tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post1691317139460858671..comments2024-03-20T11:41:56.776-04:00Comments on Tank Archives: Lend Lease Impressions: SubmachinegunsPeterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-58604237090312092372017-09-13T16:32:58.256-04:002017-09-13T16:32:58.256-04:00Only the examples that had *actual* manufacturing ...Only the examples that had *actual* manufacturing defects; design-wise the Mk II was about as minimalist as an SMG can get but entirely serviceable - and as it happened so simple to build assorted resistance groups could make their own in literal basement workshops. (Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, even the Germans got in on the act to help equip the Volkssturm in the late stages of the war...)<br /><br />That said once the situation allowed the Brits started making somewhat less austere versions for their own troops. Nothing wrong with better ergonomics after all.Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-20641169876673069292017-09-13T11:09:06.989-04:002017-09-13T11:09:06.989-04:00Yeah, agreed on the ammo weight. I recall the 5.56...Yeah, agreed on the ammo weight. I recall the 5.56mm ammo weighed about half of the 7.62mm ammo it replaced, if memory serves. It's not hard to hump 1,000 rounds of 5.56mm. <br /><br />I think the sten gun took the 'cheap' principle just a little too far ;) <br />Dat34https://www.blogger.com/profile/05191197983174208313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-87353615752152295652017-09-12T17:30:37.281-04:002017-09-12T17:30:37.281-04:00Not like they had a lot of alternatives before the...Not like they had a lot of alternatives before the "Grease Gun" came around anyway, but even the simplified military-standard variants of the Thompson had the usual pros and cons of interwar SMG designs - excellent workmanship but heavy and manifestly ill suited for fast and cheap mass production (ie. not enough of the things to go around).<br /><br />There's a reason the major wartime designs opted for "cheap and nasty" instead, taken to something of a logical conclusion with the Sten Mark II...<br /><br />That ammo-weight point the document raises is certainly hard to dispute; quick search says the 7.62 mm Tokarev round has a bit over a THIRD of the .45's mass, give or take. That kind of disparity tells when combat troops get loaded down with hundreds of the damn things - nevermind now that the high-velocity Tokarev round has much milder recoil, flatter trajectory and in the Soviet context was sourced domestically.Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-69553658873103858592017-09-12T09:02:00.184-04:002017-09-12T09:02:00.184-04:00The Reising was used in combat only briefly by US ...The Reising was used in combat only briefly by US forces on Guadalcanal. The joke was that the only Japanese ever hurt by a reising were those who got hit when a Marine or Solider threw them away. <br /><br />The Thompson always got high marks though. Dat34https://www.blogger.com/profile/05191197983174208313noreply@blogger.com