The Sten Gun

I was just wondering if the sten gun was as bad as the majority of people think it was? It was cheaper than the thompson, could have a silenced attachment, and was accurate to a larger range. If i'm right or wrong, please get in touch. later.

 

Depend which version you are referring to. The Mk.V, for example, was the "rolls royce" of Stens which served on in some armies into the 1980's. Not a bad piece by any standards! The earlier marks, though, had a somewhat shorter history.

Dave.

 

Originally posted by CROONAERT@Apr 25 2005, 11:52 PM
Depend which version you are referring to. The Mk.V, for example, was the "rolls royce" of Stens which served on in some armies into the 1980's. Not a bad piece by any standards! The earlier marks, though, had a somewhat shorter history.

Dave.
[post=33529]Quoted post[/post]

What you refer to as having served with armies until the 1980s was the Sterling Sub machine gun! Which I believe was the Mk6 Sten but a nice bit of kit anyway.

 

I am by no means a weapons expert, but the sub machine gun I used in the Royal Artillery in 1986 looked VERY much like what I would call a Sten.
I remember being convinced, for the first two or three single shots,that it wasn't working, due to the lack of a decent 'bang' and the apparent lack of any 'kick'.
It was only when I saw my empty 9mm cases on the ground that I realised all was well. (I was panicking like mad in case I'd done something wrong and would get a beasting) .
Incidentally, at the same time (1986) I trained on the Light Machine Gun (also known as the Bren Gun) which was then used by the RA, and mine had a wooden stock and grip. and had 1939 stamped on it!

 

Originally posted by Driver67@Apr 26 2005, 08:46 AM
Incidentally, at the same time (1986) I trained on the Light Machine Gun (also known as the Bren Gun) which was then used by the RA, and mine had a wooden stock and grip. and had 1939 stamped on it!
[post=33535]Quoted post[/post]

But it would have had extensive replacement of components when it was converted from .303" to 7.62mm.

 

I saw a documentary just the other day, it was in relation to Market Garden. Covering all aspects of the British airborne at Arnhem.

Part of the discussion was to "Compare" the British Sten with the German MP40, as there was concerns that the British weapons weren't up to scratch.
(Hmmmm... Where have we heard that before? <_< ).

Anyway, the conclusion was that BOTH weapons were pretty much on a par with each other.
The Sten was seen to be more easily controlled, as it produced less recoil action, because of its "Sideways" mounted magazine.
The MP40 was seen to be more "accurate", because of its more "standard" vertically mounted magazine, but the trade off was that it produced more recoil because of this.

The Sten was "Cruder" in its design, and cheaper to produce. But both weapons were also similarly prone to "Jamming".

I suposse "You pays you money, and takes your choice", as they say.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions.

Mark.

 

A little trivial anecdote:

My father was a corporal in the Home Guard and he was issued a Sten gun (MkII) in 1940 which he kept at home (no ammunition -- common in his unit -- Burnley HG).

I used to take it to bed with me at night and pretend there were German paratroopers invading our house -- I would "mow them down" (accompanied by my own sound effects).

The first night I did that, I woke up in the middle of the night with painfully burning eyes -- my father rinsed them out using copious amounts of water -- they remained red and swollen all the next day.

My father determined there was flux residue on the welds (Sten guns were utilitarian weapons hastily assembled and shipped without niceties of finish due to the pressures of wartime production requirements). I had rubbed my eyes after handling the weapon and had transferred the chemical flux residue to them. My father rinsed the entire Sten gun with hot water and dried it well. I experienced no further problems when handling it.

My father was a metallurgical inspector with Joseph Lucas Ltd. working throughout WW2 on the Jet engine development project (we didn't know that, however, because it was secret) thus his knowledge of brazing/welding fluxes.

James

 

[(Sten guns were utilitarian weapons hastily assembled and shipped without niceties of finish due to the pressures of wartime production requirements).

the Germans produced copies of the sten, but it is said that you tell the german copies from the originals because the german version version was better made!!!

Ode to a Sten Gun
By Gunner. S.N. Teed

You wicked piece of vicious tin!
Call you a gun? Don't make me grin.
You're just a bloated piece of pipe.
You couldn't hit a hunk of tripe.
But when you're with me in the night,
I'll tell you pal, you're just alright!

Each day I wipe you free of dirt.
Your dratted corners tear my shirt.
I cuss at you and call you names,
You're much more trouble than my dames.
But boy, do I love to hear you yammer
When you 're spitting lead in a business manner.

You conceited pile of salvage junk.
I think this prowess talk is bunk.
Yet if I want a wall of lead
Thrown at some Jerry's head
It is to you I raise my hat;
You're a damn good pal...
You silly gat!

 

Originally posted by morse1001+Apr 26 2005, 08:32 AM-->(morse1001 @ Apr 26 2005, 08:32 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-CROONAERT@Apr 25 2005, 11:52 PM
Depend which version you are referring to. The Mk.V, for example, was the "rolls royce" of Stens which served on in some armies into the 1980's. Not a bad piece by any standards! The earlier marks, though, had a somewhat shorter history.

Dave.
[post=33529]Quoted post[/post]

What you refer to as having served with armies until the 1980s was the Sterling Sub machine gun!

[/b]

No it's not. It's the MK.V Sten I refer to. (I'm fully aware of the Sterling - it was my "personal weapon" for a short while). I believe that the Belgian Army was still issued with the Mk.V Sten as late as 1984, as was the Indian(?) Army.

Dave.

 

Originally posted by CROONAERT+Apr 26 2005, 11:24 PM-->(CROONAERT @ Apr 26 2005, 11:24 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Originally posted by morse1001@Apr 26 2005, 08:32 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-CROONAERT@Apr 25 2005, 11:52 PM
Depend which version you are referring to. The Mk.V, for example, was the "rolls royce" of Stens which served on in some armies into the 1980's. Not a bad piece by any standards! The earlier marks, though, had a somewhat shorter history.

Dave.
[post=33529]Quoted post[/post]

What you refer to as having served with armies until the 1980s was the Sterling Sub machine gun!



No it's not. It's the MK.V Sten I refer to. (I'm fully aware of the Sterling - it was my "personal weapon" for a short while). I believe that the Belgian Army was still issued with the Mk.V Sten as late as 1984, as was the Indian(?) Army.

Dave.
[post=33586]Quoted post[/post]
[/b]
Thanks for that. I can understand the Indin army having the Sten, the Chinese used them in Korea and there are reports of some being found in Vietnam during the war.

 

Thanks guys, that has definitely helped! But fearnot, there will beplenty more random questions from 'the Student' in the near future! Laters. B)

 

The Sten and Brens guns were issued wholesale to the French Resistance and other resistant groups within Europe by parachute drops.

The Sten,an excellent short range weapon so adaptable for close fighting such as ambushes and urban fighting could be very inaccurate if not handled correctly and was prone to jamming (as already stated).The best illustration of this is when it let down the assassins of Heydrich in Prague.The Sten that they were using jammed leading the assassins to utilise a hand grenade.Overall an excellent weapon for hit and run tactics.

The Germans tended to use captured ones and there are cases where Allies irregulars having noted their German captors were armed only with Stens took the inititive, bolted and escaped unhurt from the resultant bursts of inaccurate Sten gun fire.

Production was described as a simple pressed steel operation and the cost of production was a mere 19 shillings and sixpence.I think, given the materials were available, the weapon was easily manufactured by underground forces.

 

My battalion found sterlings and stens in Iraq, most where in great shape.

 

All right folks, and especially you who served using one, which way do you hold a STEN? I've heard it was just a Hollywood custom to hold it by the magazine, and that the army frowned on this. Is that right?

 

Well, speaking for the SMG, we were threatened with the wrath of all hell's demons if we were ever seen holding it by the mag.

My dad says the sten had a nice habit of taking your finger-tips off if you held it by the body and let your fingers wander into the convenient hole there.

 

The Sten was not only the worst weapon ever invented, it was even worse than that, IT was far and away the most dangerous weapon to the user, having used them for real.
sapper

 

Wasent the problem with stens and mp40 alike the magazine? they used the same model of magazine as far as I know. These problem where common in almost every smg at the time ( excluded the Carl Gustaf m 45, aka swedish ) ?

 

The problem with the sten gun is that it shold never have been invented.

It was a real shocker, lucky to hit a barn door if you stood in front of it...Utter and complete crap! had a habit of firing on its own.

So bad that we often carried them around without the magazine loaded. I put mine on the ground, and it started to fire and parted my mate Harry's hair straight up through the middle.

I came face to face with an enemy quite suddenly... my pal "Spud" pointed his empty sten at him while I got my "Bowie knife" out ready to the poor sod some terrible damage.

Luckily he gave up.
Sapper

 

Originally posted by halfyank@May 5 2005, 06:34 PM
All right folks, and especially you who served using one, which way do you hold a STEN? I've heard it was just a Hollywood custom to hold it by the magazine, and that the army frowned on this. Is that right?
[post=34082]Quoted post[/post]

That's correct - I've had enough "words in my ear" about magazine holding when I had "my" sterling! :ph34r: (Though it does give a good "spray" effect!)

The left hand should be positioned in front of the ejector port .There was a finger guard on the Mk.III (was there one on the Mk.II ?), but that still didn't stop little fingers from wandering and getting smashed by the breach-block!

Holding the magazine didn't give a steady enough firing platform and, as mentioned, the Sten was innacurrate enough (though you wouldn't really take any SMG out to a target rifle competition!!!), so every little helped.

The Mk.V Sten had a foregrip and, being better designed (the rounds didn't "rattle" down the barrel for example, and they had improved safeties, etc.) and manufactured was far safer and more accurate - that's why it was still issued to some into the 1980's whereas the previous marks had all but disappeared by the 1950/60's.


Dave.

 

Originally posted by sapper@Aug 4 2005, 08:12 AM
The problem with the sten gun is that it shold never have been invented.[post=37249]Quoted post[/post]


Awww! Come on Sapper! :P

I'd have never been issued with my beloved Sterling, if they didn't invent the Sten!!!

Dave.