In the course of time different methods of mine clearance were developed and tested. A quick clearing of larger areas was to be achieved by machines. For example, armored vehicles specially converted for this purpose pushed massive cylindrical clearing devices in front of them, which detonated the mines without causing any damage to the vehicle itself. In impassable terrain or areas with heavy vegetation, however, this method was usually ruled out. In these cases, portable mine detectors had to be used. The mines were marked with a warning flag after detection until the time was found to dig them out by hand. During an attack, possibly still under enemy fire, this kind of search was hardly feasible.

In early 1940, the idea therefore arose to detonate laid mines by means of a so-called “Knallteppich” (literally translated as “bang carpet”). Sometimes it is also referred to as a “blasting carpet” or “blasting net”). This net was made of explosive igniter cord and could be laid over a detected minefield. When ignited by a fuse, it detonated, and the blast wave was sufficient to detonate the mines below it.

The Waffen-SS also showed great interest in this development and on 4 September 1941 a meeting took place between representatives of the Heeres-Waffenamt and the SS-Waffenamt. SS-Gruppenführer Hans Jüttner, as head of the SS-Führungshaupt- und Kommandoamt, received a protocol of this meeting that shows the technical details and the still unsolved problems.

Due to the positive assessment by the Pi.Lehr-Btl.2 in Dessau-Roßlau, 3,200 “Knallzündschnurteppiche” (blasting cord nets) were ordered and delivered to the troops. However, at this point in time there was no feedback. The carpets delivered had a length of 10 meters, a width of 7.5 meters and a mesh size of 10 to 15 centimeters. The weight was about 0.5 kilograms per square meter. The nets could be laid next to each other to cover areas of any size. It was not necessary to connect them, but they should overlap by about 10 cm to ensure a proper activation. If necessary, such carpets could also be made provisionally by stretching igniter cords over a slatted frame. When laid out, the carpets were insensitive to rifle ammunition (including tracer ammunition), but extremely sensitive to shrapnel, which caused an immediate detonation.

According to a leaflet of June 1942, the easiest way to unroll the rolled net was by two men using a rod inserted into the roll and, to the surprise of the opponent, preferably at dusk or in the dark. The loud bang of the exploding nets was to be camouflaged by simultaneous fire of the artillery. So far so good, but from this we can already see the disadvantages: to roll out the net, the two soldiers had to walk through the minefield themselves. And this, as far as possible, in the dark! Furthermore, it turned out that the nets worked very well with anti-tank mines, but almost not at all with anti-personnel mines. Trials with treated, meshless fabric (nitrated cotton cloths) brought no success.

As an alternative to the dangerous rolling out by hand, the use of line-throwing devices was tested and found to be useful. A rope was attached to an anchor, with which the net could then be pulled over the minefield. However, the method only worked in unobstructed terrain, otherwise the carpet tore when pulled over rocks or vegetation. Another idea was laying the nets from the air and so together with the Luftwaffe, they tested dropping the nets from airplanes. The success was moderate. A helicopter was a better option, but this would not have made much sense due to the danger of getting shot down while hoovering so close to the front line.

Another development called automatic net-layer did not get beyond the planning phase. A light vehicle, steered from a safe distance by cables, would have rolled out carpets 3-meters-wide over the minefield. It was controlled from a PzKpfw II, which protected the operating crew from spall. The Talbot wagon factory in Aachen had produced a prototype, but shortly afterwards the order was cancelled as “not decisive for the war”.

Although the idea with the blasting nets was well-intentioned, it failed due to the rigors of reality. No type of net or laying device was actually introduced by the Heer or Waffen-SS.

The Keiler 25.1 is also easy and intuitive to operate. The central scroll wheel controls the menu, zoom and other functions. The menu has a standard, custom, and basic mode and a quick-access menu that can be customized for frequently used functions. The design makes it easy to locate all important buttons intuitively, even in complete darkness. The Keiler 25.1 also has an internal memory capacity of 32 GB, making it simple to capture photos and videos from your hunt.

“Liemke thermal optics have been a hit with hunters here in the U.S. and those who want to observe their surroundings and nature at night,” said Jason Evans, CEO, Blaser Group. “The new Keiler 25.1 is the smallest, most compact of our Keiler line. It’s easy to carry in a pocket and delivers powerful performance.”

Features:

• 25mm objective lens
• Start-up time of only five seconds
• Ceramic VOx detector with 384×288 pixel resolution
• OLED display with 1024×768 pixel resolution
• 50 Hz refresh rate
• 2.4x basic magnification (digital zoom up to 10x)
• Five color modes
• Waterproof rating of IP67  (dustproof / waterproof for brief immersion)
• Battery run time: up to 10 hours
• Weight: 15.69 ounces

MSRP: $2,777.00

Successful inventors often have to think outside the box. In weapons technology, too, many a smirked-at pipe dream has turned out to be a great success. But now and then it’s difficult to distinguish deliberate charlatanry from actual conviction. This is a problem that the SS-Waffenamt also had to contend with when so-called “inventors” described their ideas in grandiose terms. Like Dr. Christian Fuchs, for example, with his centrifugal machine gun.

