Casualty rates by weapon types

[DudleySmith]

I saw a claim on another board that rifles were only responsible for some 5% of combat casualties in WW II, with maybe 10% in the Pacific theater, re casualties inflicted by the U.S. on enemy soldiers, and anywhere from 10% to 25% of casualties inflicted on American soldiers. I can't find any reliable stats, I'm still looking, but I found this site some might want to add to their Link-O-Ramas and look up stuff at.

Home

Gatsby port of the AMEDD History, Regiment, and Museum sites.

achh.army.mil

casualties by weapon type - AMEDD Center of History & Heritage Search Results

search.usa.gov

Personally I think the 5%-10% range is the most likely, but I'm still digging. There are some stats for specific battles, like Bougainville campaign in there, and specific units data as well.

 

[airplanemechanic]

That would be because we fight a far different type of war now. We can unleash hell on anyone, anywhere at any time without ever having a soldier put on his fatigues. They're known as stand-off weapons. We don't like that house to house fighting. We'd prefer to just level the neighborhood.

 

[DudleySmith]

That would be because we fight a far different type of war now. We can unleash hell on anyone, anywhere at any time without ever having a soldier put on his fatigues. They're known as stand-off weapons. We don't like that house to house fighting. We'd prefer to just level the neighborhood.

The war in question was WW II and Korea stats, not Viet Nam and later.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The war in question was WW II and Korea stats, not Viet Nam and later.

Oh I thought it was in all wars up to now.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

The war in question was WW II and Korea stats, not Viet Nam and later.

You don't think they preferred unleashing hell on earth instead of sending in the troops during WWII?

*****SMILE*****

 

[para bellum]

I don't know where small arms come in, but artillery and mortars top the list...

 

[DudleySmith]

I don't know where small arms come in, but artillery and mortars top the list...

I would include pistols, SMG's, and machine guns in 'small arms' as well as rifles, which is why it's tough to find decent stats for rifles alone. I was interested in how that squared with the claims that over 80% of infantry soldiers ever fired their rifles in combat. Something isn't right in there somewhere.

Yes. Fragmentation caused the most injury and death. WW I had to be artillery and machine guns. Some battles I'm seeing over 25% for rifles, but that was probably specific and not the norm. Other armies besides the U.S. probably have different mixes.

 

[para bellum]

Some battles I'm seeing over 25% for rifles, but that was probably specific and not the norm.

Theater of war matters too. The Pacific theater had fewer casualties by artillery than the European theater. Still almost half of casualties were attributed to artillery and mortars in the Pacific war vs. about 2/3 for Europe in WW2.

 

[whitehall]

Compiling statistics regarding casualties in a global war in the air, on land and sea can't be an easy task. I think it was general George Patton who once said that the M-1 Garand rifle was the greatest weapon of war ever invented.

 

[DudleySmith]

Compiling statistics regarding casualties in a global war in the air, on land and sea can't be an easy task

True. Trying to sort out the data from the medical units looks like a chore.