FN MAG watch out....

I'd think that the use of light weight materials, fluting and other additional machining where appropriate, could shave off a kg or two from the MAG.

My limited Infantry reserve experience was that the C9 was a bucket of crap.
 
I can't compare the C6 to other GPMG's, because it's the only one I've fired. But if this new gun is anything like the C9 it will be much more sensitive to the heavy fouling generated by sustained large volumes of fire. The C6 doesn't seem to mind how filthy it gets, it just keeps on chugging belt after belt. And while 4kg lighter is definitely significant, the C6 is far from unmanageble.
 
Since this is my thread, I am gonna hi-jack myself.


What do you guys think of the HK 21E

Seems like a neat gun, minus the problems with earlier models.

This site gives it rave reviews. http://www.remtek.com/arms/hk/mil/21/21.htm

Cheap, light(er), accurate (maybe too accurate, maybe not...), no gas system (yay!!!!). The stress tests that they did to the barrel shocked me too. You wouldn't think the cookoff threshold for a closed bolt MG would be so high either. If I moved to Finland can I own belt fed weapons?

I remember one of the mods did a bit of a review, seemed to like one of the earlier versions.

maybe I just have a thing for the G3 I will never be able to own (not unless the law changes) and it carries over to this gun.....:50cal:
 
ADK said:
Brits had the Bren in 7.62 as their LMG until 5.56 was adopted, GPMG was a platoon support weapon. Although in the Falklands the Paras that were over there had the GPMG temporarily issued at the section level.
Click to expand...

That's not quite true. All combat units used the mag as their section level lmg. Some combat support/service support units used the bren in 7.62. It should be noted that the mag has been reintroduced to some units at section level for service in Afghanistan.

Also my crowd (the irish) still use the mag as our section level lmg.
 
FraserJ20 said:
While I am sure this is old news to many here, what do you guys think about the FN minimi in 7.62.
minimi762_std_fxd_butt_web.jpg


Easier to produce=cheaper to produce = cheaper user cost

4kgs lighter than FN MAG.

Minimi's proven design. Whats not to like?

Will these guns beat themselves to death in the SF role?

Are barrels heavy enough contour?

Who uses them?


I want one.........
Click to expand...



4Kg lighter mean a lot now a day in the Military, 4kg Lighter mean you can carry another 4kg of Ammo, water or what ever else you needed to carry in the field, heavy doesn't necessary mean it good, all it does it wear out soldier....and result in slowing down you troops...
 
Interesting points on LMG vs GPMG role. I think a lot would depend on terrain (i.e. - Wide open Falkland Island spaces, vs FIBUA). If your target is going to be a maximum of 200m away, then go for a shake, rattle, and roll apart Minimi.

The FN MAG is one of the classics - I am sure that weapon will still be on general issue at the end of this century, barring the development of inexpensive and reliable kinetic energy tools.

Oh, and on the M60, a quote from a fellow who was a gunner / weapons tech type in the U.S. army, and was part of the old Lee Enfield board a decade or so ago: "The Lee Enfield is the only bolt action rifle to have been mistaken for a machine gun by the enemy; The M60, conversely, is the only machine gun to have been mistaken for a bolt action rifle in combat...".

Neal
 
nelly said:
"The Lee Enfield is the only bolt action rifle to have been mistaken for a machine gun by the enemy; The M60, conversely, is the only machine gun to have been mistaken for a bolt action rifle in combat...".
Click to expand...

:D

If you're using blanks and can't find the BFA for your MAG, it can also be mistaken for a bolt action. :slap:

After reading the other opinions here, I can see a purpose for a 7.62mm minimi in specialist roles. If you've got to hump it all day in a FIBUA/MOUT setting, that 4 kg makes a difference. As previously mentioned, the 7.62mm will have far better effect against barriers than 5.56mm.

I think that in most cases of dismounted ops, the weight burden of carrying 400 or 600 rounds of 7.62 along with the weight of the gun would make this a poor replacement for the C9. You'd need to assign a #2 to the gunner, and that wouldn't work all that well if you replaced both C9's within the section. The scale of employment within the platoon should probably be something decided on an operation-by-operation basis.

If it wouldn't create too much of a drain on the logistics side (make as many parts as possible common to either the C9 or C6), I can see how it would be a valuable item to have in a commander's "tool box". Not as a replacement for either the C9 or C6, but as a substitute/augmentation for certain operations. Just like 870's are used by our soldiers in Afghanistan. I could see this filling a similar niche to the HK21E.

No one weapon is going to be perfect for all of the missions that a modern soldier/section/platoon/company is going to undertake. Maybe the Minimi in 7.62 would fit nicely into a niche that hasn't been completely filled up until now.
 
+1 to Robert.

Now, thats from my perspective and comparing it to the C6, in the same role.

But for other units and other application, Big_Red has a point, I think.
 
Just had a look at the new 7.62 Minimi. Hard to tell the difference between it and the 5.56. It will be interesting to see who, if anyone buys it. I can see it selling in South America. A nice package if it holds up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom