MG08/15 - firing on the move

[James Blonde]

Just as was the case with the Lewis

Point taken, but the Maxim mag looks to be a more cumbersome affair

especially when hanging off one side of the weapon as opposed

to a Lewis drum mounted on top of a much lighter weapon.

Connaught Stranger.

[bob lembke]

I was at first quite sceptical about the German troops using the Chauchat, but I have quizzed MG experts, and read up on it, and it seems that, if a Chauchat, when tested, actually worked, if you kept it clean, if you kept the magazine clean, you had a gun that was quite likely to fire when attempted, and if it had just fired, it probably would fire again if attempted again. However, due to awful manufacturing, it really did not have interchangable parts. Additionally, if it had been converted to the more powerful and very different US .30-06 round, you really had an awful, totally unreliable weapon. If you read the memoires of the US troops in France they worked industriously to throw them and the magazines away at every opportunity. (This might be one reason for the truly awful reputation of the weapon in the English language literature, which seems excessive even for this miserable weapon in the French round.) So, for the limited purposes of the Flamm=Pioniere, the gun was a good fit to their needs. The photo of the assault school students with the Chauchat is interesting, but it itself does not prove that other troops used the weapon routinely; German troops were cross-trained with a variety of enemy weapons, grenades, etc.

Bob Lembke

[centurion]

Point taken, but the Maxim mag looks to be a more cumbersome affair

especially when hanging off one side of the weapon as opposed

to a Lewis drum mounted on top of a much lighter weapon.

One of the arguments advanced by elements in the British Army in early WW2 to the proposed introduction of the Thomson sub machine gun (the 1921 model) was that with a RoF of 800 rpm even the larger drum magazine would be quickly exhausted* and every Thomson machine gunner would have to be accompanied by a squad of men festooned with ammo drums which would have to be changed at very frequent intervals! A complete misunderstanding of the role of the sub machine gun and/or automatic rifle in an attack! I suspect tactical doctrine was even less defined in WW1

*Obviously unaware of the inexhaustible sub machine gun magazine as demonstrated by Clint Eastwood in "Where Eagles Dare"

[bob lembke]

*Obviously unaware of the inexhaustible sub machine gun magazine as demonstrated by Clint Eastwood in "Where Eagles Dare"

Always amused when the unarmed hero kills the first villinous (sp?) German, takes his MP 42, does not bother taking his spare magazines, and half an hour later he has shot down 120 Huns, three ME-109s, and is now shooting up the Bismark to the point of sinking.

Bob

[squirrel]

Probably made in the same arsenal as the Colt revolver and Winchester rifle with the endless ammunition supply so beloved of Western film makers.

[Robert Dunlop]

If you read the memoires of the US troops in France they worked industriously to throw them and the magazines away at every opportunity.

I am not aware of this in the memoires that I have read. Several citations were awarded to US Chauchat gunners.

All automatic rifles/light machine guns had to be treated with great care. Stoppages were not uncommon with the Lewis gun and MG08/15, especially in muddy conditions.

Robert

[centurion]

I am not aware of this in the memoires that I have read. Several citations were awarded to US Chauchat gunners.

I have seen a number of comments about getting rid of Chauchats ASAP made in American memoires _ I'll see if I can relocate them. Re citations - the bravery of a man is not an automatic recommendation for the weapon he had to use.

[centurion]

I am not aware of this in the memoires that I have read.

Extracts from History of The 353rd Infantry Regiment (written by ex officers of that regiment). I did post these on this forum some time ago

"Chauchats were issued instead of Browning automatic rifles and so on down the line. But with typical Yankee ingenuity, we proceeded to do the best we could with what we had at hand.

As soon as a Chauchat jammed, it was left behind for the pioneers to salvage."

