Forgotten Weapons
Published 28 Oct 2019http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg…
Sir Charles Ross was heir to a very wealthy Scottish family, and was a talented if temperamental engineer. He took an interest in firearms and their design, and worked with American and English connections to produce a line of his own straight-pull sporting rifles. Upon returning from the Boer War he looked to expand into the military market.
At this same time, the Canadian government was looking to replenish its arms supplies after the war, and requested Enfield rifles form the British. The request was turned down, as Britain did not have enough supply to spare any for the Canadians. The Canadians were expected to construct their own factory to make rifles of he standard British pattern. Well, the Canadian government was not eager to invest that sort of capital into the project. They investigated buying arms elsewhere, but the consensus was that Canada’s armaments should come from either Britain or from within Canada itself. No good solution was apparent until Sir Charles Ross stepped in.
Ross offered to fund the construction of a factory himself, and use Canadian labor and industry to manufacture Ross rifles for the military. This seemed like an excellent solution — for zero initial cash outlay, the Canadian government would get rifles both designed and produced domestically! The rifles would be chambered for the standard .303 British cartridge, thus handling the British objections about arms compatibility (Ross pointed out that the British themselves used something like 7 different patterns of rifle at the time).
In 1902, Ross and the Canadian government signed a contract for 12,000 rifles to be made in 1903 and 10,000 per year thereafter, at the price of $25 each. In addition to the Canadian military, the Royal North West Mounted Police also adopted the new Ross rifle. Deliveries did not actually begin until 1905, and when they did plenty of disturbing problems arose. The rifles proved fragile and unreliable — and a weak bolt latch periodically allowed the bolt to fall completely out of the rifle on parade drill — not a good start!
Only 10,000 of the Mark I Ross rifles were made, and an improved Mark II pattern would follow as quickly as Ross could make it a reality.
Many thanks to the private collectors who allowed me access to their rifles to make this video!
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N. Oracle #36270
Tucson, AZ 85704
November 1, 2019
Ross MkI: Canada’s First Battle Rifle
October 26, 2019
Chassepot Needle Rifle
Forgotten Weapons
Published on 30 May 2015Sold for $1,150 (with three other rifles).
The Chassepot was the French answer to the Dreyse needle rifle, and also the only other needlefire rifle to see major military service. It was adopted in 1866 and served as a primary French infantry rifle until being replaced by the 1874 Gras rifle, which was basically a conversion of the Chassepot to use self-contained brass cartridges. The concept of a needle rifle is that of a breech loading rifle using paper cartridges. A primer was set in the base of the cartridge (inside the paper), and upon firing the needle-like firing pin would pierce the paper cartridge and detonate the primer and powder charge. The system always had trouble with sealing the breech, but was still a significant improvement over muzzleloading rifles.
October 25, 2019
The World Takes Advantage of American Isolationism | BETWEEN TWO WARS | 1933 part 3 of 3
TimeGhost History
Published 24 Oct 2019America is very unprepared for rising tensions in the Pacific and in Europe. US President Franklin Roosevelt tries his best to re-arm the American Army and Navy, but the isolationist opposition is a fierce obstacle.
Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory
Subscribe to our World War Two series: https://www.youtube.com/c/worldwartwo…
Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Joram Appel
Directed by: Spartacus Olsson and Astrid Deinhard
Executive Producers: Bodo Rittenauer, Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Research by: Rune Vaever Hartvig, Sietse Kenter and Joram Appel
Edited by: Daniel Weiss
Sound design: Marek KaminskiPicture colorizations by: Norman Stewart, Julius Jääskeläinen, Daniel Weiss and Joram Appel
A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.
From the comments:
TimeGhost History
1 day ago (edited)
This episode is very much about the global ramifications of the US’s foreign policy. American inaction and isolationism left room for other nations to develop imperialist ambitions. There are of course a lot of other factors that influenced the rise of expansionist and militarist governments in Europe and East-Asia, many of which are explained in our other Between Two Wars episodes. In no way does this video have any connection to current-day events or our opinion on them. This is what happened, our future episodes will be about what followed. We’re historians and that’s all we want to do here.
Cheers,
Joram
QotD: Command and control in the US military
A book excerpt in Foreign Policy caught my eye. It is by Thomas E Ricks, a long time critic of the US military’s leadership, and it is about the US Army’s failed command and control (C²) system which has been adopted, holus bolus, by Canada. I’m guessing that the article was written for American military officers because it is full of the bafflegab and jargon that is characteristic of their system ~ never use a short, simple, English word when a long, fancy one, with French or, preferably, German roots will do.
