Machine gun squad + 50 cal vs. 20mm

[coe]

First of all has anyone ever seen a machine

gun squad huck a grenade (maybe one of the six people have grenades?)

Also, how does the 50 cal stack up vs. the

20mm, I understand that the mg42 is an

infantry killer/supressor, but was the

20 mm the axis equivalent of the 50 cal?

or did the axis design something to match

the utility of the 50 cal (12.7mm cannon?)

[Silencer]

20mm has a LOT more punch then 50cal.

20 mm has also min2 types of rounds,

Compare it like the 5.56mm versus the 50cal.

(5.56 --> 12.7 and 50cal --> 20mm)

the germans also had a 13mm MG gun and has the same stats as the 50cal.

Although not much used und the ground, it was a weapons used in bombers as defence and in their fighters.

S.

[Guest Michael emrys]

The 20mm shell for shell was deadlier (for one thing it had a small HE charge) but it usually had less ammo available to it at any given place or time on the CM battlefield. It was also a lot less mobile unless vehicle mounted.

Michael

[Uedel]

The Difference between cal .50 and 20mm is that cal .50 is a MG (MachineGun) and the 20mm is an MK(Machinecannon in german Maschienenkannone) so that means 20mm is a quickfiring automatic gun fires 20mm shells with varios warheads (Explosives, Mines etc) the 20mm was Designed and used as light AA-Gun but we all that we Germans are not soo dump we explored the use of 20mm AA Gun vs Infantry and light Tanks/Vehicles is very desastrus to them. Also the 20mm was mountet on a little vehicle made it easy transportable by Infantry. (look Saving P. Ryan there u can see an 20mm in action and what it should do).

Hope this helps your Question

mfg

Uedel

[coe]

so you are all saying that the germans didn't

filed an "as portable" equivalent of the

50 cal. at least on the ground?

[gaffertape]

Despite the difference in shell size, I think the MG42 (and the MG34) were essentially the German equivalent - usage wise - of the US 50 cal.

Their shells had less destructive power, but were far more portable. Just a trade-off.

GAFF

[IntelWeenie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by coe:

so you are all saying that the germans didn't

filed an "as portable" equivalent of the

50 cal. at least on the ground?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC, the only countries to widely use a .50 cal (approximately) MG for dismounted ground troops were the US (and some use of the same gun by our allies) and the Soviet Union (the DShK).

While it has served many (about 80!) years with distinction, The M2 HMG really doesn't fit some of it's traditional roles too well. It's way too heavy to be easily portable by infantry and too light for really effective AT work. IMO, this is why this caliber of weapon isn't seen too much. It does pretty well for longer range MG fire support, low level AA and vs lightly or non-armored vehicles, though. (Last 2 reasons are mainly why US tanks have featured them)

------------------

"Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb