What if Germany had Allied quality rifles?

Actually, I'd say the Germans had a potentially superior weapon by the late stages of the war; the MP-44/StG-44 assault rifle, the ancestor of the AK-47 (at least in looks--I know they're different internally, thank you).

The M-1 Garand may have been the best overall, but the StG-44 was the wave of the future.

Yours,
Paul

 

I remember a few years back when I had the oppurtunity to get a Master Marksman in the Enfield. Very accurate, and with lots of skill could be made nearly automatic.

I can still remember this one December afternoon. The sky was dark, cloudy, and dman near cold as hell had frozen over. Rain was pouring in sheets, soaking into my clothes, and numbing my skin. While in the prone position I noticed my part of the ridge line made a nice little dip for the water to pool into. So there I am, several inches of very very cold Canadian December rain pouring into a pool while I laid in it. The waterproof parka I had laid onto my back did very little for the water pooling underneath. Looking at the target trench 100 years away my hands where skaing from the numb as the orders to open fire came. Slaming the action closed I squeezed off a quick round. I just wanted to get done. It hammered into my shoulder, and the lead thundered downrange striking near middle. Not bad for a shaking hand, and combat sights. The smell of the burnt powder was all I could smell as it got into my sinuses. Though, it was nice to be able to smell from my dripping and sniffling nose. Without wasting a second I let the bolt spring up and then slammed it back forward and down. Another round. Then another, then another, then another. Before I knew it I had to drop the magazine and put in the next one. It didn't last very long as I ran out of rounds on the second magazine. I could have slipped a few more rounds into another magazine, but instead I let the magazine fall out and manually inserted a new round each time into the rifle.

In the time of probably 4 minutes I had fired off about 23 rounds. 2 magaznes and the rest individually fed.....got my Master Marksman too!

So really, when well trained the rifle man CAN achieve a high rate of fire and accuracy. But in NO WAY could I have used that rifle in an assault. There is absolutly no way. I would have rather put one round into it, and attacked with a sharpened shovel and bayonet.

 

The British Enfield has the smoothest bolt action of WWI and WWII rifles.

We just have to remember that an average British soldier of a rifle regiment in 1914 could have 15 very accurate shots in a minute. Which tells us that tactics and training made the difference, along with a very good rifle.

 

You are quite right on the bolt action on the 303, it was my first issued weapon upon enlistment and I still preferred it to some of the others I ended up with.

 

One thing I really like about the Lee-Enfield (in my case, the #4 Mk. 1) is its magazine capacity of ten rounds compared to the five of the Mauser or the Moisin-Nagant. It's almost like five additional chances to save one's life.

Yours,
Paul

 

Unfortunately, for those of you who got the No.4 Mk 1 it is the worst of the lot when it comes to Enfields. It was mass produced during WW II and had more than its share of poor construction problems. The one to get is the SMLE No. 1 Mk 3 manufactured from just prior to WW I through about 1938. It was well made and very accurate for a military arm.
The one I own (made in 1918) is capable of holding about a 2" group at 200 yds using the iron sights which is very good for a production military arm and non-match ammunition. I also use it with black powder from time to time (yes, the original SMLE was a black powder weapon so this isn't detrimental or dangerous to the weapon).
Oh, for those living in the fantasy land of California, the SMLE (all models) is a banned weapon as it classifies under California law as an "assault weapon." Among other descriptions one of California's legal definitions of an assault weapon is any long arm or shotgun with a detachable magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds.

 

Don’t they also classify a pack of Marlborough as a lethal weapon?

Has its advantages though. If you’re in a crowded place and you want some room for yourself, pulling out a pack of cigarettes usually has the same effect as pulling out a crucifix at a vampire convention.

Have a nice day

No.9

 

Hey everyone, I'm new here...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't German strategy revolve around the machine gun in WWII? The Germans saw the section (squad) as a way of supporting the machine gun; besides the 3 men operating the MG, you had riflemen providing cover and protection. If your section contains a MG, you really don't need semi-auto rifles if you have good bolt action rifles too. Your MG provides suppression and punch while the riflemen carefully choose and fire on targets.(theoretically)

 

that sucks. Better turn in my Ak-74 and M-16A2.