"No one was able to make high score with the Chauchat. The targets looked like they had been hit by fragments of a shell; yet the men insisted they had aimed and held the same for each shot. The French instructors contended that the effect of this dispersion was even more destructive to the morale of the enemy than direct hits, but the American soldiers were never satisfied with the result on the range and distrusted the Chauchat in campaigns. "

I've seen elsewhere that the long stroke of the Chauchat mechanism could cause vibration (especially if the manufacturing/machining quality was low) which would explain the above spread. The Chauchat was more prone to mud problems than most weapon of this class as the holes in the magazine seem almost designed to collect it. On many the breech was not completely tight causing flash that could burn a mans face if firing the gun in the conventional manner sighting down the barrel. This would not be a problem when it was used in an assault mode firing from the hip.

[bob lembke]

To refine my memory, I think that the American narratives that I have read had less of the actual gun being thrown away (one would imagine the Coy. CO not being happy if a given MGer always was "losing" his Chauchat) but they certainly recall men throwing the loaded magazines away ASAP. I specifically recall one soldier narrating crawling into a haystack to sleep and finding it rather "lumpy" with Chauchat magazines other soldiers had hidden to leave behind. (I also assume that the officers or NCOs would frown on men openly throwing their ammunition away.) I assume the machine gunners had no expectation of being able to fire off a good deal of ammunition, so why carry a lot.

One wonders about the relationship between the Americans and the French over turning out that awful .30-06 conversion that seemingly was simply a terrible weapon. I love the explaination of the French instructors about the advantages of innaccuracy.

Bob

[centurion]

One wonders about the relationship between the Americans and the French over turning out that awful .30-06 conversion that seemingly was simply a terrible weapon.

Seemingly they never used it -

"The American Expeditionary Force, awaiting delivery of their intended primary weapon, the Browning M1917 machine gun, intended to adopt the Chauchat as an interim measure, purchasing 34,000 in 1917. In order to make the transition to the Browning easier the Chauchat was modified to use 0.30 inch ammunition. However the French manufacturers used incorrect chamber measurements with the result that the weapons performed poorly.

In the event the AEF largely used French, i.e. unmodified, versions of the Chauchat rather than the U.S. model until the Browning became available."

[Jack Sheldon]

Here is an opinion from that great US expert on small arms, the late WHB Smith: 'It is ironic to note that our own supply of automatic weapons was almost nil when the war broke out and that we were forced first to equip our troops with this monstrosity in its 8mm French service caliber and to purchase 37,000 of them from the French. Nine of our combat divisions were issued Chaucats in the United States before sailing, some in caliber 8mm, some altered for our .30-06 cartridge. As a matter of record it might be mentioned that the alterations were easily made, but they reduced the magazine capacity from 20 to 16 cartridges. As might have been expected when altering such poor equipment to handle far more powerful ammunition, the .30-06 models were even worse than the originals. Cases stuck in the barrel even after moderate fire, parts broke - particularly springs - and the guns jammed under almost all field conditions. Still the BARs were not in production and we were compelled to accept the philosophy of Chaucats being better than nothing at all. To make matters worse, alterations and inspection were under French control and little heed was paid to American suggestions and requests for improvements. One French training tactic was too much even for their own long-suffering troops. This was the 'brilliant' idea of rear echelon experts that the way to use the Chaucat was to advance in line, each soldier firing a burst from the hip as he planted his left foot! Fortunately for the French, not much use was made of this and similar instructions, since it was difficult to keep the gun firing for more than two very short automatic bursts even in spite of its very leisurely rate of operation... The quality and construction of the gun was undoubtedly the crudest ever to appear in any military arm. Despite a complete lack of normal tolerances, the gun parts still were not interchangeable... The principle of manufacture was most sound. The trouble was in the crudity and carelessness of manufacture...'

Other than that he thought it was wonderful. No, I made that bit up.

