Weapons Timelines for the Twilight War

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

3. Most nations keep some sort of war-store typically of equipment that has passed from service when newer versions have been introduced. It is highly likely that that many L1A1 rifles and L4 Bren Guns were placed into the war-stores so they would be available for emergency expansion of the military if necessary.

Example: The large numbers of M-14s and M-21s that the US has pulled out of storage for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Example: The large numbers of M-14s and M-21s that the US has pulled out of storage for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I would be surprised indeed ifthey didnt have stockpiles of everything from Korea and up until today .SMLE,Sten;Bren ( which the TA used until not that long ago ),SLRs,AR-18s .Any govt with respect fo rit self keeps a stockpile .One involved in as many places as the British..probably keeps a stockpile for Bloc and one for Nato scenarios .You never know when supply dries up and those pesky third world dictators that keep oil flowing freely need a refill somewhere.

Just 10 years ago I bought a Kar98 Mauserfrom OUR TA armouries in a big clearance they did .I recall they had something like 60 000 of these still ,from the 250 000 taken from the Germans when they were sent home in 45, rechambered for 30-06 and used until we got the Garands.

I am hoping for the Garand clearance to happen

I saw a documentary on British arms dealers once ,where 2 city type pin stripe guys were fa-fa ing about their experiences -one was retiring from a long life in the biz -the other up and coming .Together they inspected a load of Turkish Mausers ( or were they German on Turkish contract ) 12 000 pieces iirc , all in a customs clearing house or some such -in a major UK port . Maybe it was London .


Britain is no # 3 arms dealer in the world I have been told.I suppose that should lead to the conclusion that there are stockpiles .

Also - consider the amount of firearms constantly being shipped .What would be in any given major port at any given time irl ? A few containers of armaments here and there for sure-also in a major shipping country like Britain .

Given the underlying mercenary bone in the Scandinavian - how many strapping British lasses would you say a trawler load of northern flank battlefield pick up AKs,RPGs,PKs,frags and ammo would be worth ?

Not as the same number as if it ws the other way around -but still

Throw in a couple of the Monty Python cast to keep us smiling through the dark winters with no telly ,and you should be able to get your self a few 23 mm AA guns too.

But I find part of the allure of a UK campaign the LACK of arms ,and the impro needed.Melee weapons,museum pieces,civillian guns .Lends a few got suspense points to a campaign . Bursting away the problem isnt enough in a way .

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by headquarters

I am hoping for the Garand clearance to happen.

Here I want a L1A1 SLR. Might have been a possibility too until about a decade ago when the governement banned any civilian weapon that was semi or fully auto, had a mag greater than 5 rounds and could actually do more than scare a rat....

I suppose I'll have to settle for the two rebuilt SMLE's with match grade barrels and top notch (for the 1950's and 60's) optics I've just inherited from my grandfather (Kings marksman with regular 1000 yard possibles in his day).

[pmulcahy11b]

You can over-generalize and say that the G-11s ammunition is solid smokeless powder -- but that's REALLY over-simplifying it. The G-11s ammunition uses a special blend of a new mix of propellant and cellulose, along with other binders and wrapped in a combustible layer of a plastic-like material (but actually a polymer). The block of propellant is also specially-shaped, to precise proportions. It's issued as a complete magazine, which is also kept in shrink-wrap until issued to the soldier. (G-11 ammunition wasn't designed for loading into magazines by hand -- HK feels the ammunition blocks will probably be damaged by an attempt to hand-load the magazine, and even very small damage will throw off the trajectory or stability of the round -- larger damage will probably jam the G-11.) The bottom of the block of propellant has a special-composition primer in a cup that is also combustible. Somehow, I can't buy it being made properly again until maybe 15-25 years after the Twilight War.

[Raellus]

Great info, Paul. Thanks.

With this in mind, I would imagine most German troops c. 2000 would be armed with 7.62mm G3s, 5.56mm G41s or G33s, or 7.62mm S AKMs.

[Raellus]

I recently picked up a copy of The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Guns (Fowler, North, Stronge, & Sweeney) from the bargain bin @ my local Barnes & Noble.

The entry for the H&K G41 states that it was to be manufactured as a weapon for reservists while the G11 was produced simultaneously for the regular Bundeswehr. The end of the Cold War put an end to both weapons and eventually led to the later adoption of the G36. So, I reckon that in the Twilight timeline that the G41 would be fairly common, alongside the venerable G3 and former DDR AKs, in the German armed forces of 2000.

