Some Interesting Military Data

[Ulsyus]

While I have never been in combat, some of my realtives have.

Harrowing stuff Jim.

One of my grandfathers was almost knocked off the perch in North Africa early in WW2, but was so badly injured they sent him home. Then after recovering he was sent to New Guinea, where he was again pretty badly injured before being sent home. It took him decades before he'd talk to anyone in the family about it.

 

[Timerover51]

Harrowing stuff Jim.

One of my grandfathers was almost knocked off the perch in North Africa early in WW2, but was so badly injured they sent him home. Then after recovering he was sent to New Guinea, where he was again pretty badly injured before being sent home. It took him decades before he'd talk to anyone in the family about it.

As the 32nd Infantry Division was the Wisconsin National Guard division sent to New Guinea in 1942, without any artillery per MacArthur's orders, about all the veterans who served there will say is how much they hate and despise Dugout Doug. They also got very tired of being bombed by Georgie Kenney's bombers, who killed more of them at Buna than they ever killed of the Japanese. As for as Georgie Kenney was concerned, artillery was not needed in New Guinea, as his planes could do it all.

 

[JimMarn]

The allied shipments to Russia enabled them to focus industry early on a few things that were needed most, and I was led to believe that they ended up with significant stockpiles of small arms towards the end of the war.

Did the paper mention at what point that ratio changed, when they all became armed?

From documentaries I have seen Russia/Soviet Union were reluctant to mention they had help from the US, but Kruschev was prevailed upon and said if it hadn't been for the Ford trucks and the cans of Spam, it would have been very difficult for them.

From movies and documentaries I didn't see much in the way of rifles and other small arms being sent over to Murmansk. New info is always welcome.

 

[JimMarn]

Harrowing stuff Jim.

One of my grandfathers was almost knocked off the perch in North Africa early in WW2, but was so badly injured they sent him home. Then after recovering he was sent to New Guinea, where he was again pretty badly injured before being sent home. It took him decades before he'd talk to anyone in the family about it.

Thanks.

My second dad did talk a bit about Viet Nam, but not much.

One of my high school buddies was sent over with his unit, and then volunteered 3 more times after that.

One time I asked him what combat was like, he tried to explain it to me. I had mentioned to him my ship had been in a hurricane, and I tried to explain that to him.

Neither of us could get it across what it was like other than lots of noise, the wind was loud, and we feared for our safety.

So we just went back to reading my comic book collection which my mother tossed out while I was making my second trip over to the Med. She told me later she felt I was too old for comics. Ah well.

 

[kilemall]

From documentaries I have seen Russia/Soviet Union were reluctant to mention they had help from the US, but Kruschev was prevailed upon and said if it hadn't been for the Ford trucks and the cans of Spam, it would have been very difficult for them.

From movies and documentaries I didn't see much in the way of rifles and other small arms being sent over to Murmansk. New info is always welcome.

This is a pretty good list. Doesn't look like a lot of small arms, mostly heavy vehicles and supply.

In total, the U.S. deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386[39] of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans);[40] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[41] and 1.75 million tons of food.[42]

Roughly 17.5 million tons of military equipment, vehicles, industrial supplies, and food were shipped from the Western Hemisphere to the USSR, 94% coming from the US. For comparison, a total of 22 million tons landed in Europe to supply American forces from January 1942 to May 1945. It has been estimated that American deliveries to the USSR through the Persian Corridor alone were sufficient, by US Army standards, to maintain sixty combat divisions in the line.[43][44]


The United States sold to the Soviet Union from October 1, 1941 to May 31, 1945 the following: 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil) or 57.8 percent of the High-octane aviation fuel,[24] 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,911 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars. Provided ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) amounted to 53 percent of total domestic production.[24]



One item typical of many was a tire plant that was lifted bodily from the Ford Company's River Rouge Plant and transferred to the USSR. The 1947 money value of the supplies and services amounted to about eleven billion dollars.[45]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease#US_deliveries_to_the_Soviet_Union

 

[JimMarn]

Interesting ! Thanks.

 

[Timerover51]

The following is one very effective but still very nasty trick. I suspect that it would work very nicely today, and also with a lot of Traveller parties.

An officer from the Central Pacific—"Large quantities of liquor were found on Saipan. A whiskey distillery was captured, and bottles of saki and containers of other beverages were found scattered all over the island.

"The men had been warned against drinking any of the beverages until medical officers could test it. These warnings were ignored in many cases. As a result, some of the men became violently drunk, while others died of what was diagnosed as wood-alcohol poisoning.

"The wood alcohol was found in bottles bearing Burgundy labels. It is strongly suspected these bottles of poisoned alcohol were planted by the Japs with the idea the liquor would be consumed by unwary Americans."

The information comes from the INTELLIGENCE BULLETIN VOL. Ill NO. 4 DECEMBER 1944 put out by the MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SERVICE, WAR DEPARTMENT * WASHINGTON, D. C.

 

[Ulsyus]

The following is one very effective but still very nasty trick. I suspect that it would work very nicely today, and also with a lot of Traveller parties.

Hmmm. Soldiers. God bless 'em. Even without the citing the source that would still be believable behaviour for them. The only thing about dealing with soldiers that doesn't need a warning label is the soldiers themselves, as it is still possible to expect from them heretofore never seen examples of gobsmacking behaviour.

 

[Timerover51]

The following comes from Secretary of War Russell Alger's account of the Spanish-American War. The Press will always be with us, and not necessarily in support.

During the first days of May, Lieutenant H. H. Whitney, 4th United States Artillery, undertook and carried out successfully a reconnoissance in Puerto Rico. Certain newspapers, with a criminal disregard for his personal safety, to say nothing of the government's plans, took pains, as soon as he had sailed, to publish, with the utmost attention to detail, not only the fact, but the purpose of his mission. The result was, of course, that when the foreign merchantman, with Whitney on board, touched Puerto Rico, she found
the Spanish officials awaiting her. The ship was boarded and carefully searched, but the American officer was hard at work in the furnace-room, "stoking" like a professional, and thoroughly disguised in sweat and coal-dust. He landed at last, and, under a different disguise, made a thorough inspection of the southern part of the island. The information thus obtained was of great value to our army when it was disembarked in the latter part of July at Guanica.

 

[JimMarn]

Supposedly true, but could be just a rumor.

Some US soldiers in Europe during WW2 sent off a bottle of wine for testing that they had bought from a local. Which country varies, usually France or Italy.

The report came back 'your horse has a uniary tract infection'.

 

[Timerover51]

Supposedly true, but could be just a rumor.

Some US soldiers in Europe during WW2 sent off a bottle of wine for testing that they had bought from a local. Which country varies, usually France or Italy.

The report came back 'your horse has a uniary tract infection'.

I have heard that one too. One of these days, I need to check to see if true.

 

[Timerover51]

The following comes from a brochure prepared by THE WOMEN'S INTERESTS SECTION WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF PUBLIC RELATIONS, 1942.

Dedicated to the Women of the United States in the belief that the story of the Army of the United States is of great interest to them as citizens and of deep concern to them as Mothers, Wives, and Sisters of the Soldiers

Today's soldier eats at the finest Army mess in the world. His individual ration costs Uncle Sam 48 cents a day, or $175.20 a year, an all-time high in Army budgeting. In World War I, the daily cost of feeding a soldier was 26 cents.

Note, that 26 cents per day figure was for early 1917, by the end of 1918 the cost of food per day had doubled. It dropped back to about 26 cents a day during the 1920s and early 1930s, then increased when the garrison ration was revised and food selection expanded. Part of the increase is due to a lot more fresh fruits and fresh vegetables being served.

 

[JimMarn]

I have read a number of books on WW2 as my first dad was in it on Corregidor Island.

I found this one to contain more information, in most cases it verifies other books and documentaries I've read, and has additional info. It starts with the landings and ends right after General Leclerc goes into Paris.

'D-Day The Battle for Normandy'. by Antony Beevor. 592 pages with maps and some photos. I highly recommend it.

