As far as grenade launchers
...there is this behemoth. I have not personally ever used this thing nor do I know anyone who has but I don't like what I see. I'm not sure what niche this thing fills. It seems like it's too big to carry along with an M4 but I wouldn't want to arm someone with just this thing.
This strikes me as more of a solution in search of a problem.
SFC W
I have not heard of any example, anecdotal or otherwise, where those things have been employed in the fight-breaker role we purchased them for. Not sure if we will either, but with the resurgence of offensive action in Afghanistan, maybe data will surface.Originally Posted by Uboat509
...there is this behemoth. I have not personally ever used this thing nor do I know anyone who has but I don't like what I see. I'm not sure what niche this thing fills. It seems like it's too big to carry along with an M4 but I wouldn't want to arm someone with just this thing.
This strikes me as more of a solution in search of a problem.
SFC W
Guys I've talked to, (UK-SF, USMC and Colombian SF) swear by them. With the new medium velocity ammunition, they're probably a better bet than a SAW-Minimi.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
LAR or GPMG?
May interest some folks here, but I’ve recently been crunching some numbers for an article and I thought I’d share them here.
An FN MAG-58/GPMG with 500 rounds weighs a total of 25.5kg. Distributed between two men this is 13.79kg and 11.76kg
An FN-LAR HB or modified HK-417 (heavy barrel, + bipod) with 500 rounds weighs about 21kg. This breaks down as a two man load of 10kg and 11kg.
Yes, magazines weight more than link, but the weight associated with belt fed weapons, tends to cancel this out, across realistic operational loads.
Now I have my own data sets, but I’d be grateful if someone wants to check those figures.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
I don’t think I like where you’re going with thisbut here goes.
Most of my data is from 1999/2000 Jane’s Infantry Weapons except the weight of a 100 belt of 7.62 which I have at 2.7 kg, and the Minimi.
MAG 58 (11.65 kg) with 5 x 2.7 kg = 25.15 kg
FN LAR (6 kg, Argy version 6.45 kg) with 25 x 20 rnd mag (0.715 kg) = 23.88 kg
SS77 (9.6 kg) with 5 x 2.7 kg = 23.1 kg
7.62 Minimi (don’t slap me guys)(8.2 kg) with 5 x 2.7 kg = 21.7 kg
L4A4 (8.68 kg) with 17 x 30 rnd mag (1.085 kg) = 27.13 kg
For L4 mag weight I used that of the 30 rnd mag for SG542 as I don’t have L4’s data.
Looks like the good old Bren is worst off. And SS77 is slightly lighter than LAR.
This does of course only work with 500 rnds. More is better for beltfeds, less is better for LAR, unless carried loose for reloading mags.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
Don't worry. You will!I don’t think I like where you’re going with this
Nearly spot on. I have all the figures for the L4 and it's 27.59!L4A4 (8.68 kg) with 17 x 30 rnd mag (1.085 kg) = 27.13 kg
Exactly, and that's the bit that needs clarification, and understanding. If you are adding weapons to fire teams, and not platoons, this might be important.This does of course only work with 500 rnds. More is better for beltfeds, less is better for LAR, unless carried loose for reloading mags.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Add around 0.8 kg per 100 rnd canvas belt pouch for the Minimi (didn't think they'd be that heavy) and probably similar for MAG58 equivalent.MAG 58 (11.65 kg) with 5 x 2.7 kg = 25.15 kg
FN LAR (6 kg, Argy version 6.45 kg) with 25 x 20 rnd mag (0.715 kg) = 23.88 kg
SS77 (9.6 kg) with 5 x 2.7 kg = 23.1 kg
7.62 Minimi (don’t slap me guys
L4A4 (8.68 kg) with 17 x 30 rnd mag (1.085 kg) = 27.13 kg
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
7.62mm Belted Weapon Weights
Definition of 7.62x51mm ammunition in STANAG 2310 has resulted in the national manufacture of rounds to various specifications. Most of those are for rounds which have a total weight in the range 370 to 393 grains, ie 23.98 to 25.47gm. (US Army data sheets published on the web have common ball, tracer and AP rounds in the range 387 to 393 grains.)
The weight of M13 links as covered by STANAG 2329 included the specification that 100 links should weight one pound, ie 454gm.
If those specs apply then a 100-rd M13 belt of 7.62 NATO will weigh 2.85 to 3.0 kg.
For light infantry, use of a free belt during tactical movement makes an MG liable to jam due to drag of the belt and especially its tendencies to twist and catch, and to collect and carry dirt into the action. So the system weight of such MGs should include one semi-permanently attached and easily refillable belt container (eg: MG3), or the weight of several quick attach/detach belt containers (eg: Minimi).
In my platoon(s) we just took a 58-Pattern Water bottle pouch, cut the top off and wired it the end of the feed tray on the GPMG. It carried 50 rounds. Everyone in the section was told to break belt belts into 50 round lengths.
The purpose built link containers, were heavy, noisy, unreliable and never used.
I guess we can factor in such weights, but they seem very marginal. I have 100-round Minimi link bag in the attic, so I guess I'll go weigh it!
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
I assume they are the metal ones you are referring to. Some nations, including Israel, have used a canvas 50 rnd bag, as pictured. I believe the US currently use a variation of this. I imagine that we will again be looking at something that weighs over half a kilo. Then again, with regards to Jcustis' remark about ergonomics (although he referred to the 100 rnd pouch under the Minimi) and Ken's reminders against dirt, it is IMO well worth the extra weight.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks