Improved Japanese small arms

[McPherson]

The Japanese were effective with the Type 89 when they hadn’t lost their well trained men to attrition, not so much after going through the meat grinder. The mark of a great weapon is how effective it‘s in the hands of replacements, not veterans. This is why nobody make weapons without sights today.

As I wrote... it is apparent that the knowledge about Japanese weapons is not well distributed or generally known.

The Type 89 did have an adjustable range set operated by threaded screw. Pick a known landmark distance, and dial it in; literally. The aim method was idiot proofed and designed into the weapon. The aim method was by spirit level. Put the bubble between the lines (at 45 degrees) and BANG. You did not need to TRAIN much to show a Japanese soldier how to use it properly. Two minutes of dry-fire drill and he is ready to go.

McP.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Nothing I have ever read has suggested that the Besal would have been anything other than a successful weapon. As far as everything I've read it wasn't produced because what savings could have been achieved weren't worth the delays in production caused by changing weapons, The Germans faced the same choice when it came to the MG 42 or the MG 34 but they had fewer resources to draw on so the savings were worth it so the changed to the 42..

 

[McPherson]

Have you actually seen or handled the Besal? I have not and until I have been to the RA and done so I would never write in absolute terms on it's qualities. so I would never dismiss it as crappy as that would be arrogant and not an opinion based on known fact!! Nothing in History is Absolute so opinions should not be either.

It was an invasion machine gun. I suspect that the complicated riveted and welded bits (see video for disassembly) which replaced the milled single block would have come apart in use in the production guns. This is not a good result; hence CRAPPY gun.

 

[Rickshaw]

Exactly the same advantages found in the British 2" mortar.

I served with a veteran of the British and Australia campaign in Borneo during the 1960s. He related how it was possible with a skilled 2" mortar operator for them to time their bombs so they all arrived on the target, one after the other in quick succession. While that would require a skilled operator, an ordinary one could achieve similar levels of accuracy without too much trouble or training. In his experience, once you were selected to fire the 2" you stayed on the 2" for most of your career, becoming more and more skilled in it's use.

The Japanese, AIUI had two weapons similar to the 2". One of the knee mortar, the other was a grenade thrower. They were separate weapons and used in different ways. The US had rifle grenades which was sufficient to throw HE at the enemy and I doubt that users became proficient in it's use. From my own limited experience with rifle grenades, it was a matter of hit or miss and I don't I could have become more experienced but they were on their way out as far as the Australian Army was concerned.

 

[Rickshaw]

It was an invasion machine gun. I suspect that the complicated riveted and welded bits (see video for disassembly) which replaced the milled single block would have come apart in use in the production guns. This is not a good result; hence CRAPPY gun.

You will never know because you will never have any exposure to the weapon. I have fired the Bren both in .303in and 7.62mm. This looks similar enough to make it possible to make a comparison. The Bren kept going seemingly forever because it was so well made. Depending on circumstances I'd expect this to perform as well.

 

[Crowbar Six]

I served with a veteran of the British and Australia campaign in Borneo during the 1960s. He related how it was possible with a skilled 2" mortar operator for them to time their bombs so they all arrived on the target, one after the other in quick succession. While that would require a skilled operator, an ordinary one could achieve similar levels of accuracy without too much trouble or training. In his experience, once you were selected to fire the 2" you stayed on the 2" for most of your career, becoming more and more skilled in it's use.

The Japanese, AIUI had two weapons similar to the 2". One of the knee mortar, the other was a grenade thrower. They were separate weapons and used in different ways. The US had rifle grenades which was sufficient to throw HE at the enemy and I doubt that users became proficient in it's use. From my own limited experience with rifle grenades, it was a matter of hit or miss and I don't I could have become more experienced but they were on their way out as far as the Australian Army was concerned.

The US M1 rifle grenade was actually pretty decent and US & Marine infantry used them a lot more than people think. Normally there was one guy in the section who's job was to use rifle grenades for support purposes.

Ian and Carl have tried this so you don't need to.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

So to use the US rifle grenade you have to
1 fit the sight.
2 fit the launcher
3 eject the clip
4 load a blank round
5 load the grenade on the launcher
6 take aim
7 fire

As opposed to a 2" mortar

1 drop to the prone position
2 take aim
3 drop round down the tube
4 fire.

 

[McPherson]

So to use the US rifle grenade you have to
1 fit the sight.
2 fit the launcher
3 eject the clip
4 load a blank round
5 load the grenade on the launcher
6 take aim
7 fire

As opposed to a 2" mortar

1 drop to the prone position
2 take aim
3 drop round down the tube
4 fire.

Just to give equal time.

