# WW2's most successful WW1 "leftover"



## Jerry W. Loper (Jun 12, 2009)

What weapon that saw wide spread use during World War I, was also used in World War II, successfully? To start this thread off, I'll nominate the Colt Model 1911 .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol.


----------



## Marcel (Jun 12, 2009)

Jerry W. Loper said:


> What weapon that saw wide spread use during World War I, was also used in World War II, successfully? To start this thread off, I'll nominate the Colt Model 1911 .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol.



The tank and aircrafts


----------



## diddyriddick (Jun 12, 2009)

Jerry W. Loper said:


> What weapon that saw wide spread use during World War I, was also used in World War II, successfully? To start this thread off, I'll nominate the Colt Model 1911 .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol.



Hard to argue with the 1911.


----------



## DBII (Jun 12, 2009)

To many to choose from Colt 1911, Browing Auto Rifle, the .30 and .50 cal machine guns, Springfield 1903 series rifle. I pick the .50 cal machine gun, followed by the 1903 Springfield. 

DBII


----------



## Freebird (Jun 12, 2009)

Jerry W. Loper said:


> What weapon that saw wide spread use during World War I, was also used in World War II, successfully? .




WARSPITE!!! 8)


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jun 12, 2009)

I have to agree with you freebird on this one, the QE Class Battleships.


----------



## Amsel (Jun 12, 2009)

I would say the mauser action.


----------



## Arsenal VG-33 (Jun 12, 2009)

I nominate the *M.1874 Gras *rifle. Replaced by the M.1886 Lebel, the Gras was obsolete by WW 1 but still saw service by reservists and class B troops mostly for drill and POW camp guards. By WW 2 the Gras was regulated to parade and drill uses, and was mostly seen in museums. However, the cadets of the military school at Saumur used them in 1940, defending the academy for almost two days. Some still remained in the hands of partisans afterwards.

More info here:

Fusil Gras mle 1874 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## GrauGeist (Jun 12, 2009)

Jerry W. Loper said:


> What weapon that saw wide spread use during World War I, was also used in World War II, successfully? To start this thread off, I'll nominate the Colt Model 1911 .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol.


The infantryman...


----------



## davebender (Jun 12, 2009)

The same bolt action rifles saw wide use during WW2. Not much you can do to improve such weapons without switching to a much more expensive semi-automatic rifle. I don't think hand grenades changed much either.


----------



## EinSchwab (Jun 13, 2009)

Theo Osterkamp


----------



## tomo pauk (Jun 13, 2009)

French 75mm and 155mm arty pieces. Queen Elisabeth BBs. Mortars (modified Stokes type).


But depth charges underwater microphones were useful in an un-modified form even in WWII, unlike the tanks and planes (planes are not a WWI invention anyway).


----------



## renrich (Jun 13, 2009)

The BAR barely got into WW1 and the Browning M2, 50 cal did not. The 1911 Colt is a good one, but the Mauser 98 served in both, I think, and so did the SMLE so those would be the most influential.


----------



## vanir (Jun 13, 2009)

What about the primary field gun of the Wehrmacht in the first two years of the war, essentially variations of the 1896 model 7.7cm FK rebarreled for the 7.5cm ammunition change of 1918 and fitted with the 1916 horse carriage. These were the FK 16 nA and FK 18 (which introduced a split rail horse carriage for anti-tank capability). Range about 13km and 9.5km respectively, hollow charge loadouts available on the latter from 1938.
Of course they were earmarked for replacement by newer 10.5cm FK but this would take some time.

Not exactly noteworthy material going up against the standard British 25-pdr in action from the start of the war, which has better than double the shell weight and the better range at about the same weapon weight and handiness.


----------



## davebender (Jun 14, 2009)

WWI era field guns like the German 7.7cm and French 75mm were so heavily modified that they were essentially new weapons. Only the gun tube was re-used. A new carriage converted the low angle direct fire field gun into a light howitzer.

The Schneider 105mm mle1913 Gun
The French Model 1913 105mm howitzer is a different story. It was so good when introduced that it was still competative during WWII without major changes.


> It had a maximum elevation of 37 degrees, quite high for a gun designed before the war. The shell weight was 16.3kg, which, combined with the range, made it quite suitable for both heavy infantry support and long range anti-artillery work. In France some 1.340 being built before the end of the war in 1918, and over 1.000 of these guns also saw service in World War Two.


