File: Remington Rolling Block.jpg (59.1 KB)

59.1 KB JPG

>>65039885
Rolling Block Rifles I guess.

The AK-47s of the 1870s 1880s. Fuckin armed everyone from Argentina to Japan. Then magazined bolt actions became a thing and that was that.

File: HMS_Dreadnought_1906_H61017.jpg (3.4 MB)

3.4 MB JPG

Dreadnoughts and to a lesser extent, battleships as a whole. Don't get me wrong, they're cool ships, but they're easily outshined by carriers.

File: Blisset.png (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB PNG

Pepperboxes were very popular for personal protection back in the day but once proper revolvers became a thing they disappeared nearly instantly. The interesting thing is that most of them were double-action so there really wasn't much of a technological leap to go from pepperbox to revolver.

Most were fairly small caliber though there are some exceptions. This one is a whopping .577, which must have been quite the brick to carry.

>>65039917
>Argentina
Dad had one and he lost it in a moving, 43 spanish is hard to come by though

File: 101791.jpg (44.5 KB)

44.5 KB JPG

1869
12 shot standard issue repeating bolt action
1878/81 version pictured but fundemenally the same

File: teatfire.jpg (36 KB)

36 KB JPG

Any of the early ignition systems, whether for cartridges or for muzzle-loaders. I.e. Teatfire, lipfire, pinfire, & cupfire cartridges. Pill-locks and tube-locks, etc.

File: 240db_10.jpg (356.3 KB)

356.3 KB JPG

>>65039938
a revolver is just a pepperboc with the pepperbox barrels cut back to make a cylinder and a barrel affixed in front anon

see transitional revolvers pic random example

File: FHG-2245-1-1500x1000.jpg (135.7 KB)

135.7 KB JPG

>>65039955
>a revolver is just a pepperboc with the pepperbox barrels cut back to make a cylinder and a barrel affixed in front anon
Yes, exactly. That's my point. It's so simple mechanically, but in reality it took a while to get them working. In other words, transitional revolvers were around for far too long and it's surprising that they were even a thing at all.

File: Infanteriegewehr_m-1888_-_Tyskland_-_kaliber_7,92mm_-_Armémuseum_noBG.png (338.1 KB)

338.1 KB PNG

gewher 1888
floated by barrel shround, block loading magasine repeater, cock on open, automatic n block loader ejection or drop, 8mm mauserm twin locking lugs, safety catch, interchangeable parts.

File: 4579_1583547_1605534056883.jpg (71.2 KB)

71.2 KB JPG

>>65039960
in practise these were my preference up until I stopped carrying guns, two of these, I never carrie a revolver but owned a cold an 1851 I think not the little one, but it was to large and too complex. Both barrels from this was preferable and thet git easilt i your overcoat pockets. I had two pepperboxes one by a man called cooper that broke after one evening trying it in the garden and a nice one that was gifted to me but I never used.

File: f78cb7b7-365a-4027-8498-580f0143f60e.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

>>65039960
fyi these briefy were around before the pepperbox, the whole barrel mechanism rotates around an axel to give you a second capped barrel but I did not like it much, too fiddely.

File: 1310.jpg (309.5 KB)

309.5 KB JPG

>>65039995
Turnover guns are pretty cool. I love this example, owned by a Maharaja and built by Charles Lancaster. This has 4 barrels, you'd fire two then rotate the cluster to fire the other two.

>>65039986
tap-action pistols were also very common for a time for personal protection.

tap action by mortimer, the 'tap' is a sector on the aside that lets you choose which loaded barrel the primed pan will discharge. They wree VERY fashionable for a while towards the 1800s an just after. You just kept a few pinches pinch of pan powder power in a second snuff box

File: srgyq3498tkerhgjkdrhgkerjger.jpg (440.8 KB)

440.8 KB JPG

The so-called "Monk's gun" was a linear version of a wheel-lock, perhaps it should have been called a "file-lock"?

File: d3a49e64-cdb5-4f48-90b7-08b234479252.png (1007.6 KB)

1007.6 KB PNG

>>65040012

File: fa7834kryhgjksdartaerthed.jpg (48.4 KB)

48.4 KB JPG

>>65040015

>>65040007
The lancaster did not need the barrel manually rotated, they worked differently to those turn over barrel pocket pistols, they became very popular with military african types and indian officer types after the sudan much more a military thing. By then people had mostly stopped carrying guns at home and carried walking sticks with the occasional sword stick or sap. There was a whole think of men using their walking sticks to defend themselves for a while which made protective hats popular.

File: alex_henry.jpg (199.1 KB)

199.1 KB JPG

>>65040007
Another interesting turnover piece. I spotted this one at auction and regret not bidding on it. This one is odd because it's a cartridge gun, and it's large-caliber too. Why not order that as a classic break-action howdah instead, that way you could get your second shot right away? Anyway, the brass in the pic is not correct for the gun, but it is a .450 BPE if I remember correctly.

File: large_DI_2016_0930.jpg (357.5 KB)

357.5 KB JPG

>>65040032
>The lancaster did not need the barrel manually rotated,
That one did. It sounds like you're talking about the break-action 2 and 4-barrel guns like picrel, that's not the same thing. The one I just posted is a muzzleloader and you can see the catch for the barrels on the tang.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/81/1310/charles-lancaster-four-barrel-percussion-rifle-with-two-actions

Interestingly, there is a modern knockoff of picrel, the COP Derringer.

File: f30d4663-677c-4422-aaa4-2af7557cb825.png (117.3 KB)

117.3 KB PNG

underhammer buggey percussion pistol/poachers gun

random example. Suprisingly accurate even if smooth bored due to the high pressure as the ball was swaged when the barrel was screwed on. The underhammer made aiming far more agreeable and was double action this one is apparently from a gunsmith in America 1860-80, they were very desirable and broke down into barrel action and near universally a detachable stock.

>>65040042
yes that's the one very must an indian officers type of thing like chainmail epaulet and all that, where offcicers from agricultural families wound up surrounded by colonial what you would now call browns.

>>65039930
>Dreadnoughts and to a lesser extent, battleships as a whole. Don't get me wrong, they're cool ships, but they're easily outshined by carriers.
I appreciate the spirit of your statement but I don't think OP was talking about just normal tech development, like, sure an M16 is better than a musket, but that's a long time period. Carriers didn't come into their own until WW2, with Pearl Harbor arguably being the true paradigm shift moment, same as aircraft in general. Depending on how we measure "modern battleships" and dreadnoughts exactly that's a solid 30-50 years and a major world war from the time of bs/dreadnoughts until carriers, I'd call that a pretty reasonable run for a given approach in that time period. Carriers could not have come any earlier either because they made no sense as a center role until aircraft development got far enough.

>>65040052
that one does not appear to be double action, my badmost were like the 'bar' pepperboxes

File: 55b9a847-e903-4161-8010-1ad510594a9d.png (204.7 KB)

204.7 KB PNG

>>65040052>>65040064

another example again American

File: 3340.jpg (389 KB)

389 KB JPG

>>65040052
>buggy pistol
those are interesting.

File: Seven-Barrel-Percussion-Volley-Gun-by-Perin-Le-Page.jpg (156.8 KB)

156.8 KB JPG

Volley Guns. As I understand it there were basically two versions of this arm. The military type usually had 7 barrels, most famously the Nock Volley Gun used by the Royal Navy. There were also small-bore versions that were intended for hunting waterfowl, basically like a long-range shotgun.

File: Screenshot_3-4-2026_161126_bid.candtauctions.co.uk.jpg (43.5 KB)

43.5 KB JPG

>>65040052
Composite Take-Down Under Hammer Percussion Gun, Irish

File: volley pistols.jpg (126.5 KB)

126.5 KB JPG

>>65040089
The handguns had all sorts of interesting designs. The one on the top here is really strange, it is a percussion gun but has interchangeable breechblocks for rapid reloading. The one at the bottom is .22LR, loads with an en-bloc clip, and can fire either 4 or 8 barrels at once.

>>65040080
they are and they were very useful guns but expensive. Short lived Often used by poachers and people up to no good in Europe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fUA_YCVkKs

>>65040089
>Volley Guns.
Kinda of interesting that VGs sorta came back, and then were instantly a bit too late/obsolete after 20 seconds, with the Metal Storm concept. There the idea was to blast out a huge amount of stuff into the rough direction of an incoming high speed missile or whatever, thus making up for not sufficiently advanced radar/guidance/control. But those got better faster then metal storm and were fundamentally superior in efficiency so MS never got into any actual deployment.

File: Watson44calAirguncane.jpg (400.2 KB)

400.2 KB JPG

>>65040032
>carried walking sticks
Gun-canes were a thing, including airgun versions.

File: W-W-Greener-Ejector.jpg (74.4 KB)

74.4 KB JPG

Cape guns. These are a two-barrel combination gun, usually side-by-side. They were a thing for colonists in India and Africa as they could be used for general-purpose hunting, including large game. Interestingly, the English made loads of these but they almost never made 3-barrel combination guns while the German/Austrian tradition went heavily into that.
These are usually solid built guns but you rarely find super nice ones, as a Gentleman would have a battery of different guns for his hunting excursions.

>>65039930
A 30ish year run from 1906 to the mid-30s is pretty good.

The Battlecruiser is a better example. It only has superiority until the other guy builds their own BC, at which point is becomes a bit of a red queen's race.

>>65040103
yes often the underhammers ha the option of a right angled can handle along with the shouldser stock and an exterior sleeve an tip. as the ball was swaged by the barrel being screwed on little the older screw barrel pocket pistols you did not risk the ball moving and causing the barrel to rupture due to an air gap being created between the ball and change, a very dangerous situation with old black powder, in some cases the barrels were two stage so could also act as hunderhammer pistols with the walking stick grip attacked or with the full long barrel and shoulder stock as lomg guns, there were perfectly accurate up to 75 yards as well.

I remember an unbrella pistol that worked in a similar way and you could innstall either the barrel or a short spike dagger in it. Walkinng stick guns really became quite common later with little 410 type shotgun cartridges or 9mmist cartridges. Their big downside was they had these rubber plugs protecting the end which with use tende to get stuck which was a bit of a nusance of you actually needed the thing. Even in their day though, the weapons I mention were reasonably rare such as the unbrella and really only used by people in special situations or circumstances as little rimfire black powder revolvers were very common and cheap by then abd much prefered by whoremongers and rent collectors.

>>65040173
I saw all the ships lined up for the jubilee in 1897, quite an event and did a tour in a little pleasure boat around all the battleships with a very nice american man and his english fiancee who's name I have long forgotted but we had gin and tonic at a bandstand afterwards, there were ones from japan and germany and italy and an American one that was quite bizzare because it wa spainted entirely white. It was like a huge festival and there were people from all over the world there.. It was an amazing exhibition of power by the British Empire, the ships went on for miles and miles in rows.

File: ParadoxGunAdvert.jpg (657.8 KB)

657.8 KB JPG

The ball-and-shot gun was a popular thing from the end of the 19th century. These were shotguns with rifled chokes, with the idea being that they were optimized for shooting slugs but could also do a passable job with shot.
These existed in all gauges, though there is a big jump in power between the 12-bore, which was a general purpose hunting gun, and the 10, which was much more powerful and suitable for dangerous game. The 12-bores were usually regulated for 3-4 drams, about the same as a normal shotgun, though I have seen 10-bore paradox guns regulated for 8 dram loads.

File: Westley-Richards-Explora-and-Super-Magnum-Explora-6-source_images-nzccc.org_.nz_.jpg (260.4 KB)

260.4 KB JPG

>>65041117
All the big makers had them. H&H called theirs the Paradox, there was also the "Colindian" by Lang IIRC, Westley Richards had the "Explora" and "Fauneta", etc. Westley Richards made special ammo for these too, these are a high-velocity hollowpoint slug with a ballistic cap made of thin sheet metal on the front.

>>65041117
Rifling destoys shot patterns and is to little to be effective in stabalising a bullet. Fowling pieces which is what I think you are discussing and were incredibly common halfstocked in percussion are universally smoothbore. They were also used for patched ball
>>65041117
>These were shotguns with rifled chokes
No.

File: 6.jpg (226 KB)

226 KB JPG

>>65041125
There was special incendiary ammunition made for these during WWI to shoot down zeppelins.

>>65041125
>>65041117
These were near uiversally used to fire big more dangerous game tier boolits. There were not at all commonn in the UK or Europe as bird guns

>>65041132
He's describing paradox rifling which is the same as today's rifled choke tubes.
It absolutely works for stabilising bullets and is short enough it didn't do too bad for shot. At the time chokes were still a new thing.

File: fcc67422b64bed2ccd10d4c8517f2784a81ad2ef_2_690x538.jpg (249.3 KB)

249.3 KB JPG

>>65041144

Picrel.
> Fowling pieces which is what I think you are discussing
No. I'm talking about Fosberry's patent of 1895. go look it up if you're this ignorant.

>>65041145
>These were near uiversally used to fire big more dangerous game tier boolits.
Yes, I just said that they were optimized for shooting slugs.

>There were not at all commonn in the UK or Europe as bird guns
Of course they weren't. Notice the names all imply their use in exotic faraway lands. The Jungle Gun, Colindian, etc, these were for rich people going to India or Africa.

File: The_Gun_and_its_development_p390.jpg (431.9 KB)

431.9 KB JPG

>>65041183
And speaking of slugs, they had some strange ones back in the day too. This thing was supposed to spin due to angled holes perforated through it.

File: 1634322.jpg (205.7 KB)

205.7 KB JPG

>>65041249
There were also explosive slugs for hunting. These actually dated back to the muzzle-loader era.

>Among other weapons, I had an extraordinary rifle that carried a half-pound percussion shell—this instrument of torture to the hunter was not sufficiently heavy for the weight of the projectile; it only weighed twenty pounds: thus, with a charge of ten drachms of powder, behind a half-pound shell, the recoil was so terrific, that I spun around like a weathercock in a hurricane. I really dreaded my own rifle, although I had been accustomed to heavy charges of powder, and severe recoil for some years. None of my men could fire it, and it was looked upon with a species of awe, and it was named "Jenna-El-Mootfah" (Child of a Cannon) by the Arabs, which being far too long a name for practice, I christened it the "Baby;" and the scream of this "Baby" loaded with a half-pound shell was always fatal. It was far too severe, and I very seldom fired it, but it is a curious fact, that I never fired a shot with that rifle without bagging: the entire practice, during several years, was confined to about twenty shots. I was afraid to use it; but now and then it was absolutely necessary that it should be cleaned, after months of staying loaded. On such occasions my men had the gratification of firing it, and the explosion was always accompanied by two men falling on their backs (one having propped up the shooter), and the "Baby" flying some yards behind them. This rifle was made by Holland & Holland, of Bond Street, and I could highly recommend it for the Goliath of Gath, but not for the men of A.D. 1866.
>>--Sir Samuel White Baker, The Albert N'Yanza, Great Basin Of The Nile

File: hfksr7e89tyhge.jpg (410.2 KB)

410.2 KB JPG

>>65041258
....as well as steel-tipped AP slugs for hunting elephants.

File: 100791495_27_043E02F870221F27.jpg (401.1 KB)

401.1 KB JPG

>>65041264
Tools for assembling said slugs.

File: 100791495_27_B4C16201EABF01A7.jpg (198.4 KB)

198.4 KB JPG

>>65041269
reproduction of one of the old molds, you can see how it casts both parts like #3 and #4 like in >>65041258, which are then swaged together to make the completed slug.

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-292-1262-07,_Nordfrankreich,_Soldat_mit_Panzerbüchse.jpg (46.1 KB)

46.1 KB JPG

Anti-tank rifles & MGs. Something relatively portable that could punch through armor? Great! For the time period of late-WW1 to early-WW2.

File: 3294.jpg (36.4 KB)

36.4 KB JPG

>>65041275
>Anti-tank rifles
That is an interesting topic. On the one hand, it wasn't very long until tanks became too heavily armored for a man-portable rifle to take one out, so the specific case of an "anti tank rifle" is indeed pretty limited. However the idea of a rifle whose size is near the limits of human capability has always been a thing. Wall guns and jingals were around for centuries. Dangerous game hunting rifles and market wildfowling guns tended towards the limits of human capability as well. Today we have anti-materiel rifles and extreme long range rigs. The idea of a big-ass-gun that someone can barely carry is very old and is still around. The thing that's changed is what people shoot them at.

>>65041183
only idiots and nuts of people desperate for advancement went to africa and india, they died like flies from malaria and cholera and typhus. People who brought their wives with them and had kids lost children constantly, they were better off in boarding schools back in england. The wives died constantly as well.

File: Type 97 auto cannon crewed.png (1009.1 KB)

1009.1 KB PNG

>>65041338
True enough. How ever they're used is how they're classified. I guess what makes them dedicated to the anti-tank role is also the ammunition used. Since you're getting into caps, jackets, tungsten core, etc. Stuff with a specific target & range in mind rather than purely long distance or knockdown power.

File: P-51H.jpg (889.3 KB)

889.3 KB JPG

>>65039885
Any late war superprop

>>65041264
>>65041269
>>65041273
Wew. Wonder if it works. No way I'd have the balls to shoot an elephant with anything less than a .416 with solids.

>>65039885
Any of the gunless jet fighters of the 50s and 60s. Technically they were the best of the best with their radars and missiles but those radars and missles just weren't good enough yet and nobody knew how to fight with a pure missile fighter either so everyone dumped them almost as quickly as they appeared. Though I feel it was more like a fad than a short-lived zenith of technology, like ram bows

File: davidbaker.jpg (74.7 KB)

74.7 KB JPG

>>65041731
Forget hunting the elephants, I don't think I'd have the balls to load the gun. Imagine ramming a sketchy impact-sensitive slug full of HE down the barrel of a muzzleloader on top of a massive amount of gunpowder.

>>65041747
Specialized ramming tips. There's a hollow so the rammer does not hit the sensitive area.

>>65041762
Sure, sounds great. You can go first.

File: P-38L-5-LO_(s_n 44-25419)_1944__P38-May1988-1.jpg (255.1 KB)

255.1 KB JPG

>>65041620
the L variant—solved all high altitude problems of earlier variants, and boosted controls—arrived mid-1944, by which time jet propelled fighters were on the way. Finest single seat piston engine (twin turbosupercharged) fighter bomber reconnaissance aircraft ever. Cadillac of piston engined fighters.

File: IMG_20260403_153719.jpg (291.4 KB)

291.4 KB JPG

>>65041769
Mine is for even worse situations.
To ram out a misfire with a live fuse.

>>65039885
Always thought the Kropatschek was neat as fuck.

>>65039917
Also the rolling block, it's an insanely smart design for what it intends to be.

>>65039955
Proper revolvers allowed for much better practical accuracy, and a lighter and slimmer gun. This required good cylinder indexing and timing, whereas for a pepper box, this was less important.

File: Granatbüsche.jpg (220.9 KB)

220.9 KB JPG

>>65041275
The interesting thing about them is that they became anti-materiel rifles instead, as tank armor got stronger during WW2, people would start using them for shooting at other things instead.
Although, pic related was a really clever adaption to keep using them against tanks (if harsh on the shoulder).

File: C37590A__59121.1546998801.jpg (89.7 KB)

89.7 KB JPG

>>65041949
reminds me of this fine weapon

File: philip-1873-three-cylinder-revolver-v0-w0nbr5hv0dz91_jpg_92.jpg (815.3 KB)

815.3 KB JPG

>>65041784
I'd feel a lot better about that. I trust the safety features of a modern fuse a lot more than I trust 19th century impact primers fitted in a soft lead bullet. But still, there would be some pucker factor involved....

>>65041161
> A combination of Barium peroxide and powdered aluminum
I am frightened and aroused.

>>65041427
Yeah and those that succeeded own huge deaths of land in Namibia and South Africa and basically have mini utopia.

>>65041747
You're right that's even worse than I imagined.

File: 1760728150099817.png (278.3 KB)

278.3 KB PNG

>>65039885
People don't give Japan the credit they deserve. In 1939 they were on the bleeding edge of aviation technology and many of their 1939 model weapons were world leading at their introduction.
Yes they were completely leapfrogged across the board within a few years but briefly they held a strong hand.
For example the Type 99 rifle was amazing feature packed for a bolt action gun, but everyone else moved on to semi-auto rifles and submachine guns pretty much immediately after.
The Zero was so good that its range was thought to be physically impossible at its debut, but better allied planes showed up to challenge it within a few short years.

File: troll-army.gif (62.5 KB)

62.5 KB GIF

>>65042842
Jap shit airpower was specifically designed, across the board, for surprise! we faster than you! by making their shit out of paper mache' and putting a big engine in it. They specifically designed their shit for an overwhelming surprise/invasion in secret, knowing that was the plan. Gee. I wonder who else has done that sort of underhanded shit before?

File: htyjnb vtyhjnhb.jpg (136 KB)

136 KB JPG

>>65042842
I think WW2 Japanese small arms get shat on because:
>1. The Nambu pistols aren't that great.
>2. The anti-air sights on the Type 99 Arisaka sounds comically useless if you don't know how they're used (still debatable in a squad, mind).
>3. The older Type 11 is weird and funky.
>4. Barely any subguns.

However, I think these things are worth considering:
>1. Pistols were of more peripheral importance to infantry combat, even in WW2, and 8mm Nambu isn't AS weak as some people insist.
>2. The Type 99 Arisaka rifle as a whole is basically on the same level as the K98k Mauser, only with an even stronger action.
>3. The Type 99 light machinegun was REALLY good, as good as the Zb.26 and Bren, and better than the 1918A2 BAR.
>4. Japan were not the only major power to foolishly neglect the subgun (see Britain and Russia), they just failed to course correct in time. IJN Marines fighting in China were strong proponents of subguns from experience, but weren't really listened to.

File: PPS-43_Soviet_7.62_mm_submachine_gun.jpg (33.1 KB)

33.1 KB JPG

>>65042951
Yeah its not like the Soviet Union not only had the best submachinegun of WW2 but also the second best submachinegun of WW2

>>65040228
>World's oldest man browses /k/

File: Vuosalmi_etulinja_1944.jpg (2.9 MB)

2.9 MB JPG

>>65043013
>Best SMG of WWII
Wrong. Very wrong.

>>65042091
The description for the fill of >>65041264
is also exciting.
>Take sulphuret of antimony and chlorate of potash, pounded separately in the mortar, mix carefully equal parts by weight with a bone knife on a plate or other smooth surface

>>65042951
>I think WW2 Japanese small arms get shat on
Agreed. Other factors were the shitty "last ditch" and training model Arisakas. The last ditch guns were mechanically sound but looked like shit. The training guns would blow up if you fired full-power ammunition through them but it's not like GI Joe could read the moonrunes.

>>65043013
I would like to know what your idea for the "second best SMG of WW2II" is and why, because personal experience got me pretty solidly convinced that it is not a PPSh...

>>65042951
I really like jap HMG tripods. A lot of care and troop feedback went into designing them.

>>65043013
>PPS users
>23 world wide
>Sten users
>58 world wide
Huh.....

>>65043013
He was fairly obviously talking about pre-war. Where the Soviets made a few PPDs and only really learnt their lesson a couple years in, like the Brits (who had a few Lanchester and Thompson pre-war). Posting a gun from mid-war doesn't change that, certainly not the best of the war.

>>65043375
Beretta 1938 mogs.

>>65044013
He didn't post a PPSH.

>>65044024
Neither the Sten nor the PPS are "good" SMGs, they're servicable and functional. The Suomi, Beretta 38, Patchett, Owen or Gustav M/45 (if you count it) are really the competitors for that.

>>65044025
I was wrong about Lanchester/Thompson because I got confused by some pictures and videos that I thought were pre-war but weren't. Britain didn't have either until 1940 durr.

File: PPS43, 7.62mm.jpg (96.2 KB)

96.2 KB JPG

>>65044024
The Sten is really fucking cheap, and the British Empire was both large, and left a lot of remnants.

>>65044033
I'd rate the PPS43 above the Sten, Greasegun, MP40, etc. Stock is kinda eh, but the magazine is really good, and it works very reliably, which is great for a gun which is so cheap, fast, and easy to produce in large numbers.

>>65039885
Bayraktar.

Absolutely dominated early in the war, and having a lot more of them could turn the tide a lot more. But practically irrelevant a few months later

File: 100-historically-accurate-plane-performance-v0-xunaoz0ktxjc1.png (282.3 KB)

282.3 KB PNG

>>65042889
The zeros actually weren't all that fast and Japanese engines of the time were kind of shit in both design and build quality. Their later war "super" fighters relied on licensed copies and variants of German engines. All the zero succeeded in was being long range, cheap, and very maneuverable at low to moderate speeds. Lord forbid you tried to maneuver after a dive in one of those

>>65044025
>He didn't post a PPSH.
Correct. He did post a PPS implying it's the No. 1.
I inquired what the supposed No. 2 is and stated that if he thinks it's the PPSh, then he's fucking wrong.

>>65042842
>and many of their 1939 model weapons were world leading at their introduction.
>For example the Type 99 rifle was amazing feature packed for a bolt action gun, but everyone else moved on to semi-auto rifles and submachine guns pretty much immediately after.
It's a good simplification of an excellent 1900s rifle, but definitely not world leading. Even if it was called Type 89, there was no shortage of improved Mausers around the world back then, and by 1939 self loading rifles were in service in the US and, depending on how you count it, the USSR for years, and close to entering service in France and Poland.
I don't see how SMGs are relevant here since they fill an entirely different role. In any case, most major armies were tentatively interested in SMGs by at least the late 30s, the Brits snubbing them altogether is really an outlier.
>The Zero was so good that its range was thought to be physically impossible at its debut
The Zero is given way too much credit if anything. Don't get me wrong, it IS one of the best single engine airplanes in the entire world at its introduction, but its capabilities tend to be overglorified to wunderwaffel status and its strengths came at the cost of massive drawbacks that were later mercilessly exploited.
>>65042951
>and better than the 1918A2 BAR.
The Type 96/99 are great but let's not pretend being a better LMG than a US BAR is a high bar.
>>65043375
Correct. Very correct.
The PPS is a sublime piece of wartime manufacturing.