Machine guns became an indispensable weapon in warfare. Their firepower helped both in attack and defense. On days of heavy fighting, however, this turned into hard work for the ammunition carriers, considering that a German MG34 could easily fire 800 rounds per minute. The MG42 even managed 1,500 rounds in the same amount of time.

Dr. Fuchs, from Poznań in the Nazi-occupied Reichsgau Wartheland area of Poland, who had a doctorate in law, had the idea of developing a machine gun that used kinetic energy instead of gunpowder to impart thrust to projectiles. Whether he was aware of other prior attempts to create such a device is unknown. He approached the Heereswaffenamt (Army Ordnance Office) with this idea and on 8 February 1943 his project was discussed during a weapons demonstration at the proving ground Kummersdorf as the agenda item “Development of a new machine gun with mechanical projectile acceleration.” According to Dr. Fuchs, his invention was recognized as correct in principle, but the development time needed to create a weapon suitable for frontline use was judged to be too long and he was refused further support.

However, Dr. Fuchs did not give up that quickly. He contacted a Nazi SS office in Poznań and presented his idea there on 20 November. “With this machine, the projectiles are hurled away without explosives, i.e. silently,” it was reported, and that, “Dr. Fuchs has already achieved a performance of 50 shots per second, that is 3,000 shots per minute, with his model.” Furthermore, he lambasted the lack of support from the Speer Ministry, declaring that he needed only six months to complete a weapon “which could be used immediately at the front,” but, of course, only if qualified mechanics and raw materials were made available to him. Furthermore, Dr. Fuchs urged a quick decision, because the suspension period for the public announcement of his patent would soon end and failing to gain an extension would be contrary to the interest of national defense. He urgently requested the support of Gauleiter SS-Obergruppenführer Arthur Greiser and wanted to demonstrate the invention to him personally.

Despite the support of the SS, Dr. Fuchs was unable to procure the necessary high-speed motors and other individual parts. In May 1944, he travelled specially to the Siemens company in Berlin where he learned the compact, high-speed electric motors he had planned to use in his design were no longer being built. Instead, he had to make do with motors that provided only 7,000 revolutions per minute, for which, however, a gearbox was necessary. Siemens agreed “in the most obliging manner” to produce a model of the machine gun and also commissioned the development of a gearbox that ran in oil. But nothing came of it.

In June 1944, Dr. Fuchs wrote to the SS headquarters (Technical Office VIII FEP), “Due to the two heavy air raids on Poznań, the workshops of the company entrusted with the construction of the gearbox were partly destroyed. […] In addition, the manager of the Poznań workshop of the Siemens company has collapsed due to work overload and is therefore no longer able to provide the kindly promised help in the construction of the machine gun.” Dr. Fuchs then built a prototype gearbox himself that reached a speed of 15,000 rpm. On the finished weapon, one bullet would have left the barrel for every revolution.

Dr. Fuchs felt very important. He again pressed for help from the SS, who this time were to make certain parts for him. The work would only progress so slowly and Fuchs urged, “since I must not neglect my professional duties as a judge, nor can I cease my intensive collaboration as Hauptsturmführer of the SA, lest I betray the cause. […] Without the requested help, it would hardly be possible to make the new weapon operational for this war. In my opinion, however, that would not be in the Führer’s interests”. Two weeks later, the SS-Führungshauptamt agreed to have the parts manufactured in SS workshops and asked for drawings to be sent to them. In mid-July, the finished parts were sent to Dr. Fuchs.

Now the personal staff of the Reichsführer-SS also intervened. SS-Obersturmbannführer Gräßler wanted to know why the matter was taking so long. The head of the technical office, SS-Brigadeführer Schwab, himself a doctor of engineering, made it clear in his answer of 3 October 1944 what he thought of the centrifugal machine gun. He reportedly said the invention was a technical gimmick and that such a weapon would weigh 100 times more than a normal machine gun and the trajectory would be uncontrollable. All this did not justify the use of an extensive test facility and the assignment of dozens of experts, he continued. Presumably in order not to upset anyone, he added, “It must remain the case that we give Dr. Fuchs further opportunities to improve his ideas and to see for himself on basic tests how far things can be realized. […] Dr. Fuchs has now expressed the wish to be transferred to the Waffen-SS in order to be able to continue working here within the framework of the Technical Office. I have no objection to this and will clear the way for him to do so. With the best will in the world, that is all that can be done at the moment.”

Unfortunately, this is where the story ends. The further fate of Dr. Fuchs, the whereabouts of his prototype and the technical drawings of his design are unknown. But, based on what we know of his ambition, the ammunition consumption of his invention would have been incredibly high, if the system worked at all. With some basic math we can see how absurdly the idea was likely viewed at the time. The common heavy pointed bullet (schweres Spitzgeschoss) of the rifle cartridge weighed 12.8 grams. At the intended target of 30,000 revolutions per minute, the centrifugal machine gun would thus have hurled 384 kilograms (about 85 pounds) of lead per minute at the enemy. So, assuming the technology could be developed to realize Fuchs’ design, the weapons insatiable appetite for ammunition would have precluded it from ever becoming a reality given that ammunition was already in short supply in almost every corner of the German Reich by this point of the war.

Unlike the U.S. Air Force, which thinks a hard-to-hit with skeletonized zip gun is a survival weapon, the German Luftwaffe went all-out, offering its pilots the ultimate survival weapon: a high quality, high priced, traditional German drilling-type rifle made by the illustrious J.P. Sauer and Sohn. This masterpiece of the gunmaker’s art had two 12-gauge barrels, with the right barrel designed for birdshot and the left barrel regulated for the famed German Brenneke shotgun slugs. Underneath the 12-gauge barrels was a 9.3x74R rifle barrel. This caliber is often preferred to its rival, the .375 H&H Magnum, which at the time, had seen numerous cases of poorly constructed bullets breaking up and failing to perform satisfactory on African game. The German ammunition makers made sure that ALL their bullets met standards and never failed to perform correctly. Not just most of them, like the numerous makers of .375 H&H Magnum cartridges did.

The utility of a 12-gauge shotgun on all sizes of birds and small game needs no elaboration. It has long been a favorite meat-getter around the world. The German Brenneke Torpedo Slug is not only super accurate, but it has also killed all African big game. A man armed with this drilling was able to take any game in the world while decisively dealing with any animal that attacked him. This is in sharp contrast to the U.S. Air Force survival guns which are chambered for the smallest and weakest small game cartridges and are virtually useless against many attacking big animals. It’s worth noting that after the war, I had a friend in Norway whose father was a commercial pilot flying the polar route. The airline had the same sort of drilling in the cockpit of every plane in case they went down. Being able to shoot seals and birds to feed the downed passengers and defend them against hungry polar bears was something that required this exact sort of gun. Once again, the value of human life was placed above the high cost of a top-quality weapon. They accepted the price for the ultimate subsistence and survival gun; a gun that was easy to make hits with and that they could be sure would provide sustenance and safety.

DEVELOPMENT

The survival drilling was the brainchild of Hermann Göring, the head of the Luftwaffe, Nazi-Germany’s air force. In addition to being a WWI fighter ace, Hermann had also taken over Baron Manfred von Richthofen’s command after the great ace was killed in combat. Göring was an avid hunter and quite an expert on sporting firearms. A former fighter ace himself; he wanted the absolute best for his fellow pilots in the Luftwaffe. He was keenly aware that the German drilling was the most versatile gun available, as it offered the ability to kill anything from birds to deer to elephants without changing the load in the gun. The word “drilling” comes from the German word “drei” which means “three”, hence it means a three-barreled gun.

For the contractor, he chose J.P. Sauer and Sohn, one of the finest drilling-makers of all time. They did not disappoint him. The Sauer Luftwaffe drillings were made to the highest German standards. They were lively and accurate pointing as shotguns and steady when sighting as a rifle. If you couldn’t make hits with the M30 drilling, then you couldn’t make hits with anything.

SPECIFICATIONS AND OPERATION

The finished gun delivered to the Luftwaffe was 7.5 pounds and 42 inches in overall length with a 25.6-inch barrel. It was a blitz action, having the mechanism mounted on the trigger plate. There is a forever-unresolved dispute over whether the trigger plate action was first developed by the Scottish “best quality” gunmaker John Dickson and Son of Edinburgh, or it was developed in Germany. John Dickson and Son employed a lot of German workmen making his guns at the time, and there’s no way to know if they took the design to Germany or if they brought it from Germany. John Dickson and Son also made 3-barreled shotguns in all barrel positions, as the trigger plate action allows this. Again, we don’t know whether they or the Germans were the first to make a three-barreled blitz-action gun. One thing we do know is that John Dickson and Son patented the trigger plate action.

To give you an idea of the high standards required of a three-barreled gun I knew a man who had to choose between building both a best quality double shotgun and a best quality double rifle, or one drilling (all with hand tools) as a capstone project before he could be accepted into the Belgium Gunmaker’s Guild. He chose to make the two doubles. Drillings are hard to make.

The Sauer drilling has a Greener-style crossbolt, as well as the traditional double locking lugs under the barrels. A Greener-style safety on the side is used as the normal safety position for a double barrel gun is taken up by the barrel selector on the drilling. To fire the rifle barrel underneath the two shotgun barrels, you push the selector forward which causes the V-notch 100-meter rear sight to pop up and the front trigger to engage the rifle barrel. Pulling the selector back causes the rear sight to fold down and activates the two side by side shotgun barrels. The front trigger fires the right barrel with birdshot while the rear trigger fires the left barrel with the Brenneke slug.

The barrels have side clips and there are gold-plated cocking indicators on the top of the receiver. The receiver is case hardened, and the blued barrels are made of the best Krupp steel.

There are three ordnance marks on the M30 drilling. The stock and the barrels both have the Luftwaffe Eagle, and the Luftwaffe ordnance stamp of Eagle 2 is on the front locking lug.

