Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Bullshit from the Army; 1943 Edition
Some of this was bullshit. Machine gun ammunition generally has a wider accuracy specification than rifle rounds. This is because a machine gun is not a point weapon, it is an area weapon. The place where the bullets are landing is the "beaten zone". A wider dispersion of fire for a machine gun is not a defect, it's the point. You want to shoot at one guy, use a rifle. You need to shoot at a bunch of guys, get a machine gun.
Which is why the touted accuracy of the American guns in the piece was just bullshit.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
So, 24 of 30 rounds “hit” for the U.S. tripod MG, versus 16 of 30 for the MG42 on a tripod. The thing they omitted is that when the 42 is tossing 90 rounds downrange and getting 48 hits, the U.S. gun gets those same 24 hits from 30. Additionally, 6 bullets spray and suppress while the 42 is tossing another 42 rounds around t keep heads down. I don’t think bullshit is forceful enough...plus, since the Germans were generally defending positions, the “proble” of lugging the ammo is overblown.
I was impressed by the Grease Gun’s accuracy, but as you note, it’s pointless.
I haven't seen the MP40 called a Schmeisser since reading old Sgt. Fury comic books.
And the MG42 was so bad, we modified it to be the M60.
Swastikas instead of Iron Crosses? Shame!
Watched it again and spotted another possible mistake. With the MP40, you were taught to NEVER use the magazine as a hand hold, because it would cause magazine to misalign...similar to the Sten gun. You could hold the magazine hosing, as it looks like he is when shooting, but the way he’s holding the magazine itself after loading is a bad look.
Post a Comment