The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 14, 2017, 10:16 PM   #26
ibfestus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2006
Location: Smack dab in the middle of it... The good ol' USA that is.
Posts: 120
The German Mauser's were designed to shoot war time produced ammunition from many different sources, including steel cased, corrosive, slave made, and other cobbled together non spec ammo.

On the eastern front in Russia. if it would chamber and go bang, they used it.

As to accuracy, that all depends on the particular rifle. What shoots accurately in gun A, may be worthless in gun B.

Bottom line, what is the best ammo for your Mauser... there ain't one.

Ah, BTW, the myth that Mausers have become some kind of collector prize is right for maybe 10% of the times. The other 90% are Bubbaized guns that make great shooters and will do everything a 30-06 or a .308 can do... and sometimes better.
__________________
It drives me nuts when people claim to know the unknowable.
ibfestus is offline  
Old July 15, 2017, 01:35 AM   #27
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 16,887
Quote:
The German Mauser's were designed to shoot war time produced ammunition from many different sources, including steel cased, corrosive, slave made, and other cobbled together non spec ammo.
No, actually they weren't designed for that. It was the excellence of the peacetime design that allowed the use of "ammo from different sources".

Everything was corrosive primed in those days. Slave labor in ammo plants didn't exist when the 98k was designed.

Certainly, soldiers on the sharp end will use (or make and use) anything that goes bang, but no guns are designed FOR that.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 16, 2017, 09:54 PM   #28
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,995
German K.98k's weren't "designed to shoot" some kind of inferior wartime ammo any more than U.S. M1 rifles were. German wartime quality control on ammunition was excellent right to the end. This is especially remarkable because (contrary to most US practice), components were not always made in the same factory. German ammo box codes often show primers, powder and cases made in different factories with the ammunition loaded in yet another factory. Yet (local conditions always excepted), the German army never lacked for ammunition and many thousands of tons were left over when hostilities ceased.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 17, 2017, 03:03 PM   #29
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 16,887
Despite the overwhelming intensity of the aerial campaign against Germany, the Allies were never able to "kill" German weapons production. Some systems (like heavy tanks) were seriously delayed and interrupted but never destroyed. We managed to virtually destroy FUEL production, and seriously damage the transportation system (and here, lack of fuel was also a huge effect), but the Germans became masters of dispersing production of many weapons systems.

its a little known fact, but it is a fact that German fighter plane production ROSE every nearly every month from the middle of the war on, and in the last few months, including the very last months, fighter plane production was higher than any other time in the war.

They couldn't USE those planes, due to lack of fuel, and lack of skilled pilots, but they did manage to build ever increasing numbers of them, in well dispersed locations.

Compared to that, small arms and ammunition for them was relatively simple.

Getting them to where they could be used was the difficult part.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 17, 2017, 10:01 PM   #30
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,995
I once met a man who, as a U.S. Army Captain, had been in charge of inventorying a German small arms depot in France. I now forget the exact numbers, but in addition to millions of rounds of standard steel case 7.9 ammo, they had several million rounds of brass case ammo, which had been made for the Luftwaffe and turned back because it failed primer ignition tests and could have blown the propellers off German fighter planes.

There would have been no problems with rifles and ground MG's though.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 12:32 PM   #31
Mk VII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2000
Location: England
Posts: 402
Phile Sharpe says something similar in The Rifle In America, IIRC - at RWS they found barrels full of perfectly serviceable brass cases that had been rejected by the Luftwaffe as not up to standard. He used them repeatedly.
Mk VII is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 09:45 PM   #32
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,995
I got a PM questioning the meaning of my remark about blowing off propellers, so here is a brief tutorial. One of the best places to put machine guns or cannon in a fighter plane is in the fuselage, but in most WWII fighters, that is also where the engine is. So the guns were sometimes arranged over/beside/under the engine. But that meant they had to fire through the propeller arc and careful timing was needed to make sure the bullets from the gun(s) did not strike the propeller, obviously an "ungood" situation. The usual arrangement was to cause the propeller blade to fire the gun, but even then, the ammunition had to function perfectly with no ignition delay or a bullet could strike the blade.

Today's jets don't have propellers so the guns (or equivalent weapons) can be put about anywhere convenient. .

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 10:14 PM   #33
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 16,887
It was during WW I that mounting the armament on the center line of the aircraft was discovered to increase the ease of aiming. The British mounted a Lewis gun on the top wing of some planes, but that had its own issues.

One of the French aces (Roland Garros) mounted a machinegun on the engine cowling, to fire through the propeller arc. He fitted steel "deflector" plates on the wooden propeller, and this did work, sort of, though he still "shot himself down" on occasion.

It was Antony Fokker who developed the "interrupter gear", a linkage system that interrupted the machinegun's "trigger pull" at the right time so the propeller blade could pass in front of the gun muzzle without getting shot. It was a huge advantage, for a time, but after a few of the Fokkers were shot down and the wrecks studied, the Allies quickly created their own version.

If you listen to any of the movies with biplanes firing cowl guns (AND the sound effects are done RIGHT) the guns don't sound like normal ground machineguns when they fire. Instead of continuous bursts like the ground gun, they "stutter", because the firing is interrupted for the propeller passage.

Cowl guns were a feature of many pre-WWII designs. Germany's ME-109 and FW-190 used them the entire war. Early war US fighters (the P-39, and early models of the P-40) had a pair of .50 cal cowl guns, and .30s in the wings. Later P-40s dispensed with the cowl guns and put .50s in the wings.

Most Japanese fighters had cowl guns, and so did those of many other nations, and all of them used some version of the interrupter gear, to keep from shooting their propellers off.

It is a matter of very precise timing, to interrupt the stream of bullets ONLY long enough for the propeller to pass in front of the muzzle, and ammo that MIGHT hang fire, even by just fractions of a second could be a rather bad thing indeed. The same ammo that didn't pass muster for a cowl mounted machinegun would be perfectly fine in a ground mount gun, or any other gun that didn't fire through the propeller arc.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 20, 2017, 01:03 PM   #34
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,995
And the P-38 solved the problem in another way.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 20, 2017, 04:47 PM   #35
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by James K
Today's jets don't have propellers so the guns (or equivalent weapons) can be put about anywhere convenient.
Assuming of course that the ejected cases and propellant gases aren't ingested by the engines, which could cause catastrophic damage in the former case, and compressor stalls in the latter case. Just sayin'.

Of course, I guess this could be considered "convenient" placement, as flameouts tend to be inconvenient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by James K
...the P-38 solved the problem in another way.
And as it relates to 7.92x57mm ammo and Germany, so did the Messerschmitt Bf 110 and Me 410.

One wonders if the suspect brass-cased ammo could have been used in these aircraft and assorted bombers where propeller synchronization wasn't a factor, but this would require keeping it segregated, and establishing safeguards to keep it from being loaded into a Bf 109 by accident. Given that the Luftwaffe was known for being politically favored by Hitler, it was presumably more expedient to dump the "bad" ammo on the Wehrmacht.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2016 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.25808 seconds with 10 queries