The Best Light Machine Gun.

[Twitch1]

Wow what a bizarre collection of minutia folks. No Army trains its personnel to accurately attempt precision targeting at 600 meters outside of snipers. If a grunt was to attempt to lay back and pop off rounds at that range your Gunny would kick you in the ass and tell you to advance to a potent distance.

Any round that can travel 600 meters has the capability of penetration, aimed or stray, resulting in death or injury. Any cartridge will travel that far. 5.56s will go a mile. Pistol cartridge SMGs are not meant to be accurate above 1-200 meters max. No one ever raised their SMG sites to max and attempted to pop off rounds a a quarter mile or more.

Point shooting is where weapons like this come into play. In fact any battle rifle can be point fired for results in combat. Unless you are in a trench somewhere completely shielded you have no time to squeeze of rounds at distant targets unless you have a properly scoped arm or something with knock down power like an 8mm Mauser or .30-06 or today’s .308. To attempt long range accuracy is frivilous in the heat of battle for the most part.

In jungle visual surroundings there are few shots taken at anything over 100 meters simply due to the fact that visibility is nil. The rounds will go much farther but they are unaimed. The concept of automatic rifles and SMGs is partly spray and pray to unleash firpower volume not buffalo rifle bullseye marksmanship.

Comparison of projectile ballistics is just silly as a determining factor of one arm over another. They all kill if you put the rounds in the proper place. None are so slow as to be less that lethal.

This whole thread sounds like some is attempting to peruse a book on weapon statitistics and decide supremacy of one weapon over another having never fire them or even having been in a real world combat situation.

[Topor]

Hang on a minute; we’re talking about MG’s here, not rifles.
MG’s are generally used on the “beaten zone” principle, rather than individually aimed shots.
The LSW may be proving useful for single aimed shots out to 600yds but that ISN’T its intended mode of operation.

Back in the 70’s, I fired the SLR effectively to 300yds whilst serving & out to 600yds with my privately owned one until Hungerford was used as an excuse to remove my Rights - I’m talking iron sights here, not 'scoped(mind you “barn door” & “couldn’t hit” apply with my ageing eyes today )

[Twitch1]

About everything has been brought into this thread though. And LMGs or even HMGs are no exception. The iron sights are guides only not specific “pick off” accessories. The whole MG concept is to direct a high rate of fire and eliminate enemies by bursts, sprays, and hosing the stream of fire. It keeps heads down while your buds flank and it kills anyone dumb enough to venture into the field of fire.

Perhaps WW I static positions in place for weeks on end could have been zeroed in by gunners familiar with the field of fire to be deadly accurate with a quick burst to pick off one soldier. How often did that occur? That is valueless when several hundred enemy troops pour out of the trenches and advance on you.

When tracers are used it is very simple to direct fire at a target in the distance. Sights are superfluous.

Most assuredly LMGs or any weapon is no good beyond visual range like in jungle surroundings.

The Viking, my pal and M-60 handler never squinted through sights; he had both eyes open and sighted down the barrel for quick and effective fire response. More often he hip shot it. As far as this type of combat field and the point of 600 meter accuracy the point is mute. In ambush in a field of fire that could reach 600 meters it is stupid to open up that far away. You give up the element of surprise and deadlyness if you open up. You wait till the enemy is about 150 meters away and open up with a pair of MGs positioned so as to be able to cover each other.

Fighter aircraft in WW 2 had electronic gunsights with which to assist aiming their .30 and .50 MGs. Even so there were almost no kills made from 600 meters even though the rounds were deadly at a far greater range.

The intellectual pros and cons of various scenarios can be entertaining but long range LMG, or any non-scoped weapon, accuracy other than by volume of fire is false.

[Cuts]

@Twitch1

About everything has been brought into this thread though. And LMGs or even HMGs are no exception. The iron sights are guides only not specific “pick off” accessories. The whole MG concept is to direct a high rate of fire and eliminate enemies by bursts, sprays, and hosing the stream of fire. It keeps heads down while your buds flank and it kills anyone dumb enough to venture into the field of fire.

I know this isn’t USMC doctrine, perhaps it is a US Army idea ?

@Twitch1

When tracers are used it is very simple to direct fire at a target in the distance. Sights are superfluous.

