rpbcps

Good point, never thought of it, from that angle.

With the introduction of M1A1, another cost cutting effort was the solid milled fore grip mount being repalced by a 3-piece riveted design, which, apparantly was a failure because the rearmost riveted part required a hole in the body of the grip mount near the front end of the receiver where the grip mount needed its maximum strength. A downward pull on the sling can bend the grip mount downward, away from the barrel. To solve this problem, the forearm re-enforcing strap was fitted to the M1A1's, with the rivetted design fore grip mount, clamping the barrel and front end of the forearm together. War time manufacturing sometimes creates an interesting dilemma. The design changes on the M1A1 grip mount, in an effort to reduce costs, created a requirement for a separate part to be manufactured to correct an issue that did not previously exist. This is a classic case of a penny saving modification, costing pounds to fix. 🙄

I found the first photo in this post, on another website with an interesting and sad caption: "Tobruk. Australians standing by in a hot section of the front, 400 yards from the enemy. Many forward posts like this are isolated during the daylight hours (Original caption). This photograph was reproduced in the unit history 'Purple and blue: the history of the 2/10th Battalion' published in 1958. The men were identified in the unit history as, front to rear, as: VX35964 Private (Pte) William John Goodgame', VX36671 Pte Gordon James Watkins and SX1412 Pte Charles George Stening'. All three were promoted to the rank of Lance Corporal during their service. Lance Corporals Goodgame and Watkins were killed in action at Buna, Papua, on 24 December 1942." We often overlook the stories of the men in these photos, RIP 🙏🏼

Four, possibly posed photos, of an Australian corporal, taken in Tobruk, Libya in Sept. 1941. First photos he is loading and 'L' drum into his Thompson and winding the drum. Then he is sighting the Thompson with the Lyman sight elevated. And ready for action

After I posted the photos above, Tom Davis mentioned to me that he believed I had attributed incorrectly, the photo of the "Australian soldier with the 5 cell pouch". Today, I had time to go over some old Topics, and found this one from 2015, posted by azboater. In this akboater posted the same photo, with what we believe is the correct details. "A fusilier of the Royal Scots provides covering fire with his Thompson sub-machine gun in the village of Namma in Burma, October 1944" Thank you Tom for that correction, and the picture adds more intrigue now. This is the first picture I have seen of a British soldier using a XX mag 5 cell pouch

Thank you Darren, Like some of the other magazines, it took a lot of patience to find a lot of those magazines. Like I said in post above, I am still looking for a couple which, so far have eluded me. 🤞I'll strike lucky eventually.

Doug, Thank you, as I said at the beginning of the post, it has taken a lot of years to put it together and I am still looking for a couple of 30 rnd magazines I still don't have for my collection.

