You’re not wrong there Tubby !
Oh now I disrespect law officers and soldiers because 2 idiots refused to drop their weapons when a cop ordered them to eh? :lol:
BTW, what was the cop doing on a military base where the soldiers were having operations excersizes? Like I said, that story is so full of holes. :roll: If it did happen though, the soldiers made their biggest mistake in life when the cop ordered them to drop their weapons or when they unthinkingly swung their weapons in his direction by mistake.
In reality, your attitude is a symptom of my not allowing someone to post false information and lies without discrediting rebuttle. Sounds like a personal problem to me.
And Cuts is not a soldier as he states. He has yet to post what service he is in. Perhaps he knows it’s against the law to impersonate an officer of the law or a military personel. Maybe that’s why he has not stated it. :lol:
I think you meant, “Sounds like a personal problem of mine.” You have not posted rebuttle (sic), you have only posted your opinion that someone else is wrong. Rebuttal would involve proof. I would accept a link to a reputable website that supports your point of view as proof, your stated opinion is just that and no more.
Ironman wrote:
“No my boy, it does not occur to me, for after so much blather, if he were a soldier, he would have ALREADY stated what service he were in. If he does so only now after such lengthly blather and stating more than once he is a soldier, it would most obvoiously be a lie. It does not take a genius to figure that one out, now does it?” …
“If it did happen though, the soldiers made their biggest mistake in life when the cop ordered them to drop their weapons or when they unthinkingly swung their weapons in his direction by mistake.”
and again :
“And Cuts is not a soldier as he states. He has yet to post what service he is in. Perhaps he knows it’s against the law to impersonate an officer of the law or a military personel. Maybe that’s why he has not stated it.”
Exactly the type of rubbish I was referring to. YOUR opinion, based on no evidence whatsoever.
Yes or no answer, quite simple, no elaboration needed, I will take your answer as the truth without question or comment whichever way you answer.
“No elaboration needed” sorry we have already heard how
“the “MORONIC” SF boys were on base, being chased by civilian police forces when these guys went for a Bonny-and-Clyde grabbing of their concealed weapons.”
or as you put it
“2 SF got shot in a blue on blue due to having weapons in their vehicle”
if you dont allow him to elaborate how can he be the big “I am.”
Come on guys lets admit it I am an airsofter. Thats right, particularly well informed airsofter with a working knowledge of the Structure of the British military and their history, a knowledge of weapons well above “pub” and a blind loyalty to anything and everything I have read in my John Le Carre, Andy McNab, Chris Ryan, Soldier, Janes Defence, Soldier Of Fortune almanac that every year I get given for Crimbo. :roll:
youre right IRONMAN I am a fraud, I have been found out. But still everything I have stated has been true or substantiated, unlike…
It does not take a genius to figure that one out, now does it?
NO IT DOES NOT. 8)
(it takes, YOU) - brackets provided to assist those that do not comprehend insinuation
Sad, if it really happend.
But incedent like that should anyway leave some traсks somewhere in Internet ? Newsletters, news, discussion etc. ?
Mybe we better take a look at facts, than continue fighting around guess-works ?
So, if such tragedy have place somewhere someday - in newsletters was at leas few words about it ?
Facts in studio, please ! :!:
Hi lads, I’ve got a minute or two spare, who wants to play SPOT THE DIFFERENCE ?
I’ve taken some statements, not quite at random, and you’ve got to see if you can spot any differences.
Take it easy, there’s no time limit, although from some people’s perspective it is apparently very difficult to see any dissimilarity.
Take no notice of the inaccuracies of the statements, they’re waltisms really, just see if you can spot any slight variations in their content or meaning.
There’ll be a prize to anyone who gets them right !
Pair One:
and
Ok ? it’s not as easy as you think you know !
Pair Two:
and
Like I said I’ve only got a couple of minutes so only two pairs, but I don’t want to tax anyone’s brain too much.
Actually, if you’d bothered to read up on the armed forces of the world (at all) you would have found out that in several countries it is completely legal to impersonate a member of the armed forces, while members of the armed forces can get in very hot water for giving out details (e.g. real name, unit and the like) in public due to the terrorist threat.
Judging by his posts to date (particularly IIRC some references to the Falklands) Cuts is from the UK, where this is very much the case. As such, anyone giving such details will probably be a Walt.
I’ve heard a similar story relating to Northern Ireland before, although it seems to be completely unverified so must be treated as suspect. In this case nobody was hurt - but it is plausible and does indicate the potential problems of this sort of work.
http://www.darwinawards.com/personal/personal2000-02.html
Cuts that is out of line, You arent quoting him in context, he didnt mean those things…
Or did he?
All together now say like Vikki Pollard
yes but, no but, yes but, no but, yes but, no but, no I never!
Getting back to the original post.
A light machine gun is to support sections/squads it must be heavy enough to give support fire and light enough to be carried. It s normally a crew served weapon.
