Posted 11 February 2006 - 10:18 PM
The booklet makes reference to a "M1928A2" Thompson. I have never seen this designation used previously, and I suspect that it is incorrect, however I thought I would float an inquiry on the board. I am unaware of any military publication that uses the "M1928A2" designation, nor can I find it mentioned in any Thompson books. There is only one reference to the designation in a search of this board, and it was a speculative reference, based on what the M1 Thompson might have been named had the military stopped using the year of adoption as the basis for model designations.
The booklet says that the "M1928A2" had a horizontal foregrip, no barrel cooling fins, no Cutts compensator, no Lyman rear sight, and that it had the simplified safety and selector levers.
Does anyone know why the designation "M1928A2" was noted as a model by the author? I am aware of authors who have used speculative designations for certain Thompson models before. This could be the case, as the booklet was written at a time when good reference material on the subject was limited to Helmer's book, and Tom Nelson's "World's Submachine Guns." Is there any basis for Cormack's mention of "M1928A2?"
Posted 12 February 2006 - 01:12 PM
I reviewed this Small Arms Profile # 4 – Thompson Submachine Gun as a section of a book titled, Famous Rifles & Machine Guns, by Cormack, Hobart and Weeks. It was featured in the Thompson Collectors News, Vol. 24, October 15, 1992. The book is a compilation of several of the Small Arms Profiles. It was published in 1977 and has a green flyleaf. I haven’t done any research with regard to your question concerning the “M1928A2” designation since it probably went right by me as I didn’t mention it in the short review. Although 1992 is not that far back, there wasn’t a steady source of paper-type artifacts from eBay like we enjoy today. Whenever a book, magazine or periodical surfaced, the pictures of Thompson guns, etc. were probably what blinded me.
Posted 13 February 2006 - 04:55 PM
Posted 13 February 2006 - 07:47 PM
Good theory regarding the sling attachment "A2" designation, but I don't think the British had fully standardized sling attachment positions for the Thompson. They were all over the place in how they attached slings. I also think they would have used a "Mk" designation instead. See my post on the subject from last year.
British Sling Attachments