Print Page | Close Window

Enfield cartridge belts?

Printed From: Enfield-Rifles.com
Category: Enfields
Forum Name: Enfield Rifles
Forum Description: Anything that has to do with the great Enfield rifles!
URL: http://www.enfield-rifles.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4535
Printed Date: March 26 2026 at 3:56pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Enfield cartridge belts?
Posted By: lovethyenfield
Subject: Enfield cartridge belts?
Date Posted: April 19 2011 at 12:51am
Did th U.K. ever produce a cartridge belt similar to the U.S. M1/1903 belt? I have seen the pre-WW1 leather styles but I'm interested in something more like the U.S. types.
 
thanks


-------------
So, you are telling me Enfields aren't the only rifle in existence? you my friend are full of it!



Replies:
Posted By: Alan de Enfield
Date Posted: April 19 2011 at 4:49am
The standard method was : Bandoliers holding 50 rounds.
5 pockets, each containing 2 chargers with 5 rounds each.
 
 


-------------
Its not what you've got thats important, its what you hav'nt got, but still want, thats important.


Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: April 19 2011 at 5:06am
I don't remember the exact details of where it came from, but I did get my grubby little mitts on a khaki web belt with loops when I was in the RAF. It fastened with the standard hook & square type fastener though, so I assume it was made by the same folks that made regular web belts. If it was "Issue" or not is another story, but I did order it from stores IIRC. That would seem to indicate some kind of belt existed in addition to the bandoliers, which we never ever saw, just wood crates with "spam cans" holding card boxes of 32(?) rounds.
Maybe there was an alternate to the ammo in chargers in bandos for some reason?

You can get great canvas belts like this here if authentic collectabiliity isn't a need. Google "Prairie belt" for a source.



-------------
Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 19 2011 at 5:12am
I have a pair of belt mounted double charger pouches that hold two chargers per pouch. That makes for 40 rounds on the belt itself.
I think these are for the Pattern 37 belt with shoulder straps. The pouches have a short strap that is afixed to the should strap of the web gear and brass (or brass plated) wire slides that afix to the belt.
They also used chest mounted pouches that could be used for STEN gun magazines or extra rifles chargers, though not well suited for digging chargers out in a hurry.
 
Bandoleers made of leather were used in the 19th century and possibly into WW1, I don't know when they first started using canvas bandoleers.
 
U S Troops (New York  National Guard) assigned to British Army control, and armed with the SMLE rifle, retained their U S Army issue cartridge belt. The Enfield chargers would be a snug fit, but it seems to have worked okay.
 
I keep two bandoleers of chargers handy, should mutant, cannibalistic, post nuclear gladiators come to call.
 
Heres some info and images on the P 08 web gear and cartridge pouches used in WW1.
http://battlefields1418.50megs.com/uniform1.htm - http://battlefields1418.50megs.com/uniform1.htm
 
Just remembered, I once saw a photo of a British Sniper wearing a cartridge belt with loops.
Its possible that they used this sort of belt to hold specialized ammunition seperate from the standard ammo.
Snipers sometimes used incendiary bullets to set fire to enemy fuel supplies.
 
 


Posted By: lovethyenfield
Date Posted: April 20 2011 at 10:08pm
Thank you very much Gentlemen, Is there a source for these 5 pocket bandoleers with fair pricing? so far I can't find them for any less the $10 and that is a bit steep for a very thin cloth bandoleer made by the billions lol

-------------
So, you are telling me Enfields aren't the only rifle in existence? you my friend are full of it!


Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 20 2011 at 11:13pm
LE Owner..just a note here.I think you'll find that the chest pouches on the web gear is for BREN magazines.All infantry wore the pouches, & were required to carry BREN magazines in them.2 per pouch, 2 pouches per man.BREN gun magazines held 30 rounds per in .303.Therefore each man was carrying 120 rounds for BREN support.
Hoadie

-------------
Loose wimmen tightened here


Posted By: Smokey
Date Posted: April 21 2011 at 6:58am
I remember asking about how a WWII British infantryman carried his personal ammo.
Grenades and extra bandoliers went into the chest pouches where there was room.
At least one bandolier was slung over the shoulders and webbing.
 


Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: April 21 2011 at 9:45am
You can use 7.62 NATO bandoliers for .303. They are a tad snug, but quite usable.Wink
They even have nice snaps, not twisted bits of copper wire. The Aussie ones are the best IMHO.


