1935-45: introduce one cartridge type for infantry weapon per each country making guns for ww2

[tomo pauk]

As it says on the tin. The spanking new cartridge can be for SMGs/pistols (reason being so these can fire with less recoil, and/or so the infatrymen can carry more ammo, and/or so the effective range fire requires less of guesswork etc), for carbines (for better firepower/less recoil/more ammo carried etc), for rifles (same as above, plus better suitability for self-loading rifles), MGs (both for LMGs and vehicle-mounted ones). Cartridges can be historical types , as well as non-historical - required is that cartridges can work with technology and materials of the day. Introduce new weapons if you want, or modify the existing types. For the ideas take a peek at enemy arsenals if you want.

Yes, you have the money to do it. Note - just one cartridge per country per person.

 

[Canuck Wingnut]

Greece having the funding to put the 7.92x36mm EPK into service would be interesting.

Britain adopting the 7.65mm Longue pistol cartridge for commonality with their French allies (or even 9mm or a different rimless pistol cartridge- maybe slightly overpowered for pistol use to get a better set of SMG options) pre-war, replacing revolvers with semi-automatics, and having a better opportunity to get SMGs into service likewise offers a feasible opportunity to make a small but meaningful improvement in the Empire's small arms.

Japan's another case where just having a good pistol cartridge in service prewar would make SMG adoption efforts easier. I'd reccomend 9mm Parabellum, a nice reliable round. Of course, without the desire to design SMGs the opportunity would be wasted...

For Italy just having the money to move smoothly to 7.35mm would make a big difference, but in hindsight switching to the German 7.92mm probably would have made more sense and at least given them ammo commonality (and hopefully the ability to buy some MGs) with somebody.

For the Americans, perhaps the .276 Pedersen would have given some advantages to both the alt-Garand and their MGs. Without such an attachment to their stocks of 30-06, maybe the BAR even gets a redesign (or replacement)!

 

[tomo pauk]

For the Americans, perhaps the .276 Pedersen would have given some advantages to both the alt-Garand and their MGs. Without such an attachment to their stocks of 30-06, maybe the BAR even gets a redesign (or replacement)!

Second that. The .276 on the BAR would've been interesting (lower mass and recoil, more rounds), as well as the Johnson LMG (that was with harsh recoil historically); better controlability for both when firing short bursts. Garand rifle was supposed to hold 10 rounds of the .276, vs. 8 rd of the .30-06 - gain in the practical RoF.

For Italy just having the money to move smoothly to 7.35mm would make a big difference, but in hindsight switching to the German 7.92mm probably would have made more sense and at least given them ammo commonality (and hopefully the ability to buy some MGs) with somebody.

Italians also have the option of designing the spitzer round for the 6.5mm cartridge.

British - I'd like for them to go with .30 Short, ie. something between the 7.62x39 and Czech 7.62x45.
Similar for the Germans - early intermediate 8mm round might make designing a self-loading rifle an easier job, also a LMG like the RPK can come in handy.