The crux of the author’s complaint is that military commanders have been relegated to the status of administrators and managers because the US Army is all about process and seems to care too little about results. The author complains, with reason, that headquarters, from battalion to the highest levels, have gotten larger and larger and more and more complex but appear to actually accomplish less and less. I think the same complaints can be, validly, made about Canada.
It is not surprising that Canada, like Australia, Britain, Chile and Denmark, has adapted at least some of the US military’s system ~ the USA has, after all, the most powerful military in the world. They must be doing something right, right?
Actually, since about 1950s, the US military has been distinguished by blunders and defeats at least as often as we have seen periodic displays of operational prowess: Viet Nam, Bay of Pigs, the failed hostage rescue in Iran, the invasion of Grenada, the second Iraq War all come to mind. The American military legacy has even spawned American satirical films about (constantly failing) American military command. That’s something I though only the Brits could do.
Ted Campbell, “Military command and control”, Ted Campbell’s Point of View, 2017-09-16.
October 17, 2019
American Eagle Lugers
Forgotten Weapons
Published on 1 Dec 2014
Dissent This
Sold for $14,950 (9mm fat barrel) and $9,775 (7.65mm test trials).Many people are aware of the .45 caliber Lugers made for US military field trials — but far fewer people realize that Lugers were both tested by the US military and sold commercially several years prior to the .45 tests.
In 1900, the US military put several hundred 7.65mm Luger pistols into field trials with both infantry and cavalry units. These pistols were marked with a large and elaborate American eagle crest, in an attempt by DWM to enhance the gun’s appeal to Americans. A similar tactic was used in production of Lugers for Swiss sale, with a large Swiss cross (and it worked well).
After complaints about the small caliber of the early 1900 Lugers, DWM developed the 9mm Parabellum cartridge, and attempted to sell them commercially in the US (and elsewhere). A small batch were also purchased for further military testing.
http://www.forgottenweapons.com
Theme music by Dylan Benson – http://dbproductioncompany.webs.com
October 16, 2019
M3 Halftrack: Strength & Weaknesses (featuring Chieftain)
Military History not Visualized
Published on 4 Sep 2019Sponsored by World of Tanks! Register here ► https://tanks.ly/2zrfzsF to receive a T-127 Premium Tank, 500 Gold and 7 days Premium access with the code
TANKTASTIC. Applicable to new users only.In this video Nicholas “The Chieftain” Moran and I talk about strength & weaknesses of the M3 Halftrack, we also compare it to the German Sdkfz 251 Halftrack.
Special thanks to WW2 Armor for helping with the interview and providing an excellent backdrop, be sure to check out their sites here:
WW2 Armor Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChM-…
WW2 Armor Homepage: http://ww2armor.org/Chieftain’s Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp4j…
D-Day Ohio: https://www.ddayohio.us/
https://www.oorlogsmuseum.nl/en/home/
Thank you to vonKickass for helping with the thumbnail.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» paypal donation – https://paypal.me/mhvis
» patreon – https://www.patreon.com/mhv
» subscribe star – https://www.subscribestar.com/mhv» SOURCES «
von Senger und Etterlin, F. M.: Die Panzergrenadiere. Geschichte und Gestalt der mechanisierten Infanterie 1930-1960. J. F. Lehmans Verlag: 1961, München.
amazon.de (affiliate): https://amzn.to/2KNTB9JChamberlain, Peter; Doyle, Hilary: Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two. Revised Edition. Arms & Armour: London, UK, 1999.
amazon.com (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2Zz2ZlD
amazon.de (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/343naf5Spielberger, Walter; Doyle, Hilary Lous, Jentz, Thomas L.: Halbkettenfahrzeuge des deutschen Heeres
amazon.de (affiliate): https://amzn.to/2KDFrpP
Spielberger: Halftracked Vehicles of the German Army 1909-1945 (Spielberger German Armor and Military Vehicle)
amazon.com (affiliate): https://amzn.to/2IeHwdrDoyle, David: The Complete Guide to German Armored Vehicles. Skyhorse Publishing: New York, USA, 2019.
amazon.com (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/34dIEWS
amazon.de (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2HvrytC» DISCLAIMER «
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Als Amazon-Partner verdiene ich an qualifizierten Käufen.
Come for the interesting profile of the M3, stay for the amusing asides on modelling trains and AFVs.
