PDA

View Full Version : Sten gun vs Owens sub machine gun



garm1and
06-11-2017, 06:48 AM
When production started in 1942, the Owens gun was somewhat bulky. It was tested for three different calibers - 9mm, .45ACP, and 38-200. The 9mm was the wiining caliber but the initial batch of ammo was not the right type and the government had to intervene to go around the military bureaucracy. A very reliable gun, the Owens was nicknamed the " Diggers Darling. " New Zealand troops swapped their Thompsons for the Owens and it was rumored that American troops favored them as well.
The British Sten Gun was also chambered in 9mm. It was simple and cheap to manufacture and put an automatic weapon into the hands of the infantry supplementing the presence of the Lee Enfield bolt actions rifles. But the Sten's accuracy was not good. Their effective ranges was about 30 meters. Plus jamming was a common problem as well as accidental discharges, sometimes going off just by laying them down. One very dramatic instance of a Sten Gun jamming was during the assassination of SS Obergruppenfuhrer Reinhard Heydrich on on 27 May 1942, when a Czechoslovak soldier – Warrant Officer Jozef Gabčík – fired his Sten point blank at Heydrich, only to have it misfire. His comrade Jan Kubiš then hastily tossed a grenade, which mortally wounded Heydrich. The Sten Guns were loved and hated almost equally earning suchn colorful nicknames as "Plumber's Nightmare", "Plumber's Abortion", or "Stench Gun". So which would you want to carry into combat?7810 Owens gun 7811 Sten Gun

Nickdfresh
06-13-2017, 09:00 AM
The Sten is often derided for its reliability or lack thereof. I'm not sure if this is a bit exaggerated or not, but the Assassination of Heydrich may not be a fair example as the Sten that jammed in that instance was surreptitious assembled under the duress and may not have been correctly put together in working order. In the film "Anthropoid", the Czech commando couldn't actually see what he was doing....

Nickdfresh
06-14-2017, 11:29 AM
The Sten itself was a bit of a mixed bag, but it seems reliability problems were probably more due to hasty initial manufacture rather than the gun being a poor design. From Wiki:


The MK II and MK III Stens were regarded by many soldiers as very temperamental, and could accidentally discharge if dropped or even laid on the ground whilst the gun was cocked.[20] Others would fire full-automatic when placed on 'single', or fire single shots when placed on 'automatic'.[20] This was particularly true of early Stens using bronze bolts, where the sear projection underneath the bolt could wear down more easily than ones made of case-hardened steel.

Stens could jam at inopportune moments. One of the more notable instances of this was the assassination of SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich on 27 May 1942, when a Czechoslovak soldier – Warrant Officer Jozef Gabčík – fired his Sten point blank at Heydrich, only to have it misfire. His comrade Jan Kubiš then hastily tossed a grenade, which mortally wounded Heydrich.[19] There are other accounts of the Sten's unreliability, some of them true, some exaggerated and some which are apocryphal. France[21] manufactured (well-made) Sten copies postwar into the early 1950s, evidently believing in the basic reliability and durability of the design.

A well-maintained (and properly-functioning) Sten gun was a devastating close-range weapon for sections previously armed only with bolt-action rifles. In addition to regular British and Commonwealth military service, Stens were air-dropped in quantity to resistance fighters and partisans throughout occupied Europe. Due to their slim profile and ease of disassembly/reassembly, they were good for concealment and guerrilla warfare. Wrapping the barrel in wet rags would delay undesirable overheating of the barrel.[22] Guerrilla fighters in Europe became adept at repairing, modifying and eventually scratch-building clones of the Sten (over 2,000 Stens and about 500 of the similar Błyskawica SMGs were manufactured in occupied Poland).

Rising Sun*
06-19-2017, 09:14 AM
Sorry to be a nit picker, but it's the "Owen" gun rather than "Owens", named after its inventor Evelyn Owen. http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/owen-evelyn-ernest-11322 The cause of death in the link may be the medical description, but it is reported in other circles that Owen pretty much drank himself to death.

Owen had experimented with various weapons and injured himself at least a couple of times before he began to develop the Owen gun.


Inventor of the Owen sub-machine gun, Evelyn Owen was born on 15 May 1915 in Wollongong, New South Wales. Despite the considerable efforts of his parents to steer him towards less dangerous pursuits, the young Owen was obsessed with guns; with making them, modifying them and firing them. At the age of eight he began his experiments by building his own shotguns from which he would fire stones at rubbish heaps.

Over the ensuing years Owen pursued his hobby with great passion. At one stage he transferred his interest to bomb making, once being wounded in the stomach by shrapnel from one of his explosives. On another occasion he shot himself in the stomach while trying out a new kind of bolt in an old rifle. He then turned his interest to sub-machine guns, making each of the prototypes himself, having learned metal and lathe work in the workshop of a family friend. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P8479

There are conflicting stories about various aspects of the development of the Owen gun, but the end result is that it was a very reliable weapon under very poor jungle conditions of mud etc.

Here are some links to expand on the above (and noting that there are conflicting stories about the history).

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/the-australian-owen-smg/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5aBa_rqZ3s

The Owen Gun was replaced in the Vietnam era by the F1, which in past posts I have described from my limited experience firing it as an outstanding piece of shit and which is the view of anyone I've ever spoken to who has also used it. Beats me why Australia replaced the Owen gun with the shitty little F1.

Nickdfresh
06-19-2017, 01:27 PM
Sorry to be a nit picker, but it's the "Owen" gun rather than "Owens", named after its inventor Evelyn Owen. http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/owen-evelyn-ernest-11322 The cause of death in the link may be the medical description, but it is reported in other circles that Owen pretty much drank himself to death.

