If Hitler sped up the development of the STG 44 assault rifle, so it's final version was introduced to the battlefield earlier than 1944, could it have affected the outcome of the Eastern Front? If so, how?
My position is that the Soviets would have quickly developed their own assault rifle, especially if they realized that the STG 44's the Germans were using were beginning to slow entire fronts.
All that would be required to produce their own was to capture an STG 44, either left behind on the field or handed over by a surrendering soldier, and reverse engineer it. Any advantages offered by the STG 44 would be short lived and would require quick exploitation.
If that was the case, then the real question is how would the outcome of the Eastern Front be different if both armies used assault rifles on a large scale?
Another variable to consider is how much earlier would this weapon end up being introduced to the front in this alternative historical timeline?
If it was in 1942 or early 1943, I would guess that the Soviets would have had to fight much harder to regain territory.
I would guess large scale deployment of automatic rifles may have turned the Eastern Front static, on the basis (again) that the Soviets would quickly just captured, replicated and mass deployed then as well. With slowed, static front, perhaps it would have given the Germans more time to develop their other 'wonder weapons' such as the helicopter, more effective ballistic missile systems, or even nuclear weapons, etc. that could have also significantly effected the war's outcome. Again, the allies would have just responded by developing their own similar weapon system.
Brian Ghilliotti
My position is that the Soviets would have quickly developed their own assault rifle, especially if they realized that the STG 44's the Germans were using were beginning to slow entire fronts.
All that would be required to produce their own was to capture an STG 44, either left behind on the field or handed over by a surrendering soldier, and reverse engineer it. Any advantages offered by the STG 44 would be short lived and would require quick exploitation.
If that was the case, then the real question is how would the outcome of the Eastern Front be different if both armies used assault rifles on a large scale?
Another variable to consider is how much earlier would this weapon end up being introduced to the front in this alternative historical timeline?
If it was in 1942 or early 1943, I would guess that the Soviets would have had to fight much harder to regain territory.
I would guess large scale deployment of automatic rifles may have turned the Eastern Front static, on the basis (again) that the Soviets would quickly just captured, replicated and mass deployed then as well. With slowed, static front, perhaps it would have given the Germans more time to develop their other 'wonder weapons' such as the helicopter, more effective ballistic missile systems, or even nuclear weapons, etc. that could have also significantly effected the war's outcome. Again, the allies would have just responded by developing their own similar weapon system.
Brian Ghilliotti