-------------
Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 22 2011 at 12:03pm
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

LE Owner..just a note here.I think you'll find that the chest pouches on the web gear is for BREN magazines.All infantry wore the pouches, & were required to carry BREN magazines in them.2 per pouch, 2 pouches per man.BREN gun magazines held 30 rounds per in .303.Therefore each man was carrying 120 rounds for BREN support.
Hoadie
Could be that was the original intent, but they seem to have adapted these pouches to other purposes. Wide spread issue of SMGs wasn't a factor when the BREN was adopted , so an existing pouch that could hold STEN mags would make designing a dedicated pouche un necessary.


Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 12:07am
That web design was continued through the 50's, as was the BREN. The STEN (AKA: room broom) wasnt in as big of use a you may think.In fact, the tactics/ formation of a rifle company was built around the BREN.
(Damn fine weapon, that BREN.)
Hoadie

-------------
Loose wimmen tightened here


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 8:05am
There were quite a few soldiers other than riflemen, and many who would be no where near a BREN Gun in the normal course of their duties.
Quote

The Sten Gun was the first purpose built submachine gun to be built by Canada and issued in large numbers, and was first used by Canadian units on the Dieppe Raid of 19 August 1942. It eventually came to be issued to all units going into North-west Europe from D-Day onwards.

Primarily the weapon of infantry section commanders, they were also commonly carried by other troops such as officers, vehicle crews, weapons crews, despatch riders, and anyone for whom the rifle was considered unwieldy and/or unnecessary.

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons/smgs/sten.htm - http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons/smgs/sten.htm
 
 


Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 11:07am
True as that may be, the BREN was still the section's prime.The Sten became-from what I'm told-popular with the "house to house" & "mouse-hole" combat.
They were also unstable & considered dangerous to their own troops.Sudden jarring or impact could/would set them off.They were not accurate, by any means.Commonly reffered to as "the plumbers contribution to the warr effort" .
TONY! a little help here? Wasn't your dad the "Bren-man" in his unit?
My uncle was in the reserves in the 50's. The late John Arbuthnott(I used to hunt with) was the designated Bren in his unit in 59-63 reserves.
Hoadie

-------------
Loose wimmen tightened here


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 1:56pm
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

True as that may be, the BREN was still the section's prime.The Sten became-from what I'm told-popular with the "house to house" & "mouse-hole" combat.
Thats not in dispute. The use of the chest pouches for purposes other than carrying BREN gun magazines is the point.
Quote
They were also unstable & considered dangerous to their own troops.Sudden jarring or impact could/would set them off.They were not accurate, by any means.Commonly reffered to as "the plumbers contribution to the warr effort" .
No doubt there were far better SMGs in use at the time, but the STEN was dirt cheap and readily available in large numbers, without drawing resources from production of more sophisticated weapons.
The STEN was issued on much the same manner as the U S issued the M1 carbine, a PDW that could take on CQB duties in skilled hands. Cheaper and more effective than a quality handgun in the hands of troops not skilled with a handgun and easier to carry than a rifle.
 
From Dunkirk until well into the war there were not enough BREN guns to go around. Much of the early production ended up in German hands.
The BAR was the base of fire weapon for U S squads, at least till the 1919A6 came along, but the individual riflemen still had to carry their own ammo load besides any magazines they might carry for the BAR man, no Thompson gunner or M3 gunner would be expected to shuck the majority of his own ammo in favor of carrying BAR ammo. Same with the Germans, each man in the squad carried LMG belts or a can of ammo for the LMG, but they also carried their own ammo loads as well.
The rifles used the same ammo as the Automatic rifle or LMG, but no soldier was expected to delink or strip rounds from a magazine to load his rifle one shot at a time.
 
IIRC the Chest pouches were even altered in production to make it easier to close the lid on a full load of STEN magazines.
 
Also since Mortar crews and other gun crews would be covered by belt fed guns when possible rather than the BREN they would not be expected to carry ammo for a gun not present, and in serving their weapons they would not be in a position to break off what they were doing to resupply another gun crew anyway.
 
Use of the chest pouche for carrying other types of ammo and supplies was a matter of convenience. The pouches were simple to make and widely available, no need to design and manufacture dedicated pouches other than those already in circulation.
 


