sculptingman

Sub machine guns are actually lousy weapons.
They are inaccurate and wasteful, and early versions tended to jam.

In general, A short, small caliber carbine like the M1- with a high capacity clip is far more effective and versatile a weapon for paratroopers. It can fire at a high rate, a more accurate round.
By contrast the Thompson was limited to sergeants and speciality groups like alpine units.


Altho the Japanese did develop sub machine guns, I would suggest the primary reason they did not see wide distribution was their excessively wasteful rate of fire and the short, low velocity rounds they fired, which were not interchangeable with regular rifle rounds, requiring additional complications to the supply chain.

Japan was always dealing with short supplies of raw materials and many of their decisions, such as their late reliance on bayonets, were driven by the need to conserve expendables such as ammunition as much as possible.

Spraying hundreds of rounds into a jungle environment where you can seldom even see a target is the kind of materiel largess that only the US could readily afford.

dagul

I think this is correct description of American war resources in WW2.

Nemowork

Kind of a pity then that the high capacity clip wasnt issued until the Korean war when the M1 was abandonned because of its tendency to jam and lack of penetration. They were good weapons in the pacific where their light small size was handy and where the enemy wasnt wearing thick clothes but in europe and later in Korea they werent nearly as useful.

This is the Japanese we're talking about here, complicating the supply chain was a national sport. Theyd had SMGs since the 20s, just like the British and Americans had and neither of those countries had thought to make them general issue either.

The only countrys who really did make large use of SMGs were the Finns, Russians and Germans. Like you said the British government wasnt keen on them before the war because they wasted ammunition. As soon as the fighting started opinions changed and we produced thousands of them and nobody cared about wasting ammunition.
Better to waste ammunition shooting up a house than waste men going into it.

Nemowork

Come to think of it why would that complicate things? A regular army already uses pistols which dont use rifle rounds either, an SMG is developed to used the nations already existing pistol round to ease supply problems.
America adopted the .45 round from its 1911 pistol for the Thompson and M3.
Germany adopted the 9mm parabellum from its Luger pistols for the MP28, MP38 and so on.
Japan used its own indigenous 8mm Nambu round for the Type 100 and since pistol rounds are cheaper than rifle rounds which they were already blasting off by the million then i dont see where the problem lay?

The only nation who complicated their supply chain with a novel weapon were the US introducing the .30 round for their M1 carbines and the Germans with their 7.92 kurz for the MP43/Stg44.

The area the Japanese had problems was in the design of their rifles and trying to change over from a 6.5 to a 7.7mm round in the middle of a war.

arras

Definitely not. Completely different design.

arras

Jet as a paradox, their 6.5 mm calibre round was much more powerful than 5.62 NATO used by modern armies.

arras

Only officers had swords. And I doubt they used them often.

Russians, Brits and Germans fought war also with WWI rifles. USA used them also at the beginning.

arras

They developed and used SMGs, it was shown earlier in the post. Reason they did not field them in large numbers is probably lack of their industrial capacity.

Also jungle might not be best place for use of SMGs. Pistol bullets are very weak, they can be stooped by vegetation easily. I do not remember that Americans or Brits would equip their units fighting Japan especially with SMGs. Not more than their units in Europe.

And by far most enthusiastic users of SMG during WWII were Russians on their steppes.

So before taking something for granted just because it seems logical for us sitting thousands miles from any jungle, whe should ask question: is SMG really preferable firearm for jungle fighting?

First, it was Hotchins not Bren copy as pointed out already and then Japanese industry simply did not pose enough productive capacity. Second they were unable to equip their soldiers as well as Americans or Brits. War in the pacific was not decided on land anyway.

arras

All nations equipped their LMGs originally with bayonets. I do not recall however instance when Japanese used them actually in combat and I am pretty sure practice was soon abandoned just like in other armies.

However it is true that Japanese placed quit a lot emphasis to morale side of the warfare and less on equipment. Relative to other armies of the time. They believed superior will can overcome superiority not just in equipment but in numbers as well. Given most of their opponents were more numerous and many better equipped it is not hard to understand why. They feld that to overcome their inferiority in numbers and technology they have to be aggressive.

But that aggressiveness is often misunderstood to be just "banzai charge" and "getting in to close or hand to hand fight". That is wrong. Famous banzai charges were matter of last resort rather than standard. What Japanese emphasised was aggressive infiltration, night attacks, attacks from the side and so on. Of course one thing is theory and other is practice. Japanese commanders often underperformed. I think reason was not bad doctrine, rather fanatical obedience to orders and books. Sometimes inadequate supply and equipment. Result was that they often failed to adapt to conditions. Always resorting to attacking in response to any situation and sticking to it despite it repeatedly failed and defence would be perhaps better. But that was not problem only in Japanese army.

What really defeated them was material and human superiority of their enemies.

ClearlyInvisible

Some soldiers brought their family's katana to fight with.

Also, I know that the Brits Russians and Germans did, but the Japanese used it as their standard rifle for the entire war. The European powers moved on the weapons such as the Gewer 43 and Lee Endfield, and the US moved on to the M1 Garand and Carbine quickly.