The Thompson Submachine Gun Page 7

  THE THOMPSON IN COMBAT

  Fighting in the Pacific

  As it was initially the only submachine gun in the inventory of the United States and Great Britain, the Tommy gun was used from the earliest days of the war. At the outset, it proved an excellent weapon for close-quarter fighting, particularly in the jungles of the Pacific, where the first US Marines landed in Guadalcanal. John George was a young army lieutenant who accompanied the Marines. He commented that the Thompson was good for jungle fighting, as its bullets would clear a path through the thickest vegetation, but its limited range was a shortcoming. This was perhaps unfair – George himself was a sniper, so preferred long-range shooting – and reach was never really an issue in jungle combat, which was generally conducted at point-blank range or a distance of a few yards. Marine Raiders also realized that because the Thompsons shared the same ammunition as the ubiquitous Colt .45 pistol, they didn’t need to carry a double supply of different calibres. One soldier commented:

  On patrols we moved in single file, with a point man carrying the Thompson – ours preferred a fifty round drum because the time it took to change the box magazine could cost your life. Sure it was heavy but most of us carried extra .45 ammo for it. There were several times when a long burst from that gun saved our skins.

  Two young Marines who served on Guadalcanal pose with their M1 Thompsons ‘somewhere in the Pacific’ alongside another soldier. Note the man on the right wears the five pocket 20-round web belt designed specifically for the Thompson magazines.

  There were dissenters, however: ‘The .45 calibre bullet will not penetrate the branches of trees, roots and dugouts, to anywhere near the degree of the .30 calibre bullet, and this is vital in jungle warfare.’7 Most Marines would have disagreed, for the heavy bullet and high rate of fire cleared jungle vegetation like a scythe, although admittedly it did lack the ability of the .30-calibre round to penetrate trees. But in reality no single weapon existed that was perfect for jungle fighting, being suitably portable as well as able to deliver a high volume of fire of a suitable calibre to penetrate any obstacle. Besides, there was no doubt that the Thompsons were purely close-quarter weapons; they had never been designed with any other purpose in mind, and the fact that the Marine Corps was not entirely happy with them was not the fault of the gun itself. While the BAR was a good compromise, its 20-round box magazine was a severe limitation (it could empty it in under three seconds), as was its length of nearly 4ft (1.2m).

  The Marines soon learned that working the ‘buddy’ system made up for shortcomings with their guns.

  We worked with the Thompson on point and second squad man with the BAR. When the Tommy-man opened up, the BAR gunner would look for the tracer rounds and then cover with the BAR, while we used rifles. It was a good system as long as the two guys at the front understood each other and the whole squad worked together.

  Thompsons in the Pacific theatre A squad of US Marines fight from a foxhole during the Pacific campaign. Men worked in small combat teams, with rifleman armed with a Browning Automatic Rifle and M1 Garand, whose job was to take care of advancing enemy out of submachine-gun range. The BAR gunner took particular care in spraying foliage and treetops with a hail of bullets, in an attempt to dislodge snipers. The Thompson-armed soldier was responsible for dealing with the enemy at closer ranges. As the Japanese were particularly fond of suicidal ‘Banzai’ charges, and as no bayonet could be fitted to a Thompson, backup men with grenades and Colt .45 pistols were expected to assist with any serious threat. Like most Marines the Thompson man carries a fighting knife, particularly useful when the Thompson had run out of ammunition. The Thompson gunner has an M1932 pistol belt with triple magazine pouch for the .45-calibre magazines used in the Thompson submachine guns, as well as a small M1942 first aid pouch.

  Few soldiers liked to carry the heavy and noisy drum magazines, and many experiments were made to improve the capacity of the original 20-round box magazines, the field trials in late 1941 of the 30- and 40-round magazines being examples. While the 30-round box was a simple extended 20-round magazine, the 40-round capacity was achieved by copying what many soldiers had begun doing in the field, taping two 20-round magazines back to back. The ordnance armourers actually brazed two together, but the tests showed there was little to be gained, concluding:

  The forty round experimental magazine does not appear to offer any great advantages over the thirty, in that after twenty rounds are fired, it is necessary to remove and reinsert the magazine. The time required for this operation was from five to eight seconds. A definite disadvantage of the forty round clip is that when firing from a prone position, the open end … of the clip has a tendency to gather dust and sand in it. The thirty round magazine offers the advantages of 50% more firepower before changing the clip, over the regular twenty round or the experimental forty round. Either type, however, is superior to the fifty round drum.8

  Thirty-round magazines were soon being manufactured and shipped to the theatres of combat, but the 20-round version was to remain the mainstay of the Thompson throughout the war.

  A Marine Corps pursuit patrol poses for the camera while pursuing Major General Matsuda and his Japanese forces in Cape Gloucester. Unusually, the leader has a 50-round drum on his M1928, which despite its weight was particularly useful in jungle fighting. Patrolling with a live grenade in one hand was not normally recommended practice. (© Bettmann/Corbis)

  7. US Marine Corps, Report of Infantry Weapons in Combat (October 1943).

  8 Report by the Chief of Ordnance (6 December 1941).

  Fighting in Europe and Africa

  If the Pacific fighting called for special tactics and different combat techniques, then so too did the fighting in Europe. Initial tests with the Thompson by the British 1st Commando Brigade seemed favourable, although the gun’s limited range resulted in some early misgivings, prompting the comment that ‘Extensive training was carried out in the use of the Tommy gun in assault and in-fighting. Results obtained were good, but the Bren proved a more effective weapon when used from the hip in similar circumstances.’9 Of course, the Bren’s .303in bullet had greater range and penetrative power, but like the BAR the Bren was heavier, at just over 22lb (10kg), and at 42½in (1.15m) long it was considerably bulkier than the Thompson.

  Men of the South Staffordshire Regiment armed with Tommy guns climb up onto a harbour wall during an amphibious exercise in Northern Ireland. (IWM H 19112)

  One of the first uses of the Thompson in combat in Europe was with British Commando units who raided the German docks and harbour on the Lofoten Islands on 4 March 1941, their objectives being to destroy oil-processing factories and shipping, and capture some of the highly secret Enigma equipment. Close fighting proved the worth of the M1928s they carried, and one Commando later said of the Thompson’s power that ‘A burst would lift a man off his feet. No-one hit by those bullets ever put up any further resistance.’10 Unlike the Bren, the squat design of the Thompson made it easy to carry close to the body, and it soon became a favourite of all of the British Commando units. After its subsequent use during the ill-fated Dieppe raid, a report on the results of the raid noted that:

  F Troop went through the wood … where they advanced under cover of smoke due north, on either side of the road, to the corner of the perimeter. Here a sergeant records that a number of Germans were surprised in a farmyard, while organizing a counterattack on C Troop. They were killed with Tommy guns. Vigorous opposition was encountered from the buildings and enclosures just inside the perimeter wire, and several casualties were sustained.

  So liked was the Thompson for its rugged dependability and knock-down firepower, that when the cheap 9mm Sten guns began to be issued, many Commandos flatly refused to accept them:

  We were told the Sten was going to replace our Thompsons. It was a truly horrible little gun, the bullet wouldn’t stop a dog, let alone a bloody big German, and it was very prone to jamming. We went mobhanded to the CO and said if we couldn’t keep
the Tommy guns, we’d all transfer back to our [army] units. He was sympathetic and I don’t know how they swung it, but the Stens never were issued to us.11

  Undoubtedly one reason for the proposed substitution of Thompson by the Sten was the cost of buying Thompsons, for whereas a Sten cost about £1 to make, a Thompson was still £56 to buy, so from the government’s point of view there was little question about which should be procured.

  Meanwhile, the Thompsons were being used in an arguably even more hostile environment, the deserts of North Africa. When issued in such hot dusty climates, there were found to be some problems with the design, for sand invaded every part of the guns. Inventive as ever, British, Australian and South African armourers serving in the desert soon found a straightforward solution. The Blish lock was thrown away and a nut and bolt substituted, which had the same mechanical effect of connecting the actuator and bolt. The open-sided cut-outs on the receiver body were welded shut, and with a magazine inserted and the bolt closed these measures effectively sealed the guns from the ingress of sand and dirt. No lubricants were used either, as they formed a fine grinding paste that could wear out internal components in an incredibly short time, and the guns appeared to function perfectly well with no ill effects. The author’s uncle carried a Thompson on his motorcycle during the desert war, and once commented that when removed from the carrying bucket, provided it was shaken hard to clear out all of the loose sand, the gun would work perfectly well. Overheating was a problem in the heat, however, and experienced users fired in short controlled bursts to give the barrel a chance to cool down. It was a particular problem for the M1 variants, which lacked the cooling fins of the M1928A1, but in general desert fighting did not require the high-volume firepower of urban street fighting in Europe.

  October 1944. During the Burma campaign, a Royal Scots Fusilier takes cover in the village of Namma and holds his M1A1 in readiness. (IWM SE 2989)

  A British patrol armed with Lee-Enfields and Thompsons in the ruins of Monte Cassino. The M1928A1 is fitted with the more practical horizontal foregrip rather than a pistol grip. He appears to be wearing Bren gun ammunition pouches, which each held about six 20-round Thompson magazines. (IWM NA 14989)

  In September 1943, the first US troops landed on European soil, at Salerno in Italy, and a mixture of M1928A1s and M1s came with them. It was in the fighting across Europe that the Thompson excelled. It worked best in the temperate climate and proved its worth time and again in closequarter combat in the villages and towns of Italy, Holland, France and Germany. During the heavy fighting for Monte Cassino, GIs fought in conditions not unlike the trenches of World War I, with incessant rain, mud and cold. Thompsons worked well nevertheless, although their excessive muzzle flash at night was a problem. Even in the thick of the fighting, the soldiers had time for some fun with their weapons. War correspondent Ernie Pyle recalled how a group of soldiers found a suitable hillside on which they set up impromptu targets, and showed him how to shoot a Thompson. He spent an instructive afternoon learning how to target shoot the gun until they had all run out of ammunition.

