Alright gents what your favorite WW2 equipment? Will start off with Aircraft first.
Classes.
1. Fighter- Yak-1b
2. Fighter Bomber- Mosquito
3. Dive Bomber- Pe-2
4. Ground Attack- IL-2 Sturmovik
5. Med Bomber- B-25
6. Heavy Bomber- B-17
1. Fighter- Fw190
2. Fighter Bomber- Hurricane
3. Dive Bomber- Ju87
4. Ground Attack- A-26
5. Medium Bomber- Ju-88
6. Heavy Bomber- B-17
Aircraft?
Spitfire
wildcat
dauntless
Me109
Me262
Ju88
P-61 black widow.
Uncatorgized because I'm a rebel.
1 - Supermarine Spitfire
2 - DeHavilland Mosquito
3 - None, so I will replace it with a torpedo Bomber, the Fairey Swordfish.
4 - Hawker Tempest
5 - Martin B-26 Marauder
6 - Avro Lancaster
1. Fighter- P-51
2. Fighter Bomber- Mosquito
3. Dive Bomber- Avenger
4. Ground Attack- IL-2
5. Medium Bomber- B-25
6. Heavy Bomber- B-17
Quote from: Neil on April 22, 2013, 12:12:23 PM
1 - Supermarine Spitfire
2 - DeHavilland Mosquito
3 - None, so I will replace it with a torpedo Bomber, the Fairey Swordfish.
4 - Hawker Tempest
5 - Boeing B-26 Marauder
6 - Avro Lancaster
Amazing that plane stayed in service until '45
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 12:15:25 PM
Quote from: Neil on April 22, 2013, 12:12:23 PM
1 - Supermarine Spitfire
2 - DeHavilland Mosquito
3 - None, so I will replace it with a torpedo Bomber, the Fairey Swordfish.
4 - Hawker Tempest
5 - Boeing B-26 Marauder
6 - Avro Lancaster
Amazing that plane stayed in service until '45
Well, it was versatile. It also helped that the Fleet Air Arm didn't have to tangle with the Japanese for the most part. And even then, the RN started replacing them with Avengers the first chance they got, at least for torpedo work. They still made alright recon and subhunting craft though, at least by RN standards.
Anything with a swastika.
No love for the Brewster Buffalo? :(
Quote from: Caliga on April 22, 2013, 12:42:07 PM
No love for the Brewster Buffalo? :(
Are you really this clever, Cal?
:hmm: Yes?
Classes.
1. Fighter- P-40e
2. Fighter Bomber- P-47
3. Dive Bomber- TBF
4. Ground Attack- A-20 Havoc
5. Med Bomber- HE-111
6. Heavy Bomber- B-17
My faves:
1. Fighter- Tie: F4U Corsair & F6F Hellkitteh :wub:
2. Fighter Bomber- Panzer-poppin' P-47 Thunderbolt
3. Dive Bomber- SBD Dauntless
4. Ground Attack- Junkers Ju-87 Stuka, complete with 22" rims and jericho trumpets
5. Med Bomber- Plenty of options here, but I'm going to go with the Tu-2, mainly for its overall multirole versatility
6. Heavy Bomber- There's only one: B-17
Honorable mention for prettiest, period: Focke-Wulf FW 200 Condor and the PBY Catalina.
Quote from: Caliga on April 22, 2013, 12:48:14 PM
:hmm: Yes?
Brewster Buffalos had swastikas in Finnish Service. I think that's what he talking about.
I'm not good with planes.
1. Fighter- P-47
2. Fighter Bomber- Mosquito
3. Dive Bomber- Dauntless
4. Ground Attack- Henschel 129
5. Med Bomber- B-25
6. Heavy Bomber- B-24 (always a bridesmaid)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 22, 2013, 12:51:17 PM
My faves:
1. Fighter- Tie:
Tie fighters were not used in WWII
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 12:52:27 PM
Brewster Buffalos had swastikas in Finnish Service. I think that's what he talking about.
I'm not good with planes.
Brewster Aeronautical used to have a factory like a mile from where I grew up. I don't think the Buffalo was made there... I think they manufactured another failed design there (a light bomber IIRC).
My favourite WWII plane was any RCAF plane that my grandfather flew in (he was a wireless operator).
Small arms is next category
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachines Gun- PPSh
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- BAR
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- Ma Deuce
Quote from: Barrister on April 22, 2013, 01:40:35 PM
My favourite WWII plane was any RCAF plane that my grandfather flew in (he was a wireless operator).