Posted By: Tony
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 6:32pm
No hoadie my old man wasn't a bren gunner but I can catagorically say ( information from my old man who served in WW2) that all the troops were issued with bren mags because the bren was the light support weapon for each section. Yes we did lose a lot of weapons at Dunkirk but production was stepped up to cover the losses.  The Sten was designed during the Battle of Britain as  a cheap weapon for supply to both troops and latterly resistance workers. The 9mm ball was standard and should ammo become scarce German ammo for the MP40 could be used.  The sten fires pistol ammo with a limited range and accuracy (ideal for house clearances etc but sod all good as a section support weapon in the field) was cheap to produce but could be just as dangerous to the users due to the number of accidental discharges because the bolt lock wasn't as good as it should have been.  Enfield went over to mass production of Brens whilst other factories like Fazakerly produced the rifles. Belt fed machine guns were Vickers ( you should try carrying 1 then you'll see why the Bren was adopted) heavy cumbersome brutes ideal for static warfare but a liability for fast moving troops.  I can vouch for that having carried both the Bren and the GPMG had a hand in moving and setting up an old vickers and had a near miss with an old sten when the halfwit carrying it caught the but on the tailgate and shoved half a magazine through the canvas roof of the lorry just missing my head. The chest pouches also carried grenades, modifications were made for drivers who were hampered by the hight of the chest pouches. Consequently they were issued with a single pouch with a loop at the back for attaching to their web belt for carrying Bren magazines.



-------------
Rottie (PitBulls dad.)


“If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons

Born free taxed to death!!!



Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 24 2011 at 9:16pm
...and there we have it..the definitive word
I have fired the BREN, & I'm still in awe as to how unbelievably accurate they are/were.
During our second whirl at war, anyone-& I DO MEAN ANYONE- that had any machining skills..or even had some machines in their house / garage were given contracts to produce BREN parts. English Electric Co here in St.Catharines were a big producer of parts.Turned all their facility over to machining, till the war ended.
In the Australian made movie KOKODA, the BREN support is shown quite well, as the lads were pulling magazines from their pouches for the BREN.
Hoadie

-------------
Loose wimmen tightened here


Posted By: Beerhunter
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 1:23am
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

LE Owner..just a note here.I think you'll find that the chest pouches on the web gear is for BREN magazines.All infantry wore the pouches, & were required to carry BREN magazines in them.2 per pouch, 2 pouches per man.BREN gun magazines held 30 rounds per in .303.Therefore each man was carrying 120 rounds for BREN support.
Hoadie

Nearly right.  Only the Bren No.1 and No.2 carried four magazines in their pouches.  In the case of No.1, a fifth magazine was carried on the gun.  No2 also carried 50 rounds in a bandolier for his rifle.  Each man in the Infantry section carried two full magazines in their pouches plus 100 rounds in chargers, in bandoliers.

Next, Bren magazines were only loaded with 28 rounds each and so each man other than No.1 and No.2 carrried 56 rounds in magazines.  As the Bren used up magazines the empties were distributed to the members of the Section for refilling from their bandoliers.


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 2:42am
Heres a site with information on the evolution of the uses of the Basic Pouch.
Quote

In 1939, the Section comprised 8 men, a Commander and “Nos. 1 to 7”, of which Nos. 1 and 2 were the Bren group. Nos. 2 to 7 carried rifles. Each man carried three Bren magazines, two in one Basic pouch and a http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1937/1937_associated_equipment_slung.html#band - Bandolier, cotton, 50 rounds in chargers, together with the third magazine in the other Basic pouch. Note the faint hand-written annotation “…Sten or Tommy Gun…”.

Quote In 1941, http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1937/pics/equipment_carriers/basic_pouches/html/1941_amendment.html - Amendment No. 1 to S.A.T. Vol. 1, Pam. 4 was issued with Army Council Instructions of 28th June. This substituted a Thompson Machine Carbine (T.M.C.) for the Commander’s rifle and removed his Cotton bandolier, though he still carried two Bren magazines.

Although not mentioned in the 1941 Amendment, the 1942 edition of http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1937/pics/equipment_carriers/basic_pouches/html/1942_pam_4.html - S.A.T. Vol. 1, Pam. 4 shows the Commander with six T.M.C. magazines. He also now carried wire-cutters* and a matchet*, as the British Army termed the machete. The section Numbers had been revised and the disposition of magazines changed, as grenades had been added to the load.

