autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3213
    MEMBERS
  • 182477
    MESSAGES
  • 3
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

açcuracy of tank guns   General Military Discussion

Started 2-Jan by smg762; 3783 views.
Murpat

From: Murpat

23-Jan

It is with some irritation that I always read this "too accurate" meme - especially of the Bren gun.

Look, this is an urban myth ... utter bullshit in other words. The Bren/BAR are not the same as an MMG - they are section or platoon weapons - or in other words combat from close to 300 metres. 

Put simply, target opportunity is bried (less than 5 seconds if hey are wise), so you have little time to identify adjust aim and fire .... you want the bloOdy round to go  THERE  -  just where you point them - NOT ALL OVER THE SHOP.

Having been trained on a Bren and operated one - that was how we were trained.

Now an MMG (Vickers and Mag 58 in my day), saturating an area with fire might be the purpose (I'd didn't train on either as infantry weapons and the GPMG we did train on was pintle mounted), but for the shorter range of infantry work - accuracy is much appreciated by the operators.

  

DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

23-Jan

Indeed! 
The acceptance criteria for no.1 barrels for the F89 minimi produced at ADI Lithgow was a 10 rd burst completely within a 10cm square on the point of aim at 50m. No.2 barrels were the “inaccurate” ones that could only hold within a 25cm square. Anything worse was relegated to a blank firing barrel.

In practice, guns were shipping with 3 no.1 barrels; not enough shoddy ones were coming out of the barrel swage. They were holding about 4cm groups without adjusting the gas regulator; I was told that if they spent 10 minutes tweaking the rate the group could be tightened,  but they didn’t bother since it was so far inside the acceptance standard without that.

@smg762 Section LMG / AR / SAW are individual weapons used to provide a base of fire against point targets, not SF weapons to suppress a beaten zone. Bullets need to go where they’re aimed. The MG42 had automatic movement built into the tripod for beaten zone suppression in its HMG configuration rather than compromise the ability to put a tight burst on a fleeting target in LMG usage.

RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

24-Jan

DavidPawley said...

The MG42 had automatic movement built into the tripod for beaten zone suppression in its HMG configuration rather than compromise the ability to put a tight burst on a fleeting target in LMG usage.

Do you have any further information on that? I’d be interested to know more.

TOP