Machine Gunners in Europe played an important role in the European war. Especially on the Western Front. Machine gunners were to give supporting fire, take out the enemy to the last man, and sometimes to fight to the last round. But most machine gunners were nerviced going into action because of the life period after you shot the first round. Usually when a machine gunner fired the first round from the gun he or she would be shot within 30 seconds. This did not always happen thoe.
M1919A4 .30 Caliber Air Cooled Machine Gun
This was probably one of the most common machine guns for the US allies. Very portable and was lighter then other machine guns in World War 2.
OPERATION: Fully Automautic, recoil operated, air-cooled
CALIBER: .30 (7.62mm)
MUZZLE VELOCITY: 853.4mps (2800 fps)
CAPACITY: 250-round belt
WEIGHT:18.5 kg (41lbs) with tripod
OVERALL LENGTH: 104.1 cm (41in.)
RATE of FIRE: 400to550 rounds per minute
EFFECTIVE RANGE: 1000m (1100 yds)
If you have any information on any more american machine guns please post.
I will post more information later.
Are you talking about offensive or defensive MG?
A defensive MG is normally well prepared in a weapon pit, bunker or other solid defensive position with pre-determined and clear fields of fire, and normally interlocking with other MG’s in adjoining units over the killing ground. Taking a properly prepared defensive MG position by infantry attack is probably the most difficult and costly infantry attack action in routine infantry tactics. A properly sited defensive MG crew can last for days, or years as in WWI, depending upon the terrain and the opportunity for flanking or infiltrating tactics. Infantry attacking it frontally might have a life of 30 seconds, or about 2 or 3 seconds in a lot of cases.
Offensive MG tactics depend on whether its LMG, MMG (like the .30 cal) or HMG.
As the LMG is the main weapon of a rifle section (?squad in US - roughly ten to a dozen riflemen normally led by a corporal) it moves with and is an integral part of the section. It can be brought into action immediately to support the section, while the riflemen also support and defend the LMG.
Fire and movement supported by an LMG is one of the most basic infantry section tactics in attack, and for that matter in unprepared defence such as an ambush. (Standard Australian tactics in Vietnam were in fact to defend an ambush by turning towards the enemy and charging it, with the LMG playing its part in support of the riflemen.) A competent section shouldn’t put its LMG into a position where it can be wiped out in 30 seconds, or even 30 minutes. It was, and probably still is, drilled into troops in some armies that if the section tactics were sound and they all got killed, the last one to die should be the machine gunner as the gun must be defended to the last to preserve section firepower. I always thought this was a most commendable principle, and one which could not be reinforced too often, but my opinion wasn’t entirely objective as I was a machine gunner. 
MMG’s may or may not be section weapons but they are probably platoon weapons with the same principles applying.
7.62mm is .308, not .30.
During the war(sorry for the ‘Uncle Albert’ line), the British used the Bren (magazine fed) light machine gun as a section fire support weapon (much as described by Rising Sun).
Generally, as a section moved in tactical bounds, the Bren would remain stationary usually where it offered enfilading fire support from a defilade position. As the rifle group maneouvered and subsequently ‘went firm’ the LMG would then be brought forward to whichever flank offered the greater tactical advantage in any ensuing firefight, thus enabling the rifle group to continue on with its next bound and so on and so on.
Later, the Bren was considered to be too accurate, and was replaced by the belt fed LMG. The vibration of this weapon widened the ‘beating zone’ of the fall of rounds, and so was considered more efective. However, the average gunner soon learned to adjust the weapons gas regualtor, thus slowing down, slightly, the weapons rate of fire which allowed him to ‘double tap’ (i.e. fire off two rounds a a time), improve his accuracy, and conserve ammuntion. How frequently this practise was undertaken would depend on the tactical situation.
THE RIFLE SQUAD (Authorized Strength - 12):
Twelve infantrymen formed the rifle squad, the basic combat unit of the Army. Eleven of these soldiers were armed with the .30-caliber, semi-automatic M1 Garand rifle; one man carried a fully automatic Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) that fired the same ammunition as the M1. A staff sergeant (squad leader) was in charge of the squad, and he was assisted by a sergeant (assistant squad leader). While both NCOs (Non-Commissioned Officers) were considered “shooters” they also had major duties to perform in leading the squad as a whole or parts of it, when the squad was divided into teams.
