There has been an increasing interest in gaming WWI of late. I felt that this article would therefore be of interest. Mal Wright has been an active gamer for many years in Australia. A long time subscriber he found us again on the net after some years of missing The Courier and I am glad he did! He sent in several articles for The Courier's readers enjoyment, his one caveat that I don't attempt to change his Australian spelling! Next issue there will be a very enlightening article about Gas in WWI Welcome back Mal! ED.
A Russian Machine Gun captured by the Germans in 1914.
An early model of the standard Russian Maxim Gun. No shield fitted (it might have been
removed). It was quite common for these weapons to be carried on an ammunition limber,
from which it could also be fired It could have belonged to a Russian Cavalry regiment,
or an infantry unit, however I would bet on Cavalry. The PBI were usually expected to
dismantle theirs and carry them about. - M Wright
The use of the machinegun up to the end of WWI was a developing science with all the participating nations learning as they went. Initial use had of course mostly been against mass targets such as Natives unwilling to be colonised. Such targets presented easy meat for the gunners and produced a fairly incorrect idea of the use of the new weapon.
The lessons of the 1904-05 conflict between Russia and Japan were not really absorbed by the higher command of most European armies, although the participants themselves certainly took note. Therefore by the commencement of war the Germans were dragging around the incredibly heavy MG.08 a version of the early Maxim gun, the French had their Hotchkiss and St. Ettienne types, the British had the Maxim as well but were moving to the Vickers. Of course the Russians still had the Maxim, but they had taken the precaution of making theirs more mobile through the addition of wheels and increasing protection through the provision of a shield.
The Cavalry of Europe were mostly still dragging around the
heavy Maxim and Hotchkiss types, usually mounted on a gun limber
and with other limbers of ammunition accompanying them. Only the
Japanese and Russians had shown any real initiative. As a result of war
experience they had seen the need to make Machineguns lighter and
easier to move above. In the case of the Russians they had adopted the
MADSEN light machinegun from 1905 onward, the type seeing limited
use against the Japanese. The Japanese had removed their Hotchkiss
guns from the heavy artillery limbers and put them on pack animals
instead, particularly when operating with the cavalry. They had
lightened the Hotchkiss as much as possible and rushed it forward in a
very aggressive manner, using manpower to over come the weight.
From just before WWI however, more weapons of a 'Light' nature began to appear. It is the arrival and role of these that confuses many wargamers. Even the armies of the time were not sure what the role of these weapons would be at first. The most famous was the LEWISGUN an American invention rejected by that country and which commenced production in Belgium. The MADSEN was also sold to many countries, although usually in small quantities and the HOTCHKISS was also produced in a lighter variant, principally at the suggestion of Japan, but adopted immediately by other countries as well. The British due to considerable Colonial experience in India, were ready to adopt the light version of the Hotchkiss for the Cavalry and in fact it became the main Cavalry LMG of WWI and into the early part of WW2.
THE MEDIUM MACHINEGUN
The 'Heavy' bracket, that is to say, what we would call Medium Machine Guns today, eventually comprised the following main types. The British had developed their own version of the Maxim, the VICKERS MG which was considerably lighter than the older gun and extremely accurate. The Germans stuck to their very heavy version of the MG.08, the Austrians had the SCHWARLOZE and SKODA, the French dumped their useless St.Ettienne, giving many to the Italians who were grateful for anything, and concentrated on the HOTCHKISS.
The Americans eventually adopted the excellent BROWNING after fiddling with the COLT POTATO DIGGER and other designs. A modified form of the Colt, known as the MARLIN, was actually a much better weapon, produced in large numbers and saw considerable WWI service with the US Army. The Italians had the FIAT REVELLI, but far too few Machineguns of any type.
THE LIGHT MACHINEGUN
The 'Light' bracket was of course, dominated by the LEWIS, and the model 1908 light version of the Hotchkiss. The French added the CHAUCHAT and some BERGMANN LMG's entered German service along with the MADSEN. The Germans having realised the need for a lot of LMG's decided to take what seemed the easy way out and convert the MG08 into the MG08/15. The Austrians followed suit with the SCHWARLOZE MG12/16.
Eventually the Italians and Germans would introduce a new type, the Sub-machinegun., but this was a very late WWI development.
SO WHAT WAS A MACHINEGUN?
At this point what constitutes a machinegun is looking a bit blurred and this confuses many rule writers and gainers alike. Most of the above weapons use similar ammunition to each other and therefore have the same technical range. Some are indeed only conversions of the same gun, so why should it not be basically the same? I know of one wargamer who would argue that if the ammunition is the same, they can both fire the same distance. He's technically right and also wrong all at the same time.
TACTICAL USE OF THE MEDIUM MACHINEGUN
Let's examine the differences. In what we now call the MMG bracket the weapons are usually mounted on some form of solid fixed base. In most cases a tripod. The weapon is usually belt fed, which enables a very high rate of fire, although the HOTCHKISS is an exception, being strip fed. In addition because of the size and weight involved, the weapon is usually set up and used from a fixed position. It is therefore not portable unless disassembled. On the positive side the heavy weight makes it able to be used with considerable accuracy firing along set lines and with devastating volume of fire.