 

[Timerover51]

Bayonet Training

It has been quite a while since I posted anything here, but this gem brings to mind a lot of the discussion early on in the thread. It just was posted to Project Gutenberg, and is for the World War One period. Methinks that it is quite similar to what would be done today.

Bayonet Training Manual Used by the British Forces

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/57186/57186-h/57186-h.htm

 

[JimMarn]

Haven't seen this thread active for a bit either.

I have, or may not have, an update on my first dad.

Ancestry DNA showed a woman I was her half brother. She is a kid from his second marriage. She contacted me via ancestry.

While he told her about the copper mine and smelter, he never made it out to Corregidor Island, from he told her. Some of his unit, at the time of capture in 1944, down to 8 to 15 men, were still on the main area somewhere near Manila. He was shot twice, and bayoneted in one sholder after he was on the ground. The Japanese did treat them better, I suppose captured warriors instead of surrendered nothings, but he did have difficulties.

She told me they did operate on his bullet and bayonet wounds. He had a frag grenade fragment in his lower spine and he asked them to not operate on that and they didn't. He was worried about not being able to walk if they worked on it.

Apparently the IJA soldiers that captured them treated them fairly well.

In the prison camp it got very cold one night. So he volunteered to go over to the guards and ask politely if they could have some coals from their fire as it was very cold. She said they knocked him down, and put coals on this shins and feet. Knocked him out when he wouldn't stop screaming.

In the same email she sent me a photo of him being a lifeguard on a Texas beach after he and mom divorced. It was apparently too painful so he didn't last but one or two summers, she wasn't certain about the time he spent there.

He apparently divorced and married a third time. He died last century. As far as I can tell, his third family isn't on ancestry.

Now I have two stories about my first dad. Only similarities are he was in the Phillipines in an anti-aircraft unit when the Japanese landings took place, and he was in a copper mine in 1945.

If I keep looking, I might find a third or more, story about what happened to him. Wouldn't be surprising. Records get lost and/or scrambled in war time.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

after a very quick look over, a lot of the principles do look very similar to what I did during my basic training back in 2009. we still use sandbags as our basic target, but modern training is a lot less about actually killing people as it is about instilling controlled aggression into the recruits, and teaching them how to both get into a state of mind where stabbing someone seems like a good idea, and how to get back out of it before the shank their corporals over some minor grievance.

Hmmm. Soldiers. God bless 'em. Even without the citing the source that would still be believable behaviour for them. The only thing about dealing with soldiers that doesn't need a warning label is the soldiers themselves, as it is still possible to expect from them heretofore never seen examples of gobsmacking behaviour.

if you want gobsmacking behaviour, I have a real corker of a story. I cannot provide a reference, but I was told it during a formal presentation as part of my pre-deployment training for afghan.

the gist of it was that a soldier was caught in a explosion and suffered several bad wounds, including some on his chest in areas that should have been protected by his body armour. As his squadmates got to work, they removed his armour to reach the wounds....and were amazed by how light it felt. a quick check turned up that this soldier had removed the protective plates form his armour and replaced them with material cut form a foam sleeping matt. the sleeping mat was there to bulk the armour out, so it looked like the plates were still in the armour, which took a good 15 kilos off the load he had to carry.


This man, while in the middle of Helmand Province, Afghanistan, and at a time when soldiers were dying at least once month, decided that he'd rather lighten his load than wear the full armour. Clearly, he was so convinced of his own immortality, that he, personally, would never be injured, that he felt it was worth the trade off.


while that example is a outlier, it was told to us as a warning and a explanation for the endless and extensive checks that NCOs were expected to preform before each and very patrol, because squaddies could, and would, leave behind equipment if they thought that they could get away without having to lug it about, especially heavy items that were only occasionally useful.

 

[Timerover51]

after a very quick look over, a lot of the principles do look very similar to what I did during my basic training back in 2009. we still use sandbags as our basic target, but modern training is a lot less about actually killing people as it is about instilling controlled aggression into the recruits, and teaching them how to both get into a state of mind where stabbing someone seems like a good idea, and how to get back out of it before the shank their corporals over some minor grievance.

