Late 1944 US Cavalry Brigade TO&E (LARGE)

[Joseph Sullivan]

Here are scans of a cavalry brigade TO&E dated September 25, 1944. The most interesting part is that it calls for a full complement of draft and riding horses and saddles and equimpment to suit. Note also that most troopers are to be equipped with pistols about half with Garrands, with few carbines at all.





Joe

[Pat Holscher]

454 carbines, as opposed to 1,820 M1 Garands. That's actually more carbines than I would have suspected, but it makes sense. 2,590 M1911s, showing the retained use of pistols by cavalry. 418 pack horses, which is a bunch.

36 M1C Garands, which is the sniper variant. They had just been adopted at that time, so that's an intersting item. I don't see any BARs, are they designated as the light machineguns?

Pat

[Joseph Sullivan]

I wondered about the BARs, too. But the real wonder to me is the horse allotment in 1944.

Joe

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by Joseph Sullivan
I wondered about the BARs, too. But the real wonder to me is the horse allotment in 1944.

Joe

That was a wonder to me too.

This brings back up the topic of when mounted units really disappeared, or at least training for them stopped. I know we've had various dates for this, but you'll find stuff that's frankly contrary to it.

As I've related before, I once took the deposition of a man who had served in World War Two and the Korean War. In World War Two he'd been trained as a horse cavalryman. He'd grown up on a ranch in Wyoming, and was inducted into the Army late in the war. He had a severe (and visible) injury from a training accident at Ft. Riley in which he'd fallen off a mount in a practice charge and several horses went over the top of him, within one stepping on his face. This was so late in the war that when he was deployed, his unit was on a ship in the Pacific when the war ended, and he disembarked in the now surrendered Japan.

It seems clear that whatever the status of it, the Army was still hedging its bets on cavalry in 44 and 45. There may have been good reason for that. We now think of the end of the war in terms of the invasion of Japan, but I wonder if the Army, in the back of the planning department, was worrying about warfare in extremely undeveloped China.

Pat

[Joseph Sullivan]

The other surprise on this TO&E was that it took a week for anyone to comment on it.

Joe

[Pat Holscher]

I wonder how this TOE compares with a Mechanized Cavalry TOE?

And, I wonder when the Horse Mech TOE disappeared, given the late existance of a horse cavalry TOE.

Pat

[Pat Holscher]

Bump.

[Michael Page]

Horse cavalry units had never possessed BAR's in their TO&E; it's interesting to read of this late-war TO&E, i.e., to see that it was still the same.

I'm interested in seeing the scans in question, as they are no longer viewable.

[Couvi]

I believe that during the Punitive Expidition that the Benet-Mercie machine gun was part of the TO&E.

I have data on carrying the .30 cal Machine Gun, M1917A2, .50 cal Machine Gun, M2 with the tall mount, and the 60mm Mortar in the pre-WWII period. I don’t remember ever seeing anything about the BAR.

[Pat Holscher]

Horse cavalry units had never possessed BAR's in their TO&E; it's interesting to read of this late-war TO&E, i.e., to see that it was still the same.

I'm interested in seeing the scans in question, as they are no longer viewable.

The cavalry actually did carry a BAR variant for some time, but it was unique to them, being the M1922 Browning Machine Rifle. They're discussed in some other threads, but they did have them. I doubt the M1922 ever saw action, but I don't know that.

Hopefully we can get the TO&E back up, as it is interesting.

[Michael Page]

This M1922 is very interesting - I had never heard of it. I've Googled but can only find vague references about it. I suspect it was an experimental project.

Only a few hundred were ever built and the M1922 was removed from service before several years before the Second World War.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=3877&page=2

M1922 B.A.R.s are obviously extremely rare birds. So rare it's almost impossible to even find a picture of one unless you have a book on the subject...

http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthrea ... post305991

[Pat Holscher]

I dimly recall that one of the Philip's pack saddle variants accommodated the M1922. Couvi, is that right?

[Couvi]

I dimly recall that one of the Philip's pack saddle variants accommodated the M1922. Couvi, is that right?

I have 1938 info on the Light Machine Gun Load, both the water-cooled M1917A1 and the air-cooled M1917A2; .50 cal Heavy Anti-Aircraft Machine Gun Load and the 37mm Gun Load, but no BAR. Other undated photos are of the 60mm Mortar Load.

[Pat Holscher]

I dimly recall that one of the Philip's pack saddle variants accommodated the M1922. Couvi, is that right?

I have 1938 info on the Light Machine Gun Load, both the water-cooled M1917A1 and the air-cooled M1917A2; .50 cal Heavy Anti-Aircraft Machine Gun Load and the 37mm Gun Load, but no BAR. Other undated photos are of the 60mm Mortar Load.

I must have imagined that then.

It does raise the question of how many M1922s there were. Seems to me I've seen the Machine Rifle listed somewhere from about that time, but my memory on it isn't very clear.

Interesting, really, in that British cavalry deployed their light machineguns to great effect in several instances in the Great War, and you'd think that lesson would have seen US application, and perhaps it did, or maybe not.

[Pat Holscher]

A book with details on how M1922s were to be carried, which of course doesn't mean that this is necessarily accurate:

http://books.google.com/books?id=weYgAb ... 22&f=false

[Pat Holscher]

Hatcher's Notebook claimed the M1922 was superseded by the M1919A4. Given the absence of photos of the M1922 in use, I suspect that's correct.

[Michael Page]

OK, don't know if you gents saw this:

http://books.google.com/books?id=OIMDAA ... &q&f=false

It's The Cavalry Journal for 1921, wherein there is discussion about the next year's incorporation of machine rifles into the Cavalry. There are tables of organization (peacetime) which show a troop comprised of one rifle platoon and one machine rifle platoon, that latter of which contains four machine rifles, two per squad. A squadron has 12, and a regiment has 24.

[Couvi]

The Cavalry Journal, January 1921, Volume XXX, No. 122, 1921, The United States Cavalry Association, Judd & Detweiler, Inc., Washington, pp. 47-50.

http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA53&i ... &q&f=false

The Browning Machine Rifle
Lieutenant-Colonel Albert E. Phillips, Cavalry

Page 47: “(a) The development of a self-loading rifle for each soldier armed with a rifle. The mechanism of this rifle must be simple and positive. It should be clip-fed, thus eliminating magazines. It should be capable of being fired either as a single-shot rifle or semi-automatically; and should there be any interruption in the semi-automatic mechanism, the rifle should be capable of being operated as a single-shot, bolt-action rifle. The weight should not be appreciably greater than the weight of the present service rifle.

Several rifles of the above-described type are being developed and at least two of them give promise of a satisfactory solution.”

Sounds like he is recommending the development of the M1/M14 Rifle.

“The Browning machine rifle is superior in every respect to either the Benet-Mercie or the Lewis; it fills a distinct need in the armament of our Army—a need that is not filled by the Browning automatic rifle.”

This sounds like they are talking about two different weapons, the Browning machine rifle and the Browning automatic rifle. Can anyone clarify this?

[Michael Page]

This sounds like they are talking about two different weapons, the Browning machine rifle and the Browning automatic rifle. Can anyone clarify this?

The journal outlined how the machine-rifle out-performed the BAR in part because it had a heavier barrel, and was capable of select-fire. It said something about the desirability of having 20-round rifles that could fire semi-auto.

Evidently the BAR originally had select-fire capability but early on (I think) they were converted to full-auto only. So I'm guessing the M1922 could fire semi-auto.

It's interesting that the cavalry was apparently making inroads in this area.

[Couvi]

I wonder if one had a changable barrel and the other didn't. That effects rate of fire and lenght of fire.