Hey Ian I'm huge fan, I just joined the Army a few months ago and I'm finishing up AIT/OSUT at Fort Benning and there's at least half a dozen guys in my platoon alone who are also huge fans of yours. When we finally get personal/prep time at the end of the night we generally all sit in a circle while we clean our M4A1's (what a pain. lol) and talk about our favorite videos on your channel! Keep up the awesome work! Cav scouts out!
the question about the gloves brought to mind an old practice with southern gunsmiths.there are some people who have for some reason a more acidic sweat.in the south, these people are known to have poison hands. so in the process of building a southern long rifle, on a humid day the gunsmith would rub his hands up and down the barrel over a period of hours or days to brown the barrel. the process of browning a barrel is a controlled rusting . the barrels of long rifles and fowlers were made from wrought iron.when wrought iron first rusts, it develops a patina that protects the iron from serious rust damage. that is why we brown a barrel in the first place. just an interesting tidbit to mull over.thanx for the video.as I've said before.you are a natural storyteller. you bring the times and places alive with the firearms as props.good job
It's not important, but you might be interested to know that working with medieval manuscripts is done gloveless for the same reasons you allude to, the risk of catastrophic damage due to loos of dexterity/slippery fingers is way greater than the risk of clean hands on the page. The one case where this does not apply is some of the illuminated books with very toxic pigments in them, or pages where there's been serious damage done to the membrane by acidic inks (green is bad news) Great videos!
Aaron Macks Historical European Martial Arts. Sword fighting on a whole and a very large chunk of that knowledge comes from very old books, fechtbooks as they're called.
I liked the shout out to those who took a revolutionary or great design and did the hard work of tooling up and getting it produced while maintaining the original designers vision.
Speaking of field modifications! I read recently about an armourer in the Rhodesian Bush War, a bloke called Phil Morgan, who took a soviet RPD machinegun and chopped the barrel down, added a foregrip, chopped the buttstock off and reversed the recoil feed mechanism to make a drum-fed 7.62mm CQC weapon. So there you, that's a thing that happened once.
Ian, Thanks for the Rollin White background about the paper cartridge breechloading pistol he was trying to develop. I had never heard about that before so you really added to my knowledge. Now I understand why Sam Colt did not use it.
Concerning gloves, I had the chance to shake Ian's hand in the hot desert and found the real reason he doesn't wear gloves. Ian does not perspire sweat, rather he exudes a light oily substance. I, of course, immediately took a sample to a lab at the university and discovered it was remarkably similar to Crisco vegetable oil, which, as we all know, is an miracle firearm cleaner, lubricant, and preservative.
Ian, I wanted to address your comment about the US service pistol for a moment. Albeit a super tiny niche use amongst the military, the Coast Guard relies heavily on pistols when boarding vessels. Most of the boarding team is armed only with pistols. Both getting to and on the other vessel as well as the INCREDIBLY tight quarters inside the vessel makes any use of a long gun somewhere between difficult to impractical. Of course it doesn't change the premise that basically any modern pistol is fine as long as it meets basic requirements for reliability and durability.
the switch from .30-06 to .308 (7.62x51) was because having a shorter cartridge was better for feeding self loading and automatic rifles, and allowed for smaller actions, while still retaining comparable ballistic characteristics to the 06. propellants had progressed enough at the time that the longer cartridge wasn't needed to get the bullet moving at the same speed. this leads to gun design between "long action" and "short action". in an automatic, a shorter case means shorter travel distance in the bokt cycle, meaning faster inherrent rate of fire. also at the time, .308 was actually more accurate than 06, though this is much less of a case nowadays.
I recently bought a Swiss Luger in almost perfect condition. The import mark was lasered onto the muzzle by my local frequented shop. The import company told them the muzzle marks were insufficient in their eyes and to mark them again in somewhere more obvious, but not before I was out the door with mine. I guess only 2 were sold in that condition. It's probably my favorite gun.
One thing that might not be widely known: electric primers are incredibly common, but not in small arms. Nearly everything that is in medium caliber cannon, particularly ammunition for gatling guns.My recollection is that the electric primers are more controllable and more reliable, particularly when you're trying to pump out 110 rounds per second a la project vulcan. Interesting historical connection: Johnson was one of the original people behind project vulcan. He managed to get an original gatling gun to pump out ~4500 shots per minute by hooking it to an electric motor. This was done in the early part of the project, back in the 50's. *edit* I just checked the MSDS for primers. They're using DDNP and BKNO3, pretty much see spot run for the choice of energetic materials without using metal based primaries. there's no reason why an electric primer would be much more expensive (once mass production was figured out) than a percussion primer, and you likely would also be able to ignite it via percussion as well. The only question is to how to mass manufacture the primer in such a way as to make it cost effective.
When it comes to the funky cartridge types; although it's highly unlikely anyone outside of Russia has ever seen them in person, have you by chance heard of the 7.62x42mm SP-4? This was a Soviet design for a quiet and non-flashing cartridge, essentially you have a metal pistol between the powder and the bullet, the powder ignition shoves the piston forward, and the piston rams against the bullet and propels it out the barrel while keeping the blast of the explosion completely sealed inside the case. The inefficiency of the design results in velocities comparable to a .22 short, but it produces no muzzle flash and almost no escaped noise.
Ian I love your videos, I learn more from listening to you than I do in any of my college classes, unfortunately fire arms history probably isn't of much practical use to a biologist. I'll definitely be contributing to your patreon. keep up the great work!
The reason to go to the 7.62mm/51mm from the .30'06 was strongly economic so far as I can see. The .308 shaves 12mm of brass off of the case without losing ballistic performance which adds up to a huge savings in copper which means more bullets can be made. A smaller bullet also saves in transportation and storage costs. While shooters tend to obsess about the excellent performance of the .30'06, they tend to forget the enormous price Uncle Sam paid in resources for that big ol' bullet. The .308 helped correct that. In other words, the .308 is the Bean-Counter's .30'06. Timing was also favorable for this change to happen because it had been decided in the early 1950s that the guns of WW2 were not really compatible with the new directions the US Military was taking. They were already going to dump the Garand, BAR, and M1919 for the new wonder-duo of the M14 and M60, and as Ian mentions earlier in the video, a good time to change bullets is when one is going to change guns anyway. Also of minor consideration is that the 1950s was also when the US had a lot of new client states begging for Uncle Sam to arm them. Thus, the .30'06-era weapons would not be going to waste. The US needed lots of decent guns for the Germans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and Banana Republics to name a few, and so it was an ideal situation. The US could acquire new guns firing a cheaper bullet while the old weaponry would help greatly improve the arsenals of "friendly" powers all over the globe. It is a little easier to adopt whole new weapon systems when one feels they have a good way to get rid of the old ones without having to deal with scrapping. Apologies for the long post but it is hard to distill this all down.
Idk i feel like the M1A and the M1 garand i was shooting at my local store/range weren't very comparable in motivation those 30-06s were a whole lot more interested in effing up whatever was down range over the more mild mannered .308
@@royperkins3851 Right the 7 x 43 aka .280 had enormous potential as a true intermediate cartridge but the 7.62 x 51 with no potential was forced on the West. Thanks US and later for the anemic 5.56.
I believe that one other factor in the scarcity of Arisaka and Nambu ammo is that a major portion of captured rounds went into the ocean, and was thus not available later sale as surplus.
