The essence of a machine carbine (to use the British army nomenclature) is automatic fire with a pistol cartridge. Open bolt blow back is simple and effective for the task and the 9x25 cartridge as strong as will work thus. The Tokarev copied the smaller diameter Mauser 25mm cartridge but principally as it allowed the same barrel machinery as the Moisin Nagano bolt action rifle. Once you start getting into delayed actions and closed bolt firing you are shading off into making a short, weak rifle. The MP5 is such. A fine weapon for it’s task, but not a true sub machine gun I would submit.
Like the bicycle, the true sub machine gun is a mature design. One can fiddle about with the details but the simple open bolt blow back full automatic fire from a pistol cartridge remains the basis.
Drum magazines have died out for good reasons. Box magazines have vastly improved from the very early days and the Sterling is an exemplary example. More rounds is more weight and the box magazine has to be carried and extracted/reinserted into the soldier’s webbing pouch or similar and this limits length. Cunning design might get a four stack ‘coffin’ 50 round magazine but I doubt if there is enough gain over a 35ish round reliable strong double stack one to justify the expense, weight on the gun and complexity.
As a universal sub machine gun I would take the Sterling as my model but in 9x25 with a long and a short version with modern sights and modern materials to reduce weight whilst maintaining reliability and robustness. If you want a small carbine then go to a short assault rifle.
The inexperienced look at sub machine gun accuracy by comparing shot to shot with a carbine. This misses the point. The sub machine gun is for short bursts. The target being rapidly reaquired for the next short burst. It is whether the burst group contains the target that counts. When you need quick suppression then it is rate/duration of fire that counts. I am of the opinion that many sub machine guns have too rapid a rate of fire. Partly to limit weapon size and weight by limiting the mass of the bolt. I am in favour of accepting a heavier bolt for the return of a lower rate of fire. Telescoping bolts allows one to reduce the receiver length and is useful in making the gun very short but a classic bolt puts the reciprocating mass rearwards which, in shoulder stock form, reduces the shaking of the gun as the mass works back and forth on firing each round.. M any years ago I tried a Sterling with an early both eyes open red dot as well as the ordinary open sights. The red dot was infinitely superior in all ways so there is room to benefit from simple modern sights over open ones.
I can see no reason for a sub machine gun to have a single round setting. Many types have been initially made with the option and had it removed in later production but I know of no example where it was absent and added later on. It is a (sub) machine gun. Pull the trigger and it goes ‘dakka’. I can see why a police user would want it as a warning of intent.
Remember. We want a strong sub machine gun not a weak rifle.
Like the bicycle, the true sub machine gun is a mature design. One can fiddle about with the details but the simple open bolt blow back full automatic fire from a pistol cartridge remains the basis.
Drum magazines have died out for good reasons. Box magazines have vastly improved from the very early days and the Sterling is an exemplary example. More rounds is more weight and the box magazine has to be carried and extracted/reinserted into the soldier’s webbing pouch or similar and this limits length. Cunning design might get a four stack ‘coffin’ 50 round magazine but I doubt if there is enough gain over a 35ish round reliable strong double stack one to justify the expense, weight on the gun and complexity.
As a universal sub machine gun I would take the Sterling as my model but in 9x25 with a long and a short version with modern sights and modern materials to reduce weight whilst maintaining reliability and robustness. If you want a small carbine then go to a short assault rifle.
The inexperienced look at sub machine gun accuracy by comparing shot to shot with a carbine. This misses the point. The sub machine gun is for short bursts. The target being rapidly reaquired for the next short burst. It is whether the burst group contains the target that counts. When you need quick suppression then it is rate/duration of fire that counts. I am of the opinion that many sub machine guns have too rapid a rate of fire. Partly to limit weapon size and weight by limiting the mass of the bolt. I am in favour of accepting a heavier bolt for the return of a lower rate of fire. Telescoping bolts allows one to reduce the receiver length and is useful in making the gun very short but a classic bolt puts the reciprocating mass rearwards which, in shoulder stock form, reduces the shaking of the gun as the mass works back and forth on firing each round.. M any years ago I tried a Sterling with an early both eyes open red dot as well as the ordinary open sights. The red dot was infinitely superior in all ways so there is room to benefit from simple modern sights over open ones.
I can see no reason for a sub machine gun to have a single round setting. Many types have been initially made with the option and had it removed in later production but I know of no example where it was absent and added later on. It is a (sub) machine gun. Pull the trigger and it goes ‘dakka’. I can see why a police user would want it as a warning of intent.
Remember. We want a strong sub machine gun not a weak rifle.