sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 19, 2017 15:15:53 GMT -5
I was looking at some 1/16th scale Dragon figures yesterday, and one caught my eye instantly. It was the Gran Saso Rescue figure. The figure was just a basic German paratrooper, but his weapon was what caught me eye. It was an MG42, but the receiver was about all that was MG42. The stock was made shorter and similar in shape to the U.S. M60. The barrel was unshrouded with a completely different flash suppressor; plus it was shorter (perhaps a hundred to hundred fifty millimeters shorter). It used what looks like 25 round magazines that went into the side where the belt normally was feed into. The pistol grip also looked to be positional(angle). It's a totally new one on me. Anybody here know anything about it? gary
P.S. I was the number two man on a recon team in the combat zone. I carried the 60, and it was the gun I longed for! But with the drum magazines like the Germans used.
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 19, 2017 18:08:04 GMT -5
did some looking around, and found it. It's not an MG-42, but an FG-42. The receivers look similar, but are not even close to being similar. The gun was only issued to paratroopers, and you either loved it or hated it. They could also shoot it with a belt feed or a 10 or 20 round box magazine. The later ones used a different grip angle than the earlier ones. gary
|
|
moramarth
Full Member
Member since: March 2014
Posts: 455
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
|
Post by moramarth on Mar 19, 2017 18:53:42 GMT -5
Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 it is indeed, as gary has identified. Only thing I'd dispute is about the belt feed, I believe it was limited to the 10 and 20 round box magazines (it used full size rifle cartridges, rather than the "short" rounds employed by assault rifles). The mechanism owed more to the Lewis gun of WW1 rather than any contemporary German machine guns, possibly because it was a Luftwaffe private project (Fallschirmjäger were Luftwaffe, not Heer) which had on a couple of occasions been ordered halted (by the Heereswaffenamt?) but the Luftwaffe weren't listening and in the end it was taken forward on Goering's personal say-so. Gran Sasso was it's first outing, but it didn't actually get used as no shooting occurred! You're right about it influencing the design of "the Pig" - the full-auto only M-60 actually has a couple of redundant components which relate to the FG 42s single shot capacity...
Cheers,
M
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 19, 2017 20:41:30 GMT -5
Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 it is indeed, as gary has identified. Only thing I'd dispute is about the belt feed, I believe it was limited to the 10 and 20 round box magazines (it used full size rifle cartridges, rather than the "short" rounds employed by assault rifles). The mechanism owed more to the Lewis gun of WW1 rather than any contemporary German machine guns, possibly because it was a Luftwaffe private project (Fallschirmjäger were Luftwaffe, not Heer) which had on a couple of occasions been ordered halted (by the Heereswaffenamt?) but the Luftwaffe weren't listening and in the end it was taken forward on Goering's personal say-so. Gran Sasso was it's first outing, but it didn't actually get used as no shooting occurred! You're right about it influencing the design of "the Pig" - the full-auto only M-60 actually has a couple of redundant components which relate to the FG 42s single shot capacity... Cheers, M In my search there were several photos of the machine gun. Then there was one titled late with belted ammo going into it. Seems like the belt went in from the bottom, but could be wrong. Also noticed that the length of pull was rather short for a quick position to your shoulder (tell you why later). There was even one with a scope mounted on it. The receiver looks a lot like the MG42 machine gun, but what I thought was strange was they didn't employ the delayed roller block system in it. It's common knowledge that the Germans (even before the NAZI's)had the auto rifle down pat. Other folks tried all sorts of ways to circumvent their ideas, and always failed in the end or adopted them. The also tells me that it was designed as a semi auto weapon first and full auto secondly. I see a lot of M60 machine gun in the design. Back in 1968 (probably earlier for sure) it was felt the M60 left a lot to be desired. Too heavy, very little control shooting off hand, and a real maintenance head ache. Still better than the junk Brownings. Special Forces took Soviet RPD's (could be RPK's) and shortened the stock a couple inches. Took three or four inches off the barrel and threaded it for an M14 style flash suppressor. Stripped everything that was needed. Used the 7.62x39 round, and was really a nice little weapon. gary
|
|
moramarth
Full Member
Member since: March 2014
Posts: 455
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
|
Post by moramarth on Mar 19, 2017 23:42:45 GMT -5
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 20, 2017 12:30:36 GMT -5
most assuredly was an FG-42. There were at least three versions on the site (I must have went to a dozen websites). Just thought it to be interesting, and almost identical to what recon teams were using in Laos.
Much has been said about the burst rate of the MG42, and I've shot the new manufactured version in 7.62x51. Absolutely the best design ever. The one I shot had a selector to allow you to shoot at what seemed like 450 to 500 rounds per minute, or full bore at over a thousand rounds per minute. I did both, and even at the high fire rate it was controllable off hand. On the contrary the M60 was hard to control. The FG-42 looks like it was a 400 round per minute gun (plenty good enough). The short length of pull shoulders much faster. The short barrel gives better balance and control. There were comments about the side loading magazine throwing the weapon out of balance on one website. Guess they never shot off hand with a 30 round belt hanging on it flopping around!
gary
|
|
|
Post by panzerjager2 on Mar 20, 2017 13:35:52 GMT -5
As a duly deputized purveyor of "all that is" LOLAM.............The FG 42 design, and production, went through six, (i think it was 5 or 6) different companies...one of these was Mauser. Thus there COULD be similarities between the FG and the MG designs. Having said that, after the war the US was so impressed with the MG42 that it became central to the design and production of what would become the M60 series of General Purpose machine guns. Lastly, there where two models: preproduction, and production variants. Mention of a third variant, comes from the fact that, I believe it might have been Stuhl, one of the companies who produced FG42's, attempted to allow belt fed ammunition. Which ultimately failed, due to MANY issues. PJ2
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 20, 2017 22:27:13 GMT -5
As a duly deputized purveyor of "all that is" LOLAM.............The FG 42 design, and production, went through six, (i think it was 5 or 6) different companies...one of these was Mauser. Thus there COULD be similarities between the FG and the MG designs. Having said that, after the war the US was so impressed with the MG42 that it became central to the design and production of what would become the M60 series of General Purpose machine guns. Lastly, there where two models: preproduction, and production variants. Mention of a third variant, comes from the fact that, I believe it might have been Stuhl, one of the companies who produced FG42's, attempted to allow belt fed ammunition. Which ultimately failed, due to MANY issues. PJ2 your probably right about the belt fed weapon system. Looking at the one bolt carrier I saw, I saw no feed paw. Yet I'd think a fifty round drum would have worked well. The bolt carrier on the MG42 has little in common with the FG model. The Pentagon Fact Finding Board was tasked with coming up with a new squad light machine gun during the Korean War. They simply said build a new MG42, and the old Army Generals promptly kicked the idea to the curb. The board met again, and said exactly the samething. After a third attempt, several manufacturers made designs f their own. They narrowed it down to two or three, and the prototype for the M60 won. Looked a lot like the MG42, but was still quite inferior. main flaw was the lack of the delayed roller block system that was used on the MG42. Plus it was about six pounds heavier than the MG42, and lacked to balance the MG42 had. I carried the sixty, and it never was right (I had a brand new one handed over to me). Later I had the chance to shoot an MG42, and fell in love with it. gary
|
|
|
Post by panzerjager2 on Mar 20, 2017 23:03:10 GMT -5
Gary, Thanks for the quote..... I have a lil experience with both the 60, and the MG3, (MG42 rechambered to NATO 7.62mm). The 60 is a PIG/BEAST/BEHEMOTH in comparison. The Pentagon team did not get it right. Although from what I have learned in recent years, the 60 made something of a resurgence, by being lightened, with small redesigning. The main issue still being, as you well know....... rate of fire and ease of operation. I'll take the MG3 any 7 days of the week, despite it's insatiable appetite for ammo.