Owen had experimented with various weapons and injured himself at least a couple of times before he began to develop the Owen gun.

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P8479

There are conflicting stories about various aspects of the development of the Owen gun, but the end result is that it was a very reliable weapon under very poor jungle conditions of mud etc.

Here are some links to expand on the above (and noting that there are conflicting stories about the history).

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/the-australian-owen-smg/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5aBa_rqZ3s

The Owen Gun was replaced in the Vietnam era by the F1, which in past posts I have described from my limited experience firing it as an outstanding piece of shit and which is the view of anyone I've ever spoken to who has also used it. Beats me why Australia replaced the Owen gun with the shitty little F1.


Sounds like he did a lot of his testing while enjoying cold beverages... :mrgreen:

Nickdfresh
06-19-2017, 01:33 PM
...

The Owen Gun was replaced in the Vietnam era by the F1, which in past posts I have described from my limited experience firing it as an outstanding piece of shit and which is the view of anyone I've ever spoken to who has also used it. Beats me why Australia replaced the Owen gun with the shitty little F1.

Wasn't the F1 supplemented, if not effectively, replaced by the M-16 by Aussie troops in 'Nam?

Rising Sun*
06-20-2017, 05:04 AM
Wasn't the F1 supplemented, if not effectively, replaced by the M-16 by Aussie troops in 'Nam?

My instinct was that M16's weren't issued to Australian troops, although all sorts of non-issue weapons were acquired informally. (See last link below for a few cases.)

Anyway, I thought I should check before replying and you are correct, so I've learnt something new.


M16A1 Armalite Rifle - (Colt AR15) fully auto - 5.56mm round - weight 7 lbs. - magazine capacity 20/30 rounds - range 300 metres - carried primarily by forwards scouts in each section of a rifle company, also issued to selected appointments in a unit. This weapon was not issued to Australian troops until stocks were obtained form US sources in 1966. Early versions of this weapon were prone to stoppages and breakages, caused mainly by an unsatisfactory and weak alloy bolt carrier. That was fixed.

F1 Sub Machine Gun - fired a 9mm round - magazine capacity 30 rounds - weight 7.2 lb - range 100 metres. This weapon was totally unsuitable for conditions in Vietnam. The range (100 Metres) and low velocity of the 9mm round was not capable of penetrating the jungle and undergrowth. The M16 Armalite was eventually issued in place of this weapon.
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/vietnam/rar-vietnam.htm

Interesting details of the range of weapons used by Australians early in Vietnam War in this armourer's memoir. http://www.5rar.asn.au/narrative/memoirs.htm

Rising Sun*
06-20-2017, 05:27 AM
M16's appear to have been issued to Australians who weren't forward scouts, such as this poor psyops digger serving as a mule for loudspeakers, which has the double disadvantage of making him a target for enemy irritated by the words he's aiming at them while he's forced to face away from the enemy.

7813

http://www.psywarrior.com/AustralianVNPSYOP.html

Rising Sun*
06-20-2017, 05:34 AM
Sounds like he did a lot of his testing while enjoying cold beverages... :mrgreen:

Well, it works OK for you and me. All we have to do now is to invent something. ;):)

Rising Sun*
06-20-2017, 10:21 AM
7813

http://www.psywarrior.com/AustralianVNPSYOP.html

Was nagging at the back of my mind, which encouraged me to come back for another look.

That's not an Australian issue shirt, either. We never had sleeve pockets nor, possibly depending on the circumstances of the photo, angled breast pockets.

And I'm not too sure it's even an Australian issue giggle hat, if only because the crown is too high and the brim too narrow, although anything could happen with jungle service and washing.

Than again, it's a photo on an Australian psyops website so one assumes they know what they're talking about, so there's no reason an Aussie mightn't have more US equipment than just his firearm.

Nickdfresh
06-20-2017, 12:02 PM
Well, it works OK for you and me. All we have to do now is to invent something. ;):)

I've thrown a lot of fireworks while semi-drunk, it didn't result in any major injuries but I would never recommend it...

I thought Australian diggers used the M-16 in Vietnam, I recall a bunch of pics here of SAS and Scouts using it along with their FAL's, which probably made for a good combo of firepower and longer range hitting power...

Nickdfresh
06-20-2017, 12:05 PM
Was nagging at the back of my mind, which encouraged me to come back for another look.

That's not an Australian issue shirt, either. We never had sleeve pockets nor, possibly depending on the circumstances of the photo, angled breast pockets.

And I'm not too sure it's even an Australian issue giggle hat, if only because the crown is too high and the brim too narrow, although anything could happen with jungle service and washing.

Than again, it's a photo on an Australian psyops website so one assumes they know what they're talking about, so there's no reason an Aussie mightn't have more US equipment than just his firearm.

It's definitely not a US shirt or cap...

Nickdfresh
06-20-2017, 12:09 PM
I've thrown a lot of fireworks while semi-drunk, it didn't result in any major injuries but I would never recommend it...

I thought Australian diggers used the M-16 in Vietnam, I recall a bunch of pics here of SAS and Scouts using it along with their FAL's, which probably made for a good combo of firepower and longer range hitting power...
Some pics, but obviously not line troops but SAS operators:

Nickdfresh
06-20-2017, 12:10 PM
Another:

Nickdfresh
06-20-2017, 12:16 PM
From a fascinating and horrifying Pininterest page: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/451134087645236767/

An Aussie SAS operator with an Owen:

Rising Sun*
06-21-2017, 08:28 AM
Some pics, but obviously not line troops but SAS operators:

Why would everyone be in camo suits and face paint but the bloke far right is going into Vietnam jungle with a light coloured headdress, unless he has a death wish?

