Dammit T-Bolt

"You SAID you were gonna pump the brakes on the 16mm educational footage!"

What?  I did!  Remember last week when I crammed like eight of em into one day?  Gah!  Now it's like one.  Max. 

So this is what madness feels like.  Or, again, the afterlife.  No way of knowing.  I published this stuff back in the Spring.

Back then I needed the time off, now.  No matter what.  A lotta YOU got to stay home, and are now sick of being cooped up.  I had to go to work extra.  I hope your lives are back to normal at this point.

Your lotto numbers didn't come back in the time machine, tho.  You bastard.  No BAR for you. 

Making the BAR

BAR

Ya know... back in 2007, I half expected to have a Browning Automatic Rifle by now. Pah. Fantasy.

Burp II, Subbie Boogaloo

The Sequel!  Excuse me.

Loren Cook had an improvement for the US Army's submachinegun, but the program was cancelled in 1948 because we didn't need any improvements then.  Right?  Some army schmuck in the Soviet Union goes on to eternal glory with an improvement on a German design and the Yankee Warrant Officer gets ignored and almost forgotten.

From here.  It's an ugly cuss of a weapon in prototype stage.  Looks like the Sten.  He had a battle rifle, too.  And some pretty wild claims about performance.  For instance, the accompanying article from the 50s makes it sound like he magically doubled the speed of a .45ACP bullet with that thing.  I suspect the truth is he is using 9mm ammunition and the paper is confuzzled.

Here's the battle rifle he was sure could give the FN FAL a run for its money

What's that Bullpup rifle look like to you?  Does it look like someone took a BAR receiver and made some other modifications?  Why, yes it does...  Awesome. 

Time machine

So I am rewatching Shawshank Redemption.  Morgan Freeman's character, Red, is out on parole in 1966, feeling mopey.  He window shops at the same pawn shop Briggs did years earlier.  There, on display, is a bunch of really nice Colt (medallions) handguns, then a couple Smiths (smaller, less shiny, medallions).   Perfect to knock over the Piggly Wiggly where he works.  He buys the compass instead to look for a cache in Buxton.

The thought occurred.  What if I were transported back in time to the mid 60s.  Besides saving 1964 and older quarters, buying gold and whatnot waiting for the mid 70s, then buying T-Bills and double digit inflation and a bunch of stocks I knew might go up in value, among other things, I'd eventually buy a firearm or two.  Especially before 1968.

But what pre-1968 firearm would I buy, knowing all the history to come.  Obviously, I like the 1911 now, but did they make decent ambi-safeties back then.  A 1911 has less utility to me without it.

I'd probably end up with the ol' stand by revolver.  Either M1917 style or Model 27.  Model 60, too.

Wait til the early 80s to get a BAR or two.

Wiki Hole

So I went down a wiki hole after looking over this and the following post on Forgotten Weapons.  That made me look up SALVO.  They thought they might be onto something with a flechette weapon that on paper fire 2300 round per minute and was controllable even though it only weighed three and half pounds, loaded with 60 cartridges.  Can you imagine?  If that had been more workable we'd have never even heard of the AR, maybe.  AR would be a footnote like a Johnson rifle.  Their are PISTOLS that weigh more than 3.5 pounds.

Doctrine would involve a lot more Spray and Pray suppressing fire, I'm thinking.  There was also a thought, made new again recently, of adding a 12 gauge style grenade launcher.  A smaller M203.  Like a XM25, but 50 years ago.  So, picture Viet Nam with a even MORE walls of bullets and lots of booms from the grenades of every squad member.  BrrrrrraaaaaapppppBOOM! BrrrrrraaaaaapppppBOOM!  BrrrrrraaaaaapppppBOOM!

But, as we know, such a future-gun didn't really make it out of the gate.  


The search for a solution that was solved by the .276 Pedersen was instead settled by the .223.  After overcoming LOTS of inertia, prejudice for stopping power over volume of fire, and a conservative mindset in the people in the Army in charge of ordnance decisions.  The opposing forces still hanker for more stopping power.  Imagine if we had adopted the .276 pre-WWII.  We'd probably have people today looking to lessen the ammo weight and increase volume of fire with something like the .223.  And the wheel turns and turns.

BAR History

The Pacific

I did a marathon of the HBO miniseries, The Pacific. It’s sort of a companion piece to the Band Of Brothers, but it isn’t executed as well, I think.

The show takes a lot of A Helmet for My Pillow by Bob Leckie (which I have not read) and The Old Breed by Eugene Sledge (which I have). The authors personas were also both characters in the series.

