Was the Owen ever tested against the M3 "Grease Gun?" I suspect it would still be better, but the M3 held up better than the Thompson and Sten.
@willmarsden76576 күн бұрын
Ugly and reliable, like those that make her. ❤
@awf65548 күн бұрын
Criticism of the overhead mag neglects the same feature in the very effective Bren.
@SimonsMilitaryStuff8 күн бұрын
Plus the SMG is not exactly designed for snipers.
@guaporeturns94729 күн бұрын
Outstanding airplane
@brucelamberton881911 күн бұрын
My father had an Owen Gun in PNG in WW2. He swore by it and said it saved his life many timex.
@carlnapp441218 күн бұрын
Actually Kurt Tank was an electical engineer.
@terrymarriott479819 күн бұрын
Range 25 yards
@halgilley571725 күн бұрын
Please remember that the P-400 was purchased under a cash contract and not lend lease. With the Battle of Britain over and no danger of invasion, the British cancelled the contract along with P-38s they had purchased at the same time. The British were also largely responsible for the staggering weight gain to an astonishing 7850# by requiring underpowered .30cal machine guns and twice the armor plate that was needed. The Russians did so well with it because they immediately removed these and other items that they deemed excessive or redundant. Performance was excellent enabling it to fight 109s and 190s at any altitude. Too bad the British and AAF didn't do the same.
@hisdudeness8328Ай бұрын
It’s basically a pipe gun before anyone was aware of such a term.
@chpman2013Ай бұрын
The F6F Hellcat may have been slower than the F4U Corsair, but it was by no means "inferior"...the Hellcat would come to be known as the "Zero killer", for a reason.
@kevinfinn9086Ай бұрын
Very brave men who should be remembered by all of us.
@kevinfinn9086Ай бұрын
Deserves a wider audience for these well made videos
@SimonsMilitaryStuffАй бұрын
Thanks Kevin. Ever since I did the "arsenal of freedom" video I seem to have a falling off of ppl getting my vids
@7366932 ай бұрын
The Luftwaffe did bomb Gorky over forty times between November 1941 & June 1943. The Luftwaffe attacked using Junkers Ju 88, Heinkel He 111, Dornier Do 215, &/or Focke Wulf Fw 200 aircraft.
@bold8102 ай бұрын
Oh, dang skippy, maing! 👍
@mikeytrains12 ай бұрын
I'd hardly call the B-26 a failure on any level bar training insufficiencies that were very easily mopped up by old heads who knew what they were doing and the aircraft's reputation amongst basically everybody that wasn't Harry Truman... Most every problems the aircraft had were very easily figured out. Having the lowest loss rate of the war and some of the highest sortie tallies of any Allied aircraft of the war doesn't lie
@SimonsMilitaryStuff2 ай бұрын
I liken it to training ppl in Formula 1 cars from the jump. There are better ways to train novices. As always it's not the mistakes, it's the cover up..
@mikeytrains12 ай бұрын
@@SimonsMilitaryStuff It wasn't a cover up as much as it was PR damage control though
@AG92292 ай бұрын
ALL P-39s were supercharged. What was removed was the turbocharger- called a turbo-supercharger at the time, hence the confusion which comes up. The P-39 had a single speed, single-stage supercharger. Do you know what else did? The Spitfire V.
@adamstrange78842 ай бұрын
The F6F wasn't inferior it was very pilot friendly!
@spritbong52852 ай бұрын
Mustang built to British specs. Merlin instead of Allison. Corsair given to Britain because Americans hated it. British engineers fix it. Enough said.
@mirimar692 ай бұрын
The stump jump plough and the owen SMG...great Aussie inventions
@darrenwhiteside16192 ай бұрын
The US Navy didn't "settle" for the Hellcat. It was the best choice for carrier operations in 1943. They picked it solely based on it's merits which at the time overshadowed the carrier qualities of the F4U Corsair. Furthermore, the Hellcat became THE dominant naval fighter in the Pacific theater. No one can dispute that claim. Just look at the record books.They speak for themselves. Now I'm not saying that the F4U wasn't an outstanding aircraft in it's own right, but as a carrier-based fighter in 1943 it required more development and wasn't the best candidate for that role during mid to late 1943. Besides, by that time the US Navy had logiststically prepared for the F6F Hellcat to be it's main fighter to spearhead it's offensive against Japan. It would have been a monumental mistake to change horses in the middle of a race which you were already winning.
@mothmagic12 ай бұрын
They had prior experience with things like the Seafire, Sea Hurricane and Barracuda so they landed the Corsair the same way. Voila, one very potent shipborne fighter.
@harveybirdman742 ай бұрын
FW is of the opinion that the Finish Suomi 31 was the best SMG of WW2. From a technical standpoint this is probably true. However, I would argue that the Owen was definitely the best SMG of the Pacific theatre, due to to its reliability.
@SimonsMilitaryStuff2 ай бұрын
Well the Owen only saw combat in the pacific. Given the opportunity.who knows?
@brucelamberton881911 күн бұрын
The Suomi was more expensive to produce and heavier.
@Alan-jn2bw2 ай бұрын
My father william henry alfred reynolds was a tag on abarracuda on this mission later on 6june diverted to convoy duty because of bad weather he was shot down and kllled he was 22years old his body was never recovered his colleagues were brown and pollen also lost 827 sqaudron
@bobkohl67793 ай бұрын
A-26C had the glass nose, zb model had tge nose guns and package guns were mounted on the fuselage
@mikerilling65153 ай бұрын
Nonsense the Thompson outclassed it in every way 👍 The Owen was chosen for political purposes and everyone knows it 🙄
@peterwarner592019 күн бұрын
Incoherent prattle.
@brucelamberton881911 күн бұрын
Utter bullshit Check out the videos of the testing and see how poorly the Thompson fared. Plus it was heavier and the Thompson's designers had a massive profit margin (around 300-400% by memory; the Owen's was just a couple of points above cost) and Australia would've had to pay a licence fee to manufacture it, making it hideously expensive. NOTHING touched the Owen in jungle orv desert conditions, or anything in between.
@maxschell88233 ай бұрын
More serious research needed here. The F4U-1A was given to the U.S. Navy VF-17 in August 10, 1943. Source book"Jolly Rogers" by Blackburn pg. 74. That Corsair had a raised canopy. The Royal Navy was first operating the F4U-1 in carrier trials , December 1943. That Corsair has a "birdcage" and lower seat. No, the Royal navy didn't design the raised canopy.
@maxschell88234 ай бұрын
Revealed in the book "Widowmaker" by Tim Hiller-Graves that the U.S. Navy was in fact using the "curved approach" for Corsair carrier landings as early as February 1943. "The first Corsair arrived in February (1943) and an intensive program began with the CO (Lt. Cdr. John "Tommy" Blackburn) playing a leading part. He realized early on when undergoing deck trials with the USS Charger in Chesapeake Bay, that the Corsair had to be handled differently to other aircraft when landing on a carrier. Blackburn reasoned that a standard , straight on approach was unsuited to this aircraft, because of its poor forward visibility when landing. Above all else, a pilot needed to see the deck and the batsman's (LSO) instructions and that could only be achieved with the Corsair using the curved approach from the port side ." Following this there is a letter from Blackburn which goes on to describing Corsair landing issues. Also read the document : Corsair F4U Navy Carrier Landing Issues" The link: facebook.com/groups/570146806355342/files
@MrKawaltd7504 ай бұрын
The Warspite launching Swordfish at Narvik? Typing error maybe ? 😅
@SimonsMilitaryStuff4 ай бұрын
Opps messed up here. The Swordfish (float boat) scored the U boat. I wanted to point out the scale of the battle, but ended up making it sound like Warspite was a Carrier. Bugger. Thanks for the pickup.
@luispalacios25254 ай бұрын
Pps41 was the best nothing more to say
@SimonsMilitaryStuff4 ай бұрын
Well it's always going to be a subjective call, and the Pps41 is an iconic weapon for a reason. The idea of the Tu-2Sh is mind bending too. But I stand by the Owen.
@brucelamberton881911 күн бұрын
No chance. The 'Papasha' didn't come close to the Owen for reliability and the drum magazine was easily knocked out of position, a fault that wasn't fixed until late in the war.
