Jump to content

Test range: The Maxim generates the similar firepower per minute like the heavy MG42


Recommended Posts

But that wasn't his argument, he does not say that no one uses MG42 anymore, but that they kept using maxim-type guns long after they could have switched to MG42 derivatives if they wanted to.

Just what I meant, thank you.

A Maxim is heavier, needs water, is harder (arguably) to emplace due to the water tank etc, was less versatile (couldn't be used as a medium/light), and still remained in service long past the availability of air-cooled rapid fire weapons. Now, this could be something like cost (I doubt it), or reliability, but I suspect that lack of fire power was not a good candidate for the reason!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting, yet debatable comment from "Intelligence Bulletin, Vol. III, Part 3, Dec 44, page 52

Machine-gun Fire

"Our men have learned how to get around the fast-shooting

German light machine guns. These guns have such a rapid rale

of fire that they are not able to cover a great deal of ground.

When our men have stayed well apart, the machine guns have

not been able to do much damage. Actually, these weapons are

terrific ammunition wasters. And our men have learned how to

take advantage of the few moments afforded when the crew must

change barrels. This happens frequently because of the high

rate of fire. What ground the light machine guns cover is cov*

ered well, but it's a very limited area."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems relevant to point out that the Bundeswehr is replacing the MG 3 with the H&K 121, a GP MG with a ROF of 600 rpm, adjustable to 800 rpm.

I also think that it's important to keep in mind that the most of the tactical concerns that US troops, at least, had with the MG-42 were not due to the high ROF of the gun in HMG mode. "Oh my God, there's an HMG in that building; we better give up because it has a higher ROF than our Browning" was just not a complaint you hear anyplace, ever.

The primary problem that US troops had with the MG-42 was the fact that there were *so-frigging-many of them*. Mostly in LMG mode - but still with a high ROF.

US squads were based around the rifle, with actual MGs being support weapons held at the company level. Although there was one BAR man per squad.

German squads were based around the LMG, with each squad having 1 or 2 MG 42's. Meaning in platoon-vs-platoon actions, you have 3-6 MG-42s, vs. no MGs (but 3 automatic rifles) on the US side. Even if you get a MMG attached, you still only have 1 MG.

This was the real issue that the US (and all allied) troops had to address - that you were always having to attack troops armed with MGs - even a single squad on an unlikely flank would have a couple of mgs along.

And I think that BF has done a good job at reflecting this reality. It's a POS trying to bring up your Allied MGs to help you in an infantry only attack because it takes them so long to deploy, whereas the German squads all have at least one MG that doesn't need to deploy.

And the tactical versatility continues with the HMG being able to fire in "LMG mode". Send a Browning into a building and it will be a turn or two before it is firing. Send a German HMG into the building and they will be firing in LMG mode as soon as they get there, although full deployment will take longer. Surprise a MMG team on the move and they'll fire back with their personal weapons. Surprise an MG-42 HMG on the move and it will immediately return fire with the MG-42 in LMG mode.

So I think the focus on the HMG's ROF as a significant advantage is both misplaced and wrong. (Which is not to say that the MG-42 as modeled as an HMG is or is not correct; it's just that it's not a very important point).

If you look at what has happened since WWII in the light of what the allies were actually concerned about, the developments make a lot more sense. The US (and many other countries) did not adopt high ROF MGs like the MG-42. They *did* adopt GPMGs for use at the squad level - the M-60 MG in the 50's by the US; I think mostly FN varieties in Europe; and, yes, some MG-42 descendants as well. But I suspect that these were adopted not so much because they were high ROF MGs as much as because they were proven SAWs. And what they showed in WWII was the importance of having a squad-level MG, rather than the importance of having a high ROF MG.

