Mg42 greatest weakness

[Los]

Actually even as far back as the early seventies the M60 had the changeable barrel similar to what we carry today. ( I know they were standard issue back in 77 when I first saw one up close) I can check to find out when that change occured. The fifty cal still has the screw in barrel where you have to set headspace and timing after every barrel change also.

Los

[Harold Jones]

As far as I know the 60 always had a quick change barrel. What it didn't have was a handle. To change the barrel you hit the release and pointed the gun to the ground and shook the barrel out. Eventually they got around to issuing asbestos mittens to the assistant gunners so that they could just grab the barrel and pull it out.

[nagy]

So this guy has to wear asbestos mittens all the time or get them on when it's time for barrel changing? I try to imagine what it must be like when they have all the other tasks that require some sort of sleigh of hand and then having these mittens on, poor assistants!

------------------

nagy

[Los]

Easy there Nagy!

Actually the M60 spare barrel bag (which the AG carries) has in it:

One spare M60 barrel.

One asbestos mit.

One gas ring tool.

One cleaning kit.

(you can fit your T&E in there too)

And whatever else you can shoveonto nit

Note that even with the handle it's a good idea to use that mit to avoid burning yourself. Even the MG42 has a mit that came with it. You don't sit there with the mit on, in fact you just use it like a pot holder when necessary.

Note that hot weapons is not the sole purview of the MG. The AK, M16 and other SLRs can get incredibly hot during a firefight. I have burned myself a few times (common occurance with infantrymen). I once had a second degree burn on my neck from an M16. Was kneeling down after consolidating on an OBJ and checking a map when the rfle, leaning on my shoudler, slipped and the muzzle burned my neck. Was a nice scar for a few weeks.

The AK is absolutely horrid in ths regard (most models) since it has a only cheesy little piece of wood over the barrel/gas tube which itself gets pretty hot (Not as efficient a heat deflector as most SLR forward grips).

Note that I'm not talking about plinking on the range but real firing like in a fight two-four mags in quick succession.

Older weapons have this problem too. Reminds me of a funny story: My old team sergeant used to tell us (He was 3 tours Marine in Vietnam) He was getting ready to lead out a LRRP when some cheesedick rear echelon Major wanted to accompnay them. The guy was horrified when he saw all the rounds they were carrying (500 per man). All authoritative-like he picks up the handset to the radio and goes, Son this is how we kill the enemy by getting on this and calling air and arty." To which our supremely confident PFC LRRP leader holds up his M14 and goes, "Sir by the time you reach anyone on that ****in' thing this here rifle is gonna be white-hot." BTW after that misison the major never went anywhere near the field again.

Los

[Herr Jung]

To my knowledge, M60 quick change barrel mechanism was borrowed from the Bren gun (Czech ZGB 1933), but unlike the Bren (with bipod attached to the frame) M60 had its bipod attached to the barrel itself so the gunner had to hold up the MG to keep it from plowing into the ground while he removed the barrel + bipod. So it was probably difficult for the gunner alone to change the barrel (unlike MG34/42). I think this is corrected with the new E3? model.

Asbestos pads were standard issue items for MG34/42 gunners. Looks like yellowish scouring pad with strap. It was often hung in front of the black leather replacement parts pouch (Ersatzstucketasche 34) carried by the gunner. It appears the gunner himself usually did the changing while the assistant handed him the fresh barrel from the barrel container.

HJ

[Tim]

Again regarding the M60, I was just talking to a friend the other day and it seems I was somewhat wrong about the barrel change. What I said was right, but only for the early versions of the M60. Later, around the late sixties, a new barrel which could more easily be unscrewed and which wasn't attached to the bipod and sight was produced in a new version of the M60. But he also told that the real problem isn't that it is hard to change the barrel on the M60 or the Bren gun. The ingenius thing about the MG42's barrel changing system is that it is easy to do while lying down. With the M60 and the Bren gun you had to either turn the gun around or pull the gun backwards so that you could reach the tip of the barrel. This caused the soldiers using either the M60 or the Bren gun in combat to mostly change their barrels after combat instead of during combat. This produces a lot of wear and tear on the barrels rifling because the rifling gets much more worn when the barrel is hot and this in the end greatly effects the precission of the weapon. Of course this is no problem if you have plenty of new barrels. I don't think that the Mg42 would have been a succes if it hadn't had the quick barrel change system bacause the doctrines said the barrel had to be changed for every 180 shots fired. Of course if somebody is assaulting your position you coudn't care less about doctrines, but when it was possible it meant that you could fire sustained for a long period of time without degredation in precision.

[Los]

Not that I wouldn't mind seeing a new LMG to replace the M60, you guys are looking ridiculously way to much into this whole barrel change thing. Even a guy with moderate training in the weapon can change the barrel on an M60 rapidly, whether it's bipod, or tripod mounted,, whether he's laying down, standing up, or sitting at a retaurant with with his feet up on the table. Also keep in mind MGs are fired as crew served weapons, which means you have an AG down there beside you to help out in most all cases. Sure in the movies you have one guy parading around firing the MG with one hand and feeding the belt himself, but there's usually someone with you to help out. It's more effective that way.

Los

[Harold Jones]

LOS I was under the impression that the M60 was being replaced by a ground mount version of the M240.

[Guest R Cunningham]

Mr Jones,

It is. It took forever, but the Army finally figured out it was better to buy a proven weapon, the M240, than to keep dicking around with the M60. The brits have had this one for quite a while, I think they call it the "gimpy" (from GPMG). It is a 1959 design. The model we are fielding is the M240B. I'm not sure what the differences are from the original version. We've had them on the M1 since the beginning as Coax and Loader's MGs.

In relation to the original theme of the thread, the M240 uses the feed system of the MG42.

[Harold Jones]

Thanks for the answer. I loved the M240, it was reliable as all heck. I don't know that I ever experienced a mechanical malfunction on one. I assume that the m240b has a shoulder stock, adjustable sights, a longer pistol grip and a bipod attached. The M240C which is used on the Bradley is identical to the M240 that is used on tanks except that it is setup for righthand feed instead of lefthand.

Other countries know the M240 as the FN MAG. Just to keep this marginally on topic. The M240 has an adjustable gas port that allows the cyclic rate to remain nearly constant as the gas ports get fouled by carbon. It has three progressively larger holes marked one to three. When you notice your rate of fire slowing you can remove the barrel and change to the next larger hole. In theory this will allow you to maintain a cyclic rate of 900 rpm for quite awhile without extensive cleaning of the gun. Of course most people just set it to three at the beginning so they can get the highest rate possible. I don't know what the rate is when the gas port is at maximum but there is a noticable difference in the sound when it fires.

------------------

If something cannot be fixed by hitting it or by swearing at it, it wasn't worth saving anyway.

[This message has been edited by Harold Jones (edited 10-13-99).]