.38-200 Ammo Issue Question

[Texas Star]

I read a book by a Member of Parliament who served in the British Army dring WW II. He carried a .38 revolver, brand not specified. (Book: "The Golden Carpet.")

He had fired several rounds in practice, and before an upcoming offensive, tried to scrounge some more ammo.

He had to borrow some from his general. (He was a staff officer.) The general had some, mainly because his handgun of preference was "of a different caliber." (Type not stated.)

I read somewhere that in most British line regiments, including tankers, the ammo issue was just six rounds in the gun and either six or twelve spares. I read an account by one British officer who went into the El Alamein attack with just his .38 and nine rounds, total! He shot an Italian, who died very slowly, from a hit in the back. (Both waited for hours for treatment at a wound station.)

And I've read that German forces usually just issued a 25-round box of pistol ammo, whether 7.65mm or 9mm, and that this was supposed to last the soldier for the war. Pistols were regarded as being mainly for emergency, closeup use, and ammo wasn't doled out too freely.

By contrast, a US soldier with a .45 had 21 rounds on him, in the gun and two spare mags. And probably more, if he wanted it or ran low.

Soldiers no doubt scrounged submachinegun ammo when it'd fit their pistols, or stole ammo off the bodies of their casualties.
Enemy handguns were also prized, and often acquired. A great many German and Italian pistols were dropped off of returning ships when announcements were made that severe penalties awaited any British soldier caught trying to bring a non-issued handgun into the UK.

At least two famous RAF pilots carried enemy guns, one a Luger, the other a .32 Beretta. They scrouged them from their Intelligence people, who took them off of Luftwaffe prisoners. The Germans got the Luger back, when the Mosquito pilot was forced to bail out over occupied Denmark and became a POW. He wrote that the Germans weren't happy to find that 9mm on him, but that he wasn't abused too badly over it.

I'm sure that Commando and parachute units had more pistol ammo and more practice than most troops. So would SOE operatives and SAS units, who carried whatever they wanted, if they could acquire it. But can anyone else confrm that the average British soldier/officer with a revolver was issued more than 12-18 rounds total? With 12 more held in unit Supply?

 

[rburg]

Back when I had a couple of .455 Triple Locks, my then Gunshow partner gave up a full box of British issue ammo. It was 12 full rounds! He gave it to me just because he didn't want to see my whining and crying about not being able to find correct ammo.

 

[ralph7]

I read a book by a Member of Parliament who served in the British Army dring WW II. He carried a .38 revolver, brand not specified. (Book: "The Golden Carpet.")

He had fired several rounds in practice, and before an upcoming offensive, tried to scrounge some more ammo.

He had to borrow some from his general. (He was a staff officer.) The general had some, mainly because his handgun of preference was "of a different caliber." (Type not stated.)

I read somewhere that in most British line regiments, including tankers, the ammo issue was just six rounds in the gun and either six or twelve spares. I read an account by one British officer who went into the El Alamein attack with just his .38 and nine rounds, total! He shot an Italian, who died very slowly, from a hit in the back. (Both waited for hours for treatment at a wound station.)

And I've read that German forces usually just issued a 25-round box of pistol ammo, whether 7.65mm or 9mm, and that this was supposed to last the soldier for the war. Pistols were regarded as being mainly for emergency, closeup use, and ammo wasn't doled out too freely.

By contrast, a US soldier with a .45 had 21 rounds on him, in the gun and two spare mags. And probably more, if he wanted it or ran low.

Soldiers no doubt scrounged submachinegun ammo when it'd fit their pistols, or stole ammo off the bodies of their casualties.
Enemy handguns were also prized, and often acquired. A great many German and Italian pistols were dropped off of returning ships when announcements were made that severe penalties awaited any British soldier caught trying to bring a non-issued handgun into the UK.

At least two famous RAF pilots carried enemy guns, one a Luger, the other a .32 Beretta. They scrouged them from their Intelligence people, who took them off of Luftwaffe prisoners. The Germans got the Luger back, when the Mosquito pilot was forced to bail out over occupied Denmark and became a POW. He wrote that the Germans weren't happy to find that 9mm on him, but that he wasn't abused too badly over it.

I'm sure that Commando and parachute units had more pistol ammo and more practice than most troops. So would SOE operatives and SAS units, who carried whatever they wanted, if they could acquire it. But can anyone else confrm that the average British soldier/officer with a revolver was issued more than 12-18 rounds total? With 12 more held in unit Supply?

why? was he a cruise ship captain??

 

[2152hq]

In Ian Skenerton's(sp?) book on the Enfield No.2 revolver, he states that "Twelve rounds was the number of rounds issued to each man armed with a .380 revolver."

(.380 revolver being the British term for 38S&W caliber)

I suspect the Webley MkIV was no different being an issue .380 revolver in WW2 also.

The standard Infantry canvas ammo pounch for belt attachment carried 12rds each (loose). So perhaps an extra 6 were scrounged for the initial loading.
There are variations including a slightly oversize RAF issue,,but still rated for 12rds.

The low-slung so called Tankers holster had loops for 6 extra rounds on the holster itself.


