People often have crazy ideas. Combined with megalomania and arrogance, they then create things like bomb-carrying bats. This “lowest form of animal life” could have burned down Japan during World War II.

It all started with a holiday. Dr. Lytle Schuyler Adams, a dentist from Pennsylvania, spent a few weeks in New Mexico in December 1941. Among other things, he visited Carlsbad Caverns National Park with its famous stalactite caves. These were then, as now, home to around one million Brazilian free-tailed bats. Their evening fly out of the caves for hunting is an impressive natural spectacle and attracts tourists from all over the world.

On the drive home, Doctor Adams’ ideal world was dealt a severe blow, for he heard on the car radio about the attack on Pearl Harbor. The United States of America suddenly found itself at war with Japan. Doctor Adams was outraged. As a great patriot, various thoughts of retaliation were soon buzzing around in his head. And the countless bats he had observed on holiday came back to his mind. In view of the traditional construction of Japanese buildings made of bamboo, wood, and paper, he devised a most perfidious plan: bats equipped with incendiary material were to set Japan’s cities ablaze.

Since in Dr. Adam’s religious world of faith, man, as the highest living being on earth, may freely dispose of all animals, he also had no inhibitions about this matter. He put his idea on paper and sent a letter to the White House in Washington D.C. in January 1942. He was helped by his acquaintance with President Roosevelt’s wife Anna Eleanor. In his letter, Dr. Adams stated that the bat was the “lowest form of animal life” and that “reasons for its creation have remained unexplained“. Completely insane, he went on to write that bats were created by God to wait to play their part in the plan of free human existence and to thwart any attempt by those who dare to desecrate that way of life. Roosevelt read the letter and noted “This man is not a nut“. It sounded like a crazy idea to him, but it would be worth looking into.

Dr. Adams gave four reasons why the bat was the ideal object: They are strong enough to carry a small load. By lowering the temperature, they go into hibernation, which makes it easier to load and transport them. In daylight, they seek dark hiding places, such as cellars and attics. And finally: there are millions of bats, so there is an almost infinite supply.

After Roosevelt gave his approval to the project, it became the responsibility of the U.S. Army Air Force. Adams assembled the staff for the project, including mammologist Jack von Bloeker, who described himself as a “bat lover”. In a later interview, he admitted that it never occurred to him to question the morality or ecological consequences of sacrificing a few million bats. Actor Tim Holt was also part of the team, then still 23 years young and at the beginning of his career as a western actor.

First of all, the type of bat had to be determined. After testing several species, the choice fell on the Brazilian free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis). Dr Adams had to ask the National Park Administration for permission to take a large number of these animals from the caves on government land.

The original plan was to equip the bats with white phosphorus. But then the chemist Louis Frederick Fieser joined the team. At the time, he was experimenting with a sticky, slow-burning incendiary compound that would later become famous: Napalm.

In tests, a 0.5 oz. (14g) bat could carry about 0.53 – 0.63 oz. (15 – 18g) of payload. The napalm was filled into small, easily inflammable cellulose containers, so-called “H-2 Units.” After trying different methods of attachment, it was decided to stick the containers to the bats’ chests with a strong adhesive. This method would also be quick, given the large number of animals to be prepared.

Now the flying incendiaries had to be brought to their destination. Dr Adams had a new employee named Andrew Paul Stanley make a cardboard model of a drop container. Inside were 26 round trays, each 76cm in diameter, each stacked on top of the other with a spacer. The trays were stacked with the open side down and connected at the edges with 7cm long strings. On the parachute, the trays would then hang among each other like an accordion. Each tray would hold 40 bats in individual chambers, similar to a square egg box. This means a total of 1,040 bats per transport container.

During the first test flight, the (still empty) cardboard container was shredded by the air current. So they turned to a small engineering firm in Del Mar, which belonged to the singer and actor Bing Crosby and his brother Larry. There, based on the plans of the cardboard model, a version in sheet metal was designed. Only the trays for the bats remained made of cardboard. The 5 ft. (1.5m) long transport container was also fitted with a parachute for slower sinking, a barometric opening device for dropping the side parts and a small heater to wake the bats from hibernation before dropping.

It was then to be brought to Japan by plane. After being dropped at dawn, at an altitude of 4,000ft (1,200m), the brake parachute would release, and the sides of the container would fall off. The bats would then be free to make their way to a protected shelter within about 20 to 40 miles (32 to 64 km).

Dr Adams was thrilled and ecstatically wrote down his ideas: “Think of thousands of fires breaking out simultaneously over a circle of forty miles [64 km] in diameter for every bomb dropped. Japan could have been devastated, yet with small loss of life“.

But the time had not yet come, and the bats first wreaked havoc in America itself. Due to carelessness, some animals equipped with incendiary devices escaped from the Carlsbad Army Airfield Auxiliary Air Base on 15 May 1943 and hid in hard-to-reach corners, such as under the tanks with the fuel supplies. And the ‘weapon’ worked – the large fire that was set off destroyed numerous buildings and there were several casualties.

After this embarrassing setback, the project was transferred to the Navy in August 1943, which renamed it ‘Project X-Ray’. Then in December, the Marine Corps took over the project and moved test operations to the Marine Corps Air Station at El Centro in California. After several trials and operational adjustments, the final test was conducted with the Japanese Village. This was a replica of some Japanese houses in typical construction, which had been built by the Chemical Warfare Service on the test site Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah. Right next to it, by the way, there was also a German Village, with two more sturdily built row houses made of bricks and concrete.

The results report provides interesting insights: “A reasonable number of destructive fires can be started in spite of the extremely small size of the units. The main advantage of the units would seem to be their placement within the enemy structures without the knowledge of the householder or fire watchers, thus allowing the fire to establish itself before being discovered“. The National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) observer noted that X-Ray was an effective weapon and was more effective on a weight basis than the standard incendiary bombs of the time: “The normal bombs would probably cause 167 to 400 fires per bomb load, while X-Ray would cause 3,625 to 4,748 fires“.

Further tests were planned for summer 1944, but then the program was cancelled by Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King. By this time, an estimated 2 million U.S. dollars (equivalent to 18.7 million U.S. dollars today) had been spent on the bat project. Presumably, progress was too slow for him, because in the meantime another weapons development had progressed very promisingly: the atomic bomb.

Photos: Dugway Proving Ground Archive, Aberdeen Proving Ground Ordnance Museum

After the annexation of the Sudetenland and the destruction of Czechoslovakia as a result of the Munich Agreement of 1938, the entire local arms industry came under German influence, including well-known companies like Škoda. The Czechs were very advanced in weapons engineering, rich in experience and know-how and possessed modern factories. Even the conglomerate Ceskoslovenská Zbrojovka A.S. Brno (Czechoslovakian Arms Factory A.S. Brno) was placed under German administration. The then trademark “Z in the rifled barrel” has been retained and is still used even today.

From 1938 to 1945, the conglomerate operated under the names Waffenwerke Brünn I (Brno) and II (Bystrica) and was affiliated with the Reichswerke Hermann Göring, an industrial conglomerate of Nazi Germany. The main products were military equipment for the Wehrmacht (German Army) and Waffen-SS. Not only were German weapons like the Karabiner 98k made, but also Czech pre-war developments under a new designation. For example, the vz. 24 rifle as Gewehr 24(t), the ZB vz. 26 as MG 26(t) and the ZB vz. 37 as MG 37(t). The (t) in the German name stands for tschechisch (Czech).

Only light tanks like this Russian T-26 could be knocked out by anti-tank rifles.

Most of these weapons were made directly for the Waffen-SS. This organization quickly succeeded in gaining full control of the weapon works in Brno. Since the Wehrmacht was preferably equipped and supplied, the leadership of the SS had to look for suitable opportunities for self-sufficiency and found it in Brno. The development department of the Waffenwerke worked from then on as a part of the SS-Waffenakademie Brünn (SS-Weapons Academy Brno) on the implementation of many innovative ideas, which would not have been possible through the official channels with involvement of the Heereswaffenamt (Army Ordnance Office) because of the intense rivalries between the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS.

