sidthefields70 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 What a fascinating thread this is turning out to be. Seeing as I appear to have one of the "salt mine" guns, I thought I would add a few more pics, this time of different parts of the gun. These include the remnants of the mysterious paint that was on it when I received it. I am no expert by any stretch, but to my 42 year old untrained eye, it looked more like a very fine, even coat of almost transparent silicone rather than paint. I took most of it off with my fingernail and it "balled up" like silicon does. It wasn't sticky and didn't have a smell to it. I could not see brush application marks - it was extremely smooth, more like a sprayed thin film than a brushed-on coat. Anyhow, here they are: Sight http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777855131/in/photostream "paint" remnant http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777854089/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777852401/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777850541/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777849061/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777847775/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777846221/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777844995/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777843041/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777841531/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777839697/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777838079/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777836319/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777834519/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777832537/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6777830379/in/photostream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 gijive said "My contention is that these guns were rebuilt or refurbished in the US prior to packing and shipping as Lend-Lease aid. Although Lend-Lease was passed in March of 1941, the key to these Thompsons is when they were actualy shipped overseas. Since most are the early 1928A1 models with Lyman adjustable sights and finned barels, I maintain that these guns were refurbished probably in the 1942 time frame when the newer model M1 series guns were being produced." Once again, please excuse my ignorance but if the guns were refurbished then does that mean they were used - and if so, by whom? If they were just lying dormant in a factory and un-issued, then why refurbish them at all? The plot thickens!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james m Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 (edited) Here's somthing else to mull over as well. I did some lend lease research and the number of estimated Sherman M4 tanks shipped to Russia is 3,000 on the low side to 4,000 on the high side. If there were 2 Thompsons per tank that would account for 6,000 to 8,000 Thompsons shipped in total. Clearly there had to be some other shipments and this is supported by the fact that there are photos of Thompsons in original shipping crates.Jim Edited January 28, 2012 by james m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 one more pic http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778343267/in/photostream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 stock metalworking detail http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778390047/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778388641/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778386669/in/photostream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Yes, the plot thickens. If the guns were "refurbished", "rebuilt" whatever...why?We are in agreement that most of the guns have storage-type wear and otherwiseappear virtually un-used and un-fired. Parts that you would expect to show wear,such as buttplates - have minimum wear or no wear at all which to me is a signthat they were stored horizontal in crates, not issued. Its almost impossible fora gun with a stock not to have wear on the buttplate since the guns are constantlyrested, leaned, racked, etc. buttplate down. And these buttplates are polished witha blue finish and still they have no wear! So under what circumstances would they have been rebuilt which takes timeand costs money? We are figuring thousands of guns here. Ordnance rebuild programs are notorious for the arsenal or depot doing the workto mark the stock with their initials, and there are no such markings on any of theseparts sets. So does that mean Savage did the work? I have noticed many re-numbered trigger frames where the number was ground off,re-numbered and then the ground spot darkened with a cold blue type process withoutrefinishing the whole frame and the parts in it - thats just too much work. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Hey reconbob, Photos of my gun's butt plate. I have no idea how this compares to other guns, and like I mentioned before, the butt plate was completely covered in the weird paint stuff. http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778588551/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/riven2011/6778591189/in/photostream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piep Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 The photos that were just posted are very close the condition of my two.Gunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Although Lend-Lease was passed in March of 1941, the key to these Thompsons is when they were actualy shipped overseas. Since most are the early 1928A1 models with Lyman adjustable sights and finned barels, I maintain that these guns were refurbished probably in the 1942 time frame when the newer model M1 series guns were being produced. If this lend-Lease aid was sent later than 1942, then these guns couldn't have been "new off the assembly line", as the 1928A1 model wasn't even in production at that time. I don't begin to know where the shipping records of these Lend-Lease supplies could be found and in what numbers they were shipped, but that would provide interesting information to the Thompson historians on the Board. Maybe the National Archives may have some records of the transactions. I'll have to consider revisiting the National Archives sometime in the future to see what might be available. FDR provided Stalin with military assistance as early as December, 1940. That's three months before Lend Lease passed the U.S. Congress. What portion of these pre Lend Lease arms constituted 1928 TSMGs will probably never be known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 TsmGguy wrote on another thread " All of the original spare parts that we see so often today were produced during the war years by the same contractors that made them under US Army Ordnance contracts for complete TSMGs. There was no post war production of spare USGI TSMG parts as wartime stocks were more than sufficient. The guns were no longer in US issue anyway, but continued to be provided to other nations under various military assistance programs. Spare parts were provided with these guns, or sold off later as surplus or scrap." Does the mean the salt mine batch may have come from another, as yet unknown nation and the sellers used the lend lease initiative to give credibility to their supposed, original location? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnshooter Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 one more pic http://www.flickr.co.../in/photostream PLEASE! More information on the Marine Dog Handlers! Are these actual WW II combat photos? Thank You. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Mnshooter - watch "war dogs of the pacific" on youtube - it's excellent. If you google WW2 doberman then loads of fantastic pics come up. Enjoy!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Yes, the plot thickens. If the guns were "refurbished", "rebuilt" whatever...why?We are in agreement that most of the guns have storage-type wear and otherwiseappear virtually un-used and un-fired. Parts that you would expect to show wear,such as buttplates - have minimum wear or no wear at all which to me is a signthat they were stored horizontal in crates, not issued. Its almost impossible fora gun with a stock not to have wear on the buttplate since the guns are constantlyrested, leaned, racked, etc. buttplate down. And these buttplates are polished witha blue finish and still they have no wear! So under what circumstances would they have been rebuilt which takes timeand costs money? We are figuring thousands of guns here. Ordnance rebuild programs are notorious for the arsenal or depot doing the workto mark the stock with their initials, and there are no such markings on any of theseparts sets. So does that mean Savage did the work? I have noticed many re-numbered trigger frames where the number was ground off,re-numbered and then the ground spot darkened with a cold blue type process withoutrefinishing the whole frame and the parts in it - thats just too much work. Bob Bob, Somebody rebuilt the buttstocks on these guns and replaced barrels. I suppose it is possible that Savage or Auto-Ordnance could have done the work, that would explain the lack of rebuild marks. Auto-Ordnance's factory was operating in 1941 and they were producing early 1928A1 Model guns with Lyman sights and finned barrels which most of these Thompsons seem to be, although some are the later model 1928A1's. I just don't see the Russians rebuilding all these guns if they were never used. Sidthefields70, The guns would have been used by the US Military and then turned in for rebuild and Lend-Lease aid. Even if they aren't Lend-Lease material someone rebuilt the buttstocks on these guns with new replacement stocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnshooter Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Mnshooter - watch "war dogs of the pacific" on youtube - it's excellent. If you google WW2 doberman then loads of fantastic pics come up. Enjoy!! Thank You. I shall search for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Thanks gijive, that's something I never considered. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with me - I'm on a steep learning curve but I'm enjoying every minute!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james m Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 (edited) I acquired this M1A1 thompson kit many years ago. Yeah I know the price is a joke today but I've attached my invoice anyway. This gun apparently was demilled overseas and the small parts came in the plastic envelope shown in the 2nd picture. I'm pretty sure the language is Vietnamese.I have a theory as to how it perhaps ended up in Vietnam.Jim Edited January 29, 2012 by james m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 And your theory is James......do tell...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthefields70 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 The vietnamese bag is a Chieu Hoi Bag. These are clear plastic bags used to hold M-16 20rd magazines. The bags kept dirt and water out of the magazines. When removed, the bag was left on the ground and printed with a surrender or "Chieu Hoi" message to encourage NVA / VC to switch sides. Original war time dated bags. Are these Thompsons somehow from Vietnam???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Are these Thompsons somehow from Vietnam????Anything is possible, but when I was in VN 64/65 all I saw was the M1/M1A1 guns.Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james m Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 (edited) Ok here goes:We gave thousands of Thompsons to the Chinese Nationalists while they were fighting the Reds after WW II. When the Nationalists abandoned Mainland China and fled to Taiwan these were left behind and rounded up by the Chinese. I suspect many were given to the Viet Cong to use in their "War of Liberaton" probably because 45acp ammo was readily available in Vietnam. After the war was over I suspect the Vietnamese wanted some hard currency so they cut these up and sold them off for parts. These of course have eventually ended up here. If anyone knows more of can add some clarity to this post feel free to do so . Again; I can't prove any of this but I think it's a potential scenario.The bag example I posted above is dated 4-25-69. Of course Paragon the Company(Apparently No longer in business) that sold there parts kits might just have had some of the bags lying around and they were convient for shipping the parts.Jim Edited January 29, 2012 by james m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Of course Paragon the Company(Apparently No longer in business) that sold there parts kits might just have had some of the bags lying around and they were convient for shipping the parts.Jim Jim, Yes, I believe that is the most likely scenario. The surplus bags have been available for years, and I bet Paragon used them out of convenience. I don't think any kits came out of Vietnam. The photo that gets posted from time to time showing the pile of M1A1's rusting on the beach is from Vietnam. David Albertdalbert@sturmgewehr.com 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoscoeTurner Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Ok here goes:We gave thousands of Thompsons to the Chinese Nationalists while they were fighting the Reds after WW II. When the Nationalists abandoned Mainland China and fled to Taiwan these were left behind and rounded up by the Chinese. I suspect many were given to the Viet Cong to use in their "War of Liberaton" probably because 45acp ammo was readily available in Vietnam. After the war was over I suspect the Vietnamese wanted some hard currency so they cut these up and sold them off for parts. These of course have eventually ended up here. If anyone knows more of can add some clarity to this post feel free to do so . Again; I can't prove any of this but I think it's a potential scenario.The bag example I posted above is dated 4-25-69. Of course Paragon the Company(Apparently No longer in business) that sold there parts kits might just have had some of the bags lying around and they were convient for shipping the parts.Jim Just to pour more gas on the fire. I bought thousands of rounds of 45 ACP from Paragon in the early 80s mixed in with US headstamps with late wartime dates was Chinese manufactured 45 ACP. The ammunition that made its way to the US via Australia from the People's Republic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james m Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 (edited) Quote:"Just to pour more gas on the fire. I bought thousands of rounds of 45 ACP from Paragon in the early 80s mixed in with US headstamps with late wartime dates was Chinese manufactured 45 ACP. The ammunition that made its way to the US via Australia from the People's Republic. " This thread just keeps getting more and more interesting! If this is the photo you're talking about David I was told it was taken in the Phillipines.Jim Edited January 29, 2012 by james m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 james m, Yes, that's the photo. My understanding has always been that it was taken in Vietnam. David Albertdalbert@sturmgewehr.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piep Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I never knew were that photo was take but it always brought a tear to my eye's.... Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now