I love Gun Jesus. He saves me so much time in explaining.

and...

As one can see, the variation in how things are done can be "startling".

McP

 

[yulzari]

I note that the French kept their 50mm/2" mortar round post war and used it as a rifle grenade. Maybe a better Japanese rifle grenade then?

 

[marathag]

This is why nobody make weapons without sights today.

Replaced by the M203 40mm, that did have a quadrant sight, but most used the simple leaf

But as shown, range estimation and accounting for wind drift is up to the operator, not the sight. Without all three, rounds are not on target

I knew a Marine, now since passed, was a mortarman in the Pacific.

He said that unless you were dropping rounds on target within three tries, and failed, they would hand you a rifle and would be a rifleman again

 

[marathag]

So to use the US rifle grenade you have to
1 fit the sight.
2 fit the launcher
3 eject the clip
4 load a blank round
5 load the grenade on the launcher
6 take aim
7 fire

As opposed to a 2" mortar

1 drop to the prone position
2 take aim
3 drop round down the tube
4 fire.

And when not needing to shoot grenades, pops a clip back into the weapon and has a rifle again.
You do not need to remove the launcher if expecting to use it shortly, and don't mind a single shot rifle, the launcher blocks the gas port, and grenade sight stay on the side,

but most guys would shoot with the butt in the dirt, and would not use that sight anyway

 

[marathag]

Don't want all that all the extra bits to keep track of,
Build them onto the rifle, like with this Yugo M59 SKS

Flip up sight, turn knob to shut off gas, fix grenade and load blank

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Just to give equal time.

I love Gun Jesus. He saves me so much time in explaining.

and...

As one can see, the variation in how things are done can be "startling".

McP

Someday, maybe German engineers will learn the principle of "Keep It Simple Stupid".

 

[M79]

Prewar: adopt the Japanese-reworked Pedersen rifle after the torture testing it endured circa 1936. Perhaps adopt or at least evaluate a C96/Colt 1911(/Hi-Power?) or clone from the plethora involved in China during their warlord period as 'inspiration' for something homegrown. Require all officers who own foreign pistols to register them as such and perhaps base trials off of the registry. Standardize all ammunition for one rifle and one pistol.

Early war: Clone the M3 and M1 carbine as soon as each is found. Simplify manufacture to one rifle and one pistol shortly after war is declared, ammunition for the others still gets made but in lower quantity/priority.

 

[marathag]

Early war: Clone the M3 and M1 carbine as soon as each is found

It's hard to go wrong with the 1910 Winchester SelfLoader, doesn't have to be in in .401, either. As big as you can get with blowback. 2647 Joules of Muzzle Energy,
and away from Metric, 250 gr bullet at 1950 fps, and 39,000PSI operating pressure

Bigger bullet at better than twice the velocity of the 45ACP M3(and 3x the ME), and twice the ME of the 30 Carbine while having the same velocity and operating pressure
One gun, takes the place of two, once you make larger magazines and select fire ability.

Changing from a rimmed to rimless would be an advantage,

Cut the case length down, and you have a close version of 10mm/40S&W for handguns, so the Officers don't feel left out. Or use the original cartridge, and issue a 4 pound Desert Eagle sized lump of steel.

But really pistols don't matter for combat potential, but rather than for inferred status, so might as well Gold Plate them while at it.

 

[Raferty]

The biggest thing that Japan needs is lower production costs. They just didn't produce nearly enough of what they needed to, and late in the war, the quality of their equipment became a real problem.

Weapon design, while not the best, really wasn't a dehabilitating issue. We also have to remember that what worked for the Pacific theatre (versatile, lighter weapons that were durable and suitable for attritional combat) was not the same as what the China theatre demanded, where combat tended to be in more set piece and combined arms battles where efficient force deployment and violence of action tended to win the day.

A mass produced SMG akin to the British Sten Gun would be I think something worth doing for them. The one they had in OTL was way too demanding in terms of spare parts and raw materials. That, and maybe slimming down the Arisaka by a couple of cm. Also, finding more common calibre's is a must. The move to the 7.7mm was bizarre

There were some very good things that Japan did. The mass production of small mortars for example (the knee mortar) outfitted their frontline troops with more firepower than their logistical capabilities would suggest. The Type 99 LMG was an effective weapon for both offensive and defensive purposes (although why they insisted on a bayonet lug baffles me).

Japanese infantry performance was far more a matter of doctrine than anything else. They made very good use of infiltration and columnar tactics, but struggled mightily to defend a static line. Their combined arms tactics tended to work well in China but get picked apart by Western does. Their artillery doctrine on the other hand was far more effective in defense than in attack. We can separate out the massive charge and later, cave defense strategies used in desperate island defenses. Those were battles already lost, and had little real impact on Japan's warmaking abilities.