Also, the entry for the L85A1 savages the weapon. Apparently, nearly the entire production run was recalled and handed over to H&K for refurbishment. The end result (L85A2) was, by many accounts, still a disappointment, extremely unpopular with most of the British troops in the field in Afghanistan. I really wonder how this weapon would have been handled if the Cold War had continued. Based on this (and other similar reports), I'd like to think that the British military would have pursued alternatives, like bringing back the SLR and/or manufacturing the AR-18 to supplement/replace the L85A1/2.

I also learned from this volume that Bulgaria and Romania (as well as Poland, which I already knew about) produced AK-74 clones in 5.45mm. I had always assumed that the Warsaw Pact nations would have done so but had never seen specific, documented references to this happening. This seems to indicate that AKM variants would be slightly less common among front line and tier one WP reservists than I'd first thought.

[pmulcahy11b]

I would add that I don't think in any timeline -- T2K v1, V2, v2.2, 2013, or Merc 2000 -- would the G-11 have ever made it into production. Even now, it's essentially "too innovative;" it would require supply people to stock exotic ammo and weird parts, require a lot of new training regimens (both for the regular troops and those like drill sergeants that have to train the masses), and upset the supply systems of most Western and Westernized countries in the world, which currently revolve around tens of millions of rounds of 5.56mm NATO and 7.62mm NATO ammunition and the weapons that fire it. Economically, pretty much any country is going to look at the G-11 and say, "It's a great rifle, it may be the wave of the future, but we can't afford for the foreseeable future."

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think it's worth noting that the people who are making savage criticisms of the L85A2 rifle are pretty much the same people who criticized it from the start and that the troops using the L85A2 are not as critical of it as some would have us believe. I'm not saying the soldiers all think it's a wonderful rifle, just that a lot of the criticism of the A2 is being produced by people who hate the entire L85 concept and is essentially the same criticism we've heard before, just updated for the new version.

P.S. Just a little request, when people mention books, could they please include the ISBN? It makes finding the book far easier, I just tried to find the book mentioned above via Google and got plenty of hits, all for the wrong books.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I would add that I don't think in any timeline -- T2K v1, V2, v2.2, 2013, or Merc 2000 -- would the G-11 have ever made it into production. Even now, it's essentially "too innovative;" it would require supply people to stock exotic ammo and weird parts, require a lot of new training regimens (both for the regular troops and those like drill sergeants that have to train the masses), and upset the supply systems of most Western and Westernized countries in the world, which currently revolve around tens of millions of rounds of 5.56mm NATO and 7.62mm NATO ammunition and the weapons that fire it. Economically, pretty much any country is going to look at the G-11 and say, "It's a great rifle, it may be the wave of the future, but we can't afford for the foreseeable future."

I tend to disagree with this assessment, economics definitely plays a part in the adoption of new weapons but national interest plays a far bigger part. The West Germans were adopting the G11 & G41 and economics weren't as important as national defence during their consideration process. The realworld timeline for service entry definitely fits into a version 2 timeline, the only reason the G11 was not adopted for service was the end of the Cold War. It then become a weapon system that was no longer required to defeat the 'Red horde'.
I disagree with the too innovative idea as well, the technology has already been proven and now the US Army is showing interest in non-traditional forms of ammunition including caseless for future weapon systems.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-153517316.html
http://www.caselessammo.com/about.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightwe...s_Technologies
http://www.defensereview.com/aai-lig...splay-at-ausa/
The adoption of any new weapon requires a change in training, logistics etc. and it wouldn't be any different if the weapon was the G11 or the G36. There was a similar change when for example the British changed from the .303 SMLE, Bren Gun & Vickers Gun to the 7.62mm L1A1 & L7 and M16/M16A1. It applied when any nation changed from bolt-action rifles to self-loading rifles and so on.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Also, the entry for the L85A1 savages the weapon. Apparently, nearly the entire production run was recalled and handed over to H&K for refurbishment. The end result (L85A2) was, by many accounts, still a disappointment, extremely unpopular with most of the British troops in the field in Afghanistan. I really wonder how this weapon would have been handled if the Cold War had continued. Based on this (and other similar reports), I'd like to think that the British military would have pursued alternatives, like bringing back the SLR and/or manufacturing the AR-18 to supplement/replace the L85A1/2.