CASE

A gun without ammo and accessories is useless, so the M30 Luftwaffe Survival drilling came in a green-painted aluminum case. It weighed 32 pounds, fully loaded, and it was intended that the pilot would remove it from the plane after a crash landing. The case contained the drilling with the barrel and forearm separated from the action and stock in the European manner of trunk cases. It also contained a cleaning kit, sling (supremely important for an exhausted and possibly injured pilot in a survival situation), a 20-round box of 9.3x74R soft point hunting ammo, a 25-round box of 12-gauge Brenneke Torpedo slugs, and a 25-round box of 12-gauge birdshot shells. You can live off the land for quite a while with this kit.

USE

The M30 was standard issue for Messerschmidt BF109 fighter planes and Stuka dive bombers during the North African campaign where it was well appreciated by pilots flying over the Dark Continent. It also was used for trap shooting, as this training was mandatory for fighter pilots. Hermann Goring also presented some of them to Luftwaffe heroes. The Knights Order of the Iron Cross may have been a great honor for a Nazi pilot, but this was a practical gift that promised many days of peacetime pleasure. Since the drilling is a traditional German sporting gun, these could expect to see a lot of use.

CONCLUSION

Issuing such a high-quality weapon is the ultimate expression of the high value that a military places on its members. This was a situation where only the very best would do. Having been a licensed Alaskan trapper and a subsistence hunter, I consider this the ultimate subsistence hunting gun. I would love to have a drilling like this stocked to my measurements. The last thing I would want is one of the American Air Force skeletonized “survival” guns. I have never seen a real subsistence hunter using such garbage. They sought after the best gun they could get for their pilots, and the Germans got it right with the M30.

On their advance through the conquered territories of the German Reich, the Allies often discovered development projects that had ended up on the drawing board. This was also the case with the Panzerhetzer as a motorized platform for the anti-tank rocket launcher Panzerschreck.

In February 1945, soldiers of the Ninth U.S. Army discovered some mechanical drawings of an unknown vehicle called the Panzerhetzer in the premises of the Neander Motorfahrzeug GmbH in Düren-Rölsdorf near the city of Aachen in North Rhine-Westphalia. However, they could not find any further documents about it, photographs or even finished individual parts. Nevertheless, it is an interesting design for the mobilization of the very effective Raketenpanzerbüchse, better known as Panzerschreck (tank fright) or Ofenrohr (stove pipe).

The company Neander Motorfahrzeug GmbH was founded in 1924 by Ernst Neumann, who called himself Neander. As an ingenious inventor, designer, painter, and illustrator, he was a very busy man. Today, he is mainly known for his three- and four-wheeled driving machines. Altogether, about 2,000 motorbikes and about 20 to 25 automobiles were produced until the dissolution of the company after his death in 1954. However, his great goal of creating a simple and affordable people´s car remained only a dream until the end because of the sale prices due to the handcrafted individual production.

Design

Neander seemed to have designed the Panzerhetzer on his own initiative, and it seems reasonable to assume that it was primarily intended to save his company during the difficult wartime period. In the autumn of 1940, he applied to the Wirtschaftsgruppe Fahrzeugindustrie (Economic Group of the Vehicle Industry) for community aid, which was devastatingly rejected: “The worthiness of your company to be preserved has been denied by the responsible district economic office”. At this time, Neander began to design a small motorbike for parachute dropping, as well as a motorized cart with rear steering. As can be seen from the drawing of 25 November 1943, the chassis for the Panzerhetzer was also designed as a tricycle, with two wheels in tandem arrangement at the front and one wheel each at the rear left and right. Steering was via the two rear wheels.

Likewise, the position of the driver is unusual; he lies on his stomach. Due to the forward sloping floor plate and an additional support for the driver’s chest, they can see forward and operate the steering wheel that’s placed flat in front of them. Thier right shoulder is directly behind the shoulder rest of the grenade launcher in order to be ready to fire immediately in case of an emergency. Their outstretched legs, in turn, reach past the fuel tank on the left and right.

The Panzerhetzer was powered by a compact internal combustion engine, about which no technical data is available—except for the hand-written note “250-350 cc.” It is attached to the front left of the frame and drives both front tandem wheels by means of a chain drive. To compensate for its weight, the spare wheel sits opposite on the right side. The turning movement of the steering wheel was transmitted to the rear wheels via a revolving cable or chain. Interestingly, the drawing even shows a ball-head hitch at the rear, intended for an additional ammunition trailer also developed by Neander.

Armament

Above the tandem wheels, Neander placed a tube with a mount for the Raketenpanzerbüchse. It was slightly offset to the right to bring the weapon in front of the driver’s right shoulder. In addition, the weapon acted as a counterweight to the heavy engine on the other side. The mount on top of the tube could be swiveled in all directions and could be raised or lowered. To reload the rocket launcher from the rear, it could be pushed forward. There was a storage compartment for 13 rounds underneath the floor plate.

The 8.8cm rocket-propelled grenade with its hollow charge was very effective and feared by the enemy. At an optimal angle of impact, it could penetrate up to 160mm of armored steel. With the early rocket-propelled grenades, however, the gunners suffered from the combustion residues of the projectiles thrown back during firing, which is why a gas mask was often worn as a face shield. Later versions were fitted with a clip-on protective shield with a glass viewing window. Because of Neander’s weapon mount, however, it would not have been possible to attach it unmodified.

Trials and Reception

In 1943, Neander was allowed to demonstrate his Panzerhetzer to a delegation of the High Command of the Wehrmacht in Berlin. According to his diary entries, the vehicle impressed in maneuverability and cross-country mobility even under poor conditions. In November 1943, the company received an order for the production and delivery of two vehicles—one with hand operation and one with combined foot and hand operation. But it did not come to that, as Ernst Neumann fell seriously ill and had to spend many months in hospital. Afterwards, he continued working on the project again, as evidenced by a second surviving set of drawings with the designation Panzerhetzer III, dated 15 May 1944. Shortly before the end of the war, he put the design of the Panzerhetzer IV on paper. It was armed with six Panzerfäusten arranged in two packs of three on each side.

Practical Use

However, quite a few changes would have been necessary for the vehicle to be ready for use in combat. Armor plating is not visible on the drawings, not even the exposed petrol tank between the driver’s legs is protected. And it is located directly in line with the rear of the Panzerschreck. Alone without a helper, the driving gunner would have had to carry out the loading process himself after each shot. Aiming with the rear sight would also have forced him to leave his prone position, depending on the direction of fire. The low weight of only 10kg made the RPzB 54 very mobile as a portable weapon for anti-tank fighters. Would such a vehicle really have been a help as a firing platform?

Post-War

Neander’s hometown of Düren was the target of over fifty air raids during the war. The heaviest on 16 November 1944 cost the lives of more than 3,000 people. His factory also suffered considerable damage and the residential building remained uninhabitable for a long time. According to his diary, all vehicle parts, materials, and tools were looted. Nothing was left of the Panzerhetzer either. At the age of 74, Ernst Neumann had to start from scratch again. He designed a few more technically innovative motorbikes, but then devoted the last years of his life mainly to painting, creating over 100 paintings by the time of his death.

Panzerhetzer III Specs:

FG 42 (type 1). The rifle grenade trials were carried out at Tarnewitz with this early type rifle.

By Michael Heidler

The success of the rifle grenade device for the Karabiner 98k during the first years of World War II resulted in a series of launcher developments for other German weapons. For most new weapon designs the launching of rifle grenades was provided – therefore also for the full automatic paratrooper rifle Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 of the Luftwaffe (Air Force).

To avoid a completely new development, the tried and tested Schießbecher (cup launcher) of the Wehrmacht was chosen. However, the clamp mount of the launcher could not be used because it did not fit the shape of the FG 42’s muzzle so the clamp mount was eliminated and instead an internal thread was cut into the rear end of the launcher. That way it could be screwed onto the muzzle-thread of the barrel. The solution was not perfect, because in combat it would have been unfavorable to remove (and stow somewhere) the flash-hider before screwing on the launcher.

The following section is an excerpt of the preliminary trial report No. 2 Testing of the paratrooper rifle FG 42 (B.Nr. E6/1776/43 geh) of the Luftwaffe proving ground at Tarnewitz from July 2, 1943:

Cup launcher for rifle grenades:

General:
The proving ground Tarnewitz has received two types of launchers for rifle grenades:

Launcher sight 235 m and cup launcher 171 mm length (fig.34)

Launcher sight 250 m and cup launcher 176 mm length (fig.35).

To 1.) The 235 m sight is significantly weaker in its design than the 250 m sight. The sight body can be bent sideways easily, thus making a constant adjustment of the weapon questionable. Due to its short thread the launcher cannot be screwed onto the muzzle far enough for a solid fix (fig.36).

To 2.) The 250 m sight is deemed suitable because of its greater strength. After reworking its mount (model Tarnewitz), the sight can be fixed directly behind the handguard in the same way as the 235 m sight, so that the magazine well is not blocked (fig.37 old model and fig.38 new model). The launcher can be screwed onto the muzzle until it gets hold by the spring-loaded catch of the flash-hider.

Early cup launcher (length 171 mm) and early launcher sight with a scale up to 235 meters. (Tarnewitz report fig. 34)

a) Function:

Trial shooting with the large AT rifle grenade (grosse Gewehr-Panzergranate) did not lead to any objections. The empty propelling cartridge cases were not ejected because the bolt does not move backwards far enough. A comparison shooting with moveable and locked bolts did not show any differences in Vo (velocity) and precision. Slow-motion pictures clearly show that the bolt opens only after the grenade has left the launcher cup. Therefore a locking of the bolt is not necessary. For feeding the cartridges the standard magazine is suitable.

The recoil when launching rifle grenades is quite heavy, so the face of the shooter is in jeopardy by the magazine during flat angle shooting when the butt is placed on his shoulder. For this kind of shooting it is necessary to remove the magazine.

