Questions on machine guns

the MP40 and the Thompson are sub-machineguns.

German MGs: MG34 (I may mix up the numbers)
MG42 (Best in my opinain)

American: M1 than tons of numbers but I know it was a 30 cal. mg

 

ppsh-43 was almost solely used in Leningrad

 

There were a lot of different SMGs and MGs used by each main power of the war.
Germany
SMG:MP18, MP34, MP38, MP40, MP3008 and all their varients (such as the MP40-2, a duel magazine MP40)
MG: MG34 and MG42

US
SMG: M1A1 Thompson and all varients and M3 "Grease Gun"
MG: M1917 Browning, M1918 BAR, M1919 Browning and M1923 Browning

Commonwealth
The Commonwealth armies didn't usually stray from what the British used but some accepted weapons of their own design.
SMG: M1928 Thompson, STEN Mk. I-VI + suppressed varients, Australia accepted the Owen Gun over the Sten and Thompson
MG: BREN, Lewis and Vickers

Japan
SMG: Type 100
MG: Type 93, Type 99 (based off of the ZB vz. 26 just like the BREN) and Type 3

Soviet
SMG: PPD 34/38/40, PPSh-41 and PPS-43 (not PPSh-43 as some of you mentioned previously, PPSh = Pistolet-Pulemyot Shpagina, PPS = Pistolet-Pulemyot Sudarev)
MG: DP 28, Maxim-Tokarev and RPD

 

I thought the water cooled rifle caliber mg's were considered heavy mg's. There was also the air cooled version of the Browning 30 cal.

As for the BAR it was an automatic rifle not really a light maching gun. It's use was simialr but among other things it was designed so you could fire it easily on the move.

Thompson was accurate and powerful for a submachine gun but also heavy and expensive.

Didn't the M2 carbine see service as well?

 

Yes, the water-cooled .30s were considered to be heavy machine guns. While the weight of the guns without water didn't vary much, water added 10 pounds over the M1919A4, and 8 pounds over the M1919A6. Also, the tripod for the water-cooled M1917A1 weighed a whopping 53 pounds compared to the air-cooled M1919A4's 14 pounds, while the M1919A6 was only used it's bipod for firing and dispensed with the tripod mount.

The M-2 Carbine was standardized in September, 1944, and by 1945 was being issued to the troops. So, it did see action, I just don't know how much.

 

From what I've read, the M3 (for those who don't know, an M2 fitted with an early infrared scope) was in use in the Pacific theatre. Apparently the soldiers loved it because of how easy the night vision made ambushes: sight on enemies who don't have a hope in hell of seeing you and fire a burst.

The .30 Carbine round hits not unlike a .357 Magnum and can take a chunk out of concrete AFTER passing through several pine boards. A full burst of those slugs into a formation of unarmored Japanese troops means a fun time....for the shooter.

 

Automatic weapons, when I first wore khaki, came in 3 flavours: Sub-Machine Gun (SMG) of 9mm calibre; Light Machine Gun (LMG) of .303" calibre; and Medium Machine Gun (MMG) of .303" calibre. The first two were magazine-fed, the third belt-fed & water-cooled. When 7.62mm became the NATO standard calibre, LMG & MMG disappeared, replaced by GPMG (General Purpose Machine Gun): 7.62mm, belt-fed & air-cooled. The 9mm SMG remained - the superb Sterling. The LMG (Bren) & MMG (Vickers) went obsolete; although the Bren soldiered on for another 20yrs or so in 7.62mm calibre. A beautiful weapon - should still be in service today.

Cheers,
Cliff

 

Leading on from my earlier post: The LMG & MMG in the British Army were WWII weapons. The Bren & Vickers were just too good to replace. The Sten (even the very good Mk V with wooden furniture & pistol grips) had given way to the Sterling as the Brits' standard SMG. But for the duration of WWII, we had the unholy trinity of Sten, Bren and Vickers as our automatic weapons. They didn't serve us too badly. If we could get US Thompson SMGs, we had to ensure a supply of .45" calibre ammunition. Which was never guaranteed.

Cheers,
Cliff

 

The US had a somewhat different naming system.
SMG - submachine gun pistol rounds
Automatic Rifle - BAR (30-06)
LMG - 30 caliber air cooled M1941 magazine fed
MMG - M1919 30-06 air cooled belt fed
HMG - 30-06 water cooled (M1917) or 50 caliber (M2) both belt fed

 

Interesting...i would have said the MG42 was the most influential...wasnt large parts of the M60 based on this weapon? ( may be wwwaaaaayyyy off here - just what my memory says)

 

My first experience of using machine guns was at my Basic Training at Bury St.Edmunds in October 1942.

The weapon on which we trained and which we were taught to strip and re-assemble while blindfolded was the Bren Gun and I remember being told that it was equally good when firing bursts or individual shots.

Much later, in May 1945 I fired (this time in action) the .30 Browning and I can testify to it's efficiency.

Ron

 

I think the M1917 likely holds the record for number of rounds fired continuously. That said I'm not sure there was all that much difference practically between the various ~8mm weapons of the same class, i.e. was a water cooled .303 Vickers that much better or worse than an M1917?

 

Hi CAC. I think it was more like the FG 42, They were both gas operated with a rod and pisiton and I think the MG42 used some type of delayed blowback with a roller locking bolt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FG_42

 

Well the M2 had a huge influenced on the M2HB and eventually the M2A1. The latter is still inservice unlike the M-60. Guess it kind of depends on how you define "most influential" though.

 

Thanks for the info gentlemen....