About rounded versus pointed pistol bullets there is another MAJOR reason that rounded bullets are typically used. Rounded bullets maintain their path through solids and liquids like flesh, bone and body fluids far better than do pointed bullets. We are now used to thinking of bullet upset as being a good thing, because a high speed bullet may then transfer its energy to the target and inflict additional damage rather than punching through cleanly. Pistol bullets however have much less energy to waste, and this is a quality of pistols that is generally consistent no matter how advanced your technology, because a pistol must be controllable when braced in the hand rather than against the shoulder, and also, very importantly, in a light weapon weighing less than half of what a rifle will weigh. To be effective, and also, as a separate issue, to be consistent in a way that causes users to rely on what is normally an emergency weapon, a pistol and its bullet must have a fair amount of "overpenetration." A normal rounded nose pistol bullet can achieve this, but a pointed bullet of comparable speed, weight and velocity often would not. To achieve an acceptable level of recoil a pointed pistol bullet must be very small, and it must be driven at rather high velocities which are difficult to achieve in a pistol with the normal technologies used in the industry. The FN 5.7mm round for example, has a case covered with a special coating to lubricate it, because the comparatively high pressures used to achieve its velocity typically cause jams in a pistol absent the coating. The problems continue because a small and high velocity bullet used in a pistol tends to disintegrate so quickly upon hitting a target that it can become ineffective. This at least is not an insurmountable problem, but such bullets are normally more expensive, and in the sizes and weights appropriate to a pistol, normally have to be designed specifically for that application. If pistols were commonly used as primary weapons by the military, pointed pistol bullets would probably have become common by now. Since pistols are not used in this way however, pointed pistol bullets have never come into vogue, and this is not only because pistols are not heavily modernized, but also because pistols are commonly used as concealable weapons. The Soviet PSM was designed as a concealed weapon with a pointed bullet, and while it achieved its size role admirably, the pointed bullet frequently performs weakly when it is driven at the speed practically achievable in so small a gun, which has a barrel length much shorter than the FN or H&K service pistols. In post-Soviet Russia the 5.45x18 has developed a reputation of having inconsistent or weak stopping power with its pointed armor-piercing bullet holding together, but often failing to tumble enough to produce a satisfactory wound. Generally speaking, a slower and heavier bullet would have a superior effect on an unarmored target. Since body armor is now quite prevalent, Russian design now tends toward the use of large light bullets which go fast and have an armor piercing core that detaches when hitting an armored target.
Love your informative videos Ian, very well done. I see you have real passion for these great firearms. Please keep up the great work you do. Just wish UK gun laws were as nice and understanding as US laws. Can't even have a 22lr handgun over here.! Great work and again love your vids!!!!
The length of the 30 06 was shortened to make the 308 for many reasons. A shorter action is handier, a tad faster, and uses less material. The 308 rounds take up less space. The 308 rounds uses less brass and brass can be a strategic material in short supply which is why the Russians and others use steel. The 06 is also overbore for guns with normal barrel lengths which is a fancy way of saying they had a significant amount of empty space that wasn't being used. You either needed a longer barrel & a heavier bullet or a larger caliber to take full advantage of the space inside the case. For various reasons rifles with a barrel a yard long didn't catch on and the bullet weight went from 190 to 150 grains if I recall correctly. That reduced recoil which helped troops flinch less and hit more often.
Thanks for putting Rollin White's contribution into context. You were most polite about the Patent Office decision, which would now seem ridiculous. I think a modern invention would need to be able to work,or at least have a probability of being made to work, before a patent could be granted.
US patents were at one time only granted when accompanied with a working design, but that principle was abandoned long ago. Sadly, bad patents have become far more common in recent decades, enabling the growing business of non-practicing entities, or patent trolls. Today, it's possible to get a patent on a business method or an algorithm, not just a mechanical design.
You mentioned the possibility of dropping a gun if you're wearing cotton gloves. This is actually a real concern even when handling paper. When handling old paper, people I've seen do not wear any gloves, this is because we are much clumsier with gloves and may tear the paper.
The modern example of modified guns include converting PKT tank machine guns into the infantry role so they look like PKM by adding the stock, the trigger, bipod anf crude iron sights. Very similar way to U.S. military men did in WW2.
The volume of a sphere is 4/3 pi by radius cubed, while the volume of a cone is 1/3 py by height by radius squared. If height is equal to radius, and we only have half a sphere, then it becomes evident that a hemisphere is twice the volume of its inscribed cone.
About funky rounds, there was a german aircraft machine gun MG131 wich used electrical primers fot it's ammo. But if i remember it correctly, ammo was converted to standart primers at the end of WWII and that 13mm machine guns were used in volksturm as a handheld machine guns.
Yep. Damn I love the "stinger". Musta surprised/scared the fuck out of the Japanese. Hahaha i've seen some vids of one that someone built and fired a few years back...absolutely insane!!
Actually the platform finds its way into the hands of ISIS and Al Nusra a ton more than you'd expect. They don't use the rifles as a novelty, they must have a ton of .223 ammo out there. Likely some of it is captured U.S. armament.
Odysseus apologies, my mind slipped as at the time I was dealing with a couple issues if I recall properly. The truth is that an AR-15 is rarely used in mass-shootings in America, all rifles less than 30% of the time. I have no idea about overseas terrorism, but with the relative simplicity and cheapness of the AK-47 there is a reason it is the "typical bad guy gun". However, the .223 round is a standard NATO round, found in the 5.56. My Ruger fires both (pressure difference, the 5.56 has a higher pressure). I wouldn't find it that strange for them to use it.
To add to the descussion of the pan fed magazine, Fighter planes during WWI with foster mounted Lewis machine guns had larger 97 round pan mags, the Nieuport 10 11 and 16 came standard with a foster mounted lewis with this configuration, the D.H.2 had a nose mounted Lewis, and the Nieuport 17 was often field modified to fit a foster mounted lewis, the S.E.5 also came standard with a foster mounted Lewis. Issue was besides the fact the Lewis being a open bolt machine gun and could not be synchronized, the belt fed guns could be loaded up to 500 rounds continuous, once the Lewis 97 round pan drum ran empty you had to fly a machine in a combat situation while at the same time unlocking a machine gun from its mounts and discarding a empty pan mag and then loading a fully loaded pan mag properly on a Lewis gun, i would imagine this was quite the stressful and frustrating task in a high pressure combat situation in the cockpit of a sometimes responsive and sensitive aircraft.
nice vid again, Ian! since you were wondering, the "ai" in Saive is pronounced as in "bet" in English. "Dieudonné" is a quaint french name meaning "Godgiven", it is pronounced something like ""Deeuhdonnay"
The development program for the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge was intended to replace previous generations of rifle cartridges in US and foreign service and unify all of them under one standard "Well its good enough" cartridge. The 7.62x51mm did everything the previous rounds did, without needing to be hilariously long or heavy. This allowed a soldier to carry smaller magazines for his new rifle, which allowed him to carry more ammo, allowing him to potentially be able to put more rounds downrange. The only cartridge that potentially could do what the 7.62x51mm NATO round could do was the 7.5x54mm French round, which was a bit lighter than the 7.62x51mm NATO while being a tad longer, however the French had had their flirting with long rifle cartridges with the 8mm Lebel. Biggest advantage of 7.62x51mm NATO wasn't any improvement in terms of performance, if anything it may be slightly inferior to these cartridges, however the nature of infantry small arms development in the West back then and now really doesn't have a role for cartridges with such weight and range like .30-06, 7.92x57mm, etc. NATO kinda did good early on with standardizing, also known as the US taking advantage of post-time war industry and dumping stuff on people, a series of cartridges, gun types, etc.