----------



## parsifal (Jun 14, 2009)

Vickers Heavy Machine Gun, Lee Enfields and the 18/25 pounders spring to mind for me for land wepons.

V&W class Destroyers, and QE class BBs for the naval side

I cannot think of a single aircraft type from WWI that also served in WWII


----------



## Njaco (Jun 14, 2009)

Jeez, this is a warbird forum!  How about the plane itself! The Concept of fighter vs fighter or bomber? Or how aircraft on each side developed into weapons. How about tactics and strategy? If you want a single, concrete weapon, how about the synchronizing gear for the machine gun to shoot through propellors? Or the monoplane? I think there was so much just with aircraft that really dictated how the next war would be fought.


----------



## tomo pauk (Jun 14, 2009)

davebender said:


> WWI era field guns like the German 7.7cm and French 75mm were so heavily modified that they were essentially new weapons. Only the gun tube was re-used. A new carriage converted the low angle direct fire field gun into a light howitzer.
> 
> The Schneider 105mm mle1913 Gun
> The French Model 1913 105mm howitzer is a different story. It was so good when introduced that it was still competative during WWII without major changes.



Yep, the Mle1913 was a superb gun, and served in many armies, Wehrmacht included. Too bad Brits haven't used it (or the US 105mm M1) as a basis for a new medium piece, instead going after 25pdr.


----------



## davebender (Jun 14, 2009)

QF 4.5 inch Howitzer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Britain preferred the inferior 4.5 in QF howitzer whose range was about half that of the French made weapon. Go figure.


----------



## fastmongrel (Jun 14, 2009)

davebender said:


> QF 4.5 inch Howitzer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Britain preferred the inferior 4.5 in QF howitzer whose range was about half that of the French made weapon. Go figure.



Different classes of artillery the QF 4.5 was a howitzer weighing 1.3 tons

The 105mm mle 1913 was a longer range gun weighing 2.6 tons You are comparing chalk and cheese 

The mle 1913 was a brilliant gun though


----------



## davebender (Jun 14, 2009)

I disagree. The 4.5 inch QF howitzer was the standard division level field howitzer used by the British army. The 105mm Modele 1913 was the standard division level field howitzer used by the French army (once they finally started procuring division level howitzers in 1915).

WWI Germany did things a bit different. Each infantry division had a battalion of short range 10.5cm howitzers plus a battery of long range 10cm Kanone M1914. The 10cm Kanone M1914 was similiar in performance to the French 105mm Modele 1913.


----------



## fastmongrel (Jun 15, 2009)

WWI Germany did things a bit different.

My point all 3 armies on the western front did things differently with different doctrines, tactics and equipment. The only artillery piece that seems to have direct equivalents with equivalent roles in all 3 armies is the medium 15cm, 6inch, 155mm howitzer. 

The 4.5 QF was the only field piece that went unmodified (apart from small production changes) from 1914 to 1918 so it must have done the job the Royal Artillery wanted.

This is a fascinating book not an easy read for the amateur like myself but worth it if you can find a copy at the very least it will cure insomnia

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0850668115/?tag=dcglabs-20


----------



## stug3 (Mar 16, 2013)

The Vickers Machine Gun was one of the longest serving weapons in British military history, with the Mk 1 being employed in virtually unaltered form from its adoption in 1912 until 1968. The gun is a development of the Maxim system (see FIR 8095) wherein the Maxim toggle action is turned upside down, allowing for the body of the gun to be significantly smaller and, therefore, lighter. The heavy brass water jacket of the the Maxim was replaced by a lighter corrugated steel version. Various other changes were made which made the Vickers much easier to strip and service than the Maxim. During the First World War the Vickers became central to British infantry tactics and, from October 1915, all the Army’s Vickers Guns were put under the control of a specialist unit, the Machine Gun Corps. This gave impetus to the development of sophisticated tactics, which made full use of the Vickers guns range, accuracy and extraordinary reliability. These tactics were founded on pre-plotted fire, which could, when necessary, be conducted in multi-gun barrages, indirectly against unseen targets and over the heads of friendly troops. Although the Machine Gun Corps was disbanded in 1922, similar tactics were employed during the Second World War, when use of the Vickers was deputed to specially trained battalions furnished from line infantry regiments. The Vickers was replaced in British service from 1962 onwards, by the L7 General Purpose Machine-Gun.


