|
|
Post by o1dn1ck on Sept 8, 2007 16:22:52 GMT 1
A search for the keyword killed yielded only one result on this site so, although I’m a newcomer, I’d like to pose two questions in one:
Firstly, how many people can we estimate have been killed by Vickers machine guns during their history?
And secondly, how many guns have been produced overall?
A division between the two would produce a crude figure for the lethality of the weapon in actual practice. A discussion and further research would no doubt refine this.
|
|
|
|
Post by woodsy on Sept 9, 2007 1:59:50 GMT 1
The second part of your question is answerable: There were approximately 118, 000 Vickers guns made in total (UK, Australia & USA).
As to their effective performance, in some WW1 engagements with huge casualty figures, the Vickers guns were credited with 60% of the figures. The rates were much lower for WW2 because of improved tactics.
|
|
|
|
Post by o1dn1ck on Sept 9, 2007 18:58:33 GMT 1
The second part of your question is answerable: There were approximately 118,000 Vickers guns made in total (UK, Australia & USA). Thanks for this information. I realised the first part would be the harder, but I’m still hoping it isn’t unanswerable. Sober, methodical forensic investigation of individual victims, with certification of cause-of-death, is hardly going to be the norm here. Yet I can’t help feeling historical research must have harvested information that could be pooled, enabling one to grope towards an impression, though never a final answer. I also wonder whether there are individual weapons whose kill history is known, and whether this might be another starting point. Personally, I haven’t the faintest idea how to begin, and I’m too old to learn; but I’d enjoy following the work of others if anyone knows of it. |
|
Tim
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by Tim on Sept 21, 2007 23:39:36 GMT 1
Odd question, and one that could not ever be calculated with any degree of reliability with an infantry weapon system. Especially one with such a long service life. And that is not taking into account the small rag tag bands of folks that would invariably end up possesing them or at least some of them at some stage
in thier long existance.
In fact you would probably go nuts just working out the variables that could be applied.
Better off with a weapons system like a spitfire or ME109. Records were actually kept.
|
|
|
|
Post by 303gunner on Sept 25, 2007 19:10:59 GMT 1
Remember, too, that in many of the major battles of the Western Front of WW1 there is not even accurate total death tolls, let alone the ability to attribute a particular "Score". How do you determine if a particular person was shot by rifle, MG or killed by Artillery when the objective is blasted for a 12hr barrage so as to be wholly unrecognisable and a large proportion of the combatants are simply listed as missing or no known grave? How do you record the effectiveness of predicted indirect fire when the target cannot be seen?
As for Lethality, which standard do you measure by? Deaths divided by guns produced, or deaths per round of ammunition? A Sniper Rifle that might use a couple of hundred rounds in the whole war might be considered more lethal than a Vickers MG that could possibly expend a million rounds in a 24hr period firing a fixed line barrage for no kills. However, the Maxim/Vickers had a profound impact on military tactical thinking and the way that wars were fought, thus having much greater impact than the effect of the actual tally of kills.
|
|
