Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Powder Keg' started by Logansdad, Jul 6, 2002.
If you had been in these wars what weapons would you have chosen to see you through... :fuss: :nod:
WW1 98 Mauser and Colt 1911. WW2 Garand and Colt 1911A1.
I like the Winchester pump shotgun & 1911 for WW1,
The M-1 carbine & Browning Hi Power for WW2
M1917 enfield. WW2, 1941 Johnson rifle,m-1 carbine,m-3a1 "grease gun".
WW1 m98k. WWII depends on the front. western front and m1 garand. eastern front sturmgewehr 44 or a Gewehr 43. pacific theatre a 12ga shotgun and 1911 sidearm.
Is a tiger tank a valid choice?
M1 garand, mauser 98k, and a King Tiger tank!
Thompson, you can't go wrong there, with a 1911 side piece...or maybe a good B1-Bomber
B-1 bomber? Which War?
problem with the tiger is you only got 84 rounds of 88mm and 5850 on the 8mm before you need a resupply.
my pop carried a BAR in okinawa said it saved his live more than once, but he did have a fondnence for the m1 carbine, the BAR was heavy my dad stood 5'4" tall and weighed 130 pounds soaking wet, so the BAR was 20% of his weight, but he loved the punch and and the sound scared the be jeezus out of the japs, ill take a BAR
A JagdPanzer 5 would be a better choice than a Tiger 1 or 2. Same gun, almost as much armor, much faster and more reliable.
WWI. Winchchester pump shotgun with 1911.
WWII. Thompson with 1911A1
For WW1, I'd take the '03 Springfield or the Canadian Ross, with a 1911. WW2 would be M1 Garand and a 1911. And, if we're talking aromor here, I'd take an M-18 Hellcat. Medium tank with the fastest road speed of any tank in WW2. One M-18 took 13 hits from a German 88 and survived. Not too bad in my book......
Ahh the Ross. As long as you didn't find any mud(yeah right) or had to use ammo from britain you would be fine. unless of course you put the bolt together the wrong way(very easy to do) and managed to take your eye out. When i travel to the gun shows around here there really isn't too many of them, you see many more lee-enfields, which is funny because the ross would have a made an excellent sporting rifle, but it wasn't quite tough enough for the trenches. As for myself in, ww1 the lee-enfield and a 1911. ww2 would be a tommy and a hi-power.
The original assault rifle, the StG44, might be a good choice for WW2. One of the Horton Stealth Jet fighter prototypes would also have kicked butt. Heck, WW1 could have been fought with jets if Henri Coanda had been a little more careful taxiing his jet powered biplane in 1910. Note: The Coanda 1910 displayed in Paris was a real jet, not ducted fan like a couple of sources claim. The compressor turbine was powered by a seperate 4 cylinder engine, rather than an exhaust turbine like a turbojet, but the thrust was developed by fuel injected into continuous combustion chambers with the burning gases expanding through a nozzle.
Here is a URL http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/coanda.htm
Nope,wouldn't have got me in that thing.