Milsurp After Hours

One of our association (HBSA) members has recently bought a house in the Argonne which makes gardening interesting. The last message from him was that BAR magazines have been unearthed in the layer of excavations dated to WW1. This would be either very late 1917 or 1918 so may prove or disprove peoples theories about what was and wasnt carried into battle by the Doughboys. I have no comments to make other than I am just the messenger!

"...so may prove or disprove peoples theories about what was and wasn't carried into battle by the Doughboys..."

The US Forces of the Great War confuse me a little, Much of their kit was of foreign origin or design, not surprising given the circumstances.

What I can't understand is why the US Army standardised on the French Chauchat Light MG, which had to be retooled for the US round) rather than the (IMHO superior) Lewis Gun (originally designed for the US standard cartridge).

Confused.

Tom

Illogical decision so probably political or some politician with relativen in France with shares in the arms industry....

Cynicism comes easy

According to one source the French Chauchat was "trust into the doughboys hands" at French run training camps. According to this source 34,000 were used by US troups. Also says the Browning didn't get into production until February of 1918 and 29,000 were shipped to France and only only 4600, were used at the front. Reason it wasn't more used was because of Pershings "dictum"...Great Weapons of World War I by William Dooly, jr.

The theory I've seen touted on why the Chauchat was readily accepted by the US was the lack of equipment the US army had on hand in 1917 - "282 Maxim guns, 158 Colt-Browning M1896 machineguns and 670 Benet-Mercie 'rifles' - not an impressive collection".

By the way the same source quotes the numbers of Chauchat's as 37,000.

The Lewis gun was liked by the US troops (I believe the US Marines were actually equiped with it and the air force used it as well) but apparently those responsible for procurement had a set against it. Specifically a General William Crozier, Chief of Ordnance (former commanding officer of Captain Lewis - the man who refined the Lewis and got it manufactured) was apparently very much against it (or Lewis). So a political decision - point to you Eoin.

The theory I've seen touted on why the Chauchat was readily accepted by the US was the lack of equipment the US army had on hand in 1917 - "282 Maxim guns, 158 Colt-Browning M1896 machineguns and 670 Benet-Mercie 'rifles' - not an impressive collection".

By the way the same source quotes the numbers of Chauchat's as 37,000.

The Lewis gun was liked by the US troops (I believe the US Marines were actually equiped with it and the air force used it as well) but apparently those responsible for procurement had a set against it. Specifically a General William Crozier, Chief of Ordnance (former commanding officer of Captain Lewis - the man who refined the Lewis and got it manufactured) was apparently very much against it (or Lewis). So a political decision - point to you Eoin.

That's a good thing isn't Duncan ?

Now if I could just get the No1 to do it

Ha Ha, I get two points

The US Army isn't always logical in it's weapon choices. They selected the M-16 self jamming peashooter as the nations battle rifle. They also dunped the 1911 pistol for the Beretta M-9. Nothing against the Beretta but IMHO, the 1911A1 was a very good service pistol.