One of the Brno-made weapons for the Waffen-SS was the anti-tank rifle Panzerbüchse (PzB) M.SS.41 in 7.92mm. It was originally based on a Czech pre-war development. In the year 1937, the Czech War Ministry requested the development of three anti-tank rifles in calibers 7.92, 13 and 15mm. One year later, the weapon was ready for trials in 7.92x145mm. It got the designation ZK 382. Its weight was 10.5 kg including a 5-round magazine. The War Ministry showed great interest and announced a demand of 10,000 pieces to Ceskoslovenská Zbrojovka.

No actual order was placed before the German Army occupied the country. Now under German management, the design was adapted for the Patrone 318 (7.92x94mm) as this ammunition was already in use with the anti-tank rifles introduced by the Wehrmacht. The bullet had a steel core, a tiny capsule of tear gas and a tracer. Later in the war, it was produced with a hardened steel core for better armor penetration. On December 16, 1939, the SS-Führungshauptamt (SS-Main Office) placed an order at the Waffenwerke Brno for 117 anti-tank rifles in caliber 15mm and 2,000 units in caliber 7.9mm. By January 1941, the first thousand weapons were completed and extensive shooting tests with the weapon Nr.1001 were carried out. It resulted in no necessary changes in the actual design. The finished weapons were shipped in lots of 150 pieces along with accessories to the SS-Main Office in Oranienburg.

The anti-tank rifles of the Wehrmacht (models PzB 38 and 39) were long and unwieldy single-shot weapons with falling-block action. After each shot, a new cartridge had to be loaded. This caused not only a waste of valuable time, but the shooter had to move the gun and thus lost sight of the target. Against the advanced tanks with heavier armor, the anti-tank rifles had little potential. Promising hits were only possible at sensitive areas, such as observation slits or motor and drive mechanisms. In contrast, the PzB M.SS.41 was a manually operated bolt action rifle with magazine feeding. The shooter could therefore keep the target in sight and fire up to six rounds before a magazine had to be changed.

The unauthorized development of PzB M.SS.41 by the Waffen-SS caused some irritation when the Allgemeines Heeresamt “AHA” (General Army Office) got wind of the plan. The SS Central Arsenal had placed an order of 200,000 cartridges for anti-tank rifles on June 10, 1941, from which the AHA logically concluded that the SS had begun the development of its own anti-tank rifle. The reply came promptly that both AHA and Chief H.Rüst.u.B.d.E. were taking a “negative position.” The SS, however, was not to be deterred from their plans. In October 1941, an inquiry was addressed to the company Gustav Appel for manufacturing of 3 or 4 barrels from unalloyed steel using the newly developed hammering method (this should extend the service life of the barrel bore). When the AHA heard about this, the SS Central Arsenal immediately got a negative notification: The company Appel is a development company of the Heereswaffenamt and already operating at full capacity. Thus, the Waffen-SS had to continue the production of its anti-tank rifle barrels from expensive alloy steel.

The PzB M.SS.41 is an extremely unusual construction for its time. It is in fact the first bullpup weapon ever officially introduced in an army. Placing action and magazine behind the trigger group permits a shorter overall weapon length. The bullpup design is widely used today because such weapons are relatively easy to use. One of the best known current representatives is the Austrian assault rifle STEYR AUG. The PzB M.SS.41 is short too. It measures only 128cm (50.4”), 34cm (13.4”) less than the model 38 anti-tank rifle.

Usually when reloading a weapon the bolt is moved back and forth while the barrel remains stationary. With the PzB M.SS.41 it is exactly the opposite and the reloading procedure is as follows: The shooter grabs the pistol grip, which is attached to the barrel, with his right hand and rotates it about 80 degrees up right. Now the barrel is unlocked and can be pushed forward. The spent cartridge case drops out of the gun. While pulling back the barrel, it picks up a new cartridge from the box magazine, which is attached to the stationary stock. In the rear position, the handle pivots back down and so again connects barrel and receiver. When the magazine is empty, the action is kept open by the protrusion of the magazine follower which stops the rearward movement of the barrel housing.

The applied safety is operated by pulling the barrel housing lock extension 1/2 inch to the rear, so that its rear alignment mark is aligned with the mark “S” (Sicher/Safe) on the barrel housing lock. Moving the barrel housing extension forward to its alignment with the “F” (Feuer/Fire) mark brings the gun to its fire position. When the action is in the safe position, the trigger cannot be pulled, nor can the action be opened. The mechanical safety device is a disconnector. If the trigger is pulled while the action is not entirely closed, the gun will not fire. Also, keeping the trigger depressed while completing the closing of the action will not permit the gun to fire. It is necessary to release the trigger and pull it again in order to release the sear.

The 5-shot ZK 382 in 7.92x145mm caliber during a trial in 1938.

The non-adjustable iron sights were zeroed for 500 meters and mounted on folding bases. To reduce the recoil, a muzzle brake was attached to the barrel and the stock got a padded leather cushion. The weapon is furnished with a bipod which folds and hinges forward for convenience in carrying. The bipod is attached to the front of the receiver jacket by inserting the bipod collar in a half-round slot and is fastened in place by a plunger-type catch. Most bipods are similar to the ones used on Czech machine gun models, but also the bipod of the MG 34 could be used. The barrel is fitted with a knob for retaining this type of bipod in carrying position. A leather strap is attached to the top of the barrel group, serving as a carrying handle. The carrying sling is attached to the right side of the weapon.

Even if the PzB M.SS.41 shows some advantages over the Wehrmacht anti-tank rifles, it could not stop the downfall of this type of weapon. The bullet could penetrate 30mm of armor from a distance of 100 meters resp. 20mm on a distance of 300meters (both at an angle of 90°). There was little chance to fight the heavy armored tanks that appeared on the battlefields later in the war. In August 1942, the production of the Patrone 318 ceased after a delivery of 93 million rounds. In February 1943, the Waffenwerke informed the SS Ordnance Office that the last remaining delivery of 58 pieces would be delayed until March. After that date, the production was cancelled. The future undoubtedly belonged to the rocket-propelled anti-tank weapons – a new type of weapon, on which the engineers of the SS-Waffenakademie Brno was already busy tinkering.

Technical data

Caliber: 7.92x94mm

Length overall: 1339mm (52.72 inches)

Length of barrel: 1100mm (43.30 inches)

Weight: (empty) 13kg (28.7 lbs)

Rifling: 4 grooves, right hand twist

Magazine capacity: 6 rounds

Weight of cartridge: 84 gr

Vo: 1,079 m/s

(Collection Dr. Geoffrey Sturgess, Switzerland)

The 5-shot ZK 382 in 7.92x145mm caliber during a trial in 1938.

The muzzle brake reduced the heavy recoil. Note the foldable front sight.

The safety is located on the left side of the pistol grip.

Soldier of the Waffen-SS with captured Russian heavy tank KW-1.

There was little chance to fight heavy tanks like the Russian T-34 or KW-2 with anti-tank rifles.

There was little chance to fight heavy tanks like the Russian T-34 or KW-2 with anti-tank rifles.

Patrone 318 with additional sealing (red color) for use in tropical regions.

Tool cartridge for armourers.

Much has already been written about German military weapons. But still today some real treasures are left to be discovered. Some of them are re-discovered – like the Erma EMP44 of the Erfurter Maschinenfabrik (in short “Erma”).

When the 3rd U.S. Army under the command of General Patton reached the city of Erfurt on 12 April 1944, Berthold Geipel, the owner of the Erfurt Maschinenfabrik “Erma”, had already fled. On trucks packed with special-purpose machinery and construction documents, he and his companions were trying to slip out to Bavaria. What remained was collected by the Americans, just in time before the Russians later took control of this area. Along with other booty, a submachine gun with the designation “EMP44” was shipped to America. The weapon was briefly tested at the Aberdeen Proving Ground (Maryland), but due to the absence of technical refinements it evoked no interest and was soon put in storage. The Allies’ focus was on German assault rifle developments. Thus, the EMP44 was soon forgotten and it’s a small miracle that the weapon survived the scrapping-orgies of the postwar time.

The EMP 44 (left side) is not a pretty sight.

The EMP44 is the result of attempts from the years 1942/1943 to create a much simpler submachine gun as the introduced MP40. At this time German weapons were still made in high quality. Other nations, however, much more early on put their focus on quantity instead of quality. The Russians introduced the PPSh-41, designed by Georgy Semenovich Shpagin, in December 1940. With its simple and uncomplicated receiver, bolt and wooden stock the weapon could be made in large quantities even in small workshops. For the completion of a PPSh-41 only 7.3 machine hours were estimated. In 1943 an even simpler weapon followed: the PPS-43. Developed by Alexei Ivanovich Sudajew, it was completely made of pressed sheet metal and its production time was only 2.7 machine hours.

The new hope in Germany was the assault rifle MP44 (later renamed Sturmgewehr 44). In 1943, Erma stopped the production of the MP40 in favor of the new assault rifle. The EMP44 was developed in the time before the switch of production. “EMP” means Erma Maschinen-Pistole. The weapon is mainly made of metal tubes welded together. The tubular receiver is extended by a sheet-metal barrel jacket of the same diameter that is riveted to its front. The jacket has four rows of four cooling slots and a laterally open muzzle brake. The trigger assembly is located in the middle of the gun between the magazine well and a vertical grip. Since the grip is hollow and not closed at its bottom, it is believed that it may have served as a mount on a bar-shaped gun carriage or installation in vehicles. At the rear end of the receiver, a nearly identical second grip is fixed. This one can be removed in order to disassemble the weapon for cleaning or repair. The sights rest high above the weapon on two bases and are protected by side plates. The rear sight consists of three leafs with a V-shaped notch for 100, 200 and 300 meters distance. Behind the rear sight base a deflector for the ejected empty cartridge cases is welded on top of the receiver.

The rear grip closes the receiver’s end. It is held in place by a spring-loaded rod.

The bolt is designed in two parts. Its front half is very similar to the bolt of the well known MP40, but it contains a moving (and thus replaceable) firing pin. The other half of the bolt is made of a solid rectangular striking piece with a tip and a sheet-metal tube riveted to its rear end for stabilization. The cocking handle is inserted transversely in a bore in the front half. The tip of the striking piece reaches through an oval hole in the middle of the cocking handle.

The weapon is put on safe by pressing the cocking handle. Then it projects out on the opposite side of the bolt and engages in one of the two holes in the left side of the receiver. This can be done either in the cocked or uncocked position of the bolt. That way the cocking handle is fixed in position and the oval hole in the cocking handle prevents a forward movement of the striking piece. There are no additional safety devices on the EMP44. A carrying sling can be looped through a slot in the front sight base and a lug welded to the rear grip.

The bolt is designed in two parts. Its front half is similar to the bolt of the well known MP40. The rear half is made of a solid rectangular metal plate and acts as a striking piece. Note the oval hole in the middle of the cocking handle. Some parts are marked with the correct serial number 15. The cocking handle is from the weapon with serial number 8.

The disassembly and reassembly of the EMP44 is done as follows: Pull down the spring-loaded rod inside the rear grip and rotate it about 90 degrees. Now the grip can be removed and the receiver is open. First, the recoil spring can be pulled out. But before the bolt can be pulled out, the cocking handle must be removed. This is possible only at one particular position along the lateral opening in the receiver. Moreover, the striking piece must be pushed back with a finger so that its tip is no longer extended into the oval hole in the cocking handle. Otherwise, the cocking handle can not be pulled. After that process the receiver is tilted backwards and both parts of the bolt will slip free from the receiver tube. The assembly is again a tricky matter: First, the front part of the bolt is inserted, then the cocking handle is pushed into its correct place from the side and after that the rear half of the bolt is inserted. Since there are no guide rails, both parts of the bolt can rotate freely during insertion. For the most part, the little finger is needed to rotate the bolt parts to their proper position. Also, the right location for insertion of the cocking handle is hard to find along the lateral opening in the receiver because there are no markings. A lot of trial and error is necessary.

