hey rick those guns came back into our shop. the problem with the 50's is that when you pour gallons of oil into them you get hard extractions or better, ruptured casing.
Gallons of oil didn't get poured into them - the old Airborne dude civvy that was working on the range was running around making sure that didn't happen at the start of the day. He visited every single gun during setup to order and ensure that wasn't done. Being as The Force was strong in him and the boys were told he was Mr. Fifty Caliber, they obeyed and did what they were told for starters.
I also, personally, by myself, set up the spare .50 that was pressed into service within half an hour of the range going live when the first of the other four on the line went down. I can tell you that I didn't pour gallons of oil into the receiver, bolt, buffer body group, etc. so it wasn't excessive oil that caused that gun to break down shortly after it was put into use.
Once they wouldn't work anymore, then the boys resorted to trying everything to get the guns running, including oil - at that point it didn't matter. I didn't look at the rest of the guns, but I didn't hear anything about ruptured casings. They were single shots.
If I remember correctly, the one bolt I looked at with the Course WO had the bottom of the bolt gouged all to hell and one of the other sergeants said they all looked like that.
the one gun on the range did run fine cause the crew was using very little oil and it worked great.
I was on the gun that worked the longest - before it quite. There was no one crew, and no one ARSO on the gun. In fact, after all the rest of the guns had broken, EVERYONE was firing on that one gun.
Furthermore, shortly after about the first four belts on that gun, a part broke in the receiver. It was down until the civilian support pers there replaced the part, which took him about 20 minutes. So no, it did not run fine. I have no issues with the gun plumbers who were on the range.
And BTW, after that part was replaced, the ARSO on that gun said "See... not enough oil" and proceeded to dump a couple of cups of CLP in it. You could barely #### and lock the thing everything was so slippery - and I happen to agree with you on how much oil should go on the guns.
Let's also mention that the T&E mechanisms are so worn out it is a joke. On the particular gun you mention, the quick release pin was constantly backing right out on firing and you had to wrap your hand around the upper elevation screw and elevation indicator unless you wanted to go into anti aircraft mode in about three bursts.
I don't have a single complaint about the gun plumbers, and the guys who were on that range did everything they could to keep them running until the bolts got chewed up. But those guns on the range, and particular their T & E mechanisms, for whatever reason, were not fit for the range. I have no idea what was found when the guns went back for inspection and I'm not a gun plumber to begin with, but I do know those guns didn't start out dripping with oil. I also know the gun which ran the longest had a broken part right after the first gun crew came off it - and after that was promptly deluged with oil and then ran far longer than any of the others.
alot of the 50' are using a number 12-17 locking block so there is still plenty of life left in the 50's.
I don't disagree with that either. But the unreliable BHPs out there can't be blamed on a belief gallons of oil were poured in them, and a T&E mechanism you have to hold together and in place with your hand is not things as they should be. Nor should a soldier have to wait until the gun plumbers show up at the range to get a rifle he has repeatedly flagged as requiring repairs worked on.
today i was at a range where there was about 24,000 556 shot and about 5000 9mm shot. our problems? hand gaurds falling off the c7 with the new forward grip. all the browing worked fine, not bad for a pistol built in the 40's.
I guess that makes up for the 30,000 rounds of .50 we never shot that day and put back on the truck to go back to the base, huh?
The point I am trying to make is, there is a disconnect between the condition of many of the weapons, the condition they should be in, and the services of the weapons techs being called on to make sure that any weapon issued is within operational specs.
I am really not too excited about when the weapon was designed. I am excited when the individual weapon does not reliably function despite being properly maintained and operated by the soldier.
Just out of curiosity, you wouldn't suggest those T&E mechanisms are perfectly fine, would you?
) stopage.
