Why would that have any impact on the fact that 60mm mortars are still in common use? Are you withdrawing your claim that they are not?
Better US Army Weapons/Equipment in WW1
- Thread starter Father Maryland
- Start date
*Pay close attention to the ration developments of the belligerents. Watch what works.
*Start working out practical individual load/mobility developments earlier - an early ALICE system could prove -extremely- useful.
*Develop better field utensils - interlocking silverware with form-fitting half-gallon tub can be developed earlier
*Pay attention to the Native American and other cultural means of preserving food without refrigeration as well as testing the existing/proposed rations on the officers in charge of their development
*Same for footwear - can the boot be built better?
*Start working out practical individual load/mobility developments earlier - an early ALICE system could prove -extremely- useful.
*Develop better field utensils - interlocking silverware with form-fitting half-gallon tub can be developed earlier
*Pay attention to the Native American and other cultural means of preserving food without refrigeration as well as testing the existing/proposed rations on the officers in charge of their development
*Same for footwear - can the boot be built better?
And the rationale behind the proliferation of the RPG was entirely different from what you're asking for. You asked for a weapon that would lob grenades further and more accurately than throwing by hand would, every nation's response (after a few dalliances with catapults) was the mortar/minenwerfer/trench gun. The proto-panzerfaust you're asking for isn't in the same category, you're suggesting they invent an anti-tank weapon before the tank exists.
What are the RPG's for? This is WW1 not WW2 , trench warfare means direct fire HE weapons are a lot less useful than ones which do plunging fire. The 2 inch mortar was commonly used and as others have noted, the company tended to be the manoeuvre unit.
Please remember modern loadouts for infantry are for mobile warfare not the different demands of static trench warfare. Most of the time in WW1 they would be firing from a fixed position not lugging stuff around the field. Even OTL they had trench stores to change weapon loadout when they attempted to assault an enemy position. So rifles got swopped out or supplemented by pistols, grenades and assorted melee weapons.
marathag
Banned
US hasn't been doing Trench Warfare, but had been doing mobile warfare before WWI
French and British were trying to toss grenades to take our armored German MG emplacements, that wasn't exactly plunging fire, and had to get suicidally close to attempt.
Launcher gives far more stand off range
And was using RPG as shorthand, rather than the more correct 'Recoilless bomb launcher' since the almost Panzerfaust didn't have a rocket engine, that was the Soviet improvement, a smaller launch charge to eject the warhead before rocket ignition, so didn't need a blast shield like the larger Panzershreck or 3.5" Bazooka
marathag
Banned
An Official Journal Of The NRA | Early Semi-Automatics: Winchester's First Self-Loading Rifles
Though not well known today, Winchester’s first semi-automatic rifles saw service in and above the trenches of World War I, faced big and dangerous game, and set the stage for the modern sporting rifle.
To acquaint aircrew in their use, both countries purchased substantial quantities of Model 1903 Self-Loading Rifles. Although exact numbers are unknown, it is estimated that British authorities bought a minimum of 1,000 and the French 1,500. In 1918, 600,000 rounds of ammunition were shipped to England, and 500,000 went to France.
France and Great Britain weren’t alone in using the Model 1907 in aircraft. The Imperial Russian Government ordered 500, plus 1.5 million rounds of ammunition, for its small air force in May 1916. During 1917 and 1918, the French Government ordered an additional 2,200 Model 1907s at a cost of $30 apiece for its land forces.
Those rifles differed from those previously received in that they were specially modified by Winchester for “volley” or full-automatic fire. Issued to special assault troops for trench warfare, those rifles were also fitted with surplus Lee Navy-pattern bayonets.
The Forgotten Winchester Model 1907
Winchester has created dozens of legendary rifles. The significance of these weapons in the settling of the 19th West is a well documen...
oldschoolguns.blogspot.com
Last edited:
Nobody is making recoilless launchers in WW1. If your “America wants a bigger and more rifle grenade” solution is actually correct (and it isn’t because historically the US went with rifle grenades) then you’d end up with something more like the Blacker Bombard than a panzerfaust. Engineers at the time are going to think in terms of “Okay a cannon, but make it smaller” than a shoulder fired recoilless launcher.
Direct fire weapons for defeating things like fixed MG emplacements already existed.
en.wikipedia.org
Canon d'Infanterie de 37 modèle 1916 TRP - Wikipedia
marathag
Banned
Other than the Davis Gun.
But recall, this is the Alternative History board, not the 'Nothing can be changed from OTL, as that was History' board
The Davis Gun is not in anyway similar to panzerfaust. It was basically two guns strapped end on end and fired simultaneously. It was also not adopted in either of its supposed roles.
Usually when changing things from history, you need a plausible path of how they might get there. Not just ex nihilo.
marathag
Banned
Now compare the weight of that, to a Panzerfaust 150. It was a lot less than the 230 pounds of that cannonDirect fire weapons for defeating things like fixed MG emplacements already existed.
Canon d'Infanterie de 37 modèle 1916 TRP - Wikipedia
Think there is room for improvement, over a light gun that could penetrate 12mm or armor at 100m, or put a small amount of HE at it.
Cool, why do infantry need to carry a handheld launcher to take care of MG bunkers that a 37mm can engage from their own trench lines?
And if they aren’t engaging hardened bunkers, why would they not be better off using rifle grenades for indirect fire in trenches?
marathag
Banned
recoilless.
Thats how is similar.
In place of a countershot, just used expanding gas from the black powder going off
Newtonian. Impetus vectors cancel
Which who at the time was aware of? Who thought of decouples weapons using anything other than how the Davis Gun did it?
marathag
Banned
Because as WWI showed, it didn't happen that way, with the Mle1916 clearing the Germans out from the Hindenburg Line.
Rifle grenades is one way, but they were hardly light on recoil.
marathag
Banned
Historical determinism is absolute?
Why are you even on this board? can anything be different from OTL?
They allowed for indirect fire though, which is more needed than a direct fire launcher. Direct fire weapons they had plenty of that could engage the kind of targets that would need this hypothetical not!panzerfaust.
Sure. But somethings don’t make sense. Like jumping from rifle grenades to a panzerfaust.
It’s like saying that because both the Winchester Rifle and .50BMG used cartridges with fixed primers, the Union could have built .50 BMG sniper rifles in the Civil War and engaged the Confederates from a mile away.
Guns of this ilk were around even earlier than WW1 if the caption in this picture is to be believed:Direct fire weapons for defeating things like fixed MG emplacements already existed.
Canon d'Infanterie de 37 modèle 1916 TRP - Wikipedia
Unfortunately finding info on this gun is incredibly difficult, in English or Spanish. All I know is that it was made by Rafael Mendoza, who later went on to design a fairly robust and decent light machine gun in the 1930's, leaving his earlier work (including an earlier machine gun that is even more difficult to find info on) completely obscure. The caption on this photo claims this gun was invented in 1912, but as far as I've been able to scrounge the earliest references come from 1914 as he made a variation in 37mm to use captured ammunition from the stores of defeated Federales. No info on weight, but it is quite a small piece, even smaller than that French piece.
The claim that the 1907 was used in the ground role is made a lot, but when you dig through the references the support for it is generally based only on the fact that very many of them were purchased. The numbers I have seen actually show over 3000 being bought by France. However, near the end of the war France had over 4000 aircraft on the front line. Even if these were only issued to the observers the French could have used them only in the air role and still want for more. It could perhaps have been used in ground combat but the primary sources for it seem to be missing. Even if it was, it was likely to be in comparatively tiny numbers.In October 1915, the French Government followed the British lead with an order for 300 Model 1907 Rifles intended for aerial use. They evidently were well-suited for that purpose as an additional 2,500 were purchased during the following 12 months. While details concerning their actual use have yet to be found, it must have been extensive, since over 1.5 million rounds of ammunition for those rifles were delivered prior to the end of 1916.An Official Journal Of The NRA | Early Semi-Automatics: Winchester's First Self-Loading Rifles
Though not well known today, Winchester’s first semi-automatic rifles saw service in and above the trenches of World War I, faced big and dangerous game, and set the stage for the modern sporting rifle.www.americanrifleman.org
To acquaint aircrew in their use, both countries purchased substantial quantities of Model 1903 Self-Loading Rifles. Although exact numbers are unknown, it is estimated that British authorities bought a minimum of 1,000 and the French 1,500. In 1918, 600,000 rounds of ammunition were shipped to England, and 500,000 went to France.
France and Great Britain weren’t alone in using the Model 1907 in aircraft. The Imperial Russian Government ordered 500, plus 1.5 million rounds of ammunition, for its small air force in May 1916. During 1917 and 1918, the French Government ordered an additional 2,200 Model 1907s at a cost of $30 apiece for its land forces.
Those rifles differed from those previously received in that they were specially modified by Winchester for “volley” or full-automatic fire. Issued to special assault troops for trench warfare, those rifles were also fitted with surplus Lee Navy-pattern bayonets.
Texas gunsmith Hyman S. Lehman modified the Model 1907 into what we would now call a “Close Quarters Battle” (CQB) weapon in the early 1930s. Unfortunately his customers were the Dillinger gang, Pretty Boy Floyd, and Baby Face Nelson among others. The Model 1907 has some proto assault rifle features, namely an intermediate power cartridge, detachable magazine, and semi automatic (sometimes converted to full automatic) operation. In addition the rifle is easily separated into upper and lower receiver groups, like a modern AR-15 rifle.The Forgotten Winchester Model 1907
Winchester has created dozens of legendary rifles. The significance of these weapons in the settling of the 19th West is a well documen...
View attachment 646769
The only references I have seen to the bayonet was a post war modification for police use. 1934 AIUI. This was offered as an option from the factory. It was not a great seller as there was a small window between the emergence of higher firepower weapons in the hands of criminals and the police forces accepting the use of the Tommy gun as an equalizer. In that small window, the 1907 was somewhat popular as a more "Friendly looking" alternative to full automatics. Its an odd choice for police use so it is possible that it was a holdover from WW1 modifications but there doesn't seem to be much evidence either way.
There is a reference to the "Auto" Modification in this video (50:32):
It is not conclusive by any stretch but they figure this claim goes back to documents relating to the purchase of 1907's by France that refer to an "Auto rifle" which in the language of the day likely means "Self-Loading" as there is no special instructions or price increase for the weapons in question.
All this to say that though it is not impossible that fully automatic 1907's with bayonets were issued to assault troops during WW1, I am a little skeptical as the primary evidence seems spotty.
EDIT: To cover something that rewatching the above video reminded me of I did not earlier:
The gun is not really field serviceable. The spring needed to throw around that huge bolt means that you cannot really do more than take apart the upper and lower in the field. For anything relating to the internals of the upper, this would be an armourer serviced weapon.
Last edited: