User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 8:17:56 PM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 8:18:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Get the M1 Carbine up and running so you've got the pdw/ assault rifle game up and running before 1939. Push 30rnd mags from the outset. While you're being granted favors, get the mag mounted on top of the BAR and increased to 30rnd capacity. So, that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 8:21:08 PM EDT
[#3]
Ak or sig in 6.5 Grendel
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 8:24:00 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SCAR 16/17 .30 would have made more sense to them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 8:39:05 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SCAR 17. .30 would have made more sense to them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 9:44:51 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You think they’d accept anything but a wood and metal gun in the 30s? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
SCAR 17. .30 would have made more sense to them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 9:52:52 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
War Dept procurement heads so far in ass, you could have given them man-portable phased plasma rifles, in the 40 watt range, including tech support, lifetime warranty and unit cost under $100... they'd have laughed in your face because it wasn't .30 caliber, and ammunition limited. The idea of intermediate cartridges would have failed because they weren't full powered. The only reason intermediate cartridges became popular was because the Germans proved they could work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 9:55:58 PM EDT
[#8]
What's the point? It's all political and has little to do with selecting the best weapon for the job and more to do with who's paying who under the table.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 9:57:17 PM EDT
[#9]
MG-34 in 30-06 to replace the M1919?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:07:06 PM EDT
[#10]
John Garand already new we needed a less powerful cartridge and detachable magazine, even with the big army screwing it up we still had the best rifle by a long shot.
Given the general flow of war, unless you have something really technically better it won't make a difference. I'm talking Mauser over trap door Springfield better. What won WW2 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:19:25 PM EDT
[#11]
AR 10 or SCAR17 carbine in 6.5 Creedmoor, 25rd magazines,
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:24:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Glock carbine
Teach that little Austrian bastage a lesson about karma time travel. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:31:30 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
War Dept procurement heads so far in ass, you could have given them man-portable phased plasma rifles, in the 40 watt range, including tech support, lifetime warranty and unit cost under $100... they'd have laughed in your face because it wasn't .30 caliber, and ammunition limited. Nothing would have passed that wasn't 30-06. And wood. And steel. And heavy. And not full auto. They didn't care. They didn't want wasted bullets or anything too new fangled. Detachable magazine? Are you a fucking witch? You'd have been burned at the stake! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:31:33 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Could the RPG-7 have been produced with 30s technology? I believe it has a piezo electric ignition, was that commonplace in gadgets of the era? Its also a reason why sandbagging your tank or adding layers of track led to a higher chance of knocking out a tank. It gave the earlier shape charges sufficient time for the fuse to effectively form the jet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:44:22 PM EDT
[#15]
The M1 was supposed to be chambered in a 270 cartridge. But Macarthur said no because we had enough 30-06 to fight 6-12 months at WWI levels.
Box mags as nice. But embloc clips are lighter and about as fast to load. If I'm going to the war department, I'm taking the plans for the P-51D. If we start the war with that plane, a while lot of bombers make it to their targets and home. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:46:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
AK. Easier to make lots of them in 1930. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:51:16 PM EDT
[#17]
M79 grenade Launcher. High angle hell in a compact package.
There was no technical reason to not have had this weapon in ww2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 10:52:48 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
DI AR-15. How is this even a question?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:16:30 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M79 grenade Launcher. High angle hell in a compact package. There was no technical reason to not have had this weapon in ww2. Lots of tiny shit that must work right. I am gonna say 40mm grenades require 50's tech at a minimum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:16:40 PM EDT
[#20]
SIG 542 but in .30-06, with a fixed wooden stock, pistol grip and handguards. Make it to take BAR mags...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:17:23 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was no glue in 1930 to make the stocks and no abilities to mass produce aluminum forging like those needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:23:57 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was no glue in 1930 to make the stocks and no abilities to mass produce aluminum forging like those needed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
DI AR-15. How is this even a question? That's the point.
You think I am bringing 1930s tech to 1930? 
I am going to grab the Arsenal by the balls and drag them kicking and screaming into the future. You can thank me later.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:26:40 PM EDT
[#23]
AK47
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:29:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Probably the RPG-7V.
Man pack, reloadable, takes out vehicles, light armor (any armor back then), and artillery pieces. Infinitely useful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:30:55 PM EDT
[#25]
The gun design inside the nukes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:40:41 PM EDT
[#26]
The Tommy Gun was already designed before 1930 so a sub-machine gun wouldn't be super innovative.
Maybe the HK G3 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:44:47 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Tommy Gun was already designed before 1930 so a sub-machine gun wouldn't be super innovative. Maybe the HK G3 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:52:34 PM EDT
[#28]
This in 6.5x33 with a 123gr.
