Posted on Sep 10, 2022
What is the OLDEST model weapon that you used in the Military?
56.1K
1.39K
554
232
232
0
For many of us, this will probably be dominated by the .45 Cal. Model 1911 Pistol (in service since 1911) and the .50 Cal. M2 Machinegun (Manufactured since 1921). For me, it was the above 2 weapons, plus the Smith & Wesson Model 1905 .38 Special Revolver. Please make this weapons that you actually used, carried, or operated as a service member. (The Navy guys will probably win. They never throw anything away.)
Rifles
Handguns and Pistols
Artillery
Machine Gun Basic
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 239
6
6
0
MSG Lonnie Averkamp
Aw, now I have machinegun envy. I got to study, disassemble, and assemble the old BAR, but come Range Day, they didn't have any 30-06 ammo available (sad face).
(2)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
MSG Lonnie Averkamp - That M1918 was the first firearm I ever fired -- courtesy of the luck of the draw when Navy ROTC split us into groups at a range for weapons familiarization. It was a round robin on the BAR, the M1 Garand, and the 1903 Springfield. I was in the group that started with the BAR.
Later I got the M1919 Browning .30 cal machine gun due to the Army's somewhat strained supply system in lieu of the M37 that we were supposed to have on our M48A2C tank in Vietnam.
Thinking about old guns makes me wonder how it is that the M2 was simple enough for the US and over a hundred other countries to operate for all those decades and numerous conflicts around the world, until suddenly the "best educated, best trained, and best equipped" Army in history found the M2 too complicated during GWOT so we needed to spend a few million dollars converting them to a fixed headspace model. It seems to me that the "headspace" problem wasn't in the gun but somewhere between the ears of the new operators.
Later I got the M1919 Browning .30 cal machine gun due to the Army's somewhat strained supply system in lieu of the M37 that we were supposed to have on our M48A2C tank in Vietnam.
Thinking about old guns makes me wonder how it is that the M2 was simple enough for the US and over a hundred other countries to operate for all those decades and numerous conflicts around the world, until suddenly the "best educated, best trained, and best equipped" Army in history found the M2 too complicated during GWOT so we needed to spend a few million dollars converting them to a fixed headspace model. It seems to me that the "headspace" problem wasn't in the gun but somewhere between the ears of the new operators.
(3)
(0)
MSG Lonnie Averkamp
MSG Thomas Currie - You're preaching to the choir, friend. My only problem with the "headspace" issue is that our instructors never explained "why". Of course, it essentially makes the chamber dimensions correct for the ammunition. Too tight, and it won't chamber ammo; too excessive, and you can have case ruptures. They couldn't take 8 seconds to add that to the Lesson Plan.
AND you got to fire a 1903 in the line of duty? How neat is that!
AND you got to fire a 1903 in the line of duty? How neat is that!
(2)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
MSG Lonnie Averkamp - I only got to live fire the M1903 "on duty" with Navy ROTC in college. All the rifles we had were fully functional, mostly we just carried them around for drill, but we did get one day at the range to shoot the BAR, the Garand, and the 1903.
Later in Vietnam one tank in our unit had an M1903 for a while. It was a scoped sniper rifle that came from an NVA arms cache. The tank crew kept it for a while but eventually they were ordered to turn it in after somewhere up the chain had traced the serial number.
Not explaining the why of headspace was part of a deliberate decision made at top levels of the Army. You might recall hearing the phrase "Performance Oriented Training" -- some people mistakenly thought that Performance Oriented Training was just a fancy name for Hands On Training, but it's not. The idea behind Performance Oriented Training was to teach soldiers what they needed to know to perform their job (which seems like a good idea), and ONLY what they NEEDED to know to perform their job (that's were guys like you and I had a problem with it).
Like most "good idea" the army adopts, the ideas behind Performance Oriented Training were never well explained and usually applied too drastically as they were implemented. It made good sense to stop teaching where your rifle was manufactured and the exact weight unloaded, with a sling, and with a sling and one full magazine, but they also stopped teaching "unnecessary" information like the cycle of functioning.
At some point very early in the 1970s the Army adopted a training philosophy that turned into training monkeys to push buttons without knowing why they were pushing the button or what the button was supposed to do.
"When the red light comes on, push the blue button" works great for training soldiers to perform the task; but what happens when the new model box arrives that has two buttons and neither of the buttons is blue? What happens is you have to retrain the soldiers from scratch instead of having soldiers who understand what they were doing and why.
Later in Vietnam one tank in our unit had an M1903 for a while. It was a scoped sniper rifle that came from an NVA arms cache. The tank crew kept it for a while but eventually they were ordered to turn it in after somewhere up the chain had traced the serial number.
Not explaining the why of headspace was part of a deliberate decision made at top levels of the Army. You might recall hearing the phrase "Performance Oriented Training" -- some people mistakenly thought that Performance Oriented Training was just a fancy name for Hands On Training, but it's not. The idea behind Performance Oriented Training was to teach soldiers what they needed to know to perform their job (which seems like a good idea), and ONLY what they NEEDED to know to perform their job (that's were guys like you and I had a problem with it).
Like most "good idea" the army adopts, the ideas behind Performance Oriented Training were never well explained and usually applied too drastically as they were implemented. It made good sense to stop teaching where your rifle was manufactured and the exact weight unloaded, with a sling, and with a sling and one full magazine, but they also stopped teaching "unnecessary" information like the cycle of functioning.
At some point very early in the 1970s the Army adopted a training philosophy that turned into training monkeys to push buttons without knowing why they were pushing the button or what the button was supposed to do.
"When the red light comes on, push the blue button" works great for training soldiers to perform the task; but what happens when the new model box arrives that has two buttons and neither of the buttons is blue? What happens is you have to retrain the soldiers from scratch instead of having soldiers who understand what they were doing and why.
(2)
(0)
6
6
0
Probably for me, it was also the .45, and the .50. All Marines at Clarksville Base was required to qualify with the .45. I hated it. I wouldn't have qualified if it wasn't for our sharpie Markers in the pits. The .50 was stuck on me as an assignment, not my MOS.
(6)
(0)
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
With A .38, I Could Blast A Speck Of Fly Shit Out Of A Pound Of Pepper.
But With a .45, I Couldn't Hit A Barn If I Were Standing Inside!.
But With a .45, I Couldn't Hit A Barn If I Were Standing Inside!.
(2)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
I always loved the .45 and never had any problem qualifying with it even though some of the ones I had rattled like maracas.
Tank crews all had the M1911A1 until the army dumped .45 in favor of 9mm.
I recall once having a young kid in our platoon who literally couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the 45 (once he put a round through the roof over the firing line on our range). Fortunately the Army pistol qualification course gave you more rounds than targets, we would make sure this kid was between two guys who could really shoot, they'd knock down their own targets then knock down his.
Tank crews all had the M1911A1 until the army dumped .45 in favor of 9mm.
I recall once having a young kid in our platoon who literally couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the 45 (once he put a round through the roof over the firing line on our range). Fortunately the Army pistol qualification course gave you more rounds than targets, we would make sure this kid was between two guys who could really shoot, they'd knock down their own targets then knock down his.
(1)
(0)
SPC Robert Coventry
I was on the pistol team and at a competition my rear sight fell off, my spotter was "Shooting Left", Shooting left then my rear sight fell off we had 15 minutes to fix then no zeroing used kentucky windage...
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
The .45 Cal .Model 1911 issued to Grenadiers and machine gunners in my unit RVN somehow I retained mine when I traded off the M79 and returned to rifleman( Old Slabsides did not jam!)
