WesWorld

[SIZE=3]Semiautomatic Rifle, Model of 1936[/SIZE]
Summary: All of the major FAR powers at the beginning of 1936 had a heavy historical investment in automatic and semiautomatic rifles: France deployed the RSC M1917 during the Great War, Russia built the Federov, and Atlantis worked on various designs as well. In 1936, the FAR members decided to build a standardized self-loading rifle, for adoption and production by all FAR member states. Russia and Atlantis developed the rifle design, while France is finishing development of a GPMG to be previewed in late 1937 or 1938. Upon entering FAR, Chile and Columbia elected to participate.

The rifle selected was designed by a Russian engineering team led by Fedor Tokarev, and added the expertise of Sergey Simonov and Atlantean firearms designers Callidus Lycurgus and Virilus Iacchus. It is chambered in the new Atlantean cartridge of 6.5x51 Nemesis. The design generally follows the traditional Tokarev rifle design but uses the Atlantean IL-SLR gas blowback system, perfected by Tokarev.

[SIZE=3]Participating Armories:[/SIZE]
- Russia: Tula Armory, Izhevsk Armory, Sestroriatsk
- Atlantis: Azeas Arsenal, Thera Arsenal
- France: Manufacture d'Armes de Saint-Etienne, Châtellerault Arsenal
- Chile: FAMAE (Fábricas y Maestranzas del Ejército) - begins participation May 1937.

[SIZE=3]Data:[/SIZE]
- Caliber: 6.5x51mm Nemesis
- Action: Gas operated, tilting bolt
- Overall length: 1226 mm
- Barrel length: 625 mm
- Weight: 3.8 kg
- Feeding: 10 rounds in detachable box magazine

[SIZE=3]Designations:[/SIZE]
Each member state is adopting different designations, though the rifle is basically the same, with minor national variations in terms of sights, etc. Also note; although adopted in 1936 production is not starting until 1937.

France: MAS-36 (Manufacture d'Armes de Saint-Etienne model of 1936; this is NOT the historic MAS-36 bolt-action)
Atlantis: TILR-36 (Tokarev-Iacchus-Lycurgus Rifle 36)
Russia: SVT-36 (Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva, 1936)
Chile and Columbia: FM36/F36 (Fusil Modelo 1936)

[SIZE=3]Current Variations:[/SIZE] - Primarily Russian at the moment
- AVT-36 Automatic Rifle: Select-fire version of SVT-36.
- SKT-36 Carbine: Carbine-length SVT-36.
- Sniperized rifle: equipped standard with scope mounts and telescopic sight (as historic)

What's the muzzle velocity for the 6.5x51mm through a 625mm barrel?


The weight's possibly a bit low, compared to the SVT-40, but fairly reasonable (increasing it a bit might result in a slightly less fragile weapon, but wouldn't make a difference in the relatively high maintenance requirements).


The adoption of such a weapon by FAR will definitely kick-start the German army on it's currently stalled semi-auto decision.

Makes the old Enfield look like an antique and the new .303in Rifle No.3 Mk I also seems a step back in time when it enters service in 1937.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
What's the muzzle velocity for the 6.5x51mm through a 625mm barrel?

Well, it'd depend on bullet size and shape, but the caliber closest in comparison to the 6.5x51 Nemesis would probably be the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser and .308 Winchester. The SM got anywhere between 2,500fps and 3,000 fps; .308W gets about the same range. I don't have the tools necessary to calculate it precisely, but I figure 2,600-2,750fps is going to be about commonplace for the .256 round with a 150-grain military bullet.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The weight's possibly a bit low, compared to the SVT-40, but fairly reasonable (increasing it a bit might result in a slightly less fragile weapon, but wouldn't make a difference in the relatively high maintenance requirements).

Oh yes... that. I took .2kg off the SVT40 when I was fiddling around with some alternate smaller rounds, and never restored it to the original 3.85kg. Fixing...

What I was looking for was an accurate round that would serve well through the semiauto rifle era, yet would still be powerful enough for 500+ yards and have low enough recoil for an SLR and GPMG. The Nemesis isn't an assault rifle round, although it could serve in something like the FN FAL or G3; but Atlantis is working on the 7x40 Carbine and Russia's probably going to make something similar for eventual assault rifle options.

As to maintenance, it's not as simplistic and sturdy as the Mauser or the Mosin-Nagant, but when they got the right care, SVT40s (and even SVT38s) performed about on par with Garands. I personally think the SVT40's one of the top three SLRs of WWII, in the same league as the Garand and G43.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The adoption of such a weapon by FAR will definitely kick-start the German army on it's currently stalled semi-auto decision.

I'm not shocked.

This is really a big change for France; instead of taking the historical bolt-action MAS-36, they're finally achieving their desire for a semiauto rifle - France only started working on that in 1900. I figured 1936 was the best time to push this, since France historically adopted a new caliber at this time, and Russia was introducing production rifles...

