Canadian tank crews small arms

[jdmcm]

What small arms were issued to Canadian tank crews during WW2, Korea and what weapons are current issue? Did it vary by vehicle? Did every crewman have a weapon?

[chris vickery]

Tank crew were typically issued a SMG and/or a sidearm.
In WW2 the sten and thompson were popular as well as the 38
Webley or Inglis 9mm.
I believe these carried into Korea as well.
These items would have changed as the CF adopted the Sterling 9mm but the Inglis stayed in service until most recntly.
I believe crew man would have a
Weapon.

[rob love]

Originally Posted by chris vickery

but the Inglis stayed in service until most recntly.
I believe crew man would have a
Weapon.

The Inglis continues to serve, and will for a few more years until the CF PDW replacement program implements another. They are augmented currently by the SIG P226 and P229 for aircrew and MPs as well as some others. However the Inglis is still in plentiful supply and does what it is supposed to do: allow you to fight your way back to the rifle.

The current crew personal weapon is generally the C8 rifle, although there are variations to this gun now. It is basically a short barrelled M16 with a collapsible stock. Some have been converted to flat top to allow the use of scopes like Elcan.

I purchased a very large number of demilitarized Sten magazines which had come out of Cdn service. In the lot was a magazine for the M3 grease gun. It was my understanding that some of the tanks purchased from the US came with their small arms, resulting in a few anomolies to the normal Canadain army issue of weapons. In my day, everyone in a tank or armoured car crew had a weapon along with their crew served. You did not let the Seargent Major see you outside your vehicle without your personal weapon within arm's reach.

[jdmcm]

So I'm guessing the brackets inside most M4A2's are originally designed for M3 grease guns or Thompson smg's? These would just be used as is for Stens? Would the stens have full stocks, skeleton or T style? I suppose if the tank is finished in Korean War era turnout, Thompson SMG's would be considered correct?

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by jdmcm

So I'm guessing the brackets inside most M4A2's are originally designed for M3 grease guns or Thompson smg's? These would just be used as is for Stens? Would the stens have full stocks, skeleton or T style? I suppose if the tank is finished in Korean War era turnout, Thompson SMG's would be considered correct?

I think Shermans were designed for what the British designated "machine carbines" aka Thompsons. Exactly how the crews wedged their Sten guns inside is another question. I doubt the crews would have been allowed to keep .45 cal personal weapons when the normal logistics train was variously bandoliered, boxed or belted .303, 9mm for Brownings and Stens, and .455 for Webleys. As for the model of Sten, I believe whatever was standard ordnance corps issue, regardless of portability. In Korea, Thompsons and M1 Carbines MIGHT have been available to the tank crews through barter or pickup from Americans, but as above I would not bet my Tokyo leave pass with the Sergeant Major for having the wrong personal weapon when he inspected. Canada's Korean contingent was relatively small and generally equipped with the same equipment available in 1945, with selected American and British vehicles and gear. Remember too, the US replaced Thompsons with M3 for their tank crews fairly early in WWII.

Many Internet electrons have been expended arguing whether or not use of nonstandard or captured weapons was permitted. Discipline starts within. The outward expression of discipline is conformity. The word uniform is not just a noun to describe a set of clothes. The whole national effort to test, build and equip soldiers depends on the users being mindful of everyone behind them, supporting them. To throw away your rifle is the same as insulting your aunt or cousin who made it. Soldiers were taught and absolutely expected to use what was issued, and God help the insubordinate ones who lost, destroyed or failed to fully use their weapons. What self-respecting soldier would not defend himself against the enemy? I have intentionally not mentioned stupidity like Sir Sam Hughes' insistence on the marginally fit Ross Rifle in WWI, or the awkwardness of drawing friendly fire from use of enemy weapons. With rare exception, British pattern firearms in WWII were quite suited for battle.

[jdmcm]

We'll put Terry! I appreciate everyone's help!

John

[cletrac (RIP)]

What about the 'tankers model' 38 Enfield with no hammer spur?

[Ed Storey]

Stens for Canadian AFV Crews in Korea, not Thompsons.

[chris vickery]

Not wanting to dispute you Ed but I know first hand that it was well known duirng Korea for Canadian troops to use US made weapons.
One Korea vet that I speak with used a M1 carbine on a regular basis while he was serving (CASF PPCLI, Kapyong). He mentioned Canadians as often scrounging for US made weapons that for whatever reason were thought of as superior to whatever the Crown was offering up at the time...

[jdmcm]

Stens it is! Thanks guys!

[Ed Storey]

Don't go confusing the small arms used by the Infantry in Korea with those used by the AFV crews. Yes, there are certainly lots of images of M1 Carbines being used by the Infantry, so I would be interested in seeing an image of one being used by an AFV crewman.

[chris vickery]

Ed, my thoughts being that Canaidan armoured crewmen perhaps following in the footsteps of their WW2 brethren, the Brits at least as well as a few Canadians seemed to have an affectinado with the Thompson SMG for one as well as the M3 grease gun.
I understand that the infantry was an entired different entity from the armoured corps whic BTW was very limited in the Korean engagement.
According to my friend who was in the PPCLI, American equipment was often chosen due to the fact that supplies were so much easier to obtain in theatre.
He mentioned that during re-supply it was often a case of "how many do you want?"

[Ed Storey]

Don't confuse WWII Thompson use with Korea. The Thompson was used early in WWII by the Canadian Army for training in the UK and in the Italian theatre. The Sten began replacing the Thompson in 1942 and the Thompson was not used by Canada in NW Europe. Remember the Thompson takes .45 cal ammunition and the Sten 9mm which impacts on the supply chain every time you introduce a new calibre of ammunition.

The RASC Standing Orders for 1 Commonwealth Division, the formation that the Canadian 25th Brigade fought under, clearly lists the variety of ammunition that the Division is require to supply and .45 cal ammunition is not on that list. The list does contain 9mm, 7.92mm BESA as well as .30 cal Belted, .50 cal Belted and .30 cal Carbine.

Some 60 years ago our U.S. may well have been very generous with their weapons and I have no doubt that 'gentlemen deals' were reached; but please do not let these colourful stories overshadow the facts.