Mp44
Moderator: sniper1shot
-
KampfgruppeMeyer
- Banned
- Posts: 340
- Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 5:06 pm
- Location: Marina del Rey, CA 90292
-
weasel_fierce
- Member
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:54 pm
x
Oleg:
the german gun was the original assault gun, it was FIRST to go into production and deployment, not the russian version.
from another point of view, some first hand comments.
I myself own (and have owned) several specimens of the mp/stg 43/44, also ak47 74 and vadios variations.
The russian verison was so much a copy, that the first models kept falling apart after a few thoushand rounds, dut to the russian factories not knowing the tolerances needed to work with stampings, In one of them the barrel/receiver trunnion started to ge tloose jsut after 200 rounds of ammo.
Said in another manner, they just copied the process, whitout knowing the small nit-picking stuff of the manufacture.
Regarding the mp44 I have now just one example, but about ten years ago I had another,
then I (unwisely now I know better) used and abused the gun for about 3 years, spending close to 3,000 rounds on it. (I got a good deal on a couple boxes of ammo back then...)
then sold the gun, and the guy that bought it from me used it somehow less, but still managed to spend close to 2 000 rounds more over 5 years, before retiring the gun to the wall.
other than the ocasional stuck casing (due to resin buildup on the chamber) or misfire due to old ammo, the gun performed flawesly, It is still sound, and solid (not rattling).
Germany was years ahead of every country in mass stamping process, not just military.
No matter how much "proof" the russians can show (or fabricate) the MP43/stg44 will always remain the grandfather of the assault gun.
best regards
Xavier
the link scrounger
the german gun was the original assault gun, it was FIRST to go into production and deployment, not the russian version.
from another point of view, some first hand comments.
I myself own (and have owned) several specimens of the mp/stg 43/44, also ak47 74 and vadios variations.
The russian verison was so much a copy, that the first models kept falling apart after a few thoushand rounds, dut to the russian factories not knowing the tolerances needed to work with stampings, In one of them the barrel/receiver trunnion started to ge tloose jsut after 200 rounds of ammo.
Said in another manner, they just copied the process, whitout knowing the small nit-picking stuff of the manufacture.
Regarding the mp44 I have now just one example, but about ten years ago I had another,
then I (unwisely now I know better) used and abused the gun for about 3 years, spending close to 3,000 rounds on it. (I got a good deal on a couple boxes of ammo back then...)
then sold the gun, and the guy that bought it from me used it somehow less, but still managed to spend close to 2 000 rounds more over 5 years, before retiring the gun to the wall.
other than the ocasional stuck casing (due to resin buildup on the chamber) or misfire due to old ammo, the gun performed flawesly, It is still sound, and solid (not rattling).
Germany was years ahead of every country in mass stamping process, not just military.
No matter how much "proof" the russians can show (or fabricate) the MP43/stg44 will always remain the grandfather of the assault gun.
best regards
Xavier
the link scrounger
"Assiduus usus uni rei deditus et ingenium et artem saepe vincit"
Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdues both intelligence and skill:
Cicero
Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdues both intelligence and skill:
Cicero
Re: x
Xavier mind explainingxavier wrote:Oleg:
the german gun was the original assault gun, it was FIRST to go into production and deployment, not the russian version.
from another point of view, some first hand comments.
I myself own (and have owned) several specimens of the mp/stg 43/44, also ak47 74 and vadios variations.
The russian verison was so much a copy, that the first models kept falling apart after a few thoushand rounds, dut to the russian factories not knowing the tolerances needed to work with stampings, In one of them the barrel/receiver trunnion started to ge tloose jsut after 200 rounds of ammo.
Said in another manner, they just copied the process, whitout knowing the small nit-picking stuff of the manufacture.
Regarding the mp44 I have now just one example, but about ten years ago I had another,
then I (unwisely now I know better) used and abused the gun for about 3 years, spending close to 3,000 rounds on it. (I got a good deal on a couple boxes of ammo back then...)
then sold the gun, and the guy that bought it from me used it somehow less, but still managed to spend close to 2 000 rounds more over 5 years, before retiring the gun to the wall.
other than the ocasional stuck casing (due to resin buildup on the chamber) or misfire due to old ammo, the gun performed flawesly, It is still sound, and solid (not rattling).
Germany was years ahead of every country in mass stamping process, not just military.
No matter how much "proof" the russians can show (or fabricate) the MP43/stg44 will always remain the grandfather of the assault gun.
best regards
Xavier
the link scrounger
a)how 1916 comes after 1944?
b) how guns whose action are differnt are copies of each other?
c) have you ever take any logic classes?
x
Oleg..
regarding your first point:
I am not comparing the other guns, just directly the mp43 stg43/44 to the ak 47 /74
regarding the second point: same answer
regarding the third point ...touche, read first and second answer....please READ before complaining. nowhere in my post I imply the avtomat was developed AFTER the stug43, just the ak 47 and ak74...
and who else knew but you about those models anyway... we are talking here real combat use.... the issue of a gun does not mean it works in real combat situations..the MP43 STg44 was combat proven beyond suspicion.
As an example, the Mondragon rifle superseeds your "avtomat" by several decades, and is a mexican design, built in switzerland and proven, if not very succsesfully, in combat (aerial) over europe:
"In the early 1890's, in a town in Mexico called Tacubaya, an artillery officer named Manuel Mondragon undertook what was then one of the most difficult technical challenges in the world of firearms design - that of creating a serviceable, portable, and reliable self loading infantry rifle. Not that he had much with which to start.
Mexico was a poor country, torn by civil strife and social antagonisms. It was an agrarian state without industrial production capacity and without a strong technical knowledge base upon which to call. It had, since 1876 been ruled by the dictator Porfirio Diaz. Diaz, in a bid for prestige, fame, and security, promoted Mondragon's efforts. If his could be the first army in the world to be armed with self loading rifles, he would have fame, and more importantly, security from his enemies, both foreign and domestic.
As a result, Mondragon, who was more of a tinkerer than a designer, and his plans for a self loading rifle were catapulted onto national and international stages at a time when professional weapons designers in Germany, England, France, Italy and the United States were still putting the finishing touches on bolt action repeaters.
In 1893 Mondragon unveiled his first gas operated repeating rifle, in 6.5mm caliber. As Mexico had no indigenous facilities to produce
the rifle, production was contracted to the Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft (SIG) (Swiss Industrial Company) in Neuhausen, Switzerland, and fifty units were delivered.
Based on Mexican Army trials of these rifles, an additional 200 were ordered in 1894. These were of an improved design that were chambered for a 5mm cartridge. Through the SIG's auspices, Mondragon had established a relationship with the famous Swiss designer, Colonel Rubin.
Rubin, then the director of the Swiss Weapons Testing Center in Thunn, had noted Mondragon's design with interest, and worked
with him to devise a cartridge for the rifle. The resultant round, the 5.2x68mm Rubin, may well have been too much for the Mondragon.
Indeed, it was almost too much for itself! To handle the extreme pressures generated when it was fired, the 5.2x68mm's bullet was surrounded by a detachable collar that moved forward within the case as the powder gases expanded so as to increase the size of the
combustion chamber.
In the next model of the rifle, Mondragon turned to more conventional ammunition types. Trials were made with rifles chambered for the .30-30 Winchester, the 7.5mm Swiss, and the 7x57mm Mauser. A version in 7x57mm was submitted for British trials in 1903.
In the first trial, the rifle suffered an internal parts breakage and was withdrawn. In the second, the rifle was successfully fired, but complaints were received that it would only function when freshly cleaned, and that its mechanism was too complicated. Further improvements were made, and the Mexican Army accepted the rifle chambered for the 7x57mm Mauser as the Model 1908. A contract for 4,000 was let to SIG in 1908, with a unit cost of 160 Swiss Francs - four times as much as a comparable Mauser bolt action rifle.
