Hi All
In the book "excursion to hell" the author mentions areas of beaten ground where the GPMG teams fire low and across each other.
Why is this done and is it still done, and how the heck do you get your own men through it, also were the bigger bullets used by the SLR better than the smaller bullets now used by the army.
sorry about the lameness of this I just hoped maybe someone could help.
Cheers Si
Share This Page:
Substained Fire
Sustained Fire, SF, is used with GPMGs on tripods. The area to be written off is designated and given limits. You don't have to put your blokes through it, as it is used in defence.
The GPMG could be used off the tripod on it's own bi-ped up to 600m
In SF the range could be increased. The butt was removed and replaced by a solid plate. It was inadvisable to sit behind the plate, a la John Wayne, in case it blew off. Spare barrels were necessary to replace overheating barrels.
The 7.62 bullet is obviously larger, the argument about stopping power is academic and possibly concentric. We all have our inbuilt preferences.
The GPMG could be used off the tripod on it's own bi-ped up to 600m
In SF the range could be increased. The butt was removed and replaced by a solid plate. It was inadvisable to sit behind the plate, a la John Wayne, in case it blew off. Spare barrels were necessary to replace overheating barrels.
The 7.62 bullet is obviously larger, the argument about stopping power is academic and possibly concentric. We all have our inbuilt preferences.
You should talk to somebody who gives a f**k.
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/Robiz/movie_star_wars_yoda.gif[/img]
El Presidente
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/Robiz/movie_star_wars_yoda.gif[/img]
El Presidente
Define'better'. If by 'better' you mean you are killed more easily i would say yes(maybe some old jedi can argue with me on that). Technically thou the smaller bullets are designed to take up vital supplies(medics,trucks,hospitals etc etc) where the 7.62(and alike) are designed to kill you ,where then your simply put in a truck and buried. That is what i was told.
got1
It is quite suprising just what they could do with gun, they could drop the bullets in front of you, they could drop them over high hills and sweep the ground in sections the size of a tennis court. The only problem was they where very heavy. The Tripod was quite a size and so was the machine gun, then there was the water that had be carried along with the ammo, it is not the thing you wanted to carry.
It is quite suprising just what they could do with gun, they could drop the bullets in front of you, they could drop them over high hills and sweep the ground in sections the size of a tennis court. The only problem was they where very heavy. The Tripod was quite a size and so was the machine gun, then there was the water that had be carried along with the ammo, it is not the thing you wanted to carry.
Tab ,
My grandfather was in a Machine Gun Pln or something similar, [WW1], and I remember him telling me about when they used to lace 2 together by a metal rod so they would fire together. Also about some competition they had with the machine gun's of the world, and the Vickers won hands down.
The other thing is, I don't think there has been another weapon that has stood the test of time, WW1 to early 60s.
My grandfather was in a Machine Gun Pln or something similar, [WW1], and I remember him telling me about when they used to lace 2 together by a metal rod so they would fire together. Also about some competition they had with the machine gun's of the world, and the Vickers won hands down.
The other thing is, I don't think there has been another weapon that has stood the test of time, WW1 to early 60s.
-
Andy O'Pray
- Member
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Thu 06 Dec, 2001 12:00 am
- Location: www
I was an HW who was Vickers MMG trained. Probably one of the best machine guns ever produced. Rate of fire was approximately 500 RPM. With Mk 7Z ammunition the maximum range was 2,800 yards. With Mk 8Z ammunition the maximum range was 4,500 yards. The gun could fire direct or indirect fire. It could also be adjusted to fire in an anti aircraft role. It could also be mounted on a monopod fitted to a champ or land rover.
I have been told that during the Korean war the Chinese referred to it as the silent death. As the gun could fire over such long ranges, they could not hear the gun firing, it just rained bullets down on them. I have personally witnessed bullets pierce steel plates sideways at 3,000 yards. To my knowledge the last time the MMG was used in active service was the Radfan 63/64. It was my MMG section that gave covering fire to B coy, 3 Para in order to get them out of Habil Sabaha
Here endeth the first lesson on the Vickers MMG.
Aye - Andy.
I have been told that during the Korean war the Chinese referred to it as the silent death. As the gun could fire over such long ranges, they could not hear the gun firing, it just rained bullets down on them. I have personally witnessed bullets pierce steel plates sideways at 3,000 yards. To my knowledge the last time the MMG was used in active service was the Radfan 63/64. It was my MMG section that gave covering fire to B coy, 3 Para in order to get them out of Habil Sabaha
Here endeth the first lesson on the Vickers MMG.
Aye - Andy.
Last edited by Andy O'Pray on Wed 24 Mar, 2004 5:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
anglo-saxon
- Guest
The nice thing about sustained fire is that the machine-gun targets can be pre-registered by day and fired at night successfully, without illum. This is through the use of the C2 sight (Canadian designation) and the glow markers. Also, ground markers potentially allow for several SF positions to be prepared, the gun and tripod being placed on the pre-positioned markers. In addition, the GPMG in the SF role is capable of indirect fire, which would involve the use of wind tables, etc.
