The depths of my memory says that it's called an assault rifle because Hitler was a bit mad, and didn't think the German military needed a new submachine gun. So the military chaps, being enlightened thinkers, made the barrel slightly longer and came back to him saying; "Forget that smelly old sub-machine gun we showed you, that was rubbish, you're right. However, look at this bright shiny, new assault rifle. Assault! How cool and buch and macho is that you mad bastard. Also, the name is probably significant numerogically."
I may now do some google and see if there's any truth in this story. It might of course be something my dad made up.
Well, it's a convoluted and fairly boring read, but there seems to be something in the mix: Wikipedia tells us, amongst other things that Hitler was cancelling weapons projects, being kept in the dark about what weapons were being developed, but that it was he who coined the term Sturmgewehr.
In other news, there are two key differences between an assault rifle and a traditional battlefield rifle. Firstly they're shorter, so better for close quarters, and getting through narrow doorways, and secondly, they can fire lots of bullets with one press of the trigger, rather than one bullet.
I had looked at the Wiki page and concluded that an assault rifle did differ from battle (and presumably hunting) rifles. I couldn't quite fathom the name, though, since I'd assumed it to be descriptive in some way rather than spin. However it seems "it sounded cool" is about the size of it.
Well surely from what secondhand_rick said an assault rifle is better for assaults. You know, you're going into a building and running through corridors and doorways and generally assaulting places and you'd want the shorter rifle to not keep banging it on doors and things I expect... You probably wouldn't care about this distinction so much if you weren't assaulting places.
Historical whatnots aside, I suspect it's "assault" in the sense of capturing some target as opposed to fighting from a fixed position. So you won't need as much long ranged shooting accuracy but you will want a lighter, wieldier weapon if possible.
I always assumed that it was a lightweight automatic weapon for assaulting fortified positions, as opposed to a long-range accurate weapon for sniping or other descriptions for other purposes.
Think I'd chose to not to be in the middle of a war regardless but if you're going to bring fashion into it I think I'd not want to be in the middle of a war in a pair of high heels. But then I'd practical like that.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:37 am (UTC)I may now do some google and see if there's any truth in this story. It might of course be something my dad made up.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:43 am (UTC)In other news, there are two key differences between an assault rifle and a traditional battlefield rifle. Firstly they're shorter, so better for close quarters, and getting through narrow doorways, and secondly, they can fire lots of bullets with one press of the trigger, rather than one bullet.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:56 am (UTC)I had looked at the Wiki page and concluded that an assault rifle did differ from battle (and presumably hunting) rifles. I couldn't quite fathom the name, though, since I'd assumed it to be descriptive in some way rather than spin. However it seems "it sounded cool" is about the size of it.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 12:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 09:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 10:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 10:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 10:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 10:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 10:51 am (UTC)http://www.arrse.co.uk might be a good|bad place to ask :-)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 11:03 am (UTC)Forget the assault rifle, what you really want is a rucksack full of landmines.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:31 pm (UTC)Damn you and your quick reactions, beating me to it.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:30 pm (UTC)Think I'd chose to not to be in the middle of a war regardless but if you're going to bring fashion into it I think I'd not want to be in the middle of a war in a pair of high heels. But then I'd practical like that.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:38 pm (UTC)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7828536.stm
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 08:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:27 pm (UTC)Hmmm, that could be tricky. I hear there are a lot of wolverines around those parts.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 02:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 11:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 12:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 12:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:28 pm (UTC)