* World War II infantry weapons specific weapon types








World War II Infantry Weapons: Small Arms Country Trends

Hitler Youth machine gunner
Figure 1.-- The Germans built many of the finest weapons of the War, but they were often complicated and difficult to mass produce and maintain in the field. Here Hitler intervened. He often resisted the massproduction of weapons that did not have the look and feel of a finely crafted weapon rather wapons that had been stamped out in high speed presses. The American infantry soldier was forced to fight the Germans while outclassed in virtually every weaons category. There were one notable exception--the M-1 Garand semi-automatic rifle. Despite the superority of their weaons, three years of fighting in the East meant that in the last year of the war, the Reich had to be defended by boys and elderly men. We are not sure about the origins of this image. We are trying to track it down, it may be a movie image, in which case we will transfer it to the HBC movie section. The image had two effects on us. One is sympathy for a little boy criminally thrown into the malestorm of war. The other is an almost reptilian look in his eye steeled by the Hitler Youth and ready to unleash the fire power of a weapon perfected by genius of German industry.

The different World War II combatant countries had different attitudes as to weapons development and usage as well as varying industrial and technolgical capabilities which affected weapons devlopment and manufacture. Access to raw materials was another factor. The Germans built many of the finest weapons of the War, but they were often complicated and difficult to mass produce and maintain in the field. Here Hitler intervened. He often resisted the mass production of weapons that did not have the look and feel of a finely crafted weapon rather wapons that had been stamped out in high speed presses. The quality of German weapons created problems for the German logistical Men had to be ordered not to fire machine guns on full automatic or if they did, limit bursts. The Soviets took a different approach. They were more prone to produce simple weapons that could be easily mass produced and maintain in the field. The fine tolerances in German weapons meant that a little mud and dirt could could reder the wepon inoperable. Soviet weapons often were more capable of operating in the actual battlefield conditions. The American infantry soldier was forced to fight the Germans while outclassed in virtually every weaons category. There were one notable exception--the M-1 Garand semi-automatic rifle. The reason for this was the very limited military budgets in the inter-War era. The United States sinply did not have time to develop weapons comparable to the Germans after Pearl Harbor thrust the country into the malestorm of World War II. And their was a major focus on the air war with American military planners. Two decades of almost non-stop attacks by pandering politicans and pacificts on the arms industry, labeling industrialists as 'merchants of death' was not helpful in arms development. A series of Congressional investigations set out to prove that the arms industry not only profited excessively from the War, but drew America into it, turned up no such evidence. Still the charges continued. Another factor is that the World War I American Expeditionary Force was largely arm with Allied (British and French) weapons and America did not have a large arms industry to begin with. The United States did produce some oustanding non-lethal equipment that was absolutely vital for the war effort. Among them were the deuce-and-a-half truck and a range of communication equipment. The inability of the Germans to produce equioment in the same quantity as the Americans, substantially weakened their combat effectiveness. And the American weapons production significantly affected its Allies because it played a major role in arming its Allies. The new French Army formed after D-Day for example was almost tolly arnmed with American military equipment. British infantry equipment was affected by the stratgic decession to focus on the air war. After Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain, a substantial portion of the country's industrial capacity was devoted to building a massive strategic bombing force formed around the Avro Lancaster bomber. The Japanese infantry soldier was forced to fight the War with some of the worst weapons of any major combaranhts. Many infantry weapons were not only poorly designed, but also not well manufactured. This was the result of the military leadership's decesion to fight a war with a relatively limited industrial base. And as the pressurs of the War increased, especially the American naval blockade. And with the drafting of skilled workers, the quality of Japanese infantry weapons declined even further.

America

President Roosevelt proclaimed the United States to be the Arsenal of Democracy even before America entered the War. The American infantry soldier, however, was forced to fight the Germans while outclassed in virtually every weapons category. There were one notable exception--the M-1 Garand semi-automatic rifle. It had replaced the World War I Springfield Rile, although the Marines did not get them in time for Guadalcanal. Infantry units did finally get Browning Automatic Rifles (BARs). Actually they were available for World War I, but the Army was concernded that the Germans might capture them. The reason that the Army failed in many other areas was the very limited military budgets in the inter-War era. The United States Army simply did not have time to develop weapons comparable to the Germans after Pearl Harbor thrust the country into the malestorm of World War II. And their was a major focus on the air war by American military planners. Two decades of almost non-stop attacks by pandering politicans and pacificts agaijst the arms industry, labeling industrialists as 'merchants of death', was not helpful in arms development. A series of Congressional investigations set out to prove that the arms industry not only profited excessively from the War, but drew America into it, turned up no such evidence. Still the charges continued. Another factor is that the World War I American Expeditionary Force was largely armed with Allied (British and French) weapons and America did not have a large arms industry to begin with. This meant that most of the American arms production did not come from well-established arms manufacturers, but companies manufacturing civilan products and converted to arms manufacture on a crash basis. Much of America's prodigious industrial power did produce some oustanding non-lethal equipment that was absolutely vital for the war effort. Among them were the deuce-and-a-half truck and a range of communication equipment. And the American weapons production significantly affected its Allies because it played a major role in arming its Allies as part of Lend Lease.