All was not well, however, and when the first 400 Mondragons arrived in Mexico in 1911, new problems surfaced. As noted by SIG, the rifle's proper function was entirely dependent on the quality of the ammunition. From an official SIG document:
It transpired that the functioning of the self-charging rifle is so dependent on the quality of the ammunition, which plays a similar role in the self- charging weapon to that of the fuel in a combustion engine. Even when this knowledge was acted on, the weapon was still sensitive, as it fired a long and powerful cartridge and its dimensions were limited.
As a result, the Mexicans canceled the order, and SIG halted production, left in dire financial straits by the uncompensated expenses of manufacture. The remaining rifles, approximately 3,000 in number were purchased by World War One belligerents, the majority of them going to the artillery depot in Spandau, Germany.
As the Mexicans had before them, the Germans attempted to make of the Mondragon a useful tool of war. It was issued, in 7x57mm Mauser, as a weapon for aircraft observers, and as such was equipped with a special thirty round drum magazine. Two Mondragons were issued per aircraft, as frequent stoppages were expected.
The Flieger-Selbstlader-Karabiner 15 (Self Loading Aircraft Carbine, Model of 1915), as the Mondragon was known in German service, yielded no better results for the Germans than it had for the Mexicans or the Swiss. The manual issued by the Prussian War Ministry in February, 1917 read:
""The Fl.-S.-K. 15 is . . .only a war-use-capable necessity-help weapon. It can only be used to advantage when the weapon can be carefully examined and maintained by technically trained hands before and after being used.
Fortunately for German observers, their aircraft were soon re-equipped with flexibly mounted Parabellum, Dreyse, and Maxim machineguns. ""
from http://www.cruffler.com
best regards
Xavier
the link scrounger
regarding your first point:
I am not comparing the other guns, just directly the mp43 stg43/44 to the ak 47 /74
regarding the second point: same answer
regarding the third point ...touche, read first and second answer....please READ before complaining. nowhere in my post I imply the avtomat was developed AFTER the stug43, just the ak 47 and ak74...
and who else knew but you about those models anyway... we are talking here real combat use.... the issue of a gun does not mean it works in real combat situations..the MP43 STg44 was combat proven beyond suspicion.
As an example, the Mondragon rifle superseeds your "avtomat" by several decades, and is a mexican design, built in switzerland and proven, if not very succsesfully, in combat (aerial) over europe:
"In the early 1890's, in a town in Mexico called Tacubaya, an artillery officer named Manuel Mondragon undertook what was then one of the most difficult technical challenges in the world of firearms design - that of creating a serviceable, portable, and reliable self loading infantry rifle. Not that he had much with which to start.
Mexico was a poor country, torn by civil strife and social antagonisms. It was an agrarian state without industrial production capacity and without a strong technical knowledge base upon which to call. It had, since 1876 been ruled by the dictator Porfirio Diaz. Diaz, in a bid for prestige, fame, and security, promoted Mondragon's efforts. If his could be the first army in the world to be armed with self loading rifles, he would have fame, and more importantly, security from his enemies, both foreign and domestic.
As a result, Mondragon, who was more of a tinkerer than a designer, and his plans for a self loading rifle were catapulted onto national and international stages at a time when professional weapons designers in Germany, England, France, Italy and the United States were still putting the finishing touches on bolt action repeaters.
In 1893 Mondragon unveiled his first gas operated repeating rifle, in 6.5mm caliber. As Mexico had no indigenous facilities to produce
the rifle, production was contracted to the Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft (SIG) (Swiss Industrial Company) in Neuhausen, Switzerland, and fifty units were delivered.
Based on Mexican Army trials of these rifles, an additional 200 were ordered in 1894. These were of an improved design that were chambered for a 5mm cartridge. Through the SIG's auspices, Mondragon had established a relationship with the famous Swiss designer, Colonel Rubin.