I take a greater interest because the unit they follow was also my grandfather's. The 1st Battalion of the 7th Marine Regiment, First Marine Division. He was a radioman in the Headquarters Company, and his first and only battle was on Pelilu, which feature prominently in the show, naturally.

So what is wrong with it? The story doesn't grab you, and the actual events lend themselves to a coherent dramatic narrative, working with the source materials, that a teleplay writer should have done a better job with. The characters aren't written very likably either. I cared about the Gunny and Captain Ack-Ack, but they got little screen time. The main characters were practically interchangeable and forgettable. In Band Of Brothers each of the non-cannon-fodder ensemble cast was at the very least memorable, and most were sympathetic.

Despite it being not as strong a series as Band Of Brothers, I still liked it. I noticed that the Marines didn’t attack anything in the first 3 or 4 parts. I’m sure they did, in the war, at Guadalcanal, but it was interesting that the film maker showed it like that. What I mean is, the Marines fought from prepared positions, and Japanese banzai charges would crash against them and be absolutely slaughtered. There is some historic validity to this portrayal. A Japanese charge relied on shock to knock out an enemy force, but pretty much up until Guadalcanal that tactic was used by veteran Japanese soldiers against Chinese forces. And against them it would work. The US forces had more firepower and probably more discipline and the aggressive Japanese method would have to be rethought.

And rethink it they did, after that hard lesson. In later episodes, as in the war, the Japanese took to well fortified bunkers to bleed the US Forces to death, and then the Marines had to assault positions and dig the enemy out. At least the Marines didn’t assume banzai charges.

Gun content? The usual for a Dub-Dub-Too movie. Lots of Tommy guns, Springfield 03’s on the ‘Canal, up grading to Garands and lots of M1 Carbines for later battles. LOTS of carbines.


We also saw machine guns go from water jacketed jobs to air cooled. Didn’t see any Reisings, but people don’t expect to see them in a World War 2 movie. Plus I don’t think there are a lot of prop Reisings for movie makers to call upon.

We saw the same green jeep pass by the camera over and over again.

But back to guns. This made me think... of a meme…

If you had to go back and fight in any of the battles of history since the invention of the gun, you as you are now, and you got to pick the weapon that would be your primary weapon, which era and weapon would you choose.

You might say, “That’s easy. I’d pick the US side of Korean War and carry around a M2 Carbine. It’s light weight and I’m old and fat.”

Or you might say, “I’d select the Martini Henry and fight the Zulu’s It was so much better than what the opposing forces had. Notwithstanding some massacres. I wouldn’t want to be in on the massacres, naturally”

Or you might say, “I’d carry a PPsH against the fascists in Stalingrad. All those round of magnum quality pistol ammo in a bullet hose. Plus I really hate Nazis.”

Or you might say, “I’m still big and strong and the M60 saved my life once back in 1967 against Charlie.”

My choices would be WWII as an American carrying the relatively heavy Thomson submachinegun. I just really like that gun. If I was young I might choose the BAR.

Machine Gun Legal?!!!

Ok, that was an obvious April Fools prank. “Machine Guns now legal to purchase as any handgun, first come first served.” Classic.

But it got my head juice a-flowing…

If machine guns WERE legal, all the onerous regulations on them repealed, and they could be had at reasonable prices (after the initial rush…) what would I want to get?

IF I would want to get a machine gun. Even if ammo came down to 1999 levels along with the legal restrictions on the guns, it’s still EXPENSIVE to shoot off a few magazines on ‘rock-n-roll’ setting.

Attitudes on gun forums arguing over their favorite boomer-shooter model would certainly change, so I’d have to take that into effect in any selection process.

Now, I really like the Browning Automatic Rifle and the Ma Deuce, but practicality is a factor. If you subsidized the ammo for the .50 I still couldn’t afford it. The BAR is rare enough to still be a bit expensive after a repeal. And it is a heavy gun that shoots a rifle ammo I don’t keep in stock. And only the older ones were select fire so that I could shoot it semi-auto. These bullet hoses are sentimental favorites, but maybe not for me.

The P90 is a cool item but, the ammo, again, is very expensive ammo wise.

The only machine guns I’ve actually shot are the German Schmeisser, MP40, and the M2 Carbine. Both are a bit more practical with regard to ammo cost. They are also easier to shoot with less-than-rifle powered cartridges. The MP40 is an absolute joy to shoot, with some very gentle recoil. And its 9mm is a fine cartridge for submachinegun work. Pretty cheap ammo, too. Moreso than .30 Carbine, but .30 isn’t too bad.

I did fire an MG42. That was FUN! It was on a tripod, of course. And the M60 machine gun is pretty much the same thing but American. AND I have some ammo for it. Some. But. Except for the BAR or Bren, I’d only get a full power machine gun that I could mount on a fixed position like a tripod, and how practical is that for one man? Still. The M60E4 and Mk 43 Mod 1 intrigues, and are new production. $8-14k new production… Ouch.

So, back to subbies as the only real alternative for one person to own and feed.

There are other 9mm subbies to choose from. Like the MP5 and the Uzi. And both would be more readily available than the WWII era stuff.

If I wanted to stick to full power pistol rounds there is .45 ACP shooters. The Tommy Gun being a sentimental favorite, but it is a HEAVY subbie. And less available. The KRISS intrigues. It’s new and has an innovative recoil system that, if it works in the field as advertised in their marketing department could be VERY nice indeed. Even with Glock mags.

And I can’t forget .22 submahine guns. The .22 isn’t SUPER reliable for cycling the action on full auto, but it makes up for it by being cheap and fun, if not cheap and practical.

Mustn’t forget the select fire AR types. These would proliferate the fastest, I bet. Especially if the surplus market opened up. But I don’t have any .223 and it is an expensive round when the only purpose I’d have for it would be in roles a cheaper 9mm could fill.

I don’t think if would be worth it to convert my M1A to a real M14, even if the receiver modifications were free, it’s still too hard to control. Same with any lighter .308 rifle.

So where does that leave me in the selection process? Sub machine gun, definitely, for cheap ammo and controllability. Either in .45 which I have some of but would soon run out, or the new to me 9mm which is fine. Of the available models out there just about any would be fine with no ideal model leading the pack. I guess a KRISS would lead the pack. A subbie I select would HAVE to have a shoulder stock of some kind.

Of course, if it was legal, gun manufacturers would pretty quickly develop and produce NEW models. That Magpul folding snubbie would/could come out. KRISS in 9mm offerings? .40? .380? A KRISS type that shot .40 and took SIG magazines would jump to the head of the line on my get-list.

I wonder if Kel Tec could come up with a cheap 21st century M3 Grease-Gun equivalent, done up in plastic, for less than $1000….

Jeff Cooper would ask, “Yes, but what’s it FOR?” Meaning what practical use is having a mythical, non-existent, KRISS .40 or ANY sub-machinegun. (Cooper would fully appreciate the impractical purposes of sub machineguns. They are fun to shoot!) The colonel concluded there are few roles at which such ‘squirt guns’ excel. Special forces. Attacking a conference room full of James Bond style arch-villains plotting the world’s demise. Repelling boarders on the high seas. Not too much else. So no hurry if machine gun regulation miraculously 'liberalize.' (a funny word, in this case...)

If I was a collector

AND I had the wherewithal…. I’d collect every firearm Browning ever designed. Decent versions of each type, and as close to the patent date as possible.

I’m sure I’m not the only one that has thought of this. I bet there are more than a few Browning collections out there.

Collector can love a finite and defined subset to put boundries on their obscession. Sure there are stamp collectors that know it is impossible to get them all, but there are other collectors that appreciate the limits. For example: The Stanley Rule and Level Company of Bridgeport Connecticut made and developed tools for the workman, and numbered them. They did this from the 1860s until a little after WWII when other tools and machines took over from their hand powered types. You can pick a tool types, like hand planes or rulers, and collect one of each. I know some of the handplane collectors. The numbers go from 1 to 444, with one or two duplicates and some gaps in the upper numbers. But the planes are well documented. You CAN get them all. And after you do you can STILL collect by getting a nicer version of each. It’d take more than a lifetime of looking and pretty deep pockets to get a hardware store new version of each tool.

For boomsticks with an open ended collector pit to fall down, better to get a milsurp rifle from all major countries thoughout time. Aaaargh has done a good job down this path. They are like Stamp collecting. You’ll never get them all. Dang Philatelists. So obscene.

The thing about collectors… the acquisition becomes as important as the object. And you don’t want to FINISH. If you do you’ll have to figure out something else to collect. That’s a danger in collecting Browning stuff. With enough money to afford em, you can FINISH pretty quick. Then you risk losing interest in the tool stuff (or shooty stuff) and you switch over to bottle caps or comic books or steam powered farm equipment.

Better to get a milsurp rifle from all major countries throughout time. Aaaargh has done a good job down this path.

I like looking at these tool collections, but I don’t want to collect myself. I have a few handtools and like the tool’s function, and futz with them in the shop a bit, but I don’t need a $2500 version of a common woodworking tool. Even if I had money to spare.

But if I had money to spare I WOULD want an armory with one of each of Brownings’s work. I don’t know why. The gun collection is much more expensive than a tool collection. There is almost zero chance I will even work down that collector’s road, seriously. Maybe that’s why I’d like to collect Browning weapons, because I know I will never have to.

And yes I’d collect the machine guns too. This is all assuming I win Powerball or a Goerge Soros turns out to be my long lost Uncle and wills all his money to me before he has a chance to give every dime to the Democrat National Committee. Since the Browning designed M2 Machine gun alone is north of $50,000, I'll need that kind of scratch

I’d have to have shooting/functioning versions of each, but some Browning firearms are more fun to shoot than others, so some in the collection will be played with more than others.

And collectors always like a spare or two in case one item breaks or fails. Spares means you can shoot the less valuable gun and preserve the pristine one, and have a source of parts for repairs.

I guess I HAVE started this collection though. Very informal. It just turns out that the practical functional firearms I want to play with are available in a pretty nigh-ideal form. And they just happen to be browning designs.


Here is a list of Browning designs from wikipedia, and I already have a version of the ones with ~~~, the ones with *** I REALLY kinda covet:



M1895 Colt-Browning machine gun
Colt Model 1897
FN Browning M1899/M1900
Colt Model 1900
Colt Model 1902
Colt Model 1903 Pocket Hammer (.38 ACP)
~~~Colt Model 1903 Pocket Hammerless (.32 ACP)
Colt Model 1905, the first .45 ACP
Remington Model 8 (1906), a long recoil semi-automatic rifle
Colt Model 1908 Vest Pocket (.25 ACP)
Colt Model 1908 Pocket Hammerless (.380 ACP)
FN Model 1910
~~~U.S. Model 1911, the first .45 ACP military handgun
Winchester Model 1886 lever-action repeating rifle
Winchester Model 1887 lever-action repeating shotgun
Winchester Model 1890 slide-action repeating rifle (.22)
Winchester Model 1892 lever-action repeating rifle
***Winchester Model 1894 lever-action repeating rifle
Winchester Model 1895 lever-action repeating rifle
Winchester Model 1897 pump-action repeating shotgun
~~~Browning Auto-5 long recoil semi-automatic shotgun
U.S. Model 1917 water-cooled machine gun
Model 1919 air-cooled machine gun
Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) of 1917
Browning M2 .50-caliber heavy machine gun of 1921
***The Browning Hi-Power, the last pistol that John Browning developed
The Superposed over/under shotgun was designed by John Browning in 1922 and entered production in 1931

If I was a collector, I'd need as antique-y minty versions as I can get of all of them.

BAR

The BAR was always my dream gun. Or it was. Back when I knew nothing and only looked at capabilities on paper, and then not looking TOO closely.


I wondered why didn’t EVERYBODY use the select fire version, before I knew better. I never understood how every pencil necked pencil pusher right on up to President Wilson didn't insist all soldiers be issue one in WWI, and never knew why they'd take away the option of firing semi-auto, as well as auto, in the WWII version. The BAR was perfect and would still be today, if we equipped our soldier. Look, it has the same size clip as an M-16, it fires REAL bullets in .30 caliber. It can fire as a machine-gun. It's accurate. It was designed by a weapons design genius. With armor piercing rounds, no regular vehicle was safe.


Even today, when I indulge in video game shoot em ups, I like to select the BAR for my virtual avatar, to wreak havoc upon the pixelated Japanazis.

Roberta X agrees with my sentiments, methinks, and mentions it in the comments here.


The only I thought that could improve it would be a 30 round magazine. AK-47 equipped commies going up against even 7.62 NATO chambered BAR equipped Muhrrican boys would wet their pants in fear.


But, I am older and wiser now. I've talked to Marines that fired it back when I still thought the BAR was the be-all, end-all gun. Their simple comment about it, other than accolades, was, "Well it IS heavy."

Heavy it is. 19 pounds empty. The M-16 weighs 8.5 pounds... LOADED. Why is it so heavy? The receiver is machined from a HUGE piece of steel. Even using CNC machining today, that would be expensive. And heavy, did I mention? If you lightened up the rifle, anyway, you'd probably end up with something that didn't fire very accurately at full auto. Now that I know better, here is what is wrong with it. Expense to machine, capacity mag, heavy. The military likes to use the smaller ammo so they can fire more times at the bad guy, so, even if I don't like it, the .30 is a non-starter on caliber choice for general issue.


Ok, so it isn't perfect. I shouldn't feel indignant that it isn't still issued as a standard primary arm in every allied army in the world. I still like it. If I win a lottery I am buying a few BARs (probably pay $20,000 and up for em.) I might buy one Tommy gun, but lots of BARs.