Perhaps when you needed extra ammo,,all you received was the 12rds,,as they (and the .455) were packed in 12rd boxes/packets.

 

[Texas Star]

In Ian Skenerton's(sp?) book on the Enfield No.2 revolver, he states that "Twelve rounds was the number of rounds issued to each man armed with a .380 revolver."

(.380 revolver being the British term for 38S&W caliber)

I suspect the Webley MkIV was no different being an issue .380 revolver in WW2 also.

The standard Infantry canvas ammo pounch for belt attachment carried 12rds each (loose). So perhaps an extra 6 were scrounged for the initial loading.
There are variations including a slightly oversize RAF issue,,but still rated for 12rds.

The low-slung so called Tankers holster had loops for 6 extra rounds on the holster itself.


Perhaps when you needed extra ammo,,all you received was the 12rds,,as they (and the .455) were packed in 12rd boxes/packets.

I don't think it mattered which brand the .38 (or .455) was. Ammo ration would be the same. But thanks for the quote from Skennerton. That's probably the definitive answer.

But this does raise the issue of whether tankers had to load just the gun and the loops on the holster, but also had 12 rounds for a belt ammo pouch.

I didn't realize that RAF ammo pouches were larger, just know that they're gray instead of olive.

 

[Waidmann]

A tanker's principal weapon is his tank, the pilot his aircraft, the general his command, ditto the machinegunner, mortarman etc. etc.

By the way we don't steal ammo off our casualties, we redistribute it within the unit.

I never carried more pistol ammo that what is being discussed here. If I was that concerned a rifle (or very rarely a shotgun) was on the menu. I would imagine the same is true today.

There truly has not been "great" emphasis on handguns since WWI.

 

[retarmyaviator]

I never carried more pistol ammo that what is being discussed here. If I was that concerned a rifle (or very rarely a shotgun) was on the menu. I would imagine the same is true today.

Same here. When I was in El Salvador in the late 80s I carried a Browning HP with three full magazines and a Car15 with three magazines, one in the weapon and two in my survival vest. My job was to fly the helicopter not get in a prolonged fire fight.

As Waidmann said, the pistol was not to be considered a primary weapon and therefore the one carrying it did not need a large amount of ammunition.

 

[Texas Star]

You guys made the obvious point, but to a WW II British officer in many units, his pistol WAS his main weapon.

Oh, I know: he was to direct the fighting, not participate. But I keep thinking of that man who went into battle at El Alamein with just a .38 and nine rounds...and he did fire at the enemy, killing at least one.

Another point. My son had to use a 9mm pistol on a number of occasions in Iraq. He would be dead now, had he not had considerable skill and a pistol. In most of these cases, his rifle or M-4 carbine had run dry while under close attack. This was especially the case while working as a contractor protecting convoys after he left the Army. I should note that he knew how to shoot before entering military service. At about age 9, he was coached by a famous IPSC competitor, in addition to what I taught him.

I am also thinking of a pilot who bails out and has to cope until rescued, although he'd normally avoid shooting at small game in occupied territory, to avoid unwanted attention.

Next point. One of you lads said that a tanker's weapon is his tank. A South African tank or armored car (I forget which) ran out of ammo for its main guns and was disabled while fighting Cuban and black commie forces in Angola. The commander used his Star 9mm to shoot Cubans (many of whom seemed to be on drugs) off of the vehicle until relieved by other South African troops. The battle was quite intense, and he received the Honoris Crux (Cross of Honor) for his gallantry.

The late Jeff Cooper admitted that pistols do not win battles, but said that they save the lives of the men who do. On three occasions when he did not have a more potent weapon at hand, Jeff used pistols to save his own life.

Unfortunately, most military personnel have very little skill with handguns, and many place little faith in them.

 

[PJGP]

I don't have anything on the .38 in WWII, but in 1914 the South African Union Defence Force (UDF) allocated for pistols (revolver) "in the field" 12 rounds on the man, 12 rounds in regimental reserve and 12 rounds with the Ammunition Column. The figures for rifle were 100 in each case.

By 1930 the Webley revolver figures were unchanged, but for the Webley & Scott 9 mm pistols (8 shot mag) the figures were 16 in each case.

Peter

 

[zonker5]

During WWII in the CBI theatre being issued just a few rounds was SOP for the Brits. Many of them traded their .38s for a GI .45 as they could get much more ammo for it.

 

[retarmyaviator]

Seems like you already had decided on the answer to your question before you posted.

You did not mention skill in your original question, what makes you think those of us who carried a pistol in combat lacked skill with it? How much ammunition you carry into combat and how much you have used to practice with are two completely different topics.

You guys made the obvious point, but to a WW II British officer in many units, his pistol WAS his main weapon.

Oh, I know: he was to direct the fighting, not participate. But I keep thinking of that man who went into battle at El Alamein with just a .38 and nine rounds...and he did fire at the enemy, killing at least one.

Another point. My son had to use a 9mm pistol on a number of occasions in Iraq. He would be dead now, had he not had considerable skill and a pistol. In most of these cases, his rifle or M-4 carbine had run dry while under close attack. This was especially the case while working as a contractor protecting convoys after he left the Army. I should note that he knew how to shoot before entering military service. At about age 9, he was coached by a famous IPSC competitor, in addition to what I taught him.