File: Swedish BAR, 6.5x55mm 01.jpg (75.7 KB)

75.7 KB JPG

>>65044541
>but let's not pretend being a better LMG than a US BAR is a high bar
The 1918A2 is an objectively mediocre LMG for its time. It works, but there's just a lot which could be better (like the sights, or the fucking bipod).

The BAR in itself has a lot of potential, and this was much better realized by the armies of other nations, like the Belgians, Polacks, and Swedes, but the U.S Army's own iterating on older WW1 era BARs to try to make them more suitable as LMGs had mixed results.
Again, good enough to be useful, but not as good as it should have been.

>>65044046
I'd take the MP40 over any of the ones listed (Every MP40 I've handled has been much higher build quality) but to me the Sten/PPS/Greasegun are much a muchness. Postwar PPS/Sten get much better with wooden stocks etc (well at least Polish ones did) so I suppose if we go by final variants I'd take the PPS. But in wartime it's just another cheap easily dispersable SMG. Not saying the PPS wasn't impressive as a technical achievement but it's hardly the peak of sub guns.

>>65044118
Yeah I was being retarded and misread fair dos

>>65044541
>Correct. Very correct.
The PPS is a sublime piece of wartime manufacturing.
That's a KP-31. The Finnish file name should have been a dead giveaway.

File: 1693464808307619.webm (640.9 KB)

640.9 KB WEBM

>>65039885
Girandoni air rifle
"They only had muskets back then bruh!" -trans-nigger-faggot

>>65040099
Maybe Metal Storm wouldn't be so retarded against drones, idk
The problem was always convergence and you don't need that against drones

>>65044939
The MP40's weakest part is the charging handle which is hilarious and a bit damning

>>65045274
That's actually not a bad idea. I'm imagining a scaled-up version of the small caliber volley guns like >>65040089 mentions. Something like .22 hornet would be a major threat to a drone, a fairly small barrel cluster could contain thousands of rounds that could be fired in bursts or volleys. That would be far more effective than buckshot, both in terms of lethality to the drone as well as range.

InB4 someone posts the M7 Spear.

>>65044939
>(Every MP40 I've handled has been much higher build quality)
The magazines matter, and the MP40's magazines were Sten tier.

>>65045448
I have shot both guns (own neither) and Sten mags are infinitely worse
MP40 mags have stiff springs but you can still fill them with 20ish rounds without a tool, I have met a Sten mag I couldn't fill beyond 8 rounds and I felt like I was about to get a hernia doing so

>>65042842
>The Zero was so good that its range was thought to be physically impossible
Nope, the zero was overrated if anything, having a flammable and brittle airframe isn't exactly a good design by any mean

File: lebel.jpg (108.4 KB)

108.4 KB JPG

Surprised noone posted the obvious thing, a Lebel rifle. Outranging literally any other infantry weapon while not obstructing view and giving off position by huge clouds of white smoke for 2 years until Germans did the same thing but better, and then everyone else too.

>>65046726
It was still superior to its opponents for all of 20 seconds

Everyone that shot an MP40 full auto knows that it's Superior to any of the Russian garbage that came out of world war II. I'm not going to shit talk the Russian garbage too much because quantity is quality but it's not the best submachine kind of world war two. The MP40 does hold that distinction. Just fire one and you'll fucking know why.

>>65047250
It's a heavy pig that has near zero recoil because of that and relatively modern controls but the rate of fire is a little anemic
That's my take from shooting an MP38 and MP40 before

>>65047181
The cartridge perhaps, but the rifle itself was obsolete from its conception

>>65047181
Rofl over the fact that the adoption of the lebel bogged the french small arms industry for the next 40 years

>>65047250
MP40 isn’t even top 5

>>65039943
fucking love the vetterli rifle

File: ONSV22NAS143__01.png (584.3 KB)

584.3 KB PNG

>>65047250
>The MP40 does hold that distinction
Inferior to the Beretta 38, inferior to the Owen.

>>65049691
I kneel

>>65049691
And the Suomi
The downside is that it weighs more than a FAL but it's such a fine shooter

>>65049691
Never noticed before how much does the magazine floorplate stick out, begging to catch on stuff like pouch edges. Still would love to shoot one, I do like the concept.

>>65048867
Well, being the ONLY rifle for such a cartridge and considering the fact it was the cartridge that gave it the edge over other infantry weapons of the time I'd argue that it still makes my point valid. Esp. when you realize that many following designs have improved upon the cartridges as well.

Mig 15

>>65050947
The Kp31 is functional and dependable if it's what you have, but it has the same problem as the Thompson does in that it's way more expensive and heavy than it needs to be for its job.

File: file.png (2.2 MB)

2.2 MB PNG

From 1971 until 1975, there existed only 1 gun that fit the mold of the classic DA/SA double stack Wonder Nine, the Model 59

>>65052200
But it's also not a POS like the Thompson
It's hard to describe how shooting one feels, it really is like you're holding a masterpiece. The rate of fire is still a handful if you're just holding down the trigger

File: H22021-L233450434_original.jpg (634.2 KB)

634.2 KB JPG

>>65052713
>DA/SA
>14+1rds of 9mm
Legit not bad for the time. Also while still carrying those sexy 1911-ish lines like the M39 did before it.

>>65052724
>But it's also not a POS like the Thompson
The Thompson has worse ergos, and a worse drum, but it works well.

>>65052728
Yeah when looking at the time, there were some DA/SA single stack 9s (P38s, Model 39s) and some double stack single action 9s (Hi Power, PA-15) as well as all the ones that didnt have either major wonder nine feature (Colt Commanders, Beretta 51s, Sig P210s) so it is pretty wild to me that the Model 59 is the gun that brought together the best of both worlds, even though it would quickly get foreshadowed by the Beretta, Sigs, CZs, ect

File: maxresdefault.jpg (94.7 KB)

94.7 KB JPG

>>65040080

>>65040062
>>65040173
I think HMS Dreadnought herself is a good example of the spirit of the thread. She undeniably changed naval warfare forever after but was herself obsolete within the decade.

File: 916491742.jpg (132.3 KB)

132.3 KB JPG

Remington Lee mogged other bolt guns hard in 1885...

>>65040042
I want one of these rated for .454 Casull/410

>>65052713
>>65053551
Good picks!

