"We two distinguished gents would like to hire a hotel room for a couple of hours. Please take our camera and whiskey up for us. Now, is the bed comfy?"
My Russian cousin and I had that conversation last night; we're now recovering from the epic hangovers while watching this, which is allot like Bob Ross talking firearms. 🤷♂️
My father-in-law who is 93 was at Monte Casino for 4 months at the front line. He said in that time he saw exactly one German soldier for about 3 seconds. He said he took a shot at him at maybe 250 yards and has no idea if he came close to hitting him. He said the German artillery always seemed to have a pretty good idea where he was though! Real life ain't like the movies.
Monte Casino had actually been empty of German Soldiers before it was bombed by the Americans. Some generals had been paranoid that the Germans had spotters up there. So two German soldiers convinced the clergy there to move all of the historical artifacts for safe keeping. They got most stuff out before Monte Casino was bombed. The Germans at that point then moved into the ruins which offered excellent cover. The two Germans that convinced the clergy were awarded by the Pope for their great idea of saving the artifacts.
@@Necronaut aceroadholder had an actual veteran who was at Monte Carlo for four months so what do you mean when you state he can ask "actual veterans", are you implying his father in law is lying about his wartime experience ?
@@hopsta5628 No, he's implying that he's not a veteran speaking with firsthand knowledge, but knows that some guys seen a lot of action and some guys see very little if none. And that making a narrow statement such as ''Real life ain't like the movies'' based on one man's experience is very naive
If someone is reporting that his M1 'ca-chinged', and the enemy rushed him, obviously the enemy didn't get him. Military records contain very few reports written by dead men.
What if someone was writing a record and it abruptly ends with "As I am currently reloading and therefor incapable of defending myself to the fullest degree I must note the fact that the Kraut for whom I unloaded my clip towards in the first place is currently advancing on my present position, making no attempts at evasive actions nor diversionary tactics. I can only presume that the distinctive sound of my standard issue En Bloc clip ejecting from my rifle after the final shot has alerted the Hessian that my weapon is no longer capable of delivering a suppressing volley and as such he has taken advantage of the situation by diving over the ruble I am using for cover and thrusting his bayonet int-"
I'm gonna have to find them but I have a Marine Corps manual from last 50's and some old army training videos on VHS that both said something to the effect of "Be aware the ping from an empty clip will alert the enemy to your weapon being empty." They didn't really say you'd be rushed or anything just that it would let everyone know you were out. The video said something about the safety too but its been too long since I watched them to remember exactly what.
it's a myth because it could never happen due to the circumstances needed for it to happen: 1 You'd need to be alone 2 your enemy needs to know that you're alone 3 your enemy needs to be close enough to hear the ping 4 you or the enemy need to be in a position to use the ping (if you're going for the alleged ping trick) 5 and did i mention that you need to either fire the last round in the gun (meaning that you have shot 7 rounds recently) or that you have a spare clip to use for the so called ping trick which most likely means you've shot 8 rounds already Which means that you and the enemy that is close by will be thoroughly combat deaf most likely. So it's something that could happen in a perfect storm scenario but did it ever happen once during the service of the M1? i don't know, but figure out the probability of all the individual conditions and you'll find as the numbers starts adding up you'll be going towards zero and going there fast.
Having an M1 I know that it does ping, loud enough to be heard in combat .. doubtful, but what I was trying to say was even though it was a myth it actually made it into formal military literature/training even if not quite like the myth is saying.
One of the biggest factors on military combat shooting, is the western moral compunction "..thou shall not kill.." This according to Lt. Col Grossman's book " On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society" (out of print, available on Amazon as ebook). A must read for any student of martial arts. Any study of lethality of small arms use requires a perspective that only 3% of soldiers using small arms will actually "aim to kill" another human.
For the M1 pick myth it's one of those things "the enemy always seems to pop up when I'm out of ammo" but doesn't remember all the times the enemy pops up when he's not out of ammo, a sorta hyper-awareness. Kinda the same thought process of Murphy law. And then having this ping sound you can blame it on other then just randomly happening, and if it doesn't you can fall back to the thinking of "maybe they didn't hear it that time" it's the perfect myth really and can't be disproved really until someone is down range from a M1 garand. And the one that where we couldn't really ask them cause they where the enemy.
There might be also 2 other factors: 1. enemy is undiscovered and waits for the perfect moment, 2. enemy has longer time to aim -> near misses / hits. 1. If the fight is happening in place with quite a lot of vegetation, some enemy soldiers might not be seen -> fired upon. And they might wait for moment, when they are the most likely to hit the target with no reciprocation or with the highest chance of hitting the target. Waiting for the enemy soldier with M1 to reload might make him for a moment stationary and therefore easier to hit. Also since he is focused on reloading, might not notice your fire or positioning. 2. The difference in firepower of rifleman in the case of US vs Axis and because of that there might be tendency to fire more accurate shots than match the US troops with rifle fire. That might lead to waiting for the US soldier to reload, so the enemy soldier might aim for longer period of time than otherwise would be possible. That might create the situation of near misses and with what wrote Cypher 1o1, might explain this myth. I don't think this is full explanation of this myth, but that it was lots of anecdotal evidence pointing in one direction.
The ping myth is just ridiculous. Combat almost never took place close enough to hear the ping or be able to see the enemy rifleman reloading. Even if it did, that enemy rifleman isn't by himself, so just knowing that THIS PARTICULAR ENEMY is reloading wouldn't give you any significant advantage. And on top of all of that, there's a BATTLE going on. You think you can hear a ping from hundreds of feet away while you and your comrades are firing rifles, mortar shells are raining down, grenades are going off, etc?
it was explained to me that WW2 soldiers rarely wore proper hearing protection. send a .30-06 off with 20 of your buddies and no ear pro, and then tell me of you can hear the ping.
Ian mentioned "better controls" in manufacturing. I was disappointed to notice nobody seems to mention just *how* much better the controls are, with *just* the availability of more accurate (control) scales, telling the operator where the tools are. Even using old ww2 machines with modern *analog* scales I am able to exceed .0002 of an inch in accuracy, even though the original equipment could only go down to .002 A power of ten in difference is *extraordinary* and I am using cheap analog units (because my equipment is set up in a garage and temperature swings prevent me from going tighter, I digress) Numerical control existed in ww2. Adding a computer today (cnc = computer numerical control) isn't why controls are so much better. Its the better, more precise, more accurate and *cheaper* ability to measure, verify and zero. In a word. Control. As a machinist; I think that mention from Ian was spectacularly cool, and well stated! Phenomenal for a man drinking.
As a machinist I'd agree wholeheartedly. I've used WWII era manual mills and then gone right over to using a modern Haas CNC machine only minutes later and indeed the accuracy of the machine itself is not...well vastly different at least. Extremely high end CNC's will out perform anything from WWII but that's a given when you're paying that price. No the difference is definitely more about the controls in place.
@@PokemonHaloFan I'm an amateur machinist and I've never operated a metal working CNC but I've owned and operated plenty of the older manual machines, many of which were considered top of the line in their day.The old K&T or Cincy mills followed the dictum of the only thing better than cast iron is more cast iron and they're as solid as can be. I have K&T mills from WW2 and I'm beyond impressed at how well made they are. Comparing a new CNC to a mill that has decades of use on it isn't really a fair fight. It would be interesting to compare a brand new CNC VMC to a brand new WW2 era vertical mill for general accuracy. Obviously the CNC is more versatile and faster but what if you were to do identical one off parts in each? It would be an interesting comparison, especially if the manual machine had a DRO installed on it to even the playing field a little bit.
I'm a mechanical engineer and did some machining in college with some equipment from the 70s and ever since then I wondered how tight tolerances were on old stuff like this. Always assumed weapons like the Stg 44 were stamped with a few machined parts since machining would be such a labor intense endeavor compared to a guy putting it in a CNC machine and walking away or stamping a pieces of sheet metal out. Nice input.
@@TheLouisianan The Stg44 is an interesting example. It was, very much like the British Sten designed to be cheap, both in price and manufacture. It's a testament to the ability and craftsmanship of the old machinists that these weapons were as capable as they were. The Sten (and the 44) were considered throw away weapons. Use them till they quit and grab a new one. They did have issues but for what they were, they were incredible weapons.
i'm also an Mechanical Engineer in apprenticeship in switzerland and you are right. At the start of my training we were working only with conventional machines but they were equipped with digital positionindicators and when we switched to CNC (DMG Mori DMC 635 V and CTX Alpha 300) we quickly realized that there is no difference in precision.
My father fought on both fronts, East and West, and he remembered that once first fighting the American they were just OVERWHELMED by US long-range firepower, that this was a whole new ballgame for them (compared to Russian charging at point-blank range with PPsH41/PPS43s), and this was a total SHOCK to him to discover a horde of ´gun crazy´ Americans with M1 Garands just unloading on his company from over 200 meters. The majority of this fire missed, because these were rather green troops, but still they had to reconfigure and reinvent their own tactics to handle American infantry assault. He was actually very positive about the M1 Garand as a weapon, stating it was accurate if handled right, fired fast and this was something new.... Not a word about the *ping* noise, from a German veteran, they didn´t even notice... So much for Myth no.1! Myth no.2: Also thought somebody cocked up Vickers and Bren somewhere on the road. But nice to hear about that group-zeroing being done in the Wehrmacht, explains some pictures I´ve seen of my father´s induction/training, where the very cocky/dangerous looking Leutnant was looking along over their shoulders, and the their M98k´s were al on a wooden pedestal, thanks for explaining that! Btw, about the MG42: he would be in agreeing with that the MG42 was ´cheapie´ compared to the MG34, he was non-stop complaining about having to give up their MG34s for 42s. He cited a lack of accuracy and logistical nightmare as the reasons for not liking it, and the fact it had no single-shot mode. They used MG42s mostly at near point-blank range, just holding their fire until a squad of Russians turned the corner and than *Kookook! Look who´s here?* kinda thing. In German it´s called ´Schweige MG´ or ´Silent MG´ that lies in ambush where there´s no cover, apparently (I learned rather recent, should go read up more on it). Myth no.3: I see no reason to assume that any of the German vets I heard their stories (from a truck driver driving up ammo to a Untersturmfuhrer with Panzergrenadiers) that their fear for being shot at >200 meters by Russian snipers was unfounded. But ofc, these guys were employed in droves, the majority had sights, so we can argue about that one all day... Fact is a lot of these night-time encounter stories ended with ´and than his brains were spread all over my uniform´. On the other hand, also surfaced the fact they didn´t even try to match this performance with a Mauser 98 and iron-sights, except as suppressing fire in hopes of getting the guy away from them. That´s why they had this extreme light-discipline, like covering their headlights and such, and this didn´t get much better once slowly units got transferred towards the Western Front from mid-44 onward. There they had to contend with ´gun-crazy, trigger-happy horde´ of Americans (pun intended there, no hostility) equipped with M1 Garands popping away at everything that moved + fighter-bombers circling overhead by the dozens. And for some reason, despite everything, and his access to SMGs, pistols, whatever for the taking, he only took his father´s artillery Luger and Mauser 98 in combat from day 1 in 1941 to the bitter end, because it was 100% reliable, packed a heavy round, and he preferred that over seeing another dead greenhorn with an MP40 that jammed (they jammed A LOT under field conditions). So battlefield versus range-shooting is a huge, huge difference. PS. He had no eardrums anymore, today people complain about my loud voice, because I always had to shout so he could hear me, and the other way around too :-) Fantastic video!
It’s interesting to hear the other side of the story I got to tell you. I heard the American World War II veterans talking, it’s just interesting to hear how the Germans viewed us in World War II that never really occurred to me. The gun crazy trigger-happy American thing is actually pretty funny. I’m in American i own guns and I still think it’s hilarious
Thank you for that condensation of some of your father's experiences. My Dad was in the RAF and was not allowed a gun. If however some of Rommel's troops in the western desert paid a fleeting visit some night he, like other tradesmen, was taught how to permanently immobilise them (that is a term which I did not think would harm them until one of his friends walked in the door and explained very briefly just how final it would be.) He would be in the aircraft harassing your father. The Bren gun was apparently used in ambushes. It was carefully sighted on, say a door, used by enemy officers, generally inside their lines. The gun was made rock steady and the ambushers would retire before sunrise and hide. First to open the door killed himself with a bullet to his chest. The next few who walked into the trip went the same way. I doubt if all the tricks they played were ever worth repeating.
@@Grimpurple_minion99 I had written a veeeery long reply to this one, that sadly enough misfired thanks to my very modern computer and highly talented ability to operate it *cough* (shouldn´t take that one too seriously) and I realized I squandered at least over 50´ worth of typing. I will try to bring myself to retyping it (it was about small arms fire, artillery, the Red Army, and how things transpired -I suspect- into both NATO vs Warsaw Pact small-arms and tactical doctrine) whenever I feel like it. I´m actually quite surprised there is a public interested in this kinda stuff... My father and me would always pick our favorites in Cold War conflicts, and analyze why they lost. Him being quite familiar with the Red Army (is why a lot of his friends ended up in Vietnam round 1.0, known as the First Indochina War) he´d always chess against me, teaching me things about tactics and strategy and stuff, was really fun :-) But gotta go now, thanks for the reply, and will try to get something done about this! And fill in some more gaps, about myths I often encounter about the Soviet Army vs US Army vs Wehrmacht etc, there´s a lot of annoying myths out there. Regards, Thomas
Yeah if I'd toldy wife I was watching two drunk and hairy men on a hotel room bed talking about their legendary and mythological weapons she'd have given me a funny look... 🤣
I watched until the end. I'm am the most firearm-ignorant element on this side of the known universe, but I had a seriously groovy time listening to you. Good rhythm. And the subject is very glamorous, especially for a Dutch resident who will on average never see a real gun in his lifetime. I admit, I've been following Ian for a while now, because I like his narratives. Good voice too. Anyway, thanks for this guy's. And more of it please. I'm not kidding. You truly have therapeutic value.
Moobs Mcgee yea. With people not going at least temporarily deaf during a fire fight and unrealistic magazine capacities being the biggest ones I think.
Steve W. One of my biggest peeves with Hollywood gun scenes, is firearms with dust covers closed ejecting CGI shells... or none at all despite having seemingly infinite ammo to boot.
I agree. The Discovery and History Channel (when it was the WW2 Western Front Channel) in the late 90's and early 2000's was where much of my info stemmed from and I remember Weaponology being the number 1 culprit for the Garand Clip "Ping" myth.
35:00, This is making me think of the 8" targets at the range I fire at. I could see the one at 200 yards, but I didn't know there were 8" targets at the 250, 300, 350, 400, and 450 yard 18" targets as well until over half a year later when I was tasked to go out there and paint them. I thought they were just shadows from rocks or the sage brush. Of course, now I know they're there, I can see them, but the one at 450 is so tiny when looking down my A3 style irons (well, A3 rear, and Magpul MBUS Pro up front), that it's smaller than the tip of my front post. Shooting from the bench with a bipod and irons, I can hit the 8" at 450 yards about 40% of the time, the most consecutive hits I've had was 3, just using 55gr 5.56x45mm NATO M193 ball ammo by Magtech. I doubt I'd be even half as accurate if that target were shooting back.
The book being shown at 6:50, 'Ordnance Went Up Front', was part of a number of books published in 1998 by Palladium Press for The Firearms Classic Library collection and marketed by the NRA. By the way, the USMC had 3 BAR's per squad not because of their unreliability. It was because a Marine infantry squad consists of three fire teams of four men each, an AR man, an assistant AR man, a rifle man, and a fire team leader. So with three fire teams, you have three BAR's.
@@ivanmonahhov2314 Is that why the did it? It's a gas operated weapon and an LMG so I can think of quite a few other reasons you might issue different ammunition than you did to riflemen.
@@andrewbroeker9819 PKT is a tank mounted version of PKM , so with recoil beign negated by a hard mount it was very accurate , but tank uses MG for first of all supressive fire.
@@andrewbroeker9819 ok I dont have a source but I think this is true. I've only ever seen coaxial MGs in ww2 tanks in "wobbly" mounts. They're a bit loose so they bounce around and dont always hit exactly where you aimed. This is because a coaxial MG is VERY hard to aim proficiently in a ww2 tank. You're using two hand wheels, not pointing it with your hands, so on the fly fine tuning is difficult, and since it's a machine gun with a lot of rounds and a high rate of fire, you can just make it have super low accuracy and achieve greater effect on target. Of course with modern fire control systems tanks probably dont to this anymore, but it wouldn't surprise me if this really did happen.
This video is a pure joy. Two knowledgeable men discussing (over a glass of scotch) their subject, with reason and enthusiasm. My respect to your phenomenal knowledge and ability to impart it to us. Power to your elbow's!!
To be fair, a post war survey about a life threatening problem was not a good methodology, since people who really suffered from the problem were dead. I think a better source of information actually be on the enemy side, who could presumably took advantages of the problem if there was one.
There are plenty of guys who vividly remember what happened when their brothers died and I promise some see it over and over again whether they want to or not. So, yes in fact it was a valid study.
Some guy at a range I was at was spouting some nonsense about guys "pretending to fire" so that way they'd have rounds while the rest were reloading. I didn't say anything at the time because I thought "at least it's not the ping thing".
And if i'm not mistaken, US doctrine was to alternate moving and shooting, so as soon as one man runs dry the other takes up his volume of fire. Just common sense to not have everyone reloading at once. Been doing it ever since the Brits with their ranks of muzzleloaders.
Interesting story on the lines of the acceptance of "combat accuracy". So my dad had always been an accuracy snob. His only center-fire rifle for years was a Remington 700 ADL in .243 Win. that he has developed a pet handload that groups .4 MOA all day long and routinely bust 1 qt oil jugs at 500 yds. He bought his first AR last year and spent around $700 on a cheaper lower quality version. Called me after shooting it and told me it was trash. I asked him why and he was throwing a fit that he could not get better than 4 MOA. I told him that's about the best he could expect out if that brand and that the distance from his front room to the garage door was still only 40 yards that he would still have a large margin of error for a man that it did not matter which eye he put the round in, just aim at his shirt button and shoot till he stops moving. He seemed to get it at that point that it was not necessary for it's intended purpose.
I think the first myth became prevalent because it leads to the absolutely wonderful pun of "...this, of course, being the first recorded instance of soldiers being killed by bad ping" or similar statements.
I remember in high school I saw the myth about the m1 garand clipazine on either the military channel or the history channel. I remember talking about it to people. Then years later in life I found a 1943 m1 garand and shot it on the range. Then i realized the gun was so damn loud I could only hear the ping after it had already been ejected, bounced off of the rifle, and hit the concrete.
Very cool and entertaining video. I had to suffer so much misinformation when I was an infantryman told to me by senior NCOs that ought to have known better. But you guys mentioned it several times. The average Soldier regardless of the nation he serves with likely has little to no shooting experience prior to enlisting and what he knows while he is on active duty is only specifics on the particular weapons that he is issued. The public perception of " this guy knows what he is talking about because he was a Ranger, Marine, SEAL... etc, does not actually reflect reality. Bloke, you got a new subscriber
My father kept saying action movies unrealistically depicted grenades as having a timed fuse, while real grenades explode on impact. I was confused. I eventually figured out the branch he served with 30 years ago excplusively uses impact grenades to this day.
