Semi-automatic Rifles in WWI

[Highlander]

On something of a WWI bend right now, if you can tell

Anywho, what would it take to get semi-automatic rifles as a main weapon in the war? I can a big problem being the dirty conditions of WWI, but would such a weapon cut back trench warfare?

What kind of firearm would this be?

 

[Fenwick]

Easy, in 1915 the Pedersen device was created in 1915. It went ahead for secret development, now WI a British-, French-, German- or hell a Russian-American with sympathy for the home country sends the plans back, I can see such a weapon being quickly advocated by some with in the army. So 1916, maybe 1917 we start seeing a semi-automatic weapon which would do wonders in the trench.

 

[Shurik]

The Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) wouldn't have to be moved up too much for that to happen...

Also, not exactly a rifle, but the Thompson submachine gun would catch on pretty quick with trench warfare.

 

[Blizrun]

The Pederson Device wasn't acceptable as a combat weapon. For starters, each counry's high command was against giving the individual soldier an automatic weapon, fearing a waste of ammo and the accompanying cost. Next, the device itself took about a minute to assemble (on the Springfield) under optimal conditions, which were never present in the trenches. Last, the ammo required a special lubricating wax in order to cycle properly.

 

[Fenwick]

The Pederson Device wasn't acceptable as a combat weapon. For starters, each counry's high command was against giving the individual soldier an automatic weapon, fearing a waste of ammo and the accompanying cost. Next, the device itself took about a minute to assemble (on the Springfield) under optimal conditions, which were never present in the trenches. Last, the ammo required a special lubricating wax in order to cycle properly.

1.) Many saw the airplane, tank, and even the Thompson as unacceptable weapons compared to already exsisting and proven weapons.

2.) One would assume an individual soldier would put the Pederson in prior to going over the top.

3.) True the wax was uncommon, but that was due to it being a system to add on to a pre-exsisting rifle. I'd expect more of the wax to become avalible, or for all we know gun oil could have done the job just as well.

The thing is that the Remington arms company had orders for half a million Pederson Device's, and over 500 million rounds of ammo, so someone saw the need for them. It was assumed that for the "big" 1919 offensive that troops would be running into the trenches needing more then single shots.

 

[MrP]

On something of a WWI bend right now, if you can tell

Anywho, what would it take to get semi-automatic rifles as a main weapon in the war? I can a big problem being the dirty conditions of WWI, but would such a weapon cut back trench warfare?

What kind of firearm would this be?

Hm, p'raps have some elite units of the IJA use them in assaulting Russian positions during the R-J War. Some observers take note and poke their governments, who introduce them in a limited way - company, then later squad support weapons, maybe?

 

[Blizrun]

1.) Many saw the airplane, tank, and even the Thompson as unacceptable weapons compared to already exsisting and proven weapons.

2.) One would assume an individual soldier would put the Pederson in prior to going over the top.

3.) True the wax was uncommon, but that was due to it being a system to add on to a pre-exsisting rifle. I'd expect more of the wax to become avalible, or for all we know gun oil could have done the job just as well.

The thing is that the Remington arms company had orders for half a million Pederson Device's, and over 500 million rounds of ammo, so someone saw the need for them. It was assumed that for the "big" 1919 offensive that troops would be running into the trenches needing more then single shots.

1. Not contesting, just saying that the particular line of thought was still very powerful.

2. The device was to be assembled before going over the top. It still took a while.

3. Eh, I'm not so sure.

 

[Hendryk]

How about the Mondragon M1908 rifle? It was a Mexican-designed automatic rifle whose manufacture was outsourced to SIG. In 1914 Germany bought SIG's entire stock of the gun but found it unsatisfactory for infantry use in trench warfare conditions; in 1915 it was issued to aviation crews with a new 30-round magazine instead of the original 20-round one, but it was later considered redundant with machine guns.

From Wikipedia:

The Mondragón was the first automatic rifle and was designed by General Manuel Mondragón. He began work in the 1890s and patented the weapon in 1907. It was gas operated with a cylinder and piston arrangement, now very familiar but unusual at the time, and rotating bolt, locked by lugs in helical grooves in the receiver; it was also possible to operate it as a simple straight-pull bolt action. The caliber was 7x57mm (.284in) Mauser with an 8-round box magazine; a trial LMG version had a 20 round box and provision for a bipod, like the BAR, the mexican army also used the 30-round drum magazine for the light support weapon or light machine gun variant produced in 1910.