My grandfather did the same for the USAAF. :hug:
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachine Gun- MP40 (PPSh-41 close second)
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- Bren
5. Med MG- MG42
6. Heavy MG- MG42
7. Sniper rifle- K98k
1. Fighter: P-40
2. Fighter Bomber: P-47
3. Dive Bomber: Ju-87
4. Ground Attack: Hs-123
5. Med Bomber: Wellington
6. Heavy Bomber- B-17
On planes I'm partial to the P-39, as an example of how even a flawed design can be used to effect by employing it to maximize its strengths and minimize its weaknesses.
Also the Corsair, for versatility and sheer longevity.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 12:52:27 PM
Quote from: Caliga on April 22, 2013, 12:48:14 PM
:hmm: Yes?
Brewster Buffalos had swastikas in Finnish Service. I think that's what he talking about.
I'm not good with planes.
:yes:
Sure you are.
Warships
1. Patrol Boats- US PT Boats
2. Frigate-??
3- Destroyers-??
4- Cruiser- Gneisenau
5- Battleships- Any Iowa Class
6- Aircraft Carrier- USS Enterprise
7. Subs- ??
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 01:58:42 PM
Small arms is next category
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachines Gun- PPSh
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- BAR
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- Ma Deuce
I don't think BAR was a light machine gun. It was sometimes used as one, but it never really worked well. The best light machine gun was Type 99 in Japanese service. You could put a bayonet on it!
Hood
Vittorio Veneto
Prinz Eugen
Nagato
Richelieu
KGV
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:01:44 PM
I don't think BAR was a light machine gun. It was sometimes used as one, but it never really worked well.
I agree up to a point. It was the first squad automatic weapon, and doesn't fit your traditional definition of a machinegun. But it was pretty effective in many situations. It was reliable & dead-accurate-- you could put all 20 rounds from a magazine into a small target. And being .30-06 rounds they penetrated well. It had its limitations (small magazine size & non-changeable barrel) but it was a very valuable squad weapon for its time.
According to vets, having a BAR in your squad and hearing it firing was a morale-booster, so there's that.
1. Patrol Boats: US PT Boats
2. Frigate: US Cannon class
3- Destroyers: US Fletcher class
4- Cruiser: USS Pensacola
5- Battleship: USS West Virginia
6- Aircraft Carrier: HMS Eagle
7. Sub: Surcouf
Eh, it wasn't first squad automatic weapon. It was made in 1918. There were several weapons before. Some of them better. The US didn't adopt the excellent Lewis gun because head of the ordinance board didn't like the inventor. There was a Danish gun, the Madsen, but it was too complicated mechanically. The French had a Chauchat but it had the disadvantage of not actually working. The BAR was a strange weapon. To heavy to be a rifle, it fired to slow and and had to small a magazine to be a good SAW or light machine gun. Soldiers liked it because they didn't have anything else. Clearly the army was dissatisfied with it, (they had some strange notions on how it was to be used, soldier were to hip fire it while walking toward the enemy), and late in the war the army tried to convert the 1919 Machine guns into SAWs.
c1. Pistol- Luger
2. Submachines Gun - Thompson-
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- MG34/42
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- M2
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:08:32 PM
According to vets, having a BAR in your squad and hearing it firing was a morale-booster, so there's that.
But also according to Vets, hearing the German MG34/42 open up was incredibly demoralizing. And the US Army had no answer for it, and the Germans used them as squad level weapons - sometimes 2 per squad in fact.
Hell, the Germans pretty much built the squad around the MG34/42 LMG.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 01:58:42 PM
Small arms is next category
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachines Gun- PPSh
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- BAR
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- Ma Deuce
I don't think BAR was a light machine gun. It was sometimes used as one, but it never really worked well. The best light machine gun was Type 99 in Japanese service. You could put a bayonet on it!
We are not talking the best. FAVORITE. Read the original post.
Also we are forgetting some categories like light mortars and anti-tank rockets and grenades. I suppose there is also anti-tank rifles, but there is no best since none of them were very useful. The US 60mm mortar was a huge advantage and nobody had anything close to it.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 01:58:42 PM
Small arms is next category
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachines Gun- PPSh
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- BAR
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- Ma Deuce
I don't think BAR was a light machine gun. It was sometimes used as one, but it never really worked well. The best light machine gun was Type 99 in Japanese service. You could put a bayonet on it!