Thanks for the feedback. I suspected that things had not changed much.

if you want gobsmacking behaviour, I have a real corker of a story. I cannot provide a reference, but I was told it during a formal presentation as part of my pre-deployment training for afghan.

the gist of it was that a soldier was caught in a explosion and suffered several bad wounds, including some on his chest in areas that should have been protected by his body armour. As his squadmates got to work, they removed his armour to reach the wounds....and were amazed by how light it felt. a quick check turned up that this soldier had removed the protective plates form his armour and replaced them with material cut form a foam sleeping matt. the sleeping mat was there to bulk the armour out, so it looked like the plates were still in the armour, which took a good 15 kilos off the load he had to carry.


This man, while in the middle of Helmand Province, Afghanistan, and at a time when soldiers were dying at least once month, decided that he'd rather lighten his load than wear the full armour. Clearly, he was so convinced of his own immortality, that he, personally, would never be injured, that he felt it was worth the trade off.


while that example is a outlier, it was told to us as a warning and a explanation for the endless and extensive checks that NCOs were expected to preform before each and very patrol, because squaddies could, and would, leave behind equipment if they thought that they could get away without having to lug it about, especially heavy items that were only occasionally useful.

I suspect that the problem with soldiers dumping things that they thought that they would not need started as soon as the first Sumerian King decided to visit his neighbor with ill intentions.

There are quire a few stories from the U. S. Civil War of veteran units hoping to follow rookie units and thereby pick up all of the stuff that they dumped as un-needed that they actually did need. Some went so far as to dump their haversacks containing their rations under the misguided idea that there would be more issued when they reached camp.

 

[JimMarn]

I have read several accounts of new units being tracked in WW2, sometimes by hostile forces, by the amount of items they dumped as they marched to their next bivouack or combat location.

 

[Timerover51]

US verses British Rations

I came across this in a report of Messing in the ETO written in 1945. There is some interesting data in it on ration nutrition, which was paid close attention to by the US Army Quartermaster Corps in conjunction with the Medical Corps. The report has a list of custom recipes worked up in the ETO, with some of them being credited to the soldier that developed them.

The first U.S.troops to reach England were placed on a straight British Army ration. It quickly became evident that if the American soldier and the British Tommy were to fight this war out on the same side, it would be wise not to expect them to enjoy one another's rations.

Accordingly,with full cooperation of the British WarOffice, a modified British.
American Ration was developed in which highscales of mutton, bread, potatoes and tea were replaced by additional quantities of eggs, milk, fresh vegetables, fruits and coffee. (Emphasis added by me.)

Against this dislike of the British Home Service Ration, their equivalent of the u.S. Field Ration A, the British Composite Pack for feeding 14 men at once was viewed quite favorably by U.S. Troops. The following quote is from the Quartermaster Corps Official History of World War 2, Volume One.

A special ration providing food for ten men for one day had been under consideration in this same period, but the project remained dormant until the spring of 1943. Then it was suddenly revived and rapidly pushed to a successful conclusion as a result of two factors. One was the great success of the British Composite Pack during the North African campaign in the fall of 1942. This "Compo" ration, packaged to feed fourteen men for one day and containing nine different menus, was intended to provide the only subsistence in new operations for as long as forty-two days. The Research and Development Branch made a complete study of this ration in the spring of 1943, and it undoubtedly had much influence on the development of the ten-in-one ration.

I suspect that one of the big reasons why the Compo Pack was liked by the U.S. troops that it was issued to was the much greater variety of menus as compared to the standard U.S. C Ration, with only three types of meat dish. When you are eating the same thing for up to 60 days at a stretch, any form of variety is greatly appreciated.

 

[Timerover51]

Still in the topic of rations (Hey, I was a quartermaster officer), I found the following in the 1902 edition of the Manual for the Subsistence Department of the U.S. Army. It is one of the most intelligent things that I have found in Army regulations.

725. Rations may be issued by a commissary to a recruiting officer to enable a cook, before enlistment, to give a practical exhibition of his ability to cook. -G. O. No. 94, A. a. O., 1898.

If you are enlisting a man as a cook, it is quite a good idea to make sure that he can, in fact, cook.