metallicman had better hire a more-experienced technical editor before posting anything further, on this topic (though to judge by some earlier posts of his, he may be immune to embarrassment, and facts.)
FG-42 used box magazines only, never belts. It did fire from a closed bolt on semi, and from an open bolt on full auto. The latter is common on air-cooled full-auto arms, to facilitate cooling, and to keep the ammunition out of contact with a hot barrel.
The first photo purported to be an MP-40 shows an arm missing its folding stock, but the stock is present (folded) in the second image. There have been some latter-day semi-only replicas made without stocks, so they can be “pistols” in compliance with US regulations. Despite what one sees in films and on TV, the gun was rarely fired with its stock folded; as an open-bolt submachine gun, its accuracy was never great, and users needed every advantage they could get. While we’re addressing film/TV use, it must be stressed that movie guns seem to fire at almost twice the rate of a real MP-40, or perhaps it’s mere sound effects. The actual gun fired only about 450 rds/minute: “chug-chug” more than “rat-a-tat.”
Small numbers of replica MP-40s were turned out before May 1986: modern-made receiver and original parts kits. Trade jargon for these: “tube guns.”
The MP-44 is indeed astonishingly weighty, and disappointingly unhandy to boot. Recoil is terrible: difficult to believe about such a tiny round fired from such a big gun. There have been recent production runs of ammunition, catering to the collector community.
If one goes by the kinetic energy of the cartridge it fires, FN’s P90 does not come up to the bar as either a submachine gun or an assault rifle. Energy at the muzzle is less than a 22 WMR. The gun’s magazine is innovative, holding 50 rounds but mounted atop the receiver to enhance portability. Unique design of follower and feed lips cause the round to rotate 90 degrees from its position in the magazine, to ready-to-chamber position. Reloading the tiny cartridge is an unbelievably fussy endeavor. What prompted the author to describe its velocity as “high” is a mystery: about 2700 ft/sec from the P90, 2100 ft/sec from the handgun. To compare, 7.62mm NATO is a nominal 2740 ft/sec, 5.56mm NATO about3100 ft/sec. Rifle rounds pushing a bullet faster than 3000 ft/sec have been available on the commercial sporting market for a century.
...and he dropped the “h” in Walther...twice.
Thank you for your comments @schurmann.
Please note that the FG 42 belt fed that I know of is the Light Automatic Machine Gun T44. And that seems to have had a side feeding mechanism similar to the prototype belt fed Kalashnikov. In this case, the Johnson belt fed seems to have a bottom closing mechanism. This would be much like the mechanism used in the HK 21.
It must have been something as the FG42 eventually evolved into the M60 belt-fed LMG.
Additionally, it is my understanding, faulted as it probably is, that the box and feeding mechanisms can be loaded from either the left or the right sides.
Regarding the MP40...
Hollywood movies usually (not always, just usually) liked to portray the users of the MP-40 firing “at the hip”, spraying the room (and evil grinning Nazi warriors) indiscriminately. I would imagine that it would have been a terrible waste of bullets. How could you possibly hit anything without sighting your target first?
As regards to your comments...Outstanding! I have always wanted to fire this weapon, and I have often wondered what it must have been like.
Regarding the MP-44. I have looked up this weapon on the internet. It does seem rather heavy and bulky. Not like the AK-47 that we have become accustomed to.
