Listening to the guys can be good ...

There are numerous instances of equipment being fielded that don't seem to be designed with actual fighting fully in mind, particularly with respect to use and repair.

One of the designs that seems to have taken this on board is the A-10 and another is the MG 42. Taking the latter, we even have a case of a non-weaponeer coming up with a good design by the GOYA and listening principles, From Herr Wiki:

Of the number of proposals submitted, Großfuß AG's proved to be the best design, by far, employing a unique recoil-operated roller locking mechanism whereas the two competing designs used a gas-actuated system.[SUP][/SUP] Interestingly, the company had no prior experience in weapons manufacture, specializing in pressed and stamped steel parts (the company's staple product was sheet metal lanterns).[SUP][/SUP] Ernst Grunow, one of the leading design engineers with Großfuß, knew nothing about machine guns when he was given the task of being involved with the project, but he specialized in the technology of mass production. Grunow would attend an army machine gunner's course in order to familiarize himself with the utility and characteristics of such a weapon, also seeking input from soldiers. He then recycled an existing Mauser-developed operating system and incorporated features from his experiences with army machine gunners and lessons learned during the early stages of the war.[SUP][/SUP] The new design required considerably less tooling and was much simpler to build—it took 75 man hours to complete the new gun as opposed to 150 man hours for the MG 34 (a 50% reduction), and cost 250 RM as opposed to 327 RM (a 24% reduction). The MG 42 was made out of stamped metal, making it much easier to produce than other machine guns.
What other equipment do you think fits the bill of actually being designed with actual fighting in mind?

Similar threads

Latest Threads