Posted on 10/17/2014 7:08:11 AM PDT by C19fan
Last year, the German armed forces announced they would purchase Heckler and Koch’s MG-5 machine gun to finally replace a World War II-era weapon. The new machine gun should put the Bundeswehr’s existing weapons to shame—and make up for past failures.
“Its main feature is that it is much more accurate than its predecessor,” German army colonel Christian Brandes told U.S. Army reporters at Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona during testing of the new gun on Oct. 14.
The predecessor Brandes was referring to is the MG-3. That aging weapon is essentially just an upgrade of a machine gun Adolf Hitler’s Wehrmacht started using in 1942. The MG-5 will replace the MG-3 as well as some of the German army’s less aged, but somewhat inadequate, MG-4s.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
And while I’m trumpeting how great I am, I erred as to the name of the Japanese Knee Mortar” it’s the Type 89, not the Type 98.
Yes, they did, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that their MG42 sucked. If it hadn't sucked, they certainly would have won WWII. It's unequivocal.
I used that same line on an army colonel way back when, when this particular colonel was pushing the 9mm Luger caliber as the new caliber for our service pistols. I asked him if it was the "same caliber the Germans lost two wars in a row with" and told me to shut up while the audience laughed.
Could be that you only had "20 years as a collector". Probably should learn to defer to people who do this thing for a living.
Semper Fi, Bub.
You bloviate for a living? Good work if you can get it I guess. Share rent with your mom?
Too bad you don’t actually know anything useful.
Can't ask for a better exposition of you lack of expertise.
Still waiting for slightest hint you ever used a machine gun for real. Guess I won't wait up for the answer.
True, but that handicap is shared with our CiC, no?
Regards,
GtG
:’) Our current one, or FDR?
FDR’s failing was going along with the UK, but that was more than made up by George Marshall.
I'll bet money that I've handled and fired more WW2 small arms, including, Japanese small arms and machine guns than you have. But that doesn't make me right, the facts do. The facts are special ammo requirements, jamming problems, mobility problems, stripper clip ratcheting hopper designs, etc.
Although I put in 23 years as an aviator, I would never try to leverage that as making me an expert on the Sopwith Camel. You embarrass the Corps by using it as a credential to talk down the MG42 and talk up POS’s like Nambu pistols and Japanese automatic weapons, which ranged from adequate to horrific.
And all of your raving over the knee mortar (more like grenade projectors) is a bit funny, given that all combatants used small mortars and/or rifle grenades. The Japanese were forced to use a special purpose projector because of the inadequate power of the 6.5x50 cartridge. And the fusing issues with the standard grenades and 50mm specialty rounds made them likely to either get thrown back before detonation or to detonate shortly after leaving the muzzle. Yea, just the weapon I want to rely on.
You are a true small arms genius. Oh wait, I forgot that because you were in the USMC you are also an expert on how awesome the Sherman was compared to a Panther, and how air superiority blew up every piece of German armor in Europe as soon as it moved.
Now I fear I've given you what you wanted, which was some attention. While you are on a roll, care to share why you think the Ford Pinto was a superior to the Mustang? I'm sure you learned something about that in the Corps.
You and I have some parts in common: I have also taken apart, put back together, and fired more machine guns that most anyone else has. At different stages of my time in the Marine Corps and after, I have handled and cleaned nearly every machine gun ever made and fired many of them.
The main difference between you and I is that I spent 17 months in combat in Vietnam and machine guns were an important part of that experience - and it was either a PK or an RPK that nearly severed my right leg one bright day in 1967. I went on to teach machine gun as an enlisted man and when I was commissioned, they still used me for machine gun instruction for some obscure reason. After I retired in '96, I stayed on to help the Corps develop and test new weapons which of course, included all the new machine guns that were available around the world. I even occasionally help teach a class at the Naval Academy on Marine Corps weapons including BARs, M1919s, Thompsons and many others in live fire training.
That said, so what? I have strong opinions about weapons and opinions are like bungholes, everybody's got one. And no, I didn't live through Guadalcanal - I just have spent a lot of obsessive time studying that and many other battles of the Pacific war. The one thing that jumps out at me is that the Japanese stuff worked too well: you only have to look at the horrific casualties at Betio and Peleliu and Iwo and Okinawa to realize that they had high-quality killing machines and the skill and commitment to use them. Calling them "junk" just cheapens the sacrifices of all those Marines, soldiers, and sailors made to overcome them and win.
I will quit being a jerk (for now) and grant you that you do know a great deal more than all but a few in this country.
But I still don't think that the MG42 was the world beater many believe it to be - just too inflexible, too wasteful, and well, we kicked their butts.
Semper Fi, Airdale.
You could have at least gotten your USMC history correct. The battle for Guadalcanal dragged on for months as both sides were able to resupply (both taking hits and getting pushed back from time to time). What finally ended it, was the inability of the Japanese to adequately resupply, due to the USN and Cactus airforce eventually keeping most everything but DDs from making the run. Yes the grunts fought hard, but as long as the Japanese kept resupplying troops, ammo, and food, the fight kept raging. When Japanese merchant ships could no longer make the run (mid November), it wound down fast, and Tokyo ordered the DDs to take out the remaining force.
I wondered if that wasn't part of the issue that got under you skin.
I'm going to do something I don't do often enough, and apologize for ramping up the rhetoric. You are no fool on the subject of machine guns. And you've paid enough dues to have have your opinion heard, for sure.
Yes, I think the Japanese machine guns ranged for really crappy (Type 11) to the adequate (Type 99). In the same breath, I think the M1919 was quite superior to anything the Japanese had and I would consider the BAR to be less adequate than the Type 99.
Of all the battle rifles of WWII, I think the Garand and the SVT-40 were the best. The G43 is far too complicated. However, I still cannot understand why the U.S. took a step back to an enbloc system (the last one ever made). Feeding with stripper clips is far superior in my mind, with or without a removable magazine. The Stg 44 is regarded by most as the ultimate rifle of WWII, but I have one and I'm not that impressed with it. Much heavier than you'd think and tough to go prone with. I find it to be a compromise between a battle rifle and machine pistol, that manages to be less handy than either. But yes, just my opinion.
I like the M-14, but I think it was inferior to the FN FAL the day it was made. Although I own a couple, I do not like the AR-15/M-16 family. I don't like the charging handle, I don't like the enclosed receiver, and I don't like the 5.56.
So there is a pile of opinions for you, and yes, many would consider them a pile of something else.
I would differ a bit about the SVT-40 - remember that the Sovs pulled them out of service at the height of their struggle with the Nazis because of all the problems they had with it.
It's an interesting progression that gave us the Garand with the en bloc clip - as I am sure you know, it was originally going to be a 10-round clip and the weapon in .276 Pederson but MacArthur quashed all that. I think the 1941 Johnson gave it a run for the money - and as you know, it could be loaded using standard Springfield stripper clips - but my experience with that rifle is that it is a bit fragile and not at all accurate compared to the Garand or the Springfield.
I am an M-14 fan. Can't help but be one, since the '14 carried me through Vietnam very reliably. I completely agree with your assessment of the M-16 family and can't wait until we finally replace it with something better - and in a healthier caliber.
Hope we have the chance to go shooting sometime.
By the way, my latest project was a .64 caliber Ferguson Rifle - and it works great! I can get off 6 aimed shots a minute with ease with that puppy. Took me about 600 hours of hard labor but it was worth it.
Semper Fi, Chainmail
One thing I’ve learned is that there are many different stories out there on every issue, and frustratingly what is commonly accepted is often wrong.
My SVT-40 runs like a song and I don’t think they ever stopped making them until 1945, but here are the issues that I think muddle the pot. The SVT-38 did have problems. The SVT-40 was supposed to replace the M91-30s, but once the war started, that wasn’t possible and production was actually decreased. Finally, the AVT-40 (full auto capable) was a big failure and its production was cancelled in about a year of its introduction. After ‘45, focus moved to the SKS with the new short round.
The ~7mm cartridges of the U.S. and Britain could fill a book. Both countries did extensive studies, both determined that the perfect military cartridge was ~7x45 more and less, and then both decided to stick with their previous cartridge. And isn’t it curious that where they would really like to go with the 6.8 Grendel is 7x50, if not for the confines of the basic AR-15.
I don’t own a 1941 Johnson, but I’ve looked them over and fired one. I do like the Garand better, but the horizontal stripper feed on the Johnson was a good idea.
I had to look up the Ferguson, as it falls a fair bit outside of my area of collecting, which is 1865-1955. Interesting early breach design. I’ve never seen one for sale. It must have been hard to come by.
Good night.
I built this puppy using the kit from the Rifle Shoppe in Oklahoma. It's steel and brass castings and semi-inletted wood and the rest is all intense file work, scraping and sanding. I was assisted a bit by the Smithsonian which let me partially disassemble their Ferguson.We were very lucky 'ol Major Ferguson was knocked out of action fairly early because if this rifle caught on, we could have lost our revolution. It is amazingly accurate and very rapid-firing and can be loaded and fired from the prone.
I built this puppy using the kit from the Rifle Shoppe in Oklahoma. It's steel and brass castings and semi-inletted wood and the rest is all intense file work, scraping and sanding. I was assisted a bit by the Smithsonian which let me partially disassemble their Ferguson.We were very lucky 'ol Major Ferguson was knocked out of action fairly early because if this rifle caught on, we could have lost our revolution. It is amazingly accurate and very rapid-firing and can be loaded and fired from the prone.
Then HTML insert.
How good is the seal? I haven't read up on the mechanism, but the early needle guns have blow past around the bolt. The Frech added a rubber seal, but that had obvious issues. The Germans just accepted some gas escape, not unlike a revolver, accept from the back side if the chamber.
Now I’m seeing it. Never mind my other post. Looks amazing!
Dang. My preview showed just fine..
The only seal is how closely the threads fit above and below the breech and the trigger guard forms a flange underneath. A healthy flame exits at the top when it touches off but it doesn’t affect the shooter or the muzzle velocity ( which is low).
The main weakness in the design is the very thin wood around the breech. In all of the originals and some of the replicas there are breaks that usually had some crude repair to hold things together.
Anticipating this, I used “ genuine 18th Century carbon fiber and epoxy” in well concealed areas to reinforce the weak parts. I have fired about 60 rounds through her so far and she’s doing well.
I realize that these old flinters don’t have much relevancy in a machine gun thread but it is amazing how much satisfaction building and shooting them can have. It was the Super Gun of its time!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.