Remove ads

East Africa 1930: An ORBAT Quest

Reader mode
While it is more mechanically complex we can simply just purchase it From FN or ask for a technical license especially since we probably lack the technical minds needed to actually design a low cost SMG especially one that can be produced by us. We have never even designed any indigenous arms designs the closest we are doing now is Reverse Engineering MGs which in the case we already have existing examples. To actually make a gun we need people who have the technical knowledge and education to actually do so and if theres one thing reewin lacks is mass technical education
 
Last edited:
I don't think mass issuing pistols with stocks improves the capability of our army in any real way to be honest. If we arent making our own go at trying to make a dirt cheap smg we should probably wait until ww2 kicks off and the bangers that are the grease gun or the pps-43 are designed, then just crib off that. We have plenty of other investments in the meanwhile.
 
Adronio said:
I don't think mass issuing pistols with stocks improves the capability of our army in any real way to be honest. If we arent making our own go at trying to make a dirt cheap smg we should probably wait until ww2 kicks off and the bangers that are the grease gun or the pps-43 are designed, then just crib off that. We have plenty of other investments in the meanwhile.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Soviets are for sure not going to share anything to us.
 
Manowl said:
The Soviets are for sure not going to share anything to us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean they could but it'd probably take until the cold war and we'd end up being used as a proxy to fight someone.


In the immediate future? No shot unless we just somehow magically get a communist revolution (that Moscow approves of).

This is unrelated to the current discussion but did we ever discuss if we wanted to purchase tanks from anyone at any point? Not that there's a real point right now since all of them are going to be severely outdated in the next few years but may as well think about it once it's the late 30s.

I think our best bet for buying tanks might be the Czech LT-35 as it'd be fairly decent until we get hit by the allies with the Sherman's and Churchill's and if we face the Italians, it'd be good till the end of the war.
 
Yeah, probably going to use them as trainers but I can't see the Army or the State having the capability to have and maintain a tank force of a quantity large enough to have an impact.
 
Helher said:
While it is more mechanically complex we can simply just purchase it From FN or ask for a technical license especially since we probably lack the technical minds needed to actually design a low cost SMG especially one that can be produced by us. We have never even designed any indigenous arms designs the closest we are doing now is Reverse Engineering MGs which in the case we already have existing examples. To actually make a gun we need people who have the technical knowledge and education to actually do so and if theres one thing reewin lacks is mass technical education
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The cost of purchasing pistols would be very high, and we might as well just issue everyone with rifles instead. You're getting no real improvement in combat effectiveness by switching to a pistol as I understand it.
I think you're underestimating the amount of technical knowledge we possess - we have a mining and steel industry, which means at least a few highly trained engineers, and have been operating an arms factory for a while. The most complicated bits are common to the weapons we are already mass-producing, or can be copied off of other weapons by purchasing one and going at it with a pair of calipers and a scale.

It's entirely possible - and quite likely - that our arms industry can't spare the time to design a weapon while busy with the stuff we're doing, or that there isn't sufficient historical justification for our ordnance board to issue a requirement for a low cost SMG, but I think Reewiinites are smarter than you give them credit for, especially those who've been working in our heavy industry for decades.
DegenWeeb said:
This is unrelated to the current discussion but did we ever discuss if we wanted to purchase tanks from anyone at any point? Not that there's a real point right now since all of them are going to be severely outdated in the next few years but may as well think about it once it's the late 30s.

I think our best bet for buying tanks might be the Czech LT-35 as it'd be fairly decent until we get hit by the allies with the Sherman's and Churchill's and if we face the Italians, it'd be good till the end of the war.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ideal world? We buy four of [whatever tankettes are cheapest] ASAP to begin training in armour tactics. Then, around 1937-1938, we use that experience to start looking for something better, such as purchasing Ha-Go parts kits from Japan along with two-crew turrets from someone else (Skoda or Landsverk might be good choices), then assembling them on a domestically-produced hull along a slightly different pattern (because then we get to draw up domestic Reewiinite tanks, which would be fun)
wabbitking said:
Yeah the only people we might be able to beat in tanks is Ethiopia. And if we're fighting them they'll ideally be to busy fighting off the Italians to send their tanks to face us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We could match the Italians, if they're also busy fighting someone else, and surpass the Japanese if they haven't yet captured a beachhead from which to deploy tanks.
 
Depending on whether we switch sides in ww2 our best bet for a sub-machine gun might be to hold out until 1940-ish and try to get our hands on the owen gun and it would probably be an easy conversion to our preferred caliber considering they developed about 5 different versions due to the aussie army giving them the run around
 
C_Z said:
The cost of purchasing pistols would be very high, and we might as well just issue everyone with rifles instead. You're getting no real improvement in combat effectiveness by switching to a pistol as I understand it.
I think you're underestimating the amount of technical knowledge we possess - we have a mining and steel industry, which means at least a few highly trained engineers, and have been operating an arms factory for a while. The most complicated bits are common to the weapons we are already mass-producing, or can be copied off of other weapons by purchasing one and going at it with a pair of calipers and a scale.

It's entirely possible - and quite likely - that our arms industry can't spare the time to design a weapon while busy with the stuff we're doing, or that there isn't sufficient historical justification for our ordnance board to issue a requirement for a low cost SMG, but I think Reewiinites are smarter than you give them credit for, especially those who've been working in our heavy industry for decades.

Ideal world? We buy four of [whatever tankettes are cheapest] ASAP to begin training in armour tactics. Then, around 1937-1938, we use that experience to start looking for something better, such as purchasing Ha-Go parts kits from Japan along with two-crew turrets from someone else (Skoda or Landsverk might be good choices), then assembling them on a domestically-produced hull along a slightly different pattern (because then we get to draw up domestic Reewiinite tanks, which would be fun)

We could match the Italians, if they're also busy fighting someone else, and surpass the Japanese if they haven't yet captured a beachhead from which to deploy tanks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Interestingly in the current period between the adoption of cheap sub-machine guns and WW1, pistols and pistol caliber carbines (aka a pistol with a shoulder stock) are actually pretty useful/in demand for close contact fighting. Orwell in Homage to Catalonia talks about how at the front for trench raids they desperately wanted more handguns ('revolvers' as he terms them) but couldn't ever seem to get enough of them and is annoyed when he goes to Barcelona and sees rear-echelon officers walking around with handguns that he feels are badly wanted at the front.

A pistol/carbine stock pistol is useful in this period! It just is only useful for about five-six years before the big war comes along and cheap SMGs become order of the day by necessity.
 
Artificial Girl said:
Interestingly in the current period between the adoption of cheap sub-machine guns and WW1, pistols and pistol caliber carbines (aka a pistol with a shoulder stock) are actually pretty useful/in demand for close contact fighting. Orwell in Homage to Catalonia talks about how at the front for trench raids they desperately wanted more handguns ('revolvers' as he terms them) but couldn't ever seem to get enough of them and is annoyed when he goes to Barcelona and sees rear-echelon officers walking around with handguns that he feels are badly wanted at the front.

A pistol/carbine stock pistol is useful in this period! It just is only useful for about five-six years before the big war comes along and cheap SMGs become order of the day by necessity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Huh, my bad, I vaguely recalled this video and forgot the details of it; his conclusion was that they were not great (because a SMG does the job better).
I'm still not enamoured with the idea, though, given the costs involved. The one good datapoint I have for prices is that a Suomi m/26 was around 2200 Finnish Marks, which is around $55 USD (which is admittedly a lot cheaper than the Bergmann, which was twice as much). Meanwhile, a M1911 is around $35-45 USD. AIUI, the m/26 is still a relatively complicated gun to manufacture, being select fire, having a floating firing pin, etc. so it's possible we could drive the price even lower when we finally get around to it, if we feel the need.
 
C_Z said:
Huh, my bad, I vaguely recalled this video and forgot the details of it; his conclusion was that they were not great (because a SMG does the job better).
I'm still not enamoured with the idea, though, given the costs involved. The one good datapoint I have for prices is that a Suomi m/26 was around 2200 Finnish Marks, which is around $55 USD (which is admittedly a lot cheaper than the Bergmann, which was twice as much). Meanwhile, a M1911 is around $35-45 USD. AIUI, the m/26 is still a relatively complicated gun to manufacture, being select fire, having a floating firing pin, etc. so it's possible we could drive the price even lower when we finally get around to it, if we feel the need.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They're not great because an SMG does the job better, but SMGs are not common currently.
 
Speaking of Weapons Procurement, are we going for a dedicated anti-tank gun? I remember them not being of much use. But then again rifles of that caliber could also be used in anti-material roles.
 
C_Z said:
Ideal world? We buy four of [whatever tankettes are cheapest] ASAP to begin training in armour tactics
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We honestly are kinda limited by choice, as all designs will be based off the Carden Loyd tankette. We could get the polish variant which has an improved engine and slightly better armour, the TKS or the Japanese variants which were the Type 94 tankette (though this one isn't available for two years) and Type 92 armoured car (its not a car).

I'm doubtful of the British selling us a few, same with the Italians.
 
For armor, an alternate is an armored car, which we might be able to domestically produce. Order a cheap, reliable, foreign automobile, strip out near everything not needed to drive, and throw on armor plates and a weapon (turreted or casemate). But this would probably be a SIGNIFICANT project
 
WallFly said:
For armor, an alternate is an armored car, which we might be able to domestically produce. Order a cheap, reliable, foreign automobile, strip out near everything not needed to drive, and throw on armor plates and a weapon (turreted or casemate). But this would probably be a SIGNIFICANT project
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We don't have the rubber to replace the wheels much during wartime.
 
DegenWeeb said:
I'm doubtful of the British selling us a few, same with the Italians.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Any chance of us being able to buy them second hand? Buy them from the people who bought them?

If all else fails we might be able to scrounge up some Renault FT's. Apparently the French sold a bunch of them so we might be able to get them even if the French don't want to sell to us. Wiki even says that a few of them were captured in Manchuria and handed over to the Manchukuo.
 
Artificial Girl said:
Interestingly in the current period between the adoption of cheap sub-machine guns and WW1, pistols and pistol caliber carbines (aka a pistol with a shoulder stock) are actually pretty useful/in demand for close contact fighting. Orwell in Homage to Catalonia talks about how at the front for trench raids they desperately wanted more handguns ('revolvers' as he terms them) but couldn't ever seem to get enough of them and is annoyed when he goes to Barcelona and sees rear-echelon officers walking around with handguns that he feels are badly wanted at the front.

A pistol/carbine stock pistol is useful in this period! It just is only useful for about five-six years before the big war comes along and cheap SMGs become order of the day by necessity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, producing pistols is less ambitious than an early cheapo SMG, but as you've pointed out, there is historically more demand for pistols than supply can fill. It reminds me of the Russian Obrez 'pistol' that's just a sawed-down Mosin-Nagant...

I'm willing to continue with a janky project for a 6.5mm pistol bullet so we can use segments of rifle barrel for our pistols, I think that would be funny as hell.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top