On gloves: libraries with old books--manuscript or early printed books--typically do not require gloves. Animal skin and early papers are very resistant to grease and acids from hands; wearing gloves makes you clumsy and more likely to damage the book mechanically by mishandling. I've handled manuscripts that are a thousand years old, and not been asked to wear gloves. This changes a bit for the 19th century, when you start getting industrially made paper, which deteriorates badly and is sensitive to the acids in skin oils. With cheap 19th c. newspapers, gloves might be important; with priceless medieval manuscripts, if you can handle it, you do so with your bare fingertips.
Qsy was too short In the United States just the Smith and Wesson .22 short black powder cartridge. The .44 Henry Flat rimfire and Spenser .56-56 black powder rimfire came a little later. The pinfire had a European patant on it as did the system that shotgun shells became based on. French design.
Ammunition for WW2 Japanese military arms is hand loaded quite a bit now. Midway USA really got successful by contracting with manufacturers to make reloading components for these cartridges in the 70s and 80s. Making those deals right turned Midway from a two man shop in the middle of nowhere to a multi million dollar business (2020 sales will probably total well over $500 million).
Ian the Glove question to wear or not comes down to the preservation method being used. Most collectors use OIL and no gloves are wanted or needed. The guns are periodically re oiled. . Museums like to use WAX for long term. Warm hands melt the wax layer so gloves are worn to protect the WAX. The question of gloves and paper goods is a means of keeping dirt and the natural skin oils off the paper.
I own a Chicom SKS, which I prize because of it`s accuracy and personal sentiment. Not my favorite firearm, by a long shot. A few years ago, I brought it over to a disabled friend who was looking around for a new rifle and I thought he might consider purchasing an SKS because of the price and availability. This guy, unknown to me, had been taking a whole slew of prescription drugs because of the chronic pain he was experiencing. I let him fondle my rifle as long as he wanted to. I suggested we go out and shoot sometime. Anyway, about 2 weeks later, I noticed that the rifle had gotten some very bad pitting on the receiver and barrel. Evidently, his hands and skin were exuding some nasty drug residue, which attacked the bluing on the rifle. So, watch out who handles your firearms.
This video made me look up "Tales of the Gun" (Ian's dad is in episode 26, it's on DailyMotion) and it was hilarious scrubbing through the video because I didn't even need the nametag to pick out which guy it was, just saw a thumbnail of a guy with an even bigger moustache
Every time I see the bookshelf in the background, I remember that I need to replace my copy of _The Sword and the Shield_, then forget it again by the time the video is over. This time I'll be smart and pause it long enough to go order one.
The biggest reason for the 7.62x51 was that the US Army refused to use a non .30 caliber round after WWII but every one of the NATO allies wanted something intermediate - see the .280 British for example. So they took .30-06 and made it "shorter & lighter" and rammed it down Europe's throat until they got to Vietnam, realized that the 7.62 wasn't worth the weight when compared to the .223. Your comments on the FAL in it's original form reflects this. The FAL in 7mm NATO would have been so much better than anything the US issued post WWII.
The US shoving things down people's throat it was. The 7.5 French was sitting there, 30cal, easier on the soldier, and the US decided to reinvent the wheel.
About the gloves Ian. There actually is quite some discussion in the academic world if using gloves to handle very old texts or artefacts is a good thing or not. I as a Dutch history student handled some medieval Dutch texts myself, without gloves. Why? Well because the gloves reduce your dexterity and make it more likely that you accidentally make a tear in the parchment. Further those gloves also increase the chance that you accidentally put dirt onto the texts which sits on the gloves. Finally and the biggest reason against them is the chance that you go over the text with cloves and damage the pigments or inks from the parchment and thus damage the text. I am defiantly in the non gloves side of the debate. Just wash your hands and I really mean wash them before handling, think and you will be fine.
What I've learned, the main reason to wear gloves is because of the oils secreted from our fingers can act as an acid on some materials, like cloth, metal and wood (and thus paper). Medieval texts were mostly made of vellum, which is calf skin. Not wearing gloves while handling those may actually be good. So it depends completely on the material. And of course, it's always a compromise. Do I handle this small wooden artifact with gloves and risk to drop it and thus damage it, or do I very carefully handle it without gloves for increased grip and dexterity? It all depends on the handler, I think.
I think pistols should move to higher velocity/pointed rounds. For those chosen few of us that can make long shots with pistols. I've got a .22 tcm I can shoot a 100 yard target with all day long. The same is manageable with a .45 just have to know how far to hold over.
Talking modifications you can fit the 7.62 Bren Magazine's to a FAL with some modifications to the spring. I believe it was done during the Falklands conflict.
Some things I've heard of and wonder if we'll get to see a video on are the various Soviet guns using "moon ammo" -special cartridges that contain the gasses and don't make sound, and bullets like roofing nails for shooting underwater; and a V.I.P. personal defense weapon fitted to a fake eyeglass case. I don't remember where I read of the latter. It looked like the top half of a modern pistol and allegedly used bizarre ammo on purpose so that if it were stolen it would be of limited utility.
My choice of program to save/modify would be the EM-2. Scope-sighted bullpup with an intermediate cartridge (which IIRC was also considered for the FAL). Said intermediate cartridge's ballistics were then rediscovered by the US military after it became dissatisfied with the 5.56 in Afghanistan. I know you've given the EM-2 a dressing down for the complexity of its manufacture, but the overall concept is a very modern one, and if any of the developers are still alive I think they are owed an apology - at the very least, they are owed a "You were right". As for the 7.62, that's no more than a somewhat uprated .300 Savage; almost exactly the same size (though not chamber-compatible, naturally) and capable of matching .30-06 ballistics as loaded (though the Savage was stretched to its limits to do that while the .308 Winchester/7.62 NATO is not). Seems they did a lot of development work just to end up more or less with a cartridge that had been around for years.
I was going to post almost exactly the same thing about the EM-2, but thought I'd better check to see if anyone had already done so, and you have, so I won't. Yours is probably better than mine would have been anyway! Kudos to you sir
Also while its an amusing thought, development of 7.62x51mm NATO helped spark development of 5.56x45mm. British near-adoption of the .280 round, which was inferior to the Soviet produced 7.62x39mm round (In terms of weight and size, a 30-round AKM mag weighing as much as a 20-round .280 mag), would have probably put us in the same boat, ironically, as the Soviets were when they began to encounter the 5.56x45mm round against their 7.62x39mm AKs in Vietnam. The Soviets found the US round to be good enough they developed the 5.45x39mm round and developed the AK-74 series after them. We did get our intermediate cartridge FAL though in the FN CAL, which was later developed into the FN FNC and the Swedish Ak5.
the difference between the 30-06 and the 7.62nato is that you can (if you do reloading) you can load 5 cases of 7.62nato vs. 4 cases of 30-06 with the same volume of powder and it also only loses 200fps for that 1/4 case less of powder, not bad, also it made the other soon to be nato countries think that we were willing to give up something as part of the agreement (we really just kept the 30-06 and made it more modern by decreasing its cost of production because guns that shot 7.62nato were .5" shorter in the receiver, mag, and bolt so you were using less metal to make a gun and you were also making 1 extra round because of the less powder. so yes 7.62nato is a better round.
what are your thoughts on the h & k g11, would you find it feasibe for the french army to substitute its famas gun for g11's? (taking into account that more development would be required to optimize and adapt the g11 to modern day standards )
Caseless ammunition just doesn't have much of a future. The 4.73x33mm G11 ammo had problems with impact & abrasion resistance, and it's much less moisture resistant than brass ammo. Even if all these problems were magically solved by modern materials science (and they haven't been), you still have the two fundamental flaws of caseless ammunition to deal with: the round dumps tremendous heat straight into the chamber, and it does nothing to seal the breech from gas cutting. In contrast, the brass case on standard centerfire ammunition acts as a heat sink and expands to seal the breech. Polymer cased ammo is even better, as it insulates the chamber, and certain types of polymer cases (such as the LSAT) have a section that pops out a small flap into the chamber throat to help seal the breech.