 

[Richard V]

As I wrote... it is apparent that the knowledge about Japanese weapons is not well distributed or generally known.

The Type 89 did have an adjustable range set operated by threaded screw. Pick a known landmark distance, and dial it in; literally. The aim method was idiot proofed and designed into the weapon. The aim method was by spirit level. Put the bubble between the lines (at 45 degrees) and BANG. You did not need to TRAIN much to show a Japanese soldier how to use it properly. Two minutes of dry-fire drill and he is ready to go.

McP.

As you can see, it has no real sights. The operator has to hold the weapon perfectly still while pulling the firing lever. Between each shot he has to re-aim because he has no bipod. This is a weapon for a skilled user. The mortar men are part of the infantry platoon. When he’s not using the mortar he’s fighting as a rifleman with a bayonet. It might be impressive for the recipient getting shelled, but for a commander that need to train replacements it’s not ideal.

 

[McPherson]

Someday, maybe German engineers will learn the principle of "Keep It Simple Stupid".

The problem, I have noted from the history is that German engineers often solve the problem in the lab or office and often quite cleverly on paper or at the bench; but do not have to get out in the field to MAKE and USE the damn things. In the naval context, I refer you to their recent U-boat efforts. NTG from published end-user reports.

The Americans seem to have been infected with the same problem at various times. (Goat Island, torpedoes, naval bureaucrats.) and Murphy, the American army from the 1950s forward.

 

[McPherson]

As you can see, it has no real sights. The operator has to hold the weapon perfectly still while pulling the firing lever. Between each shot he has to re-aim because he has no bipod. This is a weapon for a skilled user. The mortar men are part of the infantry platoon. When he’s not using the mortar he’s fighting as a rifleman with a bayonet. It might be impressive for the recipient getting shelled, but for a commander that need to train replacements it’s not ideal.

Missed the point. American rifle grenade launcher, German grenate-werfer, French 50 mm grenade launcher... all used the spirit level and adjustable gas pressure set systems profile to reach the desired range. The Joe Infantry using the device does not AIM. He sets the weapon to an generated angle of 45 or 30 degrees on the spirit level and the weapon is pre-built to deliver an area effect explosive to the range desired based on a bleed valve adjustment that was figured out in ballistic tests to generate a RANGE TABLE. The weapons illustrated use a universal angle solution and a unity cartridge or round. The only thing that changes in each is the goddamn gas pressure used to launch the unity cartridge and that is a distance estimate a human being makes that if you are a rifleman you can get quite good at, just by shooting iron sights and with experience at seeing animals/human beings at a distance.

Common user skills. Not specialist and nothing esoteric. As I wrote, anybody can do it. The Germans overthink it, the French may be a bit too clever, themselves, and the Americans could have pres-designed the M-1 better (See Yugo rifle above.), but the Japanese and British seem to have figured out KISS means preset single ANGLE SOLUTION and spirit level with adjustment of throw pressure are all that is required to build a working man portable mortar. That and a family of grenades with all the basic same shape and mass.

 

[Richard V]

Missed the point. American rifle grenade launcher, German grenate-werfer, French 50 mm grenade launcher... all used the spirit level and adjustable gas pressure set systems profile to reach the desired range. The Joe Infantry using the device does not AIM. He sets the weapon to an generated angle of 45 or 30 degrees on the spirit level and the weapon is pre-built to deliver an area effect explosive to the range desired based on a bleed valve adjustment that was figured out in ballistic tests to generate a RANGE TABLE. The weapons illustrated use a universal angle solution and a unity cartridge or round. The only thing that changes in each is the goddamn gas pressure used to launch the unity cartridge and that is a distance estimate a human being makes that if you are a rifleman you can get quite good at, just by shooting iron sights and with experience at seeing animals/human beings at a distance.

Common user skills. Not specialist and nothing esoteric. As I wrote, anybody can do it. The Germans overthink it, the French may be a bit too clever, themselves, and the Americans could have pres-designed the M-1 better (See Yugo rifle above.), but the Japanese and British seem to have figured out KISS means preset single ANGLE SOLUTION and spirit level with adjustment of throw pressure are all that is required to build a working man portable mortar. That and a family of grenades with all the basic same shape and mass.

You do realize the mortar man has to hold the thing on target while he simultaneously check the bubble level, line up the grove used for a sight, use another hand to fire, and then adjust for the miss and re-aim for each following shot? Compare that to the French mortar. It takes no more time to aim. Once you’re on target just drop several more bombs down the muzzle.