Video Description

Today's Q&A is brought to you by the fine folks at Patreon, and by Penguin Brutality: https://www.varusteleka.com/en/search?q=penguin http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons 01:11 - Was the Vickers .50 any good, and why did the British use 4 different heavy cartridges instead of consolidating? 07:35 - The Sten and its single-feed magazine design 10:27 - Owen versus Sten, and German use of the Owen. 14:38 - British wartime work on an "assault rifle" sort of weapon? 15:44 - Why no British semiauto rifle during WW2? Jonathan Ferguson on British semiauto rifle trials: https://youtu.be/ac5psNc445k?t=2531 18:04 - EM2's automatic bolt closure system 20:46 - Did the British use other allied weapons besides American ones? 23:15 - Is the PIAT a Destrucitve Device under US law and why? 26:07 - Bren vs Degtyarev 27:50 - Why not make the Sten in .45 to use Thompson ammo? 29:37 - Did the British get M3 Grease Guns? 31:01 - British SMG in .455? 32:03 - Sten vs Lanchester 33:26 - Was there an LSW version of the EM1/EM2 planned? EM1 Korsac: https://youtu.be/A8ygMDJQ0iY 34:25 - Why wasn't the BESA in .303? 36:34 - Biggest British missed opportunity during the interwar period? 38:40 - British naval service small arms 41:45 - Did .280 cartridge development begin during the war? 43:24 - Impact of MP44 on British post-war small arms development? 44:25 - Gallilean sights on the Enfield 46:25 - Why is there a semiauto selector on the Sten? 49:17 - Did American soldiers use British small arms? 50:29 - Why did the British choose the Lee action over the Mauser action? 51:16 - Which was better, Sten or Grease Gun? 52:34 - Why did the whole Commonwealth not switch to the No4 Enfield? https://utreon.com/c/forgottenweapons/ http://www.floatplane.com/channel/ForgottenWeapons Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.forgottenweapons.com