Hard to tell, but the trees in the background could be eucalypts, which means it's probably in Australia and it's a training exercise.

Rising Sun*
06-21-2017, 09:02 AM
Another:

Bearing in mind that I'm not all that interested in weapons beyond the basics and that the photo ain't all that clear on necessary details, I wouldn't be surprised if the digger second from left with his weapon's muzzle in the dirt (for doing which my corporal, sergeant, CSM, and RSM all would have kicked my arse till it bled) is holding "The Bitch".

The Bitch was a standard issue 7.62 SLR semi-auto L1A1 or fully auto L2A1 modified in various ways by the SAS in Vietnam. The L2A1 was pretty much identical with the standard semi-auto L1A1 SLR basic infantry weapon but had a heavier barrel, bipod, 30 round mag and full auto. It was more or less equivalent as a section weapon to the US BAR and a sort of (i.e. not as good as) replacement for the Bren gun previously used by Australia.

The basic mod was to shorten the barrel, which appears to be the case in the photo as the flash eliminator has gone. From ancient memory, the barrel can be shortened quite a bit further as the foresight is well behind the flash eliminator.

Assuming the weapon in the photo is a modified SLR whether L1 or L2, it's lost the wooden forestock and had a ?grenade launcher? attached forward of the magazine.

The magazine looks like it's a 30 round L2 mag rather than the standard 20 round L1 mag, which was also a standard SAS mod, for obvious reasons.

EDIT LAST SENTENCE: Remove typo reference twice to L2 mag and clarifiy L2 mag substituted for L1 mag.

Rising Sun*
07-04-2017, 11:33 AM
Spent half a day yesterday with a former Australian SAS bloke I know and the F1 came up, as in I said it was piece of shit.

He agreed, strongly (as does anyone I've ever met who actually fired it).

Then he went on to disappoint me by volunteering that the Owen gun (which I've never fired) was even worse. And he thought the M16 was so far superior to either weapon that it wasn't even a contest with the Owen /F1, and it was a f**king mystery to him why Australia didn't get on to the M16 earlier.

It's hard to believe that Australian defence procurement officials could have made a poor decision on this weapon when they have such a glowing history of brilliant procurements. :(:evil:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/rusty-ships-boats-that-dont-fit-leave-minister-all-at-sea-20110201-1acgx.html

http://www.news.com.au/news/bn-wasted-on-cancelled-seasprite/news-story/ff8a1c3ea5061fe39240795119a36cc2

For clarification for those overseas, here is a picture of an Australian defence procurement official working flat out in the national interest.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3130/3085552547_2775c62ccc_z.jpg?zz=1


However, they are not all like that. Here is an Austrlaian defence procurement official responding with great vigor to questions about how his crew managed to f**k up defence procurement on, say, the links above beyond all belief.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/2313697685/image.jpg


Lest it be thought these magnificent bureaucrats lack real energy, here is a picture of one of them reacting to news that his pay was in future to be linked to performance.

https://featherdale-media.s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/pageimages/koala/koala_0.jpg

Nickdfresh
07-05-2017, 02:56 PM
Perhaps your new ex-SAS friend was more critical of the ammo than the guns. No matter what shoots it, a 9mm no longer cut it in the jungle against enemy armed with intermediate cartridge automatic weapons like the AK or SKS. Also, the F1's he might have handled might have been 20 years old by even then. The pic's I posted I think show how the M-16/CAR-15's and the L1A1/L2's would have complemented each other well in small elite units as a combo of heavier rounds to go through jungle foliage and smaller, easier to handle rifles with more close range firepower.

I often wonder why it took the U.S. Army and Marine Corp to finally ****ing figure out that the M-16 series needed to be supplemented by a full caliber 7.62mm weapon they didn't adopted until 2007, such as the M-110 series (basically a highly modified AR-10), to give infantry a longer range weapon with more hitting power than the M-16's, like the Russians had with the Dragunov....

tankgeezer
07-05-2017, 11:41 PM
I like the idea of replacing the 16 with the 110, modern body armor, and present day battle conditions do not favor the 5.56 Cartridge, it's day is passing. The Special Forces wanted something beefier than the 5.56, something that would give them performance about equal to the 7.62x39. The answer to that was the .300 AAC Blackout 7.62x35. This used a shorter version of the 5.56 case, necked up to .30 cal. it was very good for the special Forces, as if provided more punch that would work well suppressed, and need only a different upper receiver, and Barrel. All the rest is the same as the regular M-4 currently used. The only problem with this cartridge is that it serves best in close quarters work, and suffers the same shortcoming as the M-1 Carbine. The velocity drops steeply, as does the bullet, after about 250 yds. So this is not too useful in normal Infantry situations. I'm pleased that the 7.62x51 is going to make a comeback, it will answer many needs, including simplifying supply. I also think that a completely new cartridge might be developed, building on the various short magnum cartridges now in use. Using more modern propellants, perhaps even new case, and bullet materials, a shorter, easier to carry, but still having the characteristics of the 7.62x51 would be an advantage. Just some late evening revels off the top of my head. :)

Rising Sun*
07-06-2017, 09:38 AM
Perhaps your new ex-SAS friend was more critical of the ammo than the guns.

No, it was more reliability and adaptability.

We agreed that the F1 was useful on the occasions it worked properly at very short ranges in tight jungle, but was too unreliable.

He had experience with the Owen gun and liked its reliability and usefulness in tight jungle at short range contacts, which typically was what forward scouts would encounter in tight jungle and to what the F1 was supposedly ideally suited.

