Czech arms revolutionize the world

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Inspired by this thread among other things:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-greatest-ever-devised.422822/

During the 1920s-30s the Czech arms industry was surprisingly advanced, producing the world's first significant, reliable semi-automatic service rifle that went on to influence the development of the Garand and StG 44:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZH-29

This rifle was tested in Pedersen .276 caliber ammo for the US, so the Czechs had significant access to intermediate caliber ammo and developing a military rifle around it.
The designer's brother, also an arms developer, created a number of interesting weapons too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Holek

What if one of the Holek brothers develops the concept of an intermediate cartridge to make a self loading rifle design cheaper, easier, and simpler to make and maintain to interest the Czech military and get some sales based on that? Post-war they did develop just that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm
Adopting the Pedersen round is not viable given that the Czechs were still using 7.92 Mauser ammo as their standard, but cutting down that round to more manageable proportions was viable. Post-war they then developed a series of excellent weapons around that above style of cartridge:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vz._52_machine_gun
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vz._52_rifle

So what if in the 1930s, playing off of the concept behind the intermediate Pedersen round, but not wishing to lose out on Czech military contracts one of the Holeks in concert with ammo designers develop a 7.92mm x 45mm round very similar to the above cartridge in performance and manage to field a series of semi-auto rifles and LMGs based on it?

Given that this POD wouldn't change history in the realm of geo-politics Czechoslovakia, the Holeks, and the arms industry of the Czech lands are taken over by the Nazis who then, as per OTL, exploited the developments of Czech industry, especially their self-loading rifle programs. So these weapons go on to influence German weapon design, especially after German army and SS units, equipped with Czech weapons as per OTL, report their quality and performance in the field. Designs like the Gewehr 41 and 43 don't materialize, arguably the StG44 also then doesn't arrive, as the Czech intermediate cartridge with a mass produceable self loading rifle design and corresponding LMG platform effectively replace it.

So this then gets to the heart of the discussion I'm curious about: what influence does that have on post-war NATO designs if the Germans adopted the Czech intermediate round and self loading rifle, perhaps even LMG, plus even chamber the FG-42 in this 45mm long intermediate cartridge? Post-war the US adopted a modified 7.62mm x 51mm round and a 'modernized' Garand in the shape of the M14, while developing the FG42 and MG42 concepts into the M60 machine gun. Might not NATO develop a 7.62mm x 45mm just like the historical Czech round above and platforms based around it for squad level weapons?

It is understandable historically that the US thought the German 7.92 x 33mm Kurz round was too small, but a 45mm long, longer range, flatter firing intermediate 7.62 would seem to me performance enough for the marksman school of the US army to really consider adopting their own variant of it (even if the Brits go the 7mm EM-2 route of development). With the Germans have a lot more of these sorts of intermediate caliber weapons that were self-loading earlier for the US to encounter by say 1943, might they not be influenced more by the effect they have on the battlefield? They were suitably impressed with the FG42 and MG42 IOTL, while apparently not really encountering the StG44 much except during the Battle of the Bulge and then only in limited numbers, while the Soviets and Brits faced them much more and earlier and were impressed with the effect.

If the US/NATO were to adopt a 7.62mm x 45:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm_vz._52
Would they be as interested in the 5.56mm caliber and might they adopt an assault rifle type design based around this intermediate instead? It would outperform the AK-47 7.62 x 39mm round, but not be as overpowered as the historical NATO 7.62mm x 51mm round, while if the US was influenced by German self-loading rifle designs as much as they were by MG/auto rifle designs, perhaps the M14 concept is significantly altered.

So any idea how this would change US/NATO arms development post-WW2 and the resulting weapon quality for the Cold War?
 
I do love me some Czechnology.

To be fair, however, the adoption of an intermediate cartridge is way, way more difficult than that. There always was serious resistance in adopting anything but a full-powered rifle round. The adoption of 7.62 NATO (and, earlier, the rejection of .276) is testament to the unbudging conservativism of the military establishment when it came to marksmanship/musketry. I doubt the Czechoslovak military was ever interested in an intermediate cartridge, making an earlier development of the vz.52 nigh-impossible.