In both defensive and offensive operations, the squad’s actions were geared to the BAR, which provided the squad’s primary firepower. Two of the squad’s riflemen were assigned to support the BAR gunner, one as an assistant gunner and one as an ammunition bearer. In combat, the squad leader and his assistant directed the actions of seven riflemen and the three-man BAR team.
THE RIFLE PLATOON (Authorized Strength - 41):
Three rifle squads and a small headquarters cell together comprised the infantry rifle platoon, which was commanded by a lieutenant – for as long as he survived. In addition to the platoon commander the headquarters was authorized a technical sergeant (platoon sergeant), a staff sergeant (platoon guide) and two messengers (privates), who were also called “runners.”
The rifle squads were numbered 1 - 3, as were the rifle platoons.
It was at the platoon level and above that “attachments” to the authorized strength and structure were commonly found. Each platoon normally was augmented by a medical aidman from the Regimental Medical Detachment. A mortar observer or observation team from the company’s weapons platoon or the battalion’s heavy mortar platoon might be attached for specific missions. In a similar fashion one or both of the company’s two light machine gun (air-cooled .30 caliber) teams or a heavy machine gun section (two water-cooled .30 caliber machine guns) might be attached to the platoon from the battalion’s heavy weapons company. The company commander also had five 3-man antitank rocket (“bazooka”) teams at his disposal, and he attached them to platoons as he saw fit. Under more rare conditions, engineers from the division’s engineer combat battalion might be attached.
http://www.trailblazersww2.org/divisionhistory/foster_infantry_structure.htm
My understanding is that the US ranks of sergeant and staff sergeant as squad leaders equated to lance-corporal or corporal in the British and Australian armies.
Same tactic in Australian Army in WWII, and probably with Americans with BAR.
Unlike the .30 MMG’s, the Bren (and probably BAR) had the advantage of being able to be fired fairly accurately from the hip which was very handy in jungle and rapid advance as it allowed the section LMG to maintain suppressing fire while advancing with the section. If the No.2 was willing, he could also act as an elevated bipod by holding the bipod or allowing the No. 1 to rest the gun on his shoulder, which was useful in getting a more stable gun platform for dealing with Japanese snipers in trees.
Never even seen one fired, but from people who have used them the Vickers had a strong following as being very accurate and able to do a small box barrage at ranges out to, from memory, about 4,000 to 5,000 yards. Could also be used for indirect fire. Being water cooled, it didn’t have the problem of overheating barrels which plagued air cooled MG’s which made the latter not very good in heavy defence where constant firing was necessary.
The belt-fed LMG could be converted to the sustained-fire role (to fire on fixed lines etc.) by the use of a tripod and changing barrels when overheating. Albeit a more versatile weapon, from all accounts it was never as effective as the Vickers in this role.
The problem with relying on changing barrels is that (a) accuracy drops off, and other problems are more likely, as they heat and (b) the point at which the barrel needs to be changed will usually be at the critical point of a battle.
For static (base) defence water cooled is a better option, but moving in the field requires air cooled as lugging gallons of water around can’t be justified.
Yes, absolutely. 3 Para used the GPMG (Belt-fed LMG) in the SF role, during the attack on Mount Longdon, Falklands. The tripods and spare barrels were more portable than as would have been the Vickers, but they sill suffered from all of the drawbacks as described by Rising Sun.
For the Film-buffs wanting to see a good demonstration of the Vickers firing DF (defensive fire) missions I would recommend Too Late The Hero: starring Michael Caine and Cliff Robertson. As the two reluctant heroes emerge from the jungle, they have to zig-zag accross several hundred yards of cleared ground to reach their base, all the time under fire from the Japanese lining the jungle perimeter. The base commander calls on his Vickers’ gun teams to give covering fire, which is delivered on fixed lines of indirect fire, the trajectory of the shots being well above the heads of the two fugitives.
Timber felling with a Bren. A BAR could probably do the same, but I doubt that a .30 MMG, air cooled or not, could be fired hand-held with the necessary accuracy.