We are not talking the best. FAVORITE. Read the original post.
My favorite is best. :sleep:
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2013, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:08:32 PM
According to vets, having a BAR in your squad and hearing it firing was a morale-booster, so there's that.
But also according to Vets, hearing the German MG34/42 open up was incredibly demoralizing. And the US Army had no answer for it, and the Germans used them as squad level weapons - sometimes 2 per squad in fact.
True.
QuoteHell, the Germans pretty much built the squad around the MG34/42 LMG.
They had to, at least against the US. K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
That small arms list ought to have a category appropriate to the StG 44. Best next-generation weapon? I guess it would only be competing with the SKS.
Also I think infantry anti-tank weapons deserve mention.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:30:45 PM
Also we are forgetting some categories like light mortars and anti-tank rockets and grenades. I suppose there is also anti-tank rifles, but there is no best since none of them were very useful. The US 60mm mortar was a huge advantage and nobody had anything close to it.
Small arms you git. Again read the post.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 02:55:46 PM
Warships
1. Patrol Boats- US PT Boats
2. Frigate-??
3- Destroyers-??
4- Cruiser- Gneisenau
5- Battleships- Any Iowa Class
6- Aircraft Carrier- USS Enterprise
7. Subs- ??
1 - E-boats
2 - Flower-class corvette
3 - Sumner-class
4 - HMS Norfolk
5 - HMS Warspite
6 - HMS Ark Royal
7 - Pure evil.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2013, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:08:32 PM
According to vets, having a BAR in your squad and hearing it firing was a morale-booster, so there's that.
But also according to Vets, hearing the German MG34/42 open up was incredibly demoralizing. And the US Army had no answer for it, and the Germans used them as squad level weapons - sometimes 2 per squad in fact.
True.
QuoteHell, the Germans pretty much built the squad around the MG34/42 LMG.
They had to, at least against the US. K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
True - the Garand was an excellent weapon.
It frustrates me that the US infacntry in WW2 did not have the Garand AND an excellent LMG. No reason they could not have, other than obtuseness.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:40:31 PM
Also I think infantry anti-tank weapons deserve mention.
That is easy. The Germans had the best by far.
The Panzerfaust as a disposable, 1 man weapon that made every enemy tank around terrified, and the Pazerschreck as the best crew served infantry AT weapon.
Both could destroy just about any target they were likely to come up against, and could be used against hardened positions as well (although with the PF you ahd to get pretty close).
The bazooka, while simple, effective, and a great weapon, simply could not reliably take out German armor.
On the other hand, bazooka was a better name.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 03:41:54 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:30:45 PM
Also we are forgetting some categories like light mortars and anti-tank rockets and grenades. I suppose there is also anti-tank rifles, but there is no best since none of them were very useful. The US 60mm mortar was a huge advantage and nobody had anything close to it.
Small arms you git. Again read the post.
You included heavy machine guns like the .50 which was anti-tank and an anti-air weapon. Since you were including machine guns I figured anything that would fit in a rifle company.
AFV's
Tanks: M24, Sherman Firefly, Panther, M-26
Assault Gun: StuG III
SP AT (Turreted included): Nashorn
SP ARTY: Hummel
Armored Car: SdKfz 234
APC/Half Track: M-3
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:40:31 PM
That small arms list ought to have a category appropriate to the StG 44. Best next-generation weapon? I guess it would only be competing with the SKS.
Also I think infantry anti-tank weapons deserve mention.
Yea but it was rather unquie. So, it could go in the Battle Rifle for this.
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2013, 03:49:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:40:31 PM
Also I think infantry anti-tank weapons deserve mention.
That is easy. The Germans had the best by far.
The Panzerfaust as a disposable, 1 man weapon that made every enemy tank around terrified, and the Pazerschreck as the best crew served infantry AT weapon.
Both could destroy just about any target they were likely to come up against, and could be used against hardened positions as well (although with the PF you ahd to get pretty close).
The bazooka, while simple, effective, and a great weapon, simply could not reliably take out German armor.
:)
The Piat always makes me laugh
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2013, 03:49:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:40:31 PM
Also I think infantry anti-tank weapons deserve mention.
That is easy. The Germans had the best by far.
The Panzerfaust as a disposable, 1 man weapon that made every enemy tank around terrified, and the Pazerschreck as the best crew served infantry AT weapon.