A nice little American wood fore end, lighten the stock a bit. They could manufacture this in the US industrial base in the 1930s, given automotive and firearms technology at the time. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2017 11:52:47 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The M1 was supposed to be chambered in a 270 cartridge. But Macarthur said no because we had enough 30-06 to fight 6-12 months at WWI levels. Box mags as nice. But embloc clips are lighter and about as fast to load. If I'm going to the war department, I'm taking the plans for the P-51D. If we start the war with that plane, a while lot of bombers make it to their targets and home. If you're going to stay with a relatively traditional prop aircraft, an A-1 Skyraider or B-29 might hit harder. We built 19,000 B-24s during the war. Imagine if those lines were cranking out B-29s instead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 1:38:49 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They already had it. Garand in 276 Pederson. Adding a detachable magazine would have been excellent. They didn't have the propellant technology for the modern cartridges. With the caliber established, a more modern form factor ala the StG45 could have been developed during the war years as an alternative to the M1 carbine. ______________________ 7.62x39 ____________ .30 HRT ___________ 5.56x45 _______________________ 
Then redesign the T3E2 Garand, changing it from a heavy, clip-fed, long-barreled, battle rifle into a lightweight, mag-fed, short-barreled, assault rifle. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 1:43:48 AM EDT
[#31]
I like other answers more, but they’ve been said so
MP5 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 1:48:04 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
War Dept procurement heads so far in ass, you could have given them man-portable phased plasma rifles, in the 40 watt range, including tech support, lifetime warranty and unit cost under $100... they'd have laughed in your face because it wasn't .30 caliber, and ammunition limited. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 1:53:57 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. The idea of intermediate cartridges would have failed because they weren't full powered. The only reason intermediate cartridges became popular was because the Germans proved they could work. It died with the end of the war due to unacceptable accuracy past 400 meters. The Americans never even recognized the German 7.92x33mm Kurz or StG44 as anything but a poorly conceived last ditch weapon inferior to the M1. That's how far out of touch US Army ordnance was until introduced to the AK47 in Vietnam...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 2:16:26 AM EDT
[#34]
An M1 Garand - modified with a short stroke gas piston similar to the M14. With a flash hider similar to the STG58...
And a case of AC58 rifle grenades. 30-06 rifle. No blanks or extra bullshit to launch a warhead capable of defeating 350mm of armor. Not as much fun as an RPG-7, but could have been fielded by our troops & made with the available tech. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 2:19:32 AM EDT
[#35]
An M14 since an M16 would be a hard sell.
Not an AK because our enemies would copy, produce, and shoot us with it in no time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 2:52:20 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you're talking about things other than rifles..... Get all the open source material you can find on the atomic bomb, put it in a sealed box with the following instructions: DO NOT OPEN On , Jan 1 1939, call a meeting of the following individuals: Leo Szilard Enrico Fermi Hans Bethe John von Neumann Philip Abelson Otto Frisch Arthur Compton Ernest Lawrence Robert Oppenheimer ...and present this box. Nuke the |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 7:18:02 AM EDT
[#37]
For submachine guns, I think I'd have tried to pitch something like the Sterling at them, since it was cheap, and good. Also simple, light, and reliable.
For service rifles either the STG-44, AK-47, or MAS 49/56 with the scope the French were issuing along with the rifle grenade package. The reality is that they'd need something in thirty caliber, made of milled and stamped components, with wood furniture. Otherwise I doubt they'd touch it. I also think that an ACOG would've been possible back then. Not with tritium or fiber optic, but a fixed 4X optic with a BDC, etched reticle, and utilizing a prism would've been doable back then. Like the TA01-NSN. But there's somewhere I'm going with this: 
A .30-06 10rd detatchable mag fed gun that could be ran with stripper clips if necessary, super mechanically simple, easy to manufacture with 40s tech, optics capable, easy to shoot well, rifle grenade capable, with the MSE style stock or some variant thereof means that every guy can do M1 Garand tasks, DMR tasks with the fixed 4X sight with a BDC, rifle grenades, and keep the fire rate pretty high. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 7:25:36 AM EDT
[#38]
4x scope for all rifles.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 7:56:25 AM EDT
[#39]
Stoner 63
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 8:25:44 AM EDT
[#40]
Mini 14 or Mini 30. Even if only as a PDW as the M1 carbine was originally fielded. But as with the M1 carb. the light weight and utility of it made it popular in front line use. Once they saw how well the 5.56 or 7.62X39 round worked in typically combat ranges, it would have caught on. Maybe.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 8:39:35 AM EDT
[#41]
The Ultimax 100, but with wood furniture
Chambered in a modified .30 carbine using a Zinc diecast 85gr Spitzer projectile at 2200fps. This would further reduce recoil, improve penetration, and give a projectile that would more rapidly tumble. Cartridge weight would be 11 grams, a bit less then 5.56, and less then 1/2 the weight of .45 acp or .30-06. Zinc die cast was a popular method of manufacturing toys at the time, and would allow simple mass production of lightweight projectiles. The round would be effective to 200 yards. 