Actually, Modern Caseless ammunition's are more impact and moisture resistant. And as for the G11, it was apparently good enough that the only reasons the German military didn't adopt it was, A) its incompatibility with the NATO standard ammunition (Other nations were iffy on adopting it) , and B) the titanic costs of the German reunification following the fall of the USSR.
SacoreyRugger Modern being Early 90's as opposed to that developed in the 60's. The rounds developed for the G11 got around the heat issue by using a propellant with a higher ignition temperature for instance. Current development on caseless weapons is being done by the United States, though information on that is limited. Though I do believe its using the same ammunition.
I sometime pity old Rollin White. If he hadn't sold S&W an exclusive license, he could have cleaned up during the ACW. Instead, S7W snookered him into bearing the cost of defending the patent against infringement.
Hafa Adai Ian, Greetings from Saipan! haha I actually found the story of your father very ironic. I moved here 2 years ago, and have cursed not being able to Reasonably own firearms here. So I ended up mostly watching videos, and found your channel because of it. Do you plan on visiting again in the future? Would love to buy you a drink if you do. I actually always found how little interest in WW2 History, and "Respect" for things left over from the war there is here. Its funny how things so collectable in the states has so little value here - Really makes you think. Anyways thanks for the hours of entertainment! Channel has helped keep my busy.
good video but ?? wasn't there a 1919 Browning 30ca in serves with a but shock and bipod I was thinking the 82nd and the 101 first used them ??? or I'm I just thinking of some thing else ????
It turns out the powder burns better if the powder is ignited at the front of the case. They did some experiments by making test runs of ammo with a metal tube to direct the primer discharge to the front of the case. These work better but are impractical to make for obvious reasons. Failing that a short fat case works best. Oh well.
Ian, my thoughts on the HMS trials are that the military or at least the army will go to the Glock 19 as its been adopted by some US SOF units as the standard sidearm there, many are already made in the US, easy of use for cleaning and firing, plus other NATO countries Glock 17s as the standard sidearm.
I can't help but think of two points on the point about the cartridge. First one, though the comment relates to the trade offs, sacrifices made to get more speed out of jets. The same is true of cartridges. If you're offering such a small benefit to the user, at a great sacrifice, it might not be worth it in the long run. I would also suggest that in the scope of the military buyer, user, if you did go to an entirely new and unique system, it costs them in time. Time to get everyone certified on the new tech and the implications thereof. Second point, I'd say that there's something in being too experimental. Unfortunately, if your idea is great and workable, but it's different, say, Metal Storm with stacked electrically fired projectiles, it's just as much a failure as a product which could have never worked, as the conical bore revolver cylinders were. Metal Storm has some deeply interesting and highly probable scenarios it would work wonders in. Say, aircraft weapon pods, naval vessels, etc. That being said, unfortunately as I said, it seems to just as much a failure as something that would have never worked.
Pistols are more important for stability operations. One may coordinate with local figures, and carry a pistol, but carrying a rifle in their house or office would not be acceptable.
Under import marks. I have a Westinghouse manufactured Mosin Nagant 91 that has an import mark. I would love to know where that weapon has been. Was it one of the weapons that sold to the Czar or kept in storage and sent to the Fins? How did it get into Russian hands so it could be shipped here?
Most likely it was shipped to Russia in 1915 or thereabouts, then bought or captured by the Finns, and then surplussed by Finland and bought by an American importer.
could you do a video on the remington 51? it seems like a cool mechanism that is a hybrid between a short recoil and a delayed blowback and I have yet to find a video that does a good job explaining it
Ian have you ever gotten a chance to handle the FN FNC? According to what I see most of the time it's a 5.56 version of the FN FAL, and seems like something you'd be interested in.
Hey Ian I'm huge fan, I just joined the Army a few months ago and I'm finishing up AIT/OSUT at Fort Benning and there's at least half a dozen guys in my platoon alone who are also huge fans of yours.
When we finally get personal/prep time at the end of the night we generally all sit in a circle while we clean our M4A1's (what a pain. lol) and talk about our favorite videos on your channel!
Keep up the awesome work!
Cav scouts out!
Awesome! :)
I learn so much watching this channel.... thank you for all the great information!
the question about the gloves brought to mind an old practice with southern gunsmiths.there are some people who have for some reason a more acidic sweat.in the south, these people are known to have poison hands. so in the process of building a southern long rifle, on a humid day the gunsmith would rub his hands up and down the barrel over a period of hours or days to brown the barrel. the process of browning a barrel is a controlled rusting . the barrels of long rifles and fowlers were made from wrought iron.when wrought iron first rusts, it develops a patina that protects the iron from serious rust damage. that is why we brown a barrel in the first place. just an interesting tidbit to mull over.thanx for the video.as I've said before.you are a natural storyteller. you bring the times and places alive with the firearms as props.good job
It's not important, but you might be interested to know that working with medieval manuscripts is done gloveless for the same reasons you allude to, the risk of catastrophic damage due to loos of dexterity/slippery fingers is way greater than the risk of clean hands on the page. The one case where this does not apply is some of the illuminated books with very toxic pigments in them, or pages where there's been serious damage done to the membrane by acidic inks (green is bad news)
Great videos!
Interesting - thanks!
Well, I'll be, as a HEMA student, this is something I wouldn't know about.
Guess it's time to pick up the history studies at uni again.
There Be Game HEMA? There's an acronym I don't know
Aaron Macks Historical European Martial Arts. Sword fighting on a whole and a very large chunk of that knowledge comes from very old books, fechtbooks as they're called.
Could you talk about some of the pigments, green especially since the only green I'm thinking of is Paris green, which isn't that old. (1800s)
I liked the shout out to those who took a revolutionary or great design and did the hard work of tooling up and getting it produced while maintaining the original designers vision.
Speaking of field modifications! I read recently about an armourer in the Rhodesian Bush War, a bloke called Phil Morgan, who took a soviet RPD machinegun and chopped the barrel down, added a foregrip, chopped the buttstock off and reversed the recoil feed mechanism to make a drum-fed 7.62mm CQC weapon. So there you, that's a thing that happened once.
He was a Marine and fought at Iwo Jima. He was mentioned in E.B. Sledge's book, With the Old Breed.
Great book.
8:50 I guess you could say a certain magazine design didn't pan out...
You shut your mouth
Ouch
You can sure *dish* it out...😊
Ian, Thanks for the Rollin White background about the paper cartridge breechloading pistol he was trying to develop. I had never heard about that before so you really added to my knowledge. Now I understand why Sam Colt did not use it.
