MG.42 in Stalingrad?

Discussions on the small arms used by the Axis forces.
Dima
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 03:17
Location: Russia

MG.42 in Stalingrad?

Post by Dima » 13 Mar 2005 14:26

Hello,

anyone got valid information if Mg.42 was used in Stalingrad in september 1942? Because i've read that 6A units receive it in October-November.Can someone put light on it?

Thnx in advance,Dima.

User avatar
Cool-E
Member
Posts: 244
Joined: 12 May 2004 21:45
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by Cool-E » 15 Mar 2005 23:44

Official adoption date of the MG42 was Oct 12, 1943.

Dima
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 03:17
Location: Russia

Post by Dima » 18 Mar 2005 22:18

Wow,Cool-E,didn't know that!

I've read that they used it in Afrika for the first time on 10.06.42 at Bir-Hakeim,but there were only 6 pieces.

Thnx alot!

User avatar
Cool-E
Member
Posts: 244
Joined: 12 May 2004 21:45
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by Cool-E » 18 Mar 2005 23:02

This is possible as the earliest known MG42 is dated 1942. THere were also thousands of prototypes known as the MG39/41 that are believed to be identical to the MG42. Many guns were made and sent to the field before the official adoption date.

Dima
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 03:17
Location: Russia

Post by Dima » 19 Mar 2005 04:10

Cool, are u sure that it was 12.10.43...maybe it was 12.10.42?

Dima
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 03:17
Location: Russia

Post by Dima » 19 Mar 2005 22:40

Anyone got photos of MG.39/41?

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2491
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 18:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

Post by Christian W. » 19 Mar 2005 23:00

This photo was taken in Stalingrad, and that looks like MG42.

Image

User avatar
Cool-E
Member
Posts: 244
Joined: 12 May 2004 21:45
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by Cool-E » 20 Mar 2005 00:19

Dima wrote:Anyone got photos of MG.39/41?


According to the Myrvang book:

"Since the earliest manual observed for the MG42 states that it was formerly known as the MG39/41, it is assumed that the MG42 was identical to the MG39/41, or that any differences between the two were minor."

page 127

Dima
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 03:17
Location: Russia

Post by Dima » 20 Mar 2005 03:21

Thnx again!

User avatar
boko123
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: 22 Sep 2005 15:00
Location: Western Australia

Post by boko123 » 26 Sep 2005 16:23

Hey i dont no if this helps but on the game 'call of duty' (which is extreamly historicaly correct) they german forces definatly used the MG-42 on the Stalingrad mission.

User avatar
Kristian S.
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 17 Apr 2005 10:20
Location: Germany

Post by Kristian S. » 26 Sep 2005 16:37

[quote="Christian W."]This photo was taken in Stalingrad, and that looks like MG42.

I think the quality/size is too bad to deceide wether it is an MG 42 or MG 34.

User avatar
Reich Ruin
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 28 Mar 2004 03:59
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Reich Ruin » 30 Sep 2005 05:25

Christian W. wrote:This photo was taken in Stalingrad, and that looks like MG42.

Image


Sorry Christian but it is obviously a MG34.... look at the barrel! :? There probably where MG42's used in the field long before 1943 but in Stalingrad ? Can't be sure about that. Also I wouldn't use Call Of Duty as a reference.... or any other WWII video game. For example in the same game, the German's are using MP44's in Stalingrad!!! Yes there where mkb.42 prototypes being used on the eastern front at that time but only limited production and not in Stalingrad.

User avatar
Mr Holmes
Member
Posts: 1009
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 12:14
Location: Australia

Post by Mr Holmes » 30 Sep 2005 10:36

Wildly OT post:

Reich Ruin wrote: Also I wouldn't use Call Of Duty as a reference.... or any other WWII video game.


Care to clarify that mate?8O




:lol:

User avatar
Reader3000
Member
Posts: 2114
Joined: 10 Nov 2002 16:01

Post by Reader3000 » 30 Sep 2005 14:05

Video games are no reference for historical research..they are not to be seen as "sources" :roll:

User avatar
Mr Holmes
Member
Posts: 1009
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 12:14
Location: Australia

Post by Mr Holmes » 30 Sep 2005 15:00

Panzerass wrote:Video games are no reference for historical research..they are not to be seen as "sources" :roll:


relax, it was a bad attempt at a joke...

Return to “Small Arms”