Purpose of end/post WWII arsenal work...

[TDP0311]

Just out of curiosity, what was the purpose of the army's rebuilding of their 1903s at the end of WWII? With the 1903 being firmly obsolete for combat, and more of a rear echelon weapon at that point, I'm just wondering why they decided to do this at all?

Thanks!
Tim

[Shooter5]

You just never know…it is simple prudence to prepare for contingencies and a reasonable view concluded war with the Soviets could happen.

[John Beard]

Just out of curiosity, what was the purpose of the army's rebuilding of their 1903s at the end of WWII? With the 1903 being firmly obsolete for combat, and more of a rear echelon weapon at that point, I'm just wondering why they decided to do this at all?

Thanks!
Tim

Seasons' Greetings!

I recall seeing Ordnance Dept. reports in the National Archives discussing post-WWII rifle obsolescence. But I no longer recall if those reports pertained to the M1903 rifle or the M1917 rifle. I searched in my indices and can find no record of the reports. So perhaps the reports pertained to the M1917 rifle. If so, then I would have copied the reports and given them to C.S. Ferris without recording them.

I did find an order from the Industrial Service Division of the Ordnance Dept. dated 29 October 1945 directing Springfield Armory to prepare rifle overhaul procedures. Springfield Armory had prepared an M1903 rifle overhaul procedure earlier in 1945 for use by Remington Arms.

I am not well enough versed in Ordnance Dept. post-WWII history to know the justifications for retaining the M1903 rifle. But obviously, the rifles were overhauled and placed in Ordnance stores. The overhauls were performed by arsenals, depots, and private contractors. The most likely justification was containment of Soviet expansionism via foreign aid, such as the 47,000 rifles loaned to the Greeks.

Hope this helps. Happy Holidays!

J.B.

[Rick the Librarian]

As I recall, the M1917 was declared obsolete in 1944 (although obviously continued in use).

[TDP0311]

Thanks for the replies gents... JB- the containment of Soviet expansion via the Greeks and others makes perfect sense. I knew the Greeks received a hefty amount of M1903s, and having many more re-arsenaled for other allies, or for any drastic contingency is understandable. I'd imagine that as the M1 Garand took over main battle rifle duties, there were plenty of spare barrels, stocks, and other parts for the M1903 that found themselves in a much smaller demand, so using these extras up would seem rational.

[John Beard]

Seasons' Greetings!

And there's one other consideration that I failed to mention. When a major conflict abruptly ends and a peace treaty is signed, governments cannot suddenly shut everything down and send everybody home. That is NOT politically acceptable. Governments must gradually phase down war operations and carefully transition to a peacetime economy. A case in point is production of Mark I rifles after WWI ended. The war had been over for a month when the rifles went into production. But wartime employees at Springfield Armory needed something to do for the interim until peacetime jobs could be created for them.

So overhauling surplus M1903 rifles after WWII would give the wartime work force something to do while the peacetime economy began ramping up.

Hope this helps. Happy Holidays!

J.B.

p.s.,

A similar conflict is taking place today. Congress recently appropriated money for a small quantity of M1A2 Abrams tanks for which the Army has absolutely no need whatsoever. The Army already has many thousands of Abrams tanks and nothing to do with them. But the Lima Army Tank Plant is the last remaining U.S. tank plant in existence, and the government can hardly afford to close it. One cannot construct from scratch or re-open a mothballed tank plant on the spur of the moment in an emergency. That takes years.

[Herschel]

J.B., I think you hit the nail on the head.

[TDP0311]

Very good point JB... I'm well acclimated with the Lima tank plant deal, I live just an hour north of there. It would make sense that the M1903 overhaul was along those lines, as well as getting them ready for the Greeks and any potential others that never fully materialized.

Speaking of Lima, they have a monthly gun show where you can find some hidden treasure on occasion. I was able to find a USMC stippled butt plate there once, you just have to be willing to dig through a few vendors cases of random parts. Hopefully next weekend will be lucky for me as well.

[Crashyoung]

A friend of mine told me that he had to build parts for the troop gliders
after WWII ended, then toss the finished parts into the incinerator, as
part of the contract the company had with the war department.