The areas of beaten ground you mention are caused by the "cone of fire" produced by the movement of the weapon when firing bursts. This is desireable as the aim is to dominate ("neutralize") an area. The beaten zone changes shape depending on if the weapon is fired from high ground to low ground (or vice versa), or if the impact area is flat ground, a convex slope or a concave slope, a forward slope or a reverse slope (as in indirect fire).
In the defense, the total targets able to be engaged by each MG are plotted onto a machine-gun matrix and become part of the OCs overall defensive plan. Each MG will be able to engage more than one target within the kill zone and each target will therefore be able to be engaged by more than one MG at a time. It is essential that maximum fire is able to be brought to bear against a given target area upon order. For instance, causing the mounted enemy to dismount from their APCs right in the kill zone, through the use of arty and a/armour assets, would most definitely produce a "target-rich environment" for the MGs to take a crack at.
For advancing friendly troops, MGs can be very handy in surpressing enemy positions. The GPMG in the SF role is good out to 1,800m. When sited in pairs, the density of fire in the beaten zone obviously is way more lethal. Light mortars and GPMG SF are a highly complementary mix of weaponry at this range. Ammo for task calculations are necessary and are simply the expected rate of advance of the friendly troops, multiplied by the average rate of fire of the MGs, multiplied by the distance to be covered to the objective. The result will usually involve a dumping program of some sort to allow for the right amount of ammo to be available.
As for the 5.56mm v. 7.62mm issue. At shorter ranges, it is not much of an issue, but at the longer ranges the 7.62 out-performs the 5.56mm for avariety of reasons. Hence, the GMPG is retained at pl level for SF tasks, while the sections have 5.56mm LMGs or LSWs.
The areas of beaten ground you mention are caused by the "cone of fire" produced by the movement of the weapon when firing bursts. This is desireable as the aim is to dominate ("neutralize") an area. The beaten zone changes shape depending on if the weapon is fired from high ground to low ground (or vice versa), or if the impact area is flat ground, a convex slope or a concave slope, a forward slope or a reverse slope (as in indirect fire).
In the defense, the total targets able to be engaged by each MG are plotted onto a machine-gun matrix and become part of the OCs overall defensive plan. Each MG will be able to engage more than one target within the kill zone and each target will therefore be able to be engaged by more than one MG at a time. It is essential that maximum fire is able to be brought to bear against a given target area upon order. For instance, causing the mounted enemy to dismount from their APCs right in the kill zone, through the use of arty and a/armour assets, would most definitely produce a "target-rich environment" for the MGs to take a crack at.
For advancing friendly troops, MGs can be very handy in surpressing enemy positions. The GPMG in the SF role is good out to 1,800m. When sited in pairs, the density of fire in the beaten zone obviously is way more lethal. Light mortars and GPMG SF are a highly complementary mix of weaponry at this range. Ammo for task calculations are necessary and are simply the expected rate of advance of the friendly troops, multiplied by the average rate of fire of the MGs, multiplied by the distance to be covered to the objective. The result will usually involve a dumping program of some sort to allow for the right amount of ammo to be available.
As for the 5.56mm v. 7.62mm issue. At shorter ranges, it is not much of an issue, but at the longer ranges the 7.62 out-performs the 5.56mm for avariety of reasons. Hence, the GMPG is retained at pl level for SF tasks, while the sections have 5.56mm LMGs or LSWs.
Last edited by anglo-saxon on Thu 25 Mar, 2004 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Andy O'Pray
- Member
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Thu 06 Dec, 2001 12:00 am
- Location: www
Tab, we yomped with them into the Radfan. Rule of thumb, you saved the water for your gun, or used your urine.Tab wrote:got1
It is quite suprising just what they could do with gun, they could drop the bullets in front of you, they could drop them over high hills and sweep the ground in sections the size of a tennis court. The only problem was they where very heavy. The Tripod was quite a size and so was the machine gun, then there was the water that had be carried along with the ammo, it is not the thing you wanted to carry.
Tripod = 48 lbs
Gun with water = 40 lbs.
Condenser can with water, sight, aiming post, etc: = lots.
As owdun said on another post. "When that baby came onto the field of battle, game over."
For the younger members. The Vickers MMG was brought into the British army in 1912. During WWI they had MMG companies consisting of 24 guns. Quite devastating.
Aye - Andy.
-
cambridgebloke
- Guest
Heh heh !!! The Browning High Power 9mm pistol, designed 1925 and still in service !!!!!got1 wrote:Tab ,
My grandfather was in a Machine Gun Pln or something similar, [WW1], and I remember him telling me about when they used to lace 2 together by a metal rod so they would fire together. Also about some competition they had with the machine gun's of the world, and the Vickers won hands down.
The other thing is, I don't think there has been another weapon that has stood the test of time, WW1 to early 60s.
Mexican bandit, "Badges?! We don't need no stinking badges....."
Major Kong, "Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in vegas with all that stuff....."
Gore, "The first casualty of war is your underpants....."
Major Kong, "Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in vegas with all that stuff....."
Gore, "The first casualty of war is your underpants....."