I often think that the British should have told the US to shove it after World War 2 and went their own way with the EM-2. The Belgians and the Spanish both were willing to chamber weapons for the .280 round (one of the first FAL prototypes was chambered for the .280 round, as was one of the first CETME prototypes); only US political bullying stopped the .280 round from gaining more widespread acceptance. Our loss, IMHO.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I often think that the British should have told the US to shove it after World War 2 and went their own way with the EM-2. The Belgians and the Spanish both were willing to chamber weapons for the .280 round (one of the first FAL prototypes was chambered for the .280 round, as was one of the first CETME prototypes); only US political bullying stopped the .280 round from gaining more widespread acceptance. Our loss, IMHO.

Yeah, when I think about it, there are times I wonder if the Remington .223 (5.56mm Nato) is a bit underpowered when I talk to others about it. Myself, I would have gone with something like the .243 Winchester at the smallest although something in the .270 to .280 caliber range would have been fine too. Dunno what this would do to the .308 Winchester (7.62mm Nato) though.

Chuck

[dude_uk]

Given the circumstances in Westral's 'Storm in Germany', I think that it would be deemed more prudent for the UK to manufacture an already proven design, giving more commonality within NATO, than producing something untried during the increased East-West tension after the Danilov led coup.

If you include the Gulf war as timeline, The Challenger1 is given a battle proof run and is proven to work. The amount of kills it gets and its proven reliability in the field make up for it shortcomings at CAT 87. No doubt a Challenger 2 equipped team would be fielded for the next CAT before WW3 breaks out and The British army would be playing to win...

Your are looking at around 372 Challenger 1's and 386 Challenger 2 by 1996, Just enough to equip BOAR entirely. With about 850 chieftains in reserve.

This is all speculation however, how fast production of challenger 1 or 2 in a continuing and somewhat more strained cold war is anyone's guess.

The SA80 is however another matter, the Gulf war is the catalyst for its undoing with its problems laid bare before the world. Wikipedia states that a upgrade program is conducted in '91. Whether this converts it to an A2 of sorts standard, or is simply another temp solution can be entirely up to you.

[rnitze]

V1 world, OK G-11 might have been being started being fielded, and G36 never invented. But with G3, G41 (HK33) HK53, MP5 and 7,62mm HK 11 / HK 21 and 5,56mm HK 13 / HK 23 machine guns are way more than enough for an army at war... I say G11 scrapped fast ---plenty of other things to assemble. I just wanna know if Italians ever take H&K home base at Oberndorf am Neckar....

[Raellus]

So, a lot of discussion here has focused on the G3 v. G11 v. G41 v. G36 v. MPiK-74 for the reunified German Army in the v1.0 timeline. Well, apparently there's another competitor, one that I'd never heard of before. I ran across an article on the HK32 in Recoil magazine today. It appears that the West German gov't. was interested in producing a rifle that could be fed 7.62x39mm ammunition from standard Kalashnikov magazines. According to the article, the reasoning behind this was the potential for sudden reunification with the DDR, coupled with NATO ammunition shortages. This scenario sounds uncannily similar to the T2K v1.0 premise!

http://www.recoilweb.com/recoil-issue-25-94571.html

There's an image of a modern version of the HK32 center right on the magazine cover liked to above. There's not much, online, about the HK32, but apparently a few got past the prototype stage and ended up in, of all places, Mexico.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...cal-hk32-seen-

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?optio...86:hk32-series

So, I wouldn't be surprised that, in the run-up to the v1.0 reunification, the W. German government ordered substantial numbers of the HK32 to equip former E. German units once they were absorbed into the Bundeswehr. Perhaps, instead of the more complex, more expensive G11, production was split between HK33s or 41s for W. German units and the HG32 for E. German units. That way, both segments of the newly reunified German army would be equipped with very similar weapons that could draw on existing stockpiles of ammunition.

I haven't had much time to mull this over, but I'm really liking this idea.

[swaghauler]

This is one of those areas where I significantly disagree with the cannon as well (remember that I use v2.2 Cannon here). The German Army was very conservative and wouldn't adopt a rifle that did not "pass muster."
The G11 program was dropped after only 1000 rifles were procured because of "teething problems" with the rifles (they couldn't get through two magazines without jamming) and issues with the ammo (the "powder charge" would "flake off" with rough handling and there were numerous "failures to fire"). this would have kept the G11 out of the field for general issue. Assuming that H&K could have solved the ammo issues would still mean that there were only enough rifles in existence for GSG-9 type units. Ironically, it would be FN that would solve the G11 reliability issue with the P90. All it took was using cased ammunition that wasn't so easily damaged. There was really nothing wrong with H&K's design of the G11's vertically rotating breech block. It was all in the ammo.

The G-36 would begin issue in 1996 and 2000 were submitted for extended testing with approval for adoption by 1997. This would allow around another 4000 or 5000 rifles to come into existence before the interruption of production. This rifle could be in the hands of airborne troops or other special units. The rest of the German army would still be using G3's or pressing G41A1s into service (the G41 variant that was modified AFTER losing the German trials but never produced in large numbers).

Another rifle with issues is the AN-94. This rifle has a VERY POOR reliability record. The Soviets gave about 2000 to several Spetznaz and Marine units for testing. They continue to use it but it is an incredibly complex design that is still unreliable in use. Larry Vicker's Youtube video on the An-94 (where a jam took THREE MEN with a toolkit to clear it) is normal for that rifle. I doubt the Russians would have continued extended development during the war.
The AEK-971 shows a lot of promise but with limited production, no more than a few thousand would be able to reach the field before production was interrupted.
My last "nitpick" with Twilight2000 is the idea of the AKMr (rechamber). I do NOT ALLOW this rifle in my game because there is NO REASON for it to exist.
This is simply another case where the Devs weren't well educated with small arms development (and there's no shame in that). The cost of replacing the Bolt, Bolt carrier, Trunnion, sights, and the barrel is more than 80% of the cost of a new rifle. Additionally, when you're done, you STILL HAVE A RIFLE WITH USED PARTS ON IT! It is much more economical to sell TWO OLDER AKMs and use that money to build ONE NEW AK-74 than to convert 7.62mm rifles to 5.45mm.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Here I want a L1A1 SLR.

Me too. That would make my year.

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I suppose I'll have to settle for the two rebuilt SMLE's with match grade barrels and top notch (for the 1950's and 60's) optics I've just inherited from my grandfather (Kings marksman with regular 1000 yard possibles in his day).

Very cool. Respect to your grandfather.

[Legbreaker]

Not bad for an Air Force mechanical engineer during the war.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Not bad for an Air Force mechanical engineer during the war.

Those sound like sweet rifles.

I have sniffed at the .308 Einfields that Marstar are selling -but money is holding me back..

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Not bad for an Air Force mechanical engineer during the war.

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

[Legbreaker]

I suppose my grandfather did have his childhood behind him - used to head shoot sprinting rabbits from the hip or go hungry during the depression.

During his recruit training (much reduced from the usual 3 months down to a few weeks due to the war), he was used as an instructor after demonstrating his ability to fire a full 10 rounds accurately in less than 4 seconds - apparently sounded more like a machinegun than bolt action rifle!

I witnessed this extremely impressive feat for myself about 20 years ago (a decade or two after his prime!)

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

OK crunchy

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

What's there to compare....I mean, if you had the choice of inflicting massive amounts of damage with a 120mm smoothbore, finishing off your near helpless prey with a Ma Deuce and a pair of M-240s or cranking out 5.56mm from some rinky-dink Mighty Mattel....why would you need a rifle?

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by headquarters

Given the underlying mercenary bone in the Scandinavian - how many strapping British lasses would you say a trawler load of northern flank battlefield pick up AKs,RPGs,PKs,frags and ammo would be worth ?

Not as the same number as if it ws the other way around -but still

Throw in a couple of the Monty Python cast to keep us smiling through the dark winters with no telly ,and you should be able to get your self a few 23 mm AA guns too.

But I find part of the allure of a UK campaign the LACK of arms ,and the impro needed.Melee weapons,museum pieces,civillian guns .Lends a few got suspense points to a campaign . Bursting away the problem isnt enough in a way .

I agree that the lack of weapons can in itself be entertaining, especially when dealing with small groups of marauders in the areas that have descended into anarchy, where improvised weapons are going to the norm. The other thing I would say there is how much of a force multiplier even one or two weapons can be; a couple of brigands armed with Sterlings or SLR's could easily set themselves up as absolute rulers of a community who only have melee weapons.

Where I tend to have to think more out of the box is when it comes to arming large numbers of people (i.e. into the thousands) such as the Duke of Cornwall's forces, the independent Scottish and Welsh armies, etc, which is where the Government stockpile, freight container full of SLR's etc comes in handy. I ended up equipping most of the Bragad Chan Cymru (Army of Wales) with a mix of civilian weapons and military weapons taken from the Infantry Battle School at Brecon.

In a rough draft I wrote for the Scots I orginally had them armed and equipped by the French (down to French Army uniforms and Famas rifles). Would be interested on everyone's thoughts on this; on reflection I pretty much reckoned the French might not want to be seen to interfere in UK domestic affairs quite so overtly, so chose to downplay the French involvement in Scotland, making it more subtle and covert and reducing the number of French soldiers in Scotland from several hundred to several dozen. (This means that instead of getting brand new Famas rifles, the Scottish Army only get a few hundred Belgian manufactured FN FAL's which the Franco Belgian Union can deny all knowledge of).

I've never really considered large numbers of terrorist weapons making their way to the mainland - I always figured that the majority of those weapons would stay in Ireland, although there's no reason why the Irish couldn't do the same as the Scandinavians and trade weapons for various commodities...interesting...hadn't thought about that before...I really need to sit down and have a serious look at Ireland at some point in time...

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

...Where I tend to have to think more out of the box is when it comes to arming large numbers of people (i.e. into the thousands) such as the Duke of Cornwall's forces, the independent Scottish and Welsh armies, etc...

...on reflection I pretty much reckoned the French might not want to be seen to interfere in UK domestic affairs quite so overtly, so chose to downplay the French involvement in Scotland... (This means that instead of getting brand new Famas rifles, the Scottish Army only get a few hundred Belgian manufactured FN FAL's which the Franco Belgian Union can deny all knowledge of).

Don't forget that the French probably have truckloads of weapons collected from refugees (military and civilian) trying to cross the border into France. It would include all manner of civilian hunting and sporting firearms and any military firearms they don't want to keep. They'd also have lots of older French weapons in their own war-stores that they might be prepared to offload (e.g. MAT49 SMG, MAS 36 rifle, FM24/29 LMG) and possibly even WW2 weapons that they were using/storing up to the 1950s (like Thompson SMGs, Kar98 rifles, M1 Carbines, MP40 SMGs, Bren Guns, BARs and so on)

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Don't forget that the French probably have truckloads of weapons collected from refugees (military and civilian) trying to cross the border into France. It would include all manner of civilian hunting and sporting firearms and any military firearms they don't want to keep. They'd also have lots of older French weapons in their own war-stores that they might be prepared to offload (e.g. MAT49 SMG, MAS 36 rifle, FM24/29 LMG) and possibly even WW2 weapons that they were using/storing up to the 1950s (like Thompson SMGs, Kar98 rifles, M1 Carbines, MP40 SMGs, Bren Guns, BARs and so on)

Very true. I think the downside to supplying ex French Army gear is that like the Famas rifles they'd be fairly easy to trace back to source and lead to an increase in tensions between HMG and the French. I've always assumed that the French have a stock of German and Dutch Army weapons and equipment that they captured during the occupation of the Rhineland and the Netherlands. If they supplied the Scots with Uzis, G3's etc HMG might have a fairly good idea where they've come from but proving it would be another matter.

Another area I've considered is that the French presence in Quebec means that all sorts of things (including weapons) could be being shipped back to France from North America. M16's for the Scots...?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

Very true. I think the downside to supplying ex French Army gear is that like the Famas rifles they'd be fairly easy to trace back to source and lead to an increase in tensions between HMG and the French. I've always assumed that the French have a stock of German and Dutch Army weapons and equipment that they captured during the occupation of the Rhineland and the Netherlands. If they supplied the Scots with Uzis, G3's etc HMG might have a fairly good idea where they've come from but proving it would be another matter.

Another area I've considered is that the French presence in Quebec means that all sorts of things (including weapons) could be being shipped back to France from North America. M16's for the Scots...?

Absolutely true, I think I was pondering it all from the viewpoint that there was too little of HMG to be able to check it all out. Sure the weapons are French but how can they prove that the French gave them the weapons and the Scots didn't buy/barter them?
Now that you mention weapons through Canada, how about a bulk load of Ruger Mini-14 and AC556 rifles to supplement the M16s?

[Legbreaker]

Why would the French be shipping arms over to Scotland anyway? What's in it for them?

The UK is already in a world of hurt and arming the populace for whatever reason can only contribute to even more unrest. Sure Britain and France have been long time enemies up until the last centry or so, but if you feel France might be preparing to invade sometime in the next couple of decades, wouldn't arming the Scots be against the French best interests? It means more people are arme when they make their move.

And of course there's also the difficulty of shipping them there. Even for a country like France, who's stayed mainly out of the war, fuel and other goods are sure to be in short supply. They haven't had anyone but their few scattered colonies to trade with (besides a few small exceptions). Just feeding, clothing and keeping warm the tens or millions of people within their own borders is going to be a struggle for at least a few years after the war.