MP40 Effectiveness

[JasonC]

The Suomi is a good SMG all around, and it has the stock advantage. But it is still a 9mm SMG (most models anyway), and the 9mm is just a much lower velocity round than the 7.62x25. That limits its true effective range, because large bullet drop shooting is inherently inaccurate. (It is "golfing" rather than "bowling" - meaning a perfect range estimate is needed to hit the target. If you estimate the range *perfectly*, sure you can still hit things at medium, carbine-type ranges - but you simply won't).

[Sardaukar]

The Suomi is a good SMG all around, and it has the stock advantage. But it is still a 9mm SMG (most models anyway), and the 9mm is just a much lower velocity round than the 7.62x25. That limits its true effective range, because large bullet drop shooting is inherently inaccurate. (It is "golfing" rather than "bowling" - meaning a perfect range estimate is needed to hit the target. If you estimate the range *perfectly*, sure you can still hit things at medium, carbine-type ranges - but you simply won't).

Having shot Suomi SMG, sights are quite good and there was no problem hitting man-sized target at 150m with single shots (which was doctrine, using bursts only when enemy got closer). But of course it was most effective <100m.

[YankeeDog]

Thing is, in combat soldiers would rarely be shooting at a man-sized target. Or, if they were, the man-sized target would usually be moving very quickly, dodging, and visible for only a few seconds. Stationary targets would be something like a head and bit of shoulder peeking over a stone wall or around a tree, or even just a muzzle flash spotted in a clump of bushes.

I think we as CMBN players forget this because a spotted enemy soldier in CM is always displayed in full, and we can "fly" the camera wherever we like to get a full view. But this is most definitely not what our little pixeltruppen are "seeing" when they target an enemy soldier. At least, not the vast majority of the time.

[Artofwar]

yeah like the effective range of an m16 is 550 meters but that does not mean you can readily hit everything at that range or even suppress it. It means in my opinion that if you hit something at that range supposedly it will still affect them.

Perhaps some modifier needs to be added wherein the further away the lower probability of suppression and chance of a hit are modeled into it .... maybe it already is and needs to be tweaked some it seems if they have an mp 40 its like they have an M60 machine gun....

Regarding effectiveness of any weapon if one goes to a shooting range with an original m16 and attempts to hit something at 550 yards good luck because 1st of all it will be hard to even see it especially if there is any concealment at all the front sight will cover up a lot of re estate and then when firing even one round you get off target AND then wind affects especially that type of bullet including an mp 40 bullet actually most any bullet the winds has serious affects at 550 yards

so an mp 40 should not be able to take out or suppress a whole squad but only at close range .. closer than what it is now

[JonS]

yeah like the effective range of an m16 is 550 meters but that does not mean you can readily hit everything at that range or even suppress it. It means in my opinion that if you hit something at that range supposedly it will still affect them.

Hmm, I don't think that's quite right.

The Steyr AUG (which fires the same ammn as the M16, and whose external ballistics are basically the same) is rated for effective individual fire up to 300m. Given that the maximum range shot on the annual weapons qualification is also 300m, and that everyone is expected to get hits at that range, it's reasonable to suppose that you could eek out ... maybe another 100m of effective range for individual fire. More if you're a better shot. The trick, as always, would be estimating the rrange accurately, or sensing rounds and adjusting off those.

For section fire (that is, the whole section firing at the same target), the Steyr AUG is rated as effective out to 600m.

The bullet goes a whole heck of a lot further, but militarily "effective" means that you will induce an effect on the enemy; killing, wounding, or - most likely at longer ranges - securing his attention and getting him to keep his head down.

[c3k]

Iron sights: the front sight post totally occludes a man-size torso at 300m. At least, that's my experience.

