Better US Army Weapons/Equipment in WW1

[Catsmate]

1. But not impossible, as before. Goddard had an Ur-Bazooka in 1918

I'm familiar with Goddard's proposed "rocket tube". But no-one was proposing portable counter-blast recoilless weapons before WW1.
Where is the inspiration coming from? It's all very say saying it's technically possible, it needs someone to come up with the idea and cause it to be accepted.

2.So what does the Entente do when the US is an economic wasteland, and gets no ammo, no food and no horses in 1915?
Doesn't look promising as the Shell Crisis hits. But they weren't stupid, and didn't pull evry ounce of Gold from NY

What in the name of all that is holy, unholy or atheistic are you talking about?
I pointed out that the economic impact of a major Entente capital flight in 1914 would be serious, and you seem to be heading off on some reductio ad absurdum trail of your own.

3.Actually,, all pistols are ridiculous for Army service. Really. They just don't matter
Just here you have a trusted, reliable revolver design, that can take the same ammo as another squad, and solves the
'Too puny to stop hopped up Moros' that 38 Long Colt had from the recent Army experience, yet in areas where Moros
are scarce, can use that lesser ammo, so NCO and Offices can get the ego boost of wearing a Big Iron on their hip

Yeah right......
There's a reason revolvers were dumped for military (and later police service) in favour of semi-automatics. In fact several of them.

"Big and Shiny", à la the Desert Eagle, is fine for the gunfondlers; those who use them as a tool need something more practical.
I note you have utterly failed to address the impracticality of your proposed revolver firing the .351 cartridge, i.e. the weight of such a contraption (who wants a 2kg sidearm?), the logistics of a new cartridge and the inability of such a weapon (despite your assertions) to fire the .357 revolver rounds, the muzzle blast et cetera.

 

[Driftless]

IF the Root Reforms get more traction in this universe, and there's a more cohesive Chief of Staff administration of the Army, one of the central functions is going to be contingency war planning (more than what was historically done in the "aughts" and early 10's). What's up first on their list of areas to consider? Mexico, the Philippines, Hawaii (and other Pacific protectorates) certainly. Canada? probably. The Caribbean and Central America maybe, though that's more likely in the Navy and Marines baliwick. Europe? Probably pretty far down the list. Would it be a serious effort, or more of a "what do we do if" series of conversations in the Officers Club?

The results of those plans would have an impact on what tools are needed, and vice-versa, the limitations of what tools could be obtained impacts plans.

 

[Catsmate]

And how many 60mm Mortars were hitting anything at 2k accurately?

Compared to (for example) the RPG-7? Vastly more. The RPG has a >5% hit probability against a 5m x 2.5m box at 500m.

2nd, RPGs are set to detonate well before maximum range if shot off at 45 degrees, 900m

That depends on the round. Most RPG ammunition is intended for direct fire against point targets.

60mm just aren't Squad level weapons, that's a Company level support weapon
Each squad won't be humping a 60mm around.
They can carry RPGs

60mm mortars are normally a platoon/company weapon while RPGs/rocket launchers/recoilless are not because of their different uses. Most section level combat doesn't involve indirect fire.

 

[Catsmate]

When have mortars ever been used as squad level weapons? RPGs are infantry antitank weapons, not for company-level indirect fire support.

Indeed. Though the UK (and India) issued the 51mm and 2" mortars at platoon level and the French use the FLY-K at section level.

Really this is getting a bit silly; as you say RPGs (and rocket launchers and recoilless guns) are intended for direct-fire against point targets, not indirect fire against area targets.

 

[Catsmate]

*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?

Well said. Probably the most useful suggestions so far.

[And my apologies if you got a number of like/unlike notifications, I had mouse problems]

 

[Catsmate]

Other than the Davis Gun.

Which was never used in trenches and was a failure anyway.

But recall, this is the Alternative History board, not the 'Nothing can be changed from OTL, as that was History' board

Sigh. This board is somewhat attached (except in ASB) to plausibility in alternates. You have not supplied any rationale for the development of a man-portable, direct-fire, counter-blast recoilless weapon or it's adoption.

 

[Catsmate]

Guns of this ilk were around even earlier than WW1 if the caption in this picture is to be believed:

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.

Oooo, interesting. Thanks for that.

The 35mm version (in you picture) seems to have been the earlier model, replaced by one using the common 37mm ('pom-pom') round (which the French and US 37mm guns also used). Fascinating. We tend to forget about the Mexican arms industry, except for the Mondragon.

BTW the Austrians also developed an 'Infanteriegeschütz' and deployed in in '15/16, firing a different, low velocity, 37mm round. In fact pretty much everyone developed something similar, or used captured weapons. More here.

 

[Catsmate]

Without the Hi-Low system, will have PIAT level recoil, for a much smaller bomblet.
PIAT in WWI, well.........

And yet there were plenty of 37mm flare guns in use in WW1.

