MG 34 and MG 42 Machine Guns by Chris McNab

Author:Chris McNab
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Mg 34 and Mg 42 Machine Guns
ISBN: 9781782003090
Publisher: Bloomsbury Publishing

An MG 42 machine-gunner and the crew of what appears to be a PaK 40 anti-tank gun ready themselves for the defence of the Western Front in 1944. Machine guns and anti-tank weapons often worked in close alliance, the former protecting the latter from infantry assault. (Cody Images)

Combat handling

Watching ammunition consumption was of central importance to any machine-gunner on an active battlefield, but especially those armed with the MG 34 and MG 42. The 1,800 rounds carried by a full squad could be burned through in little more than 10 or 15 minutes of intensive firing. The MG 42 was a particularly hungry gun, and even the most restrained gunner could find himself running worryingly low on ammunition, especially when facing some of the massed Soviet infantry assaults on the Eastern Front, as one old soldier here testifies:

Rather than simply attacking another section of the defensive rim, or retreating – as I believe any sane commander would do – the Russians continued to send countless troops to attack this one section of the line. They fired mortars into our rank, killing several paratroopers. German machine-gun crews were desperately screaming for ammunition as they continued mowing down groups of Russian infantrymen. They fired their MG 42s in one-second bursts, as they had been trained, but this was not enough to conserve their ammunition. The Russians were very numerous. (Erenberger 2000: 287)

It was in the interests of the rest of the rifle squad to keep their support weapon well-stocked with ammunition. If the machine gun ran silent, the chances of their being overrun increased exponentially.

Another key responsibility of using the MG 34 and MG 42 in combat was to keep the weapons extremely clean. The MG 34 in particular, with its finer tolerances and more complicated mechanism, was especially prone to jamming if not kept spotlessly clean. This proved hard to achieve in the sand, dust, dirt or snow of theatres such as North Africa, Italy and the Eastern Front. In North Africa, for example, sand and grit would build up in feed mechanisms and actions, leading to improperly chambered cartridges or jammed bolts. Oil, if applied excessively, would combine with sand to form an abrasive grinding paste in the working parts. The MG 42 also had to be cleaned properly and regularly, but its bolt system was generally more tolerant of the ingress of foreign matter, hence its popularity grew rapidly after it was first introduced into combat in North Africa in 1942.

There were general precautions a machine-gunner could take to stop dirt and dust building up in his gun. Both the MG 34 and the MG 42 had hinged dust covers over the ejection ports; the covers popped open automatically when the gun was fired, but the machine-gunner had to ensure that they were closed for most of the time, to prevent dirt entering the receiver through the open port. A fabric dust bag was also available to place over the muzzle to prevent dirt from entering the barrel, although this item is rarely seen in practical use in many photographs.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.