Jack

[bob lembke]

To date myself, I was able to fire the BAR for record when I was performing my summer camp training as an officer cadet. One magazine of 20 rounds, fired on what was called the "1000 inch range". It was a range of 1000 inches, or about 80 feet, at a target of a vertical rectangle about 2-3 inches high and 1 1/2 - 2 inches wide. Supposedly similar to a man at 200-300 yards. (Am I right here? Any other old ***** remember this range?) The gun was quite heavy, a bit more than the Chauchat, I gather, and you could get off automatic bursts of 2 and 3 rounds if you were careful, so the gun would not start walking off somewhere. From my 20 rounds I got 18 into the rectangle, probably the best firing that I have done with anything, and I have fired about everything in the 1960's arsnal from .22 target pistol to 106 mm recoilless rifle. Wonderful. Of course it was heavy, but a joy to shoot. What a disapointment to expect a BAR and get a piece of junk like the Chauchat.

Bob Lembke

[centurion]

To date myself, I was able to fire the BAR for record when I was performing my summer camp training as an officer cadet.

The BAR was Clyde Barrow's favourite weapon but I don't think you're quite that old Bob

[Mark Finneran]

It is a good point. The lewis mags at least had a number of differing 'carriers' - allowing the brave lads to at least transport some supply in battle. The only trommel drum carriers I have sen are the wooden boxes that can contain 2 German 'drums'. When fully loaded a box containing the 2 is bl... heavy, and although machine gunners of any nationality were clearly pretty tough, I cannot see the very finest of German stormtroopers having much freedom of movement carrying a box in each hand, not for long anyway. This now perhaps questions the practicality of prolonged 08/15 use in the assault? Also enforces the German love of the lewis and come o thik of it I have never seen any image of German troops carrying (somehow) additional trommels.

Interesting

a

Just as was the case with the Lewis

[Wildalaska]

Having had the opportunity on more than one occassion to fire an MG08 (as well as a Vickers) I can honestly say that one would have to be a real man to fire one from the hip, although I have, in my younger days, done it with the BAR and the Lewis Gun

[MartH]

I like, Bob have an antecedent who trained as a Strom trooper, but was on the eastern front, and was part of the early Hutier en mass training, and took part in the River Aa and Riga operations. He also in the 1917/1918 Jaeger troop listing, is he given something like the title of "person in command of the machine gun section".

Now he describe, and even demonstrated Strom trooper tactics, and he talked about how to use the new "Parebellum" gun with its snail magazine to my mother (her quote) he later on had a role in Finnish arms acquisition/ production eg the Suomi sun machine gun, purchase of weapons off the Germans in 1944, and ran Sako after the war till 69 I think. I say all this to demonstrate he was an arms specialist, not just an old soldier.

When we talked, he never talked about carrying a MG08/15 forward in the assault, he complained about the difficulty about supplying close support to the infantry going forward, and I have stood next to him with an MG08/15, and its predecessor in a "firing" museum that was part of the factory, as he discussed it long ago, and how it would "drink" ammunition.

You can only draw from this, that in later life he did not see fit to mention or remember lugging one forward, a sort of negative, but on the reverse side from what people say it was such a super human task one almost feels he would have.

[centurion]

This now perhaps questions the practicality of prolonged 08/15 use in the assault? Also enforces the German love of the lewis and come o thik of it I have never seen any image of German troops carrying (somehow) additional trommels.

Interesting

I suspect that a machine gun used in the assault would not be firing continuously but in short bursts, not that well aimed, to keep the oppositions heads down. Actually hitting someone would be a bonus (although not for him). One of the criticisms of the Chauchat (apart from its poor construction) was that it could assist in taking a position but had insufficient fire power to hold it against counter attack.

[Tom W.]

Interesting links. Unfortunately no info on walking or assault fire, but lots of stuff on tactics, equipment, personnel, etc:

“Information Drawn from the Use of the Light Machine Gun, Model 1908-15, in the Sixth Army,” from German Notes on Minor Tactics:

http://books.google.com/books?id=2K5BAAAAI...r=&as_brr=1

“Light Machine Guns,” from A survey of German tactics, 1918:

http://books.google.com/books?id=UxqQAAAAM...r=&as_brr=1

“The Light Machine Guns Recently Put into Service in the German Infantry, from Notes on Recent Operations, Army War College, August, 1917:

http://books.google.com/books?id=H69BAAAAI...r=&as_brr=1

[centurion]

It certainly appears to have happened with Lewis gunners as these extracts from citations show.

