If you liked this video check out other episodes: Top 10 American Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/OPj29j9SgAI/video.html The Soviet Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/kgMNjtD0I2w/video.html Japanese Weapons of World War II - czcams.com/video/AVYKAiPGKZ4/video.html The French Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/aT48Od5Xd_Q/video.html Italian Army Weapons in World War II - czcams.com/video/OV41GXXFzIM/video.html The Weapons of the Wild West - czcams.com/video/GNaqHrZL7n8/video.html The Brutal Weapons of the Vikings - czcams.com/video/Qp8Liya38io/video.html The Samurai's Arsenal: Understanding the Equipment and Weapons of Japan's Elite - czcams.com/video/5f5ARNjDIUs/video.html The Equipment and Weapons of the Roman Legions - czcams.com/video/3cSMbIDMGdg/video.html The Most Famous Weapons and Equipments of the Middle Ages - czcams.com/video/SoZqJ6Ako8w/video.html
@@user-xh3lz9xt4l the ZB-28 was developed by the Czechs on which Bren was based off while the Bren MkI and MkII were produced in the UK and Canada under a licence we bought from the Czechs, unlike the Americans who just copyed designs from others. The parts on a ZB-28 and Bren were not interchangeable. The EN on Bren stands for Enfield (where the weapon was made) and BR stands for Brno (the Czech factory that made the ZB).
The Lee-Enfield No4 was the first rifle I ever fired, I still consider it one of the best, even after joining the British forces in the late ‘70s I still got to use the Lee-Enfield albeit in its L39A1 competition rifle format.
A couple of points, the Lee-Enfield rifle was no longer than most of its contemporary’s and was in fact shorter than many bolt action rifles fielded during World War II, also 9mm wasn’t a standard Allied SMG cartridge until very late in the war, Britain was one of the few Allied countries that developed SMG’s to use it, the U.S. preferred its SMG’s in .45ACP, the French used 7.65mm and the Russians used 7.62mm.
Yes the main reason they used 9mm for the sten was so that commandos and resistance fighters could use enemy ammo. The sten proved so effective that in the late war the Germans made their own version as a way to provide weapons for all the civilians that were called up to fight.
@@marcmomusNot only that but the standard British service revolver in W.W.II wasn’t even the Webley, it was the Enfield revolver, the Webley was brought in as a supplemental weapon, just like the Smith & Wesson, because Enfield production couldn’t meet wartime demands, and both revolvers were in .38”.
For that matter if you’re going to mention the Lanchester used only by the Navy then why not also the Browning Hi power automatic with the Commandos and Airborne forces?
After the war: the British did a detailed study of the effectiveness if the Piat anti tank weapon. It found that it was generally effective. The study didn't rave about it, but rather gave the impression that it was combat cost effective.
The Short, magazine, Lee Enfield and its No.4 version was not longer than other battle rifles, the clue is in the name. It stands for short rifle not short magazine, there is a comma.
My grandfather fought in New Guinea in world war 2. He was in tanks, so he was issued with 2 revolvers. The revolvers where 1917 smith and wesson's chambered in 455.
The commonwealth and British utilized the .38/200 cartridge in their revolvers in WW2, both Webley and Enfield made revolvers. And later on in the war the Browning Hi-Power 9mm pistol was used by airborne and special operations troops. Of note is that 9mm Parabellum chamberings in SMG’s and handguns were chosen because the German’s used the exact same cartridge.
Exactly. It's also worth noting that at the tail end of tge war the Germans started cloning the STEN guns and using them. The only difference was that the German STEN clones had their magazines in a vertical position rather than the original, British lateral position.
Yep. I have a 1942 S&W "pre-victory model" chambered in 38 S&W aka 38/200. These Smith & Wessons were intended for Commonwealth troops, rather than the 38 special used by the US.
You forgot quite a few British weapons. Vickers Gun, Vickers K, De Lisle, Lewis Gun, M1928A1 Thompson, Stirling/Pachett SMG, Browning HP, Welrod, Portable No 2 Flamethrower and the Mills Bomb
@@aaronleverton4221 "The Sterling submachine gun is a British submachine gun (SMG). It was tested by the British Army in 1944-1945, but did not start to replace the Sten until 1953". The Sterling was used by British Paratroopers in 1944 during Operation Market Garden. There is literally a photo of a British Paratrooper holding one in Arnham.
Having fired a Lee Enfield No4, a Bren gun and Sten gun numerous times as an army cadet between 1968 and 1971, I would choose the Bren. My dad, who was an infantry sgt during WWII, told me the Boys anti tank rifle and PIAT, were dreadful things to have to fire. Though my British Army personal weapons were a Browning HP35 and Sterling SMG, my overall favourite was the SLR, which replaced the Lee Enfield.
This exploration of WWII armaments is quite fascinating! The video offers an enthralling look at the technological advancements and innovations that molded the course of history. Thoroughly investigated and articulated. You are doing an excellent job.
Fired both The Bren gun and 303 Lee Enfield during my time as a School Cadet, back in the 1960s. No mention of the 'Owen gun,' known officially as the Owen machine carbine, was an Australian submachine gun designed by Evelyn Owen in 1938. The Owen was the only entirely Australian-designed and constructed service submachine gun of World War II and was used by the Australian Army from 1942 until 1971.
Have used the Owen sub machine gun. I was 1st to qualify with it in the CMF battalion from Riverina district NSW. Had a tendency to arch to the right. Short range 25 yards fired from the hip and 75 yards fired from the shoulder. Used the 303 when I was at high school, but that rifle was made here at Lithgow in Australia based on the Lee Enfield 303. I still own a Lithgow 303 and find it great for dropping feral pigs at ranges of 300 metres+ without telescopic sights.
