1919 A4 Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
Thank you. One would think that during wartime production, as much standardization as possible would ease the supply/logistic issues between ground and air. In this case, I guess not.
The ANM2 (Army Navy M2) Caliber .30 Aircraft gun was standardized before the war and used in both Army and Navy aircraft. The 1919A4 was a ground gun which was standardized and used by all branches also. They are two completely different guns with specific applications. Just like an M1 Rifle and an M1 Carbine were standardized and used by all branches but are different guns.

The US only employed a single type of firearm for each purpose as opposed to the Germans who used a multitude of different firearms for the same purpose. The US main rifle was the M1, no other types were adopted. The German main rifles were the 98K, G41, G43, MP43, FG42 and a multitude of captured weapons that certainly did put a strain on the supply chain. So you see, the US did standardize their small arms.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
The ANM2 (Army Navy M2) Caliber .30 Aircraft gun was standardized before the war and used in both Army and Navy aircraft. The 1919A4 was a ground gun which was standardized and used by all branches also. They are two completely different guns with specific applications. Just like an M1 Rifle and an M1 Carbine were standardized and used by all branches but are different guns.

The US only employed a single type of firearm for each purpose as opposed to the Germans who used a multitude of different firearms for the same purpose. The US main rifle was the M1, no other types were adopted. The German main rifles were the 98K, G41, G43, MP43, FG42 and a multitude of captured weapons that certainly did put a strain on the supply chain. So you see, the US did standardize their small arms.
Then I assume nothing interchanges between the 2 guns.
 

· PhD in Over-Engineering
Joined
·
8,765 Posts
Not that it helps you, but for informational purposes there are a few components that interchange between the ANM2 and the M37. The belt feed pawls, for example, while being different drawing numbers are functionally interchangeable. The springs for the ejector, feed pawl and feed lever plunger are all the same part, as well as that plunger. But as has been well stated by the guys above, the ANM2 is a very different animal, about 1/3 smaller and lighter than the full size .30 cal Brownings. The 1919 series began its use right after WWI, in the form of the Tank Gun. The ANM2 was designed to serve where two or three full size aircraft models were considered obsolete. The 1918, 1918M1 and 1919 Aircraft guns, which all shared the same basic components with the 1917/1919 ground guns, were all come and gone by about 1930 when the ANM2 was coming to life.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Not that it helps you, but for informational purposes there are a few components that interchange between the ANM2 and the M37. The belt feed pawls, for example, while being different drawing numbers are functionally interchangeable. The springs for the ejector, feed pawl and feed lever plunger are all the same part, as well as that plunger. But as has been well stated by the guys above, the ANM2 is a very different animal, about 1/3 smaller and lighter than the full size .30 cal Brownings. The 1919 series began its use right after WWI, in the form of the Tank Gun. The ANM2 was designed to serve where two or three full size aircraft models were considered obsolete. The 1918, 1918M1 and 1919 Aircraft guns, which all shared the same basic components with the 1917/1919 ground guns, were all come and gone by about 1930 when the ANM2 was coming to life.
Interesting. I wondered if some small parts did interchange. Small springs being the most likely. Thanks for the info.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top