Both could destroy just about any target they were likely to come up against, and could be used against hardened positions as well (although with the PF you ahd to get pretty close).
The bazooka, while simple, effective, and a great weapon, simply could not reliably take out German armor.
Panzerfaust was the best, but in terms of favorite I'm sure the bazooka, PIAT, and improvised weapons have their followings.
I'm kind of partial to the Hafthohlladung, for the sheer ballsiness it required and also for the fact that it would destroy any tank.
Forgot about the Panzerknacker. :lol: Yea that took some stones.
Tanks: Panther (nothing comes close in my book)
Assault Gun: ISU-152 (big gun = good)
SP AT: Jagdtiger (not really a practical weapon system but cool as shit), honorable mention to the Hetzer
SP ARTY: Hummel
Armored Car: SdKfz 234
APC/Half Track: Sd.Kfz. 251 (you could mount about any weapon to it)
I think we should have at least 3 categories for tanks.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 01:58:42 PM
Small arms is next category
1. Pistol- M1911
2. Submachines Gun- PPSh
3. Battle Rifle- M1 Garand
4. Light MG- BAR
5. Med MG- MG34/42
6. Heavy MG- Ma Deuce
I don't think BAR was a light machine gun. It was sometimes used as one, but it never really worked well. The best light machine gun was Type 99 in Japanese service. You could put a bayonet on it!
We are not talking the best. FAVORITE. Read the original post.
Yeah, but there's some dispute as to whether or not the BAR counts as a LMG.
Quote from: dps on April 22, 2013, 04:33:25 PM
Yeah, but there's some dispute as to whether or not the BAR counts as a LMG.
It did fill that role in many cases.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 04:30:23 PM
Tanks: Panther (nothing comes close in my book)
Assault Gun: ISU-152 (big gun = good)
SP AT: Jagdtiger (not really a practical weapon system but cool as shit), honorable mention to the Hetzer
SP ARTY: Hummel
Armored Car: SdKfz 234
APC/Half Track: Sd.Kfz. 251 (you could mount about any weapon to it)
I think we should have at least 3 categories for tanks.
Actually I was going to break it down by LT, Med, Heavy or by tonnage <10, <20, <35, <45, 46+. I just left it open in the end. Reason was (for example) Germans classed the Panther as a Medium tank at (49T) and the US classed the M26 as a heavy at (41T). The German heavy was the Tiger. IMO The M26 was a better match to the Panther.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 04:34:43 PM
Quote from: dps on April 22, 2013, 04:33:25 PM
Yeah, but there's some dispute as to whether or not the BAR counts as a LMG.
It did fill that role in many cases.
Exactly.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 04:40:08 PM
Actually I was going to break it down by LT, Med, Heavy or by tonnage <10, <20, <35, <45, 46+. I just left it open in the end. Reason was (for example) Germans classed the Panther as a Medium tank at (49T) and the US classed the M26 as a heavy at (41T). The German heavy was the Tiger. IMO The M26 was a better match to the Panther.
I'd not only break it down by light/medium/heavy but also early, mid, late war :P
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 04:46:22 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 22, 2013, 04:40:08 PM
Actually I was going to break it down by LT, Med, Heavy or by tonnage <10, <20, <35, <45, 46+. I just left it open in the end. Reason was (for example) Germans classed the Panther as a Medium tank at (49T) and the US classed the M26 as a heavy at (41T). The German heavy was the Tiger. IMO The M26 was a better match to the Panther.
I'd not only break it down by light/medium/heavy but also early, mid, late war :P
Feel free. ;)
To finish up:
Tanks:
Panther
Panzer II
Hezter
Stug
Warships:
Enterprise
Prinz Eugen
Atago
South Dakota
GUNS:
That soviet SMG
Mg 42
PIAT
Other:
Dead Polacks
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Love the typhoon. Saw the beau fighter at the AF museum an it struck me as 'meh'.
I was too busy jacking off to the German shit there.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Love the typhoon. Saw the beau fighter at the AF museum an it struck me as 'meh'.
I was too busy jacking off to the German shit there.
RAF museum has a Sunderland set out so you can wander through it, strong impression that it's a boat. :)
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Love the typhoon. Saw the beau fighter at the AF museum an it struck me as 'meh'.
I was too busy jacking off to the German shit there.
The Germans make videos for that now. You don't have to to a museum to do that anymore.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 05:48:49 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Love the typhoon. Saw the beau fighter at the AF museum an it struck me as 'meh'.
I was too busy jacking off to the German shit there.
The Germans make videos for that now. You don't have to to a museum to do that anymore.
I like the National Musuem of the Air Force. I get the giggles near BOCKS CAR.
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
I always loved the look of the Beaufighter, at least the ones without the thimble nose. Whispering Death.
I'm not sure what favourite means in this context, if it's the 'beauty' and technical achievement of the machine then I'll go for the likes of the Mosquito.
But my preferred way to look at it, is from the perspective of being impressed with the courage men had to have to fly or fight with some rather substandard equipment in the early years of the war and yet they still did it.
So my respect goes to those who fought in these:
Light bombers - Blenheim, an very large number of these were built and many had no option but to fly this inadequate bomber.
Heavy/Medium bombers - Whitley, Hampdens with along with the Wellington formed the bulk of bomber command for the first 2-2.5 years.
Ground attack/light bomber - Fairy Battle, around a thousand of these aircraft on strength at the start of the war.
Fighters - Gladiators, Defiants
Maritime patrol - Swordfish, Ansons
Plus the various not successful types which we bought/received before the US aircraft industry got into it's stride.
For tanks, I'd like to add the Brit crusader tank. And the frog Souma.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 06:18:52 PM
For tanks, I'd like to add the Brit crusader tank.
Al a my list ?
If so yeah, there were some pretty desperate British tanks, though I think one or two of the classic cruiser tanks were adequate.
I think the Crusaders are pretty.
Atago. Good choice.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 05:51:29 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2013, 05:48:49 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2013, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
Love the typhoon. Saw the beau fighter at the AF museum an it struck me as 'meh'.
I was too busy jacking off to the German shit there.
The Germans make videos for that now. You don't have to to a museum to do that anymore.
I like the National Musuem of the Air Force. I get the giggles near BOCKS CAR.
I got to walk aboard the Enola Gay when it was at the Smithsonian. Fucking Sweet. Shortly afterword some jackasses vandalized it.
Friggin' Yamato-class super-battleship trumps all, for me.
Ships -
Patrol - the several thousand fishing vessels taken over to become escorts, rescue, anti-sub vessels etc - some heavy losses, nowadays overlooked.
Corvette/Escort - Flower class, a good choice by Neil.
Destroyer - I rather liked the Tribal class, in action all over the place and so high losses.
Cruiser - The Town class/sub classes
Battleship - If it's not Warspite, then HMS Rodney.
Aircraft Carrier - Illustrious
I have always had a soft spot in my heart for the Rodnol and the Nelsol.
There's also a case to be made for Renown.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 04:30:23 PM
Tanks: Panther (nothing comes close in my book)
Assault Gun: ISU-152 (big gun = good)
SP AT: Jagdtiger (not really a practical weapon system but cool as shit), honorable mention to the Hetzer
SP ARTY: Hummel
Armored Car: SdKfz 234
APC/Half Track: Sd.Kfz. 251 (you could mount about any weapon to it)
I think we should have at least 3 categories for tanks.
DS here's some good JTiger footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq32AjE9oMU
Quote from: mongers on April 22, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
No love for the Beaufighter, Typhoon or Sunderland ?
If it makes you feel any better, I was always more partial to the Hurricane than the Spitfire.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference was negligible. Unless you're talking about a scoped K98, but that's a different category.
Thompson was a fine submachinegun but that's definitely an area where effective range could bite you in the ass. But I could imagine you as the tough as nails cigar chomping platoon sergeant with a heart of gold lugging a Thompson around.
FWIW, I probably wouldn't want to be stuck with an M1 Carbine under any circumstances. Would love to have one to take to the range, but would not want my life to depend on one.
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 09:35:05 AM
Difference was negligible. Unless you're talking about a scoped K98, but that's a different category.
I dunno, I thought the K98 had a good 200 more yards effective range on the Garand with a skilled rifleman. But long guns aren't my thing, so I could be wrong.
QuoteThompson was a fine submachinegun but that's definitely an area where effective range could bite you in the ass. But I could imagine you as the tough as nails cigar chomping platoon sergeant with a heart of gold lugging a Thompson around.
I like the concept of its close-in chewing up capability, and the ability to lay down my own suppressing fire while I haul ass the other way.