I owned several Lee enfield rifles, and i loved them. Also, my father served as a bren gunner he was known for shooting it standing from the shoulder and was in his eyes a bloody great gun cheers all
Regarding the Lanchester....it was heavy, and had wood and brass to polish. So of course it appealed to the Navy, and they had ships to carry it around too. It is worth mentioning that the PIAT was in fact a spigot mortar, the main propellant was a cartridge at the head of the tail. There was one snag, thanks to one of Newton's laws the detonating shaped charged sometimes threw the tail back in the direction of the operator! Duck! It remained in the inventory until the 1950s (as did the Spitfire come to that).
@paultrevett1287 Seafires nailed at least a MiG 15, as did a Seafury. The MiG had the speed but the prop jobs were the turning dogfighters. Their fangs were pretty sharp too
I'm pleased you remembered to include the Lanchester sub-machine gun, it is often forgotten because of it's use primarily by the Royal Navy and Royal Marines. The Royal Navy insisted that it's fittings had to be made from brass, if I remember correctly, to prevent rust. It was also unusual in that it could be fitted with a bayonet, as it is in your photos however this feature was pretty much unique among sub-machine guns.
It was a copy of the erma m1928 German mg. A straight copy. Using Enfield furniture. It was too expensive for a broke britian at the time. The ten dollar sren took over.
It was good. The gunny proved that in one of his shows. Where he compared the m1 with the mark 4 in a shoot off. The Enfield despite it bolt action was not far behind in the number of shots taken and on target.
Germans liked the Sten as they seized so many from Resistande F8ghters in Europe and used them, liked it so much they decided to copy it and as usual Germans made a high quality weapon, watch COMBAT DEALERS on TV as they bought one of each, UK and German.
I thought I saw in the last A.I picture Charles Bronson on a Bren LMG seem to be in a polish uniform that was common in Italy and Western front and Richard Burton on PIAT ?
The Lee-Enfield needed special care in dirty environments?? The rimmed .303 round allowed for a slightly oversized chamber that made it *more* reliable in dirty environments than the Mauser, Springfield, or Garand. Dirt and crud was less likely to cause jamming.
During my younger days I did see most of these weapons Post WW2 British Malaya , when the British, Australian, New Zealanders and Commonwealth troops stationed in Malaya then. Not forgetting the Kukri (the Gurkhas knife) peculiar to soldiers from Indian Subcontinent especially Nepal.
My uncle was in the polis hutan (Jungle Police) unit. Once he dropped by to visit and put his Sten gun on the table. While he was talking to my parents I was carrying that gun up and around the house. When I think back, bloody madness to let an 8 years old having that gun walking around
Only one of those weapons, the Enfield 303, was an exceptional weapon for it’s time. Most of the other weapons mention were turned into useable tools as a result of the resourcefulness of the men armed with them. Early on the British and commonwealth forces realised the Bren was actually too accurate. They wanted more spread for suppressive fire purposes. Most men would have whined about it and asked that the weapon be replaced. The British squaddy just said, “I wonder what happens if we try a worn out barrel instead….oh alright….well that seems to work now….that’s sorted then!”.
I managed to fire many of these as a Cadet back in the late 80's, .303 (Also the scoped version and I think a .22 version it may have been the Parker-Hale), Bren, Sten and a few of the issued weapons of the time like the FN-FAL SLR 7.62, Browning Hi-Power 9mm and at the last few months of attending cadets got to fire the SA80 Cadet .22 and the real thing in 5.56mm. Loved firing all of them, especially the .303. Also, learnt what that helmet was called, the 'Brodie', many thanks.
By 1976 large elements of the Rhodesian Security Forces/RhSF (mainly the units of INTAF/Ministry of Internal Affairs) were armed with Lee Enfield Mk1 and Mk 2 and the BREN gun (.303 and 7,62). After 76 the units were slowly issued with G 3s. The BN i served with (3 BN Infantry, Salisbury) was the very last BN of RhSF who still had the BREN till "the end" in June 1980 (independence of former Rhodesia)
There is a video on the Brazilian channel focusing on the story that talks about British weapons from the Second World War and the video is the same as the Brazilian video was posted on February 29th and this video was posted on February 28th, I wanted to know who copied the other
Oi @tiagooliveira-pm6tz Eu te respondi no canal em português também. Os dois canais são irmãos - Foca na História e See U in History. O Don Foca é o dono e criador de ambos os canais 😉
The sten gun was so bad there are accounts of British Airborne at Pegasus Bridge throwing them away as soon as they could, to replace them with German weapons like the MP-40.
Were I a Brit infantryman, I’d take the SMLE rifle and the Webley or Enfield pistol. You couldn’t pay me enough to handle a STEN or a sticky bomb and the Bren gun, a fine enough weapon, is just too heavy in my humble opinion. Hey, but what do I know? I’m an American and I’d prefer the ubiquitous M-1 rifle or carbine, a .45 pistol, and a kabar fighting knife.
I still had to shoot a stengun when I did my military service in the Belgian army in the late 80s. Impossible to hit any target. It may have been cheap and it certainly was easy to (dis)assemble, but any other machine pistol in WW2 was better
I was a Canadian Infantryman. When I was in, the Lee Enfields were still in use but being replaced by the FN C1 (FAL). The Brens were gone, replaced by the FN C2. The GPMG on the other hand was a refurbished 7.62x51mm version of the iconic US .30 Cal machine gun. I quite liked the Lee Enfield and hated to give it up for the FN.
@@seanlander9321to be fair, it's still quite a popular weapon for its stopping power and the unreliability is due to the Pacific conditions, it's all damp down here
Hm, Where's the Vickers .303 MG, the Browning 9mm HP pistol, The Thompson SMG? To name just a few that escaped the presentation? Also, the Brodie helmet was not only used by UK and Commonwealth troops. It was widely used by the US Army and Marines at the start of the war until the M1 Helmet came on the scene.
@@josephberrie9550if you looked more into it you would find out the design was British and was made in the USA. And the British version is different to the USA one lol
@@Centurion101B3CI think that would be the British modification, the M1928A1 Thompson, which would've got, but a mention of the M1921 or the original M1928 would be necessary
I own three No4’s and a No5 so somewhat biased but if I had to choose I wold take a Bren. Especially if the Govt. are paying for the ammo, which is $2 a pop these days.
There was some very odd things said in this video. A number of people have already commented about the supposed downside of the Lee Enfield being longer than other rifles which was the exact opposite and had problems with dirt? What weapon didn’t? but it went through WW1 renown for its reliability in the mud of the trenches. Then there’s the helmet obstructed hearing and sight? How? I get the impression that he was looking for negatives to each of these subjects. They all had genuine faults, only he picked wrongly.
My dad actually used a piot for awhile early on when they were first issued in North Africa though from what I gather he never got to it use in anger only to demonstrate it to the top brass due to one time but when he Finally got to use it for real he found he’s ammo carrier had had got tired of lugging the ammo pack around and accidentally on purpose lost the it twenty miles down the road so he ended up dumping it it as well
British army should have adopted the M1 carbine as soon as it was available in sufficient numbers - would have increased fire power significantly - also should have made the bren half the size and weight for infantry automatic assault weapon use - why they did not is a mystery to me
How did the Brody affect peripheral vision and hearing as neither the eyes or ears were covered? Look at all the images in this video the helmet sits high on the bonce.
You know, no matter how "fast firing" the no 4 was, it was NO MATCH for a semi-auto like the Garand . I cannot understand why the 🇬🇧 stuck with a bolt action gun while the 🇺🇸 was already using a semi=auto. Ok some people has argued that the rimmed 303 was not suitable for semi-auto/auto loading, but how about the Bren and the Browning in the spitfire? Both used the same cartridge so I cannot see why the 303 could not be used in a semi-auto. PS my argument has generate lots of anger from "patriotic" people so please please do not get affected by national pride when replying. Thanks.😊
I reckon we used them because tooling was set up already and didn't need to be changed. In Australia we stayed with the no1mk3 for ww1 and ww2 for that reason. In feild conditions it takes very little effort to keep operating. Just a simple basic reliable gun that can be used at longer ranges in the desert country and short ranges in the jungle.
@@matthewcharles5867 thank you my friend. The thing i still couldn't underdtand is, if facing a group of enemy (esp close quarter) a semi auto rifle allows you to fire bsck faster and thus more chance to hit the enemy. One simple example: if a bolt action gun were that"adequate" then why are all modern armies using semi auto of even full auto gun as standard issue?
@@michaelwong4303 the Enfield does have the advantage of not losing your sight picture when manipulating the bolt and the ten shot magazine was huge bonus compared to most other rifles at the time. I think one of the main reasons most guns are semi auto these day is that they are easy to train new soldiers on from recruit level up. More effort to clean and keep functioning though.
@@matthewcharles5867 ok I agree that one could , (with practice) maintain the aiming picture (to a reasonable degree) while operating the bolt of the no 4. It wasn't as easy as what is shown in CZcams videos though. Yes some guy in CZcams did operate the gun rather quickly BUT you would notice that the gun shaked a little bit while he operated the bolt, ie he need to re-aim again. And the bolt is not always as smooth as the one he used (I have fired the no 4 myself before). Let's look at it in a realistic situation: if you were the one shooting at a group of enemy, there is no denial that you would find it easier to hit them with a Garand-like semi-auto , which also has less recoil than the no 4. A semi-auto may take more time to clean, but I think it matters more to have a gun that is easier to fire quick successive shots at the enemy while fighting.
I love movie 🎥 war 2 European it's very cool British and except the casc British military I'll say look like figures flying plane aliens 😊 something like that figure you know, anyway I love your video history my brother father.
Please explain to me how the British ww2 steel helmet (which was NOT a Brodie helmet, That was the American version) impaired hearing and vision (5,45) It was positioned above the eyes and ears, unlike the American, German and Russian steel helmets. The new mk5 Steel helmet was issued to Canadian troops just before D Day and was christened the Turtleback or Turtle shell helmet
@@coastie1961 Early 1942, Australia was on its own against Japan, no Britain, America, or even New Zealand and the Dutch had collapsed too. Then Churchill ordered the Commonwealth to refuse any assistance to Australia, which he reinforced with the Americans at the Arcadia Conference.
@@terrymcmaster2787 Partly, but initially circumstance; Britain, America and the Netherlands were defeated by Japan, which left Australia entirely on its own until the Battle of the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal. Churchill continued the treachery of abandoning Australian transports at sea and at the Arcadia Conference. Later New Zealand saw the light and agreed to the ANZAC Treaty which really got Britain offside, again, as it was excluded from a treaty within the Commonwealth.
@@seanlander9321 So are you categorically stating that it was only Australian troops in combat against the Japanese in 1942? I'm quite sure the British and Indian Army was still in contact with the Japanese during 1942 in Burma, to say nothing of the Chinese in other theatres. The Brits and Indians were not doing very well, but they were still fighting.
@bubbasbroadside7525 It's not AI. The voice is that of a professional narrator, a real person. AIs are trained to copy professionals like him. I'll tell him you think he's a robot 😂
The British did not fight alone against axis forces for a while because chinese forces were fighting japanese forces during this time and even longer since the mid 1930s.
The Brodie wasnt used by British front line troops in WW2, the Brodie helmet was disc shaped. The helmet they used was the Mk4. Which was turtle shaped, not round and gave significantly better protection than the Brodie. You may be confused because the Canadians did use the Brodie helmet and it turned up with some other Commonwealth and Empire units and British units like the Home Guard and Fire Service, but not the British front line who used the Mk4.
The Mk4 wasn't introduced until after the Second World War. You might be thinking of the Mk3 as they look similar, however they weren't introduced until late 1944.
They did use the Brodie, which is the MK2, the improved version of the WW1 version The MK4 ain't in service during WW2 and the similar looking MK3 is late in the war...
The Brodie helmet was a cheap compromise, a lot of soldiers were wounded by shrapnel passing under the brim. Today, every NATO helmet draws its shape from the German WW1 and !! helmets, which gave more head protection
when i first joined the forces we still getting issued the BRODIE mk3 helmet we used throw em away or used to cook our 24 hour rations that all good for
The early models were a bit rubbish really, and subject to frequent breakdowns. Later models were better, but were always very expensive to keep in the field.
What about the Mills 36 grenade? BTW, the "PIAT was easily carried by the infantryman!".... Yeh right mate, you try it!! Just like the Carl Gustav 84mm, good enough at its job BUT a bassa to carry.
If you liked this video check out other episodes:
Top 10 American Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/OPj29j9SgAI/video.html
The Soviet Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/kgMNjtD0I2w/video.html
Japanese Weapons of World War II - czcams.com/video/AVYKAiPGKZ4/video.html
The French Weapons of WWII - czcams.com/video/aT48Od5Xd_Q/video.html
Italian Army Weapons in World War II - czcams.com/video/OV41GXXFzIM/video.html
The Weapons of the Wild West - czcams.com/video/GNaqHrZL7n8/video.html
The Brutal Weapons of the Vikings - czcams.com/video/Qp8Liya38io/video.html
The Samurai's Arsenal: Understanding the Equipment and Weapons of Japan's Elite - czcams.com/video/5f5ARNjDIUs/video.html
The Equipment and Weapons of the Roman Legions - czcams.com/video/3cSMbIDMGdg/video.html
The Most Famous Weapons and Equipments of the Middle Ages - czcams.com/video/SoZqJ6Ako8w/video.html
I'm an old British veteran. I've used the Sten gun, Bren gun and the 303 Lee Enfield. The 303 was excellent
The Bren gun was a designed developed in Chezoslovia and modified by the UK
My father agreed with you.
@@user-xh3lz9xt4l the ZB-28 was developed by the Czechs on which Bren was based off while the Bren MkI and MkII were produced in the UK and Canada under a licence we bought from the Czechs, unlike the Americans who just copyed designs from others. The parts on a ZB-28 and Bren were not interchangeable. The EN on Bren stands for Enfield (where the weapon was made) and BR stands for Brno (the Czech factory that made the ZB).
The Lee-Enfield No4 was the first rifle I ever fired, I still consider it one of the best, even after joining the British forces in the late ‘70s I still got to use the Lee-Enfield albeit in its L39A1 competition rifle format.
Decades later, I still have the bruise on my shoulder from the first time I shot the 303 😂
A couple of points, the Lee-Enfield rifle was no longer than most of its contemporary’s and was in fact shorter than many bolt action rifles fielded during World War II, also 9mm wasn’t a standard Allied SMG cartridge until very late in the war, Britain was one of the few Allied countries that developed SMG’s to use it, the U.S. preferred its SMG’s in .45ACP, the French used 7.65mm and the Russians used 7.62mm.
Yes the main reason they used 9mm for the sten was so that commandos and resistance fighters could use enemy ammo. The sten proved so effective that in the late war the Germans made their own version as a way to provide weapons for all the civilians that were called up to fight.
@@calumdowning741the sten was pretty much the worst smg issued during ww2 but the cheapest and easiest to produce.
The Webley does not have a short barrel.
@@marcmomusNot only that but the standard British service revolver in W.W.II wasn’t even the Webley, it was the Enfield revolver, the Webley was brought in as a supplemental weapon, just like the Smith & Wesson, because Enfield production couldn’t meet wartime demands, and both revolvers were in .38”.
For that matter if you’re going to mention the Lanchester used only by the Navy then why not also the Browning Hi power automatic with the Commandos and Airborne forces?
The BREN gun was designed in Brno Czechoslovakia and Enfield in the U.K. which how it got its name.
After the war: the British did a detailed study of the effectiveness if the Piat anti tank weapon. It found that it was generally effective. The study didn't rave about it, but rather gave the impression that it was combat cost effective.
no backblast doesn't give away your position
It compared well with other personal anti-tank weapons of the time but was a technological dead end.
The Short, magazine, Lee Enfield and its No.4 version was not longer than other battle rifles, the clue is in the name. It stands for short rifle not short magazine, there is a comma.
The Webley revolver was .455 during WW1, .38 during WW2.