After all, interest in the intermediate cartridge was due to the field successes of the Germans, whom were heavily against it from the very beginning and only changed their minds at the field successes of the Mkb42 and MP43. 7.92x33 was created in 1938, but its development predates that significantly; it really was Nazi Germany's messed up system and regime that allowed the project to succeed despite having been shut down and deemed a waste of time. The field results were necessary to prove the concept, but nobody in the top brass wanted to invest in this strange concept.

Finally, you have the change the American lessons of the war. You have to keep in mind that, for example, the Soviets and Americans tried to address the new developments in Assault/Battle Rifles from opposite directions: the Soviets wanted the assault rifle to replace their Sub-machine guns, which they used en-masse during the war, and increase their firepower and range. Thus, the 7.62x39 was the result of their logic; it was, for their doctrine, the perfect balance of firepower, accuracy and range. This turned out to be a good decision as the combat ranges had gotten much shorter.

The Americans, however, wanted to replace and upgrade their rifles. To them, a reduction in accuracy was unacceptable. Thus, a battle rifle was the next logical step, which sacrificed automatic fire 'usability' because of the overpowered cartridge. Arguably, this was a poor decision, but it makes sense for American doctrine of the time.

IMO, the Rifle No.9/EM2, as it was adopted and with improvements (and not trying to make it compete with 7.62x51) was the way to go, and the Czechoslovaks had the right idea as well. Too bad they were both strong-armed by their more powerful alliance leaders.

tl;dr I don't think it would matter. The Americans need to understand the power of the assault rifle, which they didn't unlike the Brits and Soviets. Their doctrine and lessons of the war made different conclusions over what the next service rifle should be. In hindsight, we know it was wrong, but I have no idea what could make the Americans reach a different conclusion.

Edit: .280 British is basically the 7.62x45 in performance and dimension, and OTL the Americans were clearly uninterested.
 

Deleted member 1487

Will come back and reply more later, but there was this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vollmer_M35
The cartridge developed also had several variants including 7.75×40.5 mm, 7.75×39.5mm, and possibly a 7.62mm version as well, and had approximately 55 mm total length. (The actual calibre was apparently 7.9mm, with a bullet 8.05mm in diameter.[5]) Muzzle velocity was about 700 m/s (2,280 feet per second). The boat-tailed bullet weighted 140 grains (9 grams).[6]
Also the 7.92 Kurz also was invented in 1941 according to German Wikipedia, a smaller cartridge started development in 1938 that led to the StG 44 cartridge in 1941.

Perhaps as a POD having the Vollmer adopted might have been the best way forward, ignoring the Czech angle entirely.

Also the US did not face the STG in combat much in WW2, so that lack of experience was it seems a larger reason they did not care about the intermediate cartridge, while the Brits and Russians who did face it more did care about it quite a bit.

Also the British .280 was considerably more powerful than the Czech 762 x 45 due to it being quite a bit fatter for more powder, despite using a heavier bullet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm
 
Inspired by this thread among other things:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-greatest-ever-devised.422822/

During the 1920s-30s the Czech arms industry was surprisingly advanced, producing the world's first significant, reliable semi-automatic service rifle that went on to influence the development of the Garand and StG 44:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZH-29
The locking system of the ZH-29 was awful and prevented anyone from adopting it. It's locking lugs quickly wore out and their placement necessitated the rifle's bizarre barrel that didn't actually run the length of the barrel. It's a good exampling of losing functionality in favour of being on the cutting edge.
 
The locking system of the ZH-29 was awful and prevented anyone from adopting it. It's locking lugs quickly wore out and their placement necessitated the rifle's bizarre barrel that didn't actually run the length of the barrel. It's a good exampling of losing functionality in favour of being on the cutting edge.
It was also pretty expensive.

Will come back and reply more later, but there was this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vollmer_M35

Also the 7.92 Kurz also was invented in 1941 according to German Wikipedia, a smaller cartridge started development in 1938 that led to the StG 44 cartridge in 1941.

Perhaps as a POD having the Vollmer adopted might have been the best way forward, ignoring the Czech angle entirely.

Also the US did not face the STG in combat much in WW2, so that lack of experience was it seems a larger reason they did not care about the intermediate cartridge, while the Brits and Russians who did face it more did care about it quite a bit.