October 13, 2019
QotD: The modern British army is custom-tailored to resist reform of any meaningful type
This then leaves the army in a bit of a quandary. It has focused on delivery of a global division as its benchmark at a time when the politicians simply do not want to do this. It has focused on keeping 82,000 troops when it can’t afford to keep them all equipped, and to meet the political priority of protecting certain regimental capbadges, it has been forced to sacrifice its far more valuable logistics, communications and other enablers that keep it as a genuinely effective force.
Talking to friends in the army, there is a real sense of anger and frustration among many mid-level officers. The veterans of [Operation] HERRICK feel that the army hasn’t learned lessons and remains bound by tradition and an inability to really learn. Candidly, many feel that the UK “lost” in Afghanistan and hasn’t yet accepted this fact. They feel the army is overly top heavy and rigid and unable to really adapt to 21st century warfare. Suggestions that much of the army exists as a structure to support rapid expansion in the future is met with a hollow snort of derision – we could never do a WW1-style rapid expansion again for the legacy reserve stocks of weapons and equipment have long since been disposed of as part of the move to RAB accounting in the early 2000s.
The operations that the army is likely to be involved in are either low level defence engagement, or as part of NATO reassurance in Eastern Europe. The chances of needing BAOR established again are slim – if we get to the stage where the UK is trading shots with the Russians, then things will be quickly escalating beyond the point where conventional weapons are of value. Home defence remains an issue, although the days of Exercise “Brave Defender” will never be repeated — the threat is completely different. There is simply no credible home threat that needs the army to deploy against invasion or insurrection. It is telling that there has been a move to get back into the Aid to the Civil Power role again, if only because having troops able to do flood relief helps generate positive headlines.
Whenever brave efforts are made to try and look again at how things can be done differently to free up funding (such as closing RHQs or making sense of the archaic HQ and regimental structure) leaks to the press ensure a media and Parliamentary furore that prevents real change being put into play. This stops the army from being able to genuinely restructure itself because the moment it tries to do so, some tired old headline such as “we don’t have an army anymore, only a militia” (an utter fallacy) appears and men of a certain generation with angry moustaches and blazers with badges and purchased medals write to their MPs. In a Parliament without a majority, it only takes a minor backbench rebellion to threaten chaos, meaning no minister will risk reform if it angers the backbenches.
The army today faces a structural and existential crisis. Too large to be properly funded, and politically barred from restructuring itself (although the recent 2017 manifesto pledge is merely to preserve the headline strength of the forces, not the individual services, so there is still hope). Denied a credible enemy that it can prepare to fight against, it has no clear rationale for why it needs to operate at a large scale when the political decision makers are increasingly set against boots on the ground for long term commitment.
Sir Humphrey, “How Do You Solve a Problem Like a Deployable Division?”, Thin Pinstriped Line, 2017-08-06.
October 11, 2019
Bethlehem Steel 37mm Cannon – WWI Era
Forgotten Weapons
Published on 6 Jul 2014http://www.forgottenweapons.com
Theme music by Dylan Benson – http://dbproductioncompany.webs.com
The 37mm gun was found in many guises during World War One – that caliber was the smallest allowed to use exploding projectiles by the 1899 Hague accords. Every nation in the world, it seems, used 37mm guns of one type or another. Well, one particular version I had the chance to look at was built by Bethlehem Steel in Pennsylvania for the French Army. Chambered for the same 37x136mm Hotchkiss Heavy cartridge used in US naval service, 200 were purchased in 1916. Only 15 were actually shipped before the US Army seized the bulk of the order in 1917 – but they were never put into any sort of service by the US military. The French tested the guns for suitability as an infantry gun, anti-tank gun, anti-aircraft gun, and naval landing gun – and found it unsuitable for all roles. It was probably tested only as a backup in case the redesign of the Mle 1916 Tir Rapid ran into problems.
At any rate, the 15 guns sent to France were sent back at the end of the war, and the guns remained in US Army inventory until 1921, when they appear to have been distributed out the National Guard units.
I think this is a very cool gun for the present-day enthusiast. In addition to the historical links to WWI, it has the practical benefits of being relatively light and using ammunition relatively inexpensive to reload. And, of course, the free mount and shoulder rest and iron sights give it more the feel of a shoulder rifle than later light artillery that use precisely adjusted mounts. This one is just more fun to shoot! Alas, there are very few still in existence. Perhaps an opportunity for someone who wants to make a reproduction Big Boy’s Toy?
