Fallschirmjägergewehr 42

[Snow Leopard]

I wonder why Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 not armed to Fallschirmjäger squad in CMBB? Is it reason to decide to model MP 44 as "FG 42"?

[JasonC]

There were very few FG42s made. Most of the FJ were equipped with the ordinary MG42s as a result.

[Denwad]

^ yes

I would, however, like to see a Gewehr 41/43 modeled at random like the PPSH in German squads

[BaD JoKe]

Yep, FG42 was basically nothing more than a prototype toy..

One more in Germanys long list of "too little too late".

[Ant]

Originally posted by JasonC:

There were very few FG42s made. Most of the FJ were equipped with the ordinary MG42s as a result.

I could be wrong but I also think that all the FG42s that were issued ended up in Italy.

[Beorix]

7000+ FG 42 were produced, in the three versions , mostly issued in 1st Para division (who fought partially in Italy)

this rifle was more a assault rifle than a machine gun though, and had a 20 shots magazine

that's more than a prototype ,for me , a rare weapon ,sure , but not a prototype

ps : some mods for this particular weapon were made for CMBB (they work with CMAK too) the only problem is they replace the MG 34 graphic in game (LMG)

send me if u want the files.

Phil

[Bone_Vulture]

An auto rifle, people, not an assault rifle.

[mcgivney]

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

An auto rifle, people, not an assault rifle.

In the immortal words of the almighty bhudda,

Whatever.

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by mcgivney:

In the immortal words of the almighty bhudda,

Whatever.

About as "whatever" as the difference between a Bren and an M-16.

[Snow Leopard]

Originally posted by Beorix:

7000+ FG 42 were produced, in the three versions , mostly issued in 1st Para division (who fought partially in Italy)

this rifle was more a assault rifle than a machine gun though, and had a 20 shots magazine

that's more than a prototype ,for me , a rare weapon ,sure , but not a prototype

ps : some mods for this particular weapon were made for CMBB (they work with CMAK too) the only problem is they replace the MG 34 graphic in game (LMG)

send me if u want the files.

Phil

After I read some message, I see that most saw in action was at Italty. I agree that should be at CMAK only. Graphic of FG 42...I will try my best find it. It may be easy to shrink in size...I think we better ask MOD expert like Andrew Fox to see he he like to do for us.

After I see members try tell different between assault gun and auto rifle, I check word in Merriam-Webester...Guess what? It said:

"Main Entry: assault rifle

Function: noun

: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles designed for military use with large capacity magazines"

"Because German Fallschirmjagers (Paratroopers) often lacked supporting weapons during operations, the FG-42 was developed to give each individual paratrooper more firepower. A cross between a light machine gun and an assault rifle, the gas-operated FG-42 could be fired ingeniously single- shot with a closed rifle bolt or full automatic with an open bolt.

The FG 42 also featured a bipod, an attachable bayonet, and a 20 round box clip that was fitted above the trigger on the left side of the weapon. The side location for the clip however was found to snag on equipment and to unbalance the gun when it was fired.

Overall, the FG42 was a brilliant design whose development would lead to the creation of the MP-44 and assault rifles as they are known today. Because of the complex nature of the FG 42, manufacturing the weapon was difficult. Only 7,000 FG 42s were produced before war's end. " http://www.magweb.com/sample/sbwire/sbw22fal.htm

Check this full page of website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FG-42 "...even more advanced self-loading rifle...Statistics * Weapon Type: Assault Rifle..."

So both of you are right as "Auto Rifle" and "Assault Rifle" unless firearm experts can tell us what exact word for FG 42.

Look like it was a worth topic to discuss about early "assault rifle" as which one was truth first one or almost one as which are cross between light machine gun and assault rifle.

Cheers

[gunnergoz]

The FG42 certainly was a curious hybrid. I suspect it was expensive to produce, as well. FWIU it also had a severe muzzle blast that made it easily discernable on the battlefield and the recoil was supposed to make it difficult to control in full auto mode.

Still, it is an interesting mix of features: semi/full auto, bayonet lug, full-size rifle cartridge and a 20-rd magazine.

We could compare it to a number of arms based upon certain these characteristics, and might even find some equivalence but for one significant descriptive not yet mentioned: that it was designed specifically for airborne troops and for the peculiarities of their style of combat.

I think it will remain unique and a solitary example of its kind.