Doug, All sorted 👍🏼

Well, after a good few years of fighting the addiction, Dec. had me biting at the bit. Initially a deal came up for an original WW2 AOC’ L’ drum, followed by a WW2 soldered AOC ‘XX’ magazine and a 'No Buckl' sling. In January, a sale on a dealers site saw me tempted again, and I ended up buying a 1942 dated Avery drum pouch, but later in the month, I really ‘fell off the wagon’. Along came a piece missing from my collection, to complete the evolution of the Savage ‘Model of 1928’ receiver markings, ‘Model of 1928’ with the New York address and Patent numbers, complete with a pair of British CMT pouches. That ’Model of 1928’ complimented the earlier ‘Model of 1928’ with New York address Patent dates and the later ‘Model of 1928’ with Bridgeport address and Patent numbers; and the final example which reversed the Patent numbers and Bridgeport address locations. The early Savage ‘Model of 1928’ with the ‘New York, NY’ address roll-marked at the rear of the receiver, had 12 patent dates in the centre. These were marked identical to the last 540 Colt Model of 1921’s manufactured in 1922; so ironically, the first Savage Model of 1928s were not stamped with the final patent for the 1928 modifications. So, when Savage altered the marking dies on the NY address 1928’s, and the 12 patent dates, where replaced with the 13 patent numbers, the omission of the Model of 1928 patent was corrected. When I collected the ‘Model of 1928’ with the New York address and Patent numbers earlier this month, it reminded me of a bit of Thompson trivia, which I am sure not all members of the forum know about. I initially read about it in Doug Richardson booklet on Thompson Patents, and it is also mentioned in Tracie Hills ‘The Ultimate Thompson Book’. When the dies were being prepared for the patent number marking, Savage Arms placed an incorrect patent number in it. Patent # 1,403,492, (Hammer Construction), was omitted and in its place patent # 1,403,623 was used. Patent # 1,403,623 describes the use of belt fed cartridges fitted into a magazine designed to hold the belt. This was a development in the Model of 1919 guns, as they evolved from the belt fed ‘Persuader’ to the magazine fed ‘Annihilator’. Both patents were issued on the 17th of Jan 1922, despite 1,403,623 being applied for on the 19th of Dec. 1919, hence the origin of the Savage mistake. So from serial numbers around S-26500, Savage added the incorrect patent number on their ‘Model of 1928’s’. Looking at all three examples of the ‘U.S. Model of 1928A1’ in my collection; first with a Lyman adjustable sight and finned barrel, second with a battle sight and finned barrel, (Manufactured by Auto Ordnance), and finally the third with the battle sight and smooth barrel; the same mistake in the patent number markings continued throughout the production of the Model of 1928A1’s. Looking at the third edition of American Thunder on my book shelf, it appears that the same mistake continued on the Post war West Hurley Model of 1928’s. As Doug Richardson wrote, “Someone in converting the patent dates on the Model 1921 gun into patent numbers probably did not do a patent search which would have disclosed both January 17, 1922 patents and either did not read this one or did not understand what it was all about if he had read it”.

Definitely designed for 'L' drum, I own one, see picture in Gallery. I also purchased one of his drum carriers for my other 'L' drums, Gregs workmanship and attention to detail are 2nd to none in both those cases.

The CMT pouches are now in my possession, so I can answer your question.. yes, there is an opening for a strap behind the sewn-on bit., see below. Four XX mags fit into the pouch nicely though, a snug fit.

Not a lot, I bought a couple from Uncle Dudley, a few years ago. Nice item for drum collections or slot fillers, which was the purpose I bought mine.

I read somewhere that only the Model of 1928's were marked by the relevant UK authorities. The Lend Lease 1928A1s were not stamped with proofs etc. as officially they were US Govt. Property on loan. It was only when the lend lease guns were repaired that they received relevent stamps to indicate were they had been repaired and by whom. If your 1928A1 was unissued, then obviously not had any repairs, it would not have been marked.

When I got home this evening, I dug out a few books to find out if I could find out more definitive information on S/N details for Savage 'cash & carry' end and Lend Lease' take over, with little joy. Franks book, 'American Thunder 3', states that "The 1928 and the U.S. 1928A1 marked models were both being produced by Savage at the same time". Maybe due to the fact the US Govt. orders for the US Army were being placed at the same time, as the orders for the British. So, I presume the US army orders were being stamped 'U.S. Model of 1928A1', prior to Lend Lease? The US Army, in Sept. 1938 designated the Thompson as "Submachine Gun, Caliber .45, Model of 1928A1.” Going back to Franks book he states that there exist U.S 1928A1's with S/Ns in the low 17000 range, (US Army guns?); and other S/Ns in the 185000 range that were NOT U.S. 1928A1 marked. Perhaps I need to purchase volume 3 of The Thompson Encyclopaedia, to see what information that book provides on the subject.

As a postscript to my post dated April 11th 2023: "first one I bought from a fellow collector in the UK, back in 2017. He had bought it from a member of this board, who confirmed to me, that he had purchased it from a book shop in Cork, Ireland. It has no cover, but apart from that it is in pretty good nick". I have been told that a lot of handbooks that went to Ireland in the early days, purposely had their covers removed to hide the contents of the handbook, from cursory checks.