Britain

British infantry equipment was affected by the Government's budget restrictions and stratgic decession to focus on air operations in any future war. The British were determined not to refight World War I and suffer the enormous losses of land battles such as the Somme. After Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain, a substantial portion of the country's industrial capacity was devoted to building a massive strategic bombing force formed around the Avro Lancaster bomber. British infantry soldiers were armed with a lot of World War I arms and equipment. The Lee–Enfield was a bolt-action, magazine-fed repeating rifle. It was main firearm of British and he British Empire forceds during World War I and II and even continued to be used into the poist-War era. This in itself was not as bad as it may seem. Most World War II rifles and light-machine guns were of World War I vintage at the start of the war. And many were effective enough to stay in use to the end. But they were not good enough to allow the infantry soldier to stop German Panzers as the British Tommies discovered in Belgium (May 1940). Thus the Piat Gun anti-tank weapon was devedloped, but proved to be one of the more unrelable World War II infantry anti-tank weapons. Probably the most imoprtant new infantry weapn was the Bren Gun. This was a series of light machine guns (LMG) developed during the inter-War era. It was widely used by British and Empire forces' throughout the War. Britain received huge quantities of equipment and weapons from the United States through Lend Lease. The basic infantry weapons, however, were mostly British throughout the War.

France

A huge portion of the French military budget durung the 1930s went into building the costly Maginot Line rather than weapons development. The French infantry soldier when the Germans invaded was largely armed with World War I era. military equipment. French participation in the WSar was lzrgely limited to the first year of the War. The French planes and tanks were of reasonable quality. It was French tactics and obsolete communicatins equipment that led to disaster. Infantry communications were little chanbged from World War I. The fighting spirit of the Army was another serious issue. Here the World War I experience and socialist ideology were important factors. But it was French tactics left the infantry with virtually no air cover and no way to stop the German Panzers. The new French Army formed in North Africa after Torch (November 1942) and after D-Day (1944) was almost totaly armed with American military arms and equipment.

Germany

World War II histories often focus on the Luftwaffe planes and Heer Panzers. The Germans also built many of the finest infantry weapons of the War when compared in tests against the weaponry of other countries. What often did not go into the comparative tests, however, was field operations. The German weapons were often complicated and thus difficult to mass produce and maintain in the field. Also tight tolerances mean that they need to be berter maintained than Soviet weaponty. And here Hitler intervened to make matters worse. He often resisted the mass production of weapons. He did not like weapons that did not have the look and feel of a finely crafted weapon, meaning weapons that were stamped out in high speed presses, thus allowing them to be made inexpensively in large numbers. Strangely, the Germans did not work on rifles. German soldiers were armed with basically the same rifle used by their fathers in World War I. They had nothing comparable to the semi-automatic American M-1 Garande. They did produce assaulr rifles and machine guns with extremly high firing rates. Ironically the quality of German automatic weapons created problems for the notoriously weak German logistical train. Men had to be ordered not to fire machine guns on full automatic or if they did, only fire in limited bursts. The inability of the Germans to produce arms in the same quantity as the Americans, substantially weakened their combat effectiveness, especially when victory did not come in a short campaign as in Poland (1939) and France (1940). The war in the East prived a very different matter. And the G=Hitler's declaring war on America meant Germany was fighting a waar with two industrial colossi capable of producung arms and ordinance in extrodunary quantities. And the Germans did not even begin to put their economy on a full war footing until Hitler appointed Speer Armaments Minister (1942). The limitations of German war production and logistics was no where else as vissible as Omaha Beach on D-Day. Here the German beach defenses needed the rapid firing autommatic weapons and to fire on full automatic. But in perhaps the most important battle of the war the beach defenders began running out of amunition after only a few hours of combat. This included both the infantry ovelooking the beach and the artillery covering the beach. This proved to be a key factor in the bloodied American assault forces getting off the beach and seizing the high ground and fortified positions. Obviously you can have the finest gun in the workd, but if your logistic train is weak, the quality of weapons means little.

