[telewinz]

Reading about some of the great smallarms that were used to at least a limited extent in WWI, I would not feel shortchanged if I had to participate on the modern battlefield with a Lewis machine gun, BAR, 1911 .45 acp or a Webley MKVI. IMOH, these are outstanding designs even by todays standards (except manufacturing expense) and my performance would not be handicapped due to this "old" technology. Are their any other WWI weapons that could compete on the modern day battlefield. Auto loaders only.

[MicroBalrog]

BAR's were used in Vietnam IIRC...

[Marko Kloos]

Auto loaders only.

Why the qualifying remark? I'd feel very well armed with a Mauser 98 or an Eddystone M1917. Heck, the armament of current U.S. military snipers is not significantly different from that of WWI snipers. We have laser rangefinders now, but that's about it.

[Justin]

My biggest gripe would be the cruddy sighting systems. I'd miss that big fat front sight with a white or tritium dot in the center. Other than that, and the increased weight of the weapon, I wouldn't feel at too much of a disadvantage.

[4v50 Gary]

A Maxim kills then like it will now. Now, the Chauchat, I dunno but a Lewis gun will be nice. I wouldn't turn down a BAR either, but wasn't that 1918 & a bit late?

[Edward429451]

Wouldn't really make a difference. Make due with what you got. At least have a gun.

[telewinz]

The only reason I left out bolt-action weapons is that (IIRC) NO country currently uses them as their MBR. I certainly won't fault anyone who would choose a P17, 03, '98, and yes the SMLE. The BAR was on the NY docks waiting for shipment when the war ended, its a close call but I left it on the list.

[eatatjoes]

depends on who and how they are being used. although they used bolt action rifles to a limited extent the regulars did a decent job against the soviet forces in afghanistan. I think with proper tactics the Lewis machine gun and the BAR could be used very effectively, as can any weapon, and remember certain marine MEU units still use the .45 acp.

[Snake Eyes]

The only guns I own that are of that era are Colt's Model M (5-Don't ask) and 1911 (6-Why would you have to ask?).

If you told me I was going to a gunfight and I could only have ONE autoloader from my safe, it would definately be a 1911. Maybe even a 1911 if you told me I could have any handgun from my safe.

I am very comfortable carrying a Model M when a 1911 is too uncomfortable. 32 caliber or not, I can hit what I shoot and they have always functioned perfectly.

JM Browning favored the .32, who am I to argue??

[Andrew Wyatt]

it can be correctly argued that the 1911 is an improvement over the bricks that are passed off as pistols nowadays. the 1911 is the only auto that fits me so far.

[Dave R]

My opinion...the newer weapons are lighter, faster and smaller, and would work better in urban warfare.

The old ones would be fine is most other settings.

[BowStreetRunner]

what about bolt action weapons?
IIRC, the mujahadeen used enfields against the soviets in afghanistan
BSR

[foghornl]

Don't forget Goerg Luger's "Pistole Parabellum '08". The 'toggle bolt' was a bit odd, perhaps, but it worked.

[telomerase]

A Vickers mounted on a NERVA rocket would be very effective. Of course you can't get either one of these devices new anymore.

[444]

If I was issued a WWI vintage autoloading weapon, I wouldn't feel undergunned. The belt fed machine guns they used then were big and heavy, not designed to be manuvered, but we still use big heavy belt fed machine guns today. The BAR is a fine weapon and would work as well today as it ever did; I don't think it is up to the standard of what we have today but it wouldn't be much of a trade off. The 1911 is better than what is issued today IMO.
Didn't they have Thompson sub guns in WWI; the trench broom ? If so, I wouldn't want that. But again, it would work; not nearly as well as the carbines we have today, but it beats a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

I guess it is possible that you could survive with a bolt action rifle, considering the fact that in every war, there are soldiers that don't fire their weapon at all, but I think you would be at a significant disadvantage.

[GD]

A small force cannot fight a war on the terms set forth by a extremely large force - that is the concept behind guerilla warfare. If you are using the same tactics and firearms as a much larger force you are going to lose. In guerilla warfare an accurate bolt action is often all you need. Do what needs to be done and get out of there. Stick around and use up your ammo and you will lose.

[Gewehr98]

I'd miss that big fat front sight with a white or tritium dot in the center.

Justin, hard as I look, I haven't seen a lot of as-issued 1903's, 1911's, 1917's, Garands, M14's, or M16's with white or tritium dot sights. Nor do I feel our troops throughout WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, and Desert Storm were disadvantaged without such widgets. :scrutiny:

[goon]

The old Browning and Maxim MGs were water cooled. You could shoot one all day, and only stop to reload.
Today, we gotta stop to change barrels or be careful about our rate of fire.
Under certain curcumstances, a Maxim might just be better than a newer weapon.
I agree about the bolt action rifle in a modern guerilla war.
A couple good marksmen with bolt actions and a couple guys with assault rifles.
The snipers fire, and everyone runs like hell. The guys with the assault rifles only get in the fight if you get too close or have to break contact.

[Preacherman]

The British Vickers machine-gun (Maxim derivative) continued in service right through World War II and beyond, and was still in operational use with the South African Defence Force through the early '90's (may still be in use, for all I know). The SADF converted a bunch to 7.62x51mm. NATO, and used them for fixed defensive posts and guard towers. They were more effective in that role than a modern GPMG would have been - they could fire continuously to break up an attack, where this would have melted or burned out the barrel on an air-cooled weapon.

[KC]

"the armament of current U.S. military snipers is not significantly different from that of WWI snipers. "

Well, the scopes they issue sharpshooters and snipers nowadays are a teeny bit better. They can see in the dark, hold a zero at 800-1000 yards, have faster glass, reticles made out of materials a little more durable than human hair...little things like that.

As far as the weaponry goes, Tommy guns, BARs, Browning .50's and .30's are all on my states' Big List of Evil Assualt Weapons. Yes, I do live in the PRKa, but still...

KC

[C.R.Sam]

GD made good point.
If you have to fight....try to do it on your terms, not the opponent's terms.
Chairman Mao's little red book say same.

If all you have is a bolt action rifle, make your brain use it to it's best and cause the other side to tie up assets because of you....and be gone while they do it.

Sam

[duckfoot]

BAR please!!

[Detritus]

The BAR was on the NY docks waiting for shipment when the war ended,

actually BARs made it to France in time to be used by a few units, certain US Horse Cavalry units and the unit with which JMB's son deployed (the actual first unit to take the BAR into combat as i understand) at the very least.

[telewinz]

BARs WERE used in France, it was the the Thompson submachine gun that didn't quite make it "overthere". They was stacked in crates on the New York docks waiting for shipment when the war ended, my mistake.

[H Romberg]

Forget autoloaders too. The Germans armed largely with bolt action Mausers, gave our garand/tommygun/ma deuce armed troops a good run for their money.

The Afghanis kicked the Russkies out starting with flintlocks and old enfields they'd taken from the Brits.

As long as it shoots straight and there's plenty of ammo, give me whatever you want. I can always trade up.

[444]

I realize that you said, autoloaders only, but surely you realized that talking aout bolt actions is almost irresistable.

True, a bolt action, under the right circumstances would not be any kind of a liability. But, like all hypothetical questions, you have to decide the circumstances. In his question, telewinz used the phrase, "you were issued". This to me implies that I would be a member of a conventional army on "the modern battlefield". So, he didn't say anything about me being in charge, and he didn't mention that I was a member of some small special ops unit, so I have to assume that I am going to be conducting a conventional infantry type war. The bolt action rifle would not be a good choice for this in the 21st century.
Now, if you make up a senario where you get to make all the decisions, and you get to totally dictate how and when you engage the enemy, then a bolt gun isn't a bad choice; especially since if you can do all that, you could also avoid combat all together.

[cracked butt]

Wouldn't an '03 equiped with a pederson device make a pretty good all around weapon? You remove the device for long range shooting, install the device when you need to defend a confined environment.

[greyhound]

I think the "trench broom" was a pump shotgun. The Germans hated them so much they tried to have them banned.

[RandyB]

If issued WWI weapons and the rest of the US army/marines/navy/air force is there. Two words:

Air Support:D

[seeker_two]

As Nash Piazza said, "Any gun will do if YOU will do." :cool:

That being said, I wouldn't feel disadvantaged with any WWI weapon (Chauchat excluded, of course). I would just adapt my tactics to the resources that my side & my opponents side have available.

My load-out would probably consist of an SMLE (w/ extra mags & bayonet), two 1911's, and a S&W 1917 as backup...

...and hope I don't have to cross any deep water. :what:

[keyhole]

Well, most guns beat a rock or sharp pointy stick.

If I gotta fight up close, gimme a flamethrower:evil:

[jsalcedo]

I guy let me fire what he said was a 1918 beretta submachinegun

It was a 9mm with a short wood stock a 14 inch barrel.

It had 2 triggers one for semi auto and one for full auto.

I'm not sure it was used in WWI but it was handy reliable and effective.

[Dr.Rob]

I might point out that "modern" warfare doesn't mean "US deployed troops with the best of the best in top shelf fighting technology.

Most snipers in the Balkans were using 8mm mauser copies, if not rifle left by the Germans.

Plenty of nations have mountains of SMLE's in thier reserves (remeber all those released from Irish arsenals?).

Sure, most conflicts and uprisings now are fought with a Kalashnikov, but that doesn't mean a bolt rifle is useless.

The BAR is heavy, but man does it pack a whallop.