WW2 Brit army AHC/WI: carbine and/or semi-auto and/or full auto

More firepower for the Tommies in ww2.
What of these proposals should work best? Least risky? Something historical or your own? Who to design it and when? Cartridges (feel free to introduce a new one to the inventory, even if it is non-historic). Ratio of issue?
 
As the main job of the Tommy was to carry ammo and spare barrels for the BREN gun (or bombs for the Mortar and later the PIAT) it doesnt really matter about rifles except for self protection and protection of the section weapon the official issue of personal ammo was only 50 rounds (more could be issued if needed). The BREN was originally issued at a rate of 1 per Platoon but by late 1944 it was often up to 1 per section and assault troops like Glider/Para or Commandos it was even higher. You want to kill lots of bad guys then its BREN guns lots and lots of BREN Guns. In 1936 production lines for BRENs should have been set up in Canada, S Africa, Australia and Scotland or N Ireland well away from bombing.

What the Tommy in 1940 would have found useful was a reliable sturdy sub machine gun I would propose the Beretta Modelo 38 or Danuvia 39M in 9x 25mm Mauser. If we are going to have a fantasy cartridge how about the 7mm short rounds that BSA was testing around the late 1920s. A Danuvia 39M in 7 x 33mm please.
 
Properly adopt the Farquar-Hill in 1918. It supplements and eventually replaces the Lee-Enfield in the inter-war period. This pages the way for a better semi-auto rifle in the early 1930s, quite possibly chambered for a rimless cartridge. With less emphasis on the LMG the UK clones the GPMG concept.
 
The RFC in 1916 had a few Winchester 1907s issued to to observers.

Have an incident of a crashed observer fighting his way thru NoMansLand with his trusty carbine, in an exploit that would make the later fictional Captain Biggles turn green with envy.

The Weapon gets popular after that, and the British order more, and in the full auto version the French had.

It's in limited use by time of the Armistice for ground forces, but was found to have been very effective by the Royal Marines when they stormed the Zeebrugge Mole in 1918.

The Winchester was no great design of a weapon, so postwar is reworked to be like a rather large Luger or Maxim toggle action, to avoid the heavy bolt needed for its blowback operation.

So by 1939, each squad had one or two of the BSA made submachine guns.
 

Deleted member 1487

Properly adopt the Farquar-Hill in 1918. It supplements and eventually replaces the Lee-Enfield in the inter-war period. This pages the way for a better semi-auto rifle in the early 1930s, quite possibly chambered for a rimless cartridge. With less emphasis on the LMG the UK clones the GPMG concept.
The Brits also started making Japanese 6.5mm Arisaka bullets during the war...so something like that for a lightened F-H rifle/MG system would be nice.
http://quarryhs.co.uk/256brit.htm

https://modernfirearms.net/en/machineguns/great-britain-machineguns/beardmore-farquhar-eng/

Plus it comes with Gun Jesus!
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/beardmore-farquhar-photos/
idthegun.jpg
 
Properly adopt the Farquar-Hill in 1918. It supplements and eventually replaces the Lee-Enfield in the inter-war period. This pages the way for a better semi-auto rifle in the early 1930s, quite possibly chambered for a rimless cartridge. With less emphasis on the LMG the UK clones the GPMG concept.

The Farqhar-Hill is a bit big and heavy for Infantry, it was closer to the BAR than an Infantry rifle. I can see it supplementing the Lee-Enfield maybe replacing the Lewis Gun.
 

Deleted member 1487

The Farqhar-Hill is a bit big and heavy for Infantry, it was closer to the BAR than an Infantry rifle. I can see it supplementing the Lee-Enfield maybe replacing the Lewis Gun.
The 1918 version that was still relatively underdeveloped was. If adopted in 1918 and continually improved it would have been considerably lighter.
 
British Army adopts the Vickers Pederson rifle the Bergman MP28 SMG and the FN Browning Hi Power pistol. Nothing needs inventing or developing, just a willingness to spend the money. Also adopts the Besa as a GPMG in the original 7.92 mm.
 
