You research, bored ass, and the kids start to shout GIMME, GIMME, GIMME :donitz:
J/K...I guess :lol:
FuzzyBunnyThe upshot of this? Further proof of John's (that's me) law of the Internet: No matter what you are trying to find or accomplish, no matter how exotic, random or pointless, there's bound to be someone out there who's already done it, and who had far more time on their hands than you do :-)[/quote] Aint that the truth.
[quote=ANZACSAS]thing to ask is if Australia will be in Fh2
I think they will make an appearance relatively quick. Not like with FH1 as the last army.
LoboYou research, bored ass, and the kids start to shout GIMME,
Be grateful that I'm doing the research for free, and not making you hand over any of whatever you're smoking as payment!
I think its not nice to treat him this way. I dint even know there was a copy of the garand, so i learned something about ww2, which i always love to do. Now if you are not interested in this, dont read the 1st post.
FuzzyBunnyBe grateful that I'm doing the research for free, and not making you hand over any of whatever you're smoking as payment!
Whoohoo, we could do a great party :lol:
I didn't make it!
so the type 5 is real but it wasnt used, ok cool!
EglaerinionI think they will make an appearance relatively quick. Not like with FH1 as the last army.
i sure do hope so!!
ANZACSASso the type 5 is real but it wasnt used, ok cool!
Says it all really
I happen to be a frequent visitor of the gunboards forums (and Japanese WWII militaria enthusiast) and saw that thread a while back. Just to clarify The Type 100 most definitely is *NOT* a copy of the MP18, nor is it entirely related to the physical MP18 design. It is BASED on the concept of the Bergmann sub-machine guns, but the use of sub-machine guns like the MP18 by Japanese marines (SNLF) gave proof of concept enough for the Japanese command to start designing their own SMG. The design and system are Japanese, and internally there are differences between the Type 100 and the MP18 (for example). Looking at one carefully, it doesn't even resemble the MP18 all that much even on a superficial level (Indeed I tend to think it more closely resembles the Italian Beretta SMGs). Thousands of Type 100s were built, and it *WAS* deployed, and *WAS* used in combat. Specifically, it first saw use in 1942 when it was used by Japanese paratroopers in their daring assaults on the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). It was a standard weapon of Japanese paratroopers, and was highly successful; IJA called for more production and deployment amongst it's own forces...it was used in the Pacific.
The 7.7mm was already standard for the IJA by 1942, the only issue was replacing the 6.5mm Type38s still in service (which was not fully realized before the end of the war).
In point of fact, the original 6.5mm was actually MORE lethal and more damaging to human flesh than the 7.7mm. In fact, I know of no other standard rifle round in WWII that typically produces more gastly damage to human flesh. The 6.5mm tended to tumble when stressed and burst on contact....wounds created by 6.5 arisaka impacts were horrendous....not only painful, but highly lethal; gaping wounds and insides hit by round fragments.
This was both good and bad for the Japanese; Good because it increased the lethality and damage of a round if it impacted an enemy soldier Bad because the rounds were generally fragile overall, had high dispersion and inaccuracy, and the rounds were VERY poor at penetrating anything other than flesh; as I said, they tumbled and burst on contact...the rounds were so fragile, they would have a hard time even getting through wood.