Why did the Americans fail so miserably at making a real general

File: 1438429434749.jpg (9KB, 250x242px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x242px

>>32912430
Why the fuck would someone do this to an MG-42?

Theres two groups of people:

>Those that invented GPMGs and assault rifles

>Those that won the war

>>32912430
Hello anon. You've never shot a .50 cal. Enjoy trolling your way through life.

File: 1a24ed2a919e4f5a8931db157d4111db.jpg (32KB, 480x405px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x405px

>>32912430
Are you talking about General Purpose Machine Guns or Assault Rifles? Because those are two different things you seem to be interchanging between.

Because of the politics involved in selecting a new military firearm being absolutely retarded. Just look at the adoption process of the m14 for instance. It wasnt lack of technology or ability if that's what you're wondering.

>>32912445

I bet those GIs in Korean trenches really enjoyed bringing up their dad's heirloom 1919 and M2 carbines against PPsH attacks.

>22 years

>>32912430

wait so the browning m1919 isn't a gpmg ?

why did they strap them to everything ?

>>32912472
No, it's a medium machinegun.

>>32912459
Yeah, the only thing that seemed to get any priority between 1945 and 1965 was the Air Force.

>>32912483
Medium machine guns are "general purpose machine guns" you tool

>>32912483
That's what a GPMG is ya fucking weapon

File: browning50small.jpg (113KB, 1616x1077px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1616x1077px

>>32912430

lol what? the general plan for arming vehicles was

>how many M2's can we fit on it? fuck it, throw another one on

landing craft, fighters, bombers, tanks, jeeps, ships, armored vehicles/half-tracks/trucks

motherfuckers were strapping an M2 on everything that was heavy enough to carry it, and to a lesser extent the same was done for the M1919

>assault rifle
probably because the garand was cash

>pic related is undoubtedly the most based MG ever created, debate me

>>32912489
No. If it's 12+ kilograms unloaded with no quick-change barrel and a full-powered rifle cartridge and impossible to be practically carried and operated by a single soldier, than it's a medium machine gun. M1919 is a medium machine gun, M34 is a general purpose machine gun. Know the difference.

>But Wikipedia says it's the same thing!

>>32912515

>Garand was cash

M1 Garand was obsolete by 1947.

>>32912489
>>32912501
Not necessarily. They've still got to be used in a general purpose role for that.

>>32912472
>>32912489
Just cause you can slap it on anything and carry it around doesn't make it a GMPG.
DshK and Maxim heavy machine guns were routinely used by the Soviets in literally every role that required rapid fire short of issuing them as light machine guns. That doesn't make a Maxim any less of a heavy machine gun, or any less applicable to the GMPG role.

File: 1485137161872.gif (478KB, 500x224px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 500x224px

>>32912523

idk about obsolete, but obviously very dated. M14 was a decent replacement, but restrictive due to the weight of the weapon/ammo

>semi related, post yfw you watched that scene in born on the fourth of july where manlet tom cruise is spraying the M14 on full auto without the barrel rising

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54ClvMY1Xek

>>32912527
A. No they don't.
B. The M1919 was on literally everything.

>>32912575
I've never even heard of this film. Is it any good?

>>32912582
>No they don't.
Yes, they do. That's the definition of a GPMG.
>The M1919 was on literally everything.
Except in a light machinegun role.

>>32912588

it's not bad, but it's not a movie i really watch repeatedly. long story short, he gets paralyzed in 'nam and is more of a drama than a war flick. some feels were had.

>>32912430
well there wasnt a real need for one maybe, they had the BAR, the m1919 and the M1 garand, any american soldier could already lay suppresive fire better than a german.

Then the doctrine was different, and thats it...
Furthermore you retarded OP, the MG34 was 12 kg, the mg 42 13, the m1919 was 15 (around that ballpark).

if this is nota troll thread like most /k related ones, im really sorry for the OP he was born retarded and theres no cure for that

>>32912442

Looks like a CETME Ameli to me desu.

>>32913117

>any american soldier could already lay suppresive fire better than a german

Forget about the German. What about those 22 years of inadequacy and the humiliating embarrassment of the Korean War? What if a land war broke out in Europe in those decades?

> MG34 was 12 kg, the mg 42 13, the m1919 was 15

Is this supposed to be an argument? Not only did M1919 weight a 2 kilograms more, it also overheated much more rapidly, didn't have a quick-change barrel and most models could not be used as light machine guns due to lack of (real) stock.

>BAR

M1918A2 was literally worse than nothing. No suppressive fire capability, worst bipod in history, overpowered cartridge, too heavy (almost same weight as MG 34 with none of its strengths), no pistol grips, bad sights, magazines are too small, no quick-change barrel, made for "walking fire", etc, etc. It was obsolete by 1920, it was a fucking museum piece by 1941. By Korea, it was comical.

tl;dr: kys, retard.

>>32913767
the BAR could go longer than 2 minutes without running out of ammo

>>32912430
What is the BAR for 100$ please

>>32913990
And infantryman's worst nightmare
>>32913902
If you only shot a single round per every twenty seconds, maybe. Otherwise it would overheat and jam solid after 100 rounds.

>>32912523
It's a good thing World War II ended in 1945

>>32914130
>The US didn't participate in large armed conflicts between 1945 and 1965

>>32912430

Because the US asked for the FAL to be chambered in .308 in exchange for adoption by the US military.

Then they adopted the M14 instead of the FAL despite the deal.

>>32914085
memes arent arguments, kiddo

>>32914180
Gotcha, BAR was the best machine gun ever, a technological marvel in every respect. I don't have anything to prove to you, I don't care if you think the Earth's flat.

>>32912471
You know .30 carbine is a stouter round then 7.62 tokarev right?

>>32914206
You do know that M3 is terrible compared to PPsH in close quarters?

>>32914198
the BAR was outdated by ww2, but ask any GI that fought and theyll tell you they loved the extra firepower the BAR brought to the table.

an opinion from a fucking neckbeard autist such as yourself is as worthless as the crusty dingleberries on my asspubes

gas yourself, wehraboo

>>32912430
fail thread

>>32914250
Sure it was. No one ever "lost" bipod from their M1918A2, or traded their POS suicide stick/ping machine for an M1 Carbine/STG 44 at first opportunity - so much did they love the stoppan powah. It just didn't happen, period.

[spoiler]kek[/spoiler]

>>32912442
It's probably a yugo m53

>>32914228
Except its not and you have no sources to back it up besides your ass

>>32912430
>muh salt carbinez
>including the entirety of the Korean war,
hmmm... the korean war... was that MOUT? or, average engagement distances of 7 to 50 yards? lots of dismounting from unarmored vehicles and raiding outposts?

or, was it 150 to 300 yards, and were there still huge 9-man squads who could achieve the same suppressive effect by just doing the job they already knew how to, with their more general-purpose rifles that they already had, under artillery support?

>>32914290
>stoppan powah

you should be paying attention in english class, kid. i never said that

>m-muh ping

scratch that, you need to be in class with the special ed windowlickers

>spoiler

you sure are retarded, arent you? this is /k/, not /v/

>>32913117
>there wasnt a real need for one
aaaand /thread

>>32912471
>PPsH attacks.

>having to run across 50-100 yards of open field before you can even use your weapon effectively
>the kiwis are raining howitzer down on you and when you get to your position the people you're going to have to fight are bantzmaster aussies and fat americans that already know they're right and won't quit
>your "rifle" is slavic antikytherian voodoo
>you don't actually have a rifle

>>32914359
Not him, but I've got to ask you... Are you new here?

>>32912430
Because even fifty years ago everyone from the grunts to command would rather have artillery and CAS, over something that shoots quick. Check your Slav mate.

>>32913767
>humiliating embarrassment of the Korean War?

How so? We were surprised twice in that war, and constantly outnumbered. We still managed to fight the aggressors to a draw, at more or less the original starting point.

Keeping in mind that we did it with garrison and second line troops, mostly green, against Chicom formations composed entirely of seasoned veterans.

>>32914085
>And infantryman's worst nightmare

Ever hear of the Breda line of LMGs? Or how about those abortions the Japanese were fielding?

>>32914526
Not an argument

>>32914679
Japanese had fine LMG's

>>32914228
Are you talking about the carbine or the SMG? If you're talking about the SMG, M3s weren't chambered in .30 Carbine, they were .45 ACP. So, you're either stupid or you're moving the goalposts.

If you're talking about the M3 Carbine, that was chambered in .30 Carbine. It also came with an infrared scope because it was a sniper's weapon. Yes, Sparky, a sniper's weapon will be worse than a PPsH at CQB. I can play that game, too. The PPsH was terrible for indirect fire support, being inferior in every respect to the M1 Pack Howitzer.

>>32912430
What is the M1919A6 for $200, Alex.

>>32912442
>>32913148
>>32914296
I think it's actually Ruger 10/22. I forget which company makes them, but if I am not mistaken, there is a company out there that makes shells for 10/22 rifles to make them look like other guns. I think they also make shells that make the rifle look like M240s and M249s.

File: IMG_9453.jpg (122KB, 1024x782px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x782px

>>32912430
Assault rifles are a compromise between weight and fire power.

Americans don't compromise well.

>>32912471
You say it like the the M2 wasn't better in every appreciable way besides being a bullet hose.