@@swissmilitischristilxxii3691 look it up, they absolutely exist. Hell, rifle grenades and launcher grenades are one version, but impact hand grenades are absolutely a thing. They're almost universally "concussive" or "offensive" grenades, so no fragmentation. The idea is that you throw them while assaulting an enemy position, they explode immediately, and you don't have to seek cover because they have a short wounding radius (they also disorient the enemy quite well, as they often have more explosive than a frag). Swiss army is purely defensive in nature so it'd make sense they don't have them. Italian Carabinieri are shock troopers, so they have different doctrine. Of course, US marines use frags and they're shock troopers too, it's just a matter of difference in doctrine, but impact hand grenades are rather more useful on the charge than defending a trench.
@@bakenbeans420 it just makes sense that, if you are expected to yeet on the move, you need a bomb with less kill radius than your max yeet distance and no fuse.
I live in a state where certain legislators had to be informed that AR-15's do not in fact fire 30,000 round a second and that chainsaw attachments do not exist outside gears of war. You can imagine how absurd our gun laws are.
I'm no Ian, but I know a thing or two about broomsticks but I sometimes forget how utterly stupid some people can be when it comes to guns. One time I got into an argument with some guy who saw Die Hard 2 once and seriously thought a 'Glock 7' was made of porcelain, super expensive, and could bypass airport metal detectors. I shit you not.
4:44 There’s actually a scene in The Great Raid where a platoon leader has his Tommy gun jam on him when attempting to fire at a IJA soldier rushing towards his firing position. He alerted his buddy beside him with a Garand, which proceeded to empty his remaining 3 shots into this poor sod. As the guy with the Garand ducks back to reload, the platoon leader finished clearing his jam, got back up and resumed firing.
I stumbled upon this channel by accident and I'm not really into guns but this guy knows his stuff so well and is so interesting to listen to that I just kept watching. Eventually this video popped up and wow! That was really good content, subscribed.
So, you're suggesting that my inability to ride a unicycle backwards over railroad tracks while plinking aspirin tablets off fence posts at 650 yards (or meters) isn't a reflection of my inability as a man or a sign of my weak character?
So, funny story. My grandfather qualified with a broomstick. When he trained, there were two rifles and maybe a hundred or two rounds. For the entire unit. They marched with broomsticks and he never qualified with a handgun. "And," he said, "we won that war."
One of my sergeants had "floor-buffer" added to my US Army Driver's license as a joke. It is still there, along with my license to drive a bus, LOL. I still have the card from 1986.
The Marine Corps also has a tradition of marksmanship. When I was qualifying, before the days of the reflex site, I could hit 7 of 10 shots at a b-mod (torso and head) target with my M16A2 iron sights from the 500 yard line firing in the prone position. I could hit 10 of 10 at the 200 yard rapiid fire with a magazine change. I was slighty better than average for my unit.
Who actually thinks you could hear the ching sound the M1 makes when the empty clip gets ejected? Well... I know that quite a lot of people think the noise from someone firing a gun in a UA-cam video is close to reality. But it is in fact much louder, it even gave me a headache while wearing ear protection when we got ambushed during my deployment in afghanistan. So I dont think you can actually time your attack based on that ching sound considering the noise and chaos that is going on during a firefight.
OGlettuceWEED I think a lot of soldiers use what I think are called passive earplugs, they basically allow certain ambient/low volume sounds to pass through so they can communicate and hear their surroundings clearer while muffling out louder more intense sounds like gunfire. There's electronic versions and silicone versions that work in some physical manner I haven't quite looked into. Apparently there's even a class action lawsuit for some defective silicone kinds.
I was in the US Navy in the late 1970's, my total firearms training was 21 rounds from a single shot 22 LR rifle and 5 rounds from a 1911. There was no requirement to hit any sort of target, in fact the only requirement was to get the rounds to fire from the weapon.
Considering role and purpose, I suppose there's not really much point in giving ranking seamen extensive small arms training, beyond knowing which end you're supposed to point at the enemy and how to make the bullets come out. I bet you were given a whole lot more training in how to effectively operate whichever part of the boat you were assigned to. That being said, your account does tie in well with standard US military doctrine.... "Quantity has a quality all of its own". My respect to you for doing your nation a service, regards from Australia across the seas. Cheers mate.
I really enjoy these formats where multiple bloggers share the stage and compare notes. Fantastic! I would like to let them know how much more interesting it is have to the different perspectives.
Another great Q&A video. Ian and The Bloke are so spot on about giving praise to the Britishmuzzleloaders channel. I do think that when it comes to Enfields (and Mausers, and Tikka T3s too!), the RifleChair is also music to our ears.
I don't pretend to know anything about this business, but surely if 'the enemy learned' to listen out for this ping, there'd be as much documentation of Axis veterans instructing their new guys as there is allied documentation, no?
Cadde Except no ear pro was in WW2, shots and cracking of rounds would mitigate hearing much and the ranges at which fought won’t even let you be able to hear the ping and trust me, no one rushed for pings, not Japanese which rushed due to orders or as ambush
I'll never understand how the mythos of the "M1 Ping costing soldiers lives" ever got started. The average firearm creates noise around 140 Decibels (the universal measurement of how loud something is), this is equivalent to standing within 100 feet of a jet engine igniting. Now imagine firing your weapon in anger for more than 30 seconds at a time, your hearing is next to if not completely shot and you expect me to believe someone's going to hear that when they can barely understand the commands of the NCO next to them let alone their comrades beside them over the heat of battle??
People only believe this because of Saving Ryan's Privates. They seriously messed with the sound mixing and got the ping to stand out against what would have just been white noise to human ears.
About 10 years ago , found 303 brit machine gun ammo for $38 per 500 rounds , in cheaper than dirt . ran it on my SML mark 2, 7" groups at 20yd. Got home used a caliper found bullet diameter was .308 Not .314 . Had a Russian mosen migont, .310 bore , 7.62 54r round 60yd . first shot dead on , second shot 1/2" walk, 3rd 1.5" , 4th and 5th 2" to 3" walk. Now the SML MARK 2 AT 300yd from rest, fed ammo 150gr. Stays on 3" ×4" (dinty moore stew can ) iron sights (not bad for a 2 land barrel )While still warm. Surprised me too , small arms of the world, good book. Before you go surplus. Had a 1903 action sporterized match barrel 30 od6. 100yd dead on 2nd dead on. Recomend this one, and SML mark 2 if you can aford to feed it $28 per 20 rnd. Paid $100 for SML mark 2 full wood. Not jungle carbine walking zero been there too. Good booze good talk
Re: the mad minute, a weird thing I found using the....wrong guns, basically, is that if you fire a wrong-handed bolt action rifle, you can actually fire loads faster, if less accurately, by just keeping your other hand on the bolt.
You seem to have forgotten the Marine Corps at Bella Wood, they opened fire at 800 yards shocked the Germans when people started falling, trained out to 500 yards and I’m sure the old Marines did too, two things are taken very seriously in boot camp, marching ( close order drill) , and marksmanship,you spend one whole snapping in ( practicing shooting positions and trigger management) and in Vietnam there is a verifiable account of a Marine ( who shot expert) killing a three man crew of a RPD at over 650 yards when M16s would’ not reach, this was a regular rifle ( iron sights)
Went for my daily dose of Forgotten Weapons this morning. Was NOT expecting to find Ian and another guy talking on the edge of a bed, sharing a drink. Great content, but unexpected location for the conversation.
Hmm, two intelligent, attractive nerds sitting on a bed, drinking Scotch and talking about their guns. Did anyone else think this was going to be porn?
I first heard of the "ping" myth from my grandfather, a First Sergeant with the First Cavalry Division who saw action from July 1950 to July 1951. His description of it has a few caveats to the one here. (Please read them all before slamming me, because the last one is important.) 1. The empty clip thrown to the ground was not meant to copy the "ping" of the M-1 Garand ejecting the clip, but rather...the clip (or the metal magazine of any other infantry weapon the US was using in Korea) hitting the ground. 2. They only used the technique in groups of two or three, in combat situations within 50 yards, and where both sides were using suppressing fire from cover. In other words, relatively static combat where one side puts rounds down range then the other side does, but neither is precisely sure where the other is. 3. You had to fire 4-6 shots each in your fire team before throwing them, while the other fire teams in the squad took up new positions...so regular US infantry practice at the time. 4. By the time his unit was using the tactic, they were facing Chinese units that had either used captured US M-1 Garands or had been issued them during the Chinese Civil War...so they knew, and were used to, the gun. 5. The tactic was used to get the enemy to either move from their cover or pop up to return fire, allowing other members of your unit to catch them in the open or, more likely, locate the enemy and call in supporting fire like mortars (my grandfather was a platoon communications officer, so maybe a bias), while still ensuring you had a few bullets left in case you saw him. 6. My grandfather was a smart cookie for an uneducated farm boy, so he wondered whether the throwing of clips was not so much a sound trick for the enemy or a coordination trick for the friendly soldiers, and the sudden ceasing of fire was the thing that got the enemy to expose themselves.
Still doesn't explain how the enemy can hear a tiny ping from 50ish yards over the ringing in their ears from the mass of weapons fire that just solidified their need for hearing aids when they are in their mid 30s. The M1 ping myth is simply preposterous when any amount of logic is applied
Samuel: Your grandfather being a _smart cookie_ reminds me of an old adage. The definition of an INTELLECTUAL: A man or woman who has been educated BEYOND their intelligence.
I can definitely attest to the first one, first time I fired my M14, I completely forgot ear protection... my ears were ringing for a solid hour, and for the first 30 minutes it was like I had ear plugs in, everything was muffled.
The first time that I heard of the 'ping' myth of the M1 was in 'Warlord' comic back in the 1970s. So some people believe comic books are documentaries!
Before hearing protection became common, soldiers going through basic and even just normal people who grew up shooting would almost certainly have temporary or permanent hearing damage. In an actual battle with grenades, artillery and bombs dropped from planes and tanks revving their engines and thousands of people firing at once nobody could hear a ping. The thing with "too accurate" is hilarious - like booze too tasty or a painting too beautiful.
I own a Roy Dunlap book. It i called " gunsmithing" and is amazingly detailed . It has lots of old schematics special tool building,ballistic discussions , and theories on hyper velocity rounds . He surmises we won't see great improvements in velocities until we perfect round lands,u shaped groove rifling and ceramic bore liners come into popularity. Then we may see 6000 fps cartredges and so much more.
I think a lot of stupid myths are caused by the question "why" or statement "I heard" asked to professionals or semiprofessional people who eventually just say "sure" in order to go back to what they are doing or working on.
That myth is so old I can remember it being in the British "Battle" comics that used to come out weekly with a half dozen serialised war stories in them. Maybe that's where it started?
What Battle Picture Weekly/Battle Action/Battle? That only goes back to 1975 and Pat Mills and John Wagner of 2000AD fame, Gods thats my childhood and still got No.1 somewhere along with 2000Ad No.2... or are you thinking more like the much smaller Commado? Those go back beyound me to 1961
Dont forget, that statistic came from the left, who knows what sort of crooked math they used to come up with it. Or what misleading question they asked to gather thier data. "Hello NRA member, Do you support a law preventing criminals from purchasing guns?" "uh, yes" "SEE! NRA members support universal background checks!"
Like the 'ping' myth, a lot of the nonsense about the Sherman tank also came from a soldier - unfortunately (and in the US in particular) it seems utterly forbidden to question anything a member of the armed forces ever says, much less combat veterans, and so the kinds of absurd tales the boys tell each other slowly get passed into wider circulation and nobody really questions them (or when they do, they're shouted down for it). I can say without any doubt at all that the highest concentration of gun-related bullshit I ever heard in my life originated from within my own platoon. Just because someone's trained to use something effectively, it doesn't mean they're an expert on the matter, no matter how much we might have liked to fancy otherwise.
It was an interesting video, Yes, I did watch the whole thing guys. I hadn't even heard a couple of the myths, but I had head about the M1 Garand part, and it always struck me as an odd one. Glad to know I was right and it was a box of road apples. :) Keep up the great work, love watching your vids on various and sundry.
My favorite *ping* story comes from one of my mother's exes, who claimed his father carried *two* M1s, and would just have someone pass him the other one when it was empty, since clearly carrying two 8+ pound rifles was more practical than just reloading a rifle that already does half the reload for you.
When I were lad, in the RN in the early 1970's the EFFECTIVE range of the SLR L1A1 was always given as 200 yards. Why? Because that' the range you had a chance to A see the target B Time to aim and hit it.
Lindybeige also could make a cameo during the 2nd myth regarding the Bren's "too high" accuracy. But that would obviously have been a bit ungentlemanly.
No, it was the way he cocked the K98k that sounded like a cricket reply, then shot the American twice, then recocked because where there's one there's more.
There is a (presumably made-up) story of Kaiser Wilhelm II presenting the medals at a marksmanship contest in Switzerland (which has a militia army). Speaking to the champion: "So, how many trained marksmen are there in Switzerland?" "50,000, Sire!" "Oh. And what will you do if I send an army of 100,000 against you?" "We will all fire twice, Sire!"
I heard a similar tale about Hitler’s ambassador to Switzerland bragging that the Germans could field 3 times as many infantrymen as the Swiss, to which a Swiss general/dignitary replied that they would have to make sure each soldier got three rounds
Excellent choice of Whiskies! My best friend died back in the 00s and left me his collection of aged whiskies, including 3 collectors' editions of Glenrothes. They've all gone now, but they were phenomenal while they lasted;).
"We two distinguished gents would like to hire a hotel room for a couple of hours. Please take our camera and whiskey up for us. Now, is the bed comfy?"
Omg I was thinking about that
Yeah where's the footage of the afterparty
Ian knows the cheapest hourly hotels
Were only going to stay for a bit, we gotta blow our loads later.
Proceeds to passionately discuss firearm myths
Somewhere, there is a video of two experts discussing alcohol myths and sampling some guns.
Ironically, it is a much darker video
I think Hunter S Thompson did that once.
Once.
My Russian cousin and I had that conversation last night; we're now recovering from the epic hangovers while watching this, which is allot like Bob Ross talking firearms. 🤷♂️
I would love to be that expert, im getting there
In bed
You guys should have been smoking a good cigar.......you could have titled it "Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms".
ATF chating
Hands down the best ATF-related UA-cam comment I have ever heard. Well done, fellow humorist. Well done. 👌
Larry B I really wanna get stoned with Ian 😂
The Bureau of All Things Fun.
Brilliant! 😊
"you just fired 8 rds of 30-06, anyone close enough to hear the ping is already @$&#king deaf"
Clint Smith puts it most eloquently
What's that??
Al Swann deaf not blind
If you aren't deaf from artillery already
you forgot the "retard" after 30-06 lol.
2 dudes chllin on a white bed half a foot apart cause their quite intrigued by the misinformation of roy dunlap.
Yup, nothin' queer about that at all.
I was thinking it looked like it could be a porn intro. "Have a drink, so would you say you're into new things?"
@@MrJeepmarine "Do you want to see my… gun?"
Lol.
@@MrJeepmarine I mean that's all forgotten weapons is, gun porn
My father-in-law who is 93 was at Monte Casino for 4 months at the front line. He said in that time he saw exactly one German soldier for about 3 seconds. He said he took a shot at him at maybe 250 yards and has no idea if he came close to hitting him. He said the German artillery always seemed to have a pretty good idea where he was though!
Real life ain't like the movies.
Sometimes it is like the movies though, and you can ask actual veterans about that. They will tell you.
Monte Casino had actually been empty of German Soldiers before it was bombed by the Americans. Some generals had been paranoid that the Germans had spotters up there. So two German soldiers convinced the clergy there to move all of the historical artifacts for safe keeping. They got most stuff out before Monte Casino was bombed. The Germans at that point then moved into the ruins which offered excellent cover.
The two Germans that convinced the clergy were awarded by the Pope for their great idea of saving the artifacts.
@@Necronaut aceroadholder had an actual veteran who was at Monte Carlo for four months so what do you mean when you state he can ask "actual veterans", are you implying his father in law is lying about his wartime experience ?
@@hopsta5628 No, he's implying that he's not a veteran speaking with firsthand knowledge, but knows that some guys seen a lot of action and some guys see very little if none. And that making a narrow statement such as ''Real life ain't like the movies'' based on one man's experience is very naive
@@nicholaspatton5590 As if they could not spot after the bombing too. I mean it is a hill.
The Bloke actually had a bottle of water, but, by the time Ian had poured it, it turned to scotch.
Sure you mean gun oil?
From Speyside.
Broachim Meyer You made my day with this, haha
Ahh Gun Jesus strikes again.
I did write Islay first, before I saw it was a Speyside they were drinking :)
Jesus turns water to wine, Gun Jesus turns water to scotch
If someone is reporting that his M1 'ca-chinged', and the enemy rushed him, obviously the enemy didn't get him.
Military records contain very few reports written by dead men.
if its rumored it could well have been from a 3rd person
What if someone was writing a record and it abruptly ends with "As I am currently reloading and therefor incapable of defending myself to the fullest degree I must note the fact that the Kraut for whom I unloaded my clip towards in the first place is currently advancing on my present position, making no attempts at evasive actions nor diversionary tactics. I can only presume that the distinctive sound of my standard issue En Bloc clip ejecting from my rifle after the final shot has alerted the Hessian that my weapon is no longer capable of delivering a suppressing volley and as such he has taken advantage of the situation by diving over the ruble I am using for cover and thrusting his bayonet int-"
I'm gonna have to find them but I have a Marine Corps manual from last 50's and some old army training videos on VHS that both said something to the effect of "Be aware the ping from an empty clip will alert the enemy to your weapon being empty." They didn't really say you'd be rushed or anything just that it would let everyone know you were out. The video said something about the safety too but its been too long since I watched them to remember exactly what.
it's a myth because it could never happen due to the circumstances needed for it to happen:
1 You'd need to be alone
2 your enemy needs to know that you're alone
3 your enemy needs to be close enough to hear the ping
4 you or the enemy need to be in a position to use the ping (if you're going for the alleged ping trick)
5 and did i mention that you need to either fire the last round in the gun (meaning that you have shot 7 rounds recently) or that you have a spare clip to use for the so called ping trick which most likely means you've shot 8 rounds already
Which means that you and the enemy that is close by will be thoroughly combat deaf most likely.
So it's something that could happen in a perfect storm scenario
but did it ever happen once during the service of the M1? i don't know, but figure out the probability of all the individual conditions and you'll find as the numbers starts adding up you'll be going towards zero and going there fast.
Having an M1 I know that it does ping, loud enough to be heard in combat .. doubtful, but what I was trying to say was even though it was a myth it actually made it into formal military literature/training even if not quite like the myth is saying.
At roughly 27 minutes you can hear the ker-ching of the camera's dead battery ejecting. Either that or an empty whisky glass banged against a helmet.
One of the biggest factors on military combat shooting, is the western moral compunction "..thou shall not kill.." This according to Lt. Col Grossman's book " On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society" (out of print, available on Amazon as ebook). A must read for any student of martial arts. Any study of lethality of small arms use requires a perspective that only 3% of soldiers using small arms will actually "aim to kill" another human.
@@treOODA I don't believe that figure of just 3%.
