A Navy M1899/1902 in US Service....in WW2?

[ordnanceguy]

Gentlemen:

I don't think I can remember ever seeing a period photograph of the S&W Navy Model of 1899 or 1902 in service. I am certain that I have never seen one of the revolver in service in WW2.....until now.

I ran across this pic of two Army Engineer officers. It is not well known today but the Army operated the Military Railway Service during WW2 using soldiers who had been railwaymen in civilian life. Railways were essential to national defense at home and overseas were vital in moving huge amounts of supplies forward to the front. It makes sense that railwaymen would be armed.

The date and location of this photo is not known to me, but the butt of the revolver on the Captain standing to the left is unmistakably similar to the M1899/02 Smith. Could it be a civilian gun? Perhaps, but I am going with the idea that the Smith, as an obsolete revolver, was somehow allocated to soldiers in non-combat arms roles. It is well known that some of the Navy guns were shipped as Lend Lease guns to the UK. Maybe this one was missed in the round up. Anyone got a better theory?

Note that the Captain also has the web double magazine pouch for the M1911 magazines on his pistol belt. Maybe he is carrying loose .38 ammo in there.

All Aboard!!!

 

[BAM-BAM]

That Capt. can't be a day under a full Col. or Brig G. in age..................and the 'Butterball" shares birthdays with Majors..... or Lt Col.'s

 

[JSR III]

Charlie, just as an FYI, I own that gun it is serial number 5445 with Navy number 355, shipped 9/1900. I can send you a photo of the gun if you would like to add it to the photo collection.

 

[Absalom]

It's a bit late in history for the practice, but somehow, the web belt that doesn't match the rest of the uniform at all, the obviously empty magazine pouch that doesn't make sense considering the gun he carries, the round-butt revolver in a holster that may or may not fit the gun, all have a whiff of "photographer's prop" about it, especially as the two gentlemen are so photogenically placed in front of the locomotive which, judging by the cleanliness of their dress, neither one has gotten any closer to than they are in the picture.

Just a hunch . No proof. I'll happily apologize if anyone proves me wrong.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Interesting! It does looked posed. I am thinking the Captain on the left is a US Transportation Corps Train officer. Is that an issued gun? I doubt it, but anything is possible.
He may be carrying his own gun that he brought from home.
The gent on the right- French?
Our railroad guys did more work there than anywhere.
These guys are supervisors, not train engineer- fireman.
As I have posted before, my Doctor FIL was issued not one but two 1917s just before we went to Africa.

 

[handejector]

My theory and thoughts-

The old Capt brought his own gun.
Blown up, the grips look like black hard rubber to me. The Navy contract guns had wood with a different checkering pattern.

It would be problematic getting small arms off the Navy books and onto the Army's I would think.

The pistol belt is WW I vintage. Note the long Tee on the clasp and the light color. They were definitely issued early in the War. There was LOTS of gear and weapons made in 1918 that never got to France.

The old guy may have been a volunteer who got an age waiver because he was a railroad man. Or maybe he was just passed over for promotion.
He somehow looks familiar. Really- I mean that. Is that Ed Cornett?

I would think such a unit would be issued 'Secondary' sidearms, so he may have been issued a 1917 but simply preferred his own old 38 and stuck it in his issued 1917 holster. Or maybe he scrounged one of the holsters for the obsolete old 38 Colts or S&Ws- I know they made one, but don't know the model number.

The 45 pouch does work for loose 38 rounds, among other things.

The guy on the right MAY be French, but he is wearing a US Army uniform.

 

[handejector]

More thoughts-

The locomotive appears to be Number 1.

The engine is putting out smoke. If it is moving, I bet the next pic is real ugly.

 

[S&W ucla]

.....the old guy may have been a volunteer who got an age waiver because he was a railroad man. Or maybe he was just passed over for promotion.
He somehow looks familiar. Really- I mean that. Is that Ed Cornett?

No way, Ed was that age when he and Teddy took the hill!

 

[Absalom]

As for the location, I don't know whether we shipped locomotives to France after D-Day, but that cow-catcher on the one in the picture is very un-European; those were really an American thing (the concept of "open range" is unknown in Europe), so I think this is more likely a stateside location; maybe we have a railroad enthusiast on the forum who knows about such things?

The 45 pouch does work for loose 38 rounds, among other things.

It does, but if you enlarge the pouch, there's obviously nothing in it, neither magazines nor loose rounds, leading me to question the purpose of its presence.