The advantage he saw in the M16 was that, in Vietnam anyway, it was rare that anyone spent all their time in tight jungle and the Owen and even a perfectly functioning F1 were useless when moving into more open country, rubber plantations etc with longer ranges, so the M16 was far better as an all round weapon.

Rising Sun*
07-06-2017, 09:53 AM
Also, the F1's he might have handled might have been 20 years old by even then.

No. They were fresh in his hands in the mid-1960s, a few years after we started producing them in the early 1960s.

The F1s I fired had to be less than 10 years old.

In the mid to late 1960s as a civilian I fired heavily used WWII (or for all I know WWI) surplus .303 Lee Enfields that were still fairly tight and a bloody sight better than the much more recently manufactured F1s.

Probably reflects more about the steadily declining standards of government assessment, specifications, procurement and inspection than anything necessarily inherent in the weapons. Refer pictures of koalas above. :oops: :evil: :evil: :evil:

tankgeezer
07-07-2017, 08:13 AM
No. They were fresh in his hands in the mid-1960s, a few years after we started producing them in the early 1960s.

The F1s I fired had to be less than 10 years old.

In the mid to late 1960s as a civilian I fired heavily used WWII (or for all I know WWI) surplus .303 Lee Enfields that were still fairly tight and a bloody sight better than the much more recently manufactured F1s.

Probably reflects more about the steadily declining standards of government assessment, specifications, procurement and inspection than anything necessarily inherent in the weapons. Refer pictures of koalas above. :oops: :evil: :evil: :evil:

Having a 100 yr old No. 1 Mk.III I can vouch for it's ability to do a great job of grouping shots, and quickly too. Although I have not held or fired an F-1, or any of its immediate kin, I do find them to be at best limited in usefulness except perhaps in lining some Koala's pockets for recommending its adoption. For close combat, room to room sorts of work, this might do well if it can be made to run right, and function while suppressed. the FN P-90, and the Kriss Vector are other weapons most suited to that sort of work and may well cost less to procure. But for general infantry use, the F-1 is a losing proposition. Might as well give the Troops M-2 Carbines. Having seen some of our own Governmental officials in action , I must opine that your Koala's appear to be overachievers.. :mrgreen: (I hope this post still makes sense after I've had some Coffee) ;) :)

Rising Sun*
07-07-2017, 08:40 AM
Having seen some of our own Governmental officials in action , I must opine that your Koala's appear to be overachievers.

Yeah, that agrees with our koalas' exaggerated opinions of themselves.

Don't be too hard on your government officials. If you saw the crap they've managed to sell to our koalas, you'd be impressed with your blokes' ability to sell ice to eskimos.



(I hope this post still makes sense after I've had some Coffee) ;) :)

Makes sense to me, but I've had beer. :D

tankgeezer
07-07-2017, 10:31 PM
Beer is Grand! (Just not before Breakfast)....(usually) ;)

Nickdfresh
07-09-2017, 01:14 PM
Beer is Grand! (Just not before Breakfast)....(usually) ;)

Unless it's gameday!!
http://www.questfor31.com/images/BuffaloBills-Nov11%20059.jpg

Nickdfresh
07-09-2017, 01:16 PM
No. They were fresh in his hands in the mid-1960s, a few years after we started producing them in the early 1960s.

The F1s I fired had to be less than 10 years old.

In the mid to late 1960s as a civilian I fired heavily used WWII (or for all I know WWI) surplus .303 Lee Enfields that were still fairly tight and a bloody sight better than the much more recently manufactured F1s.

Probably reflects more about the steadily declining standards of government assessment, specifications, procurement and inspection than anything necessarily inherent in the weapons. Refer pictures of koalas above. :oops: :evil: :evil: :evil:

Well, the same could be said about cheaply mass-produced Stens I guess. I had the chance to buy a .303 really cheap after I got out of the Army. I really wish I had...

Nickdfresh
07-09-2017, 01:18 PM
Having a 100 yr old No. 1 Mk.III I can vouch for it's ability to do a great job of grouping shots, and quickly too. Although I have not held or fired an F-1, or any of its immediate kin, I do find them to be at best limited in usefulness except perhaps in lining some Koala's pockets for recommending its adoption. For close combat, room to room sorts of work, this might do well if it can be made to run right, and function while suppressed. the FN P-90, and the Kriss Vector are other weapons most suited to that sort of work and may well cost less to procure. But for general infantry use, the F-1 is a losing proposition. Might as well give the Troops M-2 Carbines. Having seen some of our own Governmental officials in action , I must opine that your Koala's appear to be overachievers.. :mrgreen: (I hope this post still makes sense after I've had some Coffee) ;) :)

The rate of fire achieved by well trained and disciplined British troops in the early parts of WWI was the reason the Germans believed that the Brits had far more automatic weapons than they did...

Rising Sun*
07-10-2017, 07:23 AM
Well, the same could be said about cheaply mass-produced Stens I guess.

IIRC there was a WWII American gun - ?pistol? ?smg? - produced from stamped metal in a former toy factory converted to war production. Or something like that.

Can't recall if it was a weapon that was produced in large numbers or just a small production that didn't see much service.

Rising Sun*
07-10-2017, 07:32 AM
Unless it's gameday!!
http://www.questfor31.com/images/BuffaloBills-Nov11%20059.jpg

Or in a dissolute period of my youth when working in the bush when a mate and I started Saturdays with a few beers before getting up and going into town for some serious drinking. Then the same on Sundays to recover from Saturday, but usually no more drinking after breakfast about 10 a.m. as the pubs were generally shut on Sundays, but not always in some areas due to (a) our then strange laws about pubs being able to serve travellers (which meant that everyone who wanted a drink on Sundays just went to a pub 20 miles or whatever it was from home and said they were travelling and signed the travellers' book) and (b) cops who turned a blind eye, and in a couple of cases were getting pretty close to blind with us in some outback pubs.