This means that the weapon could be test fired during daylight, the bearings being then noted and kept. If an attack developed during the hours of darkness, under the cover of smoke, dust of a barrage etc. the weapon could be fixed onto one of the previously worked out bearings and then fired. It might only sweep one or two degrees but the gunners knew with reasonable certainty where the bullets would fall. The effect of this was to create fire zones and lanes of heavy firepower, across which an attacking or assembling enemy would have to cross. For example the lip of a trench could be ranged and then fired on blindly to prevent the enemy leaving it.
I might point out here that these weapons were usually set up to fire diagonally toward the enemy lines to achieve better coverage. Firing in a straight line from the gun directly at the enemy would present only a very narrow lane, despite being popular in Hollywood movies. These weapons could be used in a manner which enabled them to swivel more widely, but that increased the spray, resulting in less concentration of fire and loss of their devastating effect.
By being set up to fire diagonally they could also be concealed from being viewed by the enemy closest to the weapon and most likely to be able to see it. In many cases firing through hessian bags enhanced concealment. All sorts of tricks were used to make it hard to see where the gun was. The weapon was a mass killer of men who attempted to move through its line of fire in close formations. It never was intended to be waved about from side to side, in the popular Hollywood fashion.
In this sort of role the fixed type machinegun could achieve
ranges out to the effective carry of the ammunition being fired. The fall
of shot from the Vickers gun was so predictable that they were often
used as barrage weapons to deny the enemy the opportunity to move
through a predicted zone. This might be used to totally deny the
movement of reserves, ammunition, food and other supplies through a
given area. During an attack it could effectively pin the enemy and
prevent all forms of movement through the use of a few Vickersguns
firing belt after belt of ammunition for hours on end.
Despite its great weight, the German MG.08 was not as versatile as the Vickers and although used in most of the same roles it was rarely used as a barrage weapon. The same applied to the Austrian and Russian weapons. The French Hotchkiss fired strips and was far more prone to jamming, so it could certainly not be used in the barrage role. None the less the style of mounting allowed these weapons to also fire out to more or less the full range of the ammunition with reasonable accuracy.
So we can see therefore that the MMG role was to act both offensively and defensively, but mostly from a pre-prepared position. It also fired off a lot of ammunition, so a ready supply was necessary, requiring a whole team of supply numbers. Such a weapon *could* be used in an advance, but it was difficult to move and all the team required to work it would have to go with it, along with spare parts, tools etc.
SO WHAT WAS A LIGHT MACHINEGUN?
The LMG or Light Machine Gun was intended at first to be simply a less expensive and more portable way of achieving the above. Combat use however, quickly showed that it was a miserable excuse for an MMG. The British even tried mounting some on Vickers tripods, but without success. When first entering service a cartload of ammunition and a large retinue of helpers usually accompanied the LMG. This was due to the armies thinking of it as simply a cheaper form of MMQ which would need all the ammunition and helpers.
Freed from the constraints of the tripod mount, some LMG's were brutes of things to keep under control. Most were fitted with a bipod mounting which was adequate for taking the weight of the weapon off the holder, but quite incapable of stopping the weapon from leaping about. For this reason, lots of short bursts were quickly found to be the best way to use one. Sustained fire would produce an extremely wide spread of bullets with reduced effect.
Because of its tendency to leap about, the weapon was therefore fairly inaccurate. Most were out of their league when firing over 500 yards and their best range was usually half that. Yes the bullets could reach further, but hitting anything would be more a matter of sheer luck than intent. To use it as such would be a total waste of ammunition. Sustained bombardment or fixed line firing was obviously out of the question. So what to do with it?
The true form of most of the weapons was really as an AUTOMATIC RIFLE.
The weapon did provide much more mobility. This is particularly the case with the LEWIS, MADSEN, HOTCHKISS LIGHT, the later American BAR and the French CHAUCHAT. Especially the Italian VILLAR PEROSA which was an exception and will be discussed separarely.
Easy mobility with the MG08/15 and its Austrian equivalent M 12/16 was far less so. These latter were simply the older heavy guns taken off the early massive mountings and put onto a bipod, with a shoulder grip or butt. The socalled 'light' MG08/15 actually still weighed more than the British Vickers gun. It was very heavy and a brute of a thing to control, as the weapon tended to leap about all over the place and required a very strong man to fire it. The gunners also needed to be exceptionally strong to even carry it for any distance.
The Austrian weapon had a similar problem. Because of this the Germans and Austrians used every workable LEWIS GUN they could get hold of. Indeed the original factory had been in Belgium and this was kept working full tilt throughout the war producing guns for the Germans in Mauser calibre, as well as repairing and servicing captured weapons. The favourite weapon of German Storm Troops was the LEWIS, not the MG08/15. The BERGMANN Model 1915nA developed by Louis Schmeisser and eventually issued on a bipod, was an excellent gun but was never available in sufficient number due to the earlier disinterest of the High Command when it was first offered and consequent lack of production facilities.
