And this is an improvement from 1917 when Mr Browning held down his trigger for 48 minutes?
And this is an improvement from 1917 when Mr Browning held down his trigger for 48 minutes?
Code Name: JET STREAM
The 1917 Browning machinegun was water-cooled, with a fluid-filled sleeve around the barrel, a supplemental water tank connected by a hose, and a tripod. Weight of the entire package (gun, tank, and tripod) was 108 pounds. It was a true crew-served machinegun, intended to be carried and operated by three men. The machinegun would have to be moved into position, the tripod planted down, and the gun mounted.
The M249 and M60 are air-cooled designs. The 249 weighs around 17 pounds, and the 60 is about 22 pounds (both before ammo). Air cooling requires frequent barrel swaps and can't match the sustained fire rates of water cooling, but the mobility means that you can have a machinegun where you need it. Both machineguns can be operated by one man, although an assistant gunner is the norm, to help feed belts into the 60, and to carry additional ammunition for both. In addition, deploying the M249 or M60 is simply a matter of setting them down in a good position--no assembly required. They could even be fired unrested in an emergency, whereas the crew of the 1917 would have their hands full, and be unable to even defend themselves in a hurry.
Or you're just being facetious
Considering the content of this thread, I'd rather be talking NDs or DQs.Originally Posted by Jim Watson
Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.
M60 barrels are no different than current MG barrels. You say "burn out" but I think you mean overheat. Firing heats up barrels. A hot barrel can cook off rounds, resulting in a runaway gun or a structural failure of the barrel. This is true of the M60, the M249, the M240 etc. This is why air colled MG have interchangeable barrels. It was true and 100 years ago and it's true today.
3 round bursts are a waste of a belt fed..... "It's a machine gun !"
Last edited by HCM; 09-07-2020 at 11:02 PM.
By burnout I mean ruin, in extreme case I mean take the gun completely out of action.
But typically 3 round bursts would reduce sustain fire rate and involve more frequent barrel change.
Light units,like Airborne infantry,might typically not have immediate access to spare barrel, couldn't always find the AG after a jump.
In any case, qualification would require demonstration of proper use, or no qualification.
The M60 is still around, newest model will use stellite lined barrels capable of around 1100 rounds continuous to complete barrel failure.
@kitchens mill Please explain how 3 round bursts will ruin a barrel faster than the 6-10 round bursts listed in the FM.
Why do 3-5 round bursts not burn out the barrel on the m249 but bill burn out a barrel on a 7.62 gun?
im strong, i can run faster than train
To be honest I'm a bit curious about this too. I've shot 249 and 240B plenty but never heard shorter bursts being problematic.
I can shoot one pretty decent but I'm not a whiz on everything about them. Perhaps smaller bursts with less time between bursts causes faster heat up?
Never noticed any issues slow or fast with the 240 but I was just a random MP gunner.
The big difference between the three guns is likely in the ammunition and maybe barrel material.
Proper use recommends 3-4 seconds between bursts, if you do the math you see 3 rounds bursts with 4 second intervals reduces the 7.62 guns from a sustained rate of 100 rounds/minute to something else.
As an example the sustained rate of fire for the 249 is about 85 rounds/minute, 3 round bursts with 4 second intervals.
If a gunner attempts a cadence of 3 round bursts to equal 100/minute sustained you'd get a shorter interval between bursts which heats a barrel faster as stated above.
A hot barrel minimum can erode throat, change chamber dimensions, increase headspace cause gun to misfire. M60 headspace is fixed.
In the extreme the barrel might bulge/split and damage the reciever taking the gun out of action even if you could do a barrel change.
One way to train a crew is to replace a barrel based on rounds fired, again as an example,100 round belts per minute equal 10 belts and a barrel change every 10 minutes. If belts are linked change barrels accordingly.
One technique maybe, but the one I used. Of course if you're using the gun in other than a sustained roll, engage targets as required.
A good example of a trained gunner is John Basilone and his MOH action at Guadalcanal.
Sorry for the thread drift, but it drove me nuts.
The real reason I know short bursts are wrong, my crusty CSM literally put his boot up my butt on the range one morning for doing it.
Pain is a good motivator, for me at least. It's still clear in my mind, some 40 years later.....
Last edited by kitchen's mill; 09-08-2020 at 08:29 AM.
Not sure if the OP is done with this thread, but you can only tell someone the same thing so many times. In the unlikely event he does decide to get training, I hope he finds an instructor with unlimited patience.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Along those lines I don’t think I will ever forget the method the Marine Corps utilizes to time machine gun fire: the length of time it takes to phrase “Die, motherf$&?er, die!” Is the length of your burst of fire!!
Reply With Quote