What made Britain's attempt at a GPMG a failure? With weapon and firearms expert Jonathan Ferguson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 дек 2021
- At the end of the Second World War, Britain looked to modernise it's small arms arsenal. With the Vickers MG a reliable but ageing weapon and the Bren limited to its 30-round magazine capacity, a more modern, belt-fed, 'general purpose machine gun' was sought. Despite excellent existing designs such as the German MG42, Britain decided to go its own way and build upon its popular Bren gun.
Subscribe to our channel for more videos about arms and armour
Explore our collection here: collections.royalarmouries.or...
Help us bring history to life by supporting us here: royalarmouries.org/support-us...
Sign up to our museum membership scheme here: royalarmouries.org/support-us...
⚔Website: royalarmouries.org/home
⚔Blog: royalarmouries.org/stories/
⚔Facebook: / royalarmouriesmuseum
⚔Twitter: / royal_armouries
⚔ Instagram: / royalarmouriesmuseum
We are the Royal Armouries, the United Kingdom's national collection of arms and armour. Discover what goes on behind the scenes and watch our collection come to life. See combat demonstrations, experience jousting and meet our experts.
Have a question about arms and armour? Feel free to leave us a comment and we'll do our best to answer it.
"Hi, its Johnathan here, with.. a couple of machineguns." sounds like the opening of a really good action movie that I now want to see.
We'll start working on it
Hi,it’s John wick here.Love this channel.
"I'm here to chew bubblegum and show guns and I'm all out of bubblegum."
2:27 😊@@cpt_nordbart
I love this stuff. It's like mechanics, engineering, physics, and history all at the same time.
Recommend you check out C&Rsenal, and Forgotten Weapons. This subject also has a heap of human psychology.
@@tamlandipper29 nah he should check out demo ranch because he blows s*** up!
Jonathan's new book: "British Light and General Purpose Machine Guns."
Take my money already.
I don't think I have that one in me to be honest, but never say "never"!
Just stop being honest. There, problem solved. Matt, Vic, Rich, Ian and Othais will help (I'm at a safe distance to volunteer them). Getting hold of porridge-eating Peter's manuscript of his ultimate Bren book (that never appeared) could be useful. On a more serious note, "Death Rattle: The British Soldier's Machine Gun 1870 to 2015" was a fair attempt but had a few issues. It needed more in-depth research and some serious editing. And the binding was crap. It fell apart as soon as I opened it.
Thanks for the acknowledgement of our coverage of the X11 SPMG an example of which you have in your video. I wonder if the collection has an example of the BSA adaption of the BREN into a belt fed gun that they designated the BSA X16. I think the National Army Museum has an example which we would love to cover on our channel, as far as I know only 2 or 3 examples were built!
Regards,
Vic
It is always good to hear the voice of Jonathan Ferguson, a keeper of firearms and artillery at the Royal Armories Museum in the UK, which houses a collection of thousands of iconic weapons from throughout history. Such a fascinating and rather gorgeous machine gun.
3.03 not sure about them not using a spare barrel for the Bren when it got hot. Many years ago a veteran of northwest Europe said he told his No 2 "This barrel is getting a bit hot change it!" to which he replied "I threw it in a ditch yesterday!"
My guess would be that the designers increase the recoil spring strength to overcome the additional drag in the system. When they did this it made the sear pressure much higher and thus resulted in needing a 2 finger pull trigger.
Great video! During WW2 under German control The Czech factory at Brno made 4 prototypes where they converted ZB26 and ZB30 to belt feed using the 50 round MG34/42 Gurttrommel.
Any pictures of those 4 prototypes?
@@aceofhearts573 The pictures I have are in the collector grade book mg34/42 vol 2. All 4 still exist and are in a museum in Prague.
@@jonathanseverin amazing. I always wondered if there had been a belt version of the mg26 or if they at least try to make some after the czech found out about the mg34. I do know the Italians made a general purpose machinegun based on the bren that was belt fed, it was made by Breda but it lost to the german mg3
Supposedly the Germans modified Madsen light MGs into belt feed.
@@christophercripps7639 I have seen a picture of a belt fed Madsen on the forgotten weapons website but I dont know if it was made during german occupation
And the BREN gun out lived them by still being in service until the 90s as the L4. Used to carry one on my Ptarmigan ERV and ESV (Electronic Repair Vehicle and Electronic Spare Vehicle) detachment for defense.
@@babalonkie It was indeed excellent. I understand why it was eventually dropped but wonder why we haven't seen a more direct equivalent weapon fielded, taking the most useful attributes of the Bren and using more modern design/manufacturing methods? To my mind an accurate DMR/LMG hybrid that can be pressed into a SFMG role with a bit of additional hardware, operable by a single man (either from the shoulder or bipod) but enhanced when served by a small crew, fed with the section's standard rifle mags that can be swapped in a second without moving the weapon from the aim, seems like a hell of useful tool.
I'm also curious about the dovetail the very early Mk1s had, which was intended for mounting the No37 telescope (why the No37 is so very robust). Had that feature not been deleted would a low-mag optic on the section LMG have proved as useful "back in the day" as it does today? Would it have accelerated widespread deployment of optics more generally?
@@babalonkie Oh yeah don't get me wrong all the R&D work to invent a slightly different rifle to equip the 150,000-odd British forces isn't the most sensible use of resources. You'll never get enough of a performance edge from a Britain-designed squaddie-proof 7.62 or 5.56 AR-type rifle to make it worthwhile. That's what the MoD is trying to do on the quiet with the SA80 replacement -- buy off-the-shelf AR15s. My money's on the Colt Canada C8 but any of the big manufs' equivalents will work. If you're concerned about robustness of supply chains you're far better off taking something extant and proven and setting up a small modern production line somewhere in the UK and running off a batch every now and then.
As to your other point about having your own-made gats turned on you? Well it's happened before plenty of times. When the lead wasps come past you you don't tend to be that interested in whose factory the rifle came out of. Also, politicians tend to be conspicuous by their absence in such situations. They're usually far more concerned by "optics" -- yes if you build a rifle factory you have to sell rifles abroad to make ends meet. Politicos are more worried about Moldovia (to whom we sold our distinct rifles last year, them being an ally) doing a spot of ethnic cleansing on their Ruritanian neighbours and getting flak for it because they're using rifles bought off the Brits than about British troops catching a few rounds from same rifle. Especially if said ethnic cleansing appears on the 9 o'clock news.
All that American gear left behind is a bit of a storm in a teacup mind. That part of the world wasn't exactly short of a few million rifles before, a few thousand extra won't make much difference except for propaganda purposes. Heck the Chinese have been making M4 copies for a couple of decades and what with them cosying up to Afghan (:cough: minerals :cough:) I'm sure they could have all the carbines and NVGs they could eat. Does boil my piss a bit that all that kit which wasn't disappeared by the ANA didn't get a few demolition charges before the pull-out but hey ho.
@@lordsummerisle87 in tne 50's the UK still had conscription and a planning assumption of a standing force of 300,000 soldiers. This only fell below 200,000 in the 70's over a decade after the move to an all professional Army. Numbers only dropped below 150,000 in the 1980's.
@@tzazosghost8256 I don't disagree with you my friend, but I'm not quite sure the point you're making. My point was that doesn't make an awful lot of sense for the UK to develop its own smallarms *today*, rather to buy OTS or at most to produce an already proven design onshore. I'm sorry that I didn't communicate that clearer! :-)
India used their Bren's in mainstream service until 2012.
It's oddly relaxing and cozy to be listening to a video on a British GPMG on a cold, snowy winter day. Firearm history is the perfect mind-relaxant.
It’s the voice.
Tell us there's a log fire...
Starting with a BREN you can’t use a belt feed system with an MG42 style roller directly attached to the piston. The issue is the locking shoulder or block which the bolt locks into. That shoulder is directly behind the bolt and above the piston’s travel.
The only way to do it is a complete redesign of the Bren’s receiver, at which point you might as well purchase a new gun. So it was done it by the short sighted decision to make it back compatible.
The X11’s system actually shows a fair amount of promise to me. Just a guess but the weak point is probably the location of the gas port. With a belt gun the port should be slightly closer to the receiver to give a longer sustained impulse. Think about how a SAW will beat itself to death if you feed it Mags instead of belts. The X11 needed more of a push than a harder hit. Just opening up to port won’t have the same effect. Yet on this example the port is obviously in the normal place.
One of the advantages of a reciprocating charging handle. The Soviets also tried this, they converted their DPM box fed machine guns to belt fed RP46 quite successfully. The RP46 design is still used today in the DSHK.
ya i was thinking of that exact design when i saw this!
You can’t convert a Bren in the same way and there is only room for a push through belt and the soviets used pull types with their rimmed rounds. Look where a PKM feeds and the belt comes up parallel to the chamber. One of the reasons Russia MGs are always lighter, shorter receivers.
You can’t do that to a Bren of course bc the gun was designed to feed from a box. Which is ironically where the West got their belts from; German mg34’s designed to accept belts or drums (boxes).
This reminds me of their attempt to make a belt fed conversion for the rpk
We used the LMG (Mag Fed, 30 x 7.62) in rural Op Banner. One of the inherent problems with any belt-fed medium MG in that scenario is that forcing through man + kit through blackthorn hedge often meant decorating the hedge like a xmas tree: pouch’s, patches of clothing, but worst of all, GMPG link. The GPMG is a peerless medium gun with its sustained fire role. The LMG, you could effective snipe with it, single tap, which is tricky on a GMPG where double-tapping is the minimum effective rate of fire unless you adjust the gas rate so that it’s operating outside of its design specs. LMG was a game-changer in NI.
LMG gunner Op Corporate. During the deployment training we had the opportunity of target practise against drones that the RCT had (fairly large remote control planes).The operator got really aggressive because we shot them all down. I think there may have even been punches thrown. As you say, very accurate impressed the hell out of range staff during Brecon, they had been so used to gpmg's being used.
@@GolfMike09 Did a lot of GPMG SF on South Georgia, 1982. We were Recce Plan; basically a slightly adjusted COP, Fermanagh, 1982 (1 Para took over from us as Corporate and Paraquet were in planning stages. One of our roles - we arrived just after hostilities - was to establish SF firing points on Shackleton heights. But also to patrol the 4 disused whaling stations. Our gunner swapped his GMPG for his LMG for those long patrols. Wonderful days. I was on the gun in a rifle coy after about 6 months. Gunners love their guns. That section weapon ethos you get in training - portage and cleaning shared - goes out the window once at you Battalion. Hands off!! It’s mine! All mine! 😎🤟
I thought I had an original idea. I always thought, “The Bren gun was wonderful, and why didn’t they design a belt fed Bren?”
It's quite interesting to see how a good idea on paper doesn't necessarily translate in practice. As cool as it would be to know this as "that British post-war MG that was replaced in the 80's" it was simply not meant to be.
I thought the same, and now we know why they didn't go forward with it.
With that being said, they could've taken what was learned with the MG34/42 and implemented that instead, but they decided to get weird with the pillar.
There were several attempts to turn the BREN into a belt fed.
It already exist, made by CZ and chambered by 54r at Warsaw pact days.
@@jalpat2272 The UK VZ 59 really only had the gas system of the Bren. There was an earlier design first chambered in 7.62x45mm and updated to 7.62x39mm which had more in common with the Bren and the ZB26 / ZB33. It was the UK VZ 52 (7.62x45) and VZ52-57 (7.62x39). It could feed from either top loaded box magazines and belts. The the UK VZ 59 in 7.62x54R is still issued to the Czech and Slovak armies though I think it is being replaced by FN MK48 Maximis at least in Czech service.
Thanks for the mention of our video Jonathan! This was fantastic, great to see examples of the SF and GPMG TADEN together.
I find these videos incredibly informative. So much knowledge with this one crew.
I really like the Bren and ZB gas regulator because you won't lose the gas plug if you don't put it in right. Very true in the Belgian and M240 model. That's the only weakness I saw in the gun. When my platoon deployed for Iraq, I told and trained my gunners about this problem. I managed to beg and steal as many gas plugs about 25 of them to make sure my platoon's guns run good in combat. My gunners paid attention to their guns and none went down other than a dud round. I gave my gunners 2 new spares just in case.
Put many rounds through a 240 and never had any gas plug problem.
Bren was never a viable option for heavy suppressed fire
@@Interdiction I agree. I used to be an M-60 gunner in a Weapons Squad. The amount of 7.62mm ammo is tremendous to carry. For me the gunner carrying. 300 rounds on my body on bandoliers in cloth pouches 100 rounds each one on the gun and 300 in my ruck and 300 on my assistant gunner in his ruck during the 1989 Panama Invasion. Yeah it sucked.. Adrenaline rush and pouring sweat from being scared. fuck yeah!!! The Bren required plenty of loaded magazines. All squad or section members in a British Infantry Section or squad was required to have 1 or two loaded BREN magazine on them during combat.
Ironic that the FN MAG is much the same modifications applied to the BAR.
Difference being that Ernest Vervier did it right.
Very good I love learning new gun history.
Fantastic video as always. Thanks!
Another outstanding video Jonathan
Never even knew this gun existed.
Thanks
So great! Please more videos like this, find this so interesting!!
As a former UK Serviceman, I notice that the TADEN LMG feeds the Belt from the right-hand side - ejecting the Links to the Left - Unlike the MAG, which feeds the belt from the Left-hand side and the Links out of the Right side, as with most other MG's. That may explain the peculiar belt feed mechanism.
I served with the Cheshire Regt.
They had two very old Sgt Majors, long service and one lunch in Sgts Mess I was given a serious talk on how in their opinion the army should never have got rid of the belt fed Vickers.
When you needed sustained fire power, nothing beat the Vickers.
I was LMG gunner at one stage in my service and loved my new BREN in 7.62.
john
During one assault in the Pacific (Guadal Canal I think) the sustained fire of their Vickers (Browning) style gun helps a small contingent of Marines to win against a very much larger Japanese force
@@MrAvant123 That was the water cooled Browning 1917 and while they did prove decisive in turning back Japanese charges the 1917 suffered rather persistent problems with failures to extract cartridges meaning that the very few trained machine gunners were running up and down the line fixing stoppages throughout. Despite being a J M B design it was never the reliable beast that the Vickers was.
A fascinating look into a GPMG that I had no idea about. My thanks, Jonathan! I'd like to see more about small arms, like Italy's M1934. A well built little single action, very sturdy, very heavy, but a well designed little pistol. Cheers!
It feels like, this only failed only because some of the designers tried to “re-invent the wheel” as the saying goes.
Honestly a belt fed BREN actually sounds like an incredibly scary weapon to be shot at by, given the Mag fed one we know and love were known to incredibly accurate weapons even for LMGs.
The Czech engineers at Brno managed to adapt the design to accept mags and belts (ZB Vz 52/57 ruclips.net/video/_BcORW06AeE/видео.html)
@@bamaboni that weapon is much like the Korean spin, mag and belt fed. TADEN was pure belt fed. Though it’s interesting I’ll give it that.
@@Duke_of_Petchington There's also the UK Vz 59, which only feeds from belts. However I wouldn't say it's a Bren, more of a BESA in GPMG form
I was using the bren back in 1988 british armed forces
Every gun builder should be required to use the gun in simulated combat with all of the distractions that the soldier would face. Weight, complexity, and ease of use should all be primary considerations. Knowing that the MG 34 and MG 42 were out there to study is amazing to me that they didn't even look at them. As you said gross memory function is what all guns should be designed for, not in the test facility.
That's what troop trials are for. The engineers who develop weapon systems are not the sort of people who should be wandering around with live ammunition. Then there's the problem of the government scientists who specify and assess the things. We had a system that the troops loved in a couple of programs, but the government chose the competitors for their own reasons. In one case we had been working with the troops and the development agencies and met exactly the requirements, but the procurement people made the decision and liked the system that had better marketing. I got to talk to one of the people who made the decision ten years later, by then he was a sales dude. I took great pleasure rubbing his nose in his mistake. The system they chose did not work out for them, or the Royal Signals.
just found this site - love it. When I joned the NZ army in 1972 we were still using the enfield MK5 and because I was the smallest member of my section, I was of course designated as the Bren gunner - loved that piece of kit.
We later updated to the 7.62 nato SLR L1A1 [the navy got the L1A2] but we soon figured out how to get the A1 to fire as an automatic.
Where's my matchstick........