The sight misaligns after every shot because of the weak catch spring. A stronger catch spring is necessary.

About 70% of the propelling cartridge cases ruptured, making a quick reloading of the weapon difficult. The tolerance of the stems of the AT rifle grenades is very different. 10% of the grenades could not be inserted into the launcher cup, while other grenades fit excessively loose.

With messages E6/1369/43 geh. II A1e v. 12.6.43 Wa Prw.1 and GL/C-E6 the complaints concerning sight and ammunition were reported to the Waffenamt.

The reinforced cup launcher (length 176 mm) and the sturdier launcher sight with a scale up to 250 meters. (Tarnewitz report fig. 35)

b) Durability:

One weapon was tested with 1,385 shots of the large AT training rifle grenade. After 70-80 shots the butt of the weapon moved onto the rear of the receiver, so that the metal lining of the butt’s front edge got bent. After 165 shots a small part of the bolt broke away. Other fractures did not occur.

When launching rifle grenades the launcher cup tightens itself very strongly on the muzzle thread of the rifle. The existing light metal spanner contained in the carrying pouch of the rifle grenade launcher set proves too weak for detaching the launcher cup. For use with the FG 42 a sturdier spanner of the same design is necessary.

c) Precision:

The determination of the precision of flat and high angle shots is not yet completed. Due to the different tolerances of the training grenades available on site, no evaluable results could be yet achieved. The precision shots carried out so far with large AT rifle grenades generally performed satisfactorily.

When launching HE rifle grenades in high angle the average point of impact partially exceeds the range adjusted at the sight up to three times. The investigation of this case is being continued in connection with Wa Prw.1.

At the time of the trials, an improved model of the buttstock was in development by Rheinmetall because the trials have shown that the first model made of sheet metal was way too weak for launching rifle grenades. Later weapons got buttstocks made of plywood.

In this context also the bipod attached to the front of the FG 42 was cause for some criticism:

Following a laterally moving target is difficult: the shooter has either to lift the weapon or to change his position. The vertical pivoting range is about 15% smaller as with the middle support, thus making aiming with the rifle grenade sight more difficult

Because of the folding-direction of the bipod, the weapon’s muzzle easily falls into the dirt when getting into position, when shooting and when changing the magazine.

Pressing the shoulder against the buttstock during full automatic fire for achieving a better hit density is impossible. This is also necessary when launching rifle grenades due to the heavy recoil.

Most of these points of criticisms lapsed after a modification of the bipod when its mounting point was moved towards the center section of the rifle.

For close combat fight the FG 42 was equipped with a spike bayonet, stored under the barrel when not in use. It could not be used while the launcher is attached to the muzzle.

Although the proving ground at Tarnewitz came to the conclusion use of the cup launcher is readily possible, and also other trials were carried out, the rifle grenade launcher for the FG 42 has neither been officially introduced nor issued to the troops.

by Jean Francois Legendre

A common feature among all former Warsaw Pact Armies is that ammunition for machine guns is not provided belted from the factories. Unlike Western Armed Forces for which machine gun belts are composed of disintegrating links which are discarded after firing, in the Former Warsaw Pact Armies, the belts for infantry machine guns (up to 14.5mm) are considered as weapon parts and are to be reused until unserviceable. Obviously, the non-disintegrating pattern of the belts helps the recovery for further use.

Since machine gun belts are not factory loaded with ammunition, this task is then delegated down to the unit level. In order to cope with this tedious activity, especially when large quantities of ammunition is to be belted, belt loading machines are especially required.

The former East German Armed Forces had to cope with the same situation, enhanced to an even worse level, due to the diversity of the armament used among its different units (National Popular Army (National Volksarmee – NVA), Police (Volkspolizei – Vopo), Border Guards (Grenztruppe – GT), Militarized Police (Kasernierte Volkspolizei – KSP), etc.). Therefore, a unique multipurpose belt-loading device has been designed to handle all the different machine gun belts in service; in one compact unit.

On the basis of the Second World War German “Gurtfüller 34”, the crank-operated belt-loader for MG34/42 belts, a new multipurpose belt-loader was adopted for service in 1964 under the designation “Gurtfüllvorrichtung 64” (“Belt-loading device 64”.) This modular machine is capable of loading different belts in calibers 7.62×39, 7.62x54R and 7.92×57, thanks to interchangeable inserts. Furthermore, it will also fill AK47 magazines for caliber 7.62×39. Loose cartridges are driven from a curved feed-tray in which the rounds are manually placed side by side which enables the loader to align the required belting sequence (ball, tracer, incendiary, etc.).

In caliber 7.62X54R, belts for the SGM (modernized SG-43) and PK’s family can be loaded. The required insert is engraved “7.62 mR” which reads “7.62 mit Rand” (with rim).

In caliber 7.92×57, belts for the MG34 and MG 42 can also be loaded. The corresponding insert is engraved “7.92”.

