress and carry small arms which made them feel more confident.

I have blue covered Canadian Army manuals from the 1950s which show the roll over from British patterns to US models: 2 Inch and 3 Inch to 60mm and 81mm mortars; from Vickers to M1917 and M1919s and M2 .50cals; and from PIAT to 3.5 Inch Bazookas and 75mm and 106mm Recoilless Rifles. The No.4 was to be replaced by Garands, and the BREN with M1918 BARs. Not sure about submachineguns, but it probably was in the cards. The RCAF actually did switch to Garands in the 1950s before getting FN C1A1s.

For a sense of how average US line doggies felt about their own issue equipment, this is very instructive. http://thegca.org/wp-content/upload...apons-and-Equipment-in-Korea-1952-reduced.pdf
Click to expand...

If its the same picture I think you are talking about turns out the private was standing outside a aid station and a photographer thought he had the look he wanted, hung a couple grenades on him and took the pic.................turns out the soldier in the picture had zero recollection of it being done or his being festooned with grenades.
 
I just finished the book "the last stand of fox company". About a marine unit in the early part of the war. It had some excellent insights into the weapons used, an excellent read all around. One thing of note is how common the Thompson smg was amongst the Chinese. Apparently the nationalists had been given quite a few of them in their fight against the communists.
 
JDForBrkFst said:
I just finished the book "the last stand of fox company". About a marine unit in the early part of the war. It had some excellent insights into the weapons used, an excellent read all around. One thing of note is how common the Thompson smg was amongst the Chinese. Apparently the nationalists had been given quite a few of them in their fight against the communists.
Click to expand...

Lots of Canadian manufactured Sten guns were used by the Chinese, the irony is that Canadian troops also were using the Sten , all made at the Long Branch Arsenal
 
VanIsleCam said:
This I found powerful and arresting.

Click to expand...

Excellent video. Well done. Two of my Mom’s brothers, both Canadian Army WW2 veterans, were in the Korean War.

To all the communist lovers, take a look at the difference today between South and North Korea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom