Posted: 3/23/2022 6:05:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: hoosier122][Edited]
|
I was watching a YouTube channel talking about US participation in post-WWII conflicts in eastern Asia. (He's a Marine that breaks down footage, claims, stories, etc...) He said that during WWII, the Japanese chose to use the Arisaka chambered in 6.550mmSR Type 38 because of metal scarcity and a smaller round would "wound not kill." I've heard of Japan utilizing non-lethal obstacles and devices to accomplish this, but I've never heard that it shaped their decision to use the Arisaka. Thoughts for those who know about Japan in WWII? ETA: Per Wiki, the Arisaka could also be chambered to shoot "the 7.758mm Type 99 cartridge, which is comparable in power to a modern .308 Winchester round" ... Was that a specialty used by snipers or in areas of heavier cover (like rain forests?) |
13B / 39C X5 / 35M yup reclassed more than once...
Joined:
Sep 2006
Posts:
5611
EE: 0% (0)
WA, USA
|
When the Japanese adopted the 6.5 many other nations were also adopting some form of 6.5. Sweden, Italy, etc. Once they really got into war the Japanese found the round lacking in performance. They went to the 7.7. The Italians had the same conclusion with their Carcano caliber change. The round just didn’t have the ooomph against the .303Brit and .30-06. |
I don't know nothin'. I just post here.
|
I have never read this, can you site any other documentation? edit: LInk https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/cartridge-of-the-week-the-7-7x58mm-arisaka.10495/ Also the 7.7 was widely used by the air force. |
| Japan adopted the smaller round long before the war started, and then tried to change in the middle to the 7.7, and found out trying to change your main rifle cartridge in the middle of a war is a bad idea as it leads to logistical problems with the wrong ammo going to the guys at the front. The amount of copper or lead the cartridge used is a side show that is never really considered when adopting a new cartridge by anybody. Yes, the total weight of a cartridge is less in the smaller calibers and the smaller cartridges and that is usually used as part of the decision making process, but not how much copper or how much lead, just total weight of cartridge. |
|
Originally Posted By Ameshawki: I'm not sure what has dumbed down society worse, U-Tube or Facebook.  This Movie Should Terrify the Chinese People about War with the USA |
|
I want to say even their forces were not uniform in choosing to change. The Imperial Army wanted to change from 6.5 to 7.7 but it was a bit too late to do so. The IJ Navy chose to stay with the 6.5mm. I think the Type I (eye not one) were in 6.5 too, they were an auxillary purchase as they really lacked the production capability. One thing they were smart about though, they mostly standardized caliber within a theater. I want to say most troops in China were Army and were using 7.7mm, a lot of the Island campaign stuff was Army and IJN infantry with 6.5mm issued. Of course there were mixed ammo needs when things start getting shuffled about. MacArthur as big of a pompous ass as he was made the right call on the M1 garand caliber as war was imminent and we were sitting on millions and millions of ‘06 ammo in depot bunkers. The .276 would have been better but better design isn’t always best in the big picture. I read that once for what that is worth. |
|
Originally Posted By HIMARS13A: Raw materials matters, the US did a study after the war and concluded that 7.62 would have used like 80 tons less brass than 30-06. It's also shorter so the cyclic rate for MGs would have been higher and made it easier to get hits on fleeting targets. |
