British Army adopts M1 Carbine as primary rifle for Normandy

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date
The M1928 Tommy Gun had a ladder sight out to 600 yards
That's like a 100' drop

I imagine this was mainly to reassure potential military customers that the rear irons looked professional from just glancing at them. That's a lot of trajectory and windage to be throwing lead at.

Which brings me to the most surprising fact I think I've ever gleaned from Forgotten Weapons; all Thompson sales to the US military ceased in early 1944, months before D-Day, the Marianas campaign, MacArthur taking his forces beyond New Guinea.

The lesson being, you can make a weapon that's too expensive, too liable to be replaced by a Grease Gun.

Now, if only the UK can make a cheap weapon as efficacious as an M3.
 
The only thing really wrong with the Sten is the magazine, and they've already working on the Stirling.
Also the inherent inaccuracy from having blowback operation, rough trigger and poor sights, tied with short sight radius for those sights. It was a 50 yard bullet hose, when the magazines allowed operation
 
Also the inherent inaccuracy from having blowback operation, rough trigger and poor sights, tied with short sight radius for those sights. It was a 50 yard bullet hose, when the magazines allowed operation

Hasn't the Sten been repeatedly tested alongside the MP40 with very little to show between them except the Sten being lighter and capable of select fire?
 
Well mechanically the two are very similar so mechanical accuracy should be similar. Problem is that the sten is about the worst designed gun ergonomically speaking of wwii so actually using it effectively was far harder, that and the magazines were much worse.
 
Hasn't the Sten been repeatedly tested alongside the MP40 with very little to show between them except the Sten being lighter and capable of select fire?
Lighter does not help, when both have similar mass for the bolt. STEN will flop around more.
Another thing is the telescoping bolt on the MP40 reduces that somewhat. Select fire is good, less recoil, than trying to do a burst from a touch on a poor latch trigger design.

To me, the winner of the cheap subgun competition is the M3A1, not the STEN or MP40.
It's easier to shoot than a M1Thompson, and the low cyclic rate lets most users keep on target.
Wins in being compact,as well.
 
Millions of carbine rounds means a direct reduction of 9mm and 303 rounds that are being shipped to the Front

As a practical matter of logistics, the drive to find a common round for pistol, carbine, rifle and machine gun is desirable.

As a practical matter of effect, the four classes of weapon are somewhat mutually exclusive as to servicing a common target set; the enemy soldier and enemy soft skinned vehicle.

I think one "might" be able to get it down to two rounds. Round nosed, low velocity, high mass bullet for pistols and close combat (under 100 meters) bullet sprayers (SMGS)
and one "type" Spitzer bullet for a "carbine", rifle and machine gun.

Difference in the Spitzer would be the propellant load. Some nations did this anyway to put more energy (chemical potential energy in machine gun ammunition to operate the "machine cycle" in the machine gun, for example.), so one could see three different shell cases for carbine, rifle and machine gun.

But that is 4 lines of ammunition again. Murphy.

'Cause I think a carbine should have been effective to battle ranges, which for an average human being is about 3 futbol (soccer) pitches in length.

By that metric, I think the M1 carbine fails the gerbil test. I don't think it would have been sensible for the British to mass arm with it. In any way, it was a miracle the Americans got what they did.

Look at this junk;


Is there a single one of those bodges, one would trust in the hands of Joe Infantry?
 
As a one time L2 SMG user I can affirm the benefits of a side magazine when you want to be prone. Very, very prone. It does not cause much of an imbalance issue. It is balanced by side pressure on the pistol grip and in use the left arm pokes out there anyway. I even got to try a Royal Navy Lanchester with the 50 round magazine once and that was no worse. Seemed a very nice SMG but heavy to carry all day but then matelots have boats to carry them about.

Cyclic rate is a function of reciprocating effective weight and can be adjusted by the mass of the bolt and somewhat by the strength of the return spring. The Sten's strength was in numbers outside the arms industry. They were intended to be handed out like sweeties just as the magazines were. Find a problem? Get another from the armoury. Sten magazines were intended to be disposable (not single use which is different) when problems happened but old habits intervened and soldiers were charged with damaging their magazines instead of just being given a new one at unit level. Quicker to make a new one than repair an old Sten or magazine. To be fair the troops did abuse the magazines and they were still using them to open beer bottles in the 1980's.......

The L2, of course, was a peacetime 'Sten'. Made to last and with a decent stock. The biggest enhancement to SMG accuracy is to actually use the stock and sights to aim the ***ing thing until you are down to pistol range when you can swap to point and squirt. Never could see why it had a single shot option. Slung properly it allows both hands to be used for whatever is the immediate task.

If the enemy are more than 150 metres away then don't shoot at them. It will only annoy them and attract their attention. However, I dare say that, with a CZ type bipod, you can drop a burst in their general area to ruin their underwear out beyond 200 metres. 25mm Mauser cases would be an improvement within the design, especially with just a bit more bolt mass/spring and a bit more adjustable rear sight. However in the middle of a world war the Sten was a better choice for the nation, if not for the individual soldier.

Most actual Sten users in action I have spoken to were quite happy with it, albeit initially nonplussed by the appearance at first and aware of it's safety issues. Some felt a real affection for it.

What my L1A1 did in the 0-200 metre range against the L2 was convert cover into concealment. The 7.62x51mm would go through most things folk hide behind under fire. That is why you move sideways once you have dropped down when coming under effective fire. It allows the unpleasant gentleman who was firing at you to fire into the place into which you disappeared without you being present. How the hell they manage to do that these days when they seem to be carrying half of the Colour Sergeant's stores on their backs into action I do not know.
 
Last edited:
To me, the winner of the cheap subgun competition is the M3A1, not the STEN or MP40.

Can't disagree with you, can't fully agree with you.

The PPS-43 ties with the M3A1. They are both just so damn good, although the M3A1 edges ahead on being easier to fire, the PPS-43 has a (IMO) better cartridge. Not that there is anything wrong with .45 ACP of course, just that 7.62 Tokarev is a damn good SMG round.
 

Deleted member 1487

Can't disagree with you, can't fully agree with you.

The PPS-43 ties with the M3A1. They are both just so damn good, although the M3A1 edges ahead on being easier to fire, the PPS-43 has a (IMO) better cartridge. Not that there is anything wrong with .45 ACP of course, just that 7.62 Tokarev is a damn good SMG round.
Is it though? There is some evidence that it just icepicked a target and required multiple hits or good shot placement to incapacitate.
 
The Sten's strength was in numbers outside the arms industry. They were intended to be handed out like sweeties just as the magazines were. Find a problem? Get another from the armoury.

That just turned the £2 STEN to a £4 weapon. Sometimes going cheap on QC is costly....
 
As a practical matter of logistics, the drive to find a common round for pistol, carbine, rifle and machine gun is desirable.

As a practical matter of effect, the four classes of weapon are somewhat mutually exclusive as to servicing a common target set; the enemy soldier and enemy soft skinned vehicle.

The .30 carbine round can also be used as a pistol round. There were later pistols made for it. Its effectively a high end .357 round.
 
Is it though? There is some evidence that it just icepicked a target and required multiple hits or good shot placement to incapacitate.

That goes for all pistol caliber rounds. They simply do not generate enough tissue damage to be effective beyond the local hit area unless you hit something vital so shot placement is always going to be alpha and omega.

Good video on the subject here.


this also goes for .30 carbine btw as it falls below the 2200 ft per second barrier it behaves far more like a pistol round than a rifle round.
 

Deleted member 1487

That goes for all pistol caliber rounds. They simply do not generate enough tissue damage to be effective beyond the local hit area unless you hit something vital so shot placement is always going to be alpha and omega.

this also goes for .30 carbine btw as it falls below the 2200 ft per second barrier it behaves far more like a pistol round than a rifle round.
Everything takes multiple hits. These aren't large game loads being fired.

That's my point, it was nothing special. Arguably a 9mm parabellum could do more damage because it's wider, so creates a larger permanent wound channel.
 
That's my point, it was nothing special. Arguably a 9mm parabellum could do more damage because it's wider, so creates a larger permanent wound channel.

Oh I Never claimed it was superior. that 2 mm is sorta insignificant though compared to shot placement with all pistol rounds.

The ppsh is nice to shoot compared to other smgs because the high RoF which makes felt recoil almost constant which makes it a bit easier to keep the sights on target without any jumping. Having shot one myself on 2 occasions I can largely agree with that.
 
Top