Browning Guns are repeatedly stated to be used by the USA. the 1911, BAR and .50 caliber are all stated to be in US use.
TL-191: Featherston's Finest - Uniforms, Weapons, and Vehicles of the CSA and Freedom Party
- Thread starter Alterwright
- Start date
I imagined the Tredegar as a cross between the French MAS-49 and the Enfield Jungle Carbine: it still maintains the 'different ammunition' issue that was commonly stated to be the primary problem with the US using them.
The CSA's Mark 3 "Barrel" and some OC variants i could imagine them developing.
With both of those, you once again run into the controllability issue. The books are quite clear on repeated instances of the weapon being used on full auto, whether from the hip or the shoulder, which really isn't possible with a weapon firing full sized rifle caliber ammo. The Jungle Carbine itself was rapidly phased out because it had even MORE recoil than the regular Lee-Enfield, due to the shorter barrel.
I reckoned ammunition issues would discourage that - the South would need to produce an entirely new, intermediate cartridge and equip an army with it, as well as the guns, so I thought they would just make do with existing rifle cartridges. So basically it's just an assault rifle. I dunno, maybe it's logistically feasible to make a new reduced power cartridge. I mean the South managed to make nuclear bombs, which is quite difficult, despite having less resources available (and also friggin ballistic missiles on top of that), so who knows.
And you can fire battle rifles standing, I think with a lower RoF it would be semi-viable. And it's early days for such a weapon, an intermediate cartridge's benefits might not be fully apparent until later. And it's not unprecedented, NATO used the 7.62 despite the control issues (though this was also why there was a swap to 5.56).
Last edited:
Btw, I can see the Mark 3 having similar problems of what the OTL Panther had, such as the transmission breaking down in rough terrain.
ANd you will find that, in practice, troop did not use such weapons on full auto except when braced and probably in a prone postition.THe only "lower rof" you can really use and be anything like accurate is semi-automatic.
Fair does, still not sure about the ammunition development and production though.
Though the Union will really struggle in infantry combat if it's bolt-action rifles against assault rifles. Obviously a single weapon does not win a war but it depends on what else they had - in OTL, the Garand was a good gun but it didn't shift things decisively in infantry combat, at least against the Wehrmacht, because of other weapons like GPMGs and SMGs. Union has more manpower I guess.
Last edited:
I feel it's worth mentioning that the BAR used full size .30-06 ammunition, and was designed to be fired from hip at full auto (it did have a low RoF, but still) Even when it shifted from, for lack of a better word, 'Assault" rifle into the role of squad LMG it still retained relative controllability when firing on the move, especially when one takes the versions that added pistol grips, larger ammo magazines and compensators to the end of the barrel. that the US didn't adopt/adapt weapons like the Bren or their reverse-engineered MG-42 is a testament to the BAR's functionality, at the very least enough that it wasn't worth it to replace it.
For another, considering the described Tredegar Rifle of GW1 is by all accounts literally a copy of the Enfield SMLE Mk.III, using a Union-sourced gun for inspiration like the M1 Carbine doesn't make much sense, as the CSA's weapon tech and engineering would be sourced from the UK and France, their primary benefactors. Hence, my idea behind the MAS-49.
Here's what I had in mind:
Well, from everything in the books, the CSA's ever-present problem, unlike Germany, wasn't a lack of resources (they'd have had no issues with fuel courtesy of Texas, for example) but a lack of heavy engineering and skilled workers. The CSA is primarily an agrarian society lacking in large amounts of industrial and technical expertise. Certainly, food would not be a problem (until the Union starts capturing farmland) but the ability to build and maintain large amounts of heavy machinery, even with Featherston's reforms, would be lacking severely. Featherston himself knew this, hence why his entire strategy banked on scaring the USA sh*tless with his assault to Lake Erie so they'd make peace.
The BAR was retained throughout WWII for several reasons. Not because it was the best, but because...
1. The US Army had developed nothing better in the interwar period, mainly due to a lack of funding for projects like a squad machinegun.
2. US tactical doctrine was focused on the rifleman, not the machinegun, and remained so even in the face of combat experience that revealed the BAR's limitations as a LMG.
3. The United States military has a long history of being resistant to accepting foreign designed of made equipment when there is a US made equivalent, even if the US made one is inferior. Exceptions such as the 40mm Bofors and 20mm Oerlikon in WWII are very rare. You see an example of this with NATO standardization, when we consistently refuse to standardize more than ammunition. The M14 vs. FAL being an example.
