This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).
Latest 20:15 by Refleks
Latest 19:52 by Refleks
Latest 18:45 by Red7272
Latest 26-Sep by Farmplinker
Latest 16:48 by JesseH1234
Latest 22-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 21-Nov by autogun
Latest 20-Nov by Farmplinker
Latest 19-Nov by taschoene
Latest 10-Nov by tomo_pauk
Latest 7-Nov by tidusyuki
Latest 6-Nov by tidusyuki
Latest 5-Nov by TonyDiG
Latest 2-Nov by QuintusO
Latest 30-Oct by Galland5
Latest 28-Oct by autogun
Latest 28-Oct by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 28-Oct by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 27-Oct by Farmplinker
Latest 27-Oct by renatohm
Latest 26-Oct by roguetechie
Latest 25-Oct by DavidPawley
Latest 25-Oct by autogun
Latest 24-Oct by Mr. T (MrT4)
The Dover devil was a 3 lug triangular pattern which has many advantages, possibly especially for large caliber guns.
The biggest reason we don't see it more is, put bluntly, most of the Free world is still pretty shockingly committed to using a 50 bmg design that's a century old. (Aka before rotating multilug bolts had established themselves as one of the better ways to do things)
Most if not all of China's 12.7x108 guns for their own military are also multilug rotating belt as well to include some of their newest ultralight infantry HMG's in development now.
There's most definitely not an issue with doing large caliber guns that way, we in the west have basically just stopped actually Fielding new designs in this class for the best part of a century.
JMB knew what he was doing when he designed the M2HB. The only real update to it was having a barrel that could be replaced without having to headspace it. And that was only because of the crappiness of machining in the "good old days".
Yep, knew it was one of the reason. The army have been trying to replace the M2 so many times yet they still end up with only doing upgrades for the Ma Deuce. Wonder why the Dover Devil failed.
Not much info about the chinese lightweight MG yet. i think it uses some sort of direct gas and recoil operation hybrid.
It's just a simple case of "if it's not broken don't fix it".
Guess it also has something to do with how there's a lot of unused replacement parts for it lying around since WW2 maybe.
I think that the M2HB has survived because:
1. It functions well enough to be not worth the cost of changing for reliability reasons, and:
2. The performance of the gun and ammo is good enough to be not worth the cost of changing for performance reasons.
Kord has multi-lug rotary bol; i do not have pic of the bolt handy, but here's an image of its barrel breech area..
and here's the CIS 50 bolt
Apart from lighter weight, what features could a newer gun possess? Higher rate of fire? Dual feed? Greater reliability or ease of maintenance?
Lighter weight is no advantage for what is almost always a vehicle mounted weapon
Higher rate of fire is unnecessary
Dual feed is redundant when you have no need to choose between AP and HE.
The M2 is reliable enough so why change it?
Yeah that kinda worked when our adversaries weren't pumping out 18.5 kg 12.7x108 guns like they're going out of style that can be fired off the bipod and etc.
Especially when "our response" is paying FN to "lightweight" qcb m2's using the same strategy that worked oh so we'll for the m240L and mk48...
The m2 is a perfect example of taking if it ain't broke don't fix it way too far.
Sure the m2 was great for a majority of it's time in service but the sheer idiocy of lightweighting, and thus quadrupling or more the cost to build of designs that have been able to get the senior discount at McDonald's before the lightweighting programs even start is the height of stupidity.
The erroneous and emotionally manipulative arguments you get from people who are against replacing these literally geriatric designs play right into the hands of people who are happy to make obscene amounts punching out shit that doesn't really fit our needs anymore are just plain ridiculous.
Yet people make frankly disingenuous arguments that attempt to make it seem like moving on from designs that are far past their prime is disrespectful play into the hands of those who thrive on mediocrity and high profit margins. Oh, and they don't give a single fuck if they're actually damaging our ability to be competitive in modern combat as long as they get paid.
And people who care more about nostalgia than Actually giving people the tools they need to do their job safely fall for it every time.
It definitely wasn't on economic grounds since at the Time the DOD was paying $10,000 each for m2's while gd quoted about a $2000 per gun price in initial production runs
Have you ever seen m2's used off a tripod?
Have you ever seen the sheer amount of time and work it takes to emplace a tripodded m2?
Not only would new guns potentially offer dual selectable feed and lighter weight but also far more manageable recoil characteristics which equate to much easier and faster emplacing when necessary.
If it ain't broke don't fix it only gets you so far when the Chinese and Russians are punching out 18.5kg 12.7x108 guns you absolutely can take you with you.
Especially in combination with their lightweight AGL's which can be emplaced and ran by two dudes that weigh less all up including multiple boxes of belted ammo the AGL itself and it's tripod that weigh less in total than a mark 19.
At the end of the day, if it ain't broke don't fix it only applies to situations where it ain't freakin broke.
Since the situation is broke though, we should seriously consider fixing it.