Concerning gloves, I had the chance to shake Ian's hand in the hot desert and found the real reason he doesn't wear gloves. Ian does not perspire sweat, rather he exudes a light oily substance. I, of course, immediately took a sample to a lab at the university and discovered it was remarkably similar to Crisco vegetable oil, which, as we all know, is an miracle firearm cleaner, lubricant, and preservative.
It's actually Ballistol, a truly miracle substance.
Probably Cosmoline United States Military Standard MIL-C-11796C Class 3 .
Ian, have you ever Forgotten the weapon you were going to talk about?
As always, you make the history of firearms interesting. The passion you have shows through your video's. Thanks for the lesson.
Ian, I wanted to address your comment about the US service pistol for a moment. Albeit a super tiny niche use amongst the military, the Coast Guard relies heavily on pistols when boarding vessels. Most of the boarding team is armed only with pistols. Both getting to and on the other vessel as well as the INCREDIBLY tight quarters inside the vessel makes any use of a long gun somewhere between difficult to impractical. Of course it doesn't change the premise that basically any modern pistol is fine as long as it meets basic requirements for reliability and durability.
I could listen to you for hours, Ian. Such a wealth of knowledge. I always look forward to your next video. You should have your own tv show.
the switch from .30-06 to .308 (7.62x51) was because having a shorter cartridge was better for feeding self loading and automatic rifles, and allowed for smaller actions, while still retaining comparable ballistic characteristics to the 06. propellants had progressed enough at the time that the longer cartridge wasn't needed to get the bullet moving at the same speed. this leads to gun design between "long action" and "short action". in an automatic, a shorter case means shorter travel distance in the bokt cycle, meaning faster inherrent rate of fire. also at the time, .308 was actually more accurate than 06, though this is much less of a case nowadays.
I recently bought a Swiss Luger in almost perfect condition. The import mark was lasered onto the muzzle by my local frequented shop. The import company told them the muzzle marks were insufficient in their eyes and to mark them again in somewhere more obvious, but not before I was out the door with mine. I guess only 2 were sold in that condition. It's probably my favorite gun.
One thing that might not be widely known: electric primers are incredibly common, but not in small arms. Nearly everything that is in medium caliber cannon, particularly ammunition for gatling guns.My recollection is that the electric primers are more controllable and more reliable, particularly when you're trying to pump out 110 rounds per second a la project vulcan.
Interesting historical connection: Johnson was one of the original people behind project vulcan. He managed to get an original gatling gun to pump out ~4500 shots per minute by hooking it to an electric motor. This was done in the early part of the project, back in the 50's.
*edit*
I just checked the MSDS for primers. They're using DDNP and BKNO3, pretty much see spot run for the choice of energetic materials without using metal based primaries. there's no reason why an electric primer would be much more expensive (once mass production was figured out) than a percussion primer, and you likely would also be able to ignite it via percussion as well. The only question is to how to mass manufacture the primer in such a way as to make it cost effective.
When it comes to the funky cartridge types; although it's highly unlikely anyone outside of Russia has ever seen them in person, have you by chance heard of the 7.62x42mm SP-4? This was a Soviet design for a quiet and non-flashing cartridge, essentially you have a metal pistol between the powder and the bullet, the powder ignition shoves the piston forward, and the piston rams against the bullet and propels it out the barrel while keeping the blast of the explosion completely sealed inside the case. The inefficiency of the design results in velocities comparable to a .22 short, but it produces no muzzle flash and almost no escaped noise.
or the underwater "needle" cartridge Russia made....
toomanyaccounts
Yep the HK P11, also the APS Used 5.66×39mm MPS round not the 7.62x42SP-4.....
toomanyaccounts
true ;)
Ian I love your videos, I learn more from listening to you than I do in any of my college classes, unfortunately fire arms history probably isn't of much practical use to a biologist. I'll definitely be contributing to your patreon. keep up the great work!
The reason to go to the 7.62mm/51mm from the .30'06 was strongly economic so far as I can see. The .308 shaves 12mm of brass off of the case without losing ballistic performance which adds up to a huge savings in copper which means more bullets can be made. A smaller bullet also saves in transportation and storage costs. While shooters tend to obsess about the excellent performance of the .30'06, they tend to forget the enormous price Uncle Sam paid in resources for that big ol' bullet. The .308 helped correct that. In other words, the .308 is the Bean-Counter's .30'06.
Timing was also favorable for this change to happen because it had been decided in the early 1950s that the guns of WW2 were not really compatible with the new directions the US Military was taking. They were already going to dump the Garand, BAR, and M1919 for the new wonder-duo of the M14 and M60, and as Ian mentions earlier in the video, a good time to change bullets is when one is going to change guns anyway.
Also of minor consideration is that the 1950s was also when the US had a lot of new client states begging for Uncle Sam to arm them. Thus, the .30'06-era weapons would not be going to waste. The US needed lots of decent guns for the Germans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and Banana Republics to name a few, and so it was an ideal situation. The US could acquire new guns firing a cheaper bullet while the old weaponry would help greatly improve the arsenals of "friendly" powers all over the globe. It is a little easier to adopt whole new weapon systems when one feels they have a good way to get rid of the old ones without having to deal with scrapping.
Apologies for the long post but it is hard to distill this all down.
they should have shaved a little more and made the 7.62x43 british the nato cartridge and both the m-14 and m-60 probably fixed the control problems!
Idk i feel like the M1A and the M1 garand i was shooting at my local store/range weren't very comparable in motivation those 30-06s were a whole lot more interested in effing up whatever was down range over the more mild mannered .308
@@royperkins3851 Right the 7 x 43 aka .280 had enormous potential as a true intermediate cartridge but the 7.62 x 51 with no potential was forced on the West. Thanks US and later for the anemic 5.56.
Absolutely phenomenal take. No need to apologize
Thanks Ian - I always feel I just took a college level course in firearms history when I get done watching these.
I believe that one other factor in the scarcity of Arisaka and Nambu ammo is that a major portion of captured rounds went into the ocean, and was thus not available later sale as surplus.
Your take on service pistols is spot on.
About rounded versus pointed pistol bullets there is another MAJOR reason that rounded bullets are typically used. Rounded bullets maintain their path through solids and liquids like flesh, bone and body fluids far better than do pointed bullets.
We are now used to thinking of bullet upset as being a good thing, because a high speed bullet may then transfer its energy to the target and inflict additional damage rather than punching through cleanly. Pistol bullets however have much less energy to waste, and this is a quality of pistols that is generally consistent no matter how advanced your technology, because a pistol must be controllable when braced in the hand rather than against the shoulder, and also, very importantly, in a light weapon weighing less than half of what a rifle will weigh. To be effective, and also, as a separate issue, to be consistent in a way that causes users to rely on what is normally an emergency weapon, a pistol and its bullet must have a fair amount of "overpenetration." A normal rounded nose pistol bullet can achieve this, but a pointed bullet of comparable speed, weight and velocity often would not.
To achieve an acceptable level of recoil a pointed pistol bullet must be very small, and it must be driven at rather high velocities which are difficult to achieve in a pistol with the normal technologies used in the industry. The FN 5.7mm round for example, has a case covered with a special coating to lubricate it, because the comparatively high pressures used to achieve its velocity typically cause jams in a pistol absent the coating.
The problems continue because a small and high velocity bullet used in a pistol tends to disintegrate so quickly upon hitting a target that it can become ineffective. This at least is not an insurmountable problem, but such bullets are normally more expensive, and in the sizes and weights appropriate to a pistol, normally have to be designed specifically for that application.
