Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull
Alway found it amazing how resourceful armor crews can be in securing long arms for the crew. Especially with the way they handle in the Iraq where much like Artillery and other non-infantry units, they could be expected to be able to do infantry foot patrols or run in convoys in other designated vehicles.
One of the many reasons why you could see US troops carrying AKs. Yet, that is another story altogether...
|
For a long time, personal weapons for tankers was limited to a pistol per man and maybe a submachine gun or two for the crew. The US started to move away from this during WWII when the crews of tank destroyers were issued M1 carbines. When the TD Branch was closed after the war, tankers went back to a M1 TSMG or a M3 Grease Gun.
When the M1 Abrams entered service, a M16 was issued with the tank, it was strapped in place under the TC's stand and was a welcome addition as the M3 was finally departing service (too many rebuilds of worn-out weapons).
I was surprised at the decision to remove the M16 when M1A1 was fielded, the official reason was that too many tankers were complaining about the length of the M16. Since the intent of the weapon was to arm a dismounted tanker, the length of the flaming thing shouldn't have been an issue.
As for myself, like many other tankers, I owned two personal weapons that rested in the arms room. Officially for targeting shooting and hunting, I had a Remington 870 pump shotgun with a folding stock that would have rode with me in the TCs hatch; for those times when somebody was crawling up the sides with a satchel charge. My second was a semi-automatic CAR-15, just in case I had to go dismounted.
My first sergeant used to ride me about both weapons, that is until I found out that he had pulled a few strings and had a M-14 waiting for him.
Yes Virgina the Beretta M9 is a wonderful pistol, but then so many US tankers were scrambling for M1911A1s, and every long arm they could scrounge, steal or requisition for the duration....