Read on Twitter
The answers from yesterday's poll have come in and you want me to do something on SWW tactic.
Fair enough. But we will need to start with some basics first.
prologue/
Fair enough. But we will need to start with some basics first.
prologue/
If we're going to talk SWW tactics then we must so some ground clearing.
That means discussing the Bren v MG34/MG42.
I know this leads to heated arguments on here.
But I am now going to tell you what British Operational Researchers thought.
1/
That means discussing the Bren v MG34/MG42.
I know this leads to heated arguments on here.
But I am now going to tell you what British Operational Researchers thought.
1/
The obvs thing to state is that MG34/42 is belt fed and uses rimless ammunition.
While the Bren is mag fed and uses rimmed ammunition.
Rimmed ammunition has a tendency to roll over itself & can create problems with feeding into the firing chamber.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2015/10/cartridges-rims-rimmed-vs-semi-rimmed_26.html
2/
While the Bren is mag fed and uses rimmed ammunition.
Rimmed ammunition has a tendency to roll over itself & can create problems with feeding into the firing chamber.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2015/10/cartridges-rims-rimmed-vs-semi-rimmed_26.html
2/
Importantly the cyclic rate of the gun is not the only way to think about the tactical possibilities that it presents.
Increased fire = carrying more ammunition. More ammunition means hot barrels. Hot barrels need to be changed and cooled.
3/
Increased fire = carrying more ammunition. More ammunition means hot barrels. Hot barrels need to be changed and cooled.
3/
And so a straight comparison between the mag fed .303" rimmed Bren and the belt-fed 7.92mm rimless MG34/42 is not possible.
UNLESS of course you are in an Operational Research unit where you go out of your way to work these things out...
4a/
UNLESS of course you are in an Operational Research unit where you go out of your way to work these things out...
4a/
Nice free paper on Army Operation Research Group (AORG) in 21 Army in Normandy and beyond by Terry Copp here:
4b/ https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol3/iss1/9/
4b/ https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol3/iss1/9/
So in September 44 the AORG got round to comparing the rate of fire of the Bren against the MG34/42.
And what they found won't impress MG42 nerds... because
5/
And what they found won't impress MG42 nerds... because
5/
After the AORG analysed mag v belt-fed weapons in various roles: defence; attack - firing to kill; attack - firing to neutralise; with a tripod, against moving targets or even used in the AA role that belt fed was only a 10% advantage over the Bren...
6/
6/
Would you change logistics infrastructure for a 10% advantage? Would you do that knowing there's not enough manpower? Need a standing army in Europe after the war & don't want to waste lives in infantry attacks when the result could be achieved with artillery?
Monty neither.
7/
Monty neither.
7/
And so reigniting the great machine gun debate begins once more... 
