Greetings
Today I picked up a no dash model 10 with 2" barrel. Marked US on the back strap. Round butt with small p on the left front of frame. SN. c510109
Someone locally said this may have been a shipment for robins afb, Ga.
Can anyone shed light? Rarity? Value ?
Thanks
Bill

Probably the only way to know would be from a factory letter. I've never heard about anything like that going to Robins, but anything's possible. I don't know about back then, but weapons engineering, including small arms, is done at Robins.

Certainly will get a letter. What's the current turn around time?
Thanks!
Bill

I spoke with Roy on the phone yesterday. He said he has 800 requests on his desk. He is currently working on those that came in during November. So he has some catching up to do. He is diligently working to get caught up, but be patient.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Bill
It seems likely that you have one of the 922 examples that were shipped to Warner Robins AFB in 1960. Your serial number is in the correct range - near the low end of the range, in fact. If it has the standard barrel it would be marked as a no-dash Model 10, and that would be what the AF ordered. And they did have the 2" barrel and round butt.
We know that guns in the small order of 2" and 4" Model 10-5 revolvers that was purchased by the military in 1967 had the markings you describe. But those would have much higher serial numbers. I think it is safe to assume the 1960 purchase would have been marked the same way, but I don't have a reference to prove it. A long time ago, there was an article in the Journal about the 1960 guns, but I don't have a copy. Perhaps someone else here does.
If I were you, I would request a letter on this gun, as advised above. Once you have it, please let us know what it says.
Regards,
Jack

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Were those guns meant to replace the fragile Aircrewman model? They should fit the same holstes.

I don't know that anyone alive knows the answer to that question, but it seems quite possible to me. The fact that both were 2" K frame guns could easily lead to that conclusion. The timing could be correct, since the company seems to have stopped making the Aircrewman in about 1957. We know that most of those were destroyed and at least some were fitted with steel cylinders by Air Force armorers. I'm not sure I've ever seen dates associated with the destruction program.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Just a correction. it's not Warner Robins AFB. It's Robins AFB, in Warner Robins GA. I spent some time there in small arms.

I make that correction all the time I was born at the Robins AFB hospital and also retired from the USAF, so I find all the history with this revolver very cool.
Truly appreciate all the great info.
Bill

Part of the confusion is that the USAF's Warner Robins Air Logistics Center is the principal tenant at Robins AFB. The base is basically a logistics and maintenance depot and doesn't really have much of a flying mission. As I said, part of the mission there is small arms engineering and logistics program management (WR-ALC/542 ASUG/GBMB). That group tracks the whereabouts of all USAF small arms in inventory throughout the Air Force, and is responsible for small arms maintenance and procurement activities. I have several close friends still working in that group.

Well now, that is quite interesting. During my two tours in SE Asia more than 40 years ago, I had to send and receive a few things from the Warner Robins Logistics people. I was never on the ground there. But during that time and all the years since, I thought that was the name of the base.

I guess old guys can learn new stuff! Thanks for setting me straight.

BTW - my wife has small arms and I like spending time there . . .

Jack

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

The last thing I did there was back in about 2007 when I wrote up the specifications and solicitation documentation for the new Air Force Pistol to replace the M9 (we were proposing 9X23mm Winchester as the caliber). That project died because the principal proponent was the USAF Chief of Staff and he got canned over that errant nuclear weapons affair. Thus endeth the Air Force pistol program. The Army is still working on something similar, and I'm still in limited contact with them. Seems they can't decide to go with .357 Sig or .40 S&W for a caliber - after years of consideration.

You have an impressive background! I'm not sure that going to 9X23mm is the answer, and would end pistol ammo interchangibility with our allies. My son scrounged 9mm NATO ammo several times from British friends when in Iraq.
He found the 9mm pretty effective, both from pistols and from the H-K MP-5 SMG. Shot placement matters, of course, as with any handgun caliber. He would have often preferred JHP bullets, but 9mm NATO ball did the job. He is now out of the Army and loads Federal's 124 grain HST in his 9mm's.