Last edited:
The 1918 version that was still relatively underdeveloped was. If adopted in 1918 and continually improved it would have been considerably lighter.

The operating system on the F-H from the gas block to the bolt was quite complicated maybe if the springs and catches had been replaced with a simple short stroke gas piston and operating rod weight and length could have been cut. As far as I understand it the gun from the breech backwards was simple light and very up to date for 1918. Its just from the breech forwards it looks like trying to run two lifts in one liftshaft.
 
British Army adopts the Vickers Pederson rifle the Bergman MP28 SMG and the FN Browning Hi Power pistol. Nothing needs inventing or developing, just a willingness to spend the money.

I would love to be able to handle and shoot a Pederson but toggle locks and minute tolerances in the desert. It might have worked but I can imagine the small arms people in the British Army would have had the screaming heebie jeebies at the thought of it.
 
I would love to be able to handle and shoot a Pederson but toggle locks and minute tolerances in the desert. It might have worked but I can imagine the small arms people in the British Army would have had the screaming heebie jeebies at the thought of it.

Anyone who opened up a Vickers or Maxim Machine Gun would have seen a toggle lock, and they were still reliable in desert, and everywhere else
 
Or the British Army could have liked the White .276 Piston rifle when they tested it in the early thirties. Convert it over to a simpler stripper clip feed and later models to a removable box magazine later and they'd be well ahead of the game.

 
Not to mention it required a lubricated cartridge, which when heated (say in a hot chamber), could potentially get sticky enough to attract/capture dirt and sand.
Other Toggle locks could work in bad conditions
The US War department were critical of the Pederson
the concerns expressed by the Semiautomatic Rifle Board regarding the vulnerability of the operating mechanism to sand and mud when held open were very real.
 
Other Toggle locks could work in bad conditions


I have no knowledge of the Pederson apart from what I have read. The US War department were the only ones to test the rifle properly and they rejected it even though the Pederson was the favourite.

Did the Semi Automatic Rifle Board choose the wrong rifle. Well everyone knows the M1 was a heap of junk that nearly lost the war.....Oh no sorry I meant arguably the best rifle of the 20th century.
 
I don't know much about ballistics etc, but I've got to ask. What is it with this boards obcession with

1 - Rimless cartriges
2 - The 7mm round
 
I honestly don’t see anything wrong with WWII British small arms. The Sten was mediocre, but not bad. I would have it use a double feed magazine like the ZK-383 instead of the MP-28 mag. Research could be put into a duplex cartridge for the 303. The Bren gun would be spitting out twice the number of bullets with no change in weapons.

The biggest problem with British and Commonwealth infantry was the pathetic allotment of mortars. Germans had 6 8cm mortars at battalion. Americans had 4 81mm mortars at battalion plus 9 60mm divided among the 3 rifle companies. Soviets had 9 82mm mortars at battalion, plus 120mm at regiment level. The British had 2 3-inch mortars at battalion, that’s it. The 3-inch also had the worst range of all WWII medium mortars.
 
The biggest problem with British and Commonwealth infantry was the pathetic allotment of mortars. Germans had 6 8cm mortars at battalion. Americans had 4 81mm mortars at battalion plus 9 60mm divided among the 3 rifle companies. Soviets had 9 82mm mortars at battalion, plus 120mm at regiment level. The British had 2 3-inch mortars at battalion, that’s it. The 3-inch also had the worst range of all WWII medium mortars.

As far as I can tell British mortars were manned by a separate support company and were not part of a normal Infantry battalion. I think it was the Cheshire regiment that manned most of the 3 inch mortars in Europe from DDay.

The mk1 3 inch mortars when issued had a range of only 1600 yards but the MK2 onwards had a range roughly equivalent to contemporary mortars. In the desert when they ran out of ammo they used Italian and German ammo and nobody noticed much difference in range. Ironically the later German mortars had a similar range to the mk1 3 inch mortars they used the 12cm mortars for long range work.

When I was a spotty young Territorial squaddie the 3inch was still in use and we could fire 81mm ammo in an emergency but we weren't allowed the long range charges which would probably have blown the tube out like a balloon.
 
Top