Hitting a melon-size target at 300m w/iron sights is VERY hard. If you have an entire torso size target, getting a few rounds to strike within a 6" diameter of the center can be done. Using a 6" diameter target as your ONLY aimpoint is very hard. The "head peeking over a wall at 300m for just a few seconds" is almost impossible to hit with iron sights. Now, add in a 3x sight with a 3,000+ fps muzzle velocity, and it becomes doable. WWII rounds were more in the range of 2,600fps. That makes quite a difference. (Battle-sighting: 3,000fps sighted in for ~250m will be (well) within 6" for anything up to almost 300m. Not so for 2,600fps. Pure ballistics.)

[Michael Emrys]

Iron sights: the front sight post totally occludes a man-size torso at 300m.

No doubt. The way I used to address this back in my gun-totin' days was to adjust my sights so that when the gun was on target, the bead on the front sight was just under and touching what I wanted to hit. Since my rear sight was an open notch, nothing was obscured. I realize that on government issue weaponry all that might not be an option.

Michael

[Artofwar]

Hmm, I don't think that's quite right.

I'm not sure what you are addressing whether the stated effective range of 550 meters of the m16 is bogus and or whether it is difficult to suppress or even affect someone at 550 meters.

Actually according to my source the statement that the effective range of the m16 being 550 meters is bogus -

I googled m16 wiki and came up with the wiki on the m16 I looked to the right column to get some stats - (I used to have to memorize the effective range but I didn't want to rely on my memory so I googled) but now having rechecked those stats they are for the M16A2 -

They had M16A2 stats to the right of the title M16 I didn't pay attention.:eek: As we know the M16A2 is a longer range weapon than the 1st issue M16, just google M16A2 wiki for more info. Wiki is not the best source for all this stuff but I wanted something quick without having to dig.

The main reason I even mentioned the M16 was I was trying to point out that perhaps the M40 in the game is not modelled that well because it can suppress enemy and take them out at its effective range - it seems their is no loss of lethality or suppression no matter the range and so I figured it I talked about shooting the m16 at 550 meters this would help someone understand that. :confused:

But anyway the M16A2 was made to be more longer range having better rifling and this and that.

Here is the area I looked at I didn't pay attention to the top of the area that read M16A2

so what's point target anyway - A person's butler is pointing at the target ???

Regarding the 5.56 x 45 - what the Aug Steyer shoots there are so many variations of weapons that shoot this round that this round cannot be given a basic effective range rather the gun and the round must.

I like the 5.56 x 45 round that was shot in the weapon Marcus used in Operation Redwing as mentioned in his book "Lone Survivor"

he used a model 12 I had no idea what that was but looked it up on the internet it was just another gun that shoots the 5.56 x 45 made primarily for the special ops guys Marcus is a SEAL check out these stats for the Model 12

The Navy had this gun done up this way.

Then here is the Aug Steyer same round but significantly different stats but it has it purpose

[JonS]

so what's point target anyway - A person's butler is pointing at the target ???

Are you serious?

I like the 5.56 x 45 round that was shot in the weapon Marcus used in Operation Redwing as mentioned in his book "Lone Survivor"

Oh, ok. You're not serious.

[JasonC]

"the maximum range shot on the annual weapons qualification is also 300m, and that everyone is expected to get hits at that range..."

Well as I recall you can readily pass with no hits at 300m, provided you hit every time at 200m and about half the time at 250m. Sure you won't get the highest rate of pass, but you can even get the second grade that way. The shots at 300m are significantly more difficult than the 200m. At 200m the shot is basically completely flat, there is no appreciable bullet drop compared to the size of the target. On range quals like that, it also helps immensely that you know the 300m target is at, guess what, 300m. You aren't judging the range and aiming high to compensate for a merely estimated bullet drop - you *know* the range. In combat that does not happen.

It is of course possible to shoot a carbine caliber weapon like the M-16 much farther if you can adjust the sight for range before taking the shot, and know it. Sniper teams mostly use higher velocity full rifle rounds, but some scoped 5.56s are used occasionally, to 700m or so. But in those cases they have a scope, adjust the zero to a longer range to start with, and can dial in an elevation or use a BDC style sight in the scope to get the right added elevation for the range. In modern warfare, they may also have a spotter with a laser rangefinder to tell them the exact distance. These aren't things you can do with iron sights and a merely estimated range.

All that said, rifle fire in open environments was militarily effective out to 1000 yards with full rifle calibers, before the post WW II move to carbine calibers for up close shooting in volume. The Boer war, fighting on the Afghan frontier in the British-India era, may stand as examples. Even untrained levies with magazine rifles when they were new, routinely pinned down enemy forces at 1000 yards without the benefit of scopes or automatics. And inflicted loss as well as suppression, if not quite outright destruction. With full rifle ammo, shooting is pretty flat out to 500 yards or so. The Marines trained to such ranges with iron sights long after the army moved to 300 yards max.

The thing to understand in all the above, though, is that the flat shooting distances are pretty much a direct linear consequence of the muzzle velocity of the different weapons. Half a second of flight time is about as far as you can push it and still have a bullet drop that is managable without the equipment of sniping described above. But half a second is a very different distance for pistol ammo, carbine ammo, or full rifle ammo. A factor of 3 less for SMG / pistol as for full rifle / MG.

[JonS]

Well as I recall you can readily pass with no hits at 300m, provided you hit every time at 200m and about half the time at 250m. Sure you won't get the highest rate of pass, but you can even get the second grade that way.

Different AWQs are, perhaps surprisingly, different. We have to get hits at 300. And, as much fun as AWQs are, I was using that merely to address artofwar's mangled interpretation of what 'effective' fire is.

0.5second TOF is a handy rule of thumb though, cheers.

[LukeFF]

The US Army's M16 qualification process is set up so that no hits are required on the 300-meter target in order to pass. In fact, many soldiers I knew would deliberately not fire on a 300-meter target so that they had an extra round for a target at a closer range.

And yes, according to official US Army literature, the maximum effective range on the M16 is 550 meters for a point target and 800 meters for an area target. I don't care what Wikipedia says it is.

[Bastables]

Barrel length of the Styer AUG and the M16a2 is 508mm. The 5,56mm should similar with ours labelled SS-109 NATO and the US ones labelled M-855, the FN designed "AP" round. US military may just have different definition of "Effective" fire. Much like how in NZ/Aussie ranges we're actually required to hit targets at 300m to pass the AWQ. IIRC any

Commonwealth AWQ may still be informed for the need of "long range" accuracy, in order to avoid the Boer's out ranging us again. Which makes no sense as Long range used to be defined as 800-1500yds.

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/ref/collection/p4013coll11/id/423

[MikeyD]

The US Army's M16 qualification process is set up so that no hits are required on the 300-meter target in order to pass.

I recall back working on the CMSF Marine module the impression was the modern army really deemphasized accurate fire at long range. The Marines, according to reports, were more old-school, placed much heavier emphasis on getting hits at longer ranges. One reason why they held onto the full-length M16 for as long as they did. That was back around 2007 or so, things have been changing rapidly in military doctrine and weapons. I don't know what they're thinking is now.

[Bastables]

Long range seems to be a relative thing thing, 300m is long now. Under the turn of the 20th century definition 300m would be considered below Long/Medium range coming under the so called "Decisive fire" bracket of sub 500yds.

I've read a couple of US officer pamphlets arguing for revised AWQ, new rifle rounds and designated squad marksman with associated qualifications and weapons/sights due to experiences in the gan. So things are never really settled.

[womble]

Barrel length of the Styer AUG and the M16a2 is 508mm.

But what's the rifling like? A bullet spun faster will behave different to one from the lesser twisted barrel.

[akd]

I'm sure they are both NATO-standard 1/7 twist.

[womble]

I'm sure they are both NATO-standard 1/7 twist.

I should've googled it before. First scan says the Steyr is 1:9, the M16 seems to be 1:14 or 1:12 (bit confusing; only cursory looks) and the SA80 1:7. Anyway, Austria isn't in NATO

[John Kettler]

Excellent thread! Most engaging and informative, not to mention groggy.

Something not mentioned here is the reason the Germans went to a higher ROF MG in the first place, which was to maximize the oft fleeting opportunities to catch a target before it could get into cover. The logic is exactly the same as the JMEM (Joint Munitions Effectiveness Manuals) modeling of artillery and mortar fire. The first volley is evaluated against troops standing and all subsequent ones against troops prone. The German intent was to catch exposed infantry "on the hop" and lace it with bullets before it could get into effective cover. A bonus is that the MG-42 sounds intimidating just firing, never mind the poor blighters actually beset by "metal bees." The reports I've seen indicate the MG-42 really preyed on the soldiers' minds, and I'm sure many here have seen the War Department training film intended to offset this situation.

Am more than a bit surprised that the Ma Deuce should be so neutered in the game. It's a known fact that the Germans absolutely hated the weapon, having nothing like it with which to reply in kind. Its high velocity, heavy bullets tore men apart (with profound abreactions from bystanders I bet aren't modeled in either CMBN or or CMFI and, I think, ought to be reflected in the weapon's suppression score), could rip through a line of men with ease, was little affected by weather and could punch through all but the heaviest cover. But you'd never know it from what's reported in this thread.

By contrast, I read an account in which a U.S. infantry platoon (lead element in a company) came under fire by a German 2 cm Flak when emerging from the woods. That gun practically destroyed the platoon, not just from direct hits but from all sorts of secondary missile damage from the big rounds chewing up the trees, dropping limbs on peoples' heads and such. As I recall, the company was out of action for hours.

Regards,

John Kettler

[LukeFF]

I should've googled it before. First scan says the Steyr is 1:9, the M16 seems to be 1:14 or 1:12 (bit confusing; only cursory looks) and the SA80 1:7. Anyway, Austria isn't in NATO

The M16 is 1:7. 1:14 would be downright awful.

[womble]

Am more than a bit surprised that the Ma Deuce should be so neutered in the game.

Is it? I've found BMG round to be tremendously effective. I haven't used one off a tripod yet, but the half track and tank-top instances utterly riddle enemy light armour and are an excellent addition to the suppression value of the unit. It's important to button your shermans if they're firing (Target Light) anywhere near your own troops, since the "no casualties from friendly bullets" only applies to bullets smaller than (i.e. not inclusive of) 0.5". Not to mention the extra suppression.

It's a known fact that the Germans absolutely hated the weapon, having nothing like it with which to reply in kind.

Yeah, that's gotta burn.

...could punch through all but the heaviest cover...

I have to agree that there are some bits of cover that look a lot flimsier than they turn out to be. "Small bush" trunks seem as resistant to bullets as mighty oaks, and mighty oaks are plenty tough, and harder to shoot from behind.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I am also surprised to learn that the Ma Deuce is neutered in the game. I had thought it was the best weapon in the game against infantry in buildings. Must be my imagination.

[YankeeDog]

We have similar dreams. I've imagined my .50 BMGs tearing up German vehicles and infantry as well...

[JasonC]

On the notion that the Germans didn't have anything like a 50 cal, um, they made and fielded about 145,000 20mm AA guns and mounted them on every imaginable sort of vehicle, in addition to ground mounts. And used them in ground roles. In single mounts and in quads. On the ground and in aircraft. Everybody had high caliber light AA weapons, the Germans just used mostly faster firing 30 cal or bigger 20mm instead of an in between item. (They did have some 15mm AA MGs too, by the way, they just preferred the 20mm and so fielded only a handful of that specialist item).

[LongLeftFlank]

Ach, so! "Flak as a field weapon"*, as featured in minute 1:12 of this classic

from "American Pop" (some of Ralph Bakshi's greatest work, IMHO. But whose pasties mod is he rotoscoping?). And BFC, take note -- at least THESE Nazi machine gunners actually prop up their MG34s on the sandbags while shooting

* Cajus Bekker's "Luftwaffe War Diaries". See "Night of Ilza" for a textbook example.