user1000 Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Somewhere in France, You have 6 US guys with Garands and 6 Germans with K98s. They are in a firefight at 60 yards distance on even ground both have the same amount of cover this being a stone fence. There are no other weapons or grenades being used just pure rifles soldiers on soldiers. Who would win and why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 The British 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Those that are the most seasoned and or trained and or have marksmanship talent imo. The garands clearly have an example being semi auto though. Perhaps at a certain distance the K98 is more accurate. But, in the end the most important thing IMO is troop training and veterancy. Basically what Jons said Edited July 20, 2015 by Lethaface 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 These sort of topics never end well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Jack Ripper Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Garands. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenris Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 The way to win is not to play. -F 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Backer Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 The ones left standing after the thread is closed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 Garands being semi-auto would suppress the k98s and eventually win. No matter the skill of the German side, just too many rounds coming in on them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Garands being semi-auto would suppress the k98s and eventually win. No matter the skill of the German side, just too many rounds coming in on them. That would be the average outcome, but each instance of the situation as described would still be subject to randomness ( eg. first German bullet luckily hits an American, their suppression goes up, some cower, the outgoing volume of fire is lessened and it spirals downwards from there. ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Whichever side has the most artillery support. 60m is ridiculously close. At that range, rate of fire will win the fight. Therefore, the Garands. Out past 200m, it starts to even out. Beyond 300m to 400m, I'd say it's even. For all intents, both weapons are equally accurate for fire out to 800m. (And just TRY to use iron sights on a man-size target, semi-exposed, at that range! You won't see a thing.) As range decreases, accuracy becomes less of a factor and ROF becomes more so. Once you can pin someone down, you're winning the firefight. The number of rounds that come close will determine suppression. (Brits did some great tests on this. I think 1m or closer causes most men to seek cover.) I think you need to make a test scenario and let us know the results. Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodlebug Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 ...(Brits did some great tests on this. I think 1m or closer causes most men to seek cover.) Interesting. Can I ask the source and whether the data is available on line anywhere? Thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzzleflash1990 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Interesting. Can I ask the source and whether the data is available on line anywhere? Thanks. https://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Real_Role_of_Small_Arms_RDS_Summer_09.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted July 24, 2015 Author Share Posted July 24, 2015 It made it easier for riflemen to do close assaults with the Garand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Wenman Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Interesting article - thanks Ken. I was quite taken by this quote in terms of applying it to CM Suppressive fire without purpose is just that: purposeless Obvious, but worth remembering P 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 https://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Real_Role_of_Small_Arms_RDS_Summer_09.pdf Interesting article - thanks Ken. I was quite taken by this quote in terms of applying it to CM Obvious, but worth remembering P All credit for the link goes to Muzzleflash. (Thanks for that, btw.) Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 There's also this: http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/CoTTP/Suppression%20McBreen%202001.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted July 25, 2015 Author Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) The Germans had the more sniper like stand off weapons I see it in their tanks and rifles. They would excel on high ground or in a wide barren field with no cover but Normandy being so close of a locked in hedgerow fight semi-autos, autos and shermans would rule. @c3k I would agree to a point that it would even out and long ranges, but the axis would still have to keep their heads down more often so rule still stands. Now take the Germans standoff long range weapons to the Russian barren steppes and that's where they would do the most damage. Not to say they didn't have close range weapons that were good in Normandy. Edited July 25, 2015 by user1000 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Idk. You.d be hard pressed to find terrain that favors the defender more than the bocage and hedgerows of Normandy. Add to that the Germans were the world leaders in hand held AT weapons at the time... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.