Redpill me on the STG-44, how good was it compared to other assault rifles and small arms of its period...

yes it was, it was just used in wrong way

>how good was it compared to other assault rifles and small arms of its period?
There were no other assault rifles, so it was breddy gud. Huge step ahead compared to contemporary small arms, but small arms clearly do not win wars.
>Was it as shit quality as anything late-war german?
Arguably, yes. Designed to be disposable in the way that USGI mags were originally disposable, and obviously hampered by logistical issues that stem from being bombed to fuck.
>Was it even a good design at all?
Reasonably, yes. Even if the assault rifle concept caught on in other nations, very few could have even produced a clever stamped design like this. Russia struggled for a decade with the AK47, France is occupied, Britain is still under pressure, which only leaves the USA. That nation had the most irrational hatred against the concept, and even if they could have made one from scratch I doubt it would have been a more resource-effective design than the Sturmgewehr.

>the design was still effective enough that they could be later sold internationally by the gommies.
Seize this memeing.

They weren't sold. Unused captured stock was simply given away as military aid to allies.

>it was somewhat common for soldiers to ditch their issued weapon in exchange for a foreign one
It was not. Most American, British and Russian reports clearly show this. Even though it was a great rifle even German soldiers had problems getting ammo, nevermind Allies.

Bad analogy
Contemporary “fighting rifles” were more like open topped bi-planes and the STG was more like the first closed air monoplane
And modern ARs are just the most optimized monoplanes
There is no jet analogy
If there’s a prop-to-jet analogy to be made it’s the switch from muzzle loaders to cartridges

>Me262
>bad aircraft
Pick one
it was common that it had over 5kills per craft

*that got off the ground
Quoth Chuck Yeager;
>The first jet I ever saw, I shot down.

Piece of shit.

>Redpill me on this thing that I clearly didn't even bother reading the Wikipedia entry for
FFS Jow Forums pick up a book. In short yes it was a good design but small arms do not win wars. Still an important gun though.

>it was somewhat common for soldiers to ditch their issued weapon in exchange for a foreign one
Cease this meme.

more like welcome to germany 44-45

Me262 was the king of the sky. 14 to 1 kill ratios.

Pros:
>self-loading/full-auto, can fire rapidly
>large magazines, a rifle with the magazine capacity of a subgun
>intermediate cartridge, can carry more ammo and rapid fire is much easier than with a full powered rifle, but it has much more range and power than a subgun
>was fairly cheap to make
>overall it let you do pretty much everything a subgun and infantry rifle usually let you do, this was revolutionary, squads where every rifleman were issued a Sturmgewehr with a full compliment of ammo and brand new magazines, could perform much better than they could with bolt-action rifles and subguns

Cons:
>poor lifespan, the trunnion, BCG, barrel and piston were all good steel, then they'd use cheaper, low quality stampings for the rest of the gun, this saved resources and money but this also meant they weren't particularly durable, notice that none of these guns have bayonet lugs, probably because the gun could be damaged from that kind of fighting
>the magazines are made from the same low quality stampings, the springs and feed lips would only last a while before the magazine wouldn't feed properly (this could be remedied to a point, by not loading the magazines full, or stretching the magazine springs a bit), there would also be a shortage of these, meaning there frequently weren't any good replacements available for a lot of people
>ammunition shortage would hit this gun extra hard, as the new 7.92x33mm cartridge would start production late in the war (Germany already had a chronic problem with not being able to produce enough ammunition), and there was only a brief time where troops issued this rifle would be able to get a full combat load and get the full advantage

So it was a really good concept, with a mediocre execution, brought about by someone who was already really fucked. It definitely proved that intermediate combat rifles were the future of small arms, and the world would learn that soon enough (some faster than others).

Attached: STG44 7.92x33mm, Good condition, most parts matching, Poland.jpg (800x600, 37K)

By the virtue of being the only one on the field.

As a rangetoy, yeah, because the M2 is built to last, and the Sturmgewehr wasn't.
Speaking purely in combat capability though, the 7.92x33mm has like three times the practical range of the .30 Carbine cartridge

Sort of.
That's why most people would grip the gun by the magwell (which doesn't help very well with recoil control).
You could probably remedy this a bit by wearing a glove, or wrapping the fore-end in cloth or leather or something.

>We know from memoirs of allied soldiers that the STG was an excellent gun
If all you know about it is that it's shooting at you and it let's your enemy advance much faster and better than with subguns/Mausers, yeah.

>and it was somewhat common for soldiers to ditch their issued weapon in exchange for a foreign one
That really doesn't happen as often as people think it does, what was far more likely is that captured weapons from enemy soldiers and locations would be issued out as reserve weapons, to cover for shortages (Germany did this far more than anyone else).

>sold internationally by the gommies.
No it wasn't.

Attached: sturmgewehr and kalashnikov.png (845x1086, 184K)

Attached: sturmgewehr.png (720x686, 380K)

Cons: A lot of soldiers didn't like the big magazine and this thing jammed a fuck lot without proper cleaning everyday. Source: me, German

The StG also weighed nearly twice as much as the M2 and the effective range of .30 carbine still puts it well within the normal fighting ranges that both rifles were designed for.

Fun fact: Early AK prototypes were hinged.

This.
It's problem was the same as with the starfighter later on.
A air-supremacy fighter used as a low altitude bomber.

wait what, for real? i need a picture of it.

Attached: 1352669668582.jpg (3448x3104, 2.78M)

The Stg44 is good for 300 yards, which is a bit on the low end for intermediate rifles, but it works.

The M1/M2 is really only good up to 100 yards, after which it suffers a lot. It's built much more like a PDW than as an infantry fighting rifle. You really would be stupidly outranged against someone with any kind of assault rifle, unless you were both in a really close CQB engagement.

One of the people who would be on Kalashnikov's design team had seen an Stg44, and one of his personal prototypes was a clone of it, like basically a rough recreation, in the same caliber even, IIRC.

You do know that actual StGs ended up in the hands of unavoury individuals all over the world, right? Nobody's saying the ak is based on the stg beyond the basic concept.

Attached: stg44-syria.jpg (610x531, 228K)

The guys getting the Me262 were the ones surviving up to that point. Which means they were manned by superior pilots.

They were not superior aircraft. They were good, but not game changers in any way. Long maintenance time, gas guzzling, expensive, poor construction and metal quality.

The StG-44 was great though. Cheaper than the k98k, effective, simple to use, and groundbreaking. It came too late to have any impact though. Wouldn't change the outcome of the war, but if it came in 1939, it would have a larger impact than the Me262 would have in 1939.

IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM

cheaper than the k98k?

>assault rifle
Used exclusively for retreat.

Watch Hickok45 use this assault rifle:
youtube.com/watch?v=gMK5OGEIbwk

yup.
The k98k is actually quite expensive. (All pre WW2 rifles were).

Milled receiver, a lot of high quality steel and precise engineering. Lot of man hours goes into the stock, the receiver and the barrel. More than you actually get out of it. And then there's the workmanship in finishing it, and making the parts fit to each individual rifle. Not really the best rifle for mass production, even though they managed to manufacture it in lots of different places.

Meanwhile, the StG-44 was made to be cheap. Most of it is stamped metal. Less high quality steel needed. Shorter barrel. If you have the tooling to make them, you can churn out a lot more StG-44s than an equivalent factory tooled up for k98k.

It's just that they had so many more factories tooled up for the k98k.

But that looks like a blowback subgun

You can still shoot people with it just fine

The AK started as a subgun. The 1946 model (chambered in 7.62x41) was also hinged, though.

The M1/2 is perfectly adequate at 200 yards

The 262 was an incredible aircraft that was unmatched at the time. Its only real failing was that the Reich was so poor for resources that they couldn't build them to last.

Many Germans infantry units basically multiplied their firepower because of this revolutionary weapon. Soviet infantry tactics had to adapt because all of a sudden established tactics became mass suicide.

>mk 108

My father was a soldier in the ETO during WWII. He ditched his 1911 and carried a captured Radom VIS 9mm because it, and its ammo, were lighter. I still have it.

>Ditched his 1911
That must've gone well with his superior officer
>Carried a captured 9mm
Which had plenty of ammo available for it, even in Allied supply trains. The Stg. 44 did not have this advantage.

The point is that it's obviously not inspired by the StG

>take a few potshots at them as they’re zooming around
>stumble across Kraut airfield
>262 on final approach can’t be doing more than 150 knots
>shoot it down
The quote makes it sound like they showed up in battle and were promptly dealt with with little difficulty, but his after action report notes that his flight was having a hard time targeting them and managed to shoot one down on its landing leg. Wish I had it saved, always love reading firsthand sources like that.

Technically, the 262 entered service after the Meteor since the first non-test squadron changed over in January 1945.

>air supremacy fighter
>armed with low velocity 30mm guns for shooting down bombers
Bit confused there mate?

It was, in part, inspired by it. Just like it was inspired by the M1 Garand and the 1908.

Attached: Remington 1908.jpg (2400x479, 224K)

His immediate superior officers were pretty busy getting killed. Don't think they had much interest in what sidearm Dad was carrying. And the captain was more likely to drop in on Dad in his fox hole for a snort of salvaged booze than to review the state of his equipment.

The BAR was at least as big an inspiration, and Mikhail said as such.

The best pilots were picked to fly it. It still got shot down by slower prop aircraft. Had a decent kill count because it went after bombers and it's speed made it harder to hit. Doesn't make it a great plane. A Taurus would seem like a good gun in the mid 1800s.

pics or it didn’t happen

>redpill

Attached: 1525735951220.jpg (663x579, 38K)