File: the OG automatic weapon.jpg (259.7 KB)

259.7 KB JPG

Really surpriaed nobody has posted this yet. For almost twenty years it was the anti-infantry weapon of choice and then Maxim came along and made it obsolete overnight. I know it saw continued service until the very early 20th century but it was almost entirely in colonial or South American wars. Gatling even filed a patent for an electrically driven version in 1893.

File: T-28.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

>>65039885
The T-28 had 3 man turret with a basket, a dedicated drive, coaxial MG, a 3" gun with design margin left for more powerful armament should it become available and radio fitted as standard in the early 30s
Then the Panzer IV came a few years later and did all that without the secondary turret nonsense while the Soviets themselves moved on to smaller 2 man turrets

>>65054784
Man I hated that tank in Heroes and Generals. Just absolute garbage.

File: images(1).jpg (26 KB)

26 KB JPG

Zeppelin, large bomb load, un-interceptable by fighters, too high for effective AA interception. A very very brief window wunderwaffe. (Sure not very effective as a strategic bomber but in 1914~ context impressive)

>>65054784
Had this been made without the turrets and the extra weight saving on more frontal armour the Germans would have had a tougher time in early Barbarossa for sure. Soviets definitely bet on the wrong horses with the lots of light tanks and multi turret ideq

>>65041738
F-4 was from 1962 and the gunless USN versions worked well in Nam.They don't really fit this.

>>65041427
>going hunting
>getting rid of unwanted wife and child at the same time
so what's the downside

>>65057900
>Had this been made without the turrets and the extra weight saving on more frontal armour
It would've been shorter and possibly a better basis for future upgrades, but unlikely to be significantly better armored. Remember, this is the early 30s, tanks with 25-30mm of front armor were considered acceptable up to and including the first year of the war and mid 30s French tanks with 40-60mm were considered extremely well protected.
>the Germans would have had a tougher time in early Barbarossa for sure
A theoretic better armored T-28 would probably fare a bit better, as the Soviets themselves found out during the Winter War, but majority of losses were from lack of spare parts and the tanks just being worn out.
>Soviets definitely bet on the wrong horses with the lots of light tanks and multi turret ideq
The light tanks were as much an exercise in building up both the industry and technical knowledge needed for domestic production as it was a serious attempt at building a formidable armored force. They could've definitely made less of whatever that wasn't a T-26, a BT or a T-28, but it wasn't really a step they could just skip and go straight to churning out T-34s like they're going out of fashion, a lesson the US had to learn the hard way with the Sherman.
Going on to make T-60s and T-70s after the French and their crappy 2 man light infantry tank concept got smoked was definitely a mistake though.

>>65044939
>I'd take the MP40 over any of the ones listed
Liking a subgun with double stack single feed magazines is a mental illness.

File: FG-42.jpg (56.9 KB)

56.9 KB JPG

>>65039938
>but once proper revolvers became a thing they disappeared nearly instantly.
Colt seethed about them for a long while, actually. They also probably stuck around longer in the US because he made sure that the US had no role in Revolver lock work technology going forward.

My personal pick's the FG42. Seems to have been the only actual good full-powered select fire infantry rifle out there.

File: whirlwindbg_2.jpg (45.8 KB)

45.8 KB JPG

>>65039885
Despite its underpowered engines this was much faster, better armed, had better ranged than any fighter in 1940 and was just as maneuverable as the single seaters.

File: 1766545832994137.jpg (16.4 KB)

16.4 KB JPG

>>65059076
>and was just as maneuverable as the single seaters.

File: CR42 Falco.jpg (3.2 MB)

3.2 MB JPG

>>65059081
Anon this was the period where the likes of the Spitfire couldn't do negative G and the BF-109 wasn't exactly the most stable at low speeds. It very much could take them in a dogfight and it did. About the only thing it had to fear in a turn battle is Luigi and his flying pasta maker, speaking of:
>Introduce the best biplane fighter in 1938
>Enters service just as everyone moves onto monoplanes

>>65058840
Good points but like you said at least without the turrets it would have been a candidate for a interim upgrade, gun and armour and would have been somewhat viable. I suppose they would still have churned on with T34s either way. The light tanks were good for the industry perhaps but the amount they made was absurd didn't the Germans blow up.. 35,000? I don't recall where I'm thinking of that number but a bigger % of that being a single turret t28 and parts would have been certainly better.

>>65059023
The double feed single stack magazine may not be the optimal but it certainly wasn't ruinous for the pps43 or the mp40 both were totally decent smgs.

>>65059176
Effectively engage and and dogfight are two very different things, and until I see a test report proving the latter I'll continue to believe it wasn't just as maneuverable as planes with barely over half its wing loading.
>Introduce the best biplane fighter in 1938
>Enters service just as everyone moves onto monoplanes
I wouldn't throw those stones with the Swordfish and Gladiator entering service in 1936 and 1937 respectively.
>>65059209
>would have been a candidate for a interim upgrade, gun and armour and would have been somewhat viable.
It was designed to mount a more powerful gun from the start, it just wasn't available due to production delays. Oh, and the designer being shot. Which is why there were about a hundred T-28s still armed with the old howitzer by the time of Barbarossa.
I don't think the armor would be any different besides mounting the add-on plates on the front section being slightly easier.
>but the amount they made was absurd didn't the Germans blow up.. 35,000?
IIRC they had about 20,000 light tanks, with under around 10,000 of them being T-26s. They lost about 75% of those, again mostly due to them being old and in various states of disrepair.
>pps43
PPS had double feed mags.

>>65057900
Zeppelin is a good example too, not only for bombing but also battlefield surveillance.

>>65059467
>Swordfish
That made the laws of aerodynamics obsolete!

File: Beretta 1938-42, Transferable.png (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB PNG

>>65059209
PPS43 used two position feed mags.
So did the Owen, the Beretta, the Suomi, and Thompson (though the Thompson isn't quite as good as the others overall). Beretta's magazine design would live on after the war for the Uzi (then subsequently also the Colt SMG), and the double-stack magazines for the Suomi would live on in the Carl Gustaf and Hovea.
The Beretta/Uzi magazines, and the Nordic magazines, are fucking excellent for their time.

The Lancaster was a reverse engineered copy of the MP28, and used the same kind of single position feed magazine, and this magazine was carried over to the Sten. It quite suffered from this magazine.
The MP38 and MP40 used a magazine derived from the MP28 as well, and basically just for patent reasons, not because it was actually better (it was a committee design), and it suffered from this as well. The Greasegun used a magazine design copying the Sten's, and it caused trouble there too.
These guns all actually work (and fairly well overall), but the style of magazine is just inferior, even when made to a higher standard of quality than what was done for the Sten, and precluded them from having truly great reliability.

