Minimi LMG to go?

AfghanAndy

On ROPS
On ROPs
What's its range and sustainability of fire? It looks like a belt fed assault rifle in all honesty.


M4 with 100rd mag.
Never a good idea.

The Yanks kept complaining that their M4s weren’t to good.


Best not to use them as an LMG.
 
Either way I bet they'd stuff it up. They had the great idea of having the 2 GPMG/M-240's at Pl level with light weight ground mounts i.e. tripods but that they should have short barrels for a lot of them, only to wonder why they have large inconsistent beaten zones.
 
I was referring to the org for US Army infantry Pl's at the moment in regards to the 2 guns with Pl HQ. They are also bringing in a version of the 84mm M4 at one per Pl. With their weapons sections organic to the Pl I guess they can afford to go lighter at section level with their weapon mix. If you take firepower off the section it needs to be replaced somewhere else where it is able to support the sections as they need it.
 
Specs on the 7.62 version still light at 6kg
7.62 LAMG - Knight's Armament
You have to wonder at what cost are the weight savings made? A belt fed 7.62 gun needs a balance between weight, controllable and robust (and cost for the bean counters) We ditched our 5.56 Minimi for the 7.62 version and to be honest I wouldn't want much of a lighter gun for the 7.62 round. Its light weight, accurate and pretty flexible for accessories. Maybe they are using titanium or other expensive/exotic metals for it (Cost). If its to light you have to wonder about durability as well especially if its yanks using it.
 
'what will replace them?'

A few dozen casualties in the next dust up followed by a massive UOR for belt fed LMGs and light mortars.

Charlie G rumoured to be replacing 60mm so 2 steps back and half a step forward
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Looks like it's confirmed that Minimi will go along with LSW and 60mm mortar.

Apparently we've just bought 397 L129s, so I guess that answers the question about what's replacing the LSW and Minimi. Interesting to see what replaces the mortar, if anything.
 
The 51mm mortar was given up some time ago for the 40mm UGL and hand held pyro. The 60 was brought in as a UOR. Nobody makes ammo for the 2"/51mm any more and the 60 was always a much heavier and more expensive beast.
 
The loss of LMG will not be missed, until we do urban again. And by idiot soldiers who think belts rattled off means suppression.

The 60mm is a real loss though. I understand, to an extent, why, if UGL HEDP ranges suddenly spring up. However, I think it is a false economy, a lt. mortar is devastating in trained hands. Presumably the cost of training people/ammo/ranges is too great currently.
 
And longer ranged
Oh indeed.. and in fact starts to creep into 81mm territory..

The problem from an equipment management and structuring pov is that whereas the 2" and 51mm were relatively short range and simple platoon level, line of sight weapons, primarily used for throwing smoke and illumination, the 60mm is a short to medium range small end "big boy" mortar with proper indirect capability and a full range of bombs.

Ammunition for the 2" was pretty cheap and cheerful with deep drawn bodies and diecast tails. The smoke and illum bombs were perfectly adequate for platoon use and for other odd jobs such as target illumination for AT, when such a thing was possible. The 2" HE bomb was quite another matter.. it was only ever of marginal performance and the fuze was pretty dodgy (as are all mortar fuzes as there is no spin to provide one of the arming forces..) There were several attempts at getting rid of 2" HE from the fifties onwards, however it hung on, mostly I understand as a result of senior Inf officers with bad attacks of nostalgia. I actually got rid of the very last 2" HE bombs at Otterburn about ten years ago!

The 51mm mortar could have been a winner, however instead of keeping the costs and performance within limits the design was allowed to morph into something much more complicated. I suspect that, given time and a fair wind, the design might have stabled out, however I think it really suffered from the decline and dissolution of the ROFs. I know there was a problem with the propellent as the WM cordite that the designer used ceased manufacture at Bishopton and a satisfactory replacement was never found. The HE bomb had a pre fragmented collar and had excellent lethality (nearly as good as an 81!) but was stuck with the old, pre WW2 fuze. The smoke and illum bombs has morphed from simple can-with-a-tail design to something much more streamlined and sexy, but without any practical advantage and a huge increase in cost. The killer was that nobody else bought it..

The final solution was to abandon the 51 and source Schermuly type throwaway pyro for illum and smoke. The impression I get is that this is OK for illum but that it struggles with smoke. The old 2" was very handy for laying down and maintaining screening smoke, and was efficient in the number of bombs needed. Mind you this was in the pre IR steam smoke and modern replacements are much bulkier..

The 2" HE was always a bit of a legend in it's own lunchtime, and DINF was finally persuaded to trade it in for section level 40mm UGL. This does provide the extended range HE capability that the 2"HE gave, but with greater accuracy and flexibility.

The problem, as I said, with the 60mm is that it is actually too heavy and has too much range for UK platoon tactics. Yes, there are all sorts of sexy bombs and fuzes available for the 60, but they are an order of magnitude more complex to control and train with than the simple platoon bomb thrower that the 2"/51mm was..

The point is that if a requirement does arise where 60mm could be utilised, you can go down to Arms'r'us and buy one at very short notice...
 
I agree the 60 was a little bulky for foot patrols but it came into its own in platoon PBs supporting patrols launched from that location.

Although they had gone before my time I always liked the look of rifle grenades.

No restriction on shape/dimension, every man can utilise them (unlike UGL which could be at the opposite end of the section from where it's required), variety of natures available including a reusable training round.
 
I agree the 60 was a little bulky for foot patrols but it came into its own in platoon PBs supporting patrols launched from that location.

Although they had gone before my time I always liked the look of rifle grenades.

No restriction on shape/dimension, every man can utilise them (unlike UGL which could be at the opposite end of the section from where it's required), variety of natures available including a reusable training round.
Yeah but you see this is using the 60 in a fire support role.. in previous decades you would have had a couple of 3"/81mm (and even famously a 25pdr) in the PB to do this, particularly when foot patrols would be going out several Ks from the patrol base. This is morphing the requirement away from a simple close in support weapon to something more complex, needing command and control and indirect fire management.

As far as ferkin rifle grenades are concerned, forget it.. we have tried them every decade since 17 howsyourfather, and abandoned them after each new generation finds out how crap and dangerous they are. They are horribly inaccurate, dangerous and unpleasant to use and carry, and have an unerring ability to fall into the mitts of the section idiot..! I have seen no less than four attempts at using rifle grenades in my career.. Energa, L2 clippies, MECAR, SIMON.. The only major users have been Ammo Techs blowing the flaming things up on dem grounds and grenade ranges.. Don't... just don't! At least with 40mm you get to decide beforehand who is trusted to start lobbing HE around the battlefield...!
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top