Why did the STG44 not catch on after WW2?

[Slamfire]

The 42, the answer to the question of how fast is too fast.

I never heard a Machine gunner complain about putting too much lead on target.





Didn't Jesse Ventura have one of these strapped to his chest?





I had buds who were in Vietnam discuss M60 races. Grunts would polish parts, play with the gas system, to get the cyclic rate up, and then bet, whose M60 was faster.

One bud of mine got to shoot the German MG3, the 308 version of the MG42. Rheinmetall MG 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG_3 Bud preferred it to a M60, one reason, he claimed he had to get up in front of a M60, buttocks toward the enemy, to change barrels. The MG3, pull a lever, tilt the gun, and the barrel falls out. I have read comments from a Military Advisor in South America, a continuing problem with the M60's was that the firing pin assembly could be assembled out of order. This is very bad. No weapon should ever allow its operator to assemble parts backwards, sideways, out of sequence, into a complete weapon. One reason the Ross rifle is still remembered is because it was possible to assemble a Ross rifle and not have the lugs in battery when a round fired.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

High rates of fire are good for engaging aerial targets. When you're only on target for a fraction of a second, you want to pump out as many rounds as you can in that fraction.

But for ground operations, high rates of fire have no real advantage. The BAR, on "slow" was ideal. If It had been belt fed and had a quick change barrel, we'd still be using it -- Wait a minute, we are! It's called the M240!

 

[Slamfire]

A bud of mine, told me of an Army program called "Phoenix". The Israeli's captured thousands and thousands of the latest Russian equipment, and the US Army got to play with the stuff. This would have been 1968 or so, and by that time, the US Army was well acquainted with the AK 47, at least, being shot at by the AK47. The one statement I remember was that the Army tester told my Bud about how simple the Russian weapons were. And that was a good thing, they were extremely well designed, you could hand them to an 8 year old, (which is what is happening in Africa today), and with only a couple of minutes of instruction, the 8 year old can go out and shoot anyone the leadership directs. In contrast, the M16 is rather complicated, is not dirt tolerant, and requires a lot of cleaning. Yes, the Army understood even back in the 1960's, that Soviet era firearms were excellent battle weapons, it is just they would not acknowledge that.

 

[entropy]

Bud preferred it to a M60, one reason, he claimed he had to get up in front of a M60, buttocks toward the enemy, to change barrels.

I don't know how he learned to change barrels, but just flipped the lever, hooked the bipod legs on something convenient, slid the barrel off, (No asbestos glove needed) jammed the new one down in, and locked the lever. you don't even have to get up from prone to do it.

High rates of fire are good for engaging aerial targets. When you're only on target for a fraction of a second, you want to pump out as many rounds as you can in that fraction.

But for ground operations, high rates of fire have no real advantage. The BAR, on "slow" was ideal. If It had been belt fed and had a quick change barrel, we'd still be using it -- Wait a minute, we are! It's called the M240!

We had fun jacking the rate of fire up on the brand-spankin' new M249's back in '86 by turning the gas block to the "Adverse" setting when still clean; sounded like an MG42! But yes, in reality any cyclic rate over 600 is wasted in the ground.

Phoenix was a program to eradicate local VC infrastructure using CIDG and RFPF cadre to attack the selected VC in VC mufti, all the while loudly claiming their targets were with the South Vietnamese. Perhaps they used kids, but the one officer I knew who had participated in it never mentioned that happening.

 

[Slamfire]

I don't know how he learned to change barrels, but just flipped the lever, hooked the bipod legs on something convenient, slid the barrel off, (No asbestos glove needed) jammed the new one down in, and locked the lever. you don't even have to get up from prone to do it.


We had fun jacking the rate of fire up on the brand-spankin' new M249's back in '86 by turning the gas block to the "Adverse" setting when still clean; sounded like an MG42! But yes, in reality any cyclic rate over 600 is wasted in the ground.