Nickdfresh
07-10-2017, 03:51 PM
IIRC there was a WWII American gun - ?pistol? ?smg? - produced from stamped metal in a former toy factory converted to war production. Or something like that.

Can't recall if it was a weapon that was produced in large numbers or just a small production that didn't see much service.

Ah yes, the FP-45 Liberator. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator) It was a .45ACP one shot pistol (could be reloaded, but is was very difficult and certainly not in combat conditions). It was dropped by the OSS to insurgents and main purpose was to allow someone to shoot one of their Axis overlord occupiers and take his weapon. No range or accuracy whatsoever, so you really hoped you killed or incapacitated the enemy. Not sure how many actually were used as intended, but the .45 was probably pretty effective in close quarters...

Nickdfresh
07-10-2017, 06:11 PM
Or in a dissolute period of my youth when working in the bush when a mate and I started Saturdays with a few beers before getting up and going into town for some serious drinking. Then the same on Sundays to recover from Saturday, but usually no more drinking after breakfast about 10 a.m. as the pubs were generally shut on Sundays, but not always in some areas due to (a) our then strange laws about pubs being able to serve travellers (which meant that everyone who wanted a drink on Sundays just went to a pub 20 miles or whatever it was from home and said they were travelling and signed the travellers' book) and (b) cops who turned a blind eye, and in a couple of cases were getting pretty close to blind with us in some outback pubs.

Interesting laws, probably didn't really help with drinking and driving, which I think an Aussie poster on another board said was epidemic in 1970's Australia. We had our share of "blue laws" and only recently in NY State can liquor stores open on Sunday and even more recently, people can purchase alcoholic beverages before noon on Sunday starting at 10am due to the popularity of brunches and "mimosas". I prefer spicy bloody marys...

One of the pubs I drink at, a hipster place with a bit of a pretentious attitude on cocktails and liquor, only serves house made specialty sausages instead of the standard bar fare of wings and burgers causing many hungry customers to leave when seeing the menus. It's actually a throwback to old laws that stated a bar had to be a restaurant and serve food to serve alcohol and serving sausage was a quick and easy walk-around. They're actually quite good though...

tankgeezer
07-10-2017, 11:46 PM
RS* might be referring to the M-3 series of Sub Machine Guns. they were cheap, and expendable, if damaged they were discarded for a replacement. A bit better than the liberator Pistol, but only in that it has a few more machined parts, and still it cost about $10 to make at the time. Guide Lamp made both weapons, at the time it was a Division of General Motors Guide produced about a million of the pistols in 90 days, sadly most were never delivered to those folks they were intended for. As you said Nick, they were intended to be supplied to resistance groups in order to kill the enemy discreetly, and take their weapons. The person would then pass the pistol along to someone else. There was room in the grip for 5 cartridges, and loading was much less than efficient. There is a present day maker of an updated version of the FP-45, it shoots little better, hope it's cheap.

Rising Sun*
07-11-2017, 07:34 AM
Ah yes, the FP-45 Liberator. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator) It was a .45ACP one shot pistol (could be reloaded, but is was very difficult and certainly not in combat conditions). It was dropped by the OSS to insurgents and main purpose was to allow someone to shoot one of their Axis overlord occupiers and take his weapon. No range or accuracy whatsoever, so you really hoped you killed or incapacitated the enemy. Not sure how many actually were used as intended, but the .45 was probably pretty effective in close quarters...

Thanks for the link.

I think that's the one I had in mind.

It sounds like a professionally made zip gun with a reloading system that makes a muzzle loading musket look ahead of its time.

I'm not surprised that the Allies didn't issue it to their own troops but only to (much more expendable) poor bastards in occupied territories.

I reckon anyone who had any experience of decent firearms who was issued with one of those would have had serious misgivings about the likelihood of it firing its single round. At the useful range of 1 to 4 metres, I'd be thinking about using something like a knife, rock in a sock or a baseball bat as the initial weapon and the zip gun as a hopeful backup. Or vice versa.

Obviously there would be a dramatic drop off in muzzle velocity and stopping power with the short unrifled barrel (and probably pretty poor gas containment in the chamber and whatever the breech arrangement was) compared with any other .45 pistol, notably the standard M1911. That is inherent in the stated useful range of 1 to 4 metres. Compare that with an arms manufacturer trying to persuade the military to accept an infantry longarm described having a useful range of 250 to 1000 metres.

I wouldn't be too confident about the accuracy of the zip gun even at 4 metres. I think I'd want the zip gun muzzle pressed against the target's skin to be confident of a disabling or fatal shot.

Rising Sun*
07-11-2017, 07:37 AM
RS* might be referring to the M-3 series of Sub Machine Guns. they were cheap, and expendable, if damaged they were discarded for a replacement. A bit better than the liberator Pistol, but only in that it has a few more machined parts, and still it cost about $10 to make at the time. Guide Lamp made both weapons, at the time it was a Division of General Motors Guide produced about a million of the pistols in 90 days, sadly most were never delivered to those folks they were intended for. As you said Nick, they were intended to be supplied to resistance groups in order to kill the enemy discreetly, and take their weapons. The person would then pass the pistol along to someone else. There was room in the grip for 5 cartridges, and loading was much less than efficient. There is a present day maker of an updated version of the FP-45, it shoots little better, hope it's cheap.

Maybe I'd seen something about this as I wasn't sure if there was an SMG version of the gun I was thinking of.

Was this what the the Americans called a grease gun? The barrel forward of the magazine isn't too different to an auto type grease gun.