IF trainng is sufficient, the .357 SIG and .40 S&W may be superior to the 9mm, but having to use FMJ ammo under the Hague Accords is a big issue. When I was an AF cop, we were issued .38's and the ammo was quite weak. I had little faith in it, and often carried a .45 when the option existed. One base used unit funds to buy High Velocity .38 ammo off base. I felt better with that.

Thanks for the info on Warner-Robbins. Is that supposed to have one or two "b"'s? I've usually seen it spelled with two.

I met pilots who had had only rudimentary training with handguns. They had very limited confidence in them.. On the other hand, you probably know about the AF cop who shot a man firing an AK-47 and killed him with a single shot at some 80 yards. (Used a Beretta M-9.) I think that was at Fairchild AFB WA. Ayoob interviewed him and has written several times about the case.

Back to the .38 snubs, I worked at Lowry AFB in Denver with two men (brothers!) who'd previously been at an Oregon base where they carried snub .38's. Not sure if they had fixed or adj. sights. The AF called the latter the M-56, and it was basically a two-inch Combat Masterpiece. They complained about it being much harder to qualify with the snub versus the usual four inch barrel.

Just one b. There were many considerations surrounding the 9X23 Win caliber choice, and in fact the whole rationale for a new service pistol is that 9X19mm was considered not effective enough, and that something more powerful was needed, regardless of interchangeability of ammunition. There were several reasons behind the 9X23 selection, the principal one was that you are getting .357 Magnum ballistics from a semi-automatic. Additionally, the 9X23 milks out about an additional 100-150 ft/sec in MV over the .357 SIG, and that seemed to be what the top brass wanted. During that program, I had Winchester make up a considerable quantity of 9X23 ammunition loaded with the standard 124 grain M882 bullet, and we were getting upwards of 1450 ft/sec from 5" barrels. I still have some of those sitting in my garage. The downside is you have a real handful when you shoot anything in 9X23. You sure know it's not a 9X19, and there was some concern over that regarding training, and women shooters. One requirement was that any new Air Force pistol could easily be re-configured to use M882 ammunition if necessary. We were also looking at two pistols, one compact, and one full size, somewhat like the M9 vs the M11. Our initial test beds for ballistics and accuracy testing were the M1911A1 converted to 9X23 and the EAA Witness. Anyway, I could fill up a lot of pages about that project, but I won't, as nothing came from it.

The correct spelling is Warner Robins, with one "B".

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Have seen, been issued 2 inch Model 10s- M&Ps. Don't recall if they were model 10 marked, but think some of them were U S marked.

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

"When I was an AF cop, we were issued .38's and the ammo was quite weak."
That would have been the M41 Ball round. It had much the same ballistics of any standard .38 Special round, except it used a nominal 130 grain FMJ bullet. The "spec" ballistics for the M41 were 950 ft/sec +/- 45 ft/sec @ 15', but my chrono tests indicate the MV is closer to 800-820 ft/sec in my .38 Special 4" revolvers. The Air Force also used a special high velocity .38 Special load during the later Vietnam era. It was called the PGU 12/B Ball, and used the same bullet as the M41 round. Its velocity was given as 1100-1175 ft/sec at 27 feet from the muzzle. So it's more or less a .38/44 - equivalent load. All of those were loaded at Lake City AAP, the only time Lake City made handgun rounds.

Somewhere around here I think I still have some PGU 12/B .38 Spl rounds with the LC headstamp. Can't remember if I brought those back with me or acquired them at my final duty station stateside before I mustered out. Probably the former. I'll have to see if I can find them.
They were definitely hotter than the M41.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

I found one of these revolvers myself in a pawn shop in Athens Georgia. Serial number C518***. It's marked MOD-10, but with that serial number, it should have been made in 1961. The backstrap is marked U.S. Any update from the original post about a S&W letter?

Welcome to the forum ! If I were you I would start a new thread, as this one is now 6 years old, and the original poster hasn't been heard from since. Oh and we love pictures.

__________________
Randy

I just have the plain old Model 10 nd snubby. C470024, shipped 9/59; makes it 62 years old this month.





matching stocks.

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065