WI: No MP44/STG44

It's not a direct copy, but the inspiration is still there in its application. A closer derivative would be the HK G3.
Not that much. IIRC, the development started independently, the internal mechanism is very different. There's not much to present as source of inspiration. It's not as, say, the Type XXI for post-war SSK, sor example.
 
Not that much. IIRC, the development started independently, the internal mechanism is very different. There's not much to present as source of inspiration. It's not as, say, the Type XXI for post-war SSK, sor example.

I'm speaking in more a doctrinal sense. As in a M16 is closer to an AK47 than it is to an M14.
 
And my point is that the AK was not unique in its trial and something identical in function but not inspired by the MP44 would have been adopted. It would then be refined over a decade into something like the AKM and be just as insanely popular. In the west the small arms development largely remains the identical as the same people are still around doing the same things.

No, you can't say something would have automatically been adopted. the AS44 was cancelled because the guy died. without the MP44, you can't say we would have something similar to the AK. The RPD type design and similar weapons could have just been relegated to a Squad Assault Weapons.
 
I'm speaking in more a doctrinal sense. As in a M16 is closer to an AK47 than it is to an M14.

But the americans and soviets came to the same design From different angles doctrinaly though yet ended on the same. The US specifically wanted a lighter and more reliable M14 style rifle and so gave it a 3 round burst to prevent full auto to focus more on long range engagements. The Soviets wanted something more accurate than a submachine gun and doctrine specifically made full auto a major part of doctrine, yet they arrived in roughly the same spot anyway.
 
No, you can't say something would have automatically been adopted. the AS44 was cancelled because the guy died. without the MP44, you can't say we would have something similar to the AK. The RPD type design and similar weapons could have just been relegated to a Squad Assault Weapons.

SKS is already there. The cat is already out of the box and the soviets wanted something better and there wasn't a shortage of competition.
 
The 7.26x39mm round was in development in the Soviet Union since 1943, yes, but that was going to be used in the SKS. The AK 47 was inspired by the STG 44, so the doctrine of infantry combat would still be affected by its absence. Not all things are inevitable. Some designs stay around for long periods of time, even if they should be replaced by something better.
It was supplied to various design bureaus for the development of an automatic rifle to fire the short cartridge, for example Sudayev's AS-44 assault rifle.
 
at44.jpg


This is tokarevs 1945 contribution, Again, does it look similar to anything?

ab46-1.jpg


Bulkins 1946 design
 
But the americans and soviets came to the same design From different angles doctrinaly though yet ended on the same. The US specifically wanted a lighter and more reliable M14 style rifle and so gave it a 3 round burst to prevent full auto to focus more on long range engagements. The Soviets wanted something more accurate than a submachine gun and doctrine specifically made full auto a major part of doctrine, yet they arrived in roughly the same spot anyway.


What are you talking about? The three round burst was a later development. The Vietnam era Stoner M16s were full auto. The M16 was developed in response to encounters with Ak47 armed troops when US soldiers were equipped with M14s.
 
What are you talking about? The three round burst was a later development. The Vietnam era Stoner M16s were full auto. The M16 was developed in response to encounters with Ak47 armed troops when US soldiers were equipped with M14s.

It demonstrates that the US came at the problem from a different mindset than the soviets but still arrived the same spot. the burst thing was a backlash result of the first full auto M-16s due to western thinking in small arms doctrine when it comes to rifles that prevails to this day that basically boils down to: If you are using your rifle in full auto unless he's 5m away from you in a trench you need to clear you are doing it wrong. I myself was infantry and fired my HK-416 precisely once on full auto... By accident... And got yelled at for it... The russians tend to think of the fun switch as a major part of the training, yet they both agree that the basic AR layout is optimal, this suggests that the AR layout is the logical end point for both schools of thought and thus the logical end result for both unless major changes are made in cartridge technology.
 
Last edited:
It demonstrates that the US came at the problem from a different mindset than the soviets but still arrived the same spot. the burst thing was a backlash result of the first full auto M-16s due to western thinking in small arms doctrine when it comes to rifles that prevails to this day that basically boils down to: If you are using your rifle in full auto unless he's 5m away from you in a trench you need to clear you are doing it wrong. I myself was infantry and fired my HK-416 precisely once on full auto... By accident... And got yelled at for it... The russians tend to think of the fun switch as a major part of the training.