Rising Sun*
07-11-2017, 07:55 AM
There is a present day maker of an updated version of the FP-45, it shoots little better, hope it's cheap.

Who would that be?

The armourer to some ninth rate kindergarten mob of gangbangers or drug dealers?

Surely there is no difficulty in getting much better weapons legally or illegally?

Even down here with our, relative to US, very strict gun laws, even a lot of the street drug dealers and wannabe gangsters and sundry thugs, not to mention the serious gangsters and outlaw bikies etc, are carrying plenty of illegal handguns and longarms that come out of well known arms manufacturers in various parts of the world.

What possible use is there for a modern version of the FP-45?

Rising Sun*
07-11-2017, 09:37 AM
Interesting laws, probably didn't really help with drinking and driving

Like most things, it was only a tiny proportion that caused serious problems. Countless people from the city went to rural fringe pubs and countless people in the bush went to a pub outside the traveller limit to have a beer on Sundays, without driving home drunk or causing any problem on the roads.


, which I think an Aussie poster on another board said was epidemic in 1970's Australia.

Mate, it wasn't epidemic. It was just part of the national male character, which has been steadily eroded by wowsers (puritanical, dictatorial, self-obsessed, self-appointed arbiters of social conduct which involves condemnation of everything which is vaguely enjoyable, apart from being a wowser) who in recent decades have been elevating their hostility to fun by prescribing as dangerous and potentially fatal or socially catastrophic conduct many perfectly normal things such as men having more than two standard drinks a day, which means I'd be dead before dinner most days.

The first problem was the introduction of breathalysers. Before that you could get away with a lot of sobriety tests such as walking a straight line and touching your index finger to your nose and drawing a line around a coin even if you were well on the way to shit-faced (which I did several times to my, and probably the constabulary's, surprise).

Also, we had a much lamented road law where you could drive at any speed on country roads as long as it wasn't unsafe. This meant that once you were out of the major cities you could go as fast as your car could go unless the cops could prove it was unsafe, which was bloody near impossible on a dry clear day as long as you could stay on the road. Oh, happy days! That's another bit of fun the wowsers have denied us, along with reducing speeds in a lot of city areas to 40 kmh / 25 mph and currently arguing for 30 kmh /18 mph so that hipster cyclists who ignore red lights and pedestrians focused on their mobile / cell phones who plunge blindly into traffic aren't wiped out as a necessary part of evolutionary improvement of the human species. We're even developing special warning lights to save these lemmings from themselves. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/flashing-ground-lights-target-melbournes-phonehappy-pedestrians/news-story/671dd1180ce3e0bd567f000a82d039f9

In the 1970s we also had some seriously fast road cars courtesy of the long gone requirement that production cars racing in our major racetrack competitions had to sell at least 500 cars to the general public.
http://www.motoring.com.au/holden-monaro-hg-350-charger-r-t-e38-ford-falcon-gt-ho-phase-iii-4482/

Okay, the foregoing is terminally irresponsible by today's wowser standards, but if like me and almost everyone else of my generation you lived through it, it was fun that was pretty much standard and which nowadays brands you as a major criminal and threat to society for doing anything remotely like it.

Which is fine with me, but only if the cops devoted a fraction of their resources, effort and success over the past 30 years to blitzing drivers doing 63kmh rather than the 60 kmh limit to dealing with the exploding number of home invasions, carjackings, violent robberies and other crimes which are making this country a second rate shithole where crime is dominated by elements brought in from various war torn countries who repay the sanctuary we gave them and their families by turning on the society which saved them from the misery they would otherwise have endured in refugee camps etc. And I'm not slagging all people from those backgrounds as most of them are good people who deserve and are grateful for the chance we've given them for a better life. As for the sizeable and hugely disproportionately violent and criminal rest, f**k off back where you came from.


We had our share of "blue laws" and only recently in NY State can liquor stores open on Sunday and even more recently, people can purchase alcoholic beverages before noon on Sunday starting at 10am due to the popularity of brunches and "mimosas". I prefer spicy bloody marys...

All our standard pubs are open from 10 am to 10 pm seven days a week, if they wish, and for much longer hours if they choose. Many suburban pubs are open close to 24 hours a day, essentially to keep sucking in the dopes who play the poker machines. The good news is that their meals have improved out of sight compared with 30 years ago as they want to keep the gamblers happy.

Nonetheless, you need to be careful about about what you do after hours in some of our licensed venues. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/critical-response-police-shot-swingers-32-seconds-after-entering-inflation-party-20170710-gx8ety.html



One of the pubs I drink at, a hipster place with a bit of a pretentious attitude on cocktails and liquor, only serves house made specialty sausages instead of the standard bar fare of wings and burgers causing many hungry customers to leave when seeing the menus. It's actually a throwback to old laws that stated a bar had to be a restaurant and serve food to serve alcohol and serving sausage was a quick and easy walk-around. They're actually quite good though...

Your post reminds me that maybe it was a requirement in some states here, or maybe just within a certain range of the capital cities, that the traveller had to eat, or at least buy, a meal to meet legal requirements. I seem to remember going to a few towns outside Melbourne for Sunday lunches in the early 1970s where we could have a beer as well.

Generally we don't have bar fare here. You want to eat at a bar, buy a packet of potato chips (crisps), peanuts, Twisties or Cheezels or whatever from the bar or a machine.

Now, and I'm reluctant to raise this with you as a moderator of previously unblemished character, but you did say you were drinking at a hipster place with a pretentious attitude.