For the M1 pick myth it's one of those things "the enemy always seems to pop up when I'm out of ammo" but doesn't remember all the times the enemy pops up when he's not out of ammo, a sorta hyper-awareness. Kinda the same thought process of Murphy law. And then having this ping sound you can blame it on other then just randomly happening, and if it doesn't you can fall back to the thinking of "maybe they didn't hear it that time" it's the perfect myth really and can't be disproved really until someone is down range from a M1 garand. And the one that where we couldn't really ask them cause they where the enemy.
There might be also 2 other factors:
1. enemy is undiscovered and waits for the perfect moment,
2. enemy has longer time to aim -> near misses / hits.
1. If the fight is happening in place with quite a lot of vegetation, some enemy soldiers might not be seen -> fired upon. And they might wait for moment, when they are the most likely to hit the target with no reciprocation or with the highest chance of hitting the target. Waiting for the enemy soldier with M1 to reload might make him for a moment stationary and therefore easier to hit. Also since he is focused on reloading, might not notice your fire or positioning.
2. The difference in firepower of rifleman in the case of US vs Axis and because of that there might be tendency to fire more accurate shots than match the US troops with rifle fire. That might lead to waiting for the US soldier to reload, so the enemy soldier might aim for longer period of time than otherwise would be possible. That might create the situation of near misses and with what wrote Cypher 1o1, might explain this myth.
I don't think this is full explanation of this myth, but that it was lots of anecdotal evidence pointing in one direction.
"You never remember the 99 times the weatherman got it right, but you always remember the one time he got it wrong"
The ping myth is just ridiculous. Combat almost never took place close enough to hear the ping or be able to see the enemy rifleman reloading. Even if it did, that enemy rifleman isn't by himself, so just knowing that THIS PARTICULAR ENEMY is reloading wouldn't give you any significant advantage. And on top of all of that, there's a BATTLE going on. You think you can hear a ping from hundreds of feet away while you and your comrades are firing rifles, mortar shells are raining down, grenades are going off, etc?
In a trench: ping*... "hold fire" *sticks head out of trench... "did u guys hear that"
Enemy soldier: "what the hell r u saying i cant hear shit"
it was explained to me that WW2 soldiers rarely wore proper hearing protection. send a .30-06 off with 20 of your buddies and no ear pro, and then tell me of you can hear the ping.
Ian (and Bloke), Thanks for the shout out! It's greatly appreciated. Cheers.
And greatly deserved! Your content is so jam packed with info. Keep up the great work
been loving your channel atm keep up the fantastic work 😀
Ian mentioned "better controls" in manufacturing. I was disappointed to notice nobody seems to mention just *how* much better the controls are, with *just* the availability of more accurate (control) scales, telling the operator where the tools are. Even using old ww2 machines with modern *analog* scales I am able to exceed .0002 of an inch in accuracy, even though the original equipment could only go down to .002
A power of ten in difference is *extraordinary* and I am using cheap analog units (because my equipment is set up in a garage and temperature swings prevent me from going tighter, I digress)
Numerical control existed in ww2.
Adding a computer today (cnc = computer numerical control) isn't why controls are so much better. Its the better, more precise, more accurate and *cheaper* ability to measure, verify and zero.
In a word. Control.
As a machinist;
I think that mention from Ian was spectacularly cool, and well stated!
Phenomenal for a man drinking.
As a machinist I'd agree wholeheartedly. I've used WWII era manual mills and then gone right over to using a modern Haas CNC machine only minutes later and indeed the accuracy of the machine itself is not...well vastly different at least. Extremely high end CNC's will out perform anything from WWII but that's a given when you're paying that price. No the difference is definitely more about the controls in place.
@@PokemonHaloFan I'm an amateur machinist and I've never operated a metal working CNC but I've owned and operated plenty of the older manual machines, many of which were considered top of the line in their day.The old K&T or Cincy mills followed the dictum of the only thing better than cast iron is more cast iron and they're as solid as can be. I have K&T mills from WW2 and I'm beyond impressed at how well made they are.
Comparing a new CNC to a mill that has decades of use on it isn't really a fair fight. It would be interesting to compare a brand new CNC VMC to a brand new WW2 era vertical mill for general accuracy. Obviously the CNC is more versatile and faster but what if you were to do identical one off parts in each? It would be an interesting comparison, especially if the manual machine had a DRO installed on it to even the playing field a little bit.
I'm a mechanical engineer and did some machining in college with some equipment from the 70s and ever since then I wondered how tight tolerances were on old stuff like this. Always assumed weapons like the Stg 44 were stamped with a few machined parts since machining would be such a labor intense endeavor compared to a guy putting it in a CNC machine and walking away or stamping a pieces of sheet metal out. Nice input.
@@TheLouisianan The Stg44 is an interesting example. It was, very much like the British Sten designed to be cheap, both in price and manufacture. It's a testament to the ability and craftsmanship of the old machinists that these weapons were as capable as they were. The Sten (and the 44) were considered throw away weapons. Use them till they quit and grab a new one. They did have issues but for what they were, they were incredible weapons.
i'm also an Mechanical Engineer in apprenticeship in switzerland and you are right. At the start of my training we were working only with conventional machines but they were equipped with digital positionindicators and when we switched to CNC (DMG Mori DMC 635 V and CTX Alpha 300) we quickly realized that there is no difference in precision.
My father fought on both fronts, East and West, and he remembered that once first fighting the American they were just OVERWHELMED by US long-range firepower, that this was a whole new ballgame for them (compared to Russian charging at point-blank range with PPsH41/PPS43s), and this was a total SHOCK to him to discover a horde of ´gun crazy´ Americans with M1 Garands just unloading on his company from over 200 meters. The majority of this fire missed, because these were rather green troops, but still they had to reconfigure and reinvent their own tactics to handle American infantry assault. He was actually very positive about the M1 Garand as a weapon, stating it was accurate if handled right, fired fast and this was something new.... Not a word about the *ping* noise, from a German veteran, they didn´t even notice...
So much for Myth no.1!
Myth no.2: Also thought somebody cocked up Vickers and Bren somewhere on the road. But nice to hear about that group-zeroing being done in the Wehrmacht, explains some pictures I´ve seen of my father´s induction/training, where the very cocky/dangerous looking Leutnant was looking along over their shoulders, and the their M98k´s were al on a wooden pedestal, thanks for explaining that!
Btw, about the MG42: he would be in agreeing with that the MG42 was ´cheapie´ compared to the MG34, he was non-stop complaining about having to give up their MG34s for 42s. He cited a lack of accuracy and logistical nightmare as the reasons for not liking it, and the fact it had no single-shot mode. They used MG42s mostly at near point-blank range, just holding their fire until a squad of Russians turned the corner and than *Kookook! Look who´s here?* kinda thing. In German it´s called ´Schweige MG´ or ´Silent MG´ that lies in ambush where there´s no cover, apparently (I learned rather recent, should go read up more on it).
Myth no.3: I see no reason to assume that any of the German vets I heard their stories (from a truck driver driving up ammo to a Untersturmfuhrer with Panzergrenadiers) that their fear for being shot at >200 meters by Russian snipers was unfounded. But ofc, these guys were employed in droves, the majority had sights, so we can argue about that one all day... Fact is a lot of these night-time encounter stories ended with ´and than his brains were spread all over my uniform´. On the other hand, also surfaced the fact they didn´t even try to match this performance with a Mauser 98 and iron-sights, except as suppressing fire in hopes of getting the guy away from them. That´s why they had this extreme light-discipline, like covering their headlights and such, and this didn´t get much better once slowly units got transferred towards the Western Front from mid-44 onward. There they had to contend with ´gun-crazy, trigger-happy horde´ of Americans (pun intended there, no hostility) equipped with M1 Garands popping away at everything that moved + fighter-bombers circling overhead by the dozens. And for some reason, despite everything, and his access to SMGs, pistols, whatever for the taking, he only took his father´s artillery Luger and Mauser 98 in combat from day 1 in 1941 to the bitter end, because it was 100% reliable, packed a heavy round, and he preferred that over seeing another dead greenhorn with an MP40 that jammed (they jammed A LOT under field conditions). So battlefield versus range-shooting is a huge, huge difference.
PS. He had no eardrums anymore, today people complain about my loud voice, because I always had to shout so he could hear me, and the other way around too :-)
Fantastic video!
It’s interesting to hear the other side of the story I got to tell you.
I heard the American World War II veterans talking, it’s just interesting to hear how the Germans viewed us in World War II that never really occurred to me.
The gun crazy trigger-happy American thing is actually pretty funny. I’m in American i own guns and I still think it’s hilarious
Thank you for that condensation of some of your father's experiences.
My Dad was in the RAF and was not allowed a gun. If however some of Rommel's troops in the western desert paid a fleeting visit some night he, like other tradesmen, was taught how to permanently immobilise them (that is a term which I did not think would harm them until one of his friends walked in the door and explained very briefly just how final it would be.) He would be in the aircraft harassing your father.
The Bren gun was apparently used in ambushes. It was carefully sighted on, say a door, used by enemy officers, generally inside their lines. The gun was made rock steady and the ambushers would retire before sunrise and hide.
First to open the door killed himself with a bullet to his chest. The next few who walked into the trip went the same way.
I doubt if all the tricks they played were ever worth repeating.
Yet another layer of real info, useful info, added to this great episode. Thanks!
@@Grimpurple_minion99 I had written a veeeery long reply to this one, that sadly enough misfired thanks to my very modern computer and highly talented ability to operate it *cough* (shouldn´t take that one too seriously) and I realized I squandered at least over 50´ worth of typing. I will try to bring myself to retyping it (it was about small arms fire, artillery, the Red Army, and how things transpired -I suspect- into both NATO vs Warsaw Pact small-arms and tactical doctrine) whenever I feel like it. I´m actually quite surprised there is a public interested in this kinda stuff... My father and me would always pick our favorites in Cold War conflicts, and analyze why they lost. Him being quite familiar with the Red Army (is why a lot of his friends ended up in Vietnam round 1.0, known as the First Indochina War) he´d always chess against me, teaching me things about tactics and strategy and stuff, was really fun :-)
But gotta go now, thanks for the reply, and will try to get something done about this!
