marathag
Banned
155mm shell buried nose up with a different trigger screwed in place of the regular time delay fuzeLand mines are your friend!
dual use device
155mm shell buried nose up with a different trigger screwed in place of the regular time delay fuzeLand mines are your friend!
I was thinking about the desert in 1941/42.It is France 1940 and there are a lot more Germans than you on ground where any field expedient fortification is going to need all the help it can get. Think like an American civil war Union soldier with Robert E. Lee breathing down your neck. Land mines are your friend!
I was thinking about the desert in 1941/42.
In 1940 the BEF was a sideshow, and too unware of enemy intentions to put mines in the right place until it was too late.
Might have laid some useful minefields in Belgium, but that was not where they would need them most.
If there had been airdroped AT mines at the time, those would have been handy to lay on Guderian's path.
155mm shell buried nose up with a different trigger screwed in place of the regular time delay fuze
dual use device
Battle of France moved too fast for the Allied high command that had to play a loosing game of catch up. Most of the time they were too far behind to be able to lay minefields in useful areas at a useful time. A few Wellingtons droping minefields in Guderian's path would haverequired the tech to have been developed in the 1930s, and would cause massive problems in terms of keeping refuges away from them.France or desert, the situation is the same pre-war.
1. Got to have them.
2. Got to play with them.
3. In order to know how to use them.
That goes for aerial mines, too. See my last comments on the sad and rather horrible implications of this kind of warfare.
Japan and Italy tried changing their major rifle caliber.
However, history shows that nations can add calibers.
GB added 7.92 to .303”, 9x19mm & .45 to .38.
US added .30 carbine! (Millions of carbines!)
Germany added 7.92x33mm
All kept the main rifle caliber.
Post war the same.
They converted most to 9mm IIRC.I would also add that Germany used about 1 million captured Machine guns and many millions of captured rifles and were very fond of the Russian PPSH
Re shotguns... Given likely ww2 era shotgun and ammo technology I would probably be inclined to issue simple blow back operated SMG's before issuing shotguns to rear echelon troops.It is interesting. For Americans, pistols are a major weapon. Every other army go, "meh! A status symbol for officers!" and then basically ignores them. Pistols? I can hit the broadside of a barn on a good day. With an SMG I can make sure I hit and make sure all parts of it are perforated. If given a choice, an SMG is a adequate weapon. For rear-echelon troops, I'd give them sawn off shotguns. They aren't interested in spending hours on the range, brushing up their marksmanship, they just want a weapon that can function in an emergency and hurt someone.
The US War Department accepted delivery of about 1 million Lee-Enfield rifles during WWII. These were then sent to Britain via L-L, so technically remained the property of the US government unless they were later purchased outright by another military user, in which case that marking would have been defaced. Your rifle probably got sent straight to a surplus or scrap dealer after it was "returned" to US government custody.I have a deactivated Savage made No4 - with the blatant lie "Property of the US government" written on the side
155mm shell buried nose up with a different trigger screwed in place of the regular time delay fuze
dual use device
Re shotguns... Given likely ww2 era shotgun and ammo technology I would probably be inclined to issue simple blow back operated SMG's before issuing shotguns to rear echelon troops.
They had artillery and mortar deliverable propaganda leaflets and aircraft dropped bomb submunitions including delayed fuze...the trick is making the submunitions capable of handling the G-forces of artillery shells. Mortars are probably a better option, 120mm and above mortars have enough room and much less G-forces compared to artillery.With 1930's tech could you create artillery (and aircraft) deliverable AT/Anti personnel landmines?
They had artillery and mortar deliverable propaganda leaflets and aircraft dropped bomb submunitions including delayed fuze...the trick is making the submunitions capable of handling the G-forces of artillery shells. Mortars are probably a better option, 120mm and above mortars have enough room and much less G-forces compared to artillery.
The problem is getting such mortars pre-war. Maybe France can license their Brandt design? The British via Canada 120mm program late in WW2 didn't pan out.
Nah:Seems like you'd need a pretty big mortar to make it worth it in terms of being able to deliver enough landmines. Something like that Soltam 160mm design or those Soviet 240mm breech loading models.
The US had what we would now call Cluster Bombs, with the E6R2 'Cluster Adapter' for deploying 38 incendiary or chemical bomblets, with the same general size and weight as the 500 pound GP bomb, and would open around 2000 feet to deploy, and the M15 Cluster Adapter in 100 pound size format, a clamshell that hold 24 4 pound frag bombs. This used a time fuze after release(3-5000) feet, and would scatter thise 24 bomblets over a 300x200 foot area.With 1930's tech could you create artillery (and aircraft) deliverable AT/Anti personnel landmines?
I am inclined to believe that air delivery was viable with WW2 technology. I am less inclined to believe that WW2 technology could produce effective air delivered anti tank land mines that would work reasonably well, be difficult for the enemy to clear, and not create a massive EOD / UXB headache later on..The US had what we would now call Cluster Bombs, with the E6R2 'Cluster Adapter' for deploying 38 incendiary or chemical bomblets, with the same general size and weight as the 500 pound GP bomb, and would open around 2000 feet to deploy, and the M15 Cluster Adapter in 100 pound size format, a clamshell that hold 24 4 pound frag bombs. This used a time fuze after release(3-5000) feet, and would scatter thise 24 bomblets over a 300x200 foot area.
More of these casing would follow, heavily used in the Pacific.
The secret is in the name. Either Bren Gun Carrier or Universal Carrier. It is not a vehicle to fight from but one to deliver and supply the fighting companies. Normally the weapons are dismounted for use. The Bren in the front was to react to ambush so the Carrier could drive away. The use of Vickers GCOs on jeeps etc. later in the war were for exactly the same purpose. Yes the SAS etc. in the Mediterranean used them as taken off aeroplanes but in NW Europe they were the ground use version with butt and bipod for dismounted use and stored on a pintle mount on the vehicle to put the enemy's heads down while the light vehicle runs away. Doctrine was VERY clear that the Carrier was NOT to be used as an offensive armoured vehicle.I would have been tempted to take the Lewis Gun out of storage earlier than OTL. The Bren Gun Carrier would have been better with the Lewis Gun. Then they would have LMG, MMG, & HMG - i.e. in terms of weight and portability rather than calibre.
Anything with armor and tracks will be treated as a tankette, whether it's a Carrier or a Tankette.The secret is in the name. Either Bren Gun Carrier or Universal Carrier. It is not a vehicle to fight from but one to deliver and supply the fighting companies. Normally the weapons are dismounted for use. The Bren in the front was to react to ambush so the Carrier could drive away.
For a little more weight and a little less effective range you could use TNTRequires plastique explosive to make it work. That wasn't invented until after WWI.