The most unusual feature of the EMP44 is its double magazine well. It holds two of the 32-round MP40 magazines side by side. A very complicated and partly movably sheet metal cover encloses the magazine well to avoid the ingress of dust and dirt. When pressing a button on the front of the magazine well, the well can be moved laterally and the cover follows this move. The idea was to save the time that would be needed for changing the magazines in the traditional way by removing the empty magazine and inserting a new loaded one. The two magazine release buttons can be found on the back of the magazine well. Nevertheless, it fits the standard MP40 magazines, since the retaining clips of the EMP44 engage in a production-related rectangular recess on the magazine back. Whether this way of changing the magazines brings advantages in combat is doubtful. Nonetheless the magazine well of the MP40 is slightly widened at its bottom to form a funnel for easier insertion of the magazine. The double magazine well on the EMP44 is missing this advantage. In a hurry or in the dark it is tricky to insert the magazines quickly without problems.

Markings on the EMP44. Note date of manufacture February 1943 and serial number 00015. The number 15 can also be found on other parts of the weapon.

The EMP44 weighs 3.66 kg without magazines, which is about 300 grams less than an MP40 or 800 gr less than an MP38. In action, the weight of two filled 32-round magazines has to be added (in total 1.35 kg). The overall length of the weapon is 72 cm and the barrel length is 25 cm. In contrast to the MP40, their barrel has only 4 grooves with right-hand twist.

Interestingly, a double magazine well of almost the same design was used on an MP40 variation called MP40/1. Only the complicated sheet metal dust cover was omitted. Of this weapon, a few pieces were produced by the Erma company in the period from late 1942 to early 1943. In contrast to the EMP44, that was specifically designed for this kind of magazine well, the MP40/1 was just a converted standard MP40. A large piece of metal was cut out of the receiver to make place for the double magazine well, but this weakened the weapon’s body. No additional reinforcement was added to the receiver to compensate the loss of stiffness. So in hard combat life the weapons would not work for long. When researching for this article the author noted that some of the still existing MP40/1s have slightly distorted receivers just caused by the long storage time. These weapons could no longer be cocked without using violence, since the bolts were jammed in the receivers in their front position.

The rear sight consists of three leafs with a V-shaped notch for 100, 200 and 300 meters distance. Note the safety by pushing in the cocking handle.

Nevertheless the MP40/1 is officially mentioned in the secret regulation D.97/1+ Geräteliste (list of equipment) of 1 July 1943 under the equipment number 1-3-3004, whereas the EMP44 is missing. All receivers of known MP40/1 came from the production of Erma and Steyr (Austria). Whether Steyr undertook modifications on its own or only supplied Erma with receivers is not known.

No information was found about the development of the EMP44. Certainly it was an attempt by the Erma company without any official order. Despite the designation E.M.P.44, the weapon was developed in the years 1942/1943. On one hand, emphasis was placed on a simplified design for easy production, but on the other hand some complicated features such as the moving dust cover or the two-piece bolt were created. Probably, the weapon was simply “too primitive” for the decision makers at that point of time and hope still rested on the new Sturmgewehr 44 assault rifle. Even in the later stages of the war, the design of the EMP44 was not taken up again. Today, only one weapon made in February 1943 with the serial number 00015 is known to exist in complete condition. It is part of the former Aberdeen Ordnance Museum collection that was moved to Fort Lee, Virginia as part of the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005. Unfortunately due to a budget shortfall the plans for building a new museum have been delayed indefinitely. For the moment, only a small new exhibition, “Subject to Recall: Collecting Intelligence,” showing captured items from enemy hands, represents the Ordnance Collection in rooms of the Quartermaster Museum. In the recent past the nonprofit organization “Ordnance Training and Heritage Center Foundation” was created by concerned members of the Ordnance Corps. Among its primary goals is raising funds to build a new Ordnance Museum.

The muzzle with laterally open muzzle brake and large front sight base.

The author would like to thank Gregory Hagge (Curator of Arms & Armour, U.S. Army Ordnance Training & Heritage Centre, Fort Lee, Virginia) for his support.