1942-12-28. PAPUA. BY EXPERIENCE ALLIED TROOPS HAVE LEARNED TO TAKE NO CHANCES WITH ENEMY TREE TOP SNIPERS. EVERY TREE TOP THAT COULD HOUSE SNIPERS WAS SPRAYED WITH HUNDREDS OF ROUNDS FROM AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. ONE BREN GUNNER VARIED THE TREATMENT WHEN HE SIGHTED A SNIPER. USING THIS EXTREMELY ACCURATE AUSTRALIAN-MADE WEAPON HE FIRED SEVERAL BURSTS AT THE TOP OF A COCANUT TREE CONCENTRATING HIS FIRE AT A SPOT SIX FEET FROM THE TOP. THE WEIGHT OF THE SNIPER CAUSED THE TREE TOP TO BREAK AND HE WAS KILLED WHEN HE HIT THE GROUND 60 FEET BELOW. THIS PHOTO SHOWS SNIPER AND THE TOP PORTION OF THE TREE LYING ON THE GROUND. AT THE TOP OF THE SNIPER’S OUTSTRETCHED RIGHT HAND IS HIS BROKEN RIFLE.
Now we get into the calibre terminology minefield. You are both in fact correct, believe it or not.
There are 25.4 mm in an inch. 7.62/25.4 = 0.3
.30" and 7.62mm are measurements across the lands of the rifling, .308" is the measurement across the grooves, and therefore the nominal bullet diameter. Some calibres quote the land-land dimension, some the groove-groove, and others bear little resemblance to any nominal figure (particularly pistol cartridges, e.g. .38 special equals .357 inch nominal diameter, .44 Magnum equals .429 nominal diameter).
Also note: 7.62 NATO and 7.62 x 54R / 7.62 x 39 do not have the same nominal bullet diameter (.308 versus .310 and sometimes larger)
Further: .30M2 = 7.62x63mm in European parlance
Mail Call: Browning M1919A4 .30 cal MG
http://www.history.com/media.do?action=clip&id=mc_a4_broadband
includes clip of A4 being fired from hip
Mail Call: Browning M2 .50 cal MG
http://www.history.com/media.do?action=clip&id=mc_ma_dukes_broadband
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytlxxGSmdxw
Mail Call: BAR - Browning Automatic Rifle
http://www.history.com/media.do?action=clip&id=mc_bar_broadband
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEo8yRiDU0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ieh1GMSZ_o
It’s getting on for 40 years since I’ve tried it, but my recollection is that the only non-issue 7.62mm round that Australian issue 7.62mm weapons could fire was .308W.
On trying to find out if my memory was right, I found an Australian Army armourer’s article which confirms that Man of Stoat is perfectly correct that .308 and .30 are the same .
Some common examples of this differentiation in calibre are the .308 Winchester and the .243 Winchester. The .308 Winchester is in reality a standard .30 calibre cartridge. .308 rifles have a bore diameter of .300" and a groove/bullet diameter of .308". (Both dimensions are identical to the earlier .30-06 and .300 Magnum.)
The .243 Winchester is a similar case and rifles in this caliber have a groove/bullet diameter of .243". Both the .243 and .308 were named for their groove diameter rather than the more traditional bore diameter. This method of nomenclature became popular after the 1950’s and many, but not all, cartridges developed since that time have been named for their groove/bullet diameter.
Bren Mk 1 Gun
“The Bren (from ‘Brno, the Czechoslovakian town of design, and Enfield’, the location of the British Royal Small Arms Factory), usually called the Bren Gun, was a series of squad automatic weapon/light machine guns adopted by Britain in the 1930s and used in various roles into the 1980s. While it is best known for its role as the British and Commonwealth forces primary infantry light machine gun (LMG) in World War II, it was also used in Korea and saw service throughout the later half of the 20th century including the Falklands War and the 1991 Operation Granby / Gulf War.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvFM3rES-h8
WW2 Re-enactment Bren Gun Blank firer SWB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UckoJ7qspXU
Bren LMG
British BREN LMG .303 british cal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-Eg4nqFbUI
Finding the Lewis Gun (approx. 24 min.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgBm5HBXx3I
BSA, based in Birmingham, are still producing small arms, George, but they’re generally better known here for their motorbikes - affectionately known as ‘Beezers’
Hi 32Bravo,
Yes, one of my Lee-Enfields (SMLE No 1 Mk III) was made at a BSA owned factory outside of Birmingham in Shirley, England in 1940… Beautiful rifle.