I trust that you were present in some capacity other than as a hipster or person with pretentious attitude, which would avoid the need for the disgraceful alternative to be raised in the mod room. ;) :D

Nickdfresh
07-11-2017, 02:18 PM
Like most things, it was only a tiny proportion that caused serious problems. Countless people from the city went to rural fringe pubs and countless people in the bush went to a pub outside the traveller limit to have a beer on Sundays, without driving home drunk or causing any problem on the roads.



Mate, it wasn't epidemic. It was just part of the national male character, which has been steadily eroded by wowsers (puritanical, dictatorial, self-obsessed, self-appointed arbiters of social conduct which involves condemnation of everything which is vaguely enjoyable, apart from being a wowser) who in recent decades have been elevating their hostility to fun by prescribing as dangerous and potentially fatal or socially catastrophic conduct many perfectly normal things such as men having more than two standard drinks a day, which means I'd be dead before dinner most days.

The first problem was the introduction of breathalysers. Before that you could get away with a lot of sobriety tests such as walking a straight line and touching your index finger to your nose and drawing a line around a coin even if you were well on the way to shit-faced (which I did several times to my, and probably the constabulary's, surprise).

Also, we had a much lamented road law where you could drive at any speed on country roads as long as it wasn't unsafe. This meant that once you were out of the major cities you could go as fast as your car could go unless the cops could prove it was unsafe, which was bloody near impossible on a dry clear day as long as you could stay on the road. Oh, happy days! That's another bit of fun the wowsers have denied us, along with reducing speeds in a lot of city areas to 40 kmh / 25 mph and currently arguing for 30 kmh /18 mph so that hipster cyclists who ignore red lights and pedestrians focused on their mobile / cell phones who plunge blindly into traffic aren't wiped out as a necessary part of evolutionary improvement of the human species. We're even developing special warning lights to save these lemmings from themselves. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/flashing-ground-lights-target-melbournes-phonehappy-pedestrians/news-story/671dd1180ce3e0bd567f000a82d039f9

In the 1970s we also had some seriously fast road cars courtesy of the long gone requirement that production cars racing in our major racetrack competitions had to sell at least 500 cars to the general public.
http://www.motoring.com.au/holden-monaro-hg-350-charger-r-t-e38-ford-falcon-gt-ho-phase-iii-4482/

Okay, the foregoing is terminally irresponsible by today's wowser standards, but if like me and almost everyone else of my generation you lived through it, it was fun that was pretty much standard and which nowadays brands you as a major criminal and threat to society for doing anything remotely like it.

Which is fine with me, but only if the cops devoted a fraction of their resources, effort and success over the past 30 years to blitzing drivers doing 63kmh rather than the 60 kmh limit to dealing with the exploding number of home invasions, carjackings, violent robberies and other crimes which are making this country a second rate shithole where crime is dominated by elements brought in from various war torn countries who repay the sanctuary we gave them and their families by turning on the society which saved them from the misery they would otherwise have endured in refugee camps etc. And I'm not slagging all people from those backgrounds as most of them are good people who deserve and are grateful for the chance we've given them for a better life. As for the sizeable and hugely disproportionately violent and criminal rest, f**k off back where you came from.



All our standard pubs are open from 10 am to 10 pm seven days a week, if they wish, and for much longer hours if they choose. Many suburban pubs are open close to 24 hours a day, essentially to keep sucking in the dopes who play the poker machines. The good news is that their meals have improved out of sight compared with 30 years ago as they want to keep the gamblers happy.

Nonetheless, you need to be careful about about what you do after hours in some of our licensed venues. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/critical-response-police-shot-swingers-32-seconds-after-entering-inflation-party-20170710-gx8ety.html




Your post reminds me that maybe it was a requirement in some states here, or maybe just within a certain range of the capital cities, that the traveller had to eat, or at least buy, a meal to meet legal requirements. I seem to remember going to a few towns outside Melbourne for Sunday lunches in the early 1970s where we could have a beer as well.

Generally we don't have bar fare here. You want to eat at a bar, buy a packet of potato chips (crisps), peanuts, Twisties or Cheezels or whatever from the bar or a machine.

Now, and I'm reluctant to raise this with you as a moderator of previously unblemished character, but you did say you were drinking at a hipster place with a pretentious attitude.

I trust that you were present in some capacity other than as a hipster or person with pretentious attitude, which would avoid the need for the disgraceful alternative to bt e raised in the mod room. ;) :D

LOL The owner is a pretentious sod but the staff are actually quite cool and good at their jobs. The bar right behind it couldn't be more different as a "dive bar" and is adverted as the oldest (continuously operating since 1886) bar in Buffalo and I tend to avoid it because it's the opposite, nice owner but uneven staffing. When I do go there, I often wonder how many people were stabbed during the rough and tumble period when Buffalo was the third largest port in the world and was the center of grain transportation in the US...

tankgeezer
07-12-2017, 10:42 AM
RS* Said : "I trust that you were present in some capacity other than as a hipster or person with pretentious attitude, which would avoid the need for the disgraceful alternative to bt e raised in the mod room."

Though I couldn't Blame Nick for drinking Pabst blue ribbon beer, (which I am told is a Favorite of the true Hipster) I'm guessing he doesn't have a man bun . ;) :)

tankgeezer
07-12-2017, 11:13 AM
Who would that be?

The armourer to some ninth rate kindergarten mob of gangbangers or drug dealers?

Surely there is no difficulty in getting much better weapons legally or illegally?

Even down here with our, relative to US, very strict gun laws, even a lot of the street drug dealers and wannabe gangsters and sundry thugs, not to mention the serious gangsters and outlaw bikies etc, are carrying plenty of illegal handguns and longarms that come out of well known arms manufacturers in various parts of the world.

What possible use is there for a modern version of the FP-45?

It's just a nostalgia toy for those who want such a piece for collectibility, or just to plink with. They are made by Vintage Ordinance, as well as replacement parts of incomplete originals. The present day price is 515.00 USD (a far cry for the one, or two dollar cost in the 40's) And yes, there are hoards of other firearms far less costly, and far more useful to be had , no self respecting Crim would be caught with an FP-45. ;) :) Plus the fact that Crims do not obey Laws of any kind just because they are Crims. There are no end to things that are Illegal, but Crims always seem to have quite alot of all of them. Laws in themselves really do nothing.

tankgeezer
07-12-2017, 11:23 AM
Maybe I'd seen something about this as I wasn't sure if there was an SMG version of the gun I was thinking of.

Was this what the the Americans called a grease gun? The barrel forward of the magazine isn't too different to an auto type grease gun.

The M-3 series was called the Grease Gun, even by us. It was a decent design, and worked well for the bullet hose it was meant to be. Machining could at times be inconsistent, a friend who owned a few of them, showed me the screw on barrel in .45 acp and a bullet just slid down, and out the muzzle. this didn't stop it working mind you, but for 10 bucks I guess one can't be choosey. :) They were also produced in 9mm presumably for Lend lease. These were not fool proof, if one was not careful, one could shoot ones self without a lot of trouble. I should have bought one while they were still inexpensive, a few hundred dollars.

Rising Sun*
07-12-2017, 11:33 AM
The M-3 series was called the Grease Gun, even by us. It was a decent design, and worked well for the bullet hose it was meant to be. Machining could at times be inconsistent, a friend who owned a few of them, showed me the screw on barrel in .45 acp and a bullet just slid down, and out the muzzle. this didn't stop it working mind you, but for 10 bucks I guess one can't be choosey. :) They were also produced in 9mm presumably for Lend lease. These were not fool proof, if one was not careful, one could shoot ones self without a lot of trouble. I should have bought one while they were still inexpensive, a few hundred dollars.

So, in WWII do we pretty much have the Sten / UK, M-3 / US, and Owen / Australia as more or less equivalent in purpose if not necessarily reliability?

I'm excluding the Thompson as it was used by all those forces to varying degrees and filled its own niche in the armoury.

tankgeezer
07-12-2017, 01:38 PM
Sounds about right, everyone decided to go the "Cheap, Fast, and Dirty" route for such types of weapons. And don't forget the Reising, (US) it was nearly as pretty as those you mentioned, and no one much liked them, I think the U.S. Marines were made to use them, and they always get the runt of the littler when it comes to any kind of weapon. In the 70's a useable Reising was $50-$65. (Plus the $200 tax on the transfer) Not very popular, even among Civilians. ;) :)

Nickdfresh
07-13-2017, 01:02 PM
RS* Said : "I trust that you were present in some capacity other than as a hipster or person with pretentious attitude, which would avoid the need for the disgraceful alternative to bt e raised in the mod room."

Though I couldn't Blame Nick for drinking Pabst blue ribbon beer, (which I am told is a Favorite of the true Hipster) I'm guessing he doesn't have a man bun . ;) :)
https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder91/66658091.jpg

Nickdfresh
07-13-2017, 01:04 PM
The M-3 series was called the Grease Gun, even by us. It was a decent design, and worked well for the bullet hose it was meant to be. Machining could at times be inconsistent, a friend who owned a few of them, showed me the screw on barrel in .45 acp and a bullet just slid down, and out the muzzle. this didn't stop it working mind you, but for 10 bucks I guess one can't be choosey. :) They were also produced in 9mm presumably for Lend lease. These were not fool proof, if one was not careful, one could shoot ones self without a lot of trouble. I should have bought one while they were still inexpensive, a few hundred dollars.

I thought it was relatively simple to change the calibers between .45ACP and 9mmP?

tankgeezer
07-14-2017, 07:59 AM
I watched a change over, a different Bolt assembly, Magazine, and Barrel, and all done. Took only a couple minutes. The danger in the M-3's were that the Bolt didn't need to go back far enough to catch the sear in order to strip a round, and chamber it. Which motion also fires the cartridge as the firing pin is fixed. Unless one has the cover closed, jumping down from a truck, or fence would be enough to cause the Bolt to slide back enough to fire a round.

tankgeezer
07-16-2017, 11:49 AM
I found this video of the M-3 being run, be sure to watch for awhile it isn't just guy after guy running out a magazine.

https://youtu.be/-lk6VPPZ1S4

And if you're interested in the Thompson, see it here.

https://youtu.be/T5ACAv_Y1-8

And the Owen SMG.

https://youtu.be/mmAigxjQbtE

And the Venerable Sten..

https://youtu.be/jt70ilN_PgU

tankgeezer
07-16-2017, 12:05 PM
Ah yes, the FP-45 Liberator. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator) It was a .45ACP one shot pistol (could be reloaded, but is was very difficult and certainly not in combat conditions). It was dropped by the OSS to insurgents and main purpose was to allow someone to shoot one of their Axis overlord occupiers and take his weapon. No range or accuracy whatsoever, so you really hoped you killed or incapacitated the enemy. Not sure how many actually were used as intended, but the .45 was probably pretty effective in close quarters...

Here is a video on the use of the Liberator Pistol using one of the new made reproductions.
https://youtu.be/_ERSQo6cmTQ

royal744
10-11-2017, 09:59 AM
My Father, who fought in the Dutch underground during WW2, was attached as a scout to a Canadian unit in Holland at the end of the war. He told me in passing that the Sten had the unfortunate tendency to fire seemingly spontaneously. He had one and wasn’t too thrilled with it.