From:	Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject:	Gun manufacturing, the LoTech approach [was: Thunderbolts: How you might get them.]
Date:	Thu, 26 Aug 1999 01:03:22 +0100

In article <990824001306CT.01207@*****.iname.net>,
runnerpaul@*****.com writes
>I had a similar question, but from a different angle.
>
>Instead of something complex like a burst fire pistol, what would it
>require to make cheap simple firearms, if say a barrens gang decided
>one weekend that they wanted to tackle this sort of Do-It-Yourself
>project? Nothing complex like a semi-auto or anything, maybe bolt
>action at the most complex.

Actually, a simple blowback SMG is one of the easiest weapons to knock
out in quantity on basic machinery. Look at the British Sten Gun, or the
US M3A1 "Grease Gun", or the Soviet PPS, from World War 2 for examples
of how basic stamped and pressed metal can be turned into a machine
gun very easily. The barrel's the toughest part.

Not a casual task, you'd need some skills and machinery, but a WW2
veteran I used to go shooting with had fond memories of a home-made
submachinegun he and some RN artificers built for themselves... with a
good machinist and reasonable tools, it's not hard at all until you try to
produce a decent rifled barrel.

>Also would the old decker's trick of using a control slave operation
>to change what a computer-aided-manufacturing production line
>produces work for making some simple gun parts?

Sure. You'd need a design, but there are plenty about.

>Essentially, what I'm going for, is the theme of "technology falling
>to the level of the street".

Simple SMGs - FA-only, no aiming aids, no recoil compensation - are
_easy_ to mass-produce. It's when you get fancy that the problems
start...

--
Paul J. Adam