Because of the Mexican Revolution no facilities in Mexico were able to mass-produce it. Mondragón attempted to interest a U.S. firm, without success. He then turned toSchweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft, (SIG) of Neuhausen am Rheinfall who agreed to manufactuer the rifle. It was issued to the Mexican Army as the Fusil Porfirio Diaz Systema Mondragón Modelo 1908.

With World War I, Germany bought SIG's entire stock, issuing them to the infantry, where they proved highly susceptible to mud and dirt in the trenches (a problem familiar even to less complex straight-pulls such as the Ross). Instead, they were withdrawn and reissued, with 30-round helical magazines, to aircraft crews as the Fliegerselbstlader Karabiner 1915 (Flier's Selfloading Carbine model 1915), until sufficient numbers of machineguns were available. Few survive.

More detailed information can be found at Cruffler.com.

 

[MrP]

Ooh, interesting. I'm so nabbing them!

 

[Firestorm]

Ooh, interesting. I'm so nabbing them!

Not sure where you would find one, but I think they were used in large numbers during the Spanish Civil War.

Actually there were quite a few semi-auto rifles showing up near the end of the war. Off the top of my head, there were the French Meunier and FA Mle 1917 rifles, the Italians had the Berretta M1918, the Russians had a small number of Fedorov Avtomats (also possibly finding their way to the Spanish Republicans), the Germans had the MP-18 submachine gun (still shows up from time to time in the hands of South American militias) and I seem to recall the Finns making use of a semi-automatic rifle during their independence and civil wars (anyone who can find out more about this rifle will get many kudos from Firestorm).

As for getting the weapons to the front, in the Civil War it was not uncommon for regiments to buy their own weapons when the Ordinance Department was unsure of their merits, I'm not sure if that would work for any participants of the Great War.

 

[Redbeard]

Technology was there well before WWI. DISA in Copenhagen produced a recoiloperated LMG from 1902 (Madsen), based on a design from 1890. Was in production into the 1950s.

I know this isn't a semi-automatic rifle, but with the technology available to produce a LMG you can also make a semi-automatic.

IMHO Blizrun probably has it right however, why semi-automatic weapons wen't introduced before - they were considdered a waste of ammo, and pre-truck it probably would have been a problem to keep frontline infantry supplied with ammo.

If you go to the Royal Armoury Museum (Tøjhusmuseet) in Copenhagen you can see several very early designs for semi-automatics that never got beyond prototype or small scale production.

Had WWI continued for longer time, we might have seen widespred use of sub-machineguns and assault rifles, but with the armistice military budgets shrunk and armies had to do with existing stocks.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[Rickshaw]

Semi-automatic rifle development however was pretty hampered by the metalurgy problems that bedevilled the Mondragon. Because of the poor quality and low hardness metals used, they were prone to breakages. Further, I'd suggest that the mere presence of a single weapon wouldn't have actually changed much in a war as vast as WWI (or for that matter WWII) simply because the tactical expertise, at least initially, wasn't there to take full advantage of the tactical possibilities that such a weapon presented to user.

If one looks at how the Pedersen or the BAR was to be employed, its obvious that the US Army was a long way behind the other combatants as far as development of their tactical doctrine was concerned. The British and the French (and to a lesser extent the Germans) had learnt the hard way, that only an all-arms approach was going to let the offensive overcome the defensive in any meaningful way. I'd recommend Paddy Griffith's "Battle Tactics of the Western Front", which lays out how the British Army learnt the tactical lessons of the Western Front. It took them 4 years but by 1918, they were tactically the superior of the much vaunted Germans and had defeated them on the battlefield.

The Americans' simplistic belief in their ability to force their opponents into open warfare meant that when they hit the Hindenberg line, they were pretty well stopped and almost decisively defeated. Adding the use of walking fire wouldn't have made any real difference, without the use of adequate artillery fireplans and the extensive use of chemical weapons to dominate the enemy's artillery. The use of CAS and armour to support the infantry onto the objective was extremely important by war's end.

So, I'd suggest the use of mechanically fragile, hard to maintain weapons such as semi/fully automatic firearms to the war, early on wouldn't have made much real difference.

 

[Tony Williams]

The British Farquhar-Hill gas-operated self-loading rifle was developed before WW1, and tested by the army several times (the first being in 1908). It kept being improved and was finally accepted at the end of 1917, but production hadn't got under way by the end of the war, when it was cancelled. It was in .303 calibre and used a 19-round drum magazine.

The French used the commercial Winchester M1907 self-loader in .351 Win SL calibre, and in 1917 ordered a quantity of a fully-automatic version.

As others have said, the resistance to self-loaders was probably more doctrinal than technical. And even if they had been in service at the start of the war, it is unlikely that they would have made a significant difference.