To what extent did Germany produce Ammunition for captured small Arms?

[Damper]

With Millions of rifles, and automatic weapons captured early in the War what arrangements did the Germans go too, to source ammunition for these weapons systems other than what was captured alongside them?

For example with Millions of Mosin Nagants captured, did Germany produce 7.62x54 for them? Or say purchase fresh production from Finland?

[Poot]

German occupied FN in Belgium produced 6.5X53R for captured Dutch Mannlichers and Lewis guns.

Germany captured so many Soviet small arms and ammunition that it wasn't necessary to produce ammunition for what would make up second and third line weapons by largely non-combat troops. There are a number of photos showing German personnel using Soviet rifles, but these are clearly almost all early war photos. Ex-Soviet, ethnic minority units fielded a number of Soviet small arms while in the service of the Wehrmacht.

Pat

[Damper]

German occupied FN in Belgium produced 6.5X53R for captured Dutch Mannlichers and Lewis guns.

Germany captured so many Soviet small arms and ammunition that it wasn't necessary to produce ammunition for what would make up second and third line weapons by largely non-combat troops. There are a number of photos showing German personnel using Soviet rifles, but these are clearly almost all early war photos. Ex-Soviet, ethnic minority units fielded a number of Soviet small arms while in the service of the Wehrmacht.

Pat

Thanks for the reply, I imagine capuring a production facility like FN's intact, gave them all sorts of options.

Ignoring the Moisin Nagant's captured, weapons like the Degtyaryov and PPS were excellent systems, did the germans ever consider that it would be worthwhile to support captured examples in service.

For example the Finns essentially replaced their Lahti M 26's with captured Degtyaryov's, couldn't the German's could have done something similar?

[JTV]

For example the Finns essentially replaced their Lahti M 26's with captured Degtyaryov's, couldn't the German's could have done something similar?

While I have seen this in some books, it is actually false in a sense that it is simplistic exaggeration. Both Lahti-Saloranta m/26 and captured Degtjarev m/27 were used by Finnish Army side by side well into post-war era. The total number of captured Degtjarev light machine guns was just so large, that there was less need to produce more Lahti-Saloranta m/26 to satisfy need of light machine guns and ultimately the number of captured Detjarev m/27 greatly exceeded that of L-S. The last production patch of 500 Lahti-Saloranta was delivered in summer of 1942, while most Degtjarev m/27 were captured in 1941.

As for the Germans replacing their belt-made general purpose machine guns MG 34 and MG 42 with pan-magazine fed Degtjarev m/27 for which they had no sparepart supply and which used non-standard ammunition, it would not have made any sense. MG 34 and MG 42 were/are better weapons than Degtjarev DP. During World War 2 there were two Finnish projects for developing belt-fed general purpose light machinegun - Sampo L-41 which did not get past field test series and 7.62 x 53R caliber MG 42 with only prototypes being made.

[ROLAND1369]

In the case of the PPsh 41 SMG the Germans did not produce ammo for them but adapted many of them to fire 9 mm P to simplify logistics.

[ROLAND1369]

later when it was time to issue captured weapons to the Volksturm especially the lesser countries French, Belgian, Dutch, and Italian stocks the ammo situation was plagued by shortages. One of the solutions was an attempt to modify the Italian 6.5 MM Carcano carbine to fire the Standard 7.92 MM mauser ammo. It was not successful.

[Poot]

later when it was time to issue captured weapons to the Volksturm especially the lesser countries French, Belgian, Dutch, and Italian stocks the ammo situation was plagued by shortages. One of the solutions was an attempt to modify the Italian 6.5 MM Carcano carbine to fire the Standard 7.92 MM mauser ammo. It was not successful.

That project (taken by the Heinrich Krieghoff firm) actually produced functional but only single shot long and medium rifle and carbine conversions (Carcano Models 1941, 1938 Fucili Corto and Moschetto, respectively). These were likely never intended for any other end users than Polizei and similar units, and I can't imagine that any of them made it very far from Sterzing.

The Italian weapons are a sort of 'special case,' because they were captured much later in the war relative to the rest of the Beutewaffen (September 1943), and they were the only ones that the Germans decided to convert for mostly non-combat unit use. They didn't even bother converting the varieties of other types, including French rifles and carbines, which comprised 40% of the captured weapons alone.

Pat

[ThatZenoGuy]

In the case of the PPsh 41 SMG the Germans did not produce ammo for them but adapted many of them to fire 9 mm P to simplify logistics.

Kinda-sorta, 7.62 Russian and 7.62 Mauser are identical cartridges just loaded to different pressures, the PPSH41 can use German ammunition perfectly fine (allegedly lowers the ROF a bit), but loading Russian ammunition into, say, a Mauser Handgun would be unwise.

So PPSH41 came in two forms, refitted guns with 9mm magazines and unmodified weapons using German stocks of 7.62 Mauser.

[ThatZenoGuy]

In the case of the PPsh 41 SMG the Germans did not produce ammo for them but adapted many of them to fire 9 mm P to simplify logistics.

Kinda-sorta, 7.62 Russian and 7.62 Mauser are identical cartridges just loaded to different pressures, the PPSH41 can use German ammunition perfectly fine (allegedly lowers the ROF a bit), but loading Russian ammunition into, say, a Mauser Handgun would be unwise.

So PPSH41 came in two forms, refitted guns with 9mm magazines and unmodified weapons using German stocks of 7.62 Mauser.

I should probably call myself out on this. The two cartridges are not 'identical', but they are so close to being identical that any weapon that will fire such cartridges will have no issues chambering the other. Excluding powder load differences, etc.