(*These items will be added to http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1937/1937_associated_equipment.html - Patt. ’37 Associated Equipment )

By 1944, the Section had increased to ten men, their roles revised again to riflemen, Nos. 1 to 6, the Section 2 i/c and Bren No. 2 both carried rifles too. The table shows two Cotton bandoliers being carried, one dedicated to the rifles, the other for re-loading empty Bren magazines. The second Bandolier is usually seen slung, the other being in the Basic pouch, along with grenades. The Commander’s (expensive) T.M.C. had also been replaced with the cheaper Sten Machine Carbine (S.M.C.).

So bandoleers were sometimes carried in the basic pouch along with other equipment.
 
Quote

Stores Ref. A1/AA 1493 Pouch, basic, W.E. Patt. ’37, Mk. I . (modified)

The claim made for the new Pattern was that all items (bar the bayonet) would be worn above the waist, in Battle Order.

http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1937/1937_pouches.html

The Drivers pouch, one only, seems intended for STEN magazines only.
Quote In 1940, the Sten Gun had yet to make its debut. When it did, yet another drawback emerged. The magazines would not fit a Mark II Pouch. List of Changes No. LoC B 6366 therefore introduced the Mark III Basic pouch, now made ½-inch longer and making the Mark II Pouch obsolescent.
Quote The A.C.I. authorised the withdrawal of Carriers, cartridge from M.T. Drivers who, though not stated, had evidently exchanged their rifles for Sten M.C.s. Also authorised was the issue of a pair of Attachments, brace, so that Braces could be worn. Only a single Pouch was worn.

The M.T. Drivers pouch was a Mark III pouch, but fitted only with a broad webbing belt loop, 2-inches wide. This allowed seated M.T. (Motor Transport) Drivers to wear the pouch “…on the left or right side whichever is more convenient when driving…”. All examples noted have a press-stud closure, not Q.R.

PS

Some British troops were not issued BREN Guns, the Long Range Desert Patrols for example used Drum Fed Vickers flexible guns on their vehicles, no need to carry BREN mags when no BREN was present.Home guard of course carried Lewis guns and the BAR.

The Basic Pouch was originally designed to carry Vickers Berthier magazines and adapted to carry the BREN magazines when the BREN was adopted. 


Posted By: SW28fan
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 7:50am
 These were made for troops drivers, etc who  the chest pouches were awkward
http://www.buymilsurp.com/ammo-pouch-british-2-pocket-tan-undated-used-p-958.html - http://www.buymilsurp.com/ammo-pouch-british-2-pocket-tan-undated-used-p-958.html
they go in place of the chest pouch for 40 rounds per man


-------------
Have a Nice Day
If already having a nice day please disregard


Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 9:08am
There ya go...learnin me again. Always good to get the finer points as well.(makes me sound like I actually know somethin when I'm talkin to the vets @ Legion)
Hoadie

-------------
Loose wimmen tightened here


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 9:21am
Originally posted by SW28fan SW28fan wrote:

 These were made for troops drivers, etc who  the chest pouches were awkward
http://www.buymilsurp.com/ammo-pouch-british-2-pocket-tan-undated-used-p-958.html - http://www.buymilsurp.com/ammo-pouch-british-2-pocket-tan-undated-used-p-958.html
they go in place of the chest pouch for 40 rounds per man
Those are similar to the pouches I have. I found these in unissued condition, in a light gray rather than sand or khaki color, possibly RAF or Sea Scout issue.
There had been a huge stack of these still in brown paper wrapping when I first saw them, but later on I could only find one of these at the shop, a year or so later I found another. When the old shop went out of business they sold everything off cheaply, but someone got there ahead of me and bought every Enfield related item in the shop at one fell swoops, including a lot of P1907 bayonets with scabbards for 12 bucks each. I had not heard about the sale soon enough.
 
The only P37 webbing they had was pretty beat up, also grey in color, and the belts and cross straps were tiny, as if for children's sizes. This must have been from a Cadet school of some sort, no adult could have worn those belts.
I use the pouches with a U S issue pistol belt and Vietnam era shoulder straps. I'll pick up a proper P37 belt and straps one day, if I find a set in gray to match the pouches.
 
These pouches would not do much good for a driver armed with a STEN Gun.
 
There were some black leather chest pouches at the shop which may have been French and intended for MAT49 magazines.
 
PS
I was a bit suprised to find that besides the vehicle mounted Vicker K drum fed guns, the Long range Patrol Groups also prefered the drum fed Lewisgun for dismounted work.
 