October 8, 2019
Big Iron: Development of the Colt 1848 Dragoon Revolver
Forgotten Weapons
Published on 23 Aug 2019RIA on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/RockIsla…
RIA on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/rockislanda…Sam Colt’s first foray into firearms manufacturing did not end well — after 6 years, he went broke and shut down production of Paterson revolvers and revolving long guns. His guns were too expensive, too fragile, and too underpowered to become a commercial success. They did make an impression on some people, however, and a few years later Colt would work with Captain Samuel Walker of the Texas Rangers to develop a much larger and more robust revolver. The US military purchased 1,000 of these Model 1847 “Walker” revolvers, and this set Colt back on the path to financial success.
Colt contracted with the Whitneyville Armory to produce his Walkers, and part of the contract was that Colt would own any tooling developed for the manufacturing process. The Walker was successful enough that it spurred a second 1,000-pistol order form the government, and Colt used the Walker tooling along with his newfound capital to set up shop in Hartford CT producing guns himself. He immediately made a number of changes to the Walker pattern, primarily making is a bit shorter and lighter (4lb 2oz, with a 7.5 inch barrel), reducing the powered charge to 50 grains (the Walker had used 60 grains), and improving the loading lever retention latch. This would become known as the Model 1848 Dragoon revolver.
Between 1848 and 1860, a total of 20,700 Dragoons were made, 8,390 of them for the US military. There would be three main variations, called the first, second and third types today. In today’s video, I will show you all three and explain how they differed from each other — and we will also take a look at a rare long-barreled version as well as one with an original shoulder stock.
http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg…
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
PO Box 87647
Tucson, AZ 85754
October 6, 2019
Shieldwalls
Lindybeige
Published on 24 Mar 2011This may address many of the comments I had for my spears video. Many of my theories are based on the I think fairly reliable notion that people in the past were similar to people today in that they tended towards a desire for self-preservation, and away from reckless bravery.
October 3, 2019
The Crimean War – History Matters
History Matters
Published on 7 Apr 2019Twitter: https://twitter.com/Tenminhistory
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4973164This episode covers the Crimean War (1853-1856) between the Russian Empire and the Ottomans, the British, the French and the Sardinians. It began largely out of Russo-Ottoman rivalry and because French Emperor Napoleon III had been appointed the protector of Christians within the Ottoman Empire, at the expense of the Russian Emperor Nicholas I. The war really kicked off in 1854 with the British and French invasion of Crimea and largely ended with the capture of Sevastopol in 1855, after which the Russians sued for peace.
October 1, 2019
Sturmgeschütz School – Choose the StuG Life
Military History Visualized
Published on 20 Aug 2019I got my hands-on information for you. Namely from the “Sturmgeschütz School Teaching Staff” (Sturmgeschütz Schule Lehrstab), which in October 1943 published a leaflet (“Merkblatt“) for the crews of the Sturmgeschütze. I looked at it and selected some crucial and interesting aspects for you.
StuG footage recorded at Militracks 2019 at the Overloon War Museum: https://www.militracks.nl – https://www.oorlogsmuseum.nl/en/home/
» SOURCES «
Wettstein, Adrian: Sturmartillerie Geschichte einer Waffengattung
http://portal-militaergeschichte.de/s…Condell, Bruce (ed.); Zabecki, David T. (ed.): On the German Art of War. TRuppenführung. Stackpole Books: Mechanicsburg, PA, USA, 2009 (2001)
amazon.com (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2yTSjmI
amazon.de (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2MOicwJCAMO: F. 500, Op. 12480, D. 137: Sturmgeschütz-Schule Lehrstab: Merkblatt – Die Geschützbedienung, Burg b. M., Oktober 1943.
Spielberger, Walter; Doyle, Hilary Lous: Sturmgeschütze: Entwicklung und Fertigung der sPak. Motorbuch Verlag: 2014.
amazon.de (affiliate): https://amzn.to/2HUvXJ1
Spielberger, Walter: Sturmgeschütz & Its Variants: (Spielberger German Armor & Military Vehicles Series, Vol 2)
amazon.com (affiliate): https://amzn.to/2HY2utAFleischer, Wolfgang: Die deutschen Sturmgeschütze 1935-1945. Podzun-Pallas, 1996.
amazon.com (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2UgyeDv
amazon.de (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2HLc8DqBuchner, Alex: Das Handbuch der deutschen Infanterie 1939-1945; Gliederung – Uniformen, Bewaffnung – Ausrüstung, Einsätze. Podzun-Pallas: Friedberg in Hessen, Germany, 1987
amazon.de (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/2O0TENR
ENGLISH VERSION: Buchner, Alex: The German Infantry Handbook 1939-1945.
amazon.com (affiliate): http://amzn.to/1l4ABU0Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945. Ferdinand Schöningh: Paderborn, 2016.
amazon.de (affiliate): http://amzn.to/2ELyDX1» DISCLAIMER «
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Als Amazon-Partner verdiene ich an qualifizierten Käufen.
