The Light Machine gun one being that fires standard rifle amunition (as opposed to pistol rounds) and being fed from a box magazine was pretty popular during WW2, with most forces fielding one, e.g BAR, Bren, The Soviet record player, i forget the name seems to have gone completly out of fashion to be replaced with hot rod assult rifles and belt fed guns. I was wondering why this was. Certinally very successfull as the squad weopen, but now no more. Have thing changed that much, whats the advantage of a magazine fed gun, its not like the technolagy wasnt there in 1939 to build a belt fed gun but instead magazine types where favoured? Kev
With a belt fed gun you don't have to stop every 20 or 30 rounds to reload. Germans used MG 34 and 42 as squad weapons they were belt fed with a disintegrating belt. It seems everyone else had fabric(?) belts. Not to clever in a squad but ok for a fixed position. Prhaps it has something to do with that. A 30 round magizine was handier until they copied the German idea. That's my idea, maybe wrong.
Pluses and minuses?? Just some speculation. Magazine: Pro's:Rounds protected?. More portable? simpler feed? Cons:Magazine itself prone to damage, (seems in Hogg books that bent lugs cause problems for many magazine designs) Problems of spring tension etc.(particularily on drums like the DP) Belts: Pros. More rounds between reloads. (big pro??) Cons: Easier to get dirt into mechanism, high rate of fire requires barrel changing/cooling, higher wear to all components and need for alternate barrels to be carried. Swings and roundabouts again innit? Seems a lot of modern kit can use magazines as well as belts depending on circumstance?? (precedent set by MG34/42 with belt or 'snail' option?) I suppose assault rifles (to some extent)did the task that LMG's had done quite well, look at the sheer firepower difference between a platoon in eg. Vietnam and one in ww2. I reckon owen's 'handier' answers it quite well. Horses for courses.
One of my mates in the greenjackets says they used to use the mag fed GPMG in Northern Island I guess so that belts arnt discarded and given to the IRA and I guess there more ready for a speedy response?? Never thought about dirt in the works thanks VP. Kev
GPMG belts are disintegrating link, so after being fired you have a pile of empty cases and a pile of little black links. To make a mag for a GPMG you can attatch a water-bottle carrier to the gun. That was to stop the belt flapping about and breaking. We sometimes had them to. Made them ourselves.
The magazine Bren was more popular in the desert as it kept out the sand and dust. Advantages and disadvantages occur in most things, that is probably why the previous saying "horses for courses" is quite appropriate.
I know that in the case of the MG42, its extremely high rate of fire caused frequent overheating of the barrels.
All belt fed MGs in the sustained fire role are suseptable to overheating barrels and even LMGs like the Bren will overheat and require a barrel change. At least with belt fed you can put 200 rounds through the MG without a re-load and on the modern disintergrating belts you can add several belts togtether meaning appart from other stoppages the only limit to the rounds you put down is the heat of the barrel. Magazine fed LMGs on the other hand are much better for patroling as the rounds are protected from twigs, branches and thorns in 'close country'. The problems are that you get a stoppage every 30 rounds, and the spring looses strength when stored loaded for too long, something that the Bren got round nicely with it's gravity aided feed. I've seen GPMGs with the rounds stored in water bottle pouches, but did you know that there were 50 round drums on issue, but nobody liked them as they were a pain to load and I'm not too sure if they are still available. As with all weapon systems, they are good at certain things and not everything. The FN Minimi or SAW if you are american gets round this as it can be belt but also accepts the standard M-16 or SA80 magazine so you get an LMG you can carry on a patrol and still put down some serious firepower if needed. Is everyone happy? No, because it's only 5.56 when every soldier wants his section weapon to be 7.62. :mellow:
To make a mag for a GPMG you can attatch a water-bottle carrier to the gun. That was to stop the belt flapping about and breaking. We sometimes had them to. Made them ourselves. ...and baked bean tin "feeders"! Ahhh! Them were the days! Dave.
The Light Machine gun one being that fires standard rifle amunition (as opposed to pistol rounds) and being fed from a box magazine was pretty popular during WW2 ... ... seems to have gone completly out of fashion to be replaced with hot rod assult rifles and belt fed guns. Oh, I don't know about that. The Bren LMG soldiered on for many years after WW2 into (at least) the late 1980's in certain roles. The current British LSW, though not too popular (well, it wasn't when I knew it anyway!), is also mag fed. Dave.
Most of the West now use the FN Minimi as the section automatic weapon. Similarly the FN MAG58 (as we call it here) is the most commonly used GPMG. Both weapons are belt fed (disintigrating link). In Australia the Minimi issued with 100 and 200 round cloth/plastic magazines into which you can load the link. The Americans used to pack 100 round plastic magazines for the Minimi with link in the factory and issue them already loaded. As plant-pilot says the Minimi also accepts the M16 mag....but unfortunately not the mag of the Austeyr. As he also says a lot of people are not satisfied that the Minimi provides enough hitting power.....particularly in the urban environment.....and depending on the operation you may find an infantry section will carry a GPMG as well as a Minimi.
The Light Machine gun one being that fires standard rifle amunition (as opposed to pistol rounds) and being fed from a box magazine was pretty popular during WW2, with most forces fielding one, e.g BAR, Bren, The Soviet record player, i forget the name seems to have gone completly out of fashion to be replaced with hot rod assult rifles and belt fed guns. I was wondering why this was. Certinally very successfull as the squad weopen, but now no more. Have thing changed that much, whats the advantage of a magazine fed gun, its not like the technolagy wasnt there in 1939 to build a belt fed gun but instead magazine types where favoured? Kev The Russian job, you're probably think of the PPSh 7.62mm with a 71 round mag.
One of my mates in the greenjackets says they used to use the mag fed GPMG in Northern Island I guess so that belts arnt discarded and given to the IRA and I guess there more ready for a speedy response?? Never thought about dirt in the works thanks VP. Kev As far as I was aware the IRA had possession of M 16's and M60's firing 5.56 so odds are the clips wouldn't have been much use unless they could get hold of a GPMG.
All belt fed MGs in the sustained fire role are suseptable to overheating barrels and even LMGs like the Bren will overheat and require a barrel change. At least with belt fed you can put 200 rounds through the MG without a re-load and on the modern disintergrating belts you can add several belts togtether meaning appart from other stoppages the only limit to the rounds you put down is the heat of the barrel. Magazine fed LMGs on the other hand are much better for patroling as the rounds are protected from twigs, branches and thorns in 'close country'. The problems are that you get a stoppage every 30 rounds, and the spring looses strength when stored loaded for too long, something that the Bren got round nicely with it's gravity aided feed. I've seen GPMGs with the rounds stored in water bottle pouches, but did you know that there were 50 round drums on issue, but nobody liked them as they were a pain to load and I'm not too sure if they are still available. As with all weapon systems, they are good at certain things and not everything. The FN Minimi or SAW if you are american gets round this as it can be belt but also accepts the standard M-16 or SA80 magazine so you get an LMG you can carry on a patrol and still put down some serious firepower if needed. Is everyone happy? No, because it's only 5.56 when every soldier wants his section weapon to be 7.62. :mellow: Agree with PP on the Gimpy. The 5.56 might be a lighter round and you can carry more of it, and the manufacturers say that the 5.56 has adequate stopping ability citing the M16. Even going on to say that the 7.62 is overkill siting instances in NI where the round hit it's target but also went through walls after doing it. In a contact situation, with enemy coming at one I would prefer something I know has the stopping power. The powers that be say the SA80/LSW are the dogs, in some instances yes, but I still miss the SLR. Horses for courses sums it up.
