Finally got to test fire the MG15 yesterday.....

[medved]

Do you have the loader ratchet and tray for the 15. If not I can supply you with the name and phone # of someone who builds both.

[Bil]

Could you post the info here? I have one of them,and several people have asked about it,but I can't find the info.I got mine from a guy in the Bronx,I think.Not sure who made them.Thanks. ---bil

[Bil]

I think the guy I got mine from was Daniel Pinto PO box 112 Yonkers,NY 10704-0112 I got mine on gunbroker,so I don't know if he just had one or more. ---bil

[TactAdv]

As near as I have been able to find out,in Roumania around 1956.Not much info on these. ---bil

While I agree there really isn't a lot of definitive, easily verified, historical information on the ST 61 variant, some things that ARE well proven mitigate against the notion these guns were actually manufactured Post-1945, despite where they ended up later.

For one, it is historical fact that the Inter-Allied Commission basically dismantled Rheinmetall-Borsig GmbH as a corporate entity in June 1945, it simply ended its existence under that corporate identity right there and then, despite a later reemergence as a reborn Rheinmetall-named carry-on. With the dismantling of the Rheinmetall-Borsig identity most certainly came the end of the Rh-B corporate logo, yet all ST 61 receivers are marked in that fashion. Hence, almost certainly, they were all actually manufactured prior to the end of the German portion of the War, or very shortly thereafter. There would be no discernible reason for the Rh-B logo to persist more than a decade after the reformation of the new Post-War company, as some assert is happening with the mid-1950's dates.

Secondly,there is every bit just as much provable and documented evidence that even as early as 1942 most of the surplus and undesirable RCMG's formerly used in airborne installations were taken up by the LuftWaffe ground defense services as expedient and useful arms. There are any number of documented ground service adaptations of MG 15, MG 17, MG 81/81z, MG 131, and MG 151's, etc. Some level of standardization existed on these adaptations, but there were certainly many experiments too as none of these guns were ever designed for the lack of airborne cooling effects. It was probably recognized just as readily back then that the MG 15 receiver design offered a supremely easy retrofit opportunity for a water-cooling jacket as the rest of the ground service parts already existed. It was also perhaps motivated along by recognition on behalf of Rheinmetall-Borsig that they were left sitting on a large repository of both actual MG 15 spares and also remaining industrial capability to manufacture the gun itself; an opportunity presented perhaps by a foreign contract may have resulted in the ST 61, which was almost CERTAINLY an entirely commercial venture on behalf of Rh-B as the water-cooled parts bear no recognizable relation to any military program known at the time and the simplistic nature of the parts lends further credence to this assumption. The fact that the receiver is marked in commercial fashion, bears a designation not known anywhere in the German military nomenclature which is legendary, and the fact that the actual designation "ST 61" is largely devoid of any clue as to what the weapon is, makes it further probable that the whole effort may have been purposely been done outside of the direct purview of the German authorities and may well have been simply a privately funded undertaking.

The assertion that it happened in the mid-1950's is also hard to believe as by this time most of eastern Europe was already well and truly under the Russian boot, that Romania would be allowed to acquire such an entirely outdated, non-military, and former German weapon design in a non-COMBLOC caliber stretches the imagination. By that time, it would have been too late. Had Romania wanted such a weapon system, it would have been under most desperate circumstances, and that would have been right after the defeat of Germany in the War as they were looking east expecting the Russian invasion. That time was summer '45, which coincidentally was when Rh-B had been shut down by the Commission, but was perhaps PERMITTED to supply Romania with simple weapons they could easily fabricate from existing stocks. That it was water-cooled showed a direct understanding of the likely circumstances it would be used under and facing a Russian invasion was understandable.

There is simply NO reasonable proof as to why, or even HOW, such a gun could have been made, or even DELIVERED, more than in the immediate few months following Germany's collapse, so dates in the 1950's simply aren't believable, much less probably, even possible when one takes into account the situation in Eastern Europe at that time and the situation of the former Rheinmetall-Borsig enterprise.

-Tom H.

[Bil]

I would think that is reasonable,except for the timeline.The Russians rolled over Roumania before they got to Germany,I am thinking you are right,these were either made for the Roumanian Army while allied with Germany,or made in Roumania in the same timeframe,while still Allied with Germany.That could explain the comparative crudeness compared to early war guns,or even the front of the WC15 to the rear!
There are many instances of remaining German equipment being used by the Soviet sattelites,the one that comes to mind is the German tanks that line the borders of many of these countries as in-place bunkers.There are quite a few that are now being recovered,as the price has come up enough to make it worth while.The RC Mausers are a lot like this.I think ,judjing by the condition of these,is that they were made by whomever during the war to help arm the Roumanian Army,and never got issued,and have been sitting in an armoury somewhere until discovered.There is still a bunch of stuff like this being found,not as much as before,though. ---bil

[TactAdv]

Here's another interesting tidbit:
http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... %3D2567833

...it's a Germany-based auction for an original condition ST-61 rig, deactivated. So sorry for those farging bastages that have to live with deactivated guns, but the interesting comment there is that the ST-61 receiver is marked as having been made in 1942. If so, that places another nail in the coffin of the Post-1945 drivel....

[Bil]

I don't think you would get any argument as to the receivers being made during the war,as they were still being used early as aircraft cuns.The ground conversions are much cruder and makeshift,the WC much so.I am of the opinion they just used up the stock of '15 receivers and issued them to secondary line troops,and their allies.The fact that the WC version seems to come from Roumania would back this up.The ST61 marking could have been put on those.Still a mystery of sorts,thanks for the picture link! ---bil

[heckinohio]

I realize the Original posting here is quite old.......however........ I fielded a MG 15 Sunday w/a home made tripod. It is not without its short comings. The event I attended has a bit of a rise then some fall to the target area. Often times I see 'belly-down' guns bullets hitting the top of the high place & going off into la-la land. Since it takes so much time to describe an event on several sites, here is a link to where the story & pictures are.

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php ... post847565

Now.......MG 15 'mount'......the whole thing is too low. I like to sit on an ammo can and at least lean forward to see the sites. With this one, you must sit on the ground with legs straight forward, then lean to the right to get low enuff to keep on the sites while firing. A rather easy fix that will take a bit of time & welding on the mounts upper brackets & then feet angles. I did drive a stake into the ground through a lower lightening hole in the front leg, a 18" piece of 1/2 drill rod. Dont know if I needed it but.......more likey will when raised 8"s.

Second problem is that back of the gun w/mag installed sits uncomfortably on the rear legs...........needs a stop of some kind, maybe a short piece of soft cable from the front leg up to the barrel jacket.....???

Anyway, .........

PJH

[TactAdv]

Interesting mount idea........I can see what you mean by its shortcomings. The MG15 was NEVER meant to be mounted on anything less than a freeswinging mount really, and a good stand-up AA tri-pod seems to be ideal in this day and age. You need to be standing UP behind it.

Even on its original ground mount adaptation, i.e.,, on the bi-pod channel kit, it juts does not seem right.

I am QUITE happy with mine on a modern standard MG3 AA tripod, using a proprietary adapter. It uses the standard aircraft mounting hard point on the receiver/barrel jacket and allows the full intended range of movement while standing up. You can see it all here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VewqEy9zI04[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsztYhq5vM4[/video]

Now, admittedly, a couple things- I am using the original ground mount shoulder stock attachment which makes a HUGE difference standing up......get one....and this a Jap Type 1 clone that has that second rear grip attached which also makes a HUGE difference, but it is a VERY nice way to shoot the gun.

Look through this section of the site.....MG15 discussion....there are good close up pictures of the proprietary adapter to look at for you here:

http://mg42.us/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9748


-TomH

[JBaum]

Last time I shot an MG15, the owner had a rubber bungee cord hooked near the muzzle, with the other end hooked on the tripod. The proper length bungee cord helped balance the gun and made taking both hands off the gun possible for replacing the drums, as it only went muzzle up about 8 inches with hands off.

Didn't look the greatest, but the stretch of the bungee made it fully controllable while reducing the tendency to have the muzzle climb.

If it's stupid and it works, it's not stupid.

[42rocker]

Thanks for the videos.

Later 42rocker

[pitfighter]

Tact-adv - did you add the foregrip?

I haven't seen that on an MG15 before.

Nice vids, thank you,

Pit.

[sbl11]

I'll answer that one...


Yes he did, and in doing so ruined a gorgeous all matching original mg-15. He drilled holes into the bottom and adapted a picatinny rail.


-Seth

[TactAdv]

I'll answer that one...


Yes he did, and in doing so ruined a gorgeous all matching original mg-15. He drilled holes into the bottom and adapted a picatinny rail.


-Seth

Ohhhhh, it was MUCH worse than THAT, Seth....as you well know. This particular gun was a bring back gun, fully documented to be Hermann Göring's personal presentation gun from his staff at Rheinmetall that was removed from his personal effects at war's end. That didn't stop me from welding up a hack-job grip that you see here, seemed the thing to do at the time, don't ya know. ;-)

-TomH

[sbl11]

Hahahahaha! I always hated mg-15's anyways. They are the most evil of the high capacity clip magazine assault rifles ar-47's out there. Especially yours with that extra pistol grip designed to fire even more easily from the hip into the innocent. mass murderers choice for sure.

-seth