Got your book, love your book. Keep up the good work. 👍
Thank you, I shall do!
With the iconic SMLE and Webley, I am profoundly sad that Britain's firearms design has largely been gutted.
Yep with all the companies dying off we ended up with inexperienced people making the criminally bad L85A1 which I'm sure got people killed undeservedly due to it's inability to function.
Britain's real strength in firearms design was always taking others guns/ideas and improving them and crucially, avoiding Not Invented Here syndrome. It meant for most of the 20th century we had very good weapons. See US Lee's action into the Lee-Enfield, US Maxim into Vickers and Pom-Poms, US Lewis gun, Czech derived Bren gun, MP-18 derived Lanchester, Czech designed BESA, US Browning MG's, Swiss Oerlikon (and Polsten), Swedish Bofor's, Swiss Hispano Suiza, German derived ADEN cannon, Canadian/Belgian Browning Hi-Power, Belgian FN FAL, Belgian FN MAG...even the L85 was essentially a rebuilt AR-18. How many fully 'British' firearms were there? Sterling SMG, Sten, EM1 and EM2 (both designed by Polish refugees), Webley pistols, TADEN guns...and thats it really. Even AI's superb sniper rifles are ultimately using Mauser actions...
Our real skill in design and building was always in artillery....
Even then Sterling and Sten are blowback SMG's that were proved, in overall design, years before...you could add the Beardmore Farquhar MG, Farquhar Hill rifle to the purely UK list (neither of which entered service), but not the Vickers Berthier or Vickers GO...
@@dogsnads5634 I suppose it depends how far back into the lineage one considers an unbroken nationality of any particular design. If we take it to extremes we could say that all metallic cartridge guns are based on Paully's designs (who was Swiss but living in Paris), or all rifled guns based on the 15th century German invention of rifling, or all based on the Chinese fire lance c.1000AD.
I would say that while AI didn't invent the two-front-lug rifle (of the sort we commonly ascribe to Mauser) but the important thing they developed was the chassis style of construction. They could have put any other accurate bolt/receiver combination on that design and still the result woudl have been just as industry-changing. Equally the Sten was a transformative design (moreso than the Lanchester, which was more or less a straight copy of the MP28) because it was a reimagining of how to achieve the outcome (a blowback 9mm SMG) using different facilities and materials than the original.
I am not sad... imagine British troops and civilians destroyed by weapons with "Made in UK" on the side...
If you cant imagine that... take a trip to Afghanistan... you will now quickly meet your end by something "Made in USA".
This guy’s presentations go from strength to strength.
Edit: I figured it out. They lifted the belt feed mechanism from the Vickers gun. It cycles in the exact same manner, pulling the belt in on the closing stroke of the mechanism.
The problem I see with the belt feed mechanism isn't necessarily the intermediary shaft, but when in the operating cycle the mechanism is activated. If I'm understanding correctly how the gun works, then the feed mechanism advances the belt on the closing stroke of the bolt, which means that it's only the recoil spring which is providing motive power for the feed mechanism, rather than the energy of the explosion of the cartridge imparted to the gas piston. I think if the mechanism was designed to advance the belt on the opening stroke of the bolt rather than on closing as it currently is, the gun might have been more reliable than it turned out to be.
yes, indeed, but being a open bolt MG weapon, usually the requirement when loaded ready for action, if the opening action also moved the belt, it might not have enough force against the main spring and cock the firing spring to ready - plus all that movement only on opening, when the operator is already dealing with recoil and trying to stay sighted on target....
..so they split the sections of the actions involved, to spread them across the recoil and loading cycle(s) IMHO, to try to keep accuracy and existing differences in training from BREN to newer prospect, whilst hoping to have a longer RoF with the belt vs the Mag.
great video. I read that in the competition for the British GPMG you had the AA-52, FN MAG, M60, SIG MG51, Madsen-Saetter, MG3 and the X11. The GPMG that came in first place was the FN MAG with the X11 being second only losing because of the feeding system. I also read that Birmingham Small Arms also created their own version of a Bren belt fed GPMG known as the X16. Hopefully Royal Armories has the X16 or is able to find it so we can get a video.
Had heard of these but never got to find out much about them. Very interesting. