Battle of the Bulge Reenactment - Big Lake, MN 19 DEC 09

[indieflmkr]

http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/

 

[jeep44]

Note to M1 Carbine owner: remove the bayonet holder ,please.

 

[MrBern]

no 4x5?

http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/

Glad to see youre still out there, Troy! What were you shooting, 35mm?

-bern

 

[thecardigankid]

Note to M1 Carbine owner: remove the bayonet holder ,please.

Why? Believe it or not, there were M1 Carbines with bayonet lugs in 1945, I have a friend and I'll try and get him to scan a photo of it so I can post it, that has a picture dated March of 1945 and 2 of the gentlemen in the photo are carrying m1 carbines with bayonet lugs.

There were very few Carbines with bayonet lugs out there being used on the front lines towards the end of ww2 but they did make it.

 

[JoshK]

Is it in the ETO or PTO?
Then again it is the MARCH of 1945 basically the end of the war. 99.99% of M1 Carbines used during the Second World War would have had the type 1 barrel band and sight. Add that a decent reproduction of those parts goes for $30 dollars it is inexcusable. You don't need to use a carbine, if it is not correct don't bring it out. It is that simple. Look at the production numbers of the Bayonet lug before the end of hostilities add to that time it took for the parts to get to the armorers and the carbines with them to be distributed it wouldn't have been seen till MARCH of 1945. I mean simply because you have one picture of it does not mean you should do it, a good general rule is don't do it unless you have three photographs from of different people around the same time and the same unit that you are portraying it should be good. Even then there are exceptions, your impression should be based off of what the average soldier in the unit you are portraying at that time you are portraying would be wearing/using and simply a bayonet lugged carbine does not meet those criteria for any World War II Impression except for maybe 4th MARDIV Camp Maui after Iwo Jima.

The photographs look good except for this one:
http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/hn8s8528-jpg.html

I mean that is also inexcusable.

-Josh

 

[indieflmkr]

Hey Bern!

Glad to see youre still out there, Troy! What were you shooting, 35mm?

-bern

Good to hear from you!

No, Sadly that was heavily photoshopped DSLR. I don't think I would have trusted myself with my speed graphic out there. Don't want to ruin it. That and I've been having some problems with it lately. I've got a light leak from somewhere. I can't tell if it's coming from the camera or there's something wrong with my film holders.

Hey -- any chance you'll be at FIG this year? I'm FINALLY going to make it out there this time around.

Troy

 

[dr greg]

Disgraceful

The photographs look good except for this one:
http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/hn8s8528-jpg.html

I mean that is also inexcusable.

-Josh

Care to enlighten those of us with merely a casual interest in such matters, what is so wrong with the picture, apart from what looks like partly-finished roof framing in the background, no doubt an unlikely sight in the Ardennes at the time......

 

[indieflmkr]

Care to enlighten those of us with merely a casual interest in such matters, what is so wrong with the picture, apart from what looks like partly-finished roof framing in the background, no doubt an unlikely sight in the Ardennes at the time......

I'm assuming he's referring to the fact that the G.I. in the shot is using a British Enfield .303 rifle, rather than an American issue one.

 

[thecardigankid]

Is it in the ETO or PTO?
Then again it is the MARCH of 1945 basically the end of the war. 99.99% of M1 Carbines used during the Second World War would have had the type 1 barrel band and sight. Add that a decent reproduction of those parts goes for $30 dollars it is inexcusable. You don't need to use a carbine, if it is not correct don't bring it out. It is that simple. Look at the production numbers of the Bayonet lug before the end of hostilities add to that time it took for the parts to get to the armorers and the carbines with them to be distributed it wouldn't have been seen till MARCH of 1945. I mean simply because you have one picture of it does not mean you should do it, a good general rule is don't do it unless you have three photographs from of different people around the same time and the same unit that you are portraying it should be good. Even then there are exceptions, your impression should be based off of what the average soldier in the unit you are portraying at that time you are portraying would be wearing/using and simply a bayonet lugged carbine does not meet those criteria for any World War II Impression except for maybe 4th MARDIV Camp Maui after Iwo Jima.