One wargarne figure manufacturer (Irregular) does produce a 15mm WWI German wielding an MG08/15 from the hip, using a strap and while it could technically be used that way, it would take a lot of doing, an incredibly brave soldier and a man of Olympic weight lifting capability! In addition even if he did fire it that way, the spray would be such as to be fairly ineffective. In compensation the Germans used as many of the Danish MADSEN guns as they could get their hands on, including many they captured from the Russian Cavalry.
As a matter of interest the VICKERS was also provided with a bipod mount for use in emergencies, but no sane British gunner would use it that way for anything but the most extreme of situations.
TACTICAL USE OF THE LIGHT MACHINEGUN
So we have LMG's. They are inaccurate at long ranges but fairly portable and easy to move about. What do we do with them? Experience quickly showed that these weapons distributed amongst the ordinary infantry, rather than specialist sections, could increase the close range firepower of a platoon considerably. Because of their bipod they could be used in direct fire roles repelling enemy frontal assaults, just as the riflemen did, but with considerably more clout. Because they were accurate out to short ranges this was quite acceptable. Most infantry use of such guns would be at 100 to 500 yards. At these ranges LMG's were quite able to put down a respectable amount of fire, even if in bursts. They could also change targets quickly, simply by swivelling, or lifting the gun to a new position.
On the attack they could be easily moved forward to defend a newly captured area until the heavier weapons were brought up. They could be effectively used in street fighting and the LEWIS in particular was often used as an anti Bunker weapon. It didn't have to knock the bunker out, it just needed to deliver enough firepower against the bunker firing slits to persuade the enemy to flinch or duck for cover, thereby allowing other infantry to get close enough to use grenades etc. From 1917, the British took out most bunkers in this manner.
The LEWIS, BAR and CHAUCHAT were provided with a strap to enable them to be fired from the hip while advancing. This was not the preferred method of use by those who had to fire the Lewis, but it was done if the situation required it. The Chauchat on the other hand, was intended to be used that way. By such use these weapons could become "Trench Brooms", sweeping defenders out of the way, once a section of trench had been breached. It would, again, take a very strong and determined German to have used an MG08/15 in such a manner and similarly the HOTCHKISS light would have been much too difficult to fire. Most LMG's were therefore quickly seen as offensive weapons as well as defensive. The Germans trained whole 'Musketen'units to use the MADSEN en-masse in the counter attack role and for plugging breaches in their line. Later they used several thousand captured and rechambered, or purpose built LEWIS guns to equip their STURM TRUPPE, for the attacking role.
I mentioned the VILLAR PEROSA in passing. This was an Italian attempt to produce a machinegun for use in Alpine regions. It used pistol ammunition but had twin barrels and an incredible rate of fire. Unfortunately its short range enabled it to be easily out shot by enemy weapons, but there can be no doubt that at very short ranges its effect was devastating. Unfortunately the high rate of fire also meant it needed an awful lot of ammunition and went through magazines very rapidly indeed. The portability of the weapon was however remarkable. Some were also later used as observer weapons in aircraft. Having proved of no use as an actual MMG -- the tripod and shield was discarded, being replaced instead by a shoulder strap. The gunner could then walk forward firing from the hip. This role made it the earliest form of what would become known as the SUBMACHINGUN. It was however rather cumbersome, especially as a twin barrel, twin magazine weapon, and the rate of fire too high.
SUBMACHINEGUNS
The Villar Perosa had however led the way to another type of "Trench Broom" and by 1918 the twin barrel weapons were being converted into single barrel weapons able to be carried and fired by one man, on the move. In fact, the Model 18 Berretta sub-machinegun.
Having failed to produce anything more than an incredibly heavy light machinegun, in the MG08/15, the Germans leapt right over to another level and also produced a Sub-Machinegun. They had appreciated the role of the "Trench Broom" type weapon and when Bergmann came up with one capable of operation by one man, they took the idea on with enthusiasm. The High Command, still stuck on the idea of a machinegun being a big heavy thing, insisted on each Bergmann being a 'team' weapon and provided lots of people to carry spare ammunition and be ready to fire it if necessary. None the less it was quite effective and liked by its users even if not used in quite the same manner as WW2 submachineguns.
The Allied armies were offered various ideas for SMG's but none were accepted or saw service. The fore runners of the later famous THOMPSON were completed in early 1918 but the weapon was not perfected for service until the war had finished. It must be mentioned that it was the THOMPSON company who coined the phrase SUB MACHINEGUN. Up until then there had been no real designation, the weapons being simply referred to as 'very light' Machineguns, trench sweepers, automatic rifles and machine pistols.
Back to Table of Contents -- Courier #82
To Courier List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2001 by The Courier Publishing Company.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com