The BAR in particular is able to be used as a shoulder or hip fired weapon because it has enough weight to absorb recoil.20 pounds just isn't a good idea for a standard issue rifle. Thats a hindrance to your average infantryman. Further,i'm not saying use an M1 Carbine. I'm saying "something similar". And Just because its a RL US weapon means nothing. THe books describe Confederates using Colt .45s and Bazookas and M1 105mm Howitzers. Not to mention basically the WWII US uniform.
P.S. The reverse engineered MG 42 (the T24) wasn't rejected because it wasn't worth it or wasn't effective. It was rejected because the company that built it made a pants on head stupid mistake, not redesigning the action for .30-06, failed the testing due to further mistakes, and being that it was 1944, the Army decided it wouldn't ever work out, because hte war was clearly going to be over soon after we got into Europe, right?
Last edited:
Given their alliance with France, the CSA would certainly have to use the Brandt 81mm Mortar design in the SGW under license.
The Taylorcraft TC-39 Liaison Aircraft belonging to the C.S. Army's 2nd Artillery Observation Wing during the Battle of the Monongahela, circa 1942.
The Taylorcraft TC-39 would the Mainstay Liaison Aircraft for the Confederate Armed Forces during the SGW with a total of 3,144 airframes being built. Examples would also serve with the Mexican Air Force and in the post-war period, with the Texan National Air Militia, Haitian Air Corps, and the United States Army.
Was this the same type of aircraft that evacuated General Patton from Pittsburgh in early 1943?
The Taylorcraft TC-39 Liaison Aircraft belonging to the C.S. Army's 2nd Artillery Observation Wing during the Battle of the Monongahela, circa 1942.
The Taylorcraft TC-39 would the Mainstay Liaison Aircraft for the Confederate Armed Forces during the SGW with a total of 3,144 airframes being built. Examples would also serve with the Mexican Air Force and in the post-war period, with the Texan National Air Militia, Haitian Air Corps, and the United States Army.
Was Vought based in Texas? That means all their planes can be Confederate.
Lots of possibilities there.
As I understand, Hughes Aircraft is one of the main CSA Aircraft producers. (based more on Howard Hughes being born in Texas, i reckon, as the IRL Hughes aircraft was based in California)
Vought did have an HQ in Texas, but Chance M. Vought was actually born in New York State, so he'd be for the "Yankees" and so would his company.
Fairchild is another Southern US company, based in San Antonio, Texas, and it was in operation from 1925, so i could see them being mixed up in the "Confederate Citrus company" shenanigans and other such subterfuge.
Of course, if folks want to come up with their own companies (lets be fair, The Author didn't give us much to work with here) we do have such figures as Aviation Pioneer Augustus Herring of Covington, Georgia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus_Moore_Herring (slightly ambiguous as to his actual contributions, but still)
We also have Aviation figures like Admiral Richard Byrd (the Polar explorer) who was from Virginia. His historical position could have him filling a Kesselring-style role of a ground commander despite being an air force officer (Kesselring was the German commander in the Mediterranian theatre: Rommel actually answered to him)
and Long-distance Pilot Douglass Corrigan of Galveston, Texas (he was a mechanic for Charles Lindburgh on The Spirit of St. Louis and made an unsanctioned flight from New York to Ireland) so I could see him Competing with Lindburgh in TL-191 or perhaps being an Adolf Galland-type officer in the air force.
Vought did have an HQ in Texas, but Chance M. Vought was actually born in New York State, so he'd be for the "Yankees" and so would his company.
Fairchild is another Southern US company, based in San Antonio, Texas, and it was in operation from 1925, so i could see them being mixed up in the "Confederate Citrus company" shenanigans and other such subterfuge.
Of course, if folks want to come up with their own companies (lets be fair, The Author didn't give us much to work with here) we do have such figures as Aviation Pioneer Augustus Herring of Covington, Georgia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus_Moore_Herring (slightly ambiguous as to his actual contributions, but still)
We also have Aviation figures like Admiral Richard Byrd (the Polar explorer) who was from Virginia. His historical position could have him filling a Kesselring-style role of a ground commander despite being an air force officer (Kesselring was the German commander in the Mediterranian theatre: Rommel actually answered to him)
and Long-distance Pilot Douglass Corrigan of Galveston, Texas (he was a mechanic for Charles Lindburgh on The Spirit of St. Louis and made an unsanctioned flight from New York to Ireland) so I could see him Competing with Lindburgh in TL-191 or perhaps being an Adolf Galland-type officer in the air force.
Last edited: