Why Did America Win the Race for a Semi-Automatic Infantry Rifle?

Status
Not open for further replies.
To return to our thread.....

After my Civil War digression, I have to say something about the Garand.

It may have been that the lengthy peace-time developement allowed Garand to refine and perfect in a way that other designers couldn't. I mean, being at war (or close to it), with a dictator demanding progress, must have caused designers in a couple of other countries to go with "good enough" when it really wasn't good enough. Just a thought.....

Bart Noir
 
The stamped sheet metal assault rifles we are familiar with (AKM, AR-18, etc.) were not developed until after WW2.
NMshooter #160

That is incorrect. The original assault rifle was developed during the war: the StG. 44. IIRC, it was originally developed under the MP designation to mask its development from Hitler for the above mentioned reasons. It wasn't until the gun was demonstrated for Hitler that it was allowed to go into full production. Hitler was so impressed that he renamed the MP44 the Sturmgewehr 44 (Assault Rifle).

Stamped receivers had been around for a few years before that. Notable examples are the M3 grease gun, Sten SMG, MP38/40, and MG42.
 
Dr. Peter Venkman, there is a difference between the doctrine underlying the development of a particular weapons system and how that weapon is actually used in combat. In my preceeding post, I am arguing for the former position. Let me clearify what I mean through two examples. The Boeing B-52 was designed as a strategic nuclear bomber. In practice, it has been deployed as a conventional bomber carrying a large non-nuclear payload in combat. Its actual use deviates from its intended one, although the strategic role played a huge part in its development.

More to the Second World War, the concept of the tank destroyer is noteworthy. It clearly shows the effect of the mobility doctrine in that it was originally designed to be a fast and powerful vehicle capable of destroying German tanks. The reality proved otherwise. Yet, it was doctrine that influenced the creation of this weapons system. In my previous posting, I was arguing that doctrine played a role in the development of the Garand, the Sherman tank and the 105mm howitzer. I see nothing that disputes this position. How these weapons were actually used is another matter. But that is not the point I was making. I hope this clearification helps.


Timthinker
 
Stg-44 had a milled receiver.

So did the AK-47 (as opposed to the AKM we are more familiar with)

Not sure if the Stg-45 prototype counts...

That one was later rediscovered as the CETME by folks who escaped to Spain.

Pretty sure there were no firearms that could be classified as assault rifles with stamped sheet metal receivers used in WW2.

If I am wrong it would be neat to find out about those rifles.
 
bad memory?

Vern Humphrey,Bart Noir,

back in the discussion a few days late..

posting on previous page was from memory of a story about gatlin, read many moons ago:

~i recalled~ it telling about him becoming a doctor at his father's wishes, because a sister of his died of fever, waiting many days for a doctor to come. they lived on a rural plantation. after getting his PHD, he only practiced medicine on his own immediate family.

gatlin's sympathy lied with the north, so he tried selling them his weapon first. union intellegence told him it was a scam to waste union resources, and that he was working for the south. enraged, he went to the and sold several units to a southern officer in command of a fort in new orleans...

i scoured the net for this story about gatlin, to no avail. but i did find a union general, one "Benjamin Franklin Butler", who bought some guns from gatlin, also out of his own pocket. he was also in charge of occupied new orleans, for a time. also someone called, "porter" had one, and another called "hancock" bought twelve. the same number attributed to gen franklin in another article.

"A dozen of the weapons were purchased privately and used by General Benjamin "Butcher" Butler during the siege of St Petersburg towards the tail end of the Civil War to great effect and this led to formal adoption in limited numbers by the US Army."

i assume the system worked, as the article goes on saying,

"Foreign observers reported on the weapon and orders were placed by the French, British and Japanese militaries in the 1870s."

http://www.civilwarhome.com/gatlinggun.htm

the two articles with differing #'s are both at this address, one titled, "The Gatling Gun 1862- Present First Machine Gun and Herald of Modern Warfare", and the other a link from the civil war weapons page.

still, NO info about a southern officer purchasing any of these for fortress protection. bad memory, or poor search skills. any body else with further input about the gatlin story? can't find article....

gunnie
 
I'm pretty sure the StG44 had a stamped. I checked Wikipedia (I know - not a real source) and here. It certainly looks like a stamped receiver. It also makes sense since Germany had been developing stamped steel arms prior to WWII and many of their small arms were constructed using that technology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top