[Emar]

There were also 2 distinct variants of the fg42. The original had a plastic butt and a sloping pistol grip. The newer version replaced these with a wooden butt and a conventional pistol grip and had the bipod moved forward to the muzzle as well as adding some other short cuts.

Interestingly the rescue of Mussolini at Gran Sasso saw the first operational use of the weapon. The fg42 however was not a predecessor to the Mp43-44 rifle. The kurz round and the assault rifle were already in development when the fg42 arrived. The fg42 rather was simply the Luftwaffes attempt to have their own "special" weapon. And had it not been a rifle that was overly costly and labor intensive to produce they might have had their wish granted.

Many of its features were copied into postwar weapons with the exception of the side mounted magazine which tended to snag on clothing or other items and unbalanced the rifle during firing.

[ February 10, 2004, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: Emar ]

[Denwad]

The proper term is battle rifle, fools.

Same as the M14, FN-FAL, L1A1 so on so forth...

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by Denwad:

The proper term is battle rifle, fools.

Same as the M14, FN-FAL, L1A1 so on so forth...

Fine, I'm willing to go for that. But was the FG42 really used while assaulting? Or was it more like a stationary support weapon? Fired from prone position, etc.?

[ February 10, 2004, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Bone_Vulture ]

[flamingknives]

A heavy barreled battle rifle would be a better comparison - in fact, a good comparison would be the modern British LSW, although that uses a smaller round.

It seems to me that it would be used in a similar manner - as precision fire support.

[Abteilung]

What is a BAR classified as? The FG-42 would be the closest thing to a BAR in the German kit. Let's see....Browning Automatic Rifle. I'd say the most accurate description would be an automatic rifle. How the weapon is deployed in combat further defines it's role and gives rise to other monikers such as Squad Assault Weapon and other such nomenclature.

[JasonC]

"more than a prototype ,for me , a rare weapon ,sure , but not a prototype"

There were 100 times as many MG34s and MG42s...

[Marlow]

Originally posted by Abteilung:

What is a BAR classified as? The FG-42 would be the closest thing to a BAR in the German kit. Let's see....Browning Automatic Rifle. I'd say the most accurate description would be an automatic rifle. How the weapon is deployed in combat further defines it's role and gives rise to other monikers such as Squad Assault Weapon and other such nomenclature.

I'd agree with this. Rather than a truely innovative design, it is basically a lighter, less accurate and less reliable equivalent of the BAR.

[gunnergoz]

Originally posted by Marlow:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Abteilung:

What is a BAR classified as? The FG-42 would be the closest thing to a BAR in the German kit. Let's see....Browning Automatic Rifle. I'd say the most accurate description would be an automatic rifle. How the weapon is deployed in combat further defines it's role and gives rise to other monikers such as Squad Assault Weapon and other such nomenclature.

I'd agree with this. Rather than a truely innovative design, it is basically a lighter, less accurate and less reliable equivalent of the BAR. </font>

[Snow Leopard]

I wonder why builder didn't noticed when test fire FG 42 that go out of balance due to heavy side of magazine? I wonder if happen to me on battle field, I may hold FG 42 sideway where magazine point down when hip shooting. Maybe, it will jam easy due to spent bullet upward.

[ February 11, 2004, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: Snow Leopard ]

[Snow Leopard]

BAR can't make single shot but two different full fire cycle as FG 42 can single fire with close bolt.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Snow Leopard:

the FG42 was a brilliant design whose development would lead to the creation of the MP-44 and assault rifles as they are known today.

The FG42 was a completely different development from the weapon which became the StG 44, and was a subsequent Luftwaffe development program. The two are unrelated.

[Aco4bn187inf]

"I wonder why builder didn't noticed when test fire FG 42 that go out of balance due to heavy side of magazine? I wonder if happen to me on battle field, I may hold FG 42 sideway where magazine point down when hip shooting. Maybe, it will jam easy due to spent bullet upward. '

Snow Leopard-

The problem is that hot brass would probably fly up and hit you in the face. I know that happens if you fire an M-16 with the ejector port facing upwards. (Don't ask me why I know this)

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by Snow Leopard:

I wonder why builder didn't noticed when test fire FG 42 that go out of balance due to heavy side of magazine?

If I had to make an uneducated guess, I'd say the biggest factor would be that the designed mechanism wasn't sophisticated enough to allow feeding from below.

[BulletRat]

Ok, a little OT, but in DoD the FG42 hits hard, has a good RoF, and has evil recoil - that said, I love using it!