My grandfather fought in New Guinea in world war 2. He was in tanks, so he was issued with 2 revolvers. The revolvers where 1917 smith and wesson's chambered in 455.
The PIAT could also be used in confined spaces since it didn't produce a back blast.
Offten use for mouse holing in urbain combat
One of those emergency innovations, basically a shoulder mount spigot mortar. Not a weapon for the faint of heart.
@@davidgifford8112 and difficult to cook I'm told. Still, better than nothing I suppose.
Wasn't the PIAT basically a really advanced crossbow with an armour piercing bolt?
@@tigerland4328 possibly, but what's wrong with that.
The commonwealth and British utilized the .38/200 cartridge in their revolvers in WW2, both Webley and Enfield made revolvers.
And later on in the war the Browning Hi-Power 9mm pistol was used by airborne and special operations troops.
Of note is that 9mm Parabellum chamberings in SMG’s and handguns were chosen because the German’s used the exact same cartridge.
Exactly. It's also worth noting that at the tail end of tge war the Germans started cloning the STEN guns and using them. The only difference was that the German STEN clones had their magazines in a vertical position rather than the original, British lateral position.
Yep. I have a 1942 S&W "pre-victory model" chambered in 38 S&W aka 38/200. These Smith & Wessons were intended for Commonwealth troops, rather than the 38 special used by the US.
You forgot quite a few British weapons.
Vickers Gun, Vickers K, De Lisle, Lewis Gun, M1928A1 Thompson, Stirling/Pachett SMG, Browning HP, Welrod, Portable No 2 Flamethrower and the Mills Bomb
I do like that Mr. Mills.
@@bartonbrevis3831 Didn't his wife play the piano and sing???
@@notwocdivad I think Juliet and Hayley would like to deny all knowledge of their alleged piano playing parent.
The Patchett and Sterling did not see combat service in WW2, the Sterling didn't even exist.
@@aaronleverton4221 "The Sterling submachine gun is a British submachine gun (SMG). It was tested by the British Army in 1944-1945, but did not start to replace the Sten until 1953". The Sterling was used by British Paratroopers in 1944 during Operation Market Garden. There is literally a photo of a British Paratrooper holding one in Arnham.
The Bren would be my choice. One of, if not the best, light machine gun of the war.
Having fired a Lee Enfield No4, a Bren gun and Sten gun numerous times as an army cadet between 1968 and 1971, I would choose the Bren. My dad, who was an infantry sgt during WWII, told me the Boys anti tank rifle and PIAT, were dreadful things to have to fire. Though my British Army personal weapons were a Browning HP35 and Sterling SMG, my overall favourite was the SLR, which replaced the Lee Enfield.
This exploration of WWII armaments is quite fascinating! The video offers an enthralling look at the technological advancements and innovations that molded the course of history. Thoroughly investigated and articulated. You are doing an excellent job.
Fired both The Bren gun and 303 Lee Enfield during my time as a School Cadet, back in the 1960s. No mention of the 'Owen gun,' known officially as the Owen machine carbine, was an Australian submachine gun designed by Evelyn Owen in 1938. The Owen was the only entirely Australian-designed and constructed service submachine gun of World War II and was used by the Australian Army from 1942 until 1971.
Have used the Owen sub machine gun. I was 1st to qualify with it in the CMF battalion from Riverina district NSW. Had a tendency to arch to the right. Short range 25 yards fired from the hip and 75 yards fired from the shoulder. Used the 303 when I was at high school, but that rifle was made here at Lithgow in Australia based on the Lee Enfield 303. I still own a Lithgow 303 and find it great for dropping feral pigs at ranges of 300 metres+ without telescopic sights.
I love these history lessons. I am fond of the Webley
There is some info wrong here...
The Lee Enfields are actually quite short and do not require constant cleaning
I owned several Lee enfield rifles, and i loved them. Also, my father served as a bren gunner he was known for shooting it standing from the shoulder and was in his eyes a bloody great gun cheers all
Regarding the Lanchester....it was heavy, and had wood and brass to polish. So of course it appealed to the Navy, and they had ships to carry it around too.
It is worth mentioning that the PIAT was in fact a spigot mortar, the main propellant was a cartridge at the head of the tail. There was one snag, thanks to one of Newton's laws the detonating shaped charged sometimes threw the tail back in the direction of the operator! Duck! It remained in the inventory until the 1950s (as did the Spitfire come to that).
I belive Spitfires served with RAAF in Korea and gave good service!
@paultrevett1287 Seafires nailed at least a MiG 15, as did a Seafury. The MiG had the speed but the prop jobs were the turning dogfighters. Their fangs were pretty sharp too
I'm pleased you remembered to include the Lanchester sub-machine gun, it is often forgotten because of it's use primarily by the Royal Navy and Royal Marines. The Royal Navy insisted that it's fittings had to be made from brass, if I remember correctly, to prevent rust. It was also unusual in that it could be fitted with a bayonet, as it is in your photos however this feature was pretty much unique among sub-machine guns.
It was a copy of the erma m1928 German mg. A straight copy. Using Enfield furniture. It was too expensive for a broke britian at the time. The ten dollar sren took over.
Bren gun for me.
Nicknamed : Barely Rapid Empty Now.
Lee enfields were hands down the best rifle of the war and best bolt actions ever made
M1
@@nickdanger3802 yes, M1 Garand.
@@michaelwong4303 The M1 wasn't a bolt action rifle.
@@garryreeve824 yes I know. I mean the M1, behind a semi auto was a better gunnthsn the no 4.
