AHC: Screw the IJN and the IJA harder for ww2

I understand that the Philippine army were largely equipped with surplus M1917 Enfields - that unfortunately had not been serviced properly and there was problems with among other things the internal magazine springs resulting in them not being that reliable.

You would have thought that things like that would be easy to resolve?

One of the issues with the M1917 was that the only spares for the rifles were surviving WW1 stock. The M1917 is an excellent rifle but it would have required someone to retool to produce new barrels, magazines, springs etc The US military would have been reluctant to divert funds and resources to this task, they also didn't own the rights to the rifle as it was based on a British design, I have no doubt the Philippines government could have bought the tooling and rights to produce the rifles locally.
 
The British sent their F2s to Malaya as there was no fighting there

The damn things could not even perform loops and it was supposed to be a bloody fighter plane!

Granted the British ones had all the extras that the British wanted and I understand that Brewster's management had gone of the rails with regards to QC and well any morals and the British aircraft arrived with less power than expected and in many cases guns that were not rigged to fire correctly (solenoids missing etc)

It was 400 kgs heavier and 200 hps less powerful than the aircraft supplied to the USN and marines (and they considered it a flying coffin)

I know the Finns did well with it - but that just goes to show how bloody awful the Soviet Aircraft and pilots were

Also never discard the fighting ability of the average Finn. I'm also surprised they never worked out a way to hang anti-tank mines off a Buffalo.
 

McPherson

Banned
One of the issues with the M1917 was that the only spares for the rifles were surviving WW1 stock. The M1917 is an excellent rifle but it would have required someone to retool to produce new barrels, magazines, springs etc The US military would have been reluctant to divert funds and resources to this task, they also didn't own the rights to the rifle as it was based on a British design, I have no doubt the Philippines government could have bought the tooling and rights to produce the rifles locally.

Would take up to a year that the Filipinos did not have. They would be better off to contract a US or Belgian gun maker to produce militarized hunting rifles from current runs.

Note that the Model 8 is more suited to the terrain and the stature of the Filipino soldier to be expected to carry the rifle? Also, there is no special rigmarole involved with licensing. It works.
 
That 1% percentage, is massive without an ongoing war.
If my math is right, that 65,000 man force would be around 4000 in uniform per 100k of the population, the UK had around 700 and the US has 192 in service during the 1930s

But it was a reserve oriented force only to be mobilized in a time of crisis, like that of many of other small nations in the era. The peacetime military, even by 1946 when its expansion was envisioned as being done, wasn't expected to exceed 20,000.

They could institute a conscript militia - every man must serve 2 years in the Militia and then be a reservist - build up a large core of reasonably trained infantrymen - relying on a small full time army and the Americans to provide the more specialised roles.

Then in time of extreme distress a lot of men can be called to the colours

Not a continental army by any stretch of the imagination but should allow a more rapid build up of soldiers

That was the plan historically, only the Philippines didn't have the money to institute universal service as they wished, and they kept cutting the training period down*. Even the five months they eventually settled on was rather poorly utilized. The head of the military training organization was a senior officer of the Philippine Constabulary that had previously headed the prison system. His attitude had been that the prisons should be mostly self sustaining, and he carried that over to the PCA, and so recruits spent much of their time farming rather than undergoing military training.

*One plan they settled on to try and cut costs was to integrate military instruction into the regular school system starting at age ten, so that upon graduating at age eighteen, Filipinos men would already be fully trained and ready to be sent into the reserves. The Japanese invasion meant that none of the cadres that would have been raised through this training pipeline ever finished, as the process only started in the late 30s.
 
Last edited:
Would take up to a year that the Filipinos did not have. They would be better off to contract a US or Belgian gun maker to produce militarized hunting rifles from current runs.

Note that the Model 8 is more suited to the terrain and the stature of the Filipino soldier to be expected to carry the rifle? Also, there is no special rigmarole involved with licensing. It works.

The Model 8 is not really suitable for service use, it has a lot of small parts which are easily lost which makes it hard to maintain in the field, that will be an be an issue with most hunting rifles. Military rifles are designed (or should) be to be easily field stripped for cleaning without a mass of small parts which can be lost.

Unless it is pre war most European countries are kinda busy with domestic production demands. The only people not overly busy would be the USA or the Swiss, and they can't afford anything Swiss. They need something relatively cheap and simple, a carbine length rifle in .30-06 for example might be useful for jungle fighting though off the top of my head I can't think of one.

 
Last edited:

McPherson

Banned
The Model 8 is not really suitable for service use, it has a lot of small parts which are easily lost which makes it hard to maintain in the field, that will be an be an issue with most hunting rifles. Military rifles are designed (or should) be to be easily field stripped for cleaning without a mass of small parts which

Unless it is pre war most European countries are kinda busy with domestic production demands. The only people not overly busy would be the USA or the Swiss, and they can't afford anything Swiss. They need something relatively cheap and simple, a carbine length rifle in .30-06 for example might be useful for jungle fighting though off the top of my head I can't think of one.


Try a Winchester 54 or 70.
 

McPherson

Banned
Even better if they had flipped the bastard, they could have been feeding the Japanese and later the Germans with a heady mixture of Chickenfeed and disinformation for decades.

Then arranged an accident.

The Japanese were sharp cookies. These are the people who independently developed the meatball landing systems, and automated aircraft carrier trap. The only reason to keep Sempill alive is to keep the IJN fixated on the strike below=sevice=arm cycle for their naval aviation on their flattops. That might be useful, but that bastard and Rutland, between them, I estimate, cost the British almost 55,000 lives, the loss of 2 battleships, Singapore, and made it possible for the Japanese to operate a better air force than they should have.

Pearl Harbor and the PACFLT campaign that followed was much harder because of Sempill (25,000 USN casualties 2 battleships, 6 aircraft carriers and maybe 16 other warships), but I restrict my comments to the British damage done, because they were British traitors.

The Americans should have killed them both, especially Sempill at the Chicago World's Fair, when they had their chance.

McP
 
Last edited:

marathag

Banned
Military rifles are designed (or should) be to be easily field stripped for cleaning without a mass of small parts which can be lost.
While a Rem 8 fan, it's easy to take down to clean, but to really get in it, you need an armorer and special tools.

For cheap and easy, the Winchester 1910 magazine selfloader, with its limited service with France for credentials.
 
Top