One would imagine that everything about German submachine guns of World War Two has already been written.  But in-depth research still goes on and sometimes little treasures surface:  So for the very first time Small Arms Defense Journal can now show details of the unique one-of-a-kind experimental submachine gun MP38(L).

The submachine gun with serial number V3013 is kept in the outstanding collection of the Czechoslovak Military Museum in Prague (Vojenský historický ústav Praha).  Until today, no other example of this model was found.  The relevant literature mentions this weapon, but no detailed pictures have ever been shown.

The thread for the barrel nut is not as fine as on the MP38. Below the sling-lug the logo “AWW” of the Aluminum works Wutöschingen is visible.

At the beginning of 1938, the Erfurter Maschinenfabrik (ERMA) received an official order for the development a new submachine gun from the Heereswaffenamt (office for army weapons).  Already a few months later, at the beginning of June 1938, ERMA presented the Maschinenpistole MP38.  This achievement is impressive; however the time interval seems to be much too short for developing such a new weapon.  This fact must arouse suspicions that a (nearly) ready draft must have slumbered in the drawers of ERMA – and now the time had come to take it out.  Actually, the MP38 wasn’t a complete new construction by any means, but rather the advancement of a nearly unknown predecessor model: the EMP36 (See: Iannamico, Frank: The MP36 – The Missing Link in Small Arms Review, Vol. 2, No. 4, January 1999).

The weightiest change, in the true sense of the word, concerned the manufacturing of the receiver.  For reasons of weight reduction, the solid steel receiver was provided with numerous oblong grooves and the vertical magazine well got a large round cutout on each side.  The furniture of the receiver’s lower part of the EMP36 was completely made of wood, but with the MP38 the much lighter bakelite was used instead.  At this time Bakelite was still a quite new material in the manufacturing of weapons.  In addition, the fire selector was omitted.

The Waffenamt WaA280 was used by ERMA. Also the marking &lsquoEE&rsquo in circle” may stand for &lsquoERMA Erfurt&rsquo. On the barrel the lowest line of the second &lsquoE&rsquo is nearly invisible.

The revision was done in a short time.  Only seven months later the MP38 was basically tested, followed by the official introduction on 29. June 1938.  Serial production started in July 1938, though very slowly.  When Germany launched the attack on Poland (“Fall Weiss”), about 8,700 MPs were listed in the inventory reports of the units.  The distribution of the new weapon took place in a hurry with the result that there was no time for special field tests.  That being so, selected units had to continuously send back experience reports.

But the MP38 was still an expensive weapon to manufacture.  In spring 1940, ERMA tried to simplify their design.  In the meantime, the use of pressed sheet metal parts in the industry had made great progress and so the receiver and grip-piece were redesigned for this kind of technology.  The new weapon was named MP40 and serial production started in March 1940.  The MP38 stayed in service till the end of the war, but most of them were modified with an improved safety from the MP40.

Right side of the MP38(L)

In this time experiments were carried out with a light-weight MP made of aluminium.  No documents or other information could be found, so all that is left is the unique MP38(L) as a piece of evidence.  The initiator of this development is still unknown.  Some researchers think that the “L” stands for “Luftwaffe” (air force) and that the weapon was a development for the paratroopers that were in need of light-weight infantry weapons.  But the air force did not have enough influence on the arms industry at this stage of war and one should keep in mind that aluminium was a rare and expensive raw-material.  Most of it was used in the aircraft industry and step by step the parts made of aluminium on military equipment were reduced to a minimum to avoid shortages.  For logical reasons the “L” means “leicht” (light).  With a weight of 3.34 kg the MP38(L) weighs one kilogram (2.2 pounds)less than the MP40.

The military manufacturer code of ERMA is not put on the weapon.  The only marking that connects the weapon with ERMA is the Waffenamt WaA280 found on some parts.  Some other markings “EE in a circle” can stand for “ERMA Erfurt.”  The cast upper and lower receivers are marked with a nearly invisible “AWW” logo.  So these parts were made by the Aluminium-Werke Wutöschingen in southern Germany close to the Swiss border.

The author wants to thank Jan Skramoušský and the Military Museum Prague (www.vhu.cz)