It was good. The gunny proved that in one of his shows. Where he compared the m1 with the mark 4 in a shoot off. The Enfield despite it bolt action was not far behind in the number of shots taken and on target.
They made the sten because the Tommy gun fwas so expensive.
Germans liked the Sten as they seized so many from Resistande F8ghters in Europe and used them, liked it so much they decided to copy it and as usual Germans made a high quality weapon, watch COMBAT DEALERS on TV as they bought one of each, UK and German.
The Enfield. I have 3.
The Lanchester , for its 50 round capacity followed by the PIAT .
I thought I saw in the last A.I picture Charles Bronson on a Bren LMG seem to be in a polish uniform that was common in Italy and Western front and Richard Burton on PIAT ?
Smith & Wesson revolvers were also widely used by British Commonwealth troops, chambered in 38 S&W (38/200) rather than 38 Special
The Lee-Enfield needed special care in dirty environments?? The rimmed .303 round allowed for a slightly oversized chamber that made it *more* reliable in dirty environments than the Mauser, Springfield, or Garand. Dirt and crud was less likely to cause jamming.
During my younger days I did see most of these weapons Post WW2 British Malaya , when the British, Australian, New Zealanders and Commonwealth troops stationed in Malaya then. Not forgetting the Kukri (the Gurkhas knife) peculiar to soldiers from Indian Subcontinent especially Nepal.
My uncle was in the polis hutan (Jungle Police) unit. Once he dropped by to visit and put his Sten gun on the table. While he was talking to my parents I was carrying that gun up and around the house. When I think back, bloody madness to let an 8 years old having that gun walking around
Only one of those weapons, the Enfield 303, was an exceptional weapon for it’s time. Most of the other weapons mention were turned into useable tools as a result of the resourcefulness of the men armed with them. Early on the British and commonwealth forces realised the Bren was actually too accurate. They wanted more spread for suppressive fire purposes. Most men would have whined about it and asked that the weapon be replaced. The British squaddy just said, “I wonder what happens if we try a worn out barrel instead….oh alright….well that seems to work now….that’s sorted then!”.
The sticky bomb didn’t stick onto the tank as shown in video, it just fell off
I managed to fire many of these as a Cadet back in the late 80's, .303 (Also the scoped version and I think a .22 version it may have been the Parker-Hale), Bren, Sten and a few of the issued weapons of the time like the FN-FAL SLR 7.62, Browning Hi-Power 9mm and at the last few months of attending cadets got to fire the SA80 Cadet .22 and the real thing in 5.56mm. Loved firing all of them, especially the .303.
Also, learnt what that helmet was called, the 'Brodie', many thanks.
By 1976 large elements of the Rhodesian Security Forces/RhSF (mainly the units of INTAF/Ministry of Internal Affairs) were armed with Lee Enfield Mk1 and Mk 2 and the BREN gun (.303 and 7,62). After 76 the units were slowly issued with G 3s. The BN i served with (3 BN Infantry, Salisbury) was the very last BN of RhSF who still had the BREN till "the end" in June 1980 (independence of former Rhodesia)
There is a video on the Brazilian channel focusing on the story that talks about British weapons from the Second World War and the video is the same as the Brazilian video was posted on February 29th and this video was posted on February 28th,
I wanted to know who copied the other
Oi @tiagooliveira-pm6tz
Eu te respondi no canal em português também. Os dois canais são irmãos - Foca na História e See U in History. O Don Foca é o dono e criador de ambos os canais 😉
10:07 That didn't look very sticky to me.......
The sten gun was so bad there are accounts of British Airborne at Pegasus Bridge throwing them away as soon as they could, to replace them with German weapons like the MP-40.
Were I a Brit infantryman, I’d take the SMLE rifle and the Webley or Enfield pistol. You couldn’t pay me enough to handle a STEN or a sticky bomb and the Bren gun, a fine enough weapon, is just too heavy in my humble opinion. Hey, but what do I know? I’m an American and I’d prefer the ubiquitous M-1 rifle or carbine, a .45 pistol, and a kabar fighting knife.
The Brody helmet did not restrict sight or vision.
For a while? You mean 5 years
I still had to shoot a stengun when I did my military service in the Belgian army in the late 80s. Impossible to hit any target. It may have been cheap and it certainly was easy to (dis)assemble, but any other machine pistol in WW2 was better
I think that is the general consensus. Whilst it was better than nothing as soon as something better , or captured came along
I was a Canadian Infantryman. When I was in, the Lee Enfields were still in use but being replaced by the FN C1 (FAL). The Brens were gone, replaced by the FN C2. The GPMG on the other hand was a refurbished 7.62x51mm version of the iconic US .30 Cal machine gun. I quite liked the Lee Enfield and hated to give it up for the FN.
GPMG was developed from the BAR using an MG42 belt feed system.
I think it would be worth adding the Vickers machine gun, the 2" mortar and the No.68 rifle grenade.
I have a No5 Jungle carbine in my bedroom cupboard. I haven't fired it in years. It is dated 1945 and is in excellent condition.
You missed the Lewis gun
Excellent Bren Guns! SMLE rifles! Good stuff!
5:05 “With it’s unique, done shaped design” you mean like a helmet…
Thanks for the video on the weapons
Also the British used American weapons like Thompson SMG since they were lend lease
Yes, but the Thompson was too expensive and very unreliable so was quickly replaced by the Owen in Australian forces.
