Discussion in 'Small Arms and Edged Weapons' started by Lt Fox, Mar 25, 2008.
By "Blah", what do you mean?
LOL The depth! The insight! The grasp of information and nuance !! All in on word!!!
That blah and the intelligent signature have earned Tiger29 the Order of the Red Flame
Hey ive fired Actual weapons in combat LOL and for my money the slingshot reigns supreme
I disssagree Mortmann. The spikey club beats all.
I just want to say that the Germans shredded the Russians but were shredded back by hundreds of Russians- I would say like 20 to 1
I just want to say that no such shredding occured.
What an intelligent post, War Hawk Sniper (a War Hawk Sniper being exactly what?). What facts do you have to support that ineffable view? Remember I said facts, not BS opinions. Please.
Yeah, I like the spikey club, too.
You'll need to cough up some supporting data to back that bold statement.
Problem with a spikey club is that it takes too long to manufacture. Thats why I prefer the pointy stick. Easy to use, and they are lying on the ground everywhere there is vegetationGermany
Strength of the opposing forces on the Soviet Western border. June 22, 1941
Germany and Allies
Guns and mortars42,601
Tanks (incl assault guns)
Guns and mortars 59,787
Tanks (incl assault guns) 15,687
Aircraft 11, 537
Source: Mikhail Meltyukhov “Stalin's Missed Chance” table 47
At Kursk the forces where
1,300,000 infantry and supporting troops
This is from Wikipedia. sometimes incorrect but these numbers are generaly on par from what i've seen elswhere.
Note: I know Kursk was a defensive battle but the Soviets knew it was coming and still didn't build up to 20:1 ratio.
Right. You cant blame the failure of a few leaders on the perceived greatness of Nazi Germany
(perceived: not real)
yeah, but the pointy stick is too delicate. There's nothing like the manly thud of heavy timber combined with the shuthunk of a spike as it connects with one of the bad guys.
Jeff, watch 10000 BC. How many things are killed by picking up the closest pointy stick. I mean, we all know Hollywood would NEVER deceive us.
Although you did strike home. I do miss that distinct shuthunk of a spiked club.
Oh, didn't you know about the Shredder Mk I? A beastly weapon. In the end the Soviets copied it. Here is an actual photgraph of the weapon.
During the Battle For Berlin the Soviets outnumbered the Germans five to one in men and tanks and fifteen to one in guns.
source: Battle for Berlin
>>The russian anti tank rifle was called the PTRS, and was very effective in ambushing Panzers. Anti tankn guns were also good at this. I read about one soldier in stalingrad who used the anti tank rifle to snipe. He even added a scope.<<
The Russians used them as sniping weapons regularly even in Korea they were used by the Chinese. They were used into the Berlin battles as a support weapon engaging support weapons with a PTDR would be the usual method the bullets penetration was such that brick walls and wood wouldn't stop it easily.
The Russians also lacked effective infantry anti tank weapons. They did use some Bazooka's on lend lease but they did not recieve any Piat's from Britain. They used various anti tank grenades many were very effective.
>>Having fired the Mp40, PPSh 41 and PPS43 under reasonably rigerous conditions my vote goes for the PPSh 41. I fired a weapon that spent 40 years in a bog, was dug out, cleaned up and had no problems emptying several mag's under pretty serious weather conditions (-15 degrees C without wind chill). When I fired an MP40 in the UK in spring it jammed several times, easy to clear but still a pain in the backside, the PPS43 was similar (in fact, I think I may be the only person in history to break one by cocking it too hard).<<
The Russian weapons were designed to be more forgiving including a layer of chrome inside the barrel to allow them to avoid corrosion. The Germans rate the russian heavy machine guns 12.7mm and 14.5mm and smg's highly were rather dismissive of their LMG's raifles and maxims. That was the opinion of my father in law and he survived two years on the eastern front.
They also admired some of the Russian Mortars and heavy guns especially the 76mm guns.
Mike, read my PM to you, please.
Just to throw a curve into this somewhat tedious thread:
The US 60mm mortar had no equal in WW 2 (yes, the French used the original Brandt version that is essentially identical). This infantry weapon gives US units a big firepower advantage over German ones.
In a German company there is no equivalent. While both the US and German company have rifles, machineguns, etc., only the US has mortars available, and an effective mortar to boot. The 60 will throw a bomb over 1000 yards. Its bomb is quite effective for its size having about double the blast and fragmentation of the smaller 50mm types many countries adopted.
When you couple that with a crude indirect fire capacity and the presence of radios and telephones in a US company these mortars form a fire base that cannot be countered by resources at the same level on the German side. This means that the US can engage German machinegun teams with mortar fire and the Germans can do nothing to respond.
I would tend to say that in overall view, the Wehrmacht infantry units had nothing much in comparison to US, UK or Russian infantry firepower besides the MG42.
Masses of Single bolt army rifles and some MP40’s or bounty PPSh, which makes it even harder to understand that the Wehrmacht was able to withstand for such a long time and even being successful in the early years of WW2.
It was merely the outstanding combination of arms and the PzGren. concept that gave them the initial advantage over their adversaries.