Also, this doesn't really have anything to do with this discussion, but calling it "the Suomi" is actually weird, since that'd be "the Finland," which gets doubly weird when people then effectively say "the Finnish Finland," when really, people should be calling it after the man himself, Lahti.

File: 1492997637958.png (1 MB)

1 MB PNG

>>65057900
>tfw when grow up with Crimson Skies where zeppelins are fucking badass
>then you grow up and learn that they actually mostly really suck

File: Mitrailleuse_front.jpg (62.1 KB)

62.1 KB JPG

>>65054595
At least it had its successes, the French thouht the mitrailleuse was going to be their edge over Germany but they realised it was shit the second they used it in an actual battle.

>>65060900
>the double-stack magazines for the Suomi would live on in the Carl Gustaf and Hovea
And the Kp/44 and the DUX

>>65061991
Naturally, though the DUX is pretty obscure as I understand.

>>65061902
It didn't help that they didn't really know what to do with it, and kind of just used it as another kind of artillery, where it obviously isn't gonna be as good as a bombshell.

File: GunMain.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

>>65063364
One of those, where it would have been a great concept a few decades earlier, like if the Puckle Gun had actually been a handcrank auto firer during the Napoleonic era

File: IMG_4319.jpg (39 KB)

39 KB JPG

>>65040118
These are super cool and weird at the same time. You can still find these in Czech Republic, mostly for hunters/jägers. Very niche rifles. Picrel is caliber trio 20/76 , .30RBlaser , 5,6x50R Magnum.

>>65060900
>Suomi used two position feed mags
Incorrect. OG early Suomi 20rd stick mags were double-stack, single-feed. Koskinen drums are single-feed, obviously, amd Swedish-designed coffin mags are single-feed as well and can't be filled anywhere near full capacity without a tool.

Finns only switched to double-stack, double-feed mags since 1954 and used imported and later domestically manufactured Carl Gustav SMG magazines for that, and IIRC from some mentions in literature the guns needed to have their magazine slots widened.

Depending on what we consider wrt whether it is conceptually superior or has to have entered production/changed the doctrine, I would submit the XB-70 and the B-58 in the sphere of pre-ICBM or at least pre-understanding that ICBMs made a lot of nuclear bomber doctrine obsolescent. What people don't usually realize is that even at the time of its death, the XB70 doing the photo op was already considered to be obsolete and was just a testbed.

Damn it'd have been cool if we never got rocket fuel mixtures as refined as we did and still relied on fleets of increasingly fast and large bombers as a means of deterrence.

As far as 'temporarily superior,' I think the Romans are the best demonstration of this with their enemies. Which is to say that Rome could be beaten using outside the box thinking or a different style of warfare than what they expected. And it would work once (for that campaign/battle/war depending on scope) but after that, they would assess and analyze their tactics, adjust, and re-deploy. Hannibal and his war elephants are a good example, as is Boudica. There was even a revolt where the rebels donned ludicrously heavy armor that made them individually superior against the more unit cohesion-based legions. Think unironic Space Marines. Anyways, once the Romans looked at it, they sent in combat engineers with picks and other tools and they were able to target the weak points and otherwise break through their heavy armor and win.

>>65063364
>>65064192
TBF it took until the Marne/Race to the Sea to really figure out that the old style of war wasn't work. Same with Volley Sights. No one really knew what to do with machine guns until entrenched positions for defense or portable suppressing fire for offense got figured out.

That era of plunging machine gun and rifle fire would have been interesting, in a less artillery-heavy war or maybe one where the Schlieffen plan didn't get the armies eye-to-eye before the weapon abilities got figured out, I can see something closer to modern artillery/counterbattery fire and infantry units moving behind concealment and cover in the hills of Europe almost like Naval gun duels.

>>65059023
I didn't say I liked them, I said I'd take the MP40 over the other examples listed, the sten uses double stack single feed and I don't like the PPS for other reasons.

>>65049691
Beretta 38 would be my actual pick if I could choose any with the KP31 as an equal. I like how the Sig MKMO looks but no idea if it's any good. Patchett gets an honourable mention as well but they still carry that Sten feel of jank.

File: IMG_0819.jpg (74.4 KB)

74.4 KB JPG

>>65041620
Unfathomably based.

File: 6h5lb96vgep81.jpg (175.1 KB)

175.1 KB JPG

>>65064211
Now you're starting to get into more advanced combination guns like drillings, vierlings, and so on. Those were very much part of the German/Austrian tradition.

It's funny, the British and the Germans both did a ton of developmental work on break-action guns, but they went in two totally different directions. The Brits stuck with two barrels but they perfected every little detail. Except for choke-boring (an American invention) the majority of the important developments of double guns came from England. The Germans went full nuts trying to add as many barrels as possible, leading to things like picrel.

I think the British made exactly one three-barrel combination gun, the Rodda 'multem in uno' and frankly it was pretty klutzy compared to a German/Austrian Drilling.

File: ghRI4dz.png (770 KB)

770 KB PNG

>>65066127
This Funfling is 16ga in the middle, and then four rather obscure rifle cartridges

File: rodda-multum-midover.jpg (242.5 KB)

242.5 KB JPG

>>65066130
>>65066127
Here's that Rodda. It's basically a side-by-side sidelock hammer shotgun with a rifle barrel added on top. The right hammer has a funky extension on the nose that you can rotate into place such that it strikes the rifle barrel instead.

>>65066127
>>65066130
I'm not sure that cat's paw style of gun was THAT widespread. I know the Germans are really big on triple barreled combination guns, and the odd quadruple ones, but anything more seems beyond exotic, even for them.

>>65066499
You're certainly correct, the 5-barrel guns (funflings) are rare. My point was that even the 3-barrel drillings like >>65064211 are less common than two barrel combination guns.

File: 7W1Spny.jpg (201.3 KB)

201.3 KB JPG

>>65066130
>four rather obscure rifle cartridges
Very obscure.
According to the internet, 9.1x52 R is supposedly a Brazilian extra-long version of the 9.1 x 40, an old German cartridge though I've never seen one.
9.3x82 Nimrod is this long skinny fucker
I'm not really sure what the 11x74 is supposed to be, I can't find reliable info on that.

File: IMG_6886.jpg (632.9 KB)

632.9 KB JPG

>>65067378
>9.3x82 Nimrod is this long skinny fucker

File: Sulun-Arms-ST601-Auslof-1024.jpg (71 KB)

71 KB JPG

>>65066499
>>65067326
You're probably already kinda rich if you own a Drilling - anything beyond that is just showing your disdain for plebs.

>>65067378
>I'm not really sure what the 11x74 is supposed to be
It's probably supposed to be 11.4 x74R.

>>65066499
>cat's paw style of gun
I hate social media so much

>>65065144
>No one really knew what to do with machine guns until entrenched positions for defense or portable suppressing fire for offense got figured out.
I wouldn't agree with that, everyone HD figured out how to use it, but they hadn't figured out how to fight against it. All they had to fall back on was previous experiences of 'if we push hard/long enough our troops will surely breakthrough'

File: 66-02_hoyamy_jpg_85.jpg (42.7 KB)

42.7 KB JPG

Ye Olde Beltfed

>>65041738
The Navy F-4s that never had a gun did very well in Vietnam, even with AIM-9Ds. The vast majority of the Crusader's kills were by Sidewinder.

>>65067678
Cry about it, faggot.

Nya~

>>65053177
So was the HMS Warrior.

>>65039917
I want a modern one in Mememoor or PRC.

File: media-244037979.jpg (454 KB)

454 KB JPG

>>65039885
Berdan primed ammo was the best thing ever for 6 months then became obsolete when Boxer put the primer anvil on the cap instead of the case, and it would have been a historical footnote except that Russia spent an incredible about of time and money building a military industry around because they decided to get their shit together about a year and a half before it was clear Boxer was the way to go

>>65044113
>Their later war "super" fighters relied on licensed copies and variants of German engines
The only copied German engine was the inline engines on the Ki61's.
The beefy radials of most 'super fighters' of Japan were homebrewed.

>>65069874
I don't agree entirely because Berdan is allegedly a bit more reliable for long time storage. That's why almost all military ammo is still Berdan primed

>>65070135
>allegedly a bit more reliable for long time storage
How the fuck is that supposed to work? And how did it make it past your bullshit filter? The only concerns about long-term storage as it pertains to the cartridge is the primer and powder fomulation, and how well the finished cartridge is sealed against air/moisture. Boxer vs. berdan primers have nothing to do with that.

I think you might be getting confused about corrosive vs. non-corrosive primers. It took many years for reliable non-corrosive primers to be developed, and for a long time the corrosive compoound was superior. Now it just so happened that this was what the Russians used is in their Berdan primed ammo, but there's no actual connection between berdan primers and any particular formulation of primer. You could just as easily make non-corrosive berdan primers or corrosive boxer primers.

File: cupfire7.jpg (50.3 KB)

50.3 KB JPG

>>65039952

>>65054595
20 years is a great run, I don't think this counts.

>>65043323
At a guess that's a long lived. There are a couple who post here occasionally. Not seen one in a while.

File: Frankford Arsenal Berdan 30-06.jpg (26.7 KB)

26.7 KB JPG

>>65069874
>Berdan primed would have been a historical footnote if not for Russian bad timing
No. Berdan primers were the mainstay of European military ammunition well past the WW II, mostly because omitting the tiny sheetmetal internal anvil from the primers helped shaving down manufacturing costs. There's 5.56 mm ammo with Berdan primers after all, notably South African and Spanish. Difficult reloading wasn't considered an issue with single - use military ammo...

>>65060900
>calling it "the Suomi"
Well, "Suomi" is literally the name of the gun, it's stamped on the receiver right under the rear sight...

>>65073561
That's the country it's made in.

>>65073856
And the name of the gun too. Nobody calls it the Lahti SMG in Finland, his name is reserved for more ill-starred guns like the Lahti pistol and LS-26

>>65073885
Do the Finns legit call it the Suomi themselves?

>>65074262
Yes.
>Suomi-konepistooli

File: lahti.jpg (135.5 KB)

135.5 KB JPG

>>65073885
Regardless, I think his anti-tank rifle was cool.

>>65074285
That's kinda weird to me, but alright, it's their language (and gun).

>>65039969
I've got one and it's honestly a beautiful file. The smoothest action out of all the bolt action rifles I own.

>>65074293
I have fired one of those, once. It also has the distinction of never being called Lahti anything, but the "norsupyssy" or elephant gun

>>65044024
Stens are literally just a clone of the MP18, they were using a design from the previous generation out of desperation, not because it was top of the line

>>65074323
More or less. The line goes:
>MP18
>MP28
>Lancaster
>Sten
The Lancaster being a reverse engineered knockoff of the MP28 specifically, and then the Sten was a violent and panicked economizing of the Lancaster. If a Lancaster gun is missing its bolt, you can outright modify a Sten bolt to work in it, and they also share magazines.

>>65074481
*Lanchester. Named after George H. Lanchester of Sterling Engineering in Dagenham.

It was a rather panicked development by itself, as in "Holy Molly, we have no machine carbines and no time to develop some, better copy a Kraut one". Sten was exactly as you said, as in "Holy Molly, there's no way we make enough Lanchesters in time, better come up with a way how to serioisly cut down on cost and time."

>>65076528
>Sten was exactly as you said, as in "Holy Molly, there's no way we make enough Lanchesters in time, better come up with a way how to serioisly cut down on cost and time."
Wasn't it more like the navy and air force ordering however many they expected to need and the army going "No thanks, these Thompsons are absolutely brilliant- Good heavens, they cost how much?!"

File: STICKY BOMB PRODUCTION.jpg (114.5 KB)

114.5 KB JPG

>>65078040
Kind of.
>*Dunkirk*
>Oh shit we need a LOT more LMGs and SMGs actually.
>REALLY a lot more!
>Oh god, oh man, oh god!
>What if the Germans get here?
>Uh, the flyboys don't really need those Lanchesters, the army will take those.
>Oh damn, it's still not enough!
>Uuuuuuuh...
>The Americans have Thompsons, we'll buy those!
>They're so expensive but we need them!
>"FUCK OFF, BRITS, THE U.S ARMY NEEDS THEM MORE THAN YOU, GET YOUR OWN! (Fuck me, they're so expensive!)"
Thus the Brits develop as cheap and fast of a derivative as they can imagine for the Lanchester. The Americans also develop the Greasegun (inspired by the Sten) because they get sick of paying and waiting for Thompsons.

Another panic weapon the British developed was the Sticky Bomb, a weird and unusual weapon which is awkward and dangerous to use, pretty much demanding ideal circumstances, but they DID function if applied right. If you were brave enough to get that close to a tank (maybe sacrificing yourself), or if you could drop it from a high window down on a tank in the street, those fuckers WOULD in fact blast through that armor.

>>65078653
>but they DID function if applied right
If your target was an early war German shitbox or rivetted Italian tank, sure.
Anything Panzer 4 G and up, basically just stuns the crew for a second.