If pistols were commonly used as primary weapons by the military, pointed pistol bullets would probably have become common by now. Since pistols are not used in this way however, pointed pistol bullets have never come into vogue, and this is not only because pistols are not heavily modernized, but also because pistols are commonly used as concealable weapons.
The Soviet PSM was designed as a concealed weapon with a pointed bullet, and while it achieved its size role admirably, the pointed bullet frequently performs weakly when it is driven at the speed practically achievable in so small a gun, which has a barrel length much shorter than the FN or H&K service pistols. In post-Soviet Russia the 5.45x18 has developed a reputation of having inconsistent or weak stopping power with its pointed armor-piercing bullet holding together, but often failing to tumble enough to produce a satisfactory wound. Generally speaking, a slower and heavier bullet would have a superior effect on an unarmored target. Since body armor is now quite prevalent, Russian design now tends toward the use of large light bullets which go fast and have an armor piercing core that detaches when hitting an armored target.
It’s incredibly that not only do you have a gewehr 41 but a scoped version. Gorgeous and rare piece
Wow, 1300+ views in less than an hour. You're really starting to kick some major ass Ian!
Love your informative videos Ian, very well done. I see you have real passion for these great firearms. Please keep up the great work you do. Just wish UK gun laws were as nice and understanding as US laws. Can't even have a 22lr handgun over here.! Great work and again love your vids!!!!
The length of the 30 06 was shortened to make the 308 for many reasons. A shorter action is handier, a tad faster, and uses less material. The 308 rounds take up less space. The 308 rounds uses less brass and brass can be a strategic material in short supply which is why the Russians and others use steel. The 06 is also overbore for guns with normal barrel lengths which is a fancy way of saying they had a significant amount of empty space that wasn't being used. You either needed a longer barrel & a heavier bullet or a larger caliber to take full advantage of the space inside the case. For various reasons rifles with a barrel a yard long didn't catch on and the bullet weight went from 190 to 150 grains if I recall correctly. That reduced recoil which helped troops flinch less and hit more often.
i could talk (listen) to this man for hours.
Thanks for putting Rollin White's contribution into context. You were most polite about the Patent Office decision, which would now seem ridiculous. I think a modern invention would need to be able to work,or at least have a probability of being made to work, before a patent could be granted.
US patents were at one time only granted when accompanied with a working design, but that principle was abandoned long ago. Sadly, bad patents have become far more common in recent decades, enabling the growing business of non-practicing entities, or patent trolls. Today, it's possible to get a patent on a business method or an algorithm, not just a mechanical design.
You mentioned the possibility of dropping a gun if you're wearing cotton gloves.
This is actually a real concern even when handling paper. When handling old paper, people I've seen do not wear any gloves, this is because we are much clumsier with gloves and may tear the paper.
The modern example of modified guns include converting PKT tank machine guns into the infantry role so they look like PKM by adding the stock, the trigger, bipod anf crude iron sights. Very similar way to U.S. military men did in WW2.
Ha,
I used to live on Saipan when I was a kid. I used to play in and around all the Japanese bunkers and rusted out tanks.
The volume of a sphere is 4/3 pi by radius cubed, while the volume of a cone is 1/3 py by height by radius squared. If height is equal to radius, and we only have half a sphere, then it becomes evident that a hemisphere is twice the volume of its inscribed cone.
Thanks for the time table of contents!
Last time I was this early, the Lebel 1886 was considered advanced
I'm sooooooo sorry
About funky rounds, there was a german aircraft machine gun MG131 wich used electrical primers fot it's ammo. But if i remember it correctly, ammo was converted to standart primers at the end of WWII and that 13mm machine guns were used in volksturm as a handheld machine guns.
thank you as always. great info and you just seem to enjoy teaching about this interesting history!
Tony Stein earned the MOH at Iwo Jima, if I remember correctly. He used his stinger to suppress and destroy several pillboxes.
Yep. Damn I love the "stinger". Musta surprised/scared the fuck out of the Japanese. Hahaha i've seen some vids of one that someone built and fired a few years back...absolutely insane!!
Posted 32 seconds ago?! Last time I was this early, the 1911 was still in trials!
+Garith Jonez and it also wasn't built yet
+Garith Jonez it rarely is anyways
depending on how low the IQ of the person you ask, it always was.
Actually the platform finds its way into the hands of ISIS and Al Nusra a ton more than you'd expect. They don't use the rifles as a novelty, they must have a ton of .223 ammo out there. Likely some of it is captured U.S. armament.
Odysseus apologies, my mind slipped as at the time I was dealing with a couple issues if I recall properly. The truth is that an AR-15 is rarely used in mass-shootings in America, all rifles less than 30% of the time. I have no idea about overseas terrorism, but with the relative simplicity and cheapness of the AK-47 there is a reason it is the "typical bad guy gun". However, the .223 round is a standard NATO round, found in the 5.56. My Ruger fires both (pressure difference, the 5.56 has a higher pressure). I wouldn't find it that strange for them to use it.
Ian, outstanding presentation, thank you.
Good to see my old book on your shelf :)
Love the table of contents
To add to the descussion of the pan fed magazine, Fighter planes during WWI with foster mounted Lewis machine guns had larger 97 round pan mags, the Nieuport 10 11 and 16 came standard with a foster mounted lewis with this configuration, the D.H.2 had a nose mounted Lewis, and the Nieuport 17 was often field modified to fit a foster mounted lewis, the S.E.5 also came standard with a foster mounted Lewis.
Issue was besides the fact the Lewis being a open bolt machine gun and could not be synchronized, the belt fed guns could be loaded up to 500 rounds continuous, once the Lewis 97 round pan drum ran empty you had to fly a machine in a combat situation while at the same time unlocking a machine gun from its mounts and discarding a empty pan mag and then loading a fully loaded pan mag properly on a Lewis gun, i would imagine this was quite the stressful and frustrating task in a high pressure combat situation in the cockpit of a sometimes responsive and sensitive aircraft.
I have heard of the 'Stinger', but never a photo; thanks!
nice vid again, Ian!
since you were wondering, the "ai" in Saive is pronounced as in "bet" in English.
"Dieudonné" is a quaint french name meaning "Godgiven", it is pronounced something like ""Deeuhdonnay"
The development program for the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge was intended to replace previous generations of rifle cartridges in US and foreign service and unify all of them under one standard "Well its good enough" cartridge. The 7.62x51mm did everything the previous rounds did, without needing to be hilariously long or heavy. This allowed a soldier to carry smaller magazines for his new rifle, which allowed him to carry more ammo, allowing him to potentially be able to put more rounds downrange. The only cartridge that potentially could do what the 7.62x51mm NATO round could do was the 7.5x54mm French round, which was a bit lighter than the 7.62x51mm NATO while being a tad longer, however the French had had their flirting with long rifle cartridges with the 8mm Lebel.
Biggest advantage of 7.62x51mm NATO wasn't any improvement in terms of performance, if anything it may be slightly inferior to these cartridges, however the nature of infantry small arms development in the West back then and now really doesn't have a role for cartridges with such weight and range like .30-06, 7.92x57mm, etc.
NATO kinda did good early on with standardizing, also known as the US taking advantage of post-time war industry and dumping stuff on people, a series of cartridges, gun types, etc.
Very enjoyable session, thanks.