That is a much later, and in hindsight development. My point of the original post is what would have happened had the original assault rifles not been developed. If the US hadn't run into AKs in Vientam and known about them earlier, then such a weapon as the M16 most likely would not have been invented.
 
That is a much later, and in hindsight development. My point of the original post is what would have happened had the original assault rifles not been developed.

Yes and we have answered this. The soviets would have adopted one of a number of largely similar prototypes that competed with the AK and that would have been the counterpart to the AK that the US encountered in Vietnam.

Again the AK wasn't special in soviet design thinking at the time. It was simply the one that got picked among a number of rifles that it was competing with.

It would have been similar to the FN FAL being picked over the M14 in the US it wouldn't have changed much in small arms doctrine thinking at the time.
 
Yes and we have answered this. The soviets would have adopted one of a number of largely similar prototypes that competed with the AK and that would have been the counterpart to the AK that the US encountered in Vietnam.

And I already answered you back that it was only a cancelled prototype. We're going in circles here.
 
And I already answered you back that it was only a cancelled prototype. We're going in circles here.

one of 10 similar prototypes that the AK was competing against of which I've linked a few more promising one. The point being that the STG 44 wasn't critical to the soviets adopting an assault rifle. They would have adopted one regardless.

The end result was that they took the best parts of the competing rifles and put it into Kalashnikovs basic AK design and that is what the AK-47 became. They would have done the same for the other rifles had they picked one of them.
 
one of 10 similar prototypes that the AK was competing against of which I've linked a few more promising one. The point being that the STG 44 wasn't critical to the soviets adopting an assault rifle. They would have adopted one regardless.

The end result was that they took the best parts of the competing rifles and put it into Kalashnikovs basic AK design and that is what the AK-47 became. They would have done the same for the other rifles.

No, none of them would have been put into mass production without the STG 44 design, German metal stamping technology and engineers. The initial Soviet assault rifle rested on the STG 44.
 
No, none of them would have been put into mass production without the STG 44 design, German metal stamping technology and engineers. The initial Soviet assault rifle rested on the STG 44.

Sorry, AK didn't become stamped until the AKM in 1959. Before that it was a machined design made by the same people who had machined mosins.
 
Last edited:
No, the first production had stamped receivers until 1949, then they ceased, went to solely milled receivers until 1959. Oh...sorry...

Yeah the initial prototypes were stamped and they never saw proper service because they didn't work. Again, refer back to what I said about a basic design that needs 15 years of work to become the legend. Any of the non-AK variants would have needed the same amount of redesign time to become said legend.

Again, refer back to your comments on prototypes. The AKM has little in common with the original 46 prototype besides the basic action and layout.
 
Yeah the initial prototypes were stamped and they never saw proper service because they didn't work. Again, refer back to what I said about a basic design that needs 15 years of work to become the legend. Any of the non-AK variants would have needed the same amount of redesign time to become the legend.


Which still proves you wrong. Thanks for the insulting "sorry". That's beside the point. No STG=no AK. So what happens to weapons development. Stay on track or be ignored.
 
Which still proves you wrong. Thanks for the insulting "sorry". That's beside the point. No STG=no AK. So what happens to weapons development. Stay on track or be ignored.

We've already said that the AK can be butterflied away. We've also determined that there are several alternatives to the AK that can easily replace it. I've only proven that the Soviet adopting an AR wasn't reliant on german stamping tech. Said tech also did not originate in the MP44 that honor goes to the MG-42 which is still there no? So the soviet still have the stamping technology to adopt into small arms design and be refined into any other design they adopt.

I'm not quite sure what point you are trying to make here anymore?
 
Which still proves you wrong. Thanks for the insulting "sorry". That's beside the point. No STG=no AK. So what happens to weapons development. Stay on track or be ignored.
You seem to have a very peculiar vision of weapon development when the Soviets had independently started multiple versions of prototype assault rifles, were known historically to make better quality weapons than Germany and did not use the Stg internals for the AK. The Soviets would have made an excellent assault rifle, Stg or not. The Stg is far, far less influential than what one would think watching the History channel.
 
Top