Also the British .280 was considerably more powerful than the Czech 762 x 45 due to it being quite a bit fatter for more powder, despite using a heavier bullet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm

Vollmer: Ain't happening for the same reason the ZH-29 wasn't successful; expensive, and nobody at the top was interested in intermediate cartridges as I explained.

I guess English wiki's wrong about the Kurz.

I also doubt that claim about the US not encountering the StG as much as the British. Definitely not as much as the Soviets, that's undeniable, but I'm fairly certain that they encountered it as much as the British. Especially in the Ardennes. Considering the British learned a similar lesson as the Soviets, I still believe it was Ordnance and top brass unwilling to compromise with their established doctrine and biases.

Considering what you said about both cartridges, thr Americans would be even less interested in the weaker Czech ammo. I doubt they would have adopted a foreign cartridge anyways at the time, considering the .280 debacle.
 

Deleted member 1487

Vollmer: Ain't happening for the same reason the ZH-29 wasn't successful; expensive, and nobody at the top was interested in intermediate cartridges as I explained.
It was a prototype, they were expensive because they were handmade and developed, the production model, like the EM-2, would have been very different and much less expensive. There was actually a fair bit of interest in intermediate German cartridges, they were developed by German army development demand in fact. The StG44 and it's ammo were born of out the development of the self-loading rifle demands after all, they didn't spring ex nihilo out of factories after all.

I guess English wiki's wrong about the Kurz.

I also doubt that claim about the US not encountering the StG as much as the British. Definitely not as much as the Soviets, that's undeniable, but I'm fairly certain that they encountered it as much as the British. Especially in the Ardennes. Considering the British learned a similar lesson as the Soviets, I still believe it was Ordnance and top brass unwilling to compromise with their established doctrine and biases.

Considering what you said about both cartridges, thr Americans would be even less interested in the weaker Czech ammo. I doubt they would have adopted a foreign cartridge anyways at the time, considering the .280 debacle.
From what I've read the British encountered it more than the US, first in Autumn 1944 in the Netherlands and quite a bit of them, while the US really didn't fight against it until the Battle of the Bulge. It certainly helped that the Brits had been looking into a 7mm caliber shift pre-WW1, so the .280 fit into existing interest. In the case of the US it seems what killed the .280 is that the US developed what they considered an intermediate cartridge with the 762 x 51 (down from 63mm long) and in fact did not understand the assault rifle concept either, as late as the early 1950s still calling it a SMG in manuals.

But if the Germans are fielding a majoring intermediate cartridge assault/semi-auto rifle as of 1943-44, they'd see the impact vs. their rifle squads and they certainly wanted to copy the MG42 after WW2 given it's impact.
 

Deleted member 1487

The Czech requirement was using the Mauser 8mm to ensure that the Czech could use German ammo. Unless Germany changes their ammo, this isn't really plausible.
You can upneck a round to add a slightly larger bullet to the x 45mm cartridge. Hence the 6mm x 45mm that uses the base 5.56mm cartridge.
 
You can upneck a round to add a slightly larger bullet to the x 45mm cartridge. Hence the 6mm x 45mm that uses the base 5.56mm cartridge.
If it has not been clear to you, the Czech military is going to look at such an ammo due to the specific military need of having the same ammo as the Germans.

Thus, all this discussion is virtually useless without the Germans changing.
 

Deleted member 1487

If it has not been clear to you, the Czech military is going to look at such an ammo due to the specific military need of having the same ammo as the Germans.

Thus, all this discussion is virtually useless without the Germans changing.
To be clear the Czech plans were to have exactly whatever the Germans had, so wouldn't be the first to change even the length of shells, correct? I misunderstood you then. Which brings us back to the Vollmer Geco round.
 
If the US/NATO were to adopt a 7.62mm x 45:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm_vz._52

Less powerful than a round the US had experience since 1906, the 30 Remington here between 223 and 308
598px-.30_Remington_with_.223_Rem_and_.308_Win.JPG

Basically, it was a rimless Winchester 30-30 made for the Remington Model 8 Rifle in 1906
150 gr (10 g) 721 m/s (2,364 ft/s ) 2,520 J (1,859 ft·lbf )
vs the 7.62x45mm
130 gr (8 g) 760 m/s (2,500 ft/s) 2,455 J (1,811 ft·lbf)
 
Top