 

[marathag]

Is it not that you now need the RPGs anyway for AT use so why not use them for more? Not sure if the reloads are actually lighter than mortars (for the same explosive payload) and that might add up quickly?

At the time, wouldn’t be for AT use, but it has the same HE punch as a 105mm shell for target under 150 yards

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

The 35mm version (in you picture) seems to have been the earlier model, replaced by one using the common 37mm ('pom-pom') round (which the French and US 37mm guns also used). Fascinating. We tend to forget about the Mexican arms industry, except for the Mondragon.

While AFAIK the Mexicans did use the pom-pom gun during the Revolution, it's not clear whether the captured 37mm ammo was from stocks for those or for the ubiquitous (for Latin America anyways) Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon which also had a 37mm version and many applications. In fact, while we're speaking of the Mexican arms industry, it was mounted on the first tank invented in the western hemisphere:

Yeah, this bad boy was put together in 1917 before the Americans had gotten around to designing and building something of their own. The company that built it, TNCA, was a fairly robust aviation group for the time it existed, 1915 to 1930.

 

[marathag]

And yet there were plenty of 37mm flare guns in use in WW1.

For an ounce or so of filling.

 

[marathag]

I'm familiar with Goddard's proposed "rocket tube". But no-one was proposing portable counter-blast recoilless weapons before WW1.
Where is the inspiration coming from? It's all very say saying it's technically possible, it needs someone to come up with the idea and cause it to be accepted

Same way any inspiration hits. It wasn't a technological limit, but imagination. Just need some backyard inventor, who has the ear of someone who can make things happen. Isn't ASB

 

[marathag]

Which was never used in trenches and was a failure anyway.


Sigh. This board is somewhat attached (except in ASB) to plausibility in alternates. You have not supplied any rationale for the development of a man-portable, direct-fire, counter-blast recoilless weapon or it's adoption.

And you haven't a thing on why it couldn't have happened, other than it didn't in OTL

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

If you want to improve the US Army in WWI start a major build up in 1916 using the problems with Mexico as the excuse. As it was the US Army was ready to launch its first offensive just as the Central Powers were throwing in the towel, and they needed British and French weapons to do it with.

 

[Catsmate]

While AFAIK the Mexicans did use the pom-pom gun during the Revolution, it's not clear whether the captured 37mm ammo was from stocks for those or for the ubiquitous (for Latin America anyways) Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon which also had a 37mm version and many applications. In fact, while we're speaking of the Mexican arms industry, it was mounted on the first tank invented in the western hemisphere:

Yeah, this bad boy was put together in 1917 before the Americans had gotten around to designing and building something of their own. The company that built it, TNCA, was a fairly robust aviation group for the time it existed, 1915 to 1930.

Hmm, thanks for that. I do believe it's time to resurrect my Mexican Revolution notes for a time-travel scenario.

IIRR the Hotchkiss used the black powder version of same shell as the pop-pom, and many other light cannon.

ETA: yes, both used the 37x94mmR round developed in 1875 in response to torpedo boats and in compliance with the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration.
Initially it used black powder propellant and filler, later smokeless and LE filler and eventually HE filler in SAPHE and APHE versions. Plus canister of course.

 

[M79]

Well said. Probably the most useful suggestions so far.

[And my apologies if you got a number of like/unlike notifications, I had mouse problems]

Thank you!

Tying an electric motor to a few dozen Gatling Guns and loading the hoppers with tracer rounds at night amidst a German offensive while the Allies shout references about Valhalla / harnessing the power of the gods may seem cool to contemplate but are far less practical than more mundane considerations like food, sanitation, etc.

 

[Catsmate]

And you haven't a thing on why it couldn't have happened, other than it didn't in OTL

Good grief, I was the one who brought up the Davis gun. I'm quite familiar with it and it's oddities. Perhaps you should look into the weapon and why it wasn't used very much.

 

[Catsmate]

Thank you!

Tying an electric motor to a few dozen Gatling Guns and loading the hoppers with tracer rounds at night amidst a German offensive while the Allies shout references about Valhalla / harnessing the power of the gods may seem cool to contemplate but are far less practical than more mundane considerations like food, sanitation, etc.

Indeed.
Disease has killed far more people during wars than bullets or blades. Now an interesting PoD would be the earlier development of sulpha drugs; sulphanilamide was developed in 1906 but it took almost thirty years for it's potential to be noticed and examined.

 

[stephen the barbarian]

some small ideas i have, working on the assumptions

• i can start in 1914
• that the "big push" will be in 1919

put a bipod on the bar
cancel the pederson device, develop a stand alone carbine instead
hire more ordinance officers in 1914
give fewer contracts to colt and spread out the mg contracts

 

[quillreiver]

Earlier American development of tanks would do no harm, spurred either by more US observers coming to the same conclusions the European nations did in how to break trench warfare or beginning development after the British deploy tanks operationally.