Jump to content

Greatest Submachine Gun of WWII


Recommended Posts

But surely the nickname should be in some way related to the weapon, which in this case it isn't. I wouldn't have a problem with the MP18 (Bergmann) being nicknamed the Schmeisser but saying one should be able to call the MP38/40 family of SMG's a Schmeisser when the well known weapons designer had absolutely nothing to do with it makes no sense at all.

It would be like calling the Porsche designed Ferdinand a Benz Ferdinand. It's just plain wrong!

Regards

Jim R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The nickname of the weapon is "Schmeisser" so there can be no big deal about that. I am aware that the name is not technically right for this SMG but everyone with a faint interest in WWII knows what a Schmeisser looks like.

Every WWII-veteran I've ever heard refers to this particular weapon as the Schmeisser, cool name btw :cool: , or as the MP40.

Duke71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

The Germans didn't use those names. You are only perpetuating an error.

Michael [/QB]

That may be true. I've never heard German veterans talking specifically about the MP40, so I don't know their nickname(s) of it. Didn't the Germans refer to SMGs as MPIs? (Machine PIstols)

Did they have other names for it?

Duke71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Originally posted by Bergerbitz:

[snips]

And the Sterling? I discovered that was developed 20 years after WWII. I must have been thinking about the Pratchett SMG it was based on.

Oops. And the Pratchett was designed after WWII as well.

Mr. Picky says that it's spelled "Patchett", to avoid confusion with the author of the Discworld series.

According to Ian Hogg's "The sub-machine gun" (Phoebus, London, 1978, 64 pages packed with colour) G. W. Patchett, of the Sterling Engineering Company, Dagenham, submitted his design in response to a requirement issued in January 1944, and 20 guns were made for trials in April of that year, when the Ordnance Board considered them acceptable for service. Some of these original 20 were taken to Arnhem and used in action, so it did see combat, albeit in homeopathic quantities, in WW2.

After a lull in interest after WW2, from 1947 to 1951, competitive trials for a new SMG were carried out. The Patchett design won in the end, and became known as the Sterling in service.

I understand from documents relating to the Malayan Emergency that I've seen at the PRO that the BSA SMG was at one point considered the favourite, and consideration was seriously given to dropping SMGs altogether and using the EM-2 rifle "in the machine carbine role". And we all know what happened to the EM-2 procurement... :(

All the best,

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

So, what's the feeling on the Bergman or the Beretta?

Oooh, no teen appeal, either of them. They're more your SMG for the pipe-and-slippers old-timey folks. The Beretta may have been a brilliant design, but anything Italian lacks kewlness. And the Bergmann may also have been brilliant, but it's altogether too woody for Schmeisser fans.

In my role as a boring old fart I feel obliged to put in a word for the Lanchester. It looks like a Bergmann, lots of woodwork, but you get brasswork too, and, the key feature of a worthwhile SMG design to my mind, a bayonet lug. And I think it's fair to say that the Lanchester did everything the Royal Navy ever needed it to as a sub-machine gun.

All the best,

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by John D Salt:

And I think it's fair to say that the Lanchester did everything the Royal Navy ever needed it to as a sub-machine gun.

Which was to make sailors look suitably menacing while herding U-boat survivors, eh?

;)

Nice to see you back, BTW, John.

smile.gif

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lucho:

MP or Mpi is right (Maschinenpistole).

MPi, not Mpi.

The Heereswaffenamt evaluation of the MPi40 was somber. "Very sensitive to moist, cold and dirt which cause frequent jams. Unreliable safety, causing several casualties. Even a rough landning on earth will trigger the mechanism causing uncontrolled fire. Troops normally improvise and secure the safety with a string, and avoid carrying loaded weapons. Feeding from magazines often malfunction, causing jams. Troops use magazines not quite filled to counter this. Magazine shape still cause problems when firing prone." Et ceteraaaw. Some of these problems were solved, most of them not.

The MPi18/38/40 replaced pistols in the equipment tables, and were thus initially considered self defence weapons only. So it's not just an Anglo-Saxon approach. Well, most Germans are technically Saxons, and to a Finn all of them are, but you know what I mean.

Still, it all sounds real primitive to me. M1 Garand and carbine seem the most intelligent mass-scale WWII solutions. Toting bolt actions and tuna-can smg's cannot have been very satisfying regardless of model.

But of course, I would at any time prefer to have Kingfish's mudbaked exwife as sidearm instead.

Cheers

Dandelion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dandelion:

Still, it all sounds real primitive to me. M1 Garand and carbine seem the most intelligent mass-scale WWII solutions. Toting bolt actions and tuna-can smg's cannot have been very satisfying regardless of model.

If it wasn't for that goofy 8-round clip I might agree with you...

M2 carbine has the advantage of being automatic also.

As you point out, the MPis were usually carried by guys who had other stuff to do than stand around blasting at the enemy anyway. Tank crews, infantry squad commanders, officers, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lucho:

But what about the SMG-Squads in the Russian army or in German Volksgrenadier and Füsilier units? Are they only specialised infantry for house-to-house combat or for use in woods?

Such as Russian regimental SMG companies were meant to do assaulting. It was also customary e.g. in Finnish army to amass experienced SMG fighters from other squads into adhoc-storm teams to lead the attack.

The Volksturm had great amounts of SMG's. I think it was an economic decision: SMG's are cheaper to produce and require less training than rifles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

If it wasn't for that goofy 8-round clip I might agree with you...

M2 carbine has the advantage of being automatic also.

Yes, the non-extractable Garand clip, how could I forget. Prevented mounting of a scope too didn't it? Should have been a magazine of course.

I was thinking about the M2 as well, but became unsure. Was it available in WWII or was it a Korea enhancement?

Cheerio

Dandelion

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...