Great Vid., Great to see your F.A.L. by your Right side. Keep up the Great work. Thanks.
On gloves: libraries with old books--manuscript or early printed books--typically do not require gloves. Animal skin and early papers are very resistant to grease and acids from hands; wearing gloves makes you clumsy and more likely to damage the book mechanically by mishandling. I've handled manuscripts that are a thousand years old, and not been asked to wear gloves. This changes a bit for the 19th century, when you start getting industrially made paper, which deteriorates badly and is sensitive to the acids in skin oils. With cheap 19th c. newspapers, gloves might be important; with priceless medieval manuscripts, if you can handle it, you do so with your bare fingertips.
"in 1855 there really weren't any metallic cartridges"
as an overzealous Frenchie I take offense to that.
Qsy was too short In the United States just the Smith and Wesson .22 short black powder cartridge. The .44 Henry Flat rimfire and Spenser .56-56 black powder rimfire came a little later. The pinfire had a European patant on it as did the system that shotgun shells became based on. French design.
Paternity tests are illegal in your country, isn't that sad.
Pauly shotgun? What year was that? 1810?
Ammunition for WW2 Japanese military arms is hand loaded quite a bit now. Midway USA really got successful by contracting with manufacturers to make reloading components for these cartridges in the 70s and 80s. Making those deals right turned Midway from a two man shop in the middle of nowhere to a multi million dollar business (2020 sales will probably total well over $500 million).
The US needs a gyrojet corps with rocketeer helmets. Even if it's main utility is propaganda the corps will be worth it's weight in gold.
MAGA Mexican As impractical as this would be, it would be hilarious.
Ian the Glove question to wear or not comes down to the preservation method being used. Most collectors use
OIL and no gloves are wanted or needed. The guns are periodically re oiled. . Museums like to use WAX for long term. Warm hands melt the wax layer so gloves are worn to protect the WAX. The question of gloves and paper goods is a means of keeping dirt and the natural skin oils off the paper.
I own a Chicom SKS, which I prize because of it`s accuracy and personal sentiment. Not my favorite firearm, by a long shot. A few years ago, I brought it over to a disabled friend who was looking around for a new rifle and I thought he might consider purchasing an SKS because of the price and availability. This guy, unknown to me, had been taking a whole slew of prescription drugs because of the chronic pain he was experiencing. I let him fondle my rifle as long as he wanted to. I suggested we go out and shoot sometime. Anyway, about 2 weeks later, I noticed that the rifle had gotten some very bad pitting on the receiver and barrel. Evidently, his hands and skin were exuding some nasty drug residue, which attacked the bluing on the rifle. So, watch out who handles your firearms.
This video made me look up "Tales of the Gun" (Ian's dad is in episode 26, it's on DailyMotion) and it was hilarious scrubbing through the video because I didn't even need the nametag to pick out which guy it was, just saw a thumbnail of a guy with an even bigger moustache
Every time I see the bookshelf in the background, I remember that I need to replace my copy of _The Sword and the Shield_, then forget it again by the time the video is over. This time I'll be smart and pause it long enough to go order one.
15:15 , Don't forget H&K's caseless ammo experiment in the 90's. Interesting, but not easily made functional.
The biggest reason for the 7.62x51 was that the US Army refused to use a non .30 caliber round after WWII but every one of the NATO allies wanted something intermediate - see the .280 British for example. So they took .30-06 and made it "shorter & lighter" and rammed it down Europe's throat until they got to Vietnam, realized that the 7.62 wasn't worth the weight when compared to the .223.
Your comments on the FAL in it's original form reflects this. The FAL in 7mm NATO would have been so much better than anything the US issued post WWII.
The US shoving things down people's throat it was. The 7.5 French was sitting there, 30cal, easier on the soldier, and the US decided to reinvent the wheel.
That's a nice Gewehr 41 in the background
Love the scoped g41
35:28 I loled hard at the example
About the gloves Ian. There actually is quite some discussion in the academic world if using gloves to handle very old texts or artefacts is a good thing or not. I as a Dutch history student handled some medieval Dutch texts myself, without gloves. Why? Well because the gloves reduce your dexterity and make it more likely that you accidentally make a tear in the parchment. Further those gloves also increase the chance that you accidentally put dirt onto the texts which sits on the gloves. Finally and the biggest reason against them is the chance that you go over the text with cloves and damage the pigments or inks from the parchment and thus damage the text.
I am defiantly in the non gloves side of the debate. Just wash your hands and I really mean wash them before handling, think and you will be fine.
What I've learned, the main reason to wear gloves is because of the oils secreted from our fingers can act as an acid on some materials, like cloth, metal and wood (and thus paper). Medieval texts were mostly made of vellum, which is calf skin. Not wearing gloves while handling those may actually be good. So it depends completely on the material.
And of course, it's always a compromise. Do I handle this small wooden artifact with gloves and risk to drop it and thus damage it, or do I very carefully handle it without gloves for increased grip and dexterity? It all depends on the handler, I think.
I think pistols should move to higher velocity/pointed rounds. For those chosen few of us that can make long shots with pistols. I've got a .22 tcm I can shoot a 100 yard target with all day long. The same is manageable with a .45 just have to know how far to hold over.
Policy to handle really old manuscipt is actually no gloves. Dry clean hands is prefered because handling is more precise bare hands.
I hope that one day, American Soldiers will be able to bring back working firearms as war trophies once again.
...they're not allowed to now?
War should be avoided whenever possible.
ShanghaiedAgain personal weaponry is frowned upon. its very very hard, your CO has to sign off on it, it still happens. the U.S millitary is anti gun.
Great Q&A.
Talking modifications you can fit the 7.62 Bren Magazine's to a FAL with some modifications to the spring. I believe it was done during the Falklands conflict.
18:10
A tempest in a teapot.
I will saviour that.
Some things I've heard of and wonder if we'll get to see a video on are the various Soviet guns using "moon ammo" -special cartridges that contain the gasses and don't make sound, and bullets like roofing nails for shooting underwater; and a V.I.P. personal defense weapon fitted to a fake eyeglass case. I don't remember where I read of the latter. It looked like the top half of a modern pistol and allegedly used bizarre ammo on purpose so that if it were stolen it would be of limited utility.
i wonder if the old m9s will be surplussed onto the civilian market when the military adopts a new handgun
It will never happen. Crushed and melted at a cost of $150 each instead of sols to us for $400 each is my guess
You spoke of me?
love the FAL
I went back and watched the Schwarzlose video it made me realize I miss the old intro. xD
My choice of program to save/modify would be the EM-2. Scope-sighted bullpup with an intermediate cartridge (which IIRC was also considered for the FAL). Said intermediate cartridge's ballistics were then rediscovered by the US military after it became dissatisfied with the 5.56 in Afghanistan. I know you've given the EM-2 a dressing down for the complexity of its manufacture, but the overall concept is a very modern one, and if any of the developers are still alive I think they are owed an apology - at the very least, they are owed a "You were right". As for the 7.62, that's no more than a somewhat uprated .300 Savage; almost exactly the same size (though not chamber-compatible, naturally) and capable of matching .30-06 ballistics as loaded (though the Savage was stretched to its limits to do that while the .308 Winchester/7.62 NATO is not). Seems they did a lot of development work just to end up more or less with a cartridge that had been around for years.
I was going to post almost exactly the same thing about the EM-2, but thought I'd better check to see if anyone had already done so, and you have, so I won't.