Cheers PJ2
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 21, 2017 13:14:25 GMT -5
Gary, Thanks for the quote..... I have a lil experience with both the 60, and the MG3, (MG42 rechambered to NATO 7.62mm). The 60 is a PIG/BEAST/BEHEMOTH in comparison. The Pentagon team did not get it right. Although from what I have learned in recent years, the 60 made something of a resurgence, by being lightened, with small redesigning. The main issue still being, as you well know....... rate of fire and ease of operation. I'll take the MG3 any 7 days of the week, despite it's insatiable appetite for ammo.
Cheers PJ2 I agree with you 100%. My last post brought back some bad memories that I'd long subdued. Hill 219 came to visit again, and now I know what happened. Two barrels later and with just a half belt I survived. Had I been using an MG42, it'd been easy. The gun never failed, but the barrels did. Not a twenty second job to change it. gary
|
|
moramarth
Full Member
Member since: March 2014
Posts: 455
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
Mar 17, 2014 7:45:01 GMT -5
|
Post by moramarth on Mar 21, 2017 20:57:55 GMT -5
I can't have looked hard enough. It's a bad idea to post in the middle of the night just because you can't sleep... I'm sorry if my insomnia has had unfortunate repercussions for gary's peace of mind. While I envy your practical experience of full-auto weapons I'm glad I didn't have to acquire some of it the way you have - I wouldn't have fared well in any branch of the military. But it's a bit frustrating that there's no way of getting hands-on experience of many historical weapons on this side of the pond. No semi-auto rifles above .22 rim-fire, no hand guns that aren't front loaders. If you own a tank and have a sympathetic local constabulary you might get the main gun on a FAC rather than being deactivated, but not the smoke dischargers (classified as a multi-barreled weapon, if in working order can only be possessed by special authorisation from the Home Office - which you won't get...) Regards, M
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 21, 2017 21:57:08 GMT -5
I can't have looked hard enough. It's a bad idea to post in the middle of the night just because you can't sleep... I'm sorry if my insomnia has had unfortunate repercussions for gary's peace of mind. While I envy your practical experience of full-auto weapons I'm glad I didn't have to acquire some of it the way you have - I wouldn't have fared well in any branch of the military. But it's a bit frustrating that there's no way of getting hands-on experience of many historical weapons on this side of the pond. No semi-auto rifles above .22 rim-fire, no hand guns that aren't front loaders. If you own a tank and have a sympathetic local constabulary you might get the main gun on a FAC rather than being deactivated, but not the smoke dischargers (classified as a multi-barreled weapon, if in working order can only be possessed by special authorisation from the Home Office - which you won't get...) Regards, M I will only tell you this about 219; it was ugly, and felt as if the world had left me to die. I was number two man in a six man team. Saw one, three, and four get shot up right beside me while I had picked up a six or eight inch gash on my right leg (unknown how). I'd still don't member firing the pig, and only remember the aftermath. Had blanked it out for a very long time till a buddy reminded me of it. Bits and pieces now filter thru (thank you Randy). After 17 insertions (some say more), I learned a lot looking back. The lack of good equipment comes forth, and the lack of a hand at my back really stands out. I was young and kinda laid back. Just did as told without a thought. Looking back all I see is insanity. gary
|
|
|
Post by panzerjager2 on Mar 21, 2017 22:33:22 GMT -5
Gary, It maybe hard to actually believe, BUT........... "sharing is healing". I literally just got home from seeing my PTSD councilor... It helps, wether 17 years ago or 30... PJ2
|
|
Deleted
Member since: January 1970
Posts: 0
Mar 29, 2024 2:05:14 GMT -5
Mar 29, 2024 2:05:14 GMT -5
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 10:21:19 GMT -5
I have a permanent kink in my back thanks to the pig.