Italy

The bombastic Italiuan diuctator, Benito Mussolini, blustered about his 8 million bayonets before the War. Of course the bayonet was arguabaly the least effectiuve weapon of World War II. The Italian infantry soldier was armed largely with World War I era equipment. An Italian infantry company was armed with Beretta pistols and sub-machine guns. Rifle pltoons had the Carcano rifle and carbine . The standard light machine gun was the Breda Modello 30. The infantry companies were supported by the ineffective 45mm Modello 35 mortar and the unreliable Breda Modello 35 and 37 machine guns. Medium mortars were hed at divisional level andhere were the highly effective 81mm Modello 35. One impressive weaoon was the Baretta pistol, one of the best of the War. But pistols were suide arms of little signifiucance. Baretta also produced a very good automatic rifle. Italy was one of the three principal Axis powers. There was, hiwever, very little cooperation between the Gernmans and Italians in weaoons research and development. This is is in sharp contrast to the close cooperation between the Amerlcans and British.

Japan

The Japanese infantry soldier was forced to fight the War with some of the worst weapons of any major combatant. Many Japanese infantry weapons were not only poorly designed, but also not well manufactured. This was the result of the military leadership's decesion to fight a war with a relatively limited industrial base. It had worked with China and given what Japanese commnders saw as their superior fighting spirit, based on their limited experiebce, they has no reason to believe that it would not work agaiunst the feable Americans and British. The exoeience with America of most Japanese officers was Hollywood movies. Which led manynto cobclude that American men were dominated by their women. And they simply ignored the unsettling, brief firefight with the Soviets in Manchuria (July 1939). Despite the Axis Alliance, thge Japanese infantry soldier had none of the excellent German infantry weapons technology. And even if they had, Japan did not have the industrial capacity to produce advanced infantry weapons in any quantity. Japanese infantry weapons were more than adequate against the poorly armed Chinese forces, but proved totally inadequate against modern fighting forces. The principal Japanese infantry weapon was the Type 99 rifle. This was an adequate weapon, but all too often Japanese commanders used it suisiudal bayonet assualts against dug-in Allied positions with disaterous results. Japanese pistols were unreliable, some even dangerous. The Japanese had no assault (sub-machine) guns or plans to produce one. One of their better weaapons was the the Nambu Type 99 Light machine gun, based on the British Bren Gun. The Japanese even chracteristically fitted it with a bayonet. Of no actual military value, Japanese officers carried swords. They were revered by the Army and would commonly actually be used as an infantry weapon. Japanese officers were also known to use them to behead captives. As the pressure of the War increased, especially the American naval blockade needed raw material becamne increasingly unaviablle affecting weapons quality. And with the drafting of skilled workers, the quality of Japanese infantry weapons declined even further.

Soviet Union

The Soviets took the opposite approach to the Germans. They were more prone to produce simple weapons that could be easily mass produced at low cost and maintained in the field. They have someines been called crude. Hitler in fact held them in great disdain. He liked the look and feel of a finely milled firesarm. The German soldier who had to face then in battle learned to admire them. As they learned from bitter experience, there is a huge difference between crude an ineffective. The fine tolerances in German weapons sought by the Wehrmacht and demanded by Hitler meant that a little mud and dirt could could reder the wepon inoperable. Soviet weapons often were more capable of operating in the actual battlefield conditions. Relibility in adverse conditions would be a critical factor in the Ost Krieg, the decisive engagement of the War. At the time the Germans launched the Barbarossa invasion of the Soviet Union (June 1941), the Red Army infantry man was still equioped with World War I era weapons -- most notably the relaiable Mosin Nagant Model 1891 Rifle-- the same basic bolt-action rifle used in World War I. The Red Army was already developing a whole new generation of small arms when the Germans struck. And by the end of the Ost Krieg the massive Red Army would be fighting with these new weapons. Barbarossa would in fact jumpstart the Soviet arms industry which would develop of some of the most important firearms of the 20th century. Soviet firearms may not hsve been the most innovative or even the highest firing rates, but they were highly reliable in the most adverse conditions experience on the Eastern Front where German guns often failed. The greatest endorsement of Siviert weaons was given by German infantry men who seized on captured weapons, prefering them to their own issue. None were more highly sought after than the Soviet PPSh-41 submachine gun.







CIH -- WW II








Navigate the CIH World War II Section:
[Return to Main World War II infantry weapons page]
[Return to Main World War II land weapons page]
[Return to Main World War II technology/tactics page]
[Return to Main World War II page]
[Biographies] [Campaigns] [Children] [Countries] [Deciding factors] [Diplomacy] [Geo-political crisis] [Economics] [Home front] [Intelligence]
[POWs] [Resistance] [Race] [Refugees] [Technology]
[Bibliographies] [Contributions] [FAQs] [Images] [Links] [Registration] [Tools]
[Return to Main World War II page]
[Return to Main war essay page]





Created: 2:45 AM 8/2/2013
Last updated: 1:58 PM 12/19/2020