I know about John Browning he was a Mormon and a genius one of the greatest firearms designers who ever lived.
The Germans used to call them "Ronsons" or "Tommy Cookers". because they were so prone to combustion.
I know about John Browning he was a Mormon and a genius one of the greatest firearms designers who ever lived.I suppose the BAR could be considered an assault rifle because it was capable of fully automatic fire. However, it differs from the usual concept of an assault rifle because it fired a full-power military cartridge (.30-06), whereas in the usual concept of an assault weapon the cartridge is of medium power (e.g. 7.62x39mm).
By the way, the BAR was designed by one of our local boys here in Utah, John Moses Browning. Mr. Browning was probably history's most accomplished, successful, and versatile designer of firearms, having designed an astonishing array of successful firearms for military, police, and civilian use. Quite a few of his designs are of iconic status.
The Germans used to call them "Ronsons" or "Tommy Cookers". because they were so prone to combustion.Sherman tanks were also easily punctured by cannon or tank rounds. Not good for the occupants.
Many tens of thousands of German P.O.W's were still in P.O.W camps long after the war was over and thousands of them died in captivity from malnutrition and disease and not just in Russia, many German prisoners in Britain and the U.S. weren't repatriated until three or four years after the war or longer.Well, 1/3 of the german POWs in soviet captivity did non came back. The last who could return, were allowed to as late as 1955.
But you were not told that 2/3 of soviet POW in german captivity did not return.
This is 30x the rate of death of other POWs in german captivity.
They ran on gasoline whereas most AFV's used diesel, which was much less combustible.I know about John Browning he was a Mormon and a genius one of the greatest firearms designers who ever lived.
The Germans used to call them "Ronsons" or "Tommy Cookers". because they were so prone to combustion.
By those standards, I don't see why the BAR couldn't be described as an LMG. The same rate of fire, fired a more powerful cartridge, had a greater effective range... The minus is the 20 cartridge magazine, which I would imagine could be changed in 3-5 sec. ...The British Bren Gun was not the same as a BAR. it was a purpose built light machine gun firing .303 ammunition (the same as the Lee Enfield standard British Infantry weapon) with an effective range of over 500 meters. It had a 30 round curved magazine which was it's Achilles heel as 30 rounds do not last very long. It was a very accurate weapon that fire single shots or in bursts. Especially when used with the bipod support When firing burst the weapon was stable and the spread of fire didn't wander off the intended target and much as some. I have never fired an original Bren gun, but have spent many hours on the ranges with the NATO ammunition version and can vouch for the accuracy. At 500m on single shot, with a correctly sighted weapon, it is possible to get a 2-3 inch grouping with ease.
This was developed to use a standard NATO 7.62mm, round but with the same or similar 30 round magazine. It was later developed even further into the standard Infantry light machine gun with a belt feed of the same ammunition. It is very similar in appearance to the American M50.
That Maybe true about the Russians Steve I don't know but the German Army used a command and control system called "Command Prompt" in which every soldier was trained to assume the duties of the next rank above his on the battlefield in case they were wounded or killed in action, it's accepted as a fact in military history circles the German army in WW 2 was the finest army in the modern era, and quite a few German senior officers like Gen. Erich Von Manstein, Gen. Fritz Speidel and several other former officers taught military tactics at West Point after the war.Those studies completely ignore the fact that US soldiers could and would show initiative without orders, whereas both German and Russian troops would not take initiative without orders. Spontaneous initiative turned many battles.
Your Germans were better than their GermansMore than a few Hollywood Directors came from Germany and German speaking areas of other nations. Many/most were Jewish refugees from Naziasm. Maybe they had the actors use the "guttural" speech!. Besides, have you ever tried to speak Spanish with a "strong Gutteral accent?" Spanish comes from the "front" of the mouth while "guttural" comes from deep in the throat, but you knew that........Regards!
They did Dan, Tommy Guns wouldn't penetrate car doors or engine blocks, they sawed a couple of inches off the barrels and the buts and nailed a leather strap to each side of the top of the but so they could suspend it from their shoulder under their coats, it also gave them a big advantage in shootouts against the police because very few police forces in the 1920s had B.A.R.'s, or Tommy Guns for that matter they were too expensive I believe the Thompson Sub Machine Gun was around $53, that was a fortune in those days especially if you had to equip a whole police forceYes indeed. I spent 1970 in Germany, got to know two veterans whose were POWs in the US. One, a violin maker in Saarbruecken, ended up in a POW camp in New Mexico, where the Red Cross found instruments so that he and three of his friends could play quartets. The other, a violinist in Kammerorchester Zweibruecken, finished his war as a prisoner working on a fox farm in upstate New York.
Ben, I doubt that Bonnie and Clyde had B.A.R.s. Thompson submachine guns, "Tommy guns," were much more likely.
They did Dan, Tommy Guns wouldn't penetrate car doors or engine blocks, they sawed a couple of inches off the barrels and the buts and nailed a leather strap to each side of the top of the but so they could suspend it from their shoulder under their coats, it also gave them a big advantage in shootouts against the police because very few police forces in the 1920s had B.A.R.'s, or Tommy Guns for that matter they were too expensive I believe the Thompson Sub Machine Gun was around $53, that was a fortune in those days especially if you had to equip a whole police force
They ran on gasoline whereas most AFV's used diesel, which was much less combustible.
After being sentenced as war criminal at a british military court.... and quite a few German senior officers like Gen. Erich Von Manstein ...taught military tactics at West Point after the war.
Wonderful job! Do you think that is any chance to get some negatives for a genuine silver print?
Ronson was a much better-known brand in Europe in the thirties and forties than Zippo, it was much more widely marketed outside the U.S. zippo's were only usually available in Europe in a PX.Studies conducted by the Army Ground Forces showed that it wasn't the gasoline that set off the early M4 and M4A1 Shermans, but ammunition fires. The way 75mm rounds were stored in the superstructure and turret basket made it likely for them to be hit when a round penetrated the relatively thin side armor.
The burning problem was greatly reduced with the introduction of the M4A3 Shermans in the fall of 1944 where ammunition was moved to 'wet ammo' bins in the bottom of the hull.
The "Ronson" thing is also a myth. "Lights every time" wasn't their slogan until the 1950s,
And why would the Germans use the name of an American lighter company that was nowhere near as popular with the GIs as Zippo?
.
For Germans it would not matter if the brand was known in the US but in Germany (as the title says:"from Axis perspective").
Though I never heard of such german saying, nor of Ronson being known in Germany back then.
From my readings it was the British and Canadians who called them Ronsons. It is at least a common story from many many otherwise reliable accounts such as Brigadier William Denis Whitaker who commanded the 1st Battalion, The Royal Hamilton Light Infantry (Wentworth Regiment) who wrote Normandy: The Real Story of How Ordinary Allied Soldiers Defeated Hitler, Victory at Falaise: The Soldier's Story, Tug of War: The Allied Victory That Opened Antwerp, Rhineland: The Battle to End the War , and The Battle of the Scheldt and was a local hero.
His Victory at Falaise told the desperate story of the 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend and II Canadian Corps.
Ken Tout, who served as a tank gunner and tank commander in the 1st Northamptonshire Yeomanry in Normandy, and wrote A Fine Night for Tanks: The Road to Falaise also recounts the Ronson account
That was because of Alan that when all the battle reports were analyzed they found out that most encounters with the enemy involving rifles were at a distance of 300 yards or less and there was little need for rifles with an effective range of 2,000 yards or more a smaller round enabled a soldier to carry more ammunition and made automatic weapons much more controllable in automatic fire mode, the Germans developed the Kurtz intermediate rifle cartridge which was 7.92X33mm for their Stermggewehr 44 assault rifle ( a forerunner of the Kalashnikov AK 47 and many subsequent assault rifles). Stermggewehr ( assault rifle ) was a term coined by Adolph Hitler.That's an interesting observation. My father was a U.S. Marine in World War II, and he told me that the Marine's held the BAR in high regard. He said that his fellow Marine's would claim that you could shoot the BAR while it was touching your nose and not get hurt, i.e. had light recoil. If so (and the claim is probably an exageration) it is probably due to a combination of the weapon's great weight and semi-auto mechanism that tends to tame recoil somewhat.
My father's favorite weapon was the M1 carbine because it was light and easy to handle and shoot. Of course, it is also relatively low-power. Interestingly, after WW II the major powers all eventually shifted to lower power rounds than the full-power military rounds they used in WW I and WW II. The Germans and the Russians lead the way in adopting lower power rounds while the war was going on or very shortly thereafter, at least to some extent, and the Americans and other major powers followed a few years later. That was the birth of the assault rifle.
Many tens of thousands of German P.O.W's were still in P.O.W camps long after the war was over and thousands of them died in captivity from malnutrition and disease and not just in Russia, many German prisoners in Britain and the U.S. weren't repatriated until three or four years after the war or longer.
When I joined the USAF in 1963, I had to qualify on a M1 carbine. It felt really comfortable to shoot. I shot a 275 out of a possible 300 on the range, missing Expert and a ribbon by 1 point. When the AIr Force switched over to the M16, (I think they were the first of the services to do so), I did a lot worse. I'm grateful I never actually made it into combat or into VietNam regardless of how well I could or couldn't shoot. My aim with a camera ain't bad though.That's an interesting observation. My father was a U.S. Marine in World War II, and he told me that the Marine's held the BAR in high regard. He said that his fellow Marine's would claim that you could shoot the BAR while it was touching your nose and not get hurt, i.e. had light recoil. If so (and the claim is probably an exageration) it is probably due to a combination of the weapon's great weight and semi-auto mechanism that tends to tame recoil somewhat.
My father's favorite weapon was the M1 carbine because it was light and easy to handle and shoot. Of course, it is also relatively low-power. Interestingly, after WW II the major powers all eventually shifted to lower power rounds than the full-power military rounds they used in WW I and WW II. The Germans and the Russians lead the way in adopting lower power rounds while the war was going on or very shortly thereafter, at least to some extent, and the Americans and other major powers followed a few years later. That was the birth of the assault rifle.
That's right Allan General Le May was very impressed with an early private demonstration of them at a Republican Party doner's home and adopted them for the U.S.A.F.When I joined the USAF in 1963, I had to qualify on a M1 carbine. It felt really comfortable to shoot. I shot a 275 out of a possible 300 on the range, missing Expert and a ribbon by 1 point. When the AIr Force switched over to the M16, (I think they were the first of the services to do so), I did a lot worse. I'm grateful I never actually made it into combat or into VietNam regardless of how well I could or couldn't shoot. My aim with a camera ain't bad though.
If I remember the debate, the Air Force needed light weight arms which better served their function for airmen then the heavier M14 the Army combat troops needed and were using. Of course, we now know that it turned out to be a weapon the Army, Marines and lots of others adopted as an effective weapon for most combat situations. It gave troops the added benefit of being able to carry more rounds due to their smaller size and lower weight. The rifle was also lighter than the M14.That's right Allan General Le May was very impressed with an early private demonstration of them at a Republican Party doner's home and adopted them for the U.S.A.F.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?