I didn’t know that BSA still made motorcycles. What about Norton, another famous British motorcycle?
Official site of Norton Motorcycles
http://www.nortonmotorcycles.com/
Norton Motorcycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_(motorcycle))
Norton motorcycles from 1970 to present day
http://www.bikez.com/brand/norton_motorcycles.php
Birmingham Small Arms Company
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Small_Arms_Company
BSA motorcycles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:BSA_motorcycles
List of BSA motorcycles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BSA_motorcycles
BSA motorcycles from 1970 to present day
http://www.bikez.com/brand/bsa_motorcycles.php
BSA Motorcycles
http://www.vintagebike.co.uk/Bike%20Directories/BSA%20Bikes/BSA%20index.htm
Yes, George, the Norton was a favourite, particularly the ‘Commando’! 
I’m not certain of the facts, but I think they were experiencing a resurgence a few years back? :neutral:
Only ever fired the Lee Enfield .303 once. I was more of an L42 man, when it came to bolt-action rifles. However, somebody dragged a few .303’s out, from goodness knows where, one day when we were playing about on the ranges. It was an excellent section (Squad) rifle.
The British ‘Musketry’ (what a quaint term) skills were found to be extremely inadequate when they came up against the Boers, at the end of the 19th Century. Marksmanship became a part of the culture of the British Infantry (and remains so to this day). The ‘Toms’ proved how they had benefited from this on the road to and, indeed, at Mons, not to mention subsequent battles of both world wars. In the hands of the Toms, the .303 was indeed a lethal weapon.
Just out of curiosity - do you happen to have a Bren or B.A.R. ? 
Hi 32Bravo,
Yes, the Norton was revived apparently in Oregon, USA. First as restorations then as new production models (as of 2005).
Official site of Norton Motorcycles
http://www.nortonmotorcycles.com/
Norton Motorcycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_(motorcycle))
I don’t have a Bren or BAR, but I know a business associate who owns a BAR. He has a “class III” dealers license (for owning fully automatic weapons). I only have a “collector of curios and relics” licence (for buying 50 year old + designed military firearms including semi-auto).
But, I have fired fully automatic weapons before (M-16 and modified AR-15).
Used the AR15 Colt Armalite, as we called it, in Malaya, George. Nice weapon, but I preferred something a little heavier in my hands. Probably psychological as much as anything, but one wanted something with a bit of ‘stopping-power’. As well as the standard issue weaponry, another favourite with us Brits, in the jungle, was the Winchester pump-action shotgun. As I’m sure that you’re aware, Jungle fighting can become ‘up-close and personal’.
Naturally, we had the GPMG(General Purpose Machine Gun), of which we have already spoken. However, the up-and-coming favourite, particularly for its lightness, is the ‘Minimi’ Light Machine Gun. As weight is all important in the bush, being that one has to ‘hump’ everything about on ones back, it isn’t difficult to see why this is so popular.
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/minimi.htm
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_mg.htm
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/hmg.htm
The only thing I shoot these days, though, is the traditional, English longbow.
Thanks for the links 32Bravo,
The M-16 / AR-15 are pretty light handling weapons with pretty low recoil compared to heavier 7.62 NATO caliber weapons. I remember cutting a small sapling in half with a burst from a modified AR-15 once while shooting with an acquaintence years ago.
I have an Ithaca M37 12 ga pump-action riot gun. A nasty weapon up close. One of my brothers also had one and I remember that he once blew a 3 1/2 inch square wood post in half with one round of 00 buckshot. He was probably no more than a couple yards/meters away from the target at the time.
The L7 / L8 GPMG (British MAG 58) is a very reliable weapon from what I’ve read. IIRC, it’s design shares a lot with the BAR.
Now that sounds like an interesting hobby, shooting the English longbow. Do you attend medieval tournaments?