(6)
(0)
SGT George Edward Brown
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter - 1967 I WAS ISSUED THE XM-148 FOR FIELD TESTING WITH THE 1st BDE, 101st ABN DIV, II CORPS
(4)
(0)
SGT Carl Blas
SGT George Edward Brown - Nice picture, even before the M-203, I carried a M-79, I liked it better than the M-203.
By the way Ed, were you in the 101st in Nam? My older brother, was transferred to the 101st from the 82nd, when the 101st went to Vietnam.
A picture of him, don't know what unit with the 101st, he was in.
By the way Ed, were you in the 101st in Nam? My older brother, was transferred to the 101st from the 82nd, when the 101st went to Vietnam.
A picture of him, don't know what unit with the 101st, he was in.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I shot the M1911 as the first hand gun, but it was when were transitioning to the Barretta. All Marine Corp Armories were required to keep a few .38's in good working order, so I checked one out one day. Shot it side by side with my Dan Wesson .45LC with Mag loads. Everyone saw the little .38, then BOOM and a big old hole in the target. It was a good day to put holes in paper.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
5
5
0
MSG Lonnie Averkamp
MAJ Ronnie Reams, that's definitely up there. My oldest was just a tiny bit older with the 1897 Winchester Shotgun.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
Being SF, I had the opportunity to work with a lot of weapons that dated back to WWI. If they could be found in use somewhere in the world, we trained on them.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Started basic training with the M14 and finished with the M16. A year or two, in my first T&OE unit we received the revised M16 with the new muzzle.
(5)
(0)
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
The M15 I was using in Vietnam in 1968-69 had the old slotted flash suppressor which I guess is what You also first used before getting the newer one that had changed on. The slots were good for putting over the binding wire on a case of C rations, turn it and break the wire to get those gourmet vittles boxed the carton.
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
Not the oldest but my favorite was a M79 gernade launcher.
I/we had sawed off and customnized them to carry in a hip holster when recon recon on HK teams to mark targets with Willy Pete for cobras from the low OH6A. We also sawed off and customnized our M60s and hung them from a bunggy cord. And of course the pilots had colt 45s. C troop 7/17th Air Cav Aerial Scouts
I/we had sawed off and customnized them to carry in a hip holster when recon recon on HK teams to mark targets with Willy Pete for cobras from the low OH6A. We also sawed off and customnized our M60s and hung them from a bunggy cord. And of course the pilots had colt 45s. C troop 7/17th Air Cav Aerial Scouts
(5)
(0)
MSG Lonnie Averkamp
I was OK with the "Thumper", but I was GREAT with the M-203. There was just something about it, that I could ALWAYS make that lucky shot with the 203.
(2)
(0)
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
MSG Lonnie Averkamp -
I'e Had Limited Success With Flame Throwers Backed Up With A Bazooka Or Two
I'e Had Limited Success With Flame Throwers Backed Up With A Bazooka Or Two
(2)
(0)
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
TSgt (Join to see)
THIS GUY?...
PFC Preston, the the most belligerent f'ing PFC in the ...
irate4x4.com/threads/pfc-preston-the-the-most...
At 2 A.M. on February 17, 1974, Robert K. Preston, a United States Army private first class, stole a United States Army Bell UH-1 Iroquois ("Huey") helicopter from Fort Meade, Maryland, flew it to Washington, D.C. and hovered for six minutes over the White House before descending on the south lawn, about 100 yards from the West Wing.
THIS GUY?...
PFC Preston, the the most belligerent f'ing PFC in the ...
irate4x4.com/threads/pfc-preston-the-the-most...
At 2 A.M. on February 17, 1974, Robert K. Preston, a United States Army private first class, stole a United States Army Bell UH-1 Iroquois ("Huey") helicopter from Fort Meade, Maryland, flew it to Washington, D.C. and hovered for six minutes over the White House before descending on the south lawn, about 100 yards from the West Wing.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
You're right the Colt 1911. Didn't get to keep it, but bought one as soon as I got out - 1969.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google