1] Pte. ALBERT STAPLETON, M.M.

On the 12th August, 1918, during operations on the Somme near Proyart, this man was advancing with a party on a strong point, when the No. 1 of the Lewis gun team became a casualty. He immediately took charge of the Lewis gun. and, firing from the hip, engaged a hostile machine-gun crew at 20 yards, thus preventing it swinging round on the rest of the party. His quickness and accuracy undoubtedly assisted in capturing the enemy garrison.

2] 'Late morning as Australian troops moved through a tall wheat crop, a hidden German machinegun post began bringing down soldiers. Panic set in. No one knew where to run, where to take shelter."Sexton stood up in, in full view of the enemy, calmly noted the position of the gun from the flashes, and firing from the hip, put it out of action," official citations record.' (Sexton was a Lewis gunner)

3] 3077 L./Cpl. (T./Cpl.) J. H. Mann, 42nd Bn., Aust. Infy.

For conspicuous gallantry and devotion to duty during operations north of Peronne on 31st August, 1918. In spite of heavy machine-gun fire, he brought his Lewis gun into action, firing from the hip.

In addition

"16th AIF Battalion's task was to clear the Bois de Vaire and Bois de Hamel. The six tanks accompanying the 16th Battalion were placed in pairs at each flank and in the centre. Strong opposition was encountered at the edge of Bois de Vaire but was quickly overcome with the majority of the fighting taking place inside the two woods, where the Germans had created several strong-points and dozens of machine-gun nests. With the aid of Lewis gunners firing from the hip to expedite the capture of the woods, opposition was crushed in just an hour and a half."

[Robert Dunlop]

One of the criticisms of the Chauchat (apart from its poor construction) was that it could assist in taking a position but had insufficient fire power to hold it against counter attack.

This is not correct. The Chauchat has been reviewed in this thread here.

Several reports were posted in the thread, many of which indicated the effectiveness of the Chauchat in defence (see this post for details).

Americans who won citations for using the Chauchat were brave men, who also had an effective weapon in order to achieve their awards (see examples here).

Spears described the use of the Chauchat in marching fire (see here).

Centurion, I fully respect that you dislike the Chauchat. It is disappointing to see that you have made several negative and inaccurate comments when you were involved in the previous thread. I don't expect that you would have changed your opinion of the Chauchat as a result of the thread, but it helps others to keep a more open mind if they realise that there are different opinions, with supporting evidence.

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

Good point Robert. The answer is almost certainly none. Provision of additional LMGs was a priority for Ludendorff after he took over that September. The weapons concerned were most probably Musketen - (mis)appropriated Madsen machine guns used in small quantities in 1916 both on the Somme and at Verdun.

Thanks, Jack. That is what I thought. I wonder if the earliest description may not even be correct. It is possible that the effectiveness of supporting MG08 teams was ascribed to firing from the hip after the event, perhaps in light of the way that the French sometimes used the Chauchat.

Robert

[centurion]

Centurion, I fully respect that you dislike the Chauchat. It is disappointing to see that you have made several negative and inaccurate comments when you were involved in the previous thread. I don't expect that you would have changed your opinion of the Chauchat as a result of the thread, but it helps others to keep a more open mind if they realise that there are different opinions, with supporting evidence.

Please do not personalise matters. It's not a matter of like or dislike. I have merely posted some quotes from people who used the thing. Is one not allowed to make negative comments about the thing? Is it a sacred French relic? Why would you be disapointed? Could you indicate the inaccuracies please?

[Tom W.]

From Robert Bruce, Machine Guns of World War I (London: Windrow and Greene, 1997), pp. 40, 42, describing assault fire with the MG08/15:

"Assault fire on the move is another formidable feat with the 08/15. At twice the weight of an American M60 machine gun with bipod the German gun is a front-heavy handful. Even suspended from its wide sling it was uncomfortably heavy and unbalanced...