Rubin, then the director of the Swiss Weapons Testing Center in Thunn, had noted Mondragon's design with interest, and worked
with him to devise a cartridge for the rifle. The resultant round, the 5.2x68mm Rubin, may well have been too much for the Mondragon.
Indeed, it was almost too much for itself! To handle the extreme pressures generated when it was fired, the 5.2x68mm's bullet was surrounded by a detachable collar that moved forward within the case as the powder gases expanded so as to increase the size of the
combustion chamber.
In the next model of the rifle, Mondragon turned to more conventional ammunition types. Trials were made with rifles chambered for the .30-30 Winchester, the 7.5mm Swiss, and the 7x57mm Mauser. A version in 7x57mm was submitted for British trials in 1903.
In the first trial, the rifle suffered an internal parts breakage and was withdrawn. In the second, the rifle was successfully fired, but complaints were received that it would only function when freshly cleaned, and that its mechanism was too complicated. Further improvements were made, and the Mexican Army accepted the rifle chambered for the 7x57mm Mauser as the Model 1908. A contract for 4,000 was let to SIG in 1908, with a unit cost of 160 Swiss Francs - four times as much as a comparable Mauser bolt action rifle.
All was not well, however, and when the first 400 Mondragons arrived in Mexico in 1911, new problems surfaced. As noted by SIG, the rifle's proper function was entirely dependent on the quality of the ammunition. From an official SIG document:
It transpired that the functioning of the self-charging rifle is so dependent on the quality of the ammunition, which plays a similar role in the self- charging weapon to that of the fuel in a combustion engine. Even when this knowledge was acted on, the weapon was still sensitive, as it fired a long and powerful cartridge and its dimensions were limited.
As a result, the Mexicans canceled the order, and SIG halted production, left in dire financial straits by the uncompensated expenses of manufacture. The remaining rifles, approximately 3,000 in number were purchased by World War One belligerents, the majority of them going to the artillery depot in Spandau, Germany.
As the Mexicans had before them, the Germans attempted to make of the Mondragon a useful tool of war. It was issued, in 7x57mm Mauser, as a weapon for aircraft observers, and as such was equipped with a special thirty round drum magazine. Two Mondragons were issued per aircraft, as frequent stoppages were expected.
The Flieger-Selbstlader-Karabiner 15 (Self Loading Aircraft Carbine, Model of 1915), as the Mondragon was known in German service, yielded no better results for the Germans than it had for the Mexicans or the Swiss. The manual issued by the Prussian War Ministry in February, 1917 read:
""The Fl.-S.-K. 15 is . . .only a war-use-capable necessity-help weapon. It can only be used to advantage when the weapon can be carefully examined and maintained by technically trained hands before and after being used.
Fortunately for German observers, their aircraft were soon re-equipped with flexibly mounted Parabellum, Dreyse, and Maxim machineguns. ""
from http://www.cruffler.com
best regards
Xavier
the link scrounger
"Assiduus usus uni rei deditus et ingenium et artem saepe vincit"
Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdues both intelligence and skill:
Cicero
Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdues both intelligence and skill:
Cicero
I did not say that AK-47 went in service before Stg. So I don’t exactly see: why did you compare in that regard. If you want you can compare Stg44 to AS44 – but that would not be fare to fare since indeed Stg was accepted into service and AS-44 was experimental.I am not comparing the other guns, just directly the mp43 stg43/44 to the ak 47 /74
What I said was that the word avtomat (Russians do not use term assault rifle) appeared in 1916 after introduction of AF-16, which had many distinguished characteristics of these class of weapons. Since there is no clear cut criteria many use bullet power index to determine if weapns fit the definition. AF-16 used cartage that power- wise positioned between German “kurz” and Soviet M43. AF-16 was capable of both single-shot and automatic fire. It was intended as individual weapon for assault grenadier teams- the idea being the platoon can provide high volume of fire in support of grenade throwing teams at short distances. – thus suppressing the hostile infantry. That is how it was used during Brusilov breakthrough –the system actually went into limited service. Granted the weapon was rather exotic – but so is the latest Russian weapon AN-94 – that however does not it make less of the avtomat.
and I am telling you that AK owns its action to PPSh/RPD-44 and partially to Grand but not to MP-44. I posted detail description of how both guns work – I don’t understand how there could be misunderstanding?regarding the second point: same answer
Finally I am aware of Mondragon rifle and as far as I recall I never claimed that AF-16 first of the class, that said IMO Mondragon is more in line with AVS-36 rather than with AF-16. All the best. Oleg
AK and MP44
Hello, many german arm constructors were used by soviets after war as developer or helper of new designs. For me is clear,that russian have their own process and line develop handguns, but was probably influenced from german MP44. Is clear that this weapon was first of attack weapon style arms, used in large quantitues in late war, the basic design is using of intermedial calibre 7,92x33, using of gas channel and close slide by firing. Other points are the mechanical stamped machinery, and a possibility of select fire. Other importanting thing is the easy plain construction with the one line butt design. AK have only few differences and this is a rotating lock system , the first probably were not realised by stamping, the reciever were mashined. It could be not compared to weapons like PPSh that uses pistol ammo or heavy selfloaders like Fedorov or Tokarevs. Its normal that they could not accept a influence of a faschist weapons. Only my opinion,best regards,Andy from BCN
Re: AK and MP44
PPSh and PPS both were made with stamped machinery and PPSh had select fire fetaure -so did AS-44. Fedorv was not a selfloader (although there was selfloading rifle by him) but a wepaon capble of both automatic and single round fier.AndyB wrote:Hello, many german arm constructors were used by soviets after war as developer or helper of new designs. For me is clear,that russian have their own process and line develop handguns, but was probably influenced from german MP44. Is clear that this weapon was first of attack weapon style arms, used in large quantitues in late war, the basic design is using of intermedial calibre 7,92x33, using of gas channel and close slide by firing. Other points are the mechanical stamped machinery, and a possibility of select fire. Other importanting thing is the easy plain construction with the one line butt design. AK have only few differences and this is a rotating lock system , the first probably were not realised by stamping, the reciever were mashined. It could be not compared to weapons like PPSh that uses pistol ammo or heavy selfloaders like Fedorov or Tokarevs. Its normal that they could not accept a influence of a faschist weapons. Only my opinion,best regards,Andy from BCN
Hey I am new to this board and happy to find it!
About the Stg-44, I can't recall where but I read that the AK-47 was inicially diferent, specially regarding its internal mecanism. The AK was even rejected at first when submitted by Kalashnikov.
It is very clear that all the projects bear resemblance to the Stg-44 (at least their exterior), so I think is out for debate how much influence the Stg had on the russian design offices.
If anyone has comments about this issue they will be welcome.
Greetings,
JAG
About the Stg-44, I can't recall where but I read that the AK-47 was inicially diferent, specially regarding its internal mecanism. The AK was even rejected at first when submitted by Kalashnikov.
It is very clear that all the projects bear resemblance to the Stg-44 (at least their exterior), so I think is out for debate how much influence the Stg had on the russian design offices.
If anyone has comments about this issue they will be welcome.
Greetings,
JAG
STG44
Hello Oleg, no problem with it,my opinion is only, the both design PPSh and PPS could be not compared, while both are blowback systems for normal pistol cartridge, fired from open bolt,they are in MP design, yes on their were in majority used a war emergency processes, and simplyed part made by stamping, but this was reliable while the tolerances were greater, that was on precise locking slide system of AK. The main stone is the intermedial cartridge and the new design and manufacturing.
I mean the Stg is a new branch of weapons, and could be not compared with MP or semifire rifles.
To compare the germans studied the semifire rifles of Tokarev, and was certainly used nay details by developing of Walther G41 or K43 rifles.
To sample i can say other comparation, AK47 with Vz.58 czechoslovakian MP, many people say that is a variant of AK system, but this is not right from sideview of inner mechanism, while the whole internal mechanism is different, have no hammer, have no rotating bolt, but the design was certainly developed from russian model,but with own inner system. But the main markings remain the same a 7,62x39 cartr, with gas chanel and selected fire option. best regards,Andy from BCN
I mean the Stg is a new branch of weapons, and could be not compared with MP or semifire rifles.
To compare the germans studied the semifire rifles of Tokarev, and was certainly used nay details by developing of Walther G41 or K43 rifles.
To sample i can say other comparation, AK47 with Vz.58 czechoslovakian MP, many people say that is a variant of AK system, but this is not right from sideview of inner mechanism, while the whole internal mechanism is different, have no hammer, have no rotating bolt, but the design was certainly developed from russian model,but with own inner system. But the main markings remain the same a 7,62x39 cartr, with gas chanel and selected fire option. best regards,Andy from BCN
And I am telling you that AK was benchmarked against AS-44 which was largely based on PPS-43, stamping included, and weight and size wise is in the same category as StG-44.Hello Oleg, no problem with it,my opinion is only, the both design PPSh and PPS could be not compared, while both are blowback systems for normal pistol cartridge, fired from open bolt,they are in MP design, yes on their were in majority used a war emergency processes, and simplyed part made by stamping, but this was reliable while the tolerances were greater, that was on precise locking slide system of AK.
AF-16 was not a rifle – it also used intermediate cartridge (initially anyway) and there is a reason why Fedorv called it “avtomat” and not “avtomaticheskaya vinotvka” (automatic rifle) which he also designed.The main stone is the intermedial cartridge and the new design and manufacturing.
I mean the Stg is a new branch of weapons, and could be not compared with MP or semifire rifles.
you making the point here that I was making all along – external resemblance is not copying. All the best.To sample i can say other comparation, AK47 with Vz.58 czechoslovakian MP, many people say that is a variant of AK system, but this is not right from sideview of inner mechanism, while the whole internal mechanism is different, have no hammer, have no rotating bolt, but the design was certainly developed from russian model,but with own inner system. But the main markings remain the same a 7,62x39 cartr, with gas chanel and selected fire option. best regards,Andy from BCN
-
MarcusSkalmaan
- Banned
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 1:11 pm
- Location: Sweden
- Contact:
-
Christian Ankerstjerne
- Supporter
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 8:30 am
- Location: The Kingdom of Denmark
Again with the AK-47 vs. M.P. 44 discussion...
First of all, regarding the internal mechanisms, the AK-47 and M.P. 44 are not even remotely alike.
The M.P. 44s spring mechanism resembles that of the M.P. 38, whereas the AK-47 resembles the PPSh-41. I have seen stripped-down photos of both, and the design difference is immense.
Second, Kalashnikov was wounded and bruoght back from the front prior to the introduction of the M.P. 43/44, and thus didn't have much of a chance to look at it. How likely would it be that a wounded soldier would get prime access to the most advanced weapons of the enemy?
Last, if you look at the AK-47 and M.P. 44 together, in real life, it becomes quite evident that the two weapons are only superficially alike - there are many visible design differences in the two weapons...
Christian
First of all, regarding the internal mechanisms, the AK-47 and M.P. 44 are not even remotely alike.
The M.P. 44s spring mechanism resembles that of the M.P. 38, whereas the AK-47 resembles the PPSh-41. I have seen stripped-down photos of both, and the design difference is immense.
Second, Kalashnikov was wounded and bruoght back from the front prior to the introduction of the M.P. 43/44, and thus didn't have much of a chance to look at it. How likely would it be that a wounded soldier would get prime access to the most advanced weapons of the enemy?
Last, if you look at the AK-47 and M.P. 44 together, in real life, it becomes quite evident that the two weapons are only superficially alike - there are many visible design differences in the two weapons...
Christian
-
Sebastian Pye
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 5:32 am
- Location: Sweden, Västerås
- Contact: