Bren or BAR.

Goofy TV show but still has some nice shots of BREN and BAR

YouTube - ‪English BREN gun Vs american B.A.R‬‏

Dave

 

My grandfather was a Bren gunner in Normandy. He was once asked by a BAR gunner whether he wanted to swap

 

My grandfather was a Bren gunner in Normandy. He was once asked by a BAR gunner whether he wanted to swap
I wouldn't have...for several reasons...

 

I love little stories like that. Thanks

Dave

 

I trained on the 7.62mm L4 the ‘modernised’ Bren.

I didn’t ever notice if the mag got in my line of site so it must not have been a problem and the sights were offset on the left side so sighting wasn’t a problem. Left handers were trained to fire from the right shoulder like ‘normal ‘ people.

Nor was accuracy a problem it was superbly accurate and ideal for suppressing an enemy position. An area weapon with a good spread of shot isn’t great for suppression because usually you are suppressing a position while your own men are closing in to take it out…all you need is a weapon that can put down a few accurate rounds onto a trench (E.G.) every few seconds and no-one is going to stick their heads up to shoot back.

The Bren at the Royal Armouries (Leeds) is knackered you’d not hit anything anyway.

Changing the mag was easy. Drop the butt onto the ground which lowers the rear, mag off and new mag on. Simples. ‘Topping up’…not needed; same drill. Mag off new mag on, then top up the magazine you’ve just removed. The usual drill was to change mags before moving.

We were taught to fire in 2-3 rounds bursts it does the job and saved ammo. Firing 2-3 in auto was habit and not hard after a bit of practice, don’t forget the Bren was a ‘personal weapon’ to its regular users although all the section was trained in it.

The Bren could be fitted with a high speed drum magazine but this was really for AA use. Infantry wouldn’t have used them generally.

Bren all the way

Smudge

 

There are some odd notions coming out here! The anti aircraft drum had nothing at all to do with high speed. The gas regulator 4 positions could increase the gas to the piston which would regulate to an extent. It was suggested that to produce a 'beaten zone' armourers filed down the interrupted barrel threads and the the spigot into the gas regulator thus allowing the barrel to float. The BAR and the Bren are two different types of weapon , the Lewis and the Bren would be a nearer selection. The Bren was probably the best gun in its class. The Bren or the later LMG 7.62m were most certainly not area weapons. Weapons have their own characteristics. the Vickers had a very high trajectory and was noted for putting down suppressing fire over the heads of advancing infantry. The GPMG produces a 'beaten zone' at short ranges a circular pattern of fall of shot, as the range increases the beaten zone elongates into a cigar shaped pattern. Guns can be sited on fixed lines to cross these patterns over a given area increasing the beaten zone. Bren magazine 28 rounds, ten magazines at the rapid rate, change to second barrels. Barrel were marked 1 and 2 sighting may change for each barrel especially if one was used for beaten zone, although I doubt very much if this practice was universal.It is a design that looks right, feels right and of all the weapons, I have fired there is not one that sounds like a .303 Bren.The IAs on the Bren - were easy - Gun stops, cock gun mag off check breech and magazine, no visual problems, replace mag, continue firing, guns stops again, cock gun, apply safety, pull gun back. lift barrel. locking handle, slide barrel forward so gas regulator is clear, with nose of round (discard after use) or use tool to rotate to next largest gas vent, slide barrel back, locking handle down, gun into position safety off continue firing. Been 15 years since I used one when running the range for a cadet unit.

Browning Automatic - Rifle.
Bren Light Machine Gun.

‪BREN Gun machine gun shooting‬‏ - YouTube

Cowboys - but it shows the weapon. He did not count the rounds as he fired them! If you look closely the gun is trying to rotate right, his left hand should be over the butt stock, wrist turned downwards with light pressure to stop this rotation.

 

The BAR and the Bren are two different types of weapon , the Lewis and the Bren would be a nearer selection..
I'd say, as they were used, they were similar types of weapons - Squad Automatic Weapons.

The Bren was probably the best gun in its class.

I agree.

 

They were indeed used as section weapons, I still suggest they are from different stables, one an automatic rifle the other a dedicated light machine gun. The BAR single role whereas the Bren could at a pinch multi role - light local air defence.


‪Shooting the British Bren MkII light machine gun‬‏ - YouTube


the opening shots on this are terrifying this gun is not under proper control!

 

They were indeed used as section weapons, I still suggest they are from different stables, one an automatic rifle the other a dedicated light machine gun. The BAR single role whereas the Bren could at a pinch multi role - light local air defence.

No strong feelings on this but the BAR was also adapted to the air defence role with a 40-round magazine. Also, I should think the correct BAR version to compare with would be the "A2". This one did not have selective single-round fire, but two different automatic rates-of-fire.

In my opinion, what made the Bren better was its quick-change barrel facility. Even if the BAR fired from an open bolt.

 

Well I fired the Bren never got to fire the BAR.


http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerdog/generalstorage/brengunfiles/01-04-42.pdf

 

I've fired both. We had the BAR in the Norwegian army in the fifties/sixties. The Swedes had their own version. The Bren I have only fired socially.........

Out of context, but the most advanced light machine gun of its time must have been the Madsen. It was acquired by the Norwegian army as early as 1914.

 

Weapons have their own characteristics. the Vickers had a very high trajectory and was noted for putting down suppressing fire over the heads of advancing infantry. .

Hello Willis,

Why did the Vickers had a higher trajectory than the BREN? Does it have a shorter barrel or typically use .303 ammo with different velocity or bullet shape and weight?

I don't understand why the trajectory is significantly different but am always ready to learn.

Thanks,

Dave

 

The Vickers is not a gun I used or taught on. I did know from methods of assault, that older hands would talk of keeping up the suppressing fire until the assault was close to the objective. I suspect it is barrel length Less likely to be the rifling. I will have to look it up ,now you have brought it up to satisfy my own curiosity.

The Vickers was used for indirect fire against enemy positions at ranges up to 4,500 yards. This plunging fire was used to great effect against road junctions, trench systems, forming up points, and other locations that might be observed by a forward observer, or zeroed in at one time for future attacks, or guessed at by men using maps and experience. Sometimes a location might be zeroed in during the day, and then attacked at night, much to the surprise and confusion of the enemy. New Zealand units were especially fond of this use. A white disc would be set up on a pole near the MMG, and the gunner would aim at a mark on it, knowing that this corresponded to aiming at the distant target. There was a special back-sight with a tall extension on it for this purpose. The only similar weapon of the time to use indirect fire was the German MG 08, which had a separate attachment sight with range calculator.


This last paragraph, was known as fixed lines, where a gun tripod could be set up the gun removed and later set back onto the tripod and fired with left and right arc markers, or set up to fire on a trip flare or surveillance devices

 

The Vickers is not a gun I used or taught on. I did know from methods of assault, that older hands would talk of keeping up the suppressing fire until the assault was close to the objective. I suspect it is barrel length Less likley to be the riflings. I will have to look it up ,now you have brought it up to satisfy my own curiosity.

http://www.weapons.org.uk/smallarmstraining/downloads/aus/01-07-I-39-S-40.pdf

I do not think it was a question of any modifications on the weapon itself but rather to adjust the distance from the intended target. That said, if you point a weapon higher than its optimal range angle you also get a shorter range for the projectiles.

 

Not modifications some weapons are known as 'flat trajectory' others the Vickers being one was a High Trajectory weapon. Sighting at say 600 on the Vickers the trajectory would be higher than other guns where the trajectory would be flatter for the same range setting. I have just dug out some old notes from my lesson plans of all those years ago! To be honest it has been a long time - looking at rise above bore line at a given range, temperature, local and target wind conditions. elevation of target. Harmonization of sights, I can still work that one out, the rest is in a fog of time!

 

my L4A4



and my L4A3

 

Not modifications some weapons are known as 'flat trajectory' others the Vickers being one was a High Trajectory weapon. Sighting at say 600 on the Vickers the trajectory would be higher than other guns where the trajectory would be flatter for the same range setting. I have just dug out some old notes from my lesson plans of all those years ago! To be honest it has been a long time - looking at rise above bore line at a given range, temperature, local and target wind conditions. elevation of target. Harmonization of sights, I can still work that one out, the rest is in a fog of time!

Sorry Wills, but I think that is nonsense! For two different weapons having similar barrel lengths, firing similar ammunition at a similar range and elevation, the trajectory will be identical. You cannot produce a high or low trajectory for two similar bullets of the same weight travelling at the same velocity.

fredleander has already pointed to the answer. the "plunging fire" was produced by the Vickers firing from well behind the line so that the bullets were falling at a steep angle at the end of their trajectory, over the heads of the attacking troops. The Brens, in support of the attack would be firing at a much shorter range and thus a flatter trajectory.

The main reason for the introduction of the Mark VIIIz ammunition for the Vickers in 1938 was to extend the maximum range of this barrage fire from about 2,800 yards of the Mark VII to about 4,500 yards for the boat-tailed Mark VIIIz bullet. The new rear sight range scale was for this purpose. Apart from the boat-tailed bullet which had a better ballistic coefficient, the muzzle velocity of the Mark VIIIz round was actually slightly higher than the normal Mark VII, 2,550 fps compared to 2.440 fps.

Regards
TonyE

 

Tony you may well be right, weapons instructors always talked of using the guns high trajectory (in conjunction with some sight harmonization. with markers or by sight setting) It has been a long time! - Is there not a formula for calibre and barrel length that alters the characteristics of flight for a given round? The barrel length of the Vickers is longer than the Bren, would that alter the flight pattern?


NZ Inf Commander
One of the virtues of the 4500-yard range of the Mark VIIIZ ammunition was that the guns did not always have to sit in the midst of the infantry they were supporting; they could be sited in rear where they would not draw retaliatory fire on the infantry. Also, at the longer range the steeper trajectory enabled them to reach targets which otherwise would have been shielded.


The Mk VIIIz is in the Small Arms Training Manual (amended) as forbidden for rifle/LMG.

Would loved to have fired the Vickers!

 

Tony you may well be right, weapons instructors always talked of using the guns high trajectory (in conjunction with some sight harmonization. with markers or by sight setting) It has been a long time! - Is there not a formula for calibre and barrel length that alters the characteristics of flight for a given round? The barrel length of the Vickers is longer than the Bren, would that alter the flight pattern?!
Hi, Wills - if anything it would flatten the trajectory as a longer barrel (to a certain extent, anyway) would actually increase the muzzle velocity. As you know the projectile trajectory is one of the functions of flight time (gravity). A longer barrel would also usually result in a more stable projectile (higher rotation), again giving longer range because of lack of toppling at the end of its range. Toppling decreases the aerodynamics.

All this is theory. Everything changes with a different cartridge. Take an example: When the Finns developed a sniper rifle they did it the Finnish way, opposite to all others. They built an integrated barrel/silencer combo for their .308 (7.62x51 NATO) Sako rifle. Problem is, silencing is not very effective on projectiles going faster than the sound so they developed a subsonic cartridge for the purpose. With other words, lousy ballistics (read: range characteristics). So what do the Finnish snipers do....?.....Sneak up on their target, of course. Yes, that is the Finnish way.........