The Ultimax would serve to replace 3 weapons - the Thompson, the BAR, and the M1 carbine. With it's constant recoil full auto, and extended capacity magazines (100rd drums and 45rd box magazines) it would offer superior firepower and full auto accuracy then any individual weapon used in the war. It would be the ideal weapon for fighting in the Pacific, as well as urban combat and assaulting positions in Europe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 3:14:54 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Ultimax 100, but with wood furniture http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/3/33/U100_Mk3_Stock.jpg/450px-U100_Mk3_Stock.jpg Chambered in a modified .30 carbine using a Zinc diecast 85gr Spitzer projectile at 2200fps. This would further reduce recoil, improve penetration, and give a projectile that would more rapidly tumble. Cartridge weight would be 11 grams, a bit less then 5.56, and less then 1/2 the weight of .45 acp or .30-06. Zinc die cast was a popular method of manufacturing toys at the time, and would allow simple mass production of lightweight projectiles. The round would be effective to 200 yards. http://www.oldammo.com/30CarbProofB.JPG The Ultimax would serve to replace 3 weapons - the Thompson, the BAR, and the M1 carbine. With it's constant recoil full auto, and extended capacity magazines (100rd drums and 45rd box magazines) it would offer superior firepower and full auto accuracy then any individual weapon used in the war. It would be the ideal weapon for fighting in the Pacific, as well as urban combat and assaulting positions in Europe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 3:34:19 PM EDT
[#43]
Meh, we started WWII with the best issue rifle, and ended the war with the Best/ Second best (Behind Sturmgewehr). Polymer wasn't a thing and there's no way they'd agree to use their limited Aluminum supply on an untested rifle. We're basically stuck with 30-06. The .276 Garand was a much better rifle, but the war department wanted a universal round and didn't want to get rid of their interwar stockpile. I'd probably try to bring back plans for a decent GPMG. An effective GPMG in place of the BAR would have made a far greater difference than any rifle would. Probably a soviet PK rechambered for 30-06, although their stamping technology was so limited I don't know if they'd be able to implement it. I'd have to go through more current GPMG's to figure out what would be cheapest to manufacture on early 40's tech.
Really, the operating principals for modern firearms were all worked out in the 30's. What changed was materials, manufacturing and doctrine. There isn't anything mechanically novel about the AR15. What makes it an exceptional rifle is the low weight provided by aluminum and polymer, manufacturing techniques that make them cheap to make, and changes in mindset that opened the military up to accepting an intermediate cartridge. Technical plans would not change this. ETA: If I had to pick a rifle, I'd go with the FAL, for the reasons posted on page one. Lengthen the chamber to accommodate the War Dept.'s love affair with 30-06 and you'd have a great battle rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 3:36:35 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kalashnikov. It's manufacture was within the capability of our 30's era industrial base. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 3:59:20 PM EDT
[#45]
Why?
They were about to adopt the M1. The US was miles ahead of every other world power at the time once adopted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 4:57:01 PM EDT
[#46]
Ak47 or FAL, totally feasible to be manufactured in 1930.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 4:59:45 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
4x scope for all rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 5:05:01 PM EDT
[#48]
I’m not sure about the RPG -7 idea. The life span of the poor bastard carrying one of these with a back pack full of rockets has got to be short. Like, real short. Think about it: a dozen dudes coming at you armed with AK’s and maybe PKM or two plus one asshole with a rocket launcher. Who do you shoot first?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 5:12:45 PM EDT
[#49]
"modern" powder recipe and a Carl Gustav type anti armor platform with modern armor penetrating projectile design.
Easily man portable system that could shred any armor the Axis throws at it |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2017 5:28:23 PM EDT
[#50]
AR 18/180-whatever it is. Stamped, easier to mass produce than AR-15, and wouldn't have the US mucking around with AK derivatives 80 years later like Russia is now.
But... Quote HistoryQuoted:
War Dept procurement heads so far in ass, you could have given them man-portable phased plasma rifles, in the 40 watt range, including tech support, lifetime warranty and unit cost under $100... they'd have laughed in your face because it wasn't .30 caliber, and ammunition limited. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