September 17, 2019
The Curator’s Dingo | The Tank Museum
The Tank Museum
Published on 16 Sep 2019Most Curators don’t own armoured cars… David Willey, Tank Museum Curator, has owned his Daimler Dingo Scout Car for over 20 years. Find out how he came to own it and what he uses it for.
As part of the 75th Anniversary of Operation Market Garden, David will be driving his Dingo in a 200 vehicle convoy retracing the route.
Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► https://www.patreon.com/tankmuseum
Visit The Tank Museum SHOP: ► https://tankmuseumshop.org/
Twitter: ► https://twitter.com/TankMuseum
Instagram: ► https://www.instagram.com/tankmuseum/
Tiger Tank Blog: ► http://blog.tiger-tank.com/
Tank 100 First World War Centenary Blog: ► http://tank100.com/
September 14, 2019
QotD: America and its army
Before 1939 the United States Army was small, but it was professional. Its tiny officers corps was parochial, but true. Its members devoted their time to the study of war, caring little what went on in the larger society around them. They were centurions, and the society around them not their concern.
When so ordered, they went to war. Spreading themselves thinner still, they commanded and trained the civilians who heeded the trumpet’s call. The civilians did the fighting, of course — but they did it the Army’s way.
In 1861 millions of volunteers donned blue or gray. Millions of words have been written on American valor, but few books dwell on the fact that of the sixty important battles, fifty-five were commanded on both sides by West Pointers, and on one side in the remaining five.
In 1917 four million men were mustered in. Few of them liked it, but again they did things the way the professionals wanted them done.
The volunteers came and went, and the Army changed not at all.
But since the Civil War, the Army had neither the esteem nor the favor of public or government. Liberal opinion, whether business-liberal or labor-liberal, dominated the United States after the destruction of the South, and the illiberal Army grew constantly more alienated from its own society.
In a truly liberal society, centurions have no place. For centurions, when they put on the soldier, do not retain the citizen. They are never citizens to begin with.
There was and is no danger of military domination of the nation. The Constitution gave Congress the power of life or death over the military, and they have always accepted the fact. The danger has been the other way around — the liberal society, in its heart, wants not only domination of the military, but acquiesence of the military toward the liberal view of life.
Domination and control society should have. The record of military rule, from the burnished and lazy Praetorians to the juntas of Latin America, to the attempted fiasco of the Légion Étrangére, are pages of history singularly foul in odor.
But acquiesence society may not have, if it wants an army worth a damn. By the very nature of its mission, the military must maintain a hard and illiberal view of life and the world. Society’s purpose is to live; the military’s is to stand ready, if need be, to die.
Soldiers are rarely fit to rule — but they must be fit to fight.
The military is in essence a tool, to be used by its society. If its society is good, it may hope to be used honorably, even if badly. If its society is criminal, it may be, like the Wehrmacht, unleashed upon a helpless world.
But when the Wehrmacht dashed against the world, it was brought to ruin, not by a throng of amateurs, but by well-motivated, well-generaled Allied troops, who had learned their military lessons.
T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War: A Study in Unpreparedness, 1963.
September 9, 2019
QotD: War
The object of warfare is to dominate a portion of the earth, with its peoples, for causes either just or unjust. It is not to destroy the land and people, unless you have gone wholly mad.
Pushbotton war has its place. There is another kind of conflict — crusade, jihad, holy war, call it what you choose. It has been loosed before, with attendant horror but indecisive results. In the past, there were never means enough to exterminate all the unholy, whether Christian, Moslem, Protestant, Papist, or Communist. If jihad is preached again, undoubtedly the modern age will do much better.
Americans, denying from moral grounds that war can ever be a part of politics, inevitably tend to think in terms of holy war — against militarism, against fascism, against bolshevism. In the postwar age, uneasy, disliking and fearing the unholiness of Communism, they have prepared for jihad. If their leaders blow the trumpet, or if their homeland is attacked, their millions are agreed to be better dead than Red.
Any kind of war short of jihad was, is, and will be unpopular with the people. Because such wars are fought with legions, and Americans, even when they are proud of them, do not like their legions. They do not like to serve in them, nor even to allow them to be what they must.
For legions have no ideological or spiritual home in the liberal society. The liberal society has no use or need for legions — as its prophets have long proclaimed.
Except that in this world are tigers.
T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War: A Study in Unpreparedness, 1963.