A sub machine gun is for troops in the support role or soldiers who have to carry other equipment or their primary role is not to engage the enemy i.e. the pl comd.
Am assault rifle is not a mid point of the SMG or the LMG, it is a class of its own. German research in WW2 found that the rifle 7.96 round was too powerful. They found that most infantry combat ranges were not much more than 300m, and so the rifle cartridge was not cost effective. They produced an excellent weapon for the task they required. Also the German section tactics was for the rifleman to carry vast quantities to feed the ravenous MG42.
The bren is considered to be the best LMG of the war as it provided all that was required from that type of weapon. It was very accurate, (at one time it had a telescopic sight) a good rate of fire, relatively light, and could at a push be fired from the shoulder as it could fire single shot, it had a heavy barrel and so give sustained fire over long periods and a detachable barrel. The disadvantage of the magazine was not noticeable with a trained crew who could change mags between bursts. The BAR was as the name implies a rifle. If was used by the US because that is what they had and it fitted their organisation. The MG42 was a general purpose machine gun not a LMG. Its high rate of fire was a problem. Also do not confuse rate of fire with RPM.
The M1 and M2 are not and never will be assault rifles, they were a replacement for the pistol not the rifle and the best you could say was that they fall into the SMG range.
Agreed SAM and thanks for attempting to keep the peace. 
IRONMAN your double post was deleted.
[b]You guys are starting to go way off topic here. This is my warning. Stay on Topic about WW2 LMG’s. Nothing else. Only weapons that deal with WW2 LMG’s. You want to discuss new weapons or weapons laws start a new post.
Secondly the insults will stop. Grow up and act like adults. As you can see i have no problem locking topics and this one it is running a very fine line.
Bottom line you are starting to piss GEN. SANDWORM off.[/b] 
:evil:
Interesting to note that the Bren evolved into the 7.62mm re-barreled LMG and was in service until the early nineties if memory serves me.
Right.
That your opinion and you have all rights for it.
But let’s take a look at few things, ok ?
MG34. General purpouse machinegun, rignt, but can be used as stacionery mounted machinegun and LMG.
Weight, Eff. range Rate of fire Feeding semiauto
Bren Mk3 8.68 kg 1000? 500 s/pm mag./30/60(?) yes
MG34 (LMG) 11.5 kg 2000m 900 s/pm mag/75, belt 50/250 yes
MG42 (LMG) 11.5 kg 2000m 1300s/pm belt50/250 no
DP/DPM 11.3 kg 1500m 600 s/pm pan mag/47 no
BARM1918A2 8.8 kg 1000m 450/650 sel. mag/20 no
Five most popular machineguns of WWII.
Yes, i agree - MG42 - can’t be negotiated in one row with LMG, but what about MG34 ?
Wight ? Normal for WWII era. Rate of fire (technical rate of fire, by the way, practical rate of fire was about 100-120 shots pet minute for all LMG, 3-5 shots in burst). Semi-auto ? MG34 got that option, and swithching between semi or full auto was just easest - trigger has two hollows, one for semi, another - for full auto.
Accuracy ? I can’t belive that Bren Mk3 was more accurate than MG34 - just by ballistical reasons - barrel lenght, mussle velosity and range of effective fire.
By feeding MG34 was better than Bren mk3 - 75 rounds in magazine or 50/250 rounds in belt, and belt can be feeded from left or right sides of MG 34, great option !
General purpouse machinegun ? Is it meand it can used in turrets, on mounts, in tanks and as LMG ? Bren mk 3 was used in turrets, on mounts, as well as MG34… i can’t see any difference by that reason.
Detachable barrel ? MG34 got it.
I like Bren, i tought bren was one of best LMG during WWII.
And if you voited for Bren as for best WWII LMG - that your right, is it matter of personal look at LMG anyway… Weapon can’t fight on one’s own.
Sir ! I’m sorry, sir ! I will stay in topic, sir ! :oops:
Yes, right.
Same story with MG42 and German Bundeswer.
I offer discuss about “Who is Who ?” in this topic: http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=211&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
Gen. Sandworm, sorry for the double post. It was accidental. Thanks for deleting it, somehow it would not let me. Perhaps the browser cookie got deleted.
Edited by Gen. Sandworm. (The rest of the post was off topic)(BTW no worries)
Preatorian, the term general purpose usually means that it can be used in both the light role, ie from a bipod in close support of, and moving with, troops, or in the sustained fire role in a position from a tripod allowing firing on fixed lines.
The name for that particular weapon within the British Army is the General Purpose Machine Gun or GPMG, pronounced by squaddies as ‘Jimpy.’
However it is a compromise between roles, and sustained fire is limited.
Personally I still consider the best SF MG to be the Vickers, but it is deemed old fashioned and therefore unacceptable to many.
That’s the way things go !