Talk:MG42

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of the Firearms WikiProject, a project devoted to the improvement of firearms coverage on Wikipedia with an emphasis on civilian firearms.

If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MG42 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Minor Edit?

Since when is rewriting the entire article a "minor edit"? Pizza Puzzle

[edit] Spandau

I recall reading Battle and War comics from the UK as a kid where these guns (or possibly the MG34) were known as Spandau. Is this factualy acurate? Htaccess 06:13, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

well theres the Spandau Prison in Germany where Rudolf Hess served a life sentence. thats the only connection I can think of Vroman 00:16, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This [1] is the "Spandau" machine gun. Sorry for the poor picture, it's not a popular weapon. RCMS 19:20, 31 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't the MG08 sometimes referred to as the Spandau? If I remember right (which I probably don't...), some of them had it stamped on the fusee-spring cover, depending on where they were manufactured, leading to Allied forces mistakenly assuming that was the name of the gun. No, I don't have a citation handy! Chris 20:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MG42 and MG 42 article merge

There is another article on the exact same gun at MG 42, with a space in between MG and 42. I dont have time right now, so if anyone interested, perhaps integrate them? --ArcticFrog 15:56, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)ArcticFrog

Gee, just delete the other article and throw out the information that's not in this one.

--ArcticFrog 02:49, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)ArcticFrog

I checked the other one. All the information there is contained in the current one. You can check the history of that page and double-check if you like. Oberiko 23:12, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MG34 jamming

I have read that the MG34 jammed because it was made so well, as in too precise, which made it jam when dust got into it and that this was a main reason for the production of a new gun with more play in the parts. Is this tidbit worth working into the article? Also: didn't anyone critisize the gun for wastefullness of bullets? It must have taken a truckload of bandaleers to keep the thing going. Just my two cents worth... --ArcticFrog 19:22, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)ArcticFrog

The article mentions that the MG42 was considerably more reliable. The high rate of fire of the weapon isn't something that can really be critisizied as there are at least as many arguements which support it. Oberiko 23:36, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
The MG34 had close tolerances, this made it susceptible to fouling which led it to jamming. The MG42 used stamped parts and welded joints which made construction faster and cheaper (the MG34 used more conventional milled parts which required lots of man-hours to build). Tolerances were not as precise as the MG34, made it less sensitive to dirt and fouling. Of course, the loose tolerance made it less accurate than the MG34, but at 1200 rounds/min who cares? :D --Pelladon 05:14, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

The main reason for close tolerances of weapons designed 1920's and 30' was fear of gas warfare, as some battlegases (chlorine?) were highly corrosive and jammed "loose" weapons, so countermeasure to that was to made weapons "gastight". --81.197.218.62 23:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to add a few points...I was watching the History channel and a German alpine WWII vet was interviewed. He said they had to limit fire to 1 second bursts to conserve ammo and that it wasn't easy to control (the aim on) the machine gun. You had to fire in a prone position, the MG42 had too much kick. But he liked the gun a lot.:D And folks, stop using dust as a reason for jamming, it's dirt and powder fouling that causes jams (and overheated metal) —Pelladon 18:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three points

1. "The US Army created training videos". Huh ?

I have changed 'videos' to 'films' - I don't think there were any videos around in the 1940s !

2. "The operating crew consists of three persons".

Have changed 'persons' to 'men' - It might be politically correct to write 'persons', but I don't think there were many female MG42 gunners in WWll !

3. "As it is recoil-operated, if there is no cartridge in the chamber, the weapon must be manually charged with the side-mounted charging handle before it can fire".

I have altered this sentence because it gives (to me at least), the impression that the weapon fires from a closed bolt. Something which personal experience and the sentence in the "Operation" section of the article both refute.
84.130.75.24 16:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The sentence currently implies that the next cartridge is removed from the belt on the bolt's rearwards stroke, but my understanding is that it's actually pushed forwards out of the belt on the forwards stroke. Anybody want to clarify this, or should I have a go at rewording it? Chris 20:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


I assume that nobody objects, so I've changed the wording of that paragraph. Chris 18:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture request

Can anyone find a croos section picture of the weapon? That would be nice. 64.31.188.26 22:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gerneral Purpose Machine Gun

We really need to make it clear that the MG 42 was a General Purpose Machine Gun. 209.221.73.5 11:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Popular Culture

Squalla - why did you delete the "Popular Culture" entry? Fernando K 17:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I feel that mentioning every recent film or tv show that has had an MG42 in it to be a waste of time. It is maybe just too popular of an item from history.
I did think that the Brazilian soldiers and their "Lurdinha" song to be interesting and probably worth having in the article somewhere, but only if it can be cited to a verifiable source. —Asatruer 03:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Pop culture references do not belong to firearms-related articles — they do not add anything to the article itself and tend to become lists of indiscriminate trivia. Most editors of firearms-related articles are coming to an agreement that these should be avoided. On the other hand, the "Lurdinha" song is probably worth mentioning, as long as in the main article itself (such as under the Spandau reference). I agree with Asatruer, however, that a verifiable source should be provided. —Squalla 15:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

OK guys I found an article about the MG42 being nicknamed Lurdinha, but it is in Portuguese: http://www.grandesguerras.com.br/artigos/text01.php?art_id=18 I could not find anything about the song in the net. I was told this by a veteran P47 pilot. The brass had a official song composed (Canção do Expedicionário), but the dogface plain Brazilian soldier enjoyed their own MG song. I have seen a Brazilian TV documentary as well that played the tune. (Fernando K 22:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

According to this reference, the MG34 was nicknamed "Lurdinha", not the MG42. It should be ok to add it to the MG34 article.
—Squalla 04:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I have seen it but if you take a look on the pictures, they show a MG42 instead; I believe the author could not tell the difference between the two. Fernando K 04:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
That's true, the picture shows an MG42. Though the rest of the text and the link at the bottom of the page only mentions and shows pictures of the MG34, so I guess it's up to somebody with better references to verify. —Squalla 04:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I found a link to a Brazilian radio where you can dowload the song free http://jovempan.uol.com.br/jpamnew/destaques/memoria/index.php?pagina=131

Click on the article that mentions lurdinha - you will need RealPlayer. I believe I read your mother language is Portuguese, so you will be able to understand it. ;) As for references, well, in my home town there is a MG42 in a local Brazilian Expeditionary Force museum with a tag mentioning it to be the "Lurdinha". As for the name, my personal theory is that some French liason officer (or even an American officer, speaking in French, better known to Brazilian officers of the time) referred to the MG42 as a "lourde" (heavy) machinegun. Fernando K 00:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Replaced the template with the recently standarised Infobox: Template:Infobox (and added image) created by the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Weaponry task force. Deon Steyn 11:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the image the wrong way around? I thought that the MG42 only fed from the left... Chris 20:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I flipped the image (giving it the wrong filename in the process!) but I see that the original's up for deletion because of possible copyright violation, so in the end I left it alone. Upon further inspection it's definitely reversed, though. Chris 18:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 30-06 too powerful?

Is it really true that an American 30-06 version was aborted because the cartridge was too powerful for the design? I find that surprising since the 30-06 and 7.92 were of roughly equivalent power, and the design was subsequently converted to 7.62 NATO without any issues. Chris 17:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MG42 or MG34?

Hi! i need some expert eyes here. is the machine gun featured in these screenshot a MG42 or a MG34 (or an US-built machinegun)?

These pictures are from the Algerian War, 1960s. I have to watch the doc again to determine wether they are used by the regular French army or by the Algerian guerrillas. I personally think this is a MG42 used by a French paratrooper or infantryman, thanks for any help. Shame On You 15:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Muzzle looks like a 42, but with that image quality I wouldn't bet money on it. Plumbob78 00:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

the first pic is a MG34, the MG34 has a leaner barrel, the second one is 100% a MG42, you can see the front sight and it looks beefier. --RaDeus 10:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/g/4/Talk%7EMG42_1a6d.html"