QuoteFWIW, I probably wouldn't want to be stuck with an M1 Carbine under any circumstances. Would love to have one to take to the range, but would not want my life to depend on one.
ROF would come in handy, though.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference in effective range 450 vs 550 is negligible. Garand has much better iron sights IMO though. K98 rifle wasnt anymore accurate than the M1 until a scope was put on it.
Yeah, I am guessing that regardlessof the weapons effective range, the riflemans effective range with it sans a scope is going to be around 300m at best, right?
A human body is a pretty freaking small target even at 300 yards without a scope. I seem to recall that was about as far as I could reliably hit the human sized target with an M-16, and I rated Expert of whatever the highest rating was for an infantryman.
I am sure exceptional shooters could hit further out, but I would guess that vast majority of competent infantryman are not hitting anything beyond 2-300 meters regardless of the accuracy of the weapon.
Quote from: Berkut on April 23, 2013, 10:31:24 AM
Yeah, I am guessing that regardlessof the weapons effective range, the riflemans effective range with it sans a scope is going to be around 300m at best, right?
A human body is a pretty freaking small target even at 300 yards without a scope. I seem to recall that was about as far as I could reliably hit the human sized target with an M-16, and I rated Expert of whatever the highest rating was for an infantryman.
I am sure exceptional shooters could hit further out, but I would guess that vast majority of competent infantryman are not hitting anything beyond 2-300 meters regardless of the accuracy of the weapon.
And that's if it's sitting still at 300 meters... :P
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 10:26:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference in effective range 450 vs 550 is negligible. Garand has much better iron sights IMO though. K98 rifle wasnt anymore accurate than the M1 until a scope was put on it.
Wan't the the main motivation for moving to the 5.56 cartridge for NATO (in addition to the reduced recoil) that virtually all combat with light arms happened at ranges shorter than 300 with most combat happening at even shorter ranges?
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 10:26:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference in effective range 450 vs 550 is negligible. Garand has much better iron sights IMO though. K98 rifle wasnt anymore accurate than the M1 until a scope was put on it.
Yep. Tangent sights FTW. I get spoiled by them to the point where I need several shots to get acclimated to the leaf sights on my Mauser and Mosin rifles.
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 10:26:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference in effective range 450 vs 550 is negligible. Garand has much better iron sights IMO though. K98 rifle wasnt anymore accurate than the M1 until a scope was put on it.
Yep. Tangent sights Aperture sights FTW. I get spoiled by them to the point where I need several shots to get acclimated to the leaf sights on my Mauser and Mosin rifles.
:P
Whoops :embarrass:
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 10:26:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2013, 03:34:09 PM
K98's couldn't put out the volume of fire of the Garand.
Yeah, but those couple hundred extra yards' of effective range with the K98 came in handy. Sometimes you want to be as far away from the enemy as possible.
Then again, if I were a squaddie in WW2, I'd want a Thompson, hands down.
Difference in effective range 450 vs 550 is negligible. Garand has much better iron sights IMO though. K98 rifle wasnt anymore accurate than the M1 until a scope was put on it.
Wan't the the main motivation for moving to the 5.56 cartridge for NATO (in addition to the reduced recoil) that virtually all combat with light arms happened at ranges shorter than 300 with most combat happening at even shorter ranges?
Carry more ammo too.
Yes, M14 on full auto is very defferent from an M16 on the same. :P
M14 auto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSceYZsGbkU
M16 auto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8QiU4ZwRgo
Given a choice I would prefer the M14. Shoot through the tree FTW.
Hey 11B, that 50 round drum mag he used on the M14, that is something aftermarket or whatever right? Not an actual military item?
More WW2 semi-auto battle rifles
G43
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kKq7i9uq_U
M-1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWuv8N0knZ8
SVT-40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O16Ip4r5Ec
AG42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxhPXBmrQi0
Quote from: Berkut on April 23, 2013, 11:20:39 AM
Hey 11B, that 50 round drum mag he used on the M14, that is something aftermarket or whatever right? Not an actual military item?
That's aftermarket. I've only ever used issued 20 rounders with the M14.
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 11:26:13 AM
SVT-40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O16Ip4r5Ec
The SVT-40 was a really nice rifle. I had one for a while but sold it once I realized it had Finn capture marks and I could make some money off it.
Wayyy too complicated a rifle for Russian peasants to operate & maintain. Sometimes the gas valve had to be adjusted for different types of 7.62x54R ammo. I know I had lots of fun fine-tuning the setting on mine for the Hungarian light ball ammo I was shooting. The dead-simple Ppsh or Mosin-Nagant (and later AK47) was much more their speed.
German NCOs seemed to love it, though. Probably *because* it was so complicated :D
MG42 :(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V47k5vyVyOw
On topic: M1 Garand, great rifle, shoots nice.
On the tangent: My fav rifle ever is the M14.
On the topic of scopes: As much as I like shooting with a good scope, I really enjoy shooting a rifle with iron/aperture sights (up to maybe 100 yds). A good rifle/ammo with a good scope is just too easy I guess.
MP40 always struck me as having such a low rate of fire. PPSh-41 on the other hand sounds almost like a buzz-saw.
You rang. Full Auto PPSh-41. Almost zero muzzle jump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeGvxZWlL2U&playnext=1&list=PL8D972F00D08D345C
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LdqnFvshVM&list=PL8D972F00D08D345C
FG42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXWTVNc5-i0
Johnson Auto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWIRjid5k7w
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:28:03 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 23, 2013, 11:19:01 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:05:14 AM
Whoops :embarrass:
Lulz, Caliga Gunfail.
I always get tangent and aperture confused.
how is that possible? it may just be my knowledge of math and optics... but I never confuse a straight line with a hole.
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 11:44:55 AM
how is that possible? it may just be my knowledge of math and optics... but I never confuse a straight line with a hole.
Just one of my many mental blocks.
Best MP40 full auto video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U
Shoot him in his toodles!!! :lol:
Tripoded MG42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwW31u6wYvE
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 11:50:02 AM
Tripoded MG42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwW31u6wYvE
Thanks to goofballs like that, all surplus 8mm dried up and all I can find these days for my M48A is commercial :angry:
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:48 AM
Best MP40 full auto video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U
:lmfao: That's from training footage of the Volksstrum self propelled submachine gun regiment.
Oh, and member guys, chicks always dig the guns. :lmfao:
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 11:53:09 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:48 AM
Best MP40 full auto video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U
:lmfao: That's from training footage of the Volksstrum self propelled submachine gun regiment.
I also like how you can hear at least 2 or 3 pings from her hitting the frame. STAY CENTER OF MASS, GRANNY!
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 11:44:55 AM
how is that possible? it may just be my knowledge of math and optics... but I never confuse a straight line with a hole.
Just one of my many mental blocks.
Well, let's not bring up your politics and what not being able to differentiate between a line and a hole has to do with that..
n.b. well, I know that an aperture often can best be described as a slit but that would mess up my anal-ogy...
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 11:53:09 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:48 AM
Best MP40 full auto video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U
:lmfao: That's from training footage of the Volksstrum self propelled submachine gun regiment.
I also like how you can hear at least 2 or 3 pings from her hitting the frame. STAY CENTER OF MASS, GRANNY!
Give her a ppsh and she'd be dead balls on. :lol: That give a mall shooter a suprise. "He sonny" BbbbbUUUURRRPPP. "Damn young-ins"
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 11:55:49 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 11:44:55 AM
how is that possible? it may just be my knowledge of math and optics... but I never confuse a straight line with a hole.
Just one of my many mental blocks.
Well, let's not bring up your politics and what not being able to differentiate between a line and a hole has to do with that..
n.b. well, I know that an aperture often can best be described as a slit but that would mess up my anal-ogy...
Give it a rest Nanook of the North.
Full auto Thompson and Sten :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG1t_ZQK9_g
I could get any chick out on the range with a good selection of guns and they leave all giggly.
Quote from: Viking on April 23, 2013, 11:55:49 AM
Well, let's not bring up your politics and what not being able to differentiate between a line and a hole has to do with that..
By all means, let's. And let's talk about religion while we're at it.
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 23, 2013, 11:53:09 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2013, 11:49:48 AM
Best MP40 full auto video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U
:lmfao: That's from training footage of the Volksstrum self propelled submachine gun regiment.
I also like how you can hear at least 2 or 3 pings from her hitting the frame. STAY CENTER OF MASS, GRANNY!
Needs more bunny hopping.
What are your standards?
Coolest? Most Useful?
I really like all the German wonder weapons, but they were all too little too late.
Me262! :punk: sturmgewehr 44! Panther Tanks!