  In the slow fight across Europe, particularly after the D-Day landings, the Americans equipped with Thompsons learned very quickly that teamwork was everything when fighting across the thickly wooded bocage country. As in the Pacific, the variety of weapons carried enabled the squads to work most efficiently if each man used his specific weapon to its fullest advantage. Soldiers armed with Garand M1 rifles were used on point, with the Thompson behind and more M1s following, and an M1 carbine in the rear. This combination provided a comprehensive firepattern, with long-range shooting catered for by the Garand, close work by the Thompson and intermediate range fire by the .30-calibre BAR.

  Thompsons in North Africa A small infantry fighting patrol uses a Thompson to pin down a German machine-gun team. The Thompson’s high rate of fire and heavy bullet ensured that the machine-gun team would keep their heads down while a grenade man approached from a side road. The second Thompson man would ensure that no snipers or stray Germans appeared from hiding. When close enough a grenade flung through the upper window would silence the machine-gun team, and the British soldiers would kick in the door of the house and toss in another grenade, then rake the upper floors with gunfire. Where house clearing was concerned, it paid to take no chances at all.

  Thompson-armed US troops move forward during the German Ardennes offensive, December 1944. (© Bettmann/Corbis)

  Although the BAR was extensively carried, its weight made it unpopular with Ranger and Airborne troops. They preferred to be lightly equipped and move quickly, and many opted for a combination of the Thompson and the light .30 M1 carbine. The British Parachute Regiment was equipped somewhat differently, their issue bolt-action rifle, the No. 4 Lee- Enfield, being very accurate but slow firing, and the Sten useful only for very short ranges. Yet these deficiencies were more than compensated for by the Bren gun, whose accuracy and reliability made it one of the most trusted Allied small arms of the war.

  Carrying the Thompson was best done with the gun slung across the front of the body; some men preferred wearing it left to right, others right to left. Lieutenant Carl H. Cartledge, a very experienced US Airborne officer and Thompson lover, wrote:

  The Thompson shoots naturally from the hip and this reveals its great advantage in combat. Shoulder shooters in combat often don’t live very long. The best combat carry is high with the muzzle up because the Thompson drops down quicker than it swings up. The second best carry is across the body with the muzzle pointed left. Shots from left to right hit better … because they follow the natural flow of the gun.

  Some GIs simply disliked the Thompson’s weight, and in the way of many soldiers decided the enemy’s small arms were better. Many adopted the German MP40 submachine gun, which at 8lb 12oz (3.85kg) was about 2lb (0.9kg) lighter than the Thompson M1A1. Unsurprisingly, the Germans had the same opinion about the American guns:

  When we got into Holland we were involved in a lot of house to house fighting. Street fighting was hard as there could be a Jerry in the next house, or even the next room. Once we kicked in a front door and heard them leaving by the back. We killed some after a fight across a street in Den Hag when our Bren was able to outshoot them. When we searched the house, there were three dead Jerries all with captured Thompsons and American web belts for the magazines. They seemed to like them too but they were no good at long range fighting.

  Often overlooked was the number of Thompsons that were dropped to resistance units during the war. The actual figures are unknown, but probably run into the tens of thousands. In some parts of France even today, Thompsons, Stens, Colt M1911 pistols and assorted .38 revolvers are commonplace, and sometimes elderly men will show you immaculate examples that have been carefully oiled and stored across the years. The author was talking with a neighbour in northern France who was a keen shooter and hunter, and while looking at the assorted rifles hung in his gun room, noticed a well-used M1A1. When asked if it was a working example, the reply was, ‘Of course. It was my Grandfather’s, he picked it up as the Allies came through France. He never joined the army but he fought alongside the British and used it to the end of the war.’ Even today, occasional arms containers surface with their contents intact, but the only battle fought over them now is between collectors and the local Gendarmerie, who are understandably anxious to retrieve the contents before anyone else. Obtaining accounts of these weapons in clandestine use is difficult, as even today many of the ex-Resistance men are reluctant to speak of their exploits. Yet one elderly man who spoke to the author had an interesting viewpoint on the merits of the Stens and Thompsons:

  We carried the Sten guns inside our clothing, hung on belts because it could be turned around and the stock removed. [With the magazine removed, the receiver could be swivelled parallel with the trigger guard, and a handgrip was fitted in place of the metal butt, reducing its bulk.] They were very small and easy to hide, very good for using in small ambushes, perh
aps a car or lorry. But the Thompson was heavy and hard to hide, even if we took the stock off, and difficult to shoot properly. When the Allies came through and we joined them to push the Boches back we could use either of these guns, but I preferred the Sten.12