And fill in some more gaps, about myths I often encounter about the Soviet Army vs US Army vs Wehrmacht etc, there´s a lot of annoying myths out there.
Regards,
Thomas
@@thomasvandevelde8157 ya I thought it was fascinating!!!
It’s a reminder that they were just as scared and young as are guys were.
When two guys filming themselves on a bed in a hotelroom having fun. A video I truly enjoyed watching.
Yeah if I'd toldy wife I was watching two drunk and hairy men on a hotel room bed talking about their legendary and mythological weapons she'd have given me a funny look... 🤣
I watched until the end. I'm am the most firearm-ignorant element on this side of the known universe, but I had a seriously groovy time listening to you. Good rhythm. And the subject is very glamorous, especially for a Dutch resident who will on average never see a real gun in his lifetime. I admit, I've been following Ian for a while now, because I like his narratives. Good voice too. Anyway, thanks for this guy's. And more of it please. I'm not kidding. You truly have therapeutic value.
I like how Clint Smith addressed the issue of the M1 ping. "You just fired eight rounds of 3006, everybody's deaf!!!"
And there’s the truth.
From Lindybeige to Forgotten Weapons. My youtube has come full circle again.
Yeah, first to hear bullshit about “spandau” and then to re abilitate your ears. Pretty good plan
Exactly what Edoardo Ferrari says. Lindysh** is as reputable as Roy Dunlap on the M1 ping.
It was odd enough when Lindy and Skall crossed over
*watches a video dispelling myths and inaccuracies- states an interest in Lindybeige*
What's the problem with Lindy?
I feel that the T.V. show weaponalogy is responsible for reinforcing misinformation in the general public.
Moobs Mcgee yea. With people not going at least temporarily deaf during a fire fight and unrealistic magazine capacities being the biggest ones I think.
I liked the show but I like this channel better
The show was okay but anytime I get to see my favorite Marine turned historian dr. William Atwatter I'll be happy.
Steve W. One of my biggest peeves with Hollywood gun scenes, is firearms with dust covers closed ejecting CGI shells... or none at all despite having seemingly infinite ammo to boot.
I agree. The Discovery and History Channel (when it was the WW2 Western Front Channel) in the late 90's and early 2000's was where much of my info stemmed from and I remember Weaponology being the number 1 culprit for the Garand Clip "Ping" myth.
35:00, This is making me think of the 8" targets at the range I fire at. I could see the one at 200 yards, but I didn't know there were 8" targets at the 250, 300, 350, 400, and 450 yard 18" targets as well until over half a year later when I was tasked to go out there and paint them. I thought they were just shadows from rocks or the sage brush. Of course, now I know they're there, I can see them, but the one at 450 is so tiny when looking down my A3 style irons (well, A3 rear, and Magpul MBUS Pro up front), that it's smaller than the tip of my front post. Shooting from the bench with a bipod and irons, I can hit the 8" at 450 yards about 40% of the time, the most consecutive hits I've had was 3, just using 55gr 5.56x45mm NATO M193 ball ammo by Magtech.
I doubt I'd be even half as accurate if that target were shooting back.
Many, perhaps most, instruments do not require you to measure exactly ON a hairline but rather between two.
The book being shown at 6:50, 'Ordnance Went Up Front', was part of a number of books published in 1998 by Palladium Press for The Firearms Classic Library collection and marketed by the NRA.
By the way, the USMC had 3 BAR's per squad not because of their unreliability. It was because a Marine infantry squad consists of three fire teams of four men each, an AR man, an assistant AR man, a rifle man, and a fire team leader. So with three fire teams, you have three BAR's.
So this is what a sleepover at Ian's looks like. "never have i ever said my gun is too accurate"
LMG is too accurate...
Thanks, as a former M249 gunner, I now have a brain tumor.
Well Russians thougth that PKT is too accurate so they issued special ammo.
@@ivanmonahhov2314 Is that why the did it? It's a gas operated weapon and an LMG so I can think of quite a few other reasons you might issue different ammunition than you did to riflemen.
@@andrewbroeker9819 PKT is a tank mounted version of PKM , so with recoil beign negated by a hard mount it was very accurate , but tank uses MG for first of all supressive fire.
@@ivanmonahhov2314 That still doesn't necessarily mean it's because they thought it was too accurate. What's your source?
@@andrewbroeker9819 ok I dont have a source but I think this is true. I've only ever seen coaxial MGs in ww2 tanks in "wobbly" mounts. They're a bit loose so they bounce around and dont always hit exactly where you aimed.
This is because a coaxial MG is VERY hard to aim proficiently in a ww2 tank. You're using two hand wheels, not pointing it with your hands, so on the fly fine tuning is difficult, and since it's a machine gun with a lot of rounds and a high rate of fire, you can just make it have super low accuracy and achieve greater effect on target.
Of course with modern fire control systems tanks probably dont to this anymore, but it wouldn't surprise me if this really did happen.
Ian doesn't drink his scotch, it all gets absorbed into his mustache
ZeroHundred Stache Osmosis
Neil Bolin Photosynthesis! Photosynthesis! Photosynthesis!
He uses it as beard oil
Irwin John Finster A weapon to surpass Metal Gear *robot noises*
Given the subject matter and the time of year.
A timely reminder. Movember: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movember
This video is a pure joy. Two knowledgeable men discussing (over a glass of scotch) their subject, with reason and enthusiasm. My respect to your phenomenal knowledge and ability to impart it to us. Power to your elbow's!!
Some times I think the ping rumor was put out to confuse the enemy so they would try to listen for it.
To be fair, a post war survey about a life threatening problem was not a good methodology, since people who really suffered from the problem were dead.
I think a better source of information actually be on the enemy side, who could presumably took advantages of the problem if there was one.
This . . . is a valid point.
It... it actually was. Too bad I don't speak japanese or korean.
There are plenty of guys who vividly remember what happened when their brothers died and I promise some see it over and over again whether they want to or not. So, yes in fact it was a valid study.
So Ian and Mr.Regular need to get together and review a obscure car, drive it to a field and blow it up with a obscure heavy machine gun.
If he still had his personal FB I would've pitched this idea to him
Squad1993 who? Mr.Regular? Or Ian?
Phillip Hand I need this!
ZooBop I know Mr. Regular. He has reviewed one of my cars
And He handed and idea onto them, and it was good
If you're with a squad of guys in ww2 with m1 garands and 1 ping goes off, there's still like 11 or more guys with loaded rifles!
Proteus "hey, a single American is monetarily out of ammunition, we should charge"
Some guy at a range I was at was spouting some nonsense about guys "pretending to fire" so that way they'd have rounds while the rest were reloading. I didn't say anything at the time because I thought "at least it's not the ping thing".
And if i'm not mistaken, US doctrine was to alternate moving and shooting, so as soon as one man runs dry the other takes up his volume of fire. Just common sense to not have everyone reloading at once. Been doing it ever since the Brits with their ranks of muzzleloaders.
One less person shooting at you is better than nothing.
Another question would be...even if the ping myth were true, how far can a person run during the time it takes to reload the Garand?
Interesting story on the lines of the acceptance of "combat accuracy". So my dad had always been an accuracy snob. His only center-fire rifle for years was a Remington 700 ADL in .243 Win. that he has developed a pet handload that groups .4 MOA all day long and routinely bust 1 qt oil jugs at 500 yds. He bought his first AR last year and spent around $700 on a cheaper lower quality version. Called me after shooting it and told me it was trash. I asked him why and he was throwing a fit that he could not get better than 4 MOA. I told him that's about the best he could expect out if that brand and that the distance from his front room to the garage door was still only 40 yards that he would still have a large margin of error for a man that it did not matter which eye he put the round in, just aim at his shirt button and shoot till he stops moving. He seemed to get it at that point that it was not necessary for it's intended purpose.
I think the first myth became prevalent because it leads to the absolutely wonderful pun of "...this, of course, being the first recorded instance of soldiers being killed by bad ping" or similar statements.
26:00 love the intermission music Monty Python for the win.
I love the fact that in the comment section of a UA-cam video about firearm mis-truths is a Monty Python reference. You, my friend, are the winner. 👌
Caught this early on Bloke's channel, glad you guys covered the mad minute.
I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW DARTH VADERRRR
Captain PHASMAAAAA!
Everyone is talking about getting an anti-gun propaganda ad before the video.
Must be a U.S. thing, I never get gun related ads.
I feel left out...
Lol the anti-gunners probably already won in your country there's no need to rub it in
You live in a country where the bad guys already won I guess.
Well, if you live in a country that has banned gun ownership, who would pay to place an ad on anti-gun propaganda in front of you?
Adblock plus has entered the chat
Or, not using an adblock extension thing. :D
“Whatever happens, we have got, *The Maxim gun,* and they have not.”-Hilaire Belloc, “The Modern Traveller” (1898)
@1stPCFerret: My Dad used to always quote that. Thanks for bringing back the memory!
I remember in high school I saw the myth about the m1 garand clipazine on either the military channel or the history channel. I remember talking about it to people. Then years later in life I found a 1943 m1 garand and shot it on the range. Then i realized the gun was so damn loud I could only hear the ping after it had already been ejected, bounced off of the rifle, and hit the concrete.
Sneaky LIndyBeige
Lindy surprise!
Notice from the point on the divergences grow exponentially.
Lindy effect
I _thought_ that was Lindy. Sneaky bugger. :-D
We are only one degree of Kevin bacon from a Lindybeige, Forgotten Weapons crossover.
And we're still waiting. Probably for Ian. The Americans are always late to war... 😉
does it count that he showed up in the video when they demonstrated the "ping" of the M1 Garand?
