So I'm sure its bogus but there is a gunshop near Houston that is selling an M1917 rifle they claim was on the Enola Gay. A friend is going back today to see if there is any provenance. Anyone ever hear of such a thing?

Of course  the Enola Gay was used for A Bomb testing after the war too so ...

Ask yourself, why would a obsolete rifle used for training early in WW2 CONUS be on a B29 in the central Pacific in 1945.  Of all things useful to have a M1917 is about as last as one could think. M1 carbine?…much more likely but even that is remote.

1 hour ago, Rhscott said:

Ask yourself, why would a obsolete rifle used for training early in WW2 CONUS be on a B29 in the central Pacific in 1945.  Of all things useful to have a M1917 is about as last as one could think. M1 carbine?…much more likely but even that is remote.

On one of the forums there was something about a mount used for carrying a Mauser k98k inside a German fighter plane.....Should also add, although it would be hard to prove he carried it, I have an M1 carbine that was part of a WW2 USN pilot's personal items....Bodes

In General Tibbits autobiography, he mentions a Thompson SMG he was issued state side and carried it through out the war. I don't recall that he said it was carried on bombing missions. But I do recall that post war in Europe, he crossed into Switzerland (If I recall correctly) with it in his car trunk. He realized it might be a "problem" so he field stripped it and tossed it into a lake. So sad.

BKW

8 hours ago, Bodes said:

On one of the forums there was something about a mount used for carrying a Mauser k98k inside a German fighter plane.....Should also add, although it would be hard to prove he carried it, I have an M1 carbine that was part of a WW2 USN pilot's personal items....Bodes

A Kar98 was the current issue weapon at that time.  Your analogy would make more sense if the pix were of a Gew 88 or Gew98 long rifle, both of which were obsolete like the M1917.

I don’t know anything about a 1917 on a B-29, but I guess I’m not as quick to throw out the idea based on what’s “obsolete”.

 

When a firearm was issued has little - if anything - to do with its functionality.

 

Say, for example, if you crash-landed on a remote island, would you rather have a bolt-action rifle or nothing?  

 

Sure, there are sleeker more modern options at the time, but in a survival situation, you could do a lot worse than a large-caliber rifle with a reliable action.

1 hour ago, Rhscott said:

A Kar98 was the current issue weapon at that time.  Your analogy would make more sense if the pix were of a Gew 88 or Gew98 long rifle, both of which were obsolete like the M1917.

The WW2 K98k was basically the same weapon used in the first world war....The Mauser being the most influential bolt actioned rifle designed....American weapons including the 1903 and 1917 were based on its design...Bodes

A somewhat premature original post presented a non-falsifiable proposition. Instead of waiting for some actual facts upon which to evaluate the claim, like moths drawn to the flame, all sorts of barely relevant observations seeking to prove a negative sallied forth. Another day at the office for a milsurp forum.

 

Understanding the futility in trying to prove a negative, the logical mind would either wait for some relevant facts or gently prod the OP to deliver on his now overdue promise to provide something resembling evidence.

 

What you think is, in large part, determined by how you think. Answering unanswerable questions is only slightly less of a waste of time than asking them.

3 hours ago, firstflabn said:

“…the logical mind would either wait for some relevant facts or gently prod the OP to deliver on his now overdue promise to provide something resembling evidence.”

I once considered minoring in Philosophy, so please indulge my asking:  You took neither of the two actions that, by your definition, would be attributable to a logical mind.  So, of what mind was your response please?

 

 

 

It is not out of line for small arms to be carried on bombardment aircraft. Established as per Tables of Organization & Equipment, all those operating overseas were authorized to carry a Thompson sub-machine gun and/or M1 Carbines, later revisions replaced Thompson with M3 sub-machine gun, on paper anyway. So yes, they carried long arms on operational flights. If the firearm in question was an M1 Carbine, totally feasible. The M1917 is highly suspect. 

We can see some Thomson sub-machine gun on VP/VPB squadrons crews photos.

 

13 hours ago, Bodes said:

The WW2 K98k was basically the same weapon used in the first world war....The Mauser being the most influential bolt actioned rifle designed....American weapons including the 1903 and 1917 were based on its design...Bodes

All true.  Again, you got a gun store selling a M1917, a rifle mothballed post WW1 then brought out of storage to train raw recruits here in the USA until enough M1 rifles were available. Other than recruit training and some POW guard use early into our war, this rifle was selected to be the go-to rifle in 1945 on arguably the most famous aircraft in history and now it is for sale.

Buy the rifle, not the story until shown otherwise. 
Find a pix showing the rifle and sn in Paul Tibbets hands and you got at least a 1 in 3 chance of a winner.

1 hour ago, Rhscott said:

All true.  Again, you got a gun store selling a M1917, a rifle mothballed post WW1 then brought out of storage to train raw recruits here in the USA until enough M1 rifles were available. Other than recruit training and some POW guard use early into our war, this rifle was selected to be the go-to rifle in 1945 on arguably the most famous aircraft in history and now it is for sale.

Buy the rifle, not the story until shown otherwise. 
Find a pix showing the rifle and sn in Paul Tibbets hands and you got at least a 1 in 3 chance of a winner.

Did Paul Tibbetts not have a crew?.....Just curious as to how a weapon on a B29 with a crew of eleven automatically becomes property of the most renown person on board?....Bodes

Yes of course he had a crew, you even say there was a crew of 11. Being you take things so extremely literal a pix of the offending rifle with any of them might legitimize it. You seem to be fighting harder to prove this than the OP and he only asked a question.

I still say BS until proven.

Time to go clean my 43 Colt that Goering took from a shot down B17.  He and Hitler used it to plink with on weekends over at Himmlers house.  

During WW2, the Air Corps purchased 22,000 Savage/Stevens .22-410 plastic stocked combo guns to issue as survival guns for Air Crews.

That is what I would expect to see on a bomber. 

 

 

W

12 hours ago, Rhscott said:

Yes of course he had a crew, you even say there was a crew of 11. Being you take things so extremely literal a pix of the offending rifle with any of them might legitimize it. You seem to be fighting harder to prove this than the OP and he only asked a question.

I still say BS until proven.

Time to go clean my 43 Colt that Goering took from a shot down B17.  He and Hitler used it to plink with on weekends over at Himmlers house.  

You do realize you are only arguing with yourself...Nobody here (including myself) are endorsing any notion that there is a strong possibility this rifle has any historical connection to do with the Enola Gay....IF you go back and read my first reply, I clearly stated it would be difficult with MY rifle alone to prove it was battle carried, and it's sounds like there is at least documented proof of carbines being carried on planes.....Why than would I expect any potential undocumented firearm with perhaps a spurious and uneventful past to be regarded as authentic?.....Just because it's been stated on the internet and somebody just happened to post the information on the forum?....I don't know anything about the sale, the seller or anything else connected with it, so you can put away your tom toms....Bodes

...

5 hours ago, Wharfmaster said:

During WW2, the Air Corps purchased 22,000 Savage/Stevens .22-410 plastic stocked combo guns to issue as survival guns for Air Crews.

That is what I would expect to see on a bomber. 

 

 

W

 

Those were procured as Government Furnished Equipment for contractors of sustenance kits, they weren't carried loose but rather in a complete assembly.