knowing how to win wars since before 1993
An insurgent armed with a heavy machine gun stands at a street in the centre of the Iraqi town of Ramadi, 100 km (60 miles) west of Baghdad, December 8, 2006. (Stringer/Reuters)
*or maybe “light” machine gun. See the comments.
andy wrote:
The PK series weapons are “light” machineguns, to nitpick the caption.
“Heavy machinegun” just sounds so much more intimidating, i guess.
Posted 09 Dec 2006 at 8:14 pm ¶
Hans wrote:
I don’t know, but at [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PK_machine_gun]19.82 pounds[/url], it seems pretty heavy to me.
(ducks and runs)
Posted 11 Dec 2006 at 6:30 pm ¶
Hans wrote:
Does this code make my posts look fat?
Posted 11 Dec 2006 at 6:31 pm ¶
John the Marine wrote:
Hans, it is not the 19.82 lbs it is the cal. of the rounds. The above is a 7.62mm, hardly heavy. Something like a .50 cal or a 12.7 mm is heavy and are used against aircraft and ground vehicles like trucks or apc’s.
… and yeh, your post does makes you look a little chunky.
Posted 13 Dec 2006 at 8:48 pm ¶
canuckistani wrote:
Just to throw in an extra helping of ignorance, my understanding has always been that a machine gun can also be qualified by the heaviness of it’s mounting and capability to sustain fire over the long term. Thus, the water-cooled Vickers machine gun, or tripod mounted MG42’s count, even though they use .303 caliber or 7.62 mm bullets.
By that standard as well, the bipod-mounted PK above is a light machine gun.
Posted 14 Dec 2006 at 12:09 pm ¶
Commissar wrote:
John the Marine has it right. To the extent that “heavy” is a precise term (and it really is quite specific in this context), it applies to larger-caliber machine guns - .50 cal or 12.7mm.
To my knowledge, other factors, like rate of fire, are not part of the definition.
Posted 14 Dec 2006 at 12:20 pm ¶
Michael wrote:
What’s up with all the bystanders? Personally, I would not be standing too near that guy.
Posted 14 Dec 2006 at 12:30 pm ¶
John the Marine wrote:
“What’s up with all the bystanders? Personally, I would not be standing too near that guy.”
The man makes a lot of sense.
“can also be qualified by the heaviness of it’s mounting and capability to sustain fire over the long term. ”
Canuckistani,
Interesting. I can’t say your wrong. However, a Vicker’s Water cooled machine gun or say even Browning .30 cal are crew serve machine guns vs say a BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle) which is a one man squad machine gun (Todays version would be the M60 7.62mm or S.A.W. 5.56 mm) which is also a .30 cal. But I don’t think either are heavy. One more thing to consider; a .50 cal or 12.7 mm will punch through an inch of steel and are expressly for the purpose of destroying light field equipment (trucks, HMV’s, light armored vehicles,…). Squad weapons are antipersonel. A .30 cal will bounce off light armor (1 inch thick.)
Posted 14 Dec 2006 at 7:42 pm ¶
commissar wrote:
John,
No, no, no. Stay by your guns. Stand your ground! “Heavy” refers to caliber.
Posted 15 Dec 2006 at 8:14 am ¶
Grim wrote:
I think canucki is right on the point. Just to make things really bad, by the way, “heavy machine guns” fall into the class of “light weapons,” which includes also grenade launchers and portable mortars. Yet an infantry platoon in a support role, structured around any of those weapons, is a “heavy weapons platoon.” Fun stuff.
None of those, however, are included in “small arms,” which includes only light machine guns as well as rifles, pistols, revolvers, etc.
It’d be laughable, except that these terms are used by lawyers and legislators as well. For example, the UN cheerily proposed a ban on ’small arms and light weapons,’ which would include everything from your kid’s squirrel-hunting .22 to an 81mm mortar capable of blasting apart small buildings.
Posted 15 Dec 2006 at 9:52 am ¶
canuckistani wrote:
If you can’t trust wikipedia, who can you trust?
“A heavy machine gun refers to either a larger-caliber, high-power machine gun or one of the smaller, medium-caliber (rifle caliber) machine guns meant for prolonged firing from heavy mounts, less mobile, or static positions (or some combination of the two).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_machine_gun
Posted 15 Dec 2006 at 10:38 am ¶
Heartless Libertaria wrote:
Actually, in this case, it’s a GPMG, a General Purpose Machinegun.
The concept was poineered by the German Wehrmacht, with the MG34 and refined with the MG42 (rechambered for 7.62 NATO and still serving today around the world as the MG3). The GPMG featured a buttstock, pistol grip, and bipod, and could be used as a light machinegun (LMG) in the infantry support role, or put on a tripod or vehicle mount for the heavy, sustained fire role. The truly innovative feature of the MG34, subsequently copied on all other GPMGs, was the quick change barrel, which allowed for sustained heavy firing without the need for water cooling or a huge mass to act as a heat sink.
Contemporary examples of the GPMG (also known as medium MGs) include the pictured PKM family (Russia), the MG3 (Germany, Pakistan), and the MAG-58/M240 series (FN Herstal, US, Israel, UK, and others), plus the now mostly replaced US M60 series.
Heavy MGs are pretty much always tripod or vehicle mounted, generally nowadays .50 cal/12.7mm or bigger. The dominant examples are the US M2 “Ma Deuce” and the Russian DShK (12.7mm) and KPV (14.5mm)
Posted 20 Dec 2006 at 12:54 am ¶
TallDave wrote:
#6,
Per BIll Roggio, I would stand good odds it’s just a “pose and run” operation. I would also cast a little doubt on the “center” assertion.
Posted 22 Dec 2006 at 7:07 pm ¶
Edward wrote:
Back in the Seventies our (British) Territorial Army unit was still equipped with the Bren Gun (similar to the BAR)
Our Colour Sergeant had been a musketry instructor in the regular army and told me of instructing a group of Nigerian soldiers on this weapon. The Bren had a special barrel for “sustained fire” . The pupils were given turns at instructing the squad. “What is this?” the squad was asked. “I don’t know” replied soldier one, who received a crack across the head with aforesaid barrel.
“What is this?” the second soldier was asked “That am de barrel for sustained fire” replied soldier two who received a similar crack on the head ” and don’t you forget it!” said trhe budding instructor.
At the end of the course, the successful pupils would be promoted from corporal to sergeant. Our Colour Sergeant did not know why his successful pupils were quite so elated. “Corporal - one wife” was the answer “Sergeant - two wives”
Posted 23 Dec 2006 at 9:04 am ¶
Blogads 3.0
Google Ads
Greetings from beautiful downtown Ramadi - 2
Locals Turn in Terrorist
The Fight for Ramadi
Beautiful Atrocities: MARY MAPES: INDC CONFIDENTIAL
Let the outing continue …