@@happycamper4315 Gotta give you euros a chance to sort it out yourselves before the big boys show up
@@happycamper4315 fashionably late just like my response to your comment
that 12:30 appearance was quite surprising to me
Very cool and entertaining video. I had to suffer so much misinformation when I was an infantryman told to me by senior NCOs that ought to have known better. But you guys mentioned it several times. The average Soldier regardless of the nation he serves with likely has little to no shooting experience prior to enlisting and what he knows while he is on active duty is only specifics on the particular weapons that he is issued. The public perception of " this guy knows what he is talking about because he was a Ranger, Marine, SEAL... etc, does not actually reflect reality. Bloke, you got a new subscriber
Video games always get a bad rap for spreading gun myths but really it was the history channel.
For real! it was especially bad with vehicles, but small arms weren't depicted with much more honesty.
'Top ten' series on combat rifles comes to mind.
I think we are confusing the history channel with the military channel but the top tens weren't good either way
Those top ten shows, yeah. Just a bunch of guys telling second hand sea stories.
Fast forward to today kids learning accurate manuals of arms in VR. Also Spec ops mission was a cool show.
My father kept saying action movies unrealistically depicted grenades as having a timed fuse, while real grenades explode on impact. I was confused. I eventually figured out the branch he served with 30 years ago excplusively uses impact grenades to this day.
Which military is this?
@@rogainegaming6924 italian Carabinieri
@@swissmilitischristilxxii3691 look it up, they absolutely exist. Hell, rifle grenades and launcher grenades are one version, but impact hand grenades are absolutely a thing. They're almost universally "concussive" or "offensive" grenades, so no fragmentation. The idea is that you throw them while assaulting an enemy position, they explode immediately, and you don't have to seek cover because they have a short wounding radius (they also disorient the enemy quite well, as they often have more explosive than a frag).
Swiss army is purely defensive in nature so it'd make sense they don't have them. Italian Carabinieri are shock troopers, so they have different doctrine. Of course, US marines use frags and they're shock troopers too, it's just a matter of difference in doctrine, but impact hand grenades are rather more useful on the charge than defending a trench.
@@bakenbeans420 it just makes sense that, if you are expected to yeet on the move, you need a bomb with less kill radius than your max yeet distance and no fuse.
we NEED a vid of Ian playing the bagpipes in a kilt
I think so too...anybody else support this idea..?
Aye, I'll support that move
Another good reason for him to live in the boonies in Arizona. Easy to shoot and play bagpipes without causing a disturbance.
I seconded that motion without prejudice.
I live in a state where certain legislators had to be informed that AR-15's do not in fact fire 30,000 round a second and that chainsaw attachments do not exist outside gears of war. You can imagine how absurd our gun laws are.
Sounds like New York and or California.
Gotta be California
Lol what? 30,000 rounds a second? Just thinking about that for literally one second can tell you that's not true.
I wouldn't even want to be near a gun that could fire 30,000 rds per second.
It would be like holding primer cord.
I'm no Ian, but I know a thing or two about broomsticks but I sometimes forget how utterly stupid some people can be when it comes to guns.
One time I got into an argument with some guy who saw Die Hard 2 once and seriously thought a 'Glock 7' was made of porcelain, super expensive, and could bypass airport metal detectors.
I shit you not.
Haha the alligator crawl Monty Python intermission music. Fascinating discussion, though! More of these when you're able!
4:44 There’s actually a scene in The Great Raid where a platoon leader has his Tommy gun jam on him when attempting to fire at a IJA soldier rushing towards his firing position.
He alerted his buddy beside him with a Garand, which proceeded to empty his remaining 3 shots into this poor sod. As the guy with the Garand ducks back to reload, the platoon leader finished clearing his jam, got back up and resumed firing.
I stumbled upon this channel by accident and I'm not really into guns but this guy knows his stuff so well and is so interesting to listen to that I just kept watching. Eventually this video popped up and wow! That was really good content, subscribed.
Same way i stumbled upon it. Haha. I owe the majority of my historical firearm knowledge to this channel.
"We're running a bit long here..."
I could enjoy an entire evening of this. I'll even bring the Scotch!
So, you're suggesting that my inability to ride a unicycle backwards over railroad tracks while plinking aspirin tablets off fence posts at 650 yards (or meters) isn't a reflection of my inability as a man or a sign of my weak character?
Absolutely
Over compensate much.
Ian and Bloke with a cameo by Lindybeige. Wow, this video was a great one.
So, funny story. My grandfather qualified with a broomstick.
When he trained, there were two rifles and maybe a hundred or two rounds. For the entire unit. They marched with broomsticks and he never qualified with a handgun. "And," he said, "we won that war."
One of my sergeants had "floor-buffer" added to my US Army Driver's license as a joke. It is still there, along with my license to drive a bus, LOL. I still have the card from 1986.
The Marine Corps also has a tradition of marksmanship. When I was qualifying, before the days of the reflex site, I could hit 7 of 10 shots at a b-mod (torso and head) target with my M16A2 iron sights from the 500 yard line firing in the prone position. I could hit 10 of 10 at the 200 yard rapiid fire with a magazine change. I was slighty better than average for my unit.
My favorite bit I heard recently was "He was in hydrostatic shock when he got to the hospital"... Uhm...
nice lindybeige cameo
Spandau!!! /sarc
Who actually thinks you could hear the ching sound the M1 makes when the empty clip gets ejected?
Well...
I know that quite a lot of people think the noise from someone firing a gun in a UA-cam video is close to reality. But it is in fact much louder, it even gave me a headache while wearing ear protection when we got ambushed during my deployment in afghanistan.
So I dont think you can actually time your attack based on that ching sound considering the noise and chaos that is going on during a firefight.
OGlettuceWEED I think a lot of soldiers use what I think are called passive earplugs, they basically allow certain ambient/low volume sounds to pass through so they can communicate and hear their surroundings clearer while muffling out louder more intense sounds like gunfire. There's electronic versions and silicone versions that work in some physical manner I haven't quite looked into.
Apparently there's even a class action lawsuit for some defective silicone kinds.
@OGlettuceWEED Modern ear defence can block noises over a certain number of decibels, it's pretty cool
Love the Monty Python "Intermission".
I was in the US Navy in the late 1970's, my total firearms training was 21 rounds from a single shot 22 LR rifle and 5 rounds from a 1911. There was no requirement to hit any sort of target, in fact the only requirement was to get the rounds to fire from the weapon.
Considering role and purpose, I suppose there's not really much point in giving ranking seamen extensive small arms training, beyond knowing which end you're supposed to point at the enemy and how to make the bullets come out. I bet you were given a whole lot more training in how to effectively operate whichever part of the boat you were assigned to. That being said, your account does tie in well with standard US military doctrine.... "Quantity has a quality all of its own".
My respect to you for doing your nation a service, regards from Australia across the seas. Cheers mate.
1974, 10 rounds of 22LR, never even saw a 1911.
"What is it with Canadians and Kilts"
I din't know either but we have more highland regiments than Scotland. I miss my kilt and the free Haggis.
“Scottish people will do anything for Scotland, except live there.” - Jeremy Clarkson.
Most popular gun myth in Poland is: Every gun once a year shoots by itself.
On its birthday?
Man, Polish closets/ gun cabinets must be a mess.
I have heard the Bren myth from an actual 1950s Bren gunner. Amazingly.
I really enjoy these formats where multiple bloggers share the stage and compare notes. Fantastic! I would like to let them know how much more interesting it is have to the different perspectives.
Another great Q&A video. Ian and The Bloke are so spot on about giving praise to the Britishmuzzleloaders channel. I do think that when it comes to Enfields (and Mausers, and Tikka T3s too!), the RifleChair is also music to our ears.
I don't pretend to know anything about this business, but surely if 'the enemy learned' to listen out for this ping, there'd be as much documentation of Axis veterans instructing their new guys as there is allied documentation, no?
Crazy talk!
Noooo, that's a well kept secret. You see, anyone who knew about it took it to his grave... After trying to charge the shooter who pinged.
Cadde Except no ear pro was in WW2, shots and cracking of rounds would mitigate hearing much and the ranges at which fought won’t even let you be able to hear the ping and trust me, no one rushed for pings, not Japanese which rushed due to orders or as ambush
I'll never understand how the mythos of the "M1 Ping costing soldiers lives" ever got started.
The average firearm creates noise around 140 Decibels (the universal measurement of how loud something is), this is equivalent to standing within 100 feet of a jet engine igniting. Now imagine firing your weapon in anger for more than 30 seconds at a time, your hearing is next to if not completely shot and you expect me to believe someone's going to hear that when they can barely understand the commands of the NCO next to them let alone their comrades beside them over the heat of battle??
People only believe this because of Saving Ryan's Privates. They seriously messed with the sound mixing and got the ping to stand out against what would have just been white noise to human ears.
@@skorpius752 Saving Private Ryan*. But yeah, who tf would hear a ping through all that
1:48 "Heeeeeello I'm Bloke on the Range. I beat it to death so you don't have to."
About 10 years ago , found 303 brit machine gun ammo for $38 per 500 rounds , in cheaper than dirt . ran it on my SML mark 2, 7" groups at 20yd. Got home used a caliper found bullet diameter was .308 Not .314 .
Had a Russian mosen migont, .310 bore , 7.62 54r round 60yd . first shot dead on , second shot 1/2" walk, 3rd 1.5" , 4th and 5th 2" to 3" walk.
Now the SML MARK 2 AT 300yd from rest, fed ammo 150gr. Stays on 3" ×4" (dinty moore stew can ) iron sights (not bad for a 2 land barrel )While still warm. Surprised me too , small arms of the world, good book. Before you go surplus.
Had a 1903 action sporterized match barrel 30 od6. 100yd dead on 2nd dead on. Recomend this one, and SML mark 2 if you can aford to feed it $28 per 20 rnd. Paid $100 for SML mark 2 full wood. Not jungle carbine walking zero been there too.
Good booze good talk
This might as well be the most insightful and beautiful video about guns on the internet. Please do that again some time
Re: the mad minute, a weird thing I found using the....wrong guns, basically, is that if you fire a wrong-handed bolt action rifle, you can actually fire loads faster, if less accurately, by just keeping your other hand on the bolt.
Everybody is wigging out about anti gun ads and I'm just wondering about the varieties of scotch.
You seem to have forgotten the Marine Corps at Bella Wood, they opened fire at 800 yards shocked the Germans when people started falling, trained out to 500 yards and I’m sure the old Marines did too, two things are taken very seriously in boot camp, marching ( close order drill) , and marksmanship,you spend one whole snapping in ( practicing shooting positions and trigger management) and in Vietnam there is a verifiable account of a Marine ( who shot expert) killing a three man crew of a RPD at over 650 yards when M16s would’ not reach, this was a regular rifle ( iron sights)
This was an awesome video! We totally need a round 2 of this.
Why have I not seen this yet? Great topics guys. This stuff irks many of us. Thank you.
Went for my daily dose of Forgotten Weapons this morning. Was NOT expecting to find Ian and another guy talking on the edge of a bed, sharing a drink. Great content, but unexpected location for the conversation.
wonder who's idea that was
Hmm, two intelligent, attractive nerds sitting on a bed, drinking Scotch and talking about their guns. Did anyone else think this was going to be porn?
Yall are seriously repressed if you cant even sit on a bed with another person and only think about sex.
Just two Bros getting drunk on a bed talking about guns. LOVE IT
I first heard of the "ping" myth from my grandfather, a First Sergeant with the First Cavalry Division who saw action from July 1950 to July 1951. His description of it has a few caveats to the one here. (Please read them all before slamming me, because the last one is important.)
1. The empty clip thrown to the ground was not meant to copy the "ping" of the M-1 Garand ejecting the clip, but rather...the clip (or the metal magazine of any other infantry weapon the US was using in Korea) hitting the ground.
2. They only used the technique in groups of two or three, in combat situations within 50 yards, and where both sides were using suppressing fire from cover. In other words, relatively static combat where one side puts rounds down range then the other side does, but neither is precisely sure where the other is.
3. You had to fire 4-6 shots each in your fire team before throwing them, while the other fire teams in the squad took up new positions...so regular US infantry practice at the time.
4. By the time his unit was using the tactic, they were facing Chinese units that had either used captured US M-1 Garands or had been issued them during the Chinese Civil War...so they knew, and were used to, the gun.
5. The tactic was used to get the enemy to either move from their cover or pop up to return fire, allowing other members of your unit to catch them in the open or, more likely, locate the enemy and call in supporting fire like mortars (my grandfather was a platoon communications officer, so maybe a bias), while still ensuring you had a few bullets left in case you saw him.
6. My grandfather was a smart cookie for an uneducated farm boy, so he wondered whether the throwing of clips was not so much a sound trick for the enemy or a coordination trick for the friendly soldiers, and the sudden ceasing of fire was the thing that got the enemy to expose themselves.
Still doesn't explain how the enemy can hear a tiny ping from 50ish yards over the ringing in their ears from the mass of weapons fire that just solidified their need for hearing aids when they are in their mid 30s. The M1 ping myth is simply preposterous when any amount of logic is applied
Samuel: Your grandfather being a _smart cookie_ reminds me of an old adage.
The definition of an INTELLECTUAL: A man or woman who has been educated BEYOND their intelligence.
"It's not about being right or wrong, it's ultimately about finding out what the truth is."
THANK YOU
This Video in the Dialogue Style really benefits from both of you having great chemistry together.
I can definitely attest to the first one, first time I fired my M14, I completely forgot ear protection... my ears were ringing for a solid hour, and for the first 30 minutes it was like I had ear plugs in, everything was muffled.
Then the ringing stops and it sounds like you're in an oil drum for a day.
Ask me how I know.
The first time that I heard of the 'ping' myth of the M1 was in 'Warlord' comic back in the 1970s. So some people believe comic books are documentaries!
Mike Grell!
Before hearing protection became common, soldiers going through basic and even just normal people who grew up shooting would almost certainly have temporary or permanent hearing damage. In an actual battle with grenades, artillery and bombs dropped from planes and tanks revving their engines and thousands of people firing at once nobody could hear a ping.
The thing with "too accurate" is hilarious - like booze too tasty or a painting too beautiful.
I absolutely love the use of the same intermission music as Monty Python.
I own a Roy Dunlap book. It i called " gunsmithing" and is amazingly detailed . It has lots of old schematics special tool building,ballistic discussions , and theories on hyper velocity rounds . He surmises we won't see great improvements in velocities until we perfect round lands,u shaped groove rifling and ceramic bore liners come into popularity. Then we may see 6000 fps cartredges and so much more.
I think a lot of stupid myths are caused by the question "why" or statement "I heard" asked to professionals or semiprofessional people who eventually just say "sure" in order to go back to what they are doing or working on.
16:04 [Lindybeige angry noises]
Remember if it is not about pointy sticks Lindy is wrong.
redteddy23 I actually have no idea what you're talking about. And I know the Spandau meme.
Dr Gumby VIKINGS!
even when its about pointy sticks its many times more like just his opinion apart from the bleedingly obvious
That myth is so old I can remember it being in the British "Battle" comics that used to come out weekly with a half dozen serialised war stories in them. Maybe that's where it started?
What Battle Picture Weekly/Battle Action/Battle? That only goes back to 1975 and Pat Mills and John Wagner of 2000AD fame, Gods thats my childhood and still got No.1 somewhere along with 2000Ad No.2... or are you thinking more like the much smaller Commado? Those go back beyound me to 1961
Awesome video gentlemen! We need more single malt gun discussions. Watched through to the end :)
12:33 nice to see lindybeige in this video, wasn't quite expecting it but it's a pleasant and welcome surprise!
Did anyone else get that Hollywood anti gun ad before this video??
Yup, good thing they are wasting thier time running those ads on pro gun channels, doubt they are changing anyones mind here.
I mean, 82% of NRA members are in support of a universal background check so...
They are so misinformed its scary.
It played the damn thing 4 times, once at the beginning and three times in the middle, interrupting the video
Dont forget, that statistic came from the left, who knows what sort of crooked math they used to come up with it. Or what misleading question they asked to gather thier data.
"Hello NRA member, Do you support a law preventing criminals from purchasing guns?"
"uh, yes"
"SEE! NRA members support universal background checks!"
Like the 'ping' myth, a lot of the nonsense about the Sherman tank also came from a soldier - unfortunately (and in the US in particular) it seems utterly forbidden to question anything a member of the armed forces ever says, much less combat veterans, and so the kinds of absurd tales the boys tell each other slowly get passed into wider circulation and nobody really questions them (or when they do, they're shouted down for it). I can say without any doubt at all that the highest concentration of gun-related bullshit I ever heard in my life originated from within my own platoon. Just because someone's trained to use something effectively, it doesn't mean they're an expert on the matter, no matter how much we might have liked to fancy otherwise.
After watching your intermission, I’m waiting to see if the guys who do your credits will be sacked midway through
You guys should do something like this more often, loved the information you brought forward.
It was an interesting video, Yes, I did watch the whole thing guys. I hadn't even heard a couple of the myths, but I had head about the M1 Garand part, and it always struck me as an odd one. Glad to know I was right and it was a box of road apples. :) Keep up the great work, love watching your vids on various and sundry.
My favorite *ping* story comes from one of my mother's exes, who claimed his father carried *two* M1s, and would just have someone pass him the other one when it was empty, since clearly carrying two 8+ pound rifles was more practical than just reloading a rifle that already does half the reload for you.
When I were lad, in the RN in the early 1970's the EFFECTIVE range of the SLR L1A1 was always given as 200 yards. Why? Because that' the range you had a chance to A see the target B Time to aim and hit it.
Gun Jesus, The Bloke, and special guest Lindybeige 1:30
Lindybeige also could make a cameo during the 2nd myth regarding the Bren's "too high" accuracy. But that would obviously have been a bit ungentlemanly.
I like that Lloyd pops up to help make the point.
Thank you Ian for recommending Bloke on the ranges channel. He's got great content.
As far as GI's getting killed when the clip ejects: It's true. I've seen it myself. *_the Longest Day_* with John Wayne.
I thought that was the cricket
You might be right. Wasn't there a scene with the M1?
Cooll Asice - the only,one I remember was the mauser bolt action sounding like the cricket friendly,forces identifier.
No, it was the way he cocked the K98k that sounded like a cricket reply, then shot the American twice, then recocked because where there's one there's more.
I had a 98K and it actually does make 4 sounds - up,back,forward, down. But it does not sound like those click toys at all.
Isn't it about that time of the year again for another holy visit from Gun Jesus?
There is a (presumably made-up) story of Kaiser Wilhelm II presenting the medals at a marksmanship contest in Switzerland (which has a militia army). Speaking to the champion:
"So, how many trained marksmen are there in Switzerland?"
"50,000, Sire!"
"Oh. And what will you do if I send an army of 100,000 against you?"
"We will all fire twice, Sire!"
I heard a similar tale about Hitler’s ambassador to Switzerland bragging that the Germans could field 3 times as many infantrymen as the Swiss, to which a Swiss general/dignitary replied that they would have to make sure each soldier got three rounds
Excellent choice of Whiskies!
My best friend died back in the 00s and left me his collection of aged whiskies, including 3 collectors' editions of Glenrothes. They've all gone now, but they were phenomenal while they lasted;).
I love the quick Lindybeige cameo...three UA-cam legends all in one video