Phoenix was a program to eradicate local VC infrastructure using CIDG and RFPF cadre to attack the selected VC in VC mufti, all the while loudly claiming their targets were with the South Vietnamese. Perhaps they used kids, but the one officer I knew who had participated in it never mentioned that happening.

It is possible I remembered the incorrect name for the weapons system test program.

 

[entropy]

It is possible I remembered the incorrect name for the weapons system test program.

I'm sure Hummer 70 knows it; he was probably in on it.

 

[tark]

They took the basic premise and turned it into the M60 which was nowhere near as good as the 42

Actually, what we stole from the MG-42 was the top cover's feed mechanism. Then we stole the trigger and firing mechanism from the FG-42 paratrooper rifle. We put them together and made a fairly reliable light machine gun, but one that had some problem areas. I was 45 bravo in Germany and I had to fix the things. Springs wore out quickly. The right locking lug was too small and it would usually start to fail after a few thousand rounds. Sometimes a very few. If you closed the top cover with the bolt forward it would refuse to close. Try to force it and you broke it.

The MG 42 was good but it would have been much better firing at half the cyclic rate .

 

[JONWILL]

Anyone hear of the “Stinger” used in WW2?

The AN/M2 aircraft gun converted to a mobile infantry weapon. The Marines loved the rate of fire
https://www.guns.com/2012/08/15/stinger-light-machinegun/

 

[Jessesky]

Most likely was the economic condition of Germany after the war, and some of the premier firearms developers went to Spain to create the CETME which caught on and became the G3(hk91) down the line. As well the ak was created and pumped out in such wide numbers the Stg was overshadowed

 

[fpgt72]

I can tell you that no one wanted to come up against it. There were Army training films dedicated to showing how ineffective it was compared to US Machine Guns because of the psychological impact of the rate of fire.
It wasn’t a problem slowing the rate of fire down. The MG3 was a copy in 7.62x51 and it was slower

You can tell me what you have seen on youtube....that is all. So how many barrels did they carry....quick look on the internet for the answer to that question.....I will tell you 2 if they are lucky.

It was too fast, a barrel burner, and yes the change is pretty easy and pretty quick, but the gun is still out of service while that change is going on.....and if you lay that hot barrel on the ground, it can catch leaves and grass on fire being so darn hot. so you had to put it at least on the case.

Short fast is not as good as long and steady....gun stays working.

Try reading a book and not get all your info off of youtube.

 

[fpgt72]

I never heard a Machine gunner complain about putting too much lead on target.


View attachment 806243


Didn't Jesse Ventura have one of these strapped to his chest?

View attachment 806244

View attachment 806245

I had buds who were in Vietnam discuss M60 races. Grunts would polish parts, play with the gas system, to get the cyclic rate up, and then bet, whose M60 was faster.

One bud of mine got to shoot the German MG3, the 308 version of the MG42. Rheinmetall MG 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG_3 Bud preferred it to a M60, one reason, he claimed he had to get up in front of a M60, buttocks toward the enemy, to change barrels. The MG3, pull a lever, tilt the gun, and the barrel falls out. I have read comments from a Military Advisor in South America, a continuing problem with the M60's was that the firing pin assembly could be assembled out of order. This is very bad. No weapon should ever allow its operator to assemble parts backwards, sideways, out of sequence, into a complete weapon. One reason the Ross rifle is still remembered is because it was possible to assemble a Ross rifle and not have the lugs in battery when a round fired.

Shooting from something that is moving, or something that is moving very fast is different. Air defense you want as much lead in the air as possible....and you are not having a long rate of fire as the fast moving thing is not around for a long time.

Sticking a gun out of a plane gives you huge cooling from the air running around the plane....and then a gun with more then one bullet tube is going to get a small rest between shots.

As far as Jessie the Body goes, it is not possible to shoot that thing from the hip.....or at least not safe at all.

 

[amd6547]

My father was a weapons guy in his armored cavalry unit in WWII. He had a collection of German MG's on his armored car, and used them to train others in their use...in case they needed to utilize captured weapons.
He much preferred the MG42 to anything else.

 

[JONWILL]

You can tell me what you have seen on youtube....that is all. So how many barrels did they carry....quick look on the internet for the answer to that question.....I will tell you 2 if they are lucky.

It was too fast, a barrel burner, and yes the change is pretty easy and pretty quick, but the gun is still out of service while that change is going on.....and if you lay that hot barrel on the ground, it can catch leaves and grass on fire being so darn hot. so you had to put it at least on the case.

Short fast is not as good as long and steady....gun stays working.

Try reading a book and not get all your info off of youtube.

US Army training film from WW2. They were trained to wait for the barrel change. The MG42 had the fastest barrel change of any WW2 machine gun. Unlatch the side tilt the gun. Barrel fell out. Slap in a new barrel. 5 seconds. I guess you think it is faked. Read any GI information about German weapons. They hated the 88, Nebelwerfer and the MG42

I am out on this argument. Some people can never accept that other countries build better weapons than the US. Especially the Germans/Nazis

 

[FL-NC]

FWIW, a friend whom is an EOD tech in the USMC told me that he saw several captured 44's and destroyed thousands of rounds of the ammo found in caches in iraq.

 

[desidog]

I am out on this argument. Some people can never accept that other countries build better weapons than the US. Especially the Germans/Nazis

During the Battle of Britain it is commonly said that Spitfires and Messerschmitts were very evenly matched in the air... but the fact of the matter is that the Allies' planes were running on 101 octane, while the germans were running on 86 octane. If they'd had more and better refineries, there would have been a different outcome.

 

[Tommygunn]

During the Battle of Britain it is commonly said that Spitfires and Messerschmitts were very evenly matched in the air... but the fact of the matter is that the Allies' planes were running on 101 octane, while the germans were running on 86 octane. If they'd had more and better refineries, there would have been a different outcome.

Octane =/= power. Octane is a metric of whatever material (it used to be lead) that is mixed in gas to suppress preignition, or "knock." If the Germans had had more refineries, it would have eliminated supply and logistics problems, but only better design makes for better airplanes.

Had the Germans been able to develop their Me 262 and other jets more rapidly, that theoretically could have put them on a much better footing in the air war. Maybe. They had a lot of good ideas. They were too late or too few in production to make a difference as it was.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

What were we talking about?

 

[Browning]

What were we talking about?

The STG-44, Germans in general, machine gun design, the Battle of Britain and octane.

 

[someguy2800]

The germans sure make nice stuff when they put their minds to it. I'm a fan personally. As for octane this one runs on ethanol.

 

[RedlegRick]

Let me know when you get to the Jeep and the bazooka.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

The STG-44, Germans in general, machine gun design, the Battle of Britain and octane.

I think everything after THE STG-44 was added at a rapid rate and confused me.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

The germans sure make nice stuff when they put their minds to it. I'm a fan personally. As for octane this one runs on ethanol.

View attachment 806739

I see that you kept your post gun related with the 22 target in the pic.

 

[chicharrones]

I see that you kept your post gun related with the 22 target in the pic.

Good eye there, Gunny. Lol.

 

[RedlegRick]

Personally, I've been interested in some of the small arms the Nazis were making towards the end of the war. My late uncle brought back one of their Volksturm rifles and it was a fascinating thing compared to their earlier designs. Very rough and crude, yet it still worked well enough. Never learned the model or who made it,though.

 

[tark]

I'll take one of these, myself. The museum has three, one first model and two second models. The one I am holding is near new. These fire the full sized 8mm Mauser round. This thing was an effective combat weapon, I've been told, as long as one stayed away from full auto. They fired at around 7-800 RPM and they only weighed 9 pounds or so. YIKES !!!