1. Shinn
    Offline

    Shinn Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    925
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    New Zealand

    Weapons

    Discussion in 'Research' started by Shinn, Jun 9, 2010.

    Hey all.

    I'm nearly ready to start writing my story, but I'm stuck on one thing; what sort of weaponry did the Germans have around D-Day/Market Garden, in the sense of rifles, machine guns, RPGs, etc, etc? Any help is appreciated! :)
     
  2. Unit7
    Offline

    Unit7 Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,151
    Likes Received:
    59
    If you google WWII German Guns the first website has pictures and some information on common weapons used by the Germans in WWII. Though I am not sure if any of them were introduced after D Day, it doesn't say. But you can always look them up further.
     
  3. mattattack007
    Offline

    mattattack007 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Try video games. Not always spot on, but pretty helpful. Also reading and research in WWII weapons are very helpful and plenty of books on the subject. I suggest you start there.
     
  4. SilverWolf0101
    Offline

    SilverWolf0101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    333
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    New York State
    I don't really know of the weapons, but I often use google to search down information on the weapons I do use in stories. Thus I figured I'd do the same to help you out. Here's a few links I found. Hope they give you some assistance.

    http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/enemy_ww2.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_German_infantry_weapons

    http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm
     
  5. Shinn
    Offline

    Shinn Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    925
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Cheers Silver! :)
     
  6. Cardboard Tube Knight
    Offline

    Cardboard Tube Knight Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    Wikipedia does a pretty good job of dating weapons.
     
  7. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Never use Wikipedia as a primary reference. Consider it quick, dirty, and not particularly reliable.
     
  8. Cardboard Tube Knight
    Offline

    Cardboard Tube Knight Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't usually without checking behind it, but just getting a handle on the types of guns and technologies for them is all you need to go from there and search for them elsewhere.
     
  9. Lemex
    Offline

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,507
    Likes Received:
    3,151
    Location:
    Northeast England
    You say this, but of the weapons I have experiance with, and know about, I find Wikipedia is - dispite it's reputation - to be rather accurate.
     
  10. Cardboard Tube Knight
    Offline

    Cardboard Tube Knight Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    Probably because its not information there's much opinion on.
     
  11. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    You cannot evaluate the accuracy of information from a single source.

    And if you only compare against the references that single source provides, chances are it will agree with those references.
     
  12. Daedalus
    Offline

    Daedalus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    172
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    South Armagh, Ireland.
    Wikipedia is one of the most well-maintained encyclopaedias available on the Internet. The canards of it being unreliable are old and fictional at this point. There are now historians, professors, and scientists writing for it -- such has been the incredible surge of Wikipedia in the last few years.

    It is, most definitely, a reliable source.
     
  13. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Right. It's as fine as any other encyclopedia, except the review process takes place at random intervals AFTER it has been published.

    I stand by my statement. So do all the college professors who instructed us that Wikipedia references are not acceptable for academic papers.
     
  14. Daedalus
    Offline

    Daedalus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    172
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    South Armagh, Ireland.
    I'm aware, Cog, that it is not accepted in academical circles. Our class has been told in no uncertain terms to avoid it completely. But we've also been told to avoid a lot of websites unless they're academic. Just don't be so quick to dismiss Wikipedia as a good source of information, despite it being the pejorative curse of the academic world.
     
  15. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    This forum is called Research, so it is completely appropriate to point out good and poor practices in gathering information.

    Wikipedia is discourged as a orimary source for good reasons. You are perfectly free to disregard that if you wish. I, on the other hand, am perfectly free to point out that it is an unreliable research strategy.

    Oddly enough, it is often about bias. Not bias against Wikipedia, but bias that can and often does find its way into Wiki articles, and can endure there for quite some time.

    And even if there is no deliberate bias, the article is no better than the research put into it by its author. As long as the article contains citations for all its major assertions, the reviewers may not spot the omission of important sources for quite some time.
     
  16. Lemex
    Offline

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,507
    Likes Received:
    3,151
    Location:
    Northeast England
    The only way you can really write about weapons is through having experiance of them first hand, THAT is the best source.

    And even where I live, here in the UK, it's very easy to not only try guns: hold them, shoot them at a target, reload them; but also to buy them; and we have the worst gun laws in the world.
     

Share This Page