If you were a WWII infantry soldier...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Were they much slower than those with standard 88 mm Krupp Kanonen?
Click to expand...
I think they were about the same as the Tiger I & II, but don't know that there is much information to confirm this. They didn't weight a great deal more due to the main gun being a short mortar, rather than the typical long howitzer.

:)
 
Since this has gone from one extreme to the other standard infantry weapons to armor why not the field radio. The field radio allowed the most effective of the triad (Infantry – amour & artillery) artillery to be employed effectively. The Germans feared USA artillery more than the massed fire of Russian artillery. Why because it could be delivered promptly on target.
 
I think I would carry a Garand, although my dad sometimes carried a flamethrower.
As an aside to the "Band of Brothers" film, I grew up a couple of blocks from "Bull ' Randleman. Went all through school with his kids and would speak to him all the time. A nice man. I never knew what he had lived through.
 
Since this has gone from one extreme to the other standard infantry weapons to armor why not the field radio. The field radio allowed the most effective of the triad (Infantry – amour & artillery) artillery to be employed effectively. The Germans feared USA artillery more than the massed fire of Russian artillery. Why because it could be delivered promptly on target.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. The majority of casualties on both sides was caused by artillery, rather than small arms fire.

That being the case...........the weapon I would want to have with me as I cringed in my foxhole during a artillery barrage would be my M1 Garand. :D
 
As an aside to the "Band of Brothers" film, I grew up a couple of blocks from "Bull ' Randleman. Went all through school with his kids and would speak to him all the time. A nice man. I never knew what he had lived through.
Click to expand...

Hero's walk among us..........and sometimes we never know.
 
Hero's walk among us..........and sometimes we never know.
Click to expand...

No joke.

I pastor a church of about 95 families. I have in my ranks, three WWII vets, two Korea vets, and I forget how many veterans of service since then - including one man who was in Panama in the late 80s and another who was in Iraq last summer. I buried another WWII vet (10th Mountain thru Italy) three years ago.

For a relatively small congregation, having 4 WWII vets is pretty cool. And, I just found out my new business/office manager's dad was an Arizona survivor.

I don't think I could handle being a flamethrower man. The prospect of turning into a glowing ball of flame just turns my guts to jelly even thinking about it.

Q
 
Yep, and was a good thing too. Great weapons, with outstanding firepower, but it severely deteriorated the production capacity, depleted valuable wartime resources, and manpower to achieve these feats.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Sturmtiger and 380mm rocket/mortar artillery pieces were a very effective use of production. These were naval guns and ammunition that had already been produced and were now useless since the German surface fleet was defunct. They merely dropped them on wheels or a destroyed Tiger Chassis and sent them to the front.
 
..."The prospect of turning into a glowing ball of flame just turns my guts to jelly even thinking about it."...

the prospect of watching a soldier you have done the same to isn't very pleasant either.

gunnie
 
Yep, and was a good thing too. Great weapons, with outstanding firepower, but it severely deteriorated the production capacity, depleted valuable wartime resources, and manpower to achieve these feats. The 800mm railway guns fired enormous, devastating shells (up to 20,000lbs IIRC )...but it also took over a thousand tons of steel, a double track railway (took 2500 railway workers), 3 battalions to man, and a major or lieutenant general (can't remember which) to command. Oh, and about 50 shells were fired between the two deployed. Thank God for Hitler.
Click to expand...

Manstein had one wheeled up for the seige on Sevastopol. It didn't fire much, but when it did it flattened an area.
 
Not to disreguard the M1 Garand.......
but I would prefer the German version, the G43/K43. The magazine is easier/simpler to put in the rifle, in my opinion. I believe it would also give me a few more semi-auto rounds then 8. It also would not go "Ka-Ching!" when I would be out of ammo for that mag. The 8mm is somewhat familiar to the 30-'06, so the firepower could be a give or take, probably along with accuracy.

As for a pistol, I'm a 1911 fan.

P.S. I own a Garand.
 
Last edited:
Although the Garand may ping. I guarantee you I can reload a garand faster than the G43/k43, especially during sustained fire.
 
Ping is common slang for the sound it makes. Although I agree Ka-ching may be closer to the sound it makes it is also more letters to spell and I don't feel being anal about that to be a necessary part of my M1 garand experience.
 
I'd rather have a large stuffed crust pepperonni pizza

M1 garand no doubt. 180 grain round at 2900 feet per second beats the heck out of a 230 grain round at 800 feet per second. and it can reach out there and touch someone further away.
 
For clearing out such as telephone booths, saloons and other such close up work, I would take the PPSh-41. The Russians produced more of them than most all other WW-2 submachine guns made. Crudely made, but very effective, the high rate of 900 rpm, the small but powerful 7.62x25 round also made for carrying lots of ammo. The Germans thought rather highly of them also and would swap their MP-38/40/41 for them if the chance arose on the Eastern Front.

Remember the movie "Cross of Iron" (IMO, one of the best war movies) it was not just gratuitous when they showed the German proud when he captured one and gave it to James Coburn, who used it to great effect for rest of the movie.
 
Nope, not that I've ever heard of. One thing that I've heard of them doing was sticking cigerette butts into their ears for a little protection. BUt one thing to remember, these were the men that built the old school, by hand, walking up hill both ways in 5ft of snow without shoes. From what my dad's told me about his father, who served in the 87th Infatry Divison which was in the battle of the bludge, wsa that any kind of complaining was looked down on. So yes, that's why you had to yell on the phone.
Click to expand...

I think troops who'd been around the block a time or two learned to use cotton balls for ear pro, too. In the context of WW2, though, those were probably mostly the pre-war guys. Don't know if draftees and volunteers in 1941+ figured it out, and the .mil definitely wasn't the least bit worried about long term hearing loss back then.
 
Just goes to show that as long as there is money to be made from rifle contracts, you'll have somebody pointing out every conceivable flaw they can think of in the issue rifle.
Click to expand...

Circa '41 there were some real issues with the Garand, as I understand it. Had the US been in the stressed position the Soviets, or even the British, were in in the 39-41 time frame, I suspect we'd have chucked the idea of the Garand to concentrate on proven bolt guns and cheap SMGs, just like they did.
 
Where you going to get a resupply of ammo on Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Saipan, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, Okinawa etc........? Email?

Bad choice for an American trooper, not in the ETO. Besides that would have meant using the highpower and Panzerfaust for most of the war. Just doesn't qualify as small arms.

Also you would have the STG-44 only for the last year of the war, starting in April 1944.
Go figure.
Click to expand...

I don't think the OP ever said you had to rely on real world logistics or battlefield scrounging for ammo.

On the topic of the StG-44 not being available until 1944 -- MKb-42(H) were firing shots in anger by late 1942 on the East Front. Under the US nomenclature system, the StG-44 would just be the "-A1" version of the 42(H).
 
Right horsesoldier, I was not thinking about fighting for any particular army or worried about supply.

Now I suppose if I were in the US Army I would settle for a .45 Grease Gun and an M1917 Revolver,still a secondary standard weapon at the time.

If i were in the Russian Army, I would use a PPS-43 and a Tokarev pistol.

British Army: Lee Enfield No4 and Browning High Power.

Italian Army: Beretta Model 1938 subgun and a Beretta 1914 Pistol.

French Army: MAC Mle.1924/29 LMG (skip the handgun)

Japanese Army- 7.7 version of the Arasaka and Type 26 Revolver
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
M1 Carbine vs. M1 Thompson/M3 Grease Gun .45ACP...
Replies
24
Views
8K
shoobe01
shoobe01
C
  • Locked
Why Fewer Choices In Small Arms For Military Today?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
Vern Humphrey
V
W
  • Locked
What rifle would be used by WWII soldier European theater?
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Tinpig
Tinpig
B
  • Locked
Most Realistic WWII PC Games??
Replies
20
Views
3K
Kestryll
K
S
  • Locked
Pipe Dream?
Replies
8
Views
606
Gewehr98
G
Back
Top