Early production BREN Guns were found to jam easily in the deaert fighting, a situation brought on by the manufacturer taking it on themselves to tighten the tolerances rather than going by the supplied drawings. The BREN Guns in service were withdrawn a few at a time and the too tight actions rectified.
A similar situation happened in WW1 when Lithgow rifles made before 1916 were found to jam in sandy environmments, due to the factory gauging the bolts at maximum allowable diameter, and the boltways at the minumum diameters, which made the rifles a tad more accurate but led to jams in sandy conditions. Those rifles were rectified by armorers in the field or sent back to the factory.


Posted By: Tony
Date Posted: April 25 2011 at 2:26pm
My old man was in the RASC he never carried a STEN he had an issue pistol. When 150 Infantry brigade 50th Division commanded by Brigadier Haydon was finally overun and wiped out he was using an enfield which he had been issued with when he went out to N Africa and had stored in the cab of his lorry!!  150th Brigade, with field and anti-tank artillery, held the Sidi Muftah box between the Trigh el Abd and Trigh Capuzzo. Check it out.

-------------
Rottie (PitBulls dad.)


“If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons

Born free taxed to death!!!



Posted By: green
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 1:19am
Google "karkee web" for info on poches, bandoliers, slings etc.


Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 3:15am
Originally posted by Tony Tony wrote:

My old man was in the RASC he never carried a STEN he had an issue pistol. When 150 Infantry brigade 50th Division commanded by Brigadier Haydon was finally overun and wiped out he was using an enfield which he had been issued with when he went out to N Africa and had stored in the cab of his lorry!!  150th Brigade, with field and anti-tank artillery, held the Sidi Muftah box between the Trigh el Abd and Trigh Capuzzo. Check it out.
No doubt those who were skilled and comfortable with a handgun would chose to carry one instead of the often troublesome STEN Gun.
I'm not a great fan of the SMG, and would much rather carry a P-35 than most any SMG.
In the U S Army many who were issued the carbine would go to great lengths to obtain a handgun of any type, sometimes bringing one from home. Even in Vietnam a friend carried an S&W Model 10 his father had bought at a yardsale and sent to him before shipping out, along with the police issue gunbelt and holster that came with it.
A pistol you had faith in was far more comforting than a SMG or carbine that you had no faith in.
 
The STEN basic design was primitive, but so long as the magazines were okay it would feed well enough. I've heard that whenever a supply of captured or discarded German MP40 or other German SMG magazines were found STEN users would switch out the magazine springs and the STEN mags worked much better. The rotating mag well that acted as an action port cover was another point that could induce malfunctions. If not tightly fitted, holding the mag well with the support hand could cause misfeeding. The later versions of the STEN used a more solid integral mag well.
The first source I read on development of the STEN said that British forces had captured nine million rounds of Italian 9mm ammo early on, and this was used with the STEN while available. The Germans are said to have prefered the Italian 9mm machine carbine ammunition for use in the MP40. The ammo was technically 9mm Glisenti though loaded to pressures that would destroy a Glisenti handgun in that chambering. Its possible that when the superior Italian 9mm ammo ran out STENs that had operated well with that ammo began to have problems with other manufactureers ammunition. One thing the Italians did very well was to make reliable SMGs and the ammo for them.
 
Heres some interesting information.
Quote

In action, the gun group would lay suppressive fire to allow the riflemen to manoeuvre. As in other such sections, the weakness lay in the moment when the gun group had to up and move to catch the riflemen. The rifle group could not match the volume of fire with their bolt action weapons, and so could not equal the job done by the exposed Bren crew. The Corporal would try to guide the actions of his men, and lead in the close assault with his submachine gun. Overall the Section was workmanlike. The rifle group was large enough to sustain casualties and still operate effectively, and its mix of weapons was mostly adequate. It was not particularly suited to street fighting, the immediate nature of encounters requiring a higher portion of automatic weapons which could only be provided by increasing the issue of Sten guns on a local basis.

Quote The officer still officially carried the traditional revolver, but it was not uncommon for a rifle to be adopted until the Sten offered a more attractive alternative. Apparently, this was often obtained by 'swapping' the pistol with the 2-inch mortar gunner, but by 1944 Rifle Platoon Commanders were provided with their own Sten guns.
http://www.bayonetstrength.com/british_army/brit_inft_bat_1943_1945 - http://www.bayonetstrength.com/british_army/brit_inft_bat_1943_1945
 
And a breakdown of common armament of the Motor Battalion.
http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/toe/armoured/british_motor_company.htm - http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/toe/armoured/british_motor_company.htm



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2024 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net