AHC: spin-offs from the StG-44 as main players in the Cold war

Idea is: most/all of the 'big' countries take a long hard look on the StG-44, decide that it is a worthwhile gun, and decide to introduce a version or two of it in their armed forces from late 1940s on. Whether with original ammo, or ammo that can fit, and you can 'invent' it (5.56-7.92mm x??, what ever floats your boat, while it can easily fit on the StG-44 base). The off-springs being viable wepons by 1970s. Note that this decision does not butterfly-off the 'full power' rifle cartridges used on machin guns used by infantry in the Cold war, but might play a role in cancelling some post-war SMGs and semi-automatic rifles.
What are benefits, what are shortcomings vs. what infatry usually carried between 1950-1970?
 
Idea is: most/all of the 'big' countries take a long hard look on the StG-44, decide that it is a worthwhile gun, and decide to introduce a version or two of it in their armed forces from late 1940s on. Whether with original ammo, or ammo that can fit, and you can 'invent' it (5.56-7.92mm x??, what ever floats your boat, while it can easily fit on the StG-44 base). The off-springs being viable wepons by 1970s. Note that this decision does not butterfly-off the 'full power' rifle cartridges used on machin guns used by infantry in the Cold war, but might play a role in cancelling some post-war SMGs and semi-automatic rifles.
What are benefits, what are shortcomings vs. what infatry usually carried between 1950-1970?

Soviets were testing what would become the SKS, so after seeing the early Nazi weapon, the SKS get modified for larger, easily detachable mags, and full auto, similar tracking how in US Service, the M1 Carbine became the M2 Carbine, and sees combat in 1945

So with that, there is no AK-47.

Not much changes, really, except no PKM, but the Soviets were not short of competing designers for that gun role.
 
OTL the British developed the BullPup EM2 in 0.27 calibrate ITTL perhaps they just developed the same rifle for the the German round despite it being infirior.
 
The British go .270 and FN FAL Bullpup

fnbullpup.jpg
 
The British go .270 and FN FAL Bullpup

OTL the British developed the BullPup EM2 in 0.27 calibrate ITTL perhaps they just developed the same rifle for the the German round despite it being infirior.

The idea was: German rifle + cartidge that can reasonably fit. Ie. 'classic' assault rifle, not a bulpup. The 7.92 Kurz was 48 mm long, British new ammo was much longer, ergo it will not be an easy fit.
 
That is why I said that the Stg-44 is and was inferior to the Rifle No9. Why would other nations ITTL accept an inferior weapon to one designed one designed and built to their requirements.
 
In that case then go with what the Germans had wanted

7mm x 33mm - same case slightly lighter and smaller bullet but higher MV

Of course the FN FAL was first chambered in the 125 grain / 685 MPS - 7.92 x 33 kurz but they and the Brits just improved it to the 100 grain / 840 mps - 7 x 46 (.270) Enfield and then were forced to make it worse with 7.62 x 51 NATO

But if we have to go with less than perfect........
 
That is why I said that the Stg-44 is and was inferior to the Rifle No9. Why would other nations ITTL accept an inferior weapon to one designed one designed and built to their requirements.

Timing of a weapon is priority No.1, the StG-44 was superior to the EM-2 because it was 5 years earlier design. Adoption of the StG-44 also cancels the Sterling, so there is a material saving with assault rifle suplanting the 'battle rifle' and SMG. That also means that US Army is too late to shove the 7.62x51 as a rifle cartridge dow the throat of British Army (and other 'early adopters').

In that case then go with what the Germans had wanted

7mm x 33mm - same case slightly lighter and smaller bullet but higher MV

Of course the FN FAL was first chambered in the 125 grain / 685 MPS - 7.92 x 33 kurz but they and the Brits just improved it to the 100 grain / 840 mps - 7 x 46 (.270) Enfield and then were forced to make it worse with 7.62 x 51 NATO

But if we have to go with less than perfect........

As above - there is an assault rifle available before the US Army can do anyting about the cartridge used. Perfect = available.

edited: Sterling, not Lancaster
 
Last edited:
Soviets were testing what would become the SKS, so after seeing the early Nazi weapon, the SKS get modified for larger, easily detachable mags, and full auto, similar tracking how in US Service, the M1 Carbine became the M2 Carbine, and sees combat in 1945

So with that, there is no AK-47.

Not much changes, really, except no PKM, but the Soviets were not short of competing designers for that gun role.
The Soviets were already working on various designs that would lead up to the AK-47 well before the end of the war, such as the AS-44 made by Sudaev which was tested in 1945 and although ultimately rejected because of its weight it was no heavier than the Stg-44. In any case, I fail to see how any of this butterflies away the existence of the AK-47 since the design process that lead to it was already underway and there'd be no reason for the Soviets to suddenly adopt the sturmgewehr as the OP suggests so there's nothing to interrupt this process.
 

Deleted member 1487

Idea is: most/all of the 'big' countries take a long hard look on the StG-44, decide that it is a worthwhile gun, and decide to introduce a version or two of it in their armed forces from late 1940s on. Whether with original ammo, or ammo that can fit, and you can 'invent' it (5.56-7.92mm x??, what ever floats your boat, while it can easily fit on the StG-44 base). The off-springs being viable wepons by 1970s. Note that this decision does not butterfly-off the 'full power' rifle cartridges used on machin guns used by infantry in the Cold war, but might play a role in cancelling some post-war SMGs and semi-automatic rifles.
What are benefits, what are shortcomings vs. what infatry usually carried between 1950-1970?
The FN FAL was originally in 7.92x33 caliber. The Brits had their .280. The Spanish their 7.92x40 CETME, while of course the Soviets had the 7.62x39. The French experimented with a 7.65x35 MAS using Mauser engineers (who would later go on to develop CETME and the Spanish round/rifle, plus the G3 rifle).

The US was the outlier and the one with the most power to ensure all the others conformed to the full powered battle rifle round.
The best bet is have the British .280 get accepted (the Belgians also developed the FAL in that caliber); though not a true intermediate even in the first low powered version, instead a very low powered battle rifle round, it was also supposed to be a new universal caliber for the Brits. I suppose you could get interesting and have NATO like and adopt the 7.92x40 CETME cartridge and rifle. Supposedly it did pretty well during an unofficial test at the Aberdeen proving grounds in 1954 and got high praise from US officials there (pp. 152-159 "Full Circle: a Treatise on Roller Locking"), but the decided to pursue what would become the M14.

If adopted it would have been a formidable foe to the AK-47 and do everything the M14 and FAL could not.

That is why I said that the Stg-44 is and was inferior to the Rifle No9. Why would other nations ITTL accept an inferior weapon to one designed one designed and built to their requirements.
Not really inferior if it already did what the EM-2 did 6-7 years earlier with all the kinks worked out.
The StG45 probably would have been the model adopted, as it was the continued development that the Germans themselves were replacing the StG44 with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_45(M)
Cheaper, easier to make, not much heavier and possible to improve vs. a bullpup technology that was still finicky and a recoil too heavy for the system to meet the requirements the British set up for it (thanks to trying to get the .280 to beat out new the US 7.62 full powered round).

Have them adopt it in say 1946-47 after having their engineers improve upon it a bit (say get it down to 7.62 to use existing barrel boring machinery) and you've got something the US will have a hard time trying to supplant later, especially if the Brits adopt the 7.62x51 NATO as their 'machine gun' round.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I fail to see how any of this butterflies away the existence of the AK-47 since the design process that lead to it was already underway and there'd be no reason for the Soviets to suddenly adopt the sturmgewehr as the OP suggests so there's nothing to interrupt this process.
I'd think a full auto SKS variant with detachable magazines would, if in service before wars end.
Here, the only influence would be magazine and select fire from the STG
 
I'd think a full auto SKS variant with detachable magazines would, if in service before wars end.
Here, the only influence would be magazine and select fire from the STG
But why would they have a full-auto SKS variant before war's end? That doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP which suggests people adopting STGs after the war, whereas in reality the Soviets were already inspired by the intermediate cartridge of the 1943 predecessor to the STG and that's what led to both the SKS and the AK-47, neither of which were used by VE Day.
 
But why would they have a full-auto SKS variant before war's end? That doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP which suggests people adopting STGs after the war, whereas in reality the Soviets were already inspired by the intermediate cartridge of the 1943 predecessor to the STG and that's what led to both the SKS and the AK-47, neither of which were used by VE Day.

I'm saying thatthe Soviets could only be inspired at most by a few features, and there is zero percent of the STG-44 itself being adopted. Trials Rifles of the SKS were supposedly in use with the 1943 type 7.62x41mm cartridge
 
Soviets were testing what would become the SKS, so after seeing the early Nazi weapon, the SKS get modified for larger, easily detachable mags, and full auto, similar tracking how in US Service, the M1 Carbine became the M2 Carbine, and sees combat in 1945

So with that, there is no AK-47.

Not much changes, really, except no PKM, but the Soviets were not short of competing designers for that gun role.
Or Sudayev doesn't die and the AS-44 sees service in the Battle of Berlin and is standardised.
 
I'm saying thatthe Soviets could only be inspired at most by a few features, and there is zero percent of the STG-44 itself being adopted. Trials Rifles of the SKS were supposedly in use with the 1943 type 7.62x41mm cartridge
I agree that the STG wouldn't be adopted, I'm just saying that I can't see the Soviets opting to try and force the SKS to be an automatic rifle when they already had purpose-built assault rifles in development.
 
Here’s an idea

For “Watch on the Rhine” (battle of the Bulge) and supporting operations the Germans manage to produce enough STG 44s to fully equip all of the infantry units taking part (not just the Elite units) with the weapon replacing their Kar98s and MP40s at Squad level and platoon level.

With the subsequent defeat several hundred thousand of these rifles fall into the hands of British, Canadian and US Troops and become a sought after weapon in the same fashion that MP40s were horded and used.

At the end of the war so many have been captured (and unofficially used by the Allies) and perhaps a factory or two ‘liberated’ that there is talk of equipping the Allied Airborne and Special Forces units slated for the invasion of Japan with the weapon.

From that point on the weapon becomes ingrained in military circles.

Meanwhile the British secretly dismantle one of the factories in their area of Occupation and ship the jigs and machine tools back to Britain – along with several of the Engineers and designers

From 1948 they start to produce the weapon in a new Cartridge – 7mm x 33 ‘Enfield’ as this is what the Germans had originally wanted (As I understand it) and initially produce enough weapons for testing and trials – however about ten Thousand make it to the Commonwealth Division in the Korean war where it more than proves itself and the rest as they say is history.
 

Deleted member 1487

Or Sudayev doesn't die and the AS-44 sees service in the Battle of Berlin and is standardised.
Apparently even the first pre-production models weren't ready until after the war in Europe ended. Maybe in Manchuria could have had a shot?

Here’s an idea

For “Watch on the Rhine” (battle of the Bulge) and supporting operations the Germans manage to produce enough STG 44s to fully equip all of the infantry units taking part (not just the Elite units) with the weapon replacing their Kar98s and MP40s at Squad level and platoon level.

With the subsequent defeat several hundred thousand of these rifles fall into the hands of British, Canadian and US Troops and become a sought after weapon in the same fashion that MP40s were horded and used.

At the end of the war so many have been captured (and unofficially used by the Allies) and perhaps a factory or two ‘liberated’ that there is talk of equipping the Allied Airborne and Special Forces units slated for the invasion of Japan with the weapon.

From that point on the weapon becomes ingrained in military circles.

Meanwhile the British secretly dismantle one of the factories in their area of Occupation and ship the jigs and machine tools back to Britain – along with several of the Engineers and designers

From 1948 they start to produce the weapon in a new Cartridge – 7mm x 33 ‘Enfield’ as this is what the Germans had originally wanted (As I understand it) and initially produce enough weapons for testing and trials – however about ten Thousand make it to the Commonwealth Division in the Korean war where it more than proves itself and the rest as they say is history.
The Brits actually faced them first in the Netherlands in 1944 before the BotB. They made an impression and led to the desire to develop the British equivalent, i.e. the .280. Because of NMH they of course had to develop their own rifles and ideal cartridge, rather than just adopt the StG. And honestly the StG was not an ideal rifle by any means, it was just good enough given the production situation as of 1942-45. Post-war the Brits did not feel constrained by such a production consideration, so went for their ideal, rather than the existing Jerry-rigged 'good enough' rifle. Yes it does seem the Germans did experiment with a DWM 7mm version, though I'm not sure if they could have necked down their existing cartridge, as the 33mm case length was the minimum necessary to accommodate the 7.92mm width of the existing round. The original British 7mm round, pre-trying to placate the American range/power demands, was better than the German 7.92x33mm round...but the Brits still had to do what the US wanted post-war as the US was paying the bills. For that reason, even though the EM-2/.280 round were adopted in 1951 Churchill forced the army to reverse that decision and accept the US 7.62 round as the NATO standard.

