WesWorld

February 3, 1936 - Berlin

The user report on the Heer trials of the various semi-automatic rifles in 7mm x 40 has been delivered to the Generalstab. This report covers the user perspective, as each rifle was issued to a different regiment of the Heer for at least a year's service. The most highly rated of the rifles was the Garand, with a score of 94 out of a possible 100, followed by the Pedersen at 91, the Solothurn at 88, and the Walther brought up the rear at only 72 (the Bang gas system proving to be prone to failures and giving the weapon poor balance). No decision has been made on procurement at this time, that decision is left for the future.


March 22, 1936 - Berlin

The Heer quartermaster service has submitted its report on the semi-automatic rifle trials to the Generalstab, and it is a document that is nearly the direct opposite of the user report. The quartermaster service was vehement in it's negativity towards the two American entries, disliking their use of non-metric standard parts and particularly disdaining the en-bloc clips they used. The Solothurn entry was rated more highly, as it could use the Mauser-standard stripper clips, and the Walther entry was also preferred to the American weapons. The en-bloc clips were disliked because their use would complicate ammunition supply while the current standard Mauser Kar-31 remained in use, requiring either a parallel supply system or the providing of sufficient en-bloc clips with all ammunition. The Solothurn, with it's removable magazines, was regarded as an improvement because as long as 1 magazine was available (the quartermaster service suggested issuing only 1 magazine, or better yet having the ability to remove the magazine deleted), standard 5 round stripper clips could be used to charge or top-up the magazine, and no difficulties would be encountered with supplying units with ammunition. The Walther, as far as the quartermaster service was concerned, posed no difficulties.

Looks like someone in the Heer Quartermaster Service is either vehemently anti-American or on the take!!

Heh, could be either, or something else entirely.

There was only a difference of 6 'points' between the Garand and Solothurn, hardly decisive. The Walthers 72 is significantly worse. Concerns regarding keeping supply lines simple and backwards compatibility could be seen as wise in hindsight.

The one thing that has to be understood about the scoring is that it's an inexact science: while the areas of scoring were the same for all the competitors, in this trial the various rifles were not issued to the same units so they were less directly compared. The real baseline of comparison was the Kar. 98a, the rifle the various units had previously been issued. Also, only the Garand saw actual action, being issued to one of the Mountain units sent to Bolivia, where it saw actual combat (though only on a very small scale). So far the units deployed to Lithuania have not included any that were issued one of the Garand's competitors.

Garands in Wesworld use the .276 Petersen, per MacArthur's orders. Though personally, I prefer having the en-bloc clip to a magazine - I can reload my Garand as fast or faster than my m1911.

Without having the US in the Great War, they didn't have the same overstocks of .30/06.

Quoted

Originally posted by howard

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Garands in Wesworld use the .276 Petersen, per MacArthur's orders. Though personally, I prefer having the en-bloc clip to a magazine - I can reload my Garand as fast or faster than my m1911.

Thanks for that information. I missed it.

With the magazine, no PING. With the magazine you can top off or carry your ammo preloaded and dirt free. With the magazine you can stack 15 bullets instead of 5-7. With the magazine you can ship the ammo as a 15 round unit of fire. With the magazine you get a rifle that is one step away from a SAW. With the magazine no Garand THUMB and no dirt in the cyclic when your dirty thumb is squashed when you don't pull it out of the way of the bolt fast enough..

The Garand has eight rounds; the .276 Petersen chambered Garand would have had ten rounds. I prefer the en bloc clip over magazines, however: it's faster to reload an empty rifle; you don't have to go back to pick up your empty magazines. And I have no clue where you got the comment about dirt from.

I've never gotten Garand thumb, because I learned the proper technique for avoiding it. When reloading, press your palm up against the bolt handle, and it holds in place.

The ping, compared to the sound of the rifle, is minimal; I only hear it when I'm shooting with earmuffs on, or when I'm standing close to another shooter. In any case, the sound permits you to use the tactic of hanging on to a spare clip, firing two or three rounds and then dropping your empty to mimic the sound of an ejecting clip: meanwhile, you're ready to shoot at anyone foolish enough to stick their head out, hoping you're out of ammo.

For what it's worth, the US did experiment quite extensively with using Browning BAR magazines in a Garand. After trials, they decided not to produce it.

I'm not entirely certain where I fall with the switch to .276 Petersen, having never fired one IRL; but honestly, I'm a great fan of .30/06. All my friends tell me I'm crazy and the recoil hurts: but I think it's very nice. Light enough not to hurt, heavy enough that you can actually feel it. I'm willing to agree that most people don't have as high a tolerance for recoil, and so the .276 might be better.

There's only one bottom-feeder that I truly love, and that's the FN FAL - pistol grip, left side cocking handle, and as solidly built as an AK. The FAL's also the only rifle I'd argue was actually BETTER than the Garand. Aside from that, only the AG-42B Ljungman comes anywhere approaching the M1's level. If you could put the M14's improved gas system on the M1, then that would be just about perfect.

(Even though I'm just a young pup, I admit I turn my nose up at all these modern plastic rifles. Give me a K31 or an my old '03, and everybody can keep their fancypants M4geries which jam if you sneeze on them wrong.)

Quoted

Originally posted by howard
From experience with the M-1.

H.

That's certainly never been my experience, nor have I heard that as a common complaint... *shrugs*

As I say, it is my humble opinion that the en bloc clip was better than a magazine, despite the common complaints which you already addressed.

If handed a FAL and an M1, though, I'd choose the FAL hands down.

Actually, in German testing, both the Garand and the Pedersen used the new German service round, the 7mm x 40 RWS. (In US service, the Garand was adopted in .276 Pedersen after MacArthur reversed course on wanting it in .30-06 because that development looked like it would take too long.) One of the reasons the Pedersen didn't score better in the German testing was that it was designed expecting the dry-lubricated cartridges, but for the German testing unlubricated cases were specified.

Quoted

Originally posted by howard

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The one thing that has to be understood about the scoring is that it's an inexact science: while the areas of scoring were the same for all the competitors, in this trial the various rifles were not issued to the same units so they were less directly compared. The real baseline of comparison was the Kar. 98a, the rifle the various units had previously been issued. Also, only the Garand saw actual action, being issued to one of the Mountain units sent to Bolivia, where it saw actual combat (though only on a very small scale). So far the units deployed to Lithuania have not included any that were issued one of the Garand's competitors.

How was this simmed?

The main simming here was done during the initial trials that reduced the candidates down to 4 weapons. Those trials took place in the fall of 1932, and a series of posts were made as they progressed in the German News and Events for Q4 1932. The troop trials for the rifles (done from 1934 to the end of 1935) was mostly simmed in my head (though I think the Solothurn score might be a bit overstated now).

June 6, 1936 - Palanga, Lithuania

The surveying crews employed by Blohm und Voss wrapped up their work a bit over a month ago, and this morning the sketches of the planned drydock were delivered to the Lithuanian authorities. Situated just south of the current docks, and protected from the Baltic by a small mole, the new drydock would give the Lithuanian Navy a site to repair and refit it's vessels. According to the representatives from Blohm und Voss, construction on the drydock was expected to begin in the new year and be completed by the end of it.

Hm, nice to know the Lithuanians are moving along.

Heh, well, I don't know if they are, but Germany is. Of course, if the western half of Lithuania is part of Germany (or Russia) by the summer of 1936, I'll have to edit the post.

Well, I don't think so. The Bulgarian fleet is scheduled to make a port call there on the way to the Coldmere coronation. I didn't plan to make a port call in Baltic Russia...