USMC, MOS 0331
G
|
|
|
Post by panzerjager2 on Mar 22, 2017 13:24:14 GMT -5
Betcha never seen this adaptation before.......... PJ2
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 22, 2017 14:01:26 GMT -5
Gary, It maybe hard to actually believe, BUT........... "sharing is healing". I literally just got home from seeing my PTSD councilor... It helps, wether 17 years ago or 30... PJ2 going to tell all of you something, so bear with me. I have PTSD pretty bad. It kinda has it's ups and downs, but never goes away. This was the last present the tax payer gave me, and it's a gift that keeps on giving. My last discussion with a doctor left him and I both in tears, and I left with a guilty feeling. We call it riding the dragon's tail, and it can be a bad ride. You are most correct about the method of simply handing off the symptom to somebody else, but that's also a temporary fix. I did it for many years till a conversation came up awhile back. Somebody received a bronze star, and yet his position and MOS made it seem odd. I had no opinion, and avoided the discussion. Then two of the guys turned to me and asked me if I'd ever tagged and bagged. I looked at them, and they knew they'd screwed up. A minute later I was crying, and walked outside to avoid them. They came out to make sure I was Ok, and of course I was. I told them what happened, and to never do that again. I did 15 months in the combat zone. Simple job, and was kinda laid back. In an arty unit you assemble a recon team (some call it an advance party). Before moving to a new location, you go and scout out the new site. I did 17 insertions (that I know of). My right hand man says 23 insertions, and First Sargent says 25 (I don't see 25, and really think 23 is on the high side. Started out as number two, but on the third I became number one when I landed ontop the First Sargent. I got the position because I could really shoot the sixty. Wasn't afraid of it, or being one or two out the door. Sometimes there's be an infantry platoon on the new LZ, and sometimes they'd be a klick or two out. Once in awhile there wasn't anybody close by. Twice they dropped us on the wrong hill top, and that was real scary. Did Tet in 68 and 69. 68 was most interesting, but made it thru without much ado. 69 was bad, as in really bad. I don't remember it much do to my blocking it out (PTSD). Bits and pieces here and there, but most of that month's a black hole. Last year I was forced to take massive doses of a pain killer, and I got to relive that month by the hour. Luckly is now hidden again. I remember shooting WP inside the wire almost daily, loosing friends. Thinking it was over every morning, and getting to do it all over again every night. Fire fights inside the wire happened around the clock. I was up on the extreme north end of the fire base (about a quarter mile square), and went thru several thousand round rounds of 7.62 up there. I had my own M60, plus each squad had one. So we had two, and there was a couple M2's close by. During a lull, I and two other guys dug an "L" shaped trench out in front of us (100 feet out). It became a major stopping point as much was going on up there, but nobody got past that trench. Probably fired off fifty claymore mines, but by then all the foo gas was gone. I was due to rotate on the last of the month, and became the last man out. I wanted to go back home really bad, but it wasn't home anymore. A102 was. Carried a guilty feeling for years over this alone. It was later learned the base camp was surrounded by three full strength NVA divisions, and they went back home with about a division and a half. Yet they never got past the place. How I still don't know, with roughly 150 guys holding the place. Interestingly, it was my brother inlaw who broke the siege in June (never knew him). His ACAV was the lead tank followed by about five hundred infantrymen. There were no infantry on A102. Had they taken the place, they'd have literally cut the country in half. Even then the got close to doing it. I'd never do it again, but never regretted being in that mix. Life can be tough, but you get over it! Hot and sunny out on the Hiep Duc Ridge today gary
|
|
sturmbird
Full Member
Member since: June 2012
Posts: 1,406
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
Jun 21, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
|
Post by sturmbird on Mar 22, 2017 14:03:28 GMT -5
I have a permanent kink in my back thanks to the pig. USMC, MOS 0331 G I actually had blisters and calluses on my shoulders from humping that thing. 110lb. combat load. glt
|
|
bbrowniii
Full Member
Member since: March 2012
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate.
Posts: 1,218
Mar 25, 2012 22:08:04 GMT -5
Mar 25, 2012 22:08:04 GMT -5
|
Post by bbrowniii on Mar 22, 2017 18:07:50 GMT -5
I love the 60. Lugged and shot that thing all over the world. It could be a tempermental bitch, but I still loved that gun.
USMC 0331
|
|
|
Post by panzerjager2 on Mar 22, 2017 19:39:22 GMT -5
For my money I'd rather carry: But for the record I carried:
9 years USAF CCT/SOW PJ2
|
|