Yours is probably better than mine would have been anyway! Kudos to you sir
Fascinating
Say, Ian, is that chair as comfy as it looks?
Nice and very interesting video, as always!
Great job, Thank You
Also while its an amusing thought, development of 7.62x51mm NATO helped spark development of 5.56x45mm. British near-adoption of the .280 round, which was inferior to the Soviet produced 7.62x39mm round (In terms of weight and size, a 30-round AKM mag weighing as much as a 20-round .280 mag), would have probably put us in the same boat, ironically, as the Soviets were when they began to encounter the 5.56x45mm round against their 7.62x39mm AKs in Vietnam. The Soviets found the US round to be good enough they developed the 5.45x39mm round and developed the AK-74 series after them.
We did get our intermediate cartridge FAL though in the FN CAL, which was later developed into the FN FNC and the Swedish Ak5.
Love that FAL.
the difference between the 30-06 and the 7.62nato is that you can (if you do reloading) you can load 5 cases of 7.62nato vs. 4 cases of 30-06 with the same volume of powder and it also only loses 200fps for that 1/4 case less of powder, not bad, also it made the other soon to be nato countries think that we were willing to give up something as part of the agreement (we really just kept the 30-06 and made it more modern by decreasing its cost of production because guns that shot 7.62nato were .5" shorter in the receiver, mag, and bolt so you were using less metal to make a gun and you were also making 1 extra round because of the less powder. so yes 7.62nato is a better round.
what are your thoughts on the h & k g11, would you find it feasibe for the french army to substitute its famas gun for g11's? (taking into account that more development would be required to optimize and adapt the g11 to modern day standards )
Caseless ammunition just doesn't have much of a future. The 4.73x33mm G11 ammo had problems with impact & abrasion resistance, and it's much less moisture resistant than brass ammo. Even if all these problems were magically solved by modern materials science (and they haven't been), you still have the two fundamental flaws of caseless ammunition to deal with: the round dumps tremendous heat straight into the chamber, and it does nothing to seal the breech from gas cutting. In contrast, the brass case on standard centerfire ammunition acts as a heat sink and expands to seal the breech. Polymer cased ammo is even better, as it insulates the chamber, and certain types of polymer cases (such as the LSAT) have a section that pops out a small flap into the chamber throat to help seal the breech.
Actually, Modern Caseless ammunition's are more impact and moisture resistant. And as for the G11, it was apparently good enough that the only reasons the German military didn't adopt it was, A) its incompatibility with the NATO standard ammunition (Other nations were iffy on adopting it) , and B) the titanic costs of the German reunification following the fall of the USSR.
+Maliciously Delicious where can I find"modern case-less ammunition"?
SacoreyRugger Modern being Early 90's as opposed to that developed in the 60's. The rounds developed for the G11 got around the heat issue by using a propellant with a higher ignition temperature for instance. Current development on caseless weapons is being done by the United States, though information on that is limited. Though I do believe its using the same ammunition.
+Maliciously Delicious The vast majority of research the American military is doing on ammo isn't caseless, it is telescopic.
I sometime pity old Rollin White. If he hadn't sold S&W an exclusive license, he could have cleaned up during the ACW. Instead, S7W snookered him into bearing the cost of defending the patent against infringement.
I really really like the stinger that Tony Stein made
Do you happen to know if a few of them were put into military museums ?
Hafa Adai Ian, Greetings from Saipan! haha I actually found the story of your father very ironic. I moved here 2 years ago, and have cursed not being able to Reasonably own firearms here. So I ended up mostly watching videos, and found your channel because of it. Do you plan on visiting again in the future? Would love to buy you a drink if you do. I actually always found how little interest in WW2 History, and "Respect" for things left over from the war there is here. Its funny how things so collectable in the states has so little value here - Really makes you think. Anyways thanks for the hours of entertainment! Channel has helped keep my busy.
You're hair is just simply amazing :P
good video but ?? wasn't there a 1919 Browning 30ca in serves with a but shock and bipod I was thinking the 82nd and the 101 first used them ??? or I'm I just thinking of some thing else ????
I think that G41 sniper rifle configuration is in the game Red Orchestra 2. Btw Ian, have you ever played it? You seem like the right guy for it
Is there a Q&A 5? I watched 1-4 and found 6 but I can't find a #5
The Dutch had lager capacity pan mag for their Lewis guns. But they did not work that well as far as i know.
It turns out the powder burns better if the powder is ignited at the front of the case. They did some experiments by making test runs of ammo with a metal tube to direct the primer discharge to the front of the case. These work better but are impractical to make for obvious reasons. Failing that a short fat case works best. Oh well.
Another "weird" cartridge is the 4.7mm caseless round for the Heckler & Koch G11.
Ian, my thoughts on the HMS trials are that the military or at least the army will go to the Glock 19 as its been adopted by some US SOF units as the standard sidearm there, many are already made in the US, easy of use for cleaning and firing, plus other NATO countries Glock 17s as the standard sidearm.
I can't help but think of two points on the point about the cartridge.
First one, though the comment relates to the trade offs, sacrifices made to get more speed out of jets. The same is true of cartridges. If you're offering such a small benefit to the user, at a great sacrifice, it might not be worth it in the long run. I would also suggest that in the scope of the military buyer, user, if you did go to an entirely new and unique system, it costs them in time. Time to get everyone certified on the new tech and the implications thereof.
Second point, I'd say that there's something in being too experimental. Unfortunately, if your idea is great and workable, but it's different, say, Metal Storm with stacked electrically fired projectiles, it's just as much a failure as a product which could have never worked, as the conical bore revolver cylinders were.
Metal Storm has some deeply interesting and highly probable scenarios it would work wonders in. Say, aircraft weapon pods, naval vessels, etc. That being said, unfortunately as I said, it seems to just as much a failure as something that would have never worked.
Pistols are more important for stability operations. One may coordinate with local figures, and carry a pistol, but carrying a rifle in their house or office would not be acceptable.
Under import marks. I have a Westinghouse manufactured Mosin Nagant 91 that has an import mark. I would love to know where that weapon has been. Was it one of the weapons that sold to the Czar or kept in storage and sent to the Fins? How did it get into Russian hands so it could be shipped here?
Most likely it was shipped to Russia in 1915 or thereabouts, then bought or captured by the Finns, and then surplussed by Finland and bought by an American importer.
could you do a video on the remington 51? it seems like a cool mechanism that is a hybrid between a short recoil and a delayed blowback and I have yet to find a video that does a good job explaining it
Ian have you ever gotten a chance to handle the FN FNC? According to what I see most of the time it's a 5.56 version of the FN FAL, and seems like something you'd be interested in.
Quick Question for the Next Q&A (I'm in no hurry) If the Luger could use an MP18's Trommelmagazin, could an MP18 use a Luger's 8 round magazine?
Very nice, I have the same poster. Will there ever be a Forgotten Weapons and C&Rsenal collaboration?
It would be fun - the geographical distance makes it a tricky proposition though.
I appreciate your work on this channel.
I have a powerful lust for that G43.
Just noticed the FAL, I want that too.
I´ts a g41
Jacob Vestergaard Damn, normally I'm the guy who corrects people in the comments. Still want it though.
+petpeeves117 if you like this one, check out Ians video on the G41 M, its extremely interesting
actually its a FN FAL.....g41 is hk. FAl has the big 308 mag. G41 shoots 556x45