"I'm told that the big, heavy Trommel was not often used in the trenches, and that its short 100-round belts were not nearly as popular as the standard 250-round version; but I am tempted to challenge this by imagining what it must have been like having to drag 10 to 15 feet of expended belt through the mud and wire of No Man's Land...

"Our gunner described crawling under a barbed wire entanglement with the 43lb. (19.5kg) 08/15 as 'like dragging an engine block.' Going 'over the top' with this awkward weight slung for assault fire is a job only for the strongest men."

There's a great photo on page 42 that shows the modern-day reenactor firing the weapon on the march, and it looks exactly like the period photos we already posted. I won't post it here for legal reasons, but you should seriously consider buying this book if you can find it. It's very useful.

The segment on firing the Chauchat alone (pp. 108-124) is worth the price of the book. The modern-day shooters describe firing it as akin to "riding a bicycle with a solid front tire down a staircase--hold on for your life!" They had to schedule two firing sessions for the book. The first ended in disaster, because the gun wouldn't fire more than four rounds before jamming and the WWI era ammunition kept splitting. In the second session, they used ammunition from the 1940s, after reaming, polishing, and deburring the gun's recoil surfaces.

Even so, the gunner had to hold the half-moon magazine with his left hand to push it upward; otherwise the gun would still jam.

[Mark Finneran]

Just to follow up on Centurion and Tom W's posts. Short bursts for MGs is standard of course and the added 100 rd trommel surely minimises its attack use but I am now interested in the German ammo distrbution methods. British/Allied Lewis gun teams/sections etc always had other members assist with drum or spare ammo carriage. In 1918 I have read it was very common for normal rifleman to have their own lewis drum loaders to assist when the opportunity arose.

To date I have seen no Imperial German Army images showing additional belted amunition, or a box full of trommels being carried by anyone outside of the gun team. I am beginning to question whether the 08/15 was hardly ever used in the assault??

From Robert Bruce, Machine Guns of World War I (London: Windrow and Greene, 1997), pp. 40, 42, describing assault fire with the MG08/15:

"Assault fire on the move is another formidable feat with the 08/15. At twice the weight of an American M60 machine gun with bipod the German gun is a front-heavy handful. Even suspended from its wide sling it was uncomfortably heavy and unbalanced...

"I'm told that the big, heavy Trommel was not often used in the trenches, and that its short 100-round belts were not nearly as popular as the standard 250-round version; but I am tempted to challenge this by imagining what it must have been like having to drag 10 to 15 feet of expended belt through the mud and wire of No Man's Land...

"Our gunner described crawling under a barbed wire entanglement with the 43lb. (19.5kg) 08/15 as 'like dragging an engine block.' Going 'over the top' with this awkward weight slung for assault fire is a job only for the strongest men."

There's a great photo on page 42 that shows the modern-day reenactor firing the weapon on the march, and it looks exactly like the period photos we already posted. I won't post it here for legal reasons, but you should seriously consider buying this book if you can find it. It's very useful.

The segment on firing the Chauchat alone (pp. 108-124) is worth the price of the book. The modern-day shooters describe firing it as akin to "riding a bicycle with a solid front tire down a staircase--hold on for your life!" They had to schedule two firing sessions for the book. The first ended in disaster, because the gun wouldn't fire more than four rounds before jamming and the WWI era ammunition kept splitting. In the second session, they used ammunition from the 1940s, after reaming, polishing, and deburring the gun's recoil surfaces.

Even so, the gunner had to hold the half-moon magazine with his left hand to push it upward; otherwise the gun would still jam.

[Tom W.]

Just to follow up on Centurion and Tom W's posts. Short bursts for MGs is standard of course and the added 100 rd trommel surely minimises its attack use but I am now interested in the German ammo distrbution methods. British/Allied Lewis gun teams/sections etc always had other members assist with drum or spare ammo carriage.

This link says there were six ammunition carriers per light machine-gun squad.

http://books.google.com/books?id=UxqQAAAAM...r=&as_brr=1