 

[handejector]

No way, Ed was that age when he and Teddy took the hill!

Ed's Teddy would be a first year Steiff, and worth $84,000 on The Antiques Roadshow.

 

[Club Gun Fan]

Lee, you should know better. Ed was never that cute, or that tall.

 

[Muley Gil]

I don't know about the 1940s, but Fort Eustis, Virginia is the home of the US Army Transportation Corps.

 

[handejector]

It does, but if you enlarge the pouch, there's obviously nothing in it, neither magazines nor loose rounds, leading me to question the purpose of its presence.

I seriously doubt that you can tell if there are any 38 rds in the pouch. It looks a little lumpy to me, but it's a lousy way to carry 38s. Kinda hard to get out. I've done it- once.
Maybe they're in his hat, or the right shirt pocket.

Tell us if the gun is loaded.

 

[Absalom]

......... and stuck it in his issued 1917 holster. Or maybe he scrounged one of the holsters for the obsolete old 38 Colts or S&Ws- I know they made one, but don't know the model number.
.......

The holster is actually more interesting. I know little of holster type history. Did they make military cross-draw holsters for left-handed people, or when did they stop making the "wrong-sided" cavalry type holsters to accommodate the saber? Otherwise, it's definitely a private rig.

 

[BOMBTEC]

Corps of Engineers

Both the Capt. & Lt. are wearing Corps of Engineers collar brass. The Capt. & Lt. at he beginning of WWII they as Engineers buy trade may have been inducted in to the Army and the Corps of Engineers. I would say the revolver the Capt. is wearing was a personal weapon.

 

[murphydog]

The holster is actually more interesting. I know little of holster type history. Did they make military cross-draw holsters for left-handed people, or when did they stop making the "wrong-sided" cavalry type holsters to accommodate the saber? Otherwise, it's definitely a private rig.

The 1892-1903 Colt D.A. series ("New Army/Navy") were issued with holsters like this one, so it may be military issue. It was meant to be used for a right-handed "twist draw" - need to keep at least one hand on the reins of the horse, pard .

Will see if I can find an example I have and post a photo.

 

[DWalt]

There are accounts that during WWI, U. S. railway troops in France were issued .30-40 Krag rifles and Colt Army/Navy revolvers, as were some other rear-area personnel. No idea what they may have used during WWII, but in any event, it is very unlikely that there would have been much need for them to have personal weapons.

 

[Skeetr57]

Without time and location context, we are all just guessing. During the interwar period, military promotion was very slow, with many officers retiring as Captains. One of my uncles was commissioned from ROTC in 1933 and entered active duty for WWII as a 1st Lt. The holster worn by the CPT would have been normal for early WWI, when sabers were carried on the left and revolvers on the right for a cross draw with both. I can see both the holster and the revolver as being issued just before WWII, especially if the CPT were in the National Guard. The train engine is definitely US because of the type of coupler on the front of the engine. European countries used chain link coupling. I also think that the Transportation Corps would have been operating trains, rather than the Corps of Engineers. My best guess is that the picture was taken in the US in the late 1930's or early 1940's during some type of exercise or maneuver, and that the CPT is most probably a National Guard officer.

 

[DWalt]

"The holster is actually more interesting. I know little of holster type history. Did they make military cross-draw holsters for left-handed people, or when did they stop making the "wrong-sided" cavalry type holsters to accommodate the saber?"

I don't know when the butt-forward holster for revolvers stopped in the U. S. Army, but I once had an 8x10 group picture of several dozen uniformed army (possibly National Guard) officers, taken I think at some army post in Pennsylvania, dated 1937, and all were wearing M1917s in butt-forward holsters on Sam Browne belts.

 

[Absalom]

....
I don't know when the butt-forward holster for revolvers stopped in the U. S. Army, but I once had an 8x10 group picture of several dozen uniformed army (possibly National Guard) officers, taken I think at some army post in Pennsylvania, dated 1937, and all were wearing M1917s in butt-forward holsters on Sam Browne belts.

Do you remember whether those were right-side or left-side holsters? Left-side butt forward on the Sam Browne-style belt was widely used by US police in the earlier 20th century, but I'm curious whether the Army ever had holsters like that or went straight from the right side butt-forward (saber on the left) of the 1892 - 1903 holsters confirmed by murphydog to the right side forward draw 1911 holsters.