Vickers machine gun team of 10th Battalion training near Bou Arada, 30 April 1943.


----------



## Timppa (Mar 16, 2013)

From Finnish perspective:

Mosin-Nagant:






Maxim:






76-02:






de 155 C Mle 1917 Schneider


----------



## davebender (Mar 16, 2013)

Artillery spotting balloons were employed from 1890s and some were still used during WWII. For instance Japan used artillery spotting balloons when bombarding Corregidor during spring of 1942. I wouldn't be surprised if spotting balloons were also used for 1942 siege of Sevastopol.


----------



## The Basket (Mar 16, 2013)

Avro 504 was perhaps...the only aircraft which served in ww1 and ww2....

Sort of....


----------



## vinnye (Mar 16, 2013)

Queen Elizabeth class BBs. Can not argue that they were value for money!


----------



## yulzari (Mar 17, 2013)

Renault FT tanks used by the French,, Yugoslavs, Germans, Poles,.......

There was even a WW1 british tank that was found abandoned outside the Reichstag in 1945.


----------



## fastmongrel (Mar 17, 2013)

British MkII Brodie helmet.

http://thebrodiehelmet.weebly.com/index.html


----------



## parsifal (Mar 17, 2013)

I think on reflection, it has to be the bolt action rifles, any kind. So many in service, and used to good effect by all. Hard to see any other singlke weapon system or generic type of kit (though I will toff my hat to the tin hat) having as much effect


----------



## davebender (Mar 17, 2013)

Provided less protection then WWI era German helmet and less protection then most WWII era helmets.


----------



## parsifal (Mar 17, 2013)

was distinctive in profile, and better sun protection for your eyes, Plus, when being shelled, gave small comfort by allowing the victim the belief he could actually crawl under the brim.

In reality and seriously, do you really think helmet shape makes any difference to the level of protection? Its more a recognition thing more tan anything. That was one of the criticisms when the US changed over to their new helmet shape back in the 80's. Made them look like latter day Germans


----------



## davebender (Mar 17, 2013)

Absolutely. 

More area covered = more area protected.


----------



## parsifal (Mar 17, 2013)

Yes thats true, but in the context of a cash strapped Britain, not wanting to spend much on defence, dont you think retaining the old Brodie Helmet (which in australia we just referred to as "the tin hat") was justified. Its a bit like the Lee Enfield. in retrospect, like the Mauser, there were better options available, but it just didnt make any sense from a cost pov to go to the trouble and expense to make that huge change. Spending limited defence dollars on upgrading artillery, or improving tanks, or the like, made far better finacial sense given that the old Infantry weapons were perfectly serviceable.

Statistically personal side arms account fopr less than 5% of enemy casualties in a full on battle. Artillery is about 50% of casualties, Tanks are about 5%, mortars and light artillery about 10%, air support anbout 5%, MGs about 15%, and things like mines, snipers etc the rest. Spending money on personal side arms, when all the combatants had bigger holes to fill, makes no sense. You make do with what you can. 

Things are completely different now. We are in the age of the "small wars, and here, personal kit has more impportance. 

As far as helmets are concerned, Ive got no data but I expect when the US redesigned their helmets they based it on some kind of data. Iremember reading in one of those defence journals that weight was a more significant concern than levels of protection. Arent the new US Hellmets made out of carbon fibre or kevlar or something?


----------



## davebender (Mar 17, 2013)

Modern U.S. helmets are made of Kevlar. I suspect other nations with well funded armies also use kevlar.

BTW, kevlar doesn't necessarily save weight. The kevlar helmet we wore during 1990s actually weighed a bit more then WWII ere steel helmet it replaced. It was more bullet resistant though in addition to protecting a bit more head space.


----------



## tomo pauk (Mar 18, 2013)

The main purpose of the helmet being shrapnel- and debris-protection, no ww2 helmet being bullet proof?


----------



## fastmongrel (Mar 18, 2013)

I would imagine the Brodie helmet would be better for airburst as it is wider than other helmets. Plus having tried on a German helmet it was like wearing a bucket on your head and degrading your hearing. 1mm of steel wouldnt even slow down a bullet at close range.