The photographs look good except for this one:
http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/hn8s8528-jpg.html

I mean that is also inexcusable.

-Josh

Who are you to say what is inexcusable? Are you an expert on all things WW2? You dont know what type of documentation this man may have one why he does his kit the way he does. And I think its inexcusable for you to claim such things as inexcusable without having those in the photos here to defend themselves.

Also:
I disagree on your logic of three photographs, take for example zip up hoodie sweatshirts, those shirts have been around since the mid 1930s, I havent seen photos of them during ww2, but it still doesnt make it incorrect to wear one properly made.

I'll take a page from doing Civil War research, I found 1 photo of a couple soldiers wearing whats known as an Aspenwall, it was an early war camp coat, made of wool knit fabric. I found out through documents that it was made by a tailor in upstate New York who made them for several men in several different regiments. Now should I use your logic and dont have one made just because I dont have three photographs of it?

So its possible that they made it to the lines by March of 1945. You say 99.99% of all barrels were Type 1, I agree with you on that, but what if he is representing that .01% that had those weapons at the end of the war. Now if there a whole company of guys toting carbines with bayonet lugs then yea I'd see your point on inexcusable, but its only one guy, and totally possible in my mind.

Also the photo my buddy has is European theater.

 

[dr greg]

303

I'm assuming he's referring to the fact that the G.I. in the shot is using a British Enfield .303 rifle, rather than an American issue one.

Having fired one myself many times I did think it unusual that it would be used, but who knows, maybe the imaginary GI lost his carbine in the confusion of the breakthrough, or had picked one up off a dead Tommy somewhere along the line, appropriation of non-standard weaponry would have been an issue at unit level surely?

 

[thecardigankid]

Having fired one myself many times I did think it unusual that it would be used, but who knows, maybe the imaginary GI lost his carbine in the confusion of the breakthrough, or had picked one up off a dead Tommy somewhere along the line, appropriation of non-standard weaponry would have been an issue at unit level surely?

Exactly, and dont forget it was the Battle of the Bulge, several American units found themselves having to rely on acquired items in order to survive as supplies had run out for them.

 

[Davep]

This is one of those age old "debates/arguments/fights" it usually involves someone who has something which is not "normal" or "average" to the theater of battle. So in order to justified it, they have some obscure photo. Often times the picture is of rear troops and not combat infantry squads.

The bottom line, if you and the majority of your squad couldn't have one, didn't have access to one, it makes no sense for one lone cowboy to parade a different weapon, gear or clothing that no one in his squad would have.

Nobody is prefect, but at least recognize it as being farbee

As far a losing and picking up a rifle, he would have picked up another american weapon not an British Enfield? This is one of those excuses used when a reenactor unit doesn't have enough rifles to pass out. Again recognize it as being farbee.

Bottomline- when people bring or use the wrong equipment, it is because they don't have it or can't afford to get one. But like anything there are shades of this. For example how many American reenactors have M1 Garands with lockbar sights, and the proper period correct trigger guard.

 

[MrBern]

assault weapons...

Why? Believe it or not, there were M1 Carbines with bayonet lugs in 1945, I have a friend and I'll try and get him to scan a photo of it so I can post it, that has a picture dated March of 1945 and 2 of the gentlemen in the photo are carrying m1 carbines with bayonet lugs.

There were very few Carbines with bayonet lugs out there being used on the front lines towards the end of ww2 but they did make it.

Well.... March `45 is still too late for a Battle of the Bulge reenactmnt. That Battle ran from Dec `44 to the end of January `45.

BTW, isnt it currently illegal to have a bayonet lug on a carbine? Or is that just certain states?

Anyway, reenactors have to make do with what theyve got. Its not like he's in a Spielberg movie.

 

[MrBern]

The Pennsylvania tundra

Good to hear from you!

No, Sadly that was heavily photoshopped DSLR. I don't think I would have trusted myself with my speed graphic out there. Don't want to ruin it. That and I've been having some problems with it lately. I've got a light leak from somewhere. I can't tell if it's coming from the camera or there's something wrong with my film holders.

Hey -- any chance you'll be at FIG this year? I'm FINALLY going to make it out there this time around.

Troy

I havent gone in a couple years. Top has been after me to join in again. Truly sorry that I cant join you guys, but all that standing around in the snow is less & less intriguing.
Plus it doesnt help that Im usually in hawaii for PearlHarbor's anniversary when I suddenly recall the FIG pre-registration deadline is that day.

And the cold jsut doesnt agree with the vintage cameras, does it?

Keep up the cool posts!
-b

 

[murena]

http://public.fotki.com/mlif/re-enactment_photos/big_lake_mn/dec-2009/

...thank you very much for posting this link! very nice pictures :eusa_clap

regards,

murena

 

[jeep44]

Why? Believe it or not, there were M1 Carbines with bayonet lugs in 1945, I have a friend and I'll try and get him to scan a photo of it so I can post it, that has a picture dated March of 1945 and 2 of the gentlemen in the photo are carrying m1 carbines with bayonet lugs.

There were very few Carbines with bayonet lugs out there being used on the front lines towards the end of ww2 but they did make it.

Guys always get touchy about that. Pointing out post-war sights on Garands doesn't win a lot of friends,either.lol

I'd like to see your photo. The very earliest photo I've been able to find showing a carbine bayonet lug is from the first wave of invasion troops into Japan,in Sept '45.

 

[PoohBang]

some of those photos looked period. The dude with the cigar should get different glasses though.

 

[p51]

Guys always get touchy about that. Pointing out post-war sights on Garands doesn't win a lot of friends,either.lol

Amen, it's always someone who's "seen" the photo but can no longer produce it. As for M-1 rifle sights, don't get me started. NO WW2 movies or TV shows made since the 50s have gotten the right sights on the rifles and I'd say less than 25% of re-enactors do, either.

I'd like to see your photo. The very earliest photo I've been able to find showing a carbine bayonet lug is from the first wave of invasion troops into Japan,in Sept '45.

I agree, I'd love to see this ETO photo, as I'm willing to bet any amount that the photo mentioned either was taken after the war or doesn't have the lug at all (or conveniently got "lost somewhere" and now can't be found). This is because no such photos exists of soldiers in the field before the surrender of the Germans in the ETO with a bayonet lug on their carbine. This has gone round and round among historians for years, and some pretty well-informed researchers have given up with such a photo. Just like the M-3A1 grease gun, there is no evidence ever surfaced to suggest bayonet lugs got on carbines used in the ETO before VE day. They did, however, get into the PTO at the extreme end of the war, but even then there is an argument on if they actually saw comabt even there.

 

[Davep]

Amen, it's always someone who's "seen" the photo but can no longer produce it. As for M-1 rifle sights, don't get me started. NO WW2 movies or TV shows made since the 50s have gotten the right sights on the rifles and I'd say less than 25% of re-enactors do, either.

Don't forget the trigger guards

 

[thecardigankid]

Guys always get touchy about that. Pointing out post-war sights on Garands doesn't win a lot of friends,either.lol

I'd like to see your photo. The very earliest photo I've been able to find showing a carbine bayonet lug is from the first wave of invasion troops into Japan,in Sept '45.

It'll be hard to get a copy of the photo for you as my friend currently resides in Ohio and is hard to get ahold of at times. BUT a really good friend of mine here in Beaufort has a Leatherneck Magazine dated May of 1944 that specifically talks about M1 Carbines being fitted with Bayonet lugs and being used overseas, with combat artist drawings of said carbines. That is a full year before the end of the war, and if we know anything about the Marine Corps technology wise, they get the good stuff last!

I will try and get a copy of the Leatherneck Magazine Article for us all to enjoy.