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
What's the muzzle velocity for the 6.5x51mm through a 625mm barrel?

Well, it'd depend on bullet size and shape, but the caliber closest in comparison to the 6.5x51 Nemesis would probably be the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser and .308 Winchester. The SM got anywhere between 2,500fps and 3,000 fps; .308W gets about the same range. I don't have the tools necessary to calculate it precisely, but I figure 2,600-2,750fps is going to be about commonplace for the .256 round with a 150-grain military bullet.

Another good comparison round would be the .277 Pedersen, which was a 7 x 51mm round. With a 150 grain bullet, it was loaded to between 2400 and 2600 fps.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The weight's possibly a bit low, compared to the SVT-40, but fairly reasonable (increasing it a bit might result in a slightly less fragile weapon, but wouldn't make a difference in the relatively high maintenance requirements).

Oh yes... that. I took .2kg off the SVT40 when I was fiddling around with some alternate smaller rounds, and never restored it to the original 3.85kg. Fixing...

What I was looking for was an accurate round that would serve well through the semiauto rifle era, yet would still be powerful enough for 500+ yards and have low enough recoil for an SLR and GPMG. The Nemesis isn't an assault rifle round, although it could serve in something like the FN FAL or G3; but Atlantis is working on the 7x40 Carbine and Russia's probably going to make something similar for eventual assault rifle options.

As to maintenance, it's not as simplistic and sturdy as the Mauser or the Mosin-Nagant, but when they got the right care, SVT40s (and even SVT38s) performed about on par with Garands. I personally think the SVT40's one of the top three SLRs of WWII, in the same league as the Garand and G43.

It was certainly fairly popular with the Finns and the Germans, if less so with the Russians except the Russian elite troops.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The adoption of such a weapon by FAR will definitely kick-start the German army on it's currently stalled semi-auto decision.

I'm not shocked.

This is really a big change for France; instead of taking the historical bolt-action MAS-36, they're finally achieving their desire for a semiauto rifle - France only started working on that in 1900. I figured 1936 was the best time to push this, since France historically adopted a new caliber at this time, and Russia was introducing production rifles...

Probably, yes.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Another good comparison round would be the .277 Pedersen, which was a 7 x 51mm round. With a 150 grain bullet, it was loaded to between 2400 and 2600 fps.

True, I forgot about that one, and that probably would be an even better example.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
It was certainly fairly popular with the Finns and the Germans, if less so with the Russians except the Russian elite troops.

Yup, mostly because the Red Army didn't really teach soldiers how to keep them fixed up, so the Comrades kept breaking them; and war emergencies forced the Russians to go back to MNs and Pa-pa-shahs due to the triple terrors of training, cost, and manufacturing ease.

US could better afford to stamp out Garands and M1 carbines, while the Soviets just couldn't hack it quite as well. I myself have always been interested to see what the US could have done if they'd taken the M1 carbine down the same road as the StG44...

Quoted

This is really a big change for France; instead of taking the historical bolt-action MAS-36, they're finally achieving their desire for a semiauto rifle

The bolt-action MAS-36 was for second line troops and adopted first in the new calibre. Examples of the semi-auto version which looks almost the same started to be produced in 1940 as the MAS-40 but WWII got in the way.

Had WWI continued another year quite a lot of semi-auto rifles would have appeared - there were quite a few orders that were cancelled at the end of the war.

Quoted

I myself have always been interested to see what the US could have done if they'd taken the M1 carbine down the same road as the StG44...

Killing power and accuracy at range aren't great but it's just so light and small. It just feels nice as well.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

I myself have always been interested to see what the US could have done if they'd taken the M1 carbine down the same road as the StG44...

Killing power and accuracy at range aren't great but it's just so light and small. It just feels nice as well.

Agreed, the M1 Carbine is one of the all-time greats. I owned one briefly (sold it to pay for college books) and I loved it - light, handy, nice recoil. The one time I tested accuracy, I was punching 1" holes at 50 yards freehand, without even a sling. Utterly brilliant little design.

Still, I wonder what you could have done instead...

Perhaps make the round a bit more powerful, like an ought-six round cut in half; then put on the M1A1 Para stock and give it select-fire like the M2 carbine, and 30-round magazines. Might not be as light and sweet as the M1Carbine, but it'd be interesting to see how it played out.

