This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 22:15 by gatnerd
Latest 20:14 by gatnerd
Latest 28-Nov by stancrist
Latest 26-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 26-Nov by stancrist
Latest 25-Nov by autogun
Latest 23-Nov by Farmplinker
Latest 23-Nov by Refleks
Latest 22-Nov by stancrist
Latest 17-Nov by PRM2
Latest 17-Nov by TonyDiG
Latest 16-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 16-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 15-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 15-Nov by TarheelYank
Latest 14-Nov by JPeelen
Latest 13-Nov by DavidPawley
Latest 10-Nov by Lorrybaker
Latest 9-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 9-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 7-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 4-Nov by stancrist
Latest 1-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 1-Nov by gatnerd
At least, most Soviet 45mm and 76mm AT crews are shown carrying their issued small arms during the action, which should be of little surprise, I think
Just did some quick search of the internet. In the not representative sample i also found that the amount of small arms carried seems to be linked to gun size. For the 3,7 cm Pak often the crew is seen with rifles. For the 5 cm Pak seldom and allmost never for the 7,5 cm Pak.
My guess is is there are several faktors at play. The larger guns are usually moved by vehicle. They are also more difficult to bring into position. It requires more labour. The ammo is larger and heavier.
Its also important to mention that a German AT platoon of WW2 has an MG section for close in defense.
I think it's both gun size and the distance from the enemy.
The bigger is the gun the further it is (usually) from the enemy and its infantry.
to change the subject slightly, didn't the netherlands airforce start to arm their pilots with MP9's?
According do the internet the Nethlands air force issued M9 to pilots flying anti ISIS mission.
No idea if they still issue the weapon or if they are issuing it more wide spread.
Looking at pictures with German troops from WW2 it mostly seem to depend how official the picture was. The staged, official propaganda pictures allways show soldiers in perfect uniform with rifle on the back. The snap shots taken during combat allways show very sloppy uniforms and no small arms nearby.
That's common in US photos, too. But I did find a pic taken during the 1943 battle for Attu Island which shows M1 carbines on the backs of the gun crew.
Since there are vehicles everywhere there are GPMGs everywhere. In the past on pintle mounts nowadays often on RWS. So what is the point of issuing carbines or rifles? The PDW is absolutely sufficient to buy time until a GPMG or heavier weapon can chime in.
Hmm. Replacing rifles and carbines with a PDW would permit elimination of 5.56x45 guns and ammo from the inventory in addition to those in 9x19 caliber, which would tremendously simplify logistics and training.
Plus, it would reduce the soldier's weight burden, while also enabling a substantial increase in basic ammo load. And being able to carry 300-400 rounds of ammo in 40-round magazines would enhance the ability to use the "area saturation" method to defeat Level IV body armor. (Disregard the pistol in the pic.)
In addition, using a compact, lightweight PDW would better enable the infantry to evolve from the centuries-old paradigm of shooting bullets that put little holes in people and things, into a combat force that wields weapons of far greater destructive power.
Okay, you convinced me. I'm in!
Not to drag an old horse carcass out of the ditch, but: now all you need is a cartridge to feed the infantry's machineguns and DMRs :)
I think they already have one.
People have been suggesting just this - more HE, less KE - for some time now.
Sure, you'll still need machine guns, but having PDW + HE lobbers + MG would probably be more effective than the current setup, and would only need 2 calibers in guns that are actually good on their jobs.
To add some spice to this thread - what HE lobbers? Mainly RPG with the odd NLAW here and there, plus ATGM for certain scenarios?