I am also thinking of a pilot who bails out and has to cope until rescued, although he'd normally avoid shooting at small game in occupied territory, to avoid unwanted attention.

Next point. One of you lads said that a tanker's weapon is his tank. A South African tank or armored car (I forget which) ran out of ammo for its main guns and was disabled while fighting Cuban and black commie forces in Angola. The commander used his Star 9mm to shoot Cubans (many of whom seemed to be on drugs) off of the vehicle until relieved by other South African troops. The battle was quite intense, and he received the Honoris Crux (Cross of Honor) for his gallantry.

The late Jeff Cooper admitted that pistols do not win battles, but said that they save the lives of the men who do. On three occasions when he did not have a more potent weapon at hand, Jeff used pistols to save his own life.

Unfortunately, most military personnel have very little skill with handguns, and many place little faith in them.

 

[Texas Star]

Seems like you already had decided on the answer to your question before you posted.

You did not mention skill in your original question, what makes you think those of us who carried a pistol in combat lacked skill with it? How much ammunition you carry into combat and how much you have used to practice with are two completely different topics.

My original question was just about how many rounds the British and Commonwealth forces issued for the .38-200 in WW II.

I think you are taking my comments too personally. You may be a good pistol shot, and I manage well enough to get by. But most of my fellow airmen did well to qualify at a basic Marksman level. I have heard some troops complain that they can't hit much with a handgun. My son heard similar remarks. I have seen published comments by a USAF marksmanship instructor to the effect that most pliots don't take pistol training too seriously, nor do they like to practice.

Now, some do. I feel pretty sure that Scott O'Grady knew how to use his Beretta M-9 when he had to bail out of his stricken F-16 over Bosnia in the celebrated incident where he escaped heavy pursuit by hostile forces. He later became an NRA director, and his book, "Return With Honor" suggests that he is a man who know guns better than some. BTW, he praised his Swiss Army knife, liking it better than the issued sheath knife, which rusted in his adventure. His M-9 also rusted.

Certainly, SEALS, Delta Force, and other units receive a LOT more handgun instruction than in most outfits.

But all of this is beside my topic, which was simply to ask the basic ammo ration to UK soldiers armed with a handgun in WW II. What you carried in El Salvador, etc. or your personal skill has nothing to do with the topic. Please don't personalize this. The topic is not about you, your skill, or your experiences. It isn't even about current US issue arms or ammo rations. I wasn't trying to insult you. Sorry if you got that impression.

I certainly know that ammo expended in practice has nothing to do with the amount issued for battle. You are correct in that.

What you might want to do (just a thought) is to open a discussion of the issues that you raised, probably in The Lounge. I think many on the board would be interested and would post in it. I found your experiences interesting, and am curious why you were in El Salvador. But this thread isn't really the right place for that. I hope that you aren't offended.

 

[Texas Star]

Peter-

Thanks for the info on the ammo issue. I did know that the SA Police once issued the Webley auto chambered for the 9mm Browning Long.

Was there also a military issue of that gun?

What do the police and military there use now? I know that some Beretta M-92 and Beretta copy (Z-88) pistols have been used, but that was a few years ago.

You are a gold mine of information from your country. I'm glad that you're here!

 

[walnutred]

The British mindset was that Officers were Gentlemen, and as such pretty much non-combatants. Just there to direct the work,don't you know.

 

[handejector]

What you see on paper and what you see on troops is quite often two different things. At times, you may not have even basic stuff, at other times plenty.
Good commanders get ammo and other essentials for their unit. Troops are pretty good at scrounging. The wounded and dead leave lots of stuff behind. After a war has been going on for awhile, lots of 'stuff' is floating around.

My CO handed this young Buck Sgt a 45 and an Ithaca 37 riot gun, with ammo for both one afternoon. I was delighted, to say the least. No hand receipt was mentioned. He just said to keep his *** alive.
I never had trouble getting ammo.

 

[pff]

I can't address the amounts issued to individuals, but some I have here was packaged in 12 round boxes in 1943.

Label reads:

H 1003 A (lot number?)


12

CARTRIDGES

REVOLVER

.380" DC MK II Z

NOV 19 1943

I. G. CANADA


Hope this helps.

Regards,

Pat

 

[0le]

During WWII in the CBI theatre being issued just a few rounds was SOP for the Brits. Many of them traded their .38s for a GI .45 as they could get much more ammo for it.

Please forgive my ignorance, Zonker5, but what was the 'CBI theatre'? I am only aware of the European, Pacific, and African.

 

[2152hq]

China/Burma/India

 

[walnutred]

There have also been first hand accounts of British troops being so desperate for handgun ammo that they loaded their Victorys with captured 9x19 ammo. I don't think a Victory would hold up to that for long.

 

[faraim]

I suspect this could be the result of the people in charge assuming that once shot the enemy would cease aggressive action. Surely in combat the soldier wouldn't need to dispatch more than 12 hostile soldiers.