Some have both, just look at the Cromwells. Plus .38 revolvers.
Brens were the standard AA weapon on British tanks, pretty much all of them had at least one (and a second stowed if it could be obtained).
British Army adopts an Auto Pistol before 1939
- Thread starter fastmongrel
- Start date
Brens were the standard AA weapon on British tanks, pretty much all of them had at least one (and a second stowed if it could be obtained).
I think Webley and Scott would differ regarding the "Enfield" revolver...
The first design requests from the British Army for a machine carbine (pre-Lanchester) required it to fire a service cartridge, i.e. .38/200, .303 or 7.92mm.
Owen actually built prototypes in .38/200, at least four of them, before the Army was told to stop faffing around. Not bad work using a rimmed revolver cartridge.
Hmm fair one.
And more recently of course the L85 prototype wasn't internally an unlicensed copy of the Sterling built AR18.
Nope. No Sirrreee. It actually used Sterling built components. See not a copy at all.
The troops are not using much .38 ammo though, they are either in a vehicle relying on the weapons mounted or if out and about they are only going pistol if the shit has hit the fan, mostly it is a security blanket, if they want something more effective they will acquire a SMG or a rifle from somewhere.
Those suggesting something more powerful than .38/.45/9x19 are ignoring that pistols are secondary weapons and users are unlikely to be firing more than a few rounds to qualify. Pistols take a lot of effort to get good with, you don't want to issue something that needs a lot of training to use effectively; .38 super for example is a bit hot for most users especially as the commonly trained method at the time is a single handed combat stance and a lot of soldiers were on average smaller than today so less able to handle recoil. The only people training a two handed stance was SOE and that was a close range point and shoot technique.
The Bren on British tanks was for dismounted defensive fire in laager. Thought was given to making 7.92mm versions so that they could use the same ammunition as the BESA.
The A2 is actually supposed to be pretty good, which is what happens when you let someone like HK sort out a weapon.
I suspect that most tankers thought of their revolvers as a way to avoid burning to death.
Ingliss was making 8mm Brens for the Chinese, but adding these to the logistics system would also mean introducing yet another magazine type to the mix. If they end up in a serious firefight when dismounted it would make sense to use the PBI's .303 ammo and mags rather than run out.
The logistical burden of having an additional small arms caliber for pistols would be so insignificant as to be barely worth mentioning.
And small arms ammo was a small slice of a given infantry or armored units logistical burden - with POL, potable water, food, spares and main weapon ammunition, hell even the mail and laundry probably of greater difficulty to deliver than small arms ammo.
And yet it was managed.
I am not aware of any British unit regularly running out of or even run low of ammo except in a few isolated situations such as 1st AB at Arnhem and the Rifle Brigade at Calais, but in both cases the root cause of their problems was not shortage of ammo due to 'poor logistics' in the British army.
And small arms ammo was a small slice of a given infantry or armored units logistical burden - with POL, potable water, food, spares and main weapon ammunition, hell even the mail and laundry probably of greater difficulty to deliver than small arms ammo.
And yet it was managed.
I am not aware of any British unit regularly running out of or even run low of ammo except in a few isolated situations such as 1st AB at Arnhem and the Rifle Brigade at Calais, but in both cases the root cause of their problems was not shortage of ammo due to 'poor logistics' in the British army.
It cost more in (highly profitable) refits that it did to make originally.Which explains why its only been in service for 34 years
It's never been adopted/bought by anyone who didn't get it for free or attached with string to "military aid".
The SA-80 family had so many fault it wasn't funny.
Yes, and spend as much as buying new, better, rifles on the remanufacturing.
I was in the TA when they were being introduced. A sergeant was sent on a course about them and when he came back we asked him what he thought of it. His answer, "It's got a good sling". Fat lot of good that is to a light infantryman who's forbidden by tradition from using the sling.
I didn't hear any complaints about the sling. Unlike the magazine, the magazine release, the sights, the firing pin, the grenade launcher, the bayonet, the safety, the furniture and the general unreliability.
I recall my now late uncle who was involved in the introduction of the original SLR in the 50s (he was in the Skins) after hearing my cousin (a RM Commando) list the problems with the L85A1 (this was late 80s) tell us how many faults 'Gods own Bang Stick' had when first adopted and how many changes had to be made before it was fit for purpose.
The L85s problem was that it was pushed into deployment because the Evil tories (tm) wanted to sell Enfield / RSAF and needed to show that it was being productive and the move to Nottingham also caused lots of problems.
I was RNR and so did not put that many rounds through the 'Civil Servant' or had to carry it through the mud etc so maybe my opinion is not worth spit
But the ones I used always went bang when I pulled the trigger and I was a pretty good shot with it
But yes the issues with the original and particularly the early L85A1s were criminal - not quite Tank hatches on British WW2 tanks level criminal but still shockingly bad.
But we digress
Some real world British handguns of WWII Era:
Colt 1911 in .38 Super. Issued to Commando Units.
Ballester-Molina in .45 ACP. Made in Argentina. Issued to Commando Units and 8th Army in the North Africa.
My personal favorite! Colt Single Action in .357 Magnum. Issued to Royal Air Force pilots.
Colt SAA in .45 cal. Same as above.
Colt 1911 in .38 Super. Issued to Commando Units.
Ballester-Molina in .45 ACP. Made in Argentina. Issued to Commando Units and 8th Army in the North Africa.
My personal favorite! Colt Single Action in .357 Magnum. Issued to Royal Air Force pilots.
Colt SAA in .45 cal. Same as above.
Yeah I know why they did that.
Bloody hell what did the poor sod do to get issued a 19th century hand cannon. Where would you stow it in a cockpit or did it have it's own compartment in the bomb bay.
That's because there's no new build A2s, they're all rebuilt A1s. It's a very good rifle.
Not when you include the cost of retraining every single member of the Armed Forces and Cadet Forces, additional retraining for every single armourer, probably 15x magazines for each, new rifle cleaning kits for everyone (plus spares), new armourer kits, replacement rifle clips for every single tank, APC, SPG, CVR(T), 43, MAN SV, specialised vehicle, 4T and Land Rover in the Armed Forces, new shelving for every single armoury in the Armed Forces and Cadet Forces, new rifle racks for every single guardroom in the Armed Forces, new posters for every training wing, basic training room, TA/Cadet hall etc in the entire Armed Forces, rewriting the drill manual (and retraining the entire Armed Forces and Cadet Force), new PAMs for the entire Armed Forces/Cadet Forces, rewriting TAMs for every single member of the Armed Forces (assuming they still exist) and probably a load of other costs I've not thought of from the top of my head.
If a new rifle was cheaper we'd have got new rifles. The L85A2 could be the greatest rifle ever made but if replacing it with the M4/M16/Galil/Steyr AUG/whatever else someone thinks we should buy because it's ally as fuck or they've prestiged with it on COD was 25p cheaper then that's what the Treasury would have had us doing.
There was a special rack developed to allow Hurricane pilots to stow them under the wings