However sights are necessary to put the rds onto the tgt in the first place, just walking the fire towards the tgt wastes valuable ammo and violates Rule Three - only the adoo need to be receiving rds.
We teach the importance of controlled fire - short accurate bursts. It has been proven time and again that this system works better than throwing lead alles uber die platz.

Remember tracer is a double-edged sword, it indicates the gun psn as well as the tgt.

@Twitch1

Most assuredly LMGs or any weapon is no good beyond visual range like in jungle surroundings.

I realise that some countries fail to teach indirect fire but it is a vital tool when MGs are used in the SF role.
That the gunner can’t see the tgt is immaterial as long as those controlling the guns can.

@Twitch1

The Viking, my pal and M-60 handler never squinted through sights; he had both eyes open and sighted down the barrel for quick and effective fire response. More often he hip shot it. As far as this type of combat field and the point of 600 meter accuracy the point is mute. In ambush in a field of fire that could reach 600 meters it is stupid to open up that far away. You give up the element of surprise and deadlyness if you open up. You wait till the enemy is about 150 meters away and open up with a pair of MGs positioned so as to be able to cover each other.

Mixing an ambush with other types of MG fire is as nonsensical as using a sniper with his primary wpn in CQB.

@Twitch1

Fighter aircraft in WW 2 had electronic gunsights with which to assist aiming their .30 and .50 MGs. Even so there were almost no kills made from 600 meters even though the rounds were deadly at a far greater range.

I’ve not heard of these electronic sights, I thought they generally used reflector sights.
Do you have a link please ?

@Twitch1

The intellectual pros and cons of various scenarios can be entertaining but long range LMG, or any non-scoped weapon, accuracy other than by volume of fire is false.

Accuracy is everything - whether in point fire or beaten zone, the rds must go where intended.

[Twitch1]

Of course sights are necessary to give a gunner an general idea of a sight picture but in this thread people were talking about pick off style accuracy at 600 meters with non-scoped weapons and that is just impossible to do on a regular basis beyond dumb luck.

An MG is not a surgical weapon it is a suppression weapon. No one can’t see individual soldiers at 600 meters unless light is perfect and background contrast is excellent. This is rare especially when the enemy is trying to stay concealedand is moving. You may target a bunker, pillbox, vehicle or mortar launch site but at 600 meters no one is going to use any non-scoped weapon to accurately pop off an enemy soldier. You can see the fire coming out of a pillbox at that range but you cannot discern individual soldiers.

The point is you just don’t see individual human forms at 600 meters in most combat scenarios and automatic weapons of any type preclude a constant, accurate sight picture at nearly any range due to recoil, muzzle climb and flash. No one uses unscoped LMGs in an attempt to squeeze off just a couple rounds at that range thinking they are going to drop a target. No one. Doing that is a waste of the firepower potential of the weapon.

[2nd_of_foot]

You could say that one of the falling of the Bren was that it was very accurate. I was told by an old and bold that the sniper scope for the L something or other (303, I have used so many Ls they all merge into each other) was first used on the Bren. It goes against the grain to have my gunner not fire aimed bursts. Area fire is for the SF in the attack and defence not the section fire support.

I would agree that it would be difficult (very) to locate an individual at 600m, but that why the gun has a beaten zone and section fire from the rest. The third battle drill is locating the enemy, and the fourth is winning the firefight. So unless you have located them there is no need to engage the horizon.

I tried firing a GPMG from the hip once out to ranges of 400m +, I had great difficulty seeing the tracer against the sky and the round hit some place in the English channel.

[Topor]

“I’ve not heard of these electronic sights, I thought they generally used reflector sights.
Do you have a link please ?”

I assume the Gyroscopic gun sight is the item.

As far as individual aiming & LMG’s go, I personally see the role of the LMG as suppressing a specific target, whether it is a single opponent, trench or other compact area; the LMG has insufficient capacity for much more than this.
If you wish to suppress a body of men, a trench SYSTEM or a forming up area, then you are out of the bounds of the LMG & looking at something like the MAG58/M240.
A bipod mounted LMG can’t afford to fart around, walking rounds onto a target - especially one that is magazine fed.

[Man_of_Stoat]

An old soldier I know (one of THEM I believe) was in the Middle East and used to lie a few BRENS in a line and snipe the Arabs with them at 500-600yds…