Thompsons were not included in lend lease, they were paid for in gold. This is why they designed the Sten, the Tommy gun was ludicrously expensive
@@seanlander9321to be fair, it's still quite a popular weapon for its stopping power and the unreliability is due to the Pacific conditions, it's all damp down here
@@HarryFlashmanVC 651,086 Submachine, Cal. .45, (All Types) Lend Leased to British Empire
page 3
Hyperwar Lend Lease shipments Ordnance--General Supplies
@@seanlander9321 50 round drum magazine the British ordered with the Thompson's that were purchased was the cause, IMHO.
Hm, Where's the Vickers .303 MG, the Browning 9mm HP pistol, The Thompson SMG? To name just a few that escaped the presentation?
Also, the Brodie helmet was not only used by UK and Commonwealth troops. It was widely used by the US Army and Marines at the start of the war until the M1 Helmet came on the scene.
the thomson was an american made weapon
@@josephberrie9550 Ja en de BREN was een Tsjechisch wapen. Uw punt is?
@@josephberrie9550 Yep, and the BREN was a ChechoSlovakian weapon. Your point is?????
@@josephberrie9550if you looked more into it you would find out the design was British and was made in the USA. And the British version is different to the USA one lol
@@Centurion101B3CI think that would be the British modification, the M1928A1 Thompson, which would've got, but a mention of the M1921 or the original M1928 would be necessary
So the brodie helmet is also a weapon, when out of ammo u can use brodie helmet like kung lao from MK
❤🤍💙 all your videos mate👍especially this one because it's about the Great British🇬🇧 Warriors💪 & there Weapons of WW-II.
I own three No4’s and a No5 so somewhat biased but if I had to choose I wold take a Bren. Especially if the Govt. are paying for the ammo, which is $2 a pop these days.
$2 a round???? They literally dumped millions of .303 rounds into the sea in the 1970s... depresssing
There was some very odd things said in this video. A number of people have already commented about the supposed downside of the Lee Enfield being longer than other rifles which was the exact opposite and had problems with dirt? What weapon didn’t? but it went through WW1 renown for its reliability in the mud of the trenches. Then there’s the helmet obstructed hearing and sight? How?
I get the impression that he was looking for negatives to each of these subjects. They all had genuine faults, only he picked wrongly.
There are things out right wrong or missing here...
My dad actually used a piot for awhile early on when they were first issued in North Africa though from what I gather he never got to it use in anger only to demonstrate it to the top brass due to one time but when he Finally got to use it for real he found he’s ammo carrier had had got tired of lugging the ammo pack around and accidentally on purpose lost the it twenty miles down the road so he ended up dumping it it as well
I had a Peugeot years ago, never liked them never bought another one
@@rayswann7618 sorry I was talking about the anti-tank gun only the auto-correct slipped past me there . And have now corrected it
@@jameshead9119and it’s still wrong! Piat not Piot
An Australian Owen
Amity L.I.'s police chief had his own HELMET😮. 😅🤓😎✌🏻🇺🇲
SAS dagger
The stan machine gun be my choice Weapon.
7.62 slr my weapon of choice 70 to 90 l served no blockaches if you loved and took care of your very heavy baby
The Vickers did not have a shield. That may have been the Soviets.
British army should have adopted the M1 carbine as soon as it was available in sufficient numbers - would have increased fire power significantly - also should have made the bren half the size and weight for infantry automatic assault weapon use - why they did not is a mystery to me
used the bren in congo 1961
in WW2 I don't mind if pictures in colour or not, all I care about is the quality
And the info is correct
In this video, there is some errors
At 08:19 there is soldier holding a Owen gun
Whatever is issued to me.
The bren was not modelled on the vz32 it wasthevz32 adapted to fire. 303 ammo. State the facts correctly.
How did the Brody affect peripheral vision and hearing as neither the eyes or ears were covered? Look at all the images in this video the helmet sits high on the bonce.
Too many pics of post war Lee Enfields
Bry
Sorry, the video lost me at 'outstanding'.
The PIAT could and did take out the Panther and Tiger. The Bazooka couldn’t do that.
panther side armour could be penetrated by Soviet 14.5mm AT rifle
You know, no matter how "fast firing" the no 4 was, it was NO MATCH for a semi-auto like the Garand . I cannot understand why the 🇬🇧 stuck with a bolt action gun while the 🇺🇸 was already using a semi=auto. Ok some people has argued that the rimmed 303 was not suitable for semi-auto/auto loading, but how about the Bren and the Browning in the spitfire? Both used the same cartridge so I cannot see why the 303 could not be used in a semi-auto.
PS my argument has generate lots of anger from "patriotic" people so please please do not get affected by national pride when replying. Thanks.😊
I reckon we used them because tooling was set up already and didn't need to be changed. In Australia we stayed with the no1mk3 for ww1 and ww2 for that reason.
In feild conditions it takes very little effort to keep operating. Just a simple basic reliable gun that can be used at longer ranges in the desert country and short ranges in the jungle.
@@matthewcharles5867 thank you my friend. The thing i still couldn't underdtand is, if facing a group of enemy (esp close quarter) a semi auto rifle allows you to fire bsck faster and thus more chance to hit the enemy.
One simple example: if a bolt action gun were that"adequate" then why are all modern armies using semi auto of even full auto gun as standard issue?
@@michaelwong4303 the Enfield does have the advantage of not losing your sight picture when manipulating the bolt and the ten shot magazine was huge bonus compared to most other rifles at the time. I think one of the main reasons most guns are semi auto these day is that they are easy to train new soldiers on from recruit level up. More effort to clean and keep functioning though.
@@matthewcharles5867 ok I agree that one could , (with practice) maintain the aiming picture (to a reasonable degree) while operating the bolt of the no 4. It wasn't as easy as what is shown in CZcams videos though. Yes some guy in CZcams did operate the gun rather quickly BUT you would notice that the gun shaked a little bit while he operated the bolt, ie he need to re-aim again. And the bolt is not always as smooth as the one he used (I have fired the no 4 myself before).
Let's look at it in a realistic situation: if you were the one shooting at a group of enemy, there is no denial that you would find it easier to hit them with a Garand-like semi-auto , which also has less recoil than the no 4.
A semi-auto may take more time to clean, but I think it matters more to have a gun that is easier to fire quick successive shots at the enemy while fighting.
I love movie 🎥 war 2 European it's very cool British and except the casc British military I'll say look like figures flying plane aliens 😊 something like that figure you know, anyway I love your video history my brother father.
Thanks
@@SeeUinHistory you're very welcome my brother father.
BREN
Barley
Rapid
Empty
Now
Please explain to me how the British ww2 steel helmet (which was NOT a Brodie helmet, That was the American version) impaired hearing and vision (5,45) It was positioned above the eyes and ears, unlike the American, German and Russian steel helmets. The new mk5 Steel helmet was issued to Canadian troops just before D Day and was christened the Turtleback or Turtle shell helmet
Australia was the only Commonwealth country that ever fought entirely on its own.
Huh? Please elaborate....
@@coastie1961 Early 1942, Australia was on its own against Japan, no Britain, America, or even New Zealand and the Dutch had collapsed too. Then Churchill ordered the Commonwealth to refuse any assistance to Australia, which he reinforced with the Americans at the Arcadia Conference.
Very interesting. Is this connected to John Curtin bringing the troops home, in defiance of Churchill?
@@terrymcmaster2787 Partly, but initially circumstance; Britain, America and the Netherlands were defeated by Japan, which left Australia entirely on its own until the Battle of the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal. Churchill continued the treachery of abandoning Australian transports at sea and at the Arcadia Conference. Later New Zealand saw the light and agreed to the ANZAC Treaty which really got Britain offside, again, as it was excluded from a treaty within the Commonwealth.
@@seanlander9321 So are you categorically stating that it was only Australian troops in combat against the Japanese in 1942?
I'm quite sure the British and Indian Army was still in contact with the Japanese during 1942 in Burma, to say nothing of the Chinese in other theatres. The Brits and Indians were not doing very well, but they were still fighting.
British no use belt base machine gun like German MG 34 ????
Welrod pistol and dryeser carbine😂
As soon as you here the AI voice time to switch off
@bubbasbroadside7525
It's not AI. The voice is that of a professional narrator, a real person. AIs are trained to copy professionals like him.
I'll tell him you think he's a robot 😂
All was decent except the Sten!!!! That was garbage!!!! The troops would ditch the Sten for the MP-40!!!!
Back when the British had a good army
Sten gun
The #4 Lee-Enfield is the smoothest bolt actionzi have ever used. Given a choice it would be a tough decision beyween it and the 1903 Springfield.
No 4
The British did not fight alone against axis forces for a while because chinese forces were fighting japanese forces during this time and even longer since the mid 1930s.
Everything said about the Sten Gun could be applied to USA troops!
They call it... The M3 Grease Gun
1940 British forces "evacuated" from Norway, Belgium and France.
1941 Greece, Crete and Libya.
1942 Dieppe and Tobruk.
1943 Leros.
@@nickdanger3802 and your point is?
The Brodie wasnt used by British front line troops in WW2, the Brodie helmet was disc shaped. The helmet they used was the Mk4. Which was turtle shaped, not round and gave significantly better protection than the Brodie.
You may be confused because the Canadians did use the Brodie helmet and it turned up with some other Commonwealth and Empire units and British units like the Home Guard and Fire Service, but not the British front line who used the Mk4.
The Mk4 wasn't introduced until after the Second World War. You might be thinking of the Mk3 as they look similar, however they weren't introduced until late 1944.
They did use the Brodie, which is the MK2, the improved version of the WW1 version
The MK4 ain't in service during WW2 and the similar looking MK3 is late in the war...
The Brodie helmet was a cheap compromise, a lot of soldiers were wounded by shrapnel passing under the brim. Today, every NATO helmet draws its shape from the German WW1 and !! helmets, which gave more head protection
The British didn't use the Brodie Helmet in WW2, they used the Mk4 which is turtle shaped
@@HarryFlashmanVC The mk4 didn't get issued till after the war, you mean the mk3 which wasn't issued till 1944.
Brodie helmet was excelent, that's why in 1944 was replaced by Mk III helmet ( sarcasm)
when i first joined the forces we still getting issued the BRODIE mk3 helmet we used throw em away or used to cook our 24 hour rations that all good for
The Mk4 helmet was not the Brodie. The Brodie has a disc shaped profile. The Mk4 was turtle shaped, deeper and gave far better protection
The owen was better……
First. Probably.
what about the greatest weapon british money could buy, the american conscript?
Bitter.
The early models were a bit rubbish really, and subject to frequent breakdowns.
Later models were better, but were always very expensive to keep in the field.
Although produced in great numbers lacked accuracy and safety devices which lead to many friendly casualties.
What about the Mills 36 grenade? BTW, the "PIAT was easily carried by the infantryman!".... Yeh right mate, you try it!! Just like the Carl Gustav 84mm, good enough at its job BUT a bassa to carry.