That's why Austria's MG-74 has a very similar design to the MG-42, but with a much lower ROF; that's why the Bundeswehr developed heavier bolts to slow down the ROF of the MG-42 (although they did keep the option of using the lighter bolts as well); and that's ultimately why the Bundeswehr is phasing out the MG-3 for the slower ROF H&K model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll have to check, but I thought the latest coding included area firing into adjacent action spots. This simulates, somewhat, the "swingfiring" that Kauz is looking for. Aimed fire at a specific target does not, as far as I remember, have that trait. It seems that Kauz is looking for "swingfire" when there is "aimed" fire at multiple targets.

It would be interesting to set area fire on multiple action spots, similar to linear artillery calls. But that's an old thread...

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vickers MG in continuous fire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_machine_gun

"The weapon had a reputation for great solidity and reliability. Ian V. Hogg, in Weapons & War Machines, describes an action that took place in August 1916, during which the British Army's 100th Company of the Machine Gun Corps fired their ten Vickers guns continuously for twelve hours. Using 100 new barrels, they fired a million rounds without a single failure. "It was this absolute foolproof reliability which endeared the Vickers to every British soldier who ever fired one."[2]"

"The gun was 3 feet 8 inches (112 cm) long and its cyclic rate of fire was between 450 and 600 rounds per minute. In practice, it was expected that 10,000 rounds would be fired per hour, and that the barrel would be changed every hour—a two-minute job for a trained team. The Mark 8 cartridge, which had a boat tailed bullet, could be used against targets at a range of approximately 4,500 yards (4,100 m)."

Service status

"The Vickers MG remains in service with the Indian, Pakistani, and Nepalese armed forces, as a reserve weapon, intended for emergency use in the event of a major conflict."

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"the British Army's 100th Company of the Machine Gun Corps fired their ten Vickers guns continuously for twelve hours. Using 100 new barrels, they fired a million rounds without a single failure."

Certainly very impressive. But did they *hit* anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JasonC,

It's been decades since I read the account, but as I recall, they tore up the Germans big time. My memory is confirmed by this excerpt from a most informative Somme site.

(Fair Use)

"On 24 August one of the most celebrated machine gun actions of all time took place nearby. This was the famous barrage fired by 100th Machine Gun Company in support of the capture of High Wood. With the assistance of two companies of infantry to do the fetching and carrying, rapid fire (officially laid down as 250–300 rounds per minute) by 10 guns was maintained continuously for twelve hours. At the end of this period they had fired 900,750 rounds. Their target was the area behind the crest-line on which High Wood stands, through which German infantry attempting to counter-attack had to pass. According to a German prisoner, the effect of the machine-gun fire was ‘annihilating'. This barrage was of course rather out of the ordinary, both in terms of its duration and in the lavish expenditure of ammunition. Nevertheless, along with the preceding examples, it shows that by the late summer of 1916 the use of machine guns in the British army was showing signs of increasing sophistication."

This thread says the Vickers barrage outright stopped a German counterattack before it could even start.

100th Co. MGC 1 million round Barrage - 24.08.16

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7886

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I essentially stated this in a round about way in my post that he ignored. But what do I know I only did this for a living for 23 years. ;)

interesting, yet debatable comment from "Intelligence Bulletin, Vol. III, Part 3, Dec 44, page 52

Machine-gun Fire

"Our men have learned how to get around the fast-shooting

German light machine guns. These guns have such a rapid rale

of fire that they are not able to cover a great deal of ground.

When our men have stayed well apart, the machine guns have

not been able to do much damage. Actually, these weapons are

terrific ammunition wasters. And our men have learned how to

take advantage of the few moments afforded when the crew must

change barrels. This happens frequently because of the high

rate of fire. What ground the light machine guns cover is cov*

ered well, but it's a very limited area."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sixxkiller,

Point taken, but how will we model the MG-34/42 fire skedaddle in the game? As it is, we've got people routinely doing the mortar fire avoidance skedaddle already.

Regarding the latter, I've so far encountered one example, and it wasn't from WW II, but Afghanistan. It involved a single Taliban 60mm mortar which had straddled a target fixated M240 gunner. His SL saw what was happening, raced in and dragged the guy out, leaving the SAW in place. They were barely clear when the next round obliterated the SAW.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"the British Army's 100th Company of the Machine Gun Corps fired their ten Vickers guns continuously for twelve hours. Using 100 new barrels, they fired a million rounds without a single failure."

Certainly very impressive. But did they *hit* anybody?

Interesting question, but only in terms of this thread of course. In RL, the question is 'but did it have any tactical effect?' I suggest the answer is probably 'yes- in that no one was going to pass through the beaten zone for 12 hours without losses or severe morale effect... since it sounds like the barrage was at an area behind the lines the biggest effect may well have been on things beyond CM - no ammo resupply, no hot food, no casevac, etc. Things that after 12 hours in combat would have an effect on the front line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..lower ROF...

i fear it is more for ammo conservation... obviously one man can only carry so much weight, meanwhile they're supported by the m134 and stuff, 3k rounds/min rof:p, apparently ammo is less a concern when it's vehicle mounted, i mean who doesn't like more firepower.. but for mg42 if you fire 2 second bursts per time the basic ammo load will be gone in 20 something shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i fear it is more for ammo conservation... obviously one man can only carry so much weight, meanwhile they're supported by the m134 and stuff, 3k rounds/min rof:p, apparently ammo is less a concern when it's vehicle mounted, i mean who doesn't like more firepower.. but for mg42 if you fire 2 second bursts per time the basic ammo load will be gone in 20 something shots.

Sure, but does the 3k rpm mean that you get more kills than you would with a lower rof weapon?

Hardly.

That's not why they use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but does the 3k rpm mean that you get more kills than you would with a lower rof weapon?

Hardly.

That's not why they use it.

lol yeah but you can achieve multiple kills with just one ... knife... actually i think higher the rof the less efficient ammo usage wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sailor - no, I really think the real world question was and is whether they hit anyone. And I will venture to say they did not - or, at the outside, only a handful of unlucky souls near the start of the exercise. I have no doubt they intended a barrage effect to cut off a location or protect a force too far forward or some such. But the million rounds spent doing it could have and would have had a far greater impact used in almost any other manner.

Next ask why I can be reasonably confident that they hit practically no one, especially after the first ten or fifteen minutes... Because a predictable and consistent pattern of fire is trivial to avoid. Sure it may have tactical effects, that such an adaptation is practically forced. But you know what else has a tactical effect? Being shot.

Target exposure does not fall from heaven, it is part of a mutually adapted competition. It is actually pretty easy to drive it very low if you need to. This is why fire has to concentrate in the periods during which the enemy is more exposed to be remotely effective. And that is both the real point of rate of fire as a weapon characteristic, and why all these tests of the fire effect of triggers held down indefinitely, in real life doing nothing or it game tests with fanatic zombie hordes, are utterly meaningless and completely miss the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does barbed wire kill?

Does barbed wire have an effect?

Is barbed wire effective?

Does smoke kill?

Does smoke have an effect?

Is a smoke effective?

Does an standing barrage, fired by artillery, kill after the first few minutes?

Does an standing barrage, fired by artillery, have an effect?

Is a standing barrage, fired by artillery, effective?

Does an standing barrage, fired by a different weapon system, kill after the first few minutes?

Does an standing barrage, fired by that different weapon system, have an effect?

Is a standing barrage, fired by that different weapon system, effective?

Discuss. Answers on a postcard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JasonC,

There's another case where the British used indirect MG fire to target a German field kitchen. At dinnertime. As I recall, that was a slaughter, since it was against a dense target.

"Annihilating" as a description by an eyewitness to the primary case would seem to qualify as more than merely casualty producing, contrary to your assertion. The Vickers had handwheels for traverse and elevation, so it doesn't necessarily follow that the bullets consistently fell in well defined areas. All sorts of nasty possibilities therefore were possible. Maybe there's some sort of fire plan still extant for the big shoot. It was, after all, a barrage using indirect fire, so one would seem reasonable in the situation.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It reminds me, One time at band camp we modified a MG42 to fire a 155mm shell. We set it on auto but we were having trouble with this as it fired just once and took 2 minutes to load again. The tuba player had an idea to use it on 3 shot bursts. Well dummy that didnt work as it really did the same thing. The flute player had an idea to use 50 shot bursts. So we set it to 50 shot bursts and that fixed the problem. See why flute players are usually smarter than tuba players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It reminds me, One time at band camp we modified a MG42 to fire a 155mm shell. We set it on auto but we were having trouble with this as it fired just once and took 2 minutes to load again. The tuba player had an idea to use it on 3 shot bursts. Well dummy that didnt work as it really did the same thing. The flute player had an idea to use 50 shot bursts. So we set it to 50 shot bursts and that fixed the problem. See why flute players are usually smarter than tuba players?

Was his name by chance Ian Anderson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People unclear on the concept --- a million rounds fired. Over 12 hours. No, they didn't catch anyone by surprise in hour 2, or 4, or 12. Or after the first ten minutes. Even that long would only matter if people were trying to get out of the area hit. On how unclear on the concept JonS is, ammo actually is scarce, and firing it on one occasion actually does mean not firing it on other occasions. The mission described probably saved the lives of about 1000 German soldiers. There is such a thing as being epically stupid in the misuse of weapons, and no, just using every possible tool any way you can think of to secure command goal X is not command or intelligence.

But this is exactly the same sort of thing that gave use 3 million shell prep fires lasting a week that just ensured the enemy had plenty of reserves behind the threatened sector - while throwing away the shells, which would have cut the defenders in half if fired anytime *except* when they were all deep in their dugouts. Dumb commanders force their tools to obey The Plan, without any regard to whether those tools are actually any good at it or The Plan makes the slightest sense. Smart ones make their plans in the first place in a manner that lets their tools operate under their best conditions, to maximum effect.

It is the difference between just demanding that things happen and knowing what actually brings them about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

900,000 some odd rounds (by the official count) over 12 hours averages out to 20 bullets per second.

That sounds impressive, until you think of how much area they must've been interdicting. I would think it had some suppressive effect, especially if the Germans did not have communication trenches to use for their movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JasonC,

Since the objective was to prevent certain counterattack while the British themselves were attacking, the mission was a great success, and so the records show. One gets the sense that the POW who called the MG barrage "annihilating" participated in the German counterattack (likely, multiple attempts were made, only to be shredded and forced to ground) so rudely interrupted. Wish I knew what German unit was on the receiving end of the lead rain and if known, whether pertinent German records can be had.

As for what I believe to be Somme prep fires you're describing, most of the shells fired with a view to tearing up the massive barbed wire arrays were the real deal shrapnel, which is practically useless for destroying the very heavy duty barbed wire in vast use. I believe it was John Keegan who mentioned this in his excellent The Face of Battle.

c3k,

In order to understand the issues properly, it seems to me that we need to know how big the area was which was interdicted. The interdiction target was behind High Wood, where German counterattacks would form up, during the Battle of the Somme.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7886

"Prisoners examined at Divisional and Corps H.Q. reported that the effect of the machine-gun barrage was annihilating, and the counter-attacks which had attempted to retake the ground lost, were broken up whilst being concentrated east of Flers Ridge and High Wood."

Further details are in that thread, and here is some information on the ground in question.

http://www.ww1battlefields.co.uk/somme/high_wood.html

As noted in that thread, the CW forces were firing from along the rough line of Bazentin le-Grand to ~the Caterpillar Cemetery, with the rounds coming down on the far side of High Wood. Since the map's not very good, that's all I have for now. One of the posters in that thread makes reference to the WO95 for 100th Machine Gun Coy, but so far, I can't find it online. Googling "wo95" will bring up lots of stuff, allowing you to see how richly detailed these docs are, complete with appalling casualty lists of practically whole pages of dead in the form of cross outs in the unit roster provided in the WO95 for the 245th!

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...