 

The Mk 4 Enfield woodwork had a tendency to come adrift in later life, but under WWII combat use does not seem to have been a major factor. Using similar sights, the Mk 4 could 'hold' its accuracy for longer than the SMLE due to the adoption of a considerably heavier barrel - it was the same length, but with a thicker wall section. Much of this advantage was lost when the 2-aperture 'leaf' sight was used, especially on Savage-produced weapons. Using the ladder-sight, great accuracy could be achieved in well-trained hands.

Worst of the Enfield series was undoubtedly the Mk V 'Jungle carbine'. The lightened receiver led to considerable problems with wandering accuracy - the sighting would go 'off' after about half-a-dozen shots.

( Sources : Hogg, 'Infantry Weapons Of WW2' , Skennerton, 'The Lee-Enfield Story' ).

 

Yep, we know that, read from the start of the thread! oh. and welcome to the forums!

Looks like the consensus is, Germans with nearly a 100% loadout of G-43s or Garands is a moot point given the MG tactics used and that was probably as effective as having the capitalist republicans (pun on you mr Eisenhower ) all armed with semi autos.

 

The Germans used triple the rifle ammunition in Normandy in infantry engagements due to their machineguns.

I'm curious about mortar ammo expenditure rates between the two sides..

I'm under the impression that the key components of infantry firepower at the platoon level were:

1. machineguns
2. mortars

and to a lesser extent (if these are available):
3. rifle grenadiers
4. designated marksmen
5. SMG armed troops (in close quarters)

 

That matches both my take from examining descriptions from the actual infantrymen, and the others who have published studies on the same question.

In the 1920s the Reichswehr tested a variety of infantry tactics and weapon combinations. They decided a combination of light & tripod mounted MG using short but high volume bursts should be the basis of the rifle company. The role of the men not assigned to the MG or mortar crews were as grenadiers or assualt teams. In both the offence or defense they were to close with and assualt the enemy infantry suppressed by the high volume of MG fire. The MG 34 was selected as best suited of the available candidates. (The MG42 was not broadly distributed until the last three years of the war.)

The Reichswehr officers conducting the tests concluded that a shorter high volume burst from a MG produced more hits on a target area than longer lower volume bursts, and had a greater psychological or morale effect. They also concluded that high volume long or medium range rifle fire was of secondary value & the riflemen were much more effective at close range with grenades.

 

I've heard of these studies but apparently, modern section MGs like the SAW, etc. usually fire in the 800-900 RPM range. Even the MG3 (modernized MG-42) has been given a reduced firing rate.

 

It might have made quite a difference if they had started the war with a good semi auto. But of course we will never know. The Germans were well aware of the limitations of the KAR since we know they made at least half a million G43s (semi auto rifle) and at least that many Mp-44 (selective fire). But these rifles came too late to have much effect since they did not show up in meaningful numbers until 1943-1944.

Any GI or marine will tell you how vitally important it is to get and keep fire superiority over your enemy. One of the few virtues of the little 5.56 round is the soldier can carry so many more than say 7.62. Those little bullets do less damage but when the air is filled with lead, you want to make darn sure that lead is mostly coming from your own people. If you get in a fire fight and lose fire superiority for long, without support or reinforcement, you will lose. The German soldiers were able to blast out 5 slow rounds from their bolt action. Fire, lift bolt, pull it back, push it forward, push it down. Fire and do all that over again while in the meantime bullets are streaming over your head and Americans are coming at you. Then stop, find a loaded clip, shove it in, repeat. The GI had 8 shots with no break in between each shot. Who would you rather be in this situation?

The limit is 10 rounds. Dont give them ideas lol

 

On a similar note in the US armed forces during WW2 only 20% of the men shooting were actually aiming at a person. The theory is that men deep down inside do not want to kill other men. So the rate of fire often doesnt matter as much as what they are pointing it at.

Did the Germans run out of ammunition frequently (as compared to the Allies).

I was reading this whole thread and kept being astonished at the plethora of comments from the old members. Then I looked at the date of the conversation.

 

Ive read that once the lead starts flying any sort of empathy for the enemy diminishes.

Up against the Japanese Ive never read anything of the sort that suggests Allied soldiers were popping off shots yet missing intentionally. Maybe for some American soldiers killing German teens was perhaps harder.

 

I thought that "20%" statistic is referring to percentage of soldiers that are willing to expose themselves and open fire. It is not so much empathy.....

 

Wolfy, was there really a need to dig up this thread that hasn't been posted in in OVER 6 YEARS?