As it was the STG proved itself in WW2, the US Army just was convinced that their weapon systems had proved themselves superior...so how do you convince the US Army until Vietnam that they were wrong? I'd think you'd need to have the North Koreans and Chinese equipped with AK-47s for the US to finally accept the reality of the situation.
 
Apparently even the first pre-production models weren't ready until after the war in Europe ended. Maybe in Manchuria could have had a shot?


The Brits actually faced them first in the Netherlands in 1944 before the BotB. They made an impression and led to the desire to develop the British equivalent, i.e. the .280. Because of NMH they of course had to develop their own rifles and ideal cartridge, rather than just adopt the StG. And honestly the StG was not an ideal rifle by any means, it was just good enough given the production situation as of 1942-45. Post-war the Brits did not feel constrained by such a production consideration, so went for their ideal, rather than the existing Jerry-rigged 'good enough' rifle. Yes it does seem the Germans did experiment with a DWM 7mm version, though I'm not sure if they could have necked down their existing cartridge, as the 33mm case length was the minimum necessary to accommodate the 7.92mm width of the existing round. The original British 7mm round, pre-trying to placate the American range/power demands, was better than the German 7.92x33mm round...but the Brits still had to do what the US wanted post-war as the US was paying the bills. For that reason, even though the EM-2/.280 round were adopted in 1951 Churchill forced the army to reverse that decision and accept the US 7.62 round as the NATO standard.

As it was the STG proved itself in WW2, the US Army just was convinced that their weapon systems had proved themselves superior...so how do you convince the US Army until Vietnam that they were wrong? I'd think you'd need to have the North Koreans and Chinese equipped with AK-47s for the US to finally accept the reality of the situation.

The 'perfect round' that the British had wanted was the less powerful .270 a 6.48 g (100 gr) round that had a 840 MPS MV - this was the '0-300 meter round' designed to be the best comprosmise for the majority of combat ranges that soldiers in WW2 had found themselves at (the majority being sub 100m) - pretty much what the 6.8 Remington SPC round is today (and arguably the 5.56 nato round) - the .280 and subsequant .280/30 where the results of increasing compromises to try to match what the US was asking for. The US would not even contemplate the .270.

In the end there was so little difference between the eventual .280/30 that it made little difference in adopting 7.62mm x 51

The ultimate decision in adopting 7.62mm x 51 was to enable a common ammunition supply - which in a large war situation the lions share would come from the US or so the thinking went at the time.
 

Deleted member 1487

The 'perfect round' that the British had wanted was the less powerful .270 a 6.48 g (100 gr) round that had a 840 MPS MV - this was the '0-300 meter round' designed to be the best comprosmise for the majority of combat ranges that soldiers in WW2 had found themselves at (the majority being sub 100m) - pretty much what the 6.8 Remington SPC round is today (and arguably the 5.56 nato round) - the .280 and subsequant .280/30 where the results of increasing compromises to try to match what the US was asking for. The US would not even contemplate the .270.

In the end there was so little difference between the eventual .280/30 that it made little difference in adopting 7.62mm x 51

The ultimate decision in adopting 7.62mm x 51 was to enable a common ammunition supply - which in a large war situation the lions share would come from the US or so the thinking went at the time.
Right. So how do you get around the problem of the US? Hitler accepting the StG44 earlier? According to a German historian who wrote the most comprehensive history of the STG ("Sturmgewehr!") Hitler's lack of acceptance delayed the weapon by about 12 months; by the time it was accepted in mid-1944 it was too late to really tool for it effectively and production was limited...but even more so for the ammo, which remained the major bottleneck for the weapon getting fielded.
So perhaps the POD is that Hitler is convinced to order it into production in mid-1943 so that it is the primary arm of the German army by 1944 so when the Allies land in Normandy they face a hellscape of assault rifles, which prove especially devastating in the close in terrain of Normandy. The impression made is then made on on the Americans, who perhaps partner with the Brits on the .270 or .280?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top