Sterling SMG

[John W. Howard]

Was the Sterling used in WWII? When did it come into use in the British army? Can anyone give info about its history and reliability? How did it compare to the Sten? Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[Tony]

Sterling production started im the '60s I think. I think it was adopted by the Brits around then also. It was used in the Army and with Special Forces units. The Sterling looked like the Sten, ugly as hell but very reliable, and the magazine was curved and was fed in from the right instead of the left.
Can anyone add anything else?
cheers
Tony

[John Kilmartin]

The Sterling AFAIK is basically a refined and some what more expensive Sten. The Sterling has a fixed firing pin and therefore fires from an open breech which tends to attract dirt. It also has the unfortunate characteristic that it can be put together incorrectly after field stripping so it should always be tested after assembly to make sure the fire selector works correctly. The shortness of the barrel makes it potentially dangerous in the hands of someone who as they say isn't switched on.
I never had any problems firing live FMJ with it but definitely a lot of trouble with blank ammunition which suggests to me that like most 9mm weapons good quality ammunition is a must.
I've never had occasion to fire the Sterling at anything beyond 100 M but at that distance firing single rounds I found it to be more accurate for me personally than a rifle [I'm a very poor shot] , lucky for me it was my personal weapon. I don't think I've fired enough bursts with the Canadian variant of the M16 to compare it with the Sterling but compared to firing a heavy barreled FAL without using the bipod it is a dream again at short ranges.
Apparently, one of the good things about a Sterling is that it can be fired under water [not going to try that myself]
For me if I were FIBUA I would definitely want one but of course I've never used an H&K, which from everything I've read and heard is much superior though I tend to believe that at my skill level it wouldn't make a lot of difference.

[John W. Howard]

Thank You John and Tony:
That was what I was looking for guys. Thanks again. If ever I skin dive in shark infested waters I will consider a Sterling!!!! Thanks again.

[dave keenan]

Our friend from Calgary has given a pretty good description of the weapon. The Sterling Patchett SMG (I used the C1 variant) was developed in the 1950s and was adopted largely by Britain and the Commonwealth countries (UK, SA, NZ. Australia and Canada) as part of the standardization of ammunitions by NATO (7.62x51 and 9mm). In these countries it was adopted alongside the FN-FAL and the MAG 58 (for most of the countries). It was also a fairly common weapon used by the armed forces of former British colonies, for obvious reasons.

As John K. described, it fired from an open bolt. The process was referred to as advanced primer ignition. This meant that as the breechblock moved forward (with its fixed firing pin) it extracted the next round from the magazine, carrying it forward towards the breech. However, unlike most other weapons, the round actually went off as soon as it made contact with the firing pin, which was prior to the breechblock closing over the breech. This created a blowback, which propelled the breechblock back, to extract another round, or be held back by the sear. Unfortunately, to correct Tony, the magazine definitely fed from the left (I am right handed) which forced every NCO to teach recruits about the dangers of holding onto the weapon by the magazine. Additionally, the lips to the magazine often bent rather easily, which posed a problem with loading. Recruits were taught not to slap the magazine after inserting it, something that we did with our rifle mags, for fear of bending the lips. The very short barrel also posed a problem, as it made accidents more common. I can recall at least one fellow who was shot in the hand when someone turned their weapon away from the safe direction. To this day I can't believe the other soldier beat the charge.

As a 9mm, the weapon was rather easy to fire, but it was definitely a short-range weapon. The recoil was not much more pronounced than that of the 5.56 weapons currently used, but was much less than the 7.62mm rifles and MGs that were used by other soldiers at the time. Personally I think it was much less effective than the FN Minimi (C9 to Canadians, M249 SAW to Americans) and carbines that replaced it. To me, the biggest problem was muzzle-climb, a common problem with all automatic weapons. The Sterling had a very pronounced muzzle-climb (up and right) which made burst control a very important consideration for soldiers. Even at close ranges a three-round burst was likely to throw one round over the target's shoulder. A five round burst would lose three rounds. There was no burst control mechanism with this weapon.

Thats about all I remember. The weapon folded rather easily and compactly, and had a ten-round cheater clip (for drivers), which made it rather unique, I hope that helps.

[Paul Timms]

A friend of mine who carried it on active service said that it had a tendency to fire a round if you dropped it. I would imagine this could prove alarming.

[John W. Howard]

Hello Dave and Paul:
Thank you for the additional info on the Sterling. I have always been curious about it; one hears so much more about the Thompson, Sten, MP-40, etc. The Sterling being a post-WWII weapon might explain that. My father carried a Thompson when he entered towns during WWII; he was issued a carbine and Colt to go with his MG, but a GI in his company, who was issued with a Thompson, preferred an M-1 Carbine, so my father gleefully switched with him whenever possible when they went into towns. My father loved it. Best wishes.

[Dan Behr]

Hi,

I have read that the Parachute Regiment used the Pachett in operation Market Garden to combat test it.

One thing I would mention is that it would take Sten mags as well as its curved mag.

Dan

[John W. Howard]

Hello Dan:
Your info is interesting: most of the sites etc. that I have viewed state the 1950's as the start of the Sterling era. Your info about Market-Garden would indicate that the Patchett was in development before the 50's, and used in WWII. Do you have a source for your Market-Garden info? I will keep digging on my end. Best wishes.

[SvenW]

Hi!

"... George William Patchett from Sterling Enegineering Company had a patent for his SMG in 1942. A huge amount of them (more than normal for testing purposes) were tested by British Paras at the end of the war. ...
Since 1953 it was the (British) standard SMG as SMG L2 A1, just called Sterling. ..."


Schützenwaffen Heute, Wollert/Lidschun/Kopenhagen, Militärverlag der DDR.


Sven.

[John W. Howard]

Hello Sven:
Your quote seems to have answered my question quite nicely!!!! Now I know there was a patent out there in 1942, and the Sterling was used in the later stages of WWII by Brit paras, like Dan said. Thank you for your Teutonic thoroughness!!!!! Vielen Dank.

[Dan Behr]

John,

I got my info from an Osprey military uniform book on the Paras.

It was essentialy the same weapon but without bayonet lug etc.

Dan

[John W. Howard]

Thank You Dan!!

[nigelfe]

Sterling was never used by Aust units (possible exception those in 28 Comwel Bde in Malaya). The WW2 OMC was replaced by the F1 Carbine, regarded by many as not a step forward. The F1 had a wooden butt although the working parts were very close to a Sterling.

[Schultz]

the tommy is better