Finally, for the 7.62×39 caliber, an extra spacer engraved “M43” is first to be inserted into the feed-tray so as to accommodate the shorter round. Two different inserts are provided to handle the two different types of belts available for the RPD machine guns. The first insert is engraved “M43sG” and is designed for the original Russian style belt where the links are positioned within the cartridge extraction groove.

The second insert, engraved “M43uG” is provided to cope with the later RPD belt style where the link is positioned by a re-curved tab folded over the cartridge base. A third, more complex insert, is provided to load MPi-KM (variant of the Russian AKM) magazines and is engraved “M43 M.”

It is evident that the feature which slows down the rate of belting capacity of this machine is the manual filling of the feed-tray. Therefore, for each caliber, 7.62×39 and 7.62X54R, a special feed accessory is provided, respectively denoted as “GFV-64, Z1” – Zubehör 1 (accessory 1) and “GFV-64, Z2” – Zubehör 2 (accessory 2). This feed-device, in the form of a large pan, is operated by the main crank handle motion by means of a driving chain. This simultaneously enables, in one single turn, to move the belt one step forward, to insert a cartridge into the belt and rotates the pan to feed one cartridge in the correct position. More than 300 7.62x54R rounds and 500 7.62×39 rounds can be thrown in bulk into the pan. By means of a grooved wheel, cartridges are ingeniously pre-positioned in the correct position before being fed into the loader itself.

No doubt that many former East-German armorers and soldiers have been grateful to this loader for having preserved their fingers, as anyone who has ever manually loaded belts can attest to. Since the re-unification of Germany in 1989 and thereafter the re-organization of the Armed Forces, it seems that many of these multipurpose loaders have been discarded. Only the screwdrivers and brushes contained in the boxes have been salvaged for further private use; indeed those tools are invariably missing in every box the author has examined.

By Frank Iannamico

During the Second World War the German Wehrmacht fielded some of the most unique and advanced weapons of the conflict. Many of the design features and manufacturing methods can still be found utilized in the modern weapons of today. Although German arms like the MG42, MP44 and the MP40 were certainly innovative, there was one design that really stood out. That weapon was the rare Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 or FG42.The FG42 was manufactured especially for the elite Luftwaffe (German Air Force) paratroopers the Fallschirmjäger.

The FG42 is a lightweight select-fire weapon that appears to be very similar to a modern assault rifle except that it is chambered for the full power 8mm Mauser cartridge. The 8mm (7.92×57) cartridge was the standard rifle and machine gun round of all the German forces in WWII. The German paratroopers insisted on the full power cartridge because of their experiences in the invasion of the British held Greek isle of Crete in May of 1941.

The German airborne invasion of Crete was a disaster for the Fallschirmjäger. For one thing the 38,000 British, New Zealanders and Greeks who held the island were fully aware of the forthcoming invasion and were well prepared. Even though the Germans eventually won the battle their casualties were extremely high. Adolph Hitler was infuriated with the high cost of taking Crete and lost all confidence in the future of the airborne concept of warfare.

After the German gliders and paratroopers landed on Crete they discovered that they were well dispersed from one another and separated from much of their equipment, which included their rifles, machine guns and ammunition. The machine guns and much of the paratrooper’s equipment had to be air dropped separately in containers because of the weight. The Fallschirmjäger troops were left only with their short-range MP40 submachine guns and pistols with which to fight the British Empire troops that were well dug in 1000 meters away. The virtually defenseless Germans were easy prey for the defending troops that were equipped with long-range .303 caliber Enfield rifles, Bren guns and artillery.

The development of the proposed FG42 was first requested by the Air Ministry through the German Army Weapons office, the Heereswaffenamt. The request was denied partially because of the rivalry that existed between the German Airforce and the Army. The German Air Ministry took up the task themselves and began searching for contractors to develop and produce their proposed new weapon exclusively for the Luftwaffe. Many German companies were contacted, but only two companies, Reinmetall and Kriegoff, were interested in pursuing the development of the new arm. Both companies submitted prototype weapons, and Reinmetall’s design was chosen for further development. Even though Reinmetall designed and developed the FG42, Kriegoff -Suhl was eventually chosen to mass-produce it.

Design engineer, Louis Stange, conceived the FG42 at the German Reinmetall-Borsig factory. Mr. Stange was a very talented weapons designer having designed, among others, the MG34 and MG42 machine guns. While the FG42 was being developed and tested, the new 7.92×33 Kurz cartridge was also being developed by the army. As the principle designer of the weapon, Louis Stange thought that the new midrange Kurz round would be ideal for the new FG42, and a few weapons were converted to fire the 7.92 Kurz cartridge. The small 7.92 Kurz round made the required weight and other design specifications of the FG42 much easier to meet. The Luftwaffe paratroopers however, adamantly opposed the use of anything but the full power 8mm cartridge for the weapon. The Luftwaffe’s original concept of the FG42 was that it would replace the service rifle, sniper rifle, machine gun and submachine gun with one weapon. Such a weapon would be ideal for lightly equipped paratroopers and perhaps prevent future disasters as had occurred on Crete.

The FG42 had its combat debut in May of 1943 against the British Army at the battle for the island of Rhodes. Certainly the most famous exploit involving the FG42 weapon was the German rescue of Italian leader Benito Mussolini on September 12, 1943. Mussolini was being held at a mountain top resort in Italy by Italian partisans. A daring glider attack was planned by the Nazis, and Mussolini was successfully rescued by the Fallschirmjäger and SS troops that participated in the operation.

The FG42 was produced in a number of variations. There were several prototypes and experimental models. The only FG42’s that were manufactured in any substantial numbers were the E and G models. The early E models differed so much from the final G variation that they hardly appear to be the same weapon. Even the magazines are not interchangeable between early and later versions. There was even a fair amount of minor feature variations within each model designation. Some features that were common among all models were the folding bipod, straight-line buffered stock, the high profile folding sights, and the 4-sided spike bayonet. Another characteristic all models of the FG42 share is an excessive muzzle flash. The steel double-stack magazines were manufactured in both 10 and 20 round capacities.

The FG42 weapon is gas operated, featuring a gas piston and cylinder assembly located under the barrel. The bolt is attached to the top of the gas piston assembly. The bolt has a camed slot cut into it that rotates the two bolt lugs in or out of the locked position via a fixed stud that protrudes from the gas piston rod. The spring-loaded firing pin is mounted on top of the stud. The sear is moved right or left by the detent stud on the selector for semi or full auto fire. The gas piston has two sear engagement notches, one for semi-automatic fire, the other for full automatic. The FG42 fires from the closed bolt position for semi-automatic and from an open bolt when in the full-automatic mode. Although when firing from the open bolt position, the bolt still turns and locks to the breech before firing.

The 1st (production) model, also often referred to as the model E, is most easily recognized by the radical angle of its pistol grip. The E model featured a receiver painstakingly machined out of steel. Little thought of expense or difficulty of manufacture was given to the early FG42. The E model featured a buffered stamped steel (or aluminum) buttstock, and a bipod that was located just forward of the forearm. The bipod folded forward when not in use. The magazine well is located on the left side of the receiver. The magazine could be replenished via five round stripper clips while remaining in the weapon through a guide machined into the receiver. A single selector lever marked E-S-D controlled the safe-auto and semi-automatic modes of fire. When the selector is placed in the safe position the detent stud of the selector fits into a locking hole in the sear, preventing it from moving. The cyclic rate of the E model was fast at 800-900 rounds per minute. A threaded muzzle brake was installed on the end of the barrel. The E model brake has 32 small 1/6-inch holes drilled in it. The ZFG-42 four-power scope was often issued as standard equipment with the weapon. The E model was very compact with an overall length of just 37.2” and a weight of 11.06 pounds fully loaded. The finish on the E model was a dark blue-black color.

The 2nd (limited production) model, also known as The F model, was totally redesigned and was quite different from the E model. One of the biggest differences was the use of a stamped sheet steel receiver instead of the milled steel receiver used on earlier versions. Critical wartime shortages of steel forced the design to be altered to use more stampings. The pistol grip was re-configured with a more conventional and ergonomic angle. The F model also featured a spring-loaded ejection port cover, a spent case deflector, a wooden buttstock, a redesigned muzzle brake and a variable gas regulator. The bipod was relocated to the muzzle of the barrel and now folded rearward against the barrel when not in use. The model GWZF4 scope was issued with the F and G versions. The safety and fire selector controls were now two separate levers. The newly located separate safety lever blocked the tail of the sear when applied, preventing it from moving. The rounded cocking handle of the E model was replaced with a hook style lever. The overall length of the F model was slightly longer than the E model at 38.2 inches. The F and G models were generally finished in black or the clear phosphate often seen on German weapons of the era. The F or 2nd model was only made in limited numbers and is extremely rare.

The 3rd model, or G model, was the final production version and differed only slightly from the F model. One of the most obvious changes was that of the muzzle brake, that now was a ribbed design. Both the F and G models were fitted with durable double wound springs throughout. Most of the G models were manufactured by Kriegoff, stamped with the code fzs, or L.O. Dietrich using code gcy. Waffenampt inspector stamps, normally seen on other German weapons, are not present on FG42s, because the weapon was not obtained through the normal channels, of the Hereswaffenamt, the German Army Weapons Office.

Accessories issued with the FG42 weapon included a leather sling, and a grenade launcher that screwed onto the barrel in place of the muzzle brake. A cloth bandoleer that was worn draped around the neck was provided, The bandoleer could carry eight spare magazines.

Although the exact number of FG42s manufactured is unknown, it has been estimated that only 5000 to 7000 were made. Only a few of that number survived the war and only a fraction of those made their way to the United States. This of course makes it one of the rarest weapons available on the class III collector’s market today. As a class III enthusiast you certainly know the word expensive is always used in conjunction with rare, and this certainly applies to all models of the FG42. The magazines alone for the FG42, when they can be found can cost as much as many lower end class III weapons. Although the wartime production of the FG42 was relatively small, it had great impact on post war weapons development.