@SPACE_LIFE_SCIENCE4 ай бұрын
Love these old reels 😁
@SimonsMilitaryStuff4 ай бұрын
Me too!
@mdee87844 ай бұрын
Phenomenal engineering
@SPACE_LIFE_SCIENCE5 ай бұрын
What a great yarn. I wonder how much was just propaganda?
@SimonsMilitaryStuff4 ай бұрын
Really, who knows? Propaganda was rife in WW2 for all countries.
@historyfactshorts4 ай бұрын
Its funny how the Soviet Communists focused its propaganda via individuals. Counter intuitive.
@MrRugbylane5 ай бұрын
what a great video. Liked
@SimonsMilitaryStuff4 ай бұрын
Thank you! Cheers!
@shanemossmoss5 ай бұрын
The F1 was ok to me no where as good as the Owen if I had a stoppage it was with the F1 I don't remember one with the Owen Oh only when the mag was empty
@norahisaac26875 ай бұрын
*promosm*
@SimonsMilitaryStuff5 ай бұрын
Sorry I don't understand that??
@LuccaReakt5 ай бұрын
I can bet when Australia decide to adopt the Steyr Aug as their Main Rifle a few of those folks who decided maybe bear the Owen SMG, 'cause nearly the same ergonomics.
@brucelamberton881911 күн бұрын
Except the Steyr is a bullpup.
@Colt38546 ай бұрын
Owen received 10,000 pounds for his design. After failed business ventures in a sawmill after the war he died from alcoholism in 1949. The gun that Owen designed and made was a rather crude home made firearm. A next door neighbour of Owen's, Vincent Wardell who was a supervisor at Lysaght in Newcastle NSW and a engineer Freddie Kunzler who also worked at Lysaght developed the gun to it's final design. Lysaght was allowed a 4% profit margin for manufacture. They were not payed by the Government until 1949 with inflation they made a 1.5% profit margin on the manufacture. The Thompson ran out at 300% profit. Major difference.
@danielcurtis14342 ай бұрын
Thanks for the context I was only aware of about half of that. 😮
@garrybrischke5311 күн бұрын
Wars are good for some businesses , not so good for others .
@richardeast56606 ай бұрын
The diggers darling there is no substitute 🇦🇺
@allancarey26046 ай бұрын
Often overlooked…the rounded edges were a design choice as it reduced cuts from sharpe edges. Very important given that risk of infection from even minor wounds in the tropics
@SPACE_LIFE_SCIENCE6 ай бұрын
You make a solid argument.
@SPACE_LIFE_SCIENCE6 ай бұрын
The yanks built sturdy planes, the Japs not so much. Lucky the weave tactic worked.
@Ubique29276 ай бұрын
It’s like comparing the Meteor to the F35. Different era different planes. The wildcat was great in 1941, not so good in 1942.
@joshuashackelford66966 ай бұрын
As a pilot I find the visibility complaints to be overstated. We don’t look out the sides to fly. We look at where we are going to be not where we are. Especially at 350mph. I think they were an excuse for a staff that didn’t want to upgrade.
@SimonsMilitaryStuff6 ай бұрын
I think the complaint was about visibility of the ground when trying to spot the enemy.
@LauchlanAdorjan6 ай бұрын
LOL
@SimonsMilitaryStuff6 ай бұрын
I for one am hoping its a laughable proposition.
@chovboy72266 ай бұрын
but wasn’t there two pilots who took off in P-40s in dec 7th and shot down multiple japanese aircraft? wouldn’t they be the first?
@motorboatmygoat22116 ай бұрын
George Welch and Kenneth Taylor were at Pearl Harbor but they were Army pilots not Navy
@naturefarms68346 ай бұрын
Wonder what the greatest generation would think of the current MAGA generation aka the worst generation in American history
@Tim.NavVet.EN26 ай бұрын
They would probably be more disappointed by the Cancel Culture... (something about the First Amendment)
@SimonsMilitaryStuff6 ай бұрын
I tend to think all Americans are rightfully proud of the sacrifice of those who served. The current schism in US politics would probably be quite distressing for most of them.