----------



## yulzari (Mar 18, 2013)

Airburst shrapnel is exactly what the Brodie helmet was designed to cope with. No WW1 or WW2 helmet was expected to defeat a rifle round. Possibly deflect a very glancing strike. Hence the maximising of overhead cover.

Having designed and issued the Brodie helmet (aka Battle Bowler in later itterations) to reduce the prevalant head wounds, the medical staff were initially puzzled as to why the numbers of head wounds, and deaths from head wounds, were increasing. Until they realised that, thanks to the new helmets, more were surviving long enough to reach medical aid.

IIRC (and it was a long time ago) the Parachute Regiment sponsored a study that indicated that, in WW2, using helmets instead of berets made a noticeable difference in head wounds and deaths but only in the case artillery and mortar fire. Against small arms helmets showed no statistical evidence of reducing head wounds, even with numerous anecdotal stories of deflected small arms strikes. I (very) vaguely recall that they attempted to weed out sustained long range HMG plunging fire from the small arms figures, treating them as artillery as the principal vector was vertical. Please treat this a information from a very low reliability source (my ancient memory.)


----------



## davebender (Mar 18, 2013)

There's plenty of ground burst shrapnel too. Mortar rounds, hand grenades, rifle grenades, assault artillery rounds, flakvierling rounds, panzerfaust rounds etc.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Mar 18, 2013)

George S. Patton


----------



## tomo pauk (Mar 18, 2013)

Hugh Dowding. Or Winston Churchill?


----------



## parsifal (Mar 18, 2013)

too cute....going down that path opens a whole range of possibilities.....the Soviet Government, German general staff, the Admiralty, stosstruppen tactics, tank warfare....boy the list goes on and on.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Mar 18, 2013)

michaelmaltby said:


> George S. Patton


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## tyrodtom (Mar 19, 2013)

Irwin Rommel.

I can't believe after all these other WW2 generals, that got their start in WW1, nobody mentions Rommel.

There's not many WW2 generals that weren't in WW1 though , unless you look at the Russians. Stalin had most of them shot.


----------



## Shortround6 (Mar 19, 2013)

davebender said:


> There's plenty of ground burst shrapnel too. Mortar rounds, hand grenades, rifle grenades, assault artillery rounds, flakvierling rounds, panzerfaust rounds etc.



Actually air burst shrapnel was not only pre WWI it dates to before the Civil war. Because it used different shells than HE and needed _good_ observation/communication to be effective it went out of favor until the proximity fuse greatly simplified things. The trouble with ground burst "SHRAPNEL " is that about 1/2 your fragments go directly into the ground.


----------



## pattle (May 27, 2013)

HMS WARSPITE.


----------



## mike siggins (May 30, 2013)

hold on what about the old english tank foud outside the reichstag


----------



## Shortround6 (May 30, 2013)

Key word is "successful" 

Now if it had successfully the defended the reichstag????


----------



## yulzari (May 31, 2013)

mike siggins said:


> hold on what about the old english tank foud outside the reichstag



Not english but british. Maybe england will regain it's independence one day but not as yet.


----------



## stug3 (Aug 15, 2013)

A British soldier with his rifle (SMLE No. 3) and kit, newly-arrived in Egypt, August 1942.


----------



## dutchman (Aug 16, 2013)

One of the things the brodie helmut did was well was keep the rain from running down the back of your neck. I know it doesn't sound like much but when your in the field that type of thing means a lot!!!


----------



## nuuumannn (Aug 16, 2013)

Broadly speaking, the aircraft carrier and carrier tactics experimented with by the Royal Navy, specifically HMS _Furious_. Carried out the very first successful aircraft carrier launched air strike on 17/18 July 1918, the first landing of a aeroplane on a carrier deck (although strictly speaking _Furious_ was still a seaplane carrier as the rear deck hadn't been fitted at that stage) and countless experiments with deck landing apparatus in 1918, 1919.

The Royal Naval Air Service's spiritual decendant, the Fleet Air Arm controlled by the Admiralty.


----------



## vinnye (Aug 17, 2013)

May have been suggested before - Winston Churchill?


----------