I don't recall much about what he said, and sad to say, he has died, so
I can't ask any questions. Maybe others know of things that happened
at the end of the war.

[JimF]

. . . . Maybe others know of things that happened
at the end of the war.

I can still see those TV images of "new-in-the-crate" bulldozers, trucks, jeeps, helos, etc., being pushed over the side of ships just outside Saigon, immediately after the Vietnam war ended!

It was deemed cheaper to destroy them rather than return them to the U.S.!
Typical D.C.-inspired "common sense"!

[Rick the Librarian]

Nothing new in that ... the British destroyed or pushed over the side large numbers of Corsairs and Avengers after WWII because they couldn't afford to pay for them (specified in the Lend/Lease agreement) and it wasn't convenient to return them. Unfortunately, war is waste ...on a huge scale!

[Jon Field]

I saw a working party of USMC recruits smashing up M-14 stocks in 1975. I was a Senior Drill Instructor at Parris Island, had a platoon going through the swimming pool for training. Pool was located behind the Rifle Range armory. I knew an armorer, so asked him what was happening, he showed me numerous racks of M-14s with no stocks, the rifles were going to allies who were to fit them with the new fiberglass stocks. All wooden stocks were removed, smashed with sledge hammers and thrown in the dumpster! A small example of waste compared to previous posts above, but still pretty sad.

[firstflabn]

To get a big picture understanding of how the War Department wound down its massive procurement operation at the end of WWII, see The Army and Economic Mobilization by R. Elberton Smith. This volume is part of the superb Army Green Books series (99 volumes?) and is one of several that cover logistics.

About 100 pages of the cited title cover contract termination and settlement and its role in reconversion. I can't do as good a job as the author, but a few points made by him shed light on what has been speculated about here.

1. Recognizing that a miserable job had been done on contract terminations at the end of WWI, the War Department began planning for termination and reconversion in June 1943. Contracts are, of course, legally enforceable, so Congress passed legislation to provide legal authority to the War Department in the exercise of broad discretion in shutting off the money tap and settling claims by contractors. Doing this in as timely a manner as possible supported economic normalization.

On p. 649, Smith writes: "With the passage of the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act of 1944, it became definite national policy not to continue production of war materiel in excess of military need in order to ease the process of national readjustment at the end of the war." Earlier (p. 613), Smith had noted that on V-J Day, the War Department had terminated 48,000 prime contracts (without email!!) and later (p. 695) pointed out that "By the end of September 1945 - the first full calendar month after V-J Day - 95 percent of all World War II terminations had been effected."

In light of this, it is hard to see how a case could be made that there was a gentle wind down.

Further, there was no shortage of work for civilian ordnance workers at depots. Milsurp collectors often ignore the fact that small arms made up a miniscule percentage of Ordnance work. All vehicles (except a few USAAF specialty trucks), artillery, optics, ground radar - even watches and clocks - were also Ordnance's responsibility. Gracious plenty stateside work was needed to rehab and preserve gear that costs thousands of times as much as small arms (if there was budget).

With no actual rebuild quantities or dates having been presented, here's a possible hint from the carbine world. The Carbine Club Newsletter lists late war and early postwar carbine refurb numbers at RIA. From a trickle of about 30k in FY 46 and another 26k in FY 47, the total for FY 48 (which includes "prepared for storage") leapt to 348k.

Considering that the carbine was still a primary weapon and that 6 or 7 MWOs were in effect, why would anyone suppose significant resources would be devoted to the '03?

Looks obvious to me that the sudden jump in 1947 was a result of the crisis in Greece and Turkey in the spring of 1947, followed by the Berlin Blockade and then the commie coup in Czechoslovakia in Feb 48. America's slumber had been brief, but it was in this period that defense got a little budget breathing room (it was to be brief).

If you're still reading, one more quick point: FN in Belgium performed a basic function check, cleaned, and packed a reported 2.1 million ETO small arms. With these weapons functional and preserved, there was no need to take immediate action - especially for an arm awaiting the obvious final verdict.

Combine this with brand new never issued, others lightly used stateside, and WWII reserve stocks and it gets harder to see why anything would have happened in '45.

As a number cruncher, I would be interested in learning of any foreign military aid quantities between V-J Day and June 30, 1950.

Also, does anyone know the details of MWO B3-W8?

[11mm]

Termination. in the instance of the above mentioned 48,000 contracts for convenience, probably applied to legal arrangements that the Government had with civilian suppliers. If a civilian company (for example let's say Remington) were involved in refurbishing rifles, then the Government could issue a termination order, subject to certain accounting and property rules, for convenience. The terms could include a number of features, including the disposal of work in progress, inventory and Government facilities. The stop work could be (is usually) instantaneous upon receipt of notice. However, if the entity doing the refurbishment belonged to the Government (an arsenal, for example) there might be any number of other arrangements made, and the work might continue to a certain date, or until certain supplies were exhausted. The Government does not have to contract with itself, so the rules could be as different from those under real contracts as the Government could want to make them.

[John Beard]

Seasons' Greetings!

Mr. R. Elbertson Smith's statements are misleading at the very least. I will make several points:

(1) Ordnance responsibilities that include munitions extending well beyond small arms is acknowledged. The subject on this forum, however, is small arms.
(2) Terminating workers in the small arms industry while retaining rehab workers in the aircraft, tank, and ground vehicle industries didn't help those workers in the small arms industries. They vote too!!! And you can bet that their District Congressmen and Senators listen!
(3) Mr. Smith states that 95 percent of contracts had been terminated by the end of September, 1945. But, he didn't explicitly describe what constituted termination. Had all the workers been sent home to stand in bread lines? Hardly. Contract termination is a negotiated matter and usually includes a wind-down and build-out period. So, while the contracts may have been negotiated and settled, one should not assume that all work had stopped. I work for a defense contractor. And some of our contracts have been cancelled. But in every case, new work orders were opened immediately to collect reimbursable costs associated with winding down.
(4) Remington Arms was given a M1903 rifle overhaul contract in April, 1945, and that's a documented and established fact. And I have strong reason to believe that a second M1903 rifle overhaul contract had been awarded in 1945. In addition, M1903 spare parts contracts extended into 1945. These facts hardly support the notion that the Army had near-term plans to obsolete and abandon the M1903 rifle.
(5) Permit me to digress. Of all the known B17 aircraft in existence today, only two are known to have actually flown in combat. According to a B17 tour operator, all B17's flying today were built after the war ended.

The position that no "gentle wind down" existed has not been proven.

Happy Holidays!

J.B.

[TDP0311]

firstflabn- the reason I mentioned this is there is a significant amount of army M1903s that were overhauled late war/post war out there for sale. They are easy to spot, as they have barrels made after the M1903 had been replaced by the M1 Garand as the primary US infantry weapon for both the Corps and the army, as well as other indicators of their time of overhaul. With the amount of rifle out there that fit this bill, these overhauls appeared to have been of decent proportions.

[Col. Colt]

I have a Rock Island 03 that appears to be part of the 1945 Remington Overhaul group, although I am not 100% sure.
It is an original, worn finish action and floorplate/triggerguard, new Commercial Controls bolt combined with a new SA 1942 barrel in a Scant Stock with the small "P" in circle (.400 or so diameter) and a "45" with a "7" directly above and in the middle of the "45"(July of 1945?). It appears like the weapon was rebarrelled and then reassembled, without refinishing the entire gun, although the front band and rear sight is refininshed. Is that likely - or even possible? I originally thought it was just put together from parts, and it of course it could be. I remember reading that Remington was paid a fixed flat rate of $10.45 to refurbish each 1903, with the US Government supplying the parts needed, so perhaps a full refinish was not part of the deal, only as needed? CC

[John Beard]

I have a Rock Island 03 that appears to be part of the 1945 Remington Overhaul group, although I am not 100% sure.
It is an original, worn finish action and floorplate/triggerguard, new Commercial Controls bolt combined with a new SA 1942 barrel in a Scant Stock with the small "P" in circle (.400 or so diameter) and a "45" with a "7" directly above and in the middle of the "45"(July of 1945?). It appears like the weapon was rebarrelled and then reassembled, without refinishing the entire gun, although the front band and rear sight is refininshed. Is that likely - or even possible? I originally thought it was just put together from parts, and it of course it could be. I remember reading that Remington was paid a fixed flat rate of $10.45 to refurbish each 1903, with the US Government supplying the parts needed, so perhaps a full refinish was not part of the deal, only as needed? CC

Seasons' Greetings!

Your description is not sufficiently convincing that you have a rifle from the Remington Overhaul contract. Where are the "7" and "45" markings located? Does the stock exhibit any other markings? If so, please describe.

Happy New Year!

J.B.

[firstflabn]

Good points by all. We're all seeking the same info - how many '03s were refurbed?; when and where was the work done? In the absence of stumbling into a report that neatly answers the question, we're left to indirect methods. I questioned the applicability of anecdotes from current experience to circumstances unique in US history; others questioned the relevance of broad context from overall Army Service Forces procurement activities. So, it becomes a bit of a philosophical question. Kinda like feeling for the light switch in the dark. You think you're getting close when you feel the door jamb; I think I'm getting close when I stub my toe on the table on the other side. Until the light comes on, we won't know, but when it does, we'll all celebrate.

A lot of unanswered questions remain (including, especially, the primary 'how many/when/where' one), but perhaps some big picture ideas about the late war/early postwar procurement process can be reconsidered.

The position that no "gentle wind down" existed has not been proven.

Had all the workers been sent home to stand in bread lines? Hardly. Contract termination is a negotiated matter and usually includes a wind-down and build-out period. So, while the contracts may have been negotiated and settled, one should not assume that all work had stopped. I work for a defense contractor. And some of our contracts have been cancelled. But in every case, new work orders were opened immediately to collect reimbursable costs associated with winding down.

http://s5.postimg.org/h8owp8xbr/asf_winddown_table_001.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

I like to call this 'My Gentle Wind-down Table' :icon_lol:

one should not assume that all work had stopped is a bit of a strawman, a 90% reduction in a short period comes close enough to make the point.

The reconversion process was every bit as amazing as the conversion process had been four years earlier and deserves attention beyond its use in this discussion. Looks likely it was the same folks on both ends. Somewhere in his very long book (even longer than my replies!), Smith writes that the War Department plan called for using 30,000 employees to terminate and settle procurement contracts.

What happened to all the ordnance civilian workers? Engaging in my own unsupported speculation - the women went home to make babies; the men changed employers and made cars and refrigerators. And, very unlike today, the political pressure was to slash government's influence in the economy to make room for private enterprise. No bread lines resulted, so it must have worked.

[Rick the Librarian]

There was a short downturn and lots of strikes and shortages (people had lots of money and suddenly there was a lot of pent-up demand), but the economy soon righted itself.

[John Beard]

Seasons' Greetings!

Again, firstflabn's data are grossly misleading and terribly one-sided. Here's the real picture:

1945 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $92,712,000,000
1946 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $55,232,000,000
1947 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $34,496,000,000

I fail to see a 90% reduction over a 6-month period, or anything even remotely close to it.

Happy New Year!

J.B.

[Col. Colt]

The "45" is directly in front of the front guard screw with the "7" above the 45. Read with the rifle muzzle up. CC

[John Beard]

The "45" is directly in front of the front guard screw with the "7" above the 45. Read with the rifle muzzle up. CC

Seasons' Greetings!

Are the numbers enclosed in geometric shapes? Approximately how tall are the numbers? Please advise.

Thanks! And Happy New Year!

J.B.

[Col. Colt]

John, I will try to get some pictures sometime this weekend. They are in the same place as the regular Remington stamps from 03A3 production, but they are at least twice as big, and not enclosed in any geometric shape. It looks like below (except the leg of the seven is between the 4 and the 5 and centered), and would logically seem to mean July of 1945. This combined with the small (.398) circled P proof may mean that at least the Scant Stock and matching WWII handguard was in the rebuild program. Otherwise, I am at a loss to explain the use of the numbers. The barrel still has cosmoline in the date initials, although the rifle had been fired by the time I got it.

7
45

I love a mystery - especially after it is solved! CC