Also, a bit of looking shows the British tested the .256 British, or 6.5x50 round. Here's the specs:

.256" British - 6.5x50SR
Bullet weight in grams: 139
Muzzle velocity: 2,500fps
Energy: 1,930 ft/lbs

The 6.5x50 British is a lot later from the 1960s but its pretty similar to the 7x43 (.280) from the immediate postwar. There's also the .280 cartridge's stablemate, the .270 which is 7x46 but shorter overall length. A lighter bullet fired at greater velocity. Theres a video on youtube of the EM-2 which shows the manageable recoil.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
The 6.5x50 British is a lot later from the 1960s but its pretty similar to the 7x43 (.280) from the immediate postwar. There's also the .280 cartridge's stablemate, the .270 which is 7x46 but shorter overall length. A lighter bullet fired at greater velocity. Theres a video on youtube of the EM-2 which shows the manageable recoil.

I have the stats for that as well:

.280" British - 7x43
Bullet weight in grams: 139
Muzzle velocity: 2,530fps
Energy: 1,986 ft/lbs

Heh, I think the bullet weight above is in GRAINS, not GRAMS......


The problem I see with the .30 Carbine cartridge is pretty simple: it's a poor cartridge, limited very much to it's intended role as a slight improvement on a pistol. The case is too small to get above at best moderate velocity, and the bullets weight and shape mean that it will lose velocity and energy quickly. Here in WW, if the M1 carbine is developed, it may, or may not, use the historical cartridge. Given the use of the .277 Pedersen in the Garand, a hypothetical WW M1 Carbine might use a necked down cartridge firing a .277 spitzer bullet of the same weight as the .30 caliber round. This would, at least, have better down-range numbers since the bullet would be more aerodynamic.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Heh, I think the bullet weight above is in GRAINS, not GRAMS......

D@mn chair-to-keyboard interface messed it up in transition.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The problem I see with the .30 Carbine cartridge is pretty simple: it's a poor cartridge, limited very much to it's intended role as a slight improvement on a pistol. The case is too small to get above at best moderate velocity, and the bullets weight and shape mean that it will lose velocity and energy quickly. Here in WW, if the M1 carbine is developed, it may, or may not, use the historical cartridge. Given the use of the .277 Pedersen in the Garand, a hypothetical WW M1 Carbine might use a necked down cartridge firing a .277 spitzer bullet of the same weight as the .30 caliber round. This would, at least, have better down-range numbers since the bullet would be more aerodynamic.

I think it'd be interesting to chamber an M1 Carbine in .357 Magnum, myself. But your idea is definitely more along the lines of what I'd design for the US, if I was suddenly sucked back in time to the 1930s.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The problem I see with the .30 Carbine cartridge is pretty simple: it's a poor cartridge, limited very much to it's intended role as a slight improvement on a pistol. The case is too small to get above at best moderate velocity, and the bullets weight and shape mean that it will lose velocity and energy quickly. Here in WW, if the M1 carbine is developed, it may, or may not, use the historical cartridge. Given the use of the .277 Pedersen in the Garand, a hypothetical WW M1 Carbine might use a necked down cartridge firing a .277 spitzer bullet of the same weight as the .30 caliber round. This would, at least, have better down-range numbers since the bullet would be more aerodynamic.

I think it'd be interesting to chamber an M1 Carbine in .357 Magnum, myself. But your idea is definitely more along the lines of what I'd design for the US, if I was suddenly sucked back in time to the 1930s.

The .357 would give the Carbine a bit more impact, but the rimmed case would be a pain in the tail as far as the magazine goes, and it wouldn't help the issues of range and energy at range much.

The basic issue, of course, is that the idea behind the Carbine is that it is a pistol replacement, so weight (and hence power) must be kept low.

An interesting question to see the answer to will be what do the various countries decide to do for support weapons. Will they develop versions of various LMGs to use the new cartridge? Continue using their current LMGs? Or what?

Bharat have so many 7.92mm x 57 rifles laying around that production of that round will continue. Makes sense to continue to use the Bhandara 1929 as the standard LMG for now to same money but it will be a logistical problem later on; with supply units having to carry two different rounds for their infantry complements. Of course the US Army did for a long while without any major problem.

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
Bharat have so many 7.92mm x 57 rifles laying around that production of that round will continue. Makes sense to continue to use the Bhandara 1929 as the standard LMG for now to same money but it will be a logistical problem later on; with supply units having to carry two different rounds for their infantry complements. Of course the US Army did for a long while without any major problem.

I was thinking of the FARC countries, but certainly other countries that adopt new rifle cartridges will have the same issue.

The MG issue will actually be covered by the GPMG-1937 project. As we decided, Russia and Atlantis provided the rifle design; France is providing a new GPMG design.

Hmmmm. That SOUNDS like (though we'll have to wait and see, of course) that FARC will be standardizing on a new MG as well. Given the history of such international arms projects, and the differing requirements of countries as diverse as the FARC countries, I'd expect a pretty low bar common denominator, but most likely chambered in the new 6.5mm round. Something along the lines of the FM 24/29, but chambered in the 6.5 Nemesis.

More like the Solothurn MG30, I think we decided.