Equip your army...modern war with WW2 small arms.

The Russians sure used women snipers to great effect against the Huns. :kill:

 

?

 

I don't know what these are if they aren't women soviet snipers!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Ljalkov%C3%A1

 

Im sure some where out there you can find a hard core fetish site
on the very subject.

I just hope no one brings up Russian explosive anti tank dogs...

 

:angry:

 

????

do i detect a note of disbelief about the existence of soviet woman snipers?
the russkies used women in a lot of combat roles including but limited to snipers, pilots [ of just about everything they operated], tank crews, fire control, and many others.

 

NO disbelief here...I think most people here should know the exploits of Soviet women during the Great Patriotic War...

as snipers, bombers, fighter pilots and infantry not to mention the other burdens these women under went to make up for 'man power' shortages.

Interesting note in regard to these ladies...

I remember reading some time ago, that the Women were found to be less compassionate as 'marksman' than there male counter parts in combat. Generally they showed a colder side towards there target.

So much for soft and maternal, these cold hearted warriors helped perhaps tip the balance on the battle field with there capabilities.

Kym

 

I don't whether they were cold-hearted or just more angry with the enemy. Men tended to accept war, and usually didn't personally hate the enemy. Women, on the other hand, may have been more likely to see it as a kind of personal violation and get really mad.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

A female, Russian sniper... with PMS.
Armed and dangerous would be an understatement.
:evil:

Tim

 

Hahah goood point..
as political correct as it sounds too

 

Here is what I would pick for infantry weapons: (assume that the standard rifle, the squad automatic and the MGs are all chambered for the same round---lets say .30-06 for logistical purposes)
Pistol:
Walther P38 9mm
Submachine Guns:
MP 38 and MP 40
Standard Infantry Rifle:
M-1 Garand
Service Carbine:
M-1 Carbine (the M1 Rifle and Carbine would be distributed like they were in the US Army during WWII---riflemen getting the Garand, while other soldiers/Marines who had special duties being armed with the smaller, light carbine)
Sniper/Sharpshooter rifle
Springfield 1903
Squad Automatic
Bren LMG (chambered for .30-06)
Light Machine Gun (company level)
MG-42 (in .30-06)
Water cooled machine gun for sustained fire (Battalion level units and for some vehicles)
British Vickers chambered in .30-06
Heavy Machine Gun Units and for certain vehicles
.50 Caliber M2
Anti-Tank
Panzerfaust
Panzerschreck
US M18 Recoiless Rifle (57mm) at Company level
US M20 Recoilless Rifle (75mm) at Battalion level
German 88 mm (at Division)
Mortars:
60 mm (at company level)
81(at battalion level)
120mm (German Granatwerfer) at Division

 

Interesting choices. 8mm Mauser and 30:06 are pretty much exchange able though if you are going to produce the weapons in calibers different from the original I think I'd go with one of the 7mm rounds instead.
Why the sub gun choice? Most here have expressed a preference for either the Soviet, US, or other less well known ones.
Sharpshooter again I don't think there's a great deal of difference between the bolt action rifles of the various nationalities although I think the US did come out with a sniper version of the Garand which would have some advantages (and some disadvantages).
Why the Vickers over say the Browning? Both were good guns but the Browning holds the records on rounds fired continuously. In any case if I were going water cooled I think I'd just as soon have it in 12.7. You already have logistical constraints.
The Pansershreck IMO had enough issues that it probably wasn't worth it. Panzerfausts and RR would be my choice.
I'd be temepted to use 81mm mortars at both company and battalion levels just to simplify logistics as well.
The Bren is an LMG for a squad level automatic rifle you choice is pretty much limited to the BAR at that time. The question is what does a squad look like? If you have plenty of motor vehicle support having an LMG team and two or even possibly 3 fire teams with a BAR and a couple of rifles might work. If you hare relying on man or horse power to move your supplies though that could create issues. Think I'd be tempted to use the Bren at squad level and the MG-42 at company level with enough of them to allocate one per platoon if needed.
Not sure if I'd want two calibers of RR either. Whether to go with a 17lber, 88, or 90mm for division level AT gun is an interesting question. Probably would depend on what ones tanks were armed with. I think I'd tend to go 90mm though. All of this assumes a rather late war unit though.

 

Having humped both, the 81 is a bear and best suited for not displacing often or with adequate motor transport. The 60 is light enough to hump along with the company and displace frequently. The WWII M2 60mm mortar was 42 lbs. and the shells were about three pounds each. The M1 81mm was 136 lbs. and the light HE round was right at 7 lbs. each. Quite a difference when you figure the weight that had to be humped and the weight of sufficient ammo.

Base Plate M2 60mm-12.8 lbs. M1 81mm-45 lbs. (3 pounds more than the entire M2 system)
Tube M2 60mm-12.8 lbs. M1 81mm-44.5 lbs.
Bipod mount M2 60mm-16.4 lbs. M1 81mm-46.5
100 rounds M2 60mm HE-M49A2 273 lbs. M1 80mm M43A1 HE 687 lbs.
Now the common practice is for the Mortar section to carry the bulk of the ammunition with most of the rest of the men in the company carrying an additional round, same same for MG ammo. If the riflemen are humping a 2.73 lb round that's more weight for MG ammo. A 6.87 lb. round means they may not carry an extra belt for the MG's. Things to consider.

 

I believe the Hoyt-Clagwell Avenger was available in limited numbers during the period.
Seems sufficient.

 

Really sounds like you need to decide what kind and quantity is available for transporting things before you look to closely at support weapons. If the mortar (or heavy mg) has a dedicated carrier or even trailer that's one thing if it's got to be man portable for extended distances that's another.

 

You'd want the Mark II. The Mark I was extremely problematic since its .68/120 round tended to shatter the shooter's upper torso.

.

 

I'm a tin-pot island dictator.
I'll take the mark one, please.
Troops are expendable - it's all about looking good and bigger calibres.

Can't see any mortars in the catalogue.
They'd make a damned fine mortar.

 

Don't forget the Lepage Glue Gun, the finest AA weapon of the entire war.

 

It is indeed unfortunate that Hoyt-Clagwell's ventures into the artillery market fizzled following the failure of Operation Drug Bunker. The experimental Fuscia Assploder saboted incendiary shaped charge had incredible potential, and is rumoured to have formed the foundation of the shaped charges used to disable Eben-Emael in 1940.