Jump to content
tanknet.org

Recommended Posts

Cristobal was lever delayed, practically .30 Carbine version of hungarian 39M/43M SMG. It was also not the most reliable thing, but it is unclear if that was connected to some inherent problem or just sloppy manufacture.

It was also just slightly less than 8 pounds unloaded.

 

No way for a good plastic stock in the WW2, or until glass reinforced nylon becomes a thing in the 1950s. Smaller pieces of the furniture can be made from bakelite, but there is no weight advantage over wood and it can be prone to cracking.

Edited by bojan
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I know, I looked at it and took its weight to get an idea how much a delayed blowback carbine in .30 Carbine weighs. Too much more than what the Ordnance Department would have been comfortable with, so there will be more trials. 

Would a folding stock get the weight down? It looks like it does not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Simon Tan said:

An inertia bolt system is pretty much ideal for this. Think Benelli B76. There is no gas system, no piston etc. The lighter the gun, the better the system works. 

Thanks. I will look at that gun this evening. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Simon Tan said:

An inertia bolt system is pretty much ideal for this. Think Benelli B76. There is no gas system, no piston etc. The lighter the gun, the better the system works. 

Inertial lock tens to work unreliably when fired at high upward and downward angles. Hence it never found use in military weapons (other than shotguns that are a very narrow niche), despite a lot of other things going for it.

Edited by bojan
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

Of course. :) Also check I this out. No video of the Christobal though. 

 

Machinist in me hurts just looking at that receiver. That was not economic to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bojan said:

Machinist in me hurts just looking at that receiver. That was not economic to make.

Old habits die hard I guess. Their wartime SMG was getting high marks by users but also not that well suited for mass production. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beretta SMG receivers were relatively simple, this requires deep drilling, complicated milling, precise milling of the locking slot etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is ZB and M1 Carbine lovechild. The big challenge for doing a Light RIfle is the damned ammunition, which is in development and unobtanium outside US official channels.

The Schelegelmilch architecture works rather nicely with the Sjogren operating system and the early versions of Tankovian  SLR essentially had a Sjogren bolt assembly that would engage an arm (LHS) that actuates the operating spring in the handguard under the barrel. The shrouded bolt running on exposed rails and external operating arm would be bitched about endlessly by 'experts' which is how we got to the M33. 

Something like this for the Light Rifle would be really light. Though probably not 5lb light without use of alloys. 

On the other end of the spectrum, domestic gunsmiths have been offering laminated wood stocks for private purchase. These are heavier than normal wood but they are much more stable and have become very popular with target shooting community. The Army Sharpshooting School is working with some of these shops to build what they consider to be an ideal sharpshooting rifle and they are using these stocks as well as special barrels and blueprinted actions. It is proposed to do all maintenance of such rifles at a dedicated unit, vis through the standard arsenal system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Simon Tan said:

...Something like this for the Light Rifle would be really light. Though probably not 5lb light without use of alloys. ...

There is that zamak thing that is light and cheap and can be used for non-critical parts (trigger guards, covers and such). Another way is using stamping for those parts which enables thinner steel to be used, saving some weight.

On the "boring but important things", what do we use for a helmet and gas mask? I propose Czech ones in both cases, looks like it was Eastern Europe standard by that time. Can we make helmets? That would be our first foray into large-scale stamping operation and could evolve by the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We used surplus Austrian M17 Stahlhelm after WW1, replacing assorted Stahlhelms bought ad hoc during WW1.

Surplus German M17 Ledeschutzmask were the standard at this time.

We should absolutely be able to make helmets. Spartacus does a lot of stamping (that is their specialization). Everyone and their dog has a different helmet but given our Special Relationship(tm) with Czechoslovakia, it is entirely feasible to adopt Vz32/34. It's not oddly swoopy like Bulgarian. Issue is incomplete. Territorials almost all still on Stahlhelm.

Again, a more modern design of gas mask is probably warranted. Czech vz35 Fatra butyl rubber is fine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Helmets are no problem. Even if the Tankovian industry wasn't a world leader in detachable magazine design and production, Czechoslovakian helmets could be obtained rather easily due to the recent decline in domestic use.

Speaking of stamping. We have a prototype for the next generation of machine carbine in the works. It is intended to use a U shaped pressed steel receiver and a stamped top cover. Design and production wise a rather straightforward gun that has been put on the back burner because of the necessary tooling. The presses require a not insubstantial investment and they can only make one type of part. Five years ago we'd done that in a heartbeat but nowadays so many countries and companies work on their own designs that we are uncertain about the market prospects a year from now.

The current machine carbines are not only very competitive but they can also be made on tooling that can make more or less anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vz32 helmets at least make us look less like German Landwehr. 

Why don't you flip it over and have a stamped upper receiver and an a stamped lower assembly? That way you can have a contigual plane for putting your sights. and integrate on your heatshield around the barrel. Your lower assembly can also be mostly stamped and indexed with a shelf to the trunnion. Rear trunnion is on the lower with upper receiver that fits over , secured with a pin. The latter is not captive but tethered with a small brass wire to the trunnion. You can then have any sort of stock, folding, metal, wood etc. fitted to the trunnion.

ETA.....We can do this for the SLR.......

 

Edited by Simon Tan
Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically enlarged PPSh :)

IMO "Soviet style" PPSh like metal bending rather than "German style" stamping would be a way to go for someone w/o access to the top of the shelf technology and fast presses (and realistically we would not don't have it and fast presses were just appearing en mass in the firearms industry, and those are way more important for artillery ammo production). Even if you have to do a final passes on the mill for a size critical parts (insides of the receiver), it would still save butload of the machine time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We get inspirations from the good enough(MG13) and sometimes from the good. All for restoring the somewhat bend timeline in this case. :) 

As far as Tankovian stamping skills go, we do magazines very well and that was difficult enough to get to. Alas it helped to have no choice. With receivers there is one and a complex stamped receiver is something we want no part of. But I'm afraid we'll have to bite that bullet sooner or later. ;) 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mags use thinner steel that can be pre-fabricated by rolling rather than stamping and then welded (or even brazed) together. All you need to do is to cut them to size accurately and have good jigs to hold parts while they are welded. This was a major method of the mags production until 1930s. Exceptions were pistol mags that were stamped (or more precisely bent) around jigs, as those were less critical due the low capacity and less powerful springs involved (and also less expected round count).

Complexity wise: pistol mags < SMG mags < rifle mags < MG mags.

Edited by bojan
Link to post
Share on other sites

State linked companies like Arsenal are part of the national industrialization program. This was increasingly necessary due to rapid population growth during and after WW1 with many refugees and displaced persons. Rapid population growth in an agrarian economy generally requires growth of arable land area. There is limited opportunity for this in Tankovia ergo industrialization being the alternative.

Laissez faire industrialization invariably leads to concentration and consequent overcapitalization of property. Decentralization requires provision of infrastructure which is always a lost leader. Hence the role of the state as infrastructure investor for future growth opportunities. This of course resulted in Marxist labels being thrown at the government, primarily by property owners in Tankovia who wanted the growth concentrated in the capital. Shanty towns began to spring up near the estate houses of the elites, who in turn demanded that they be removed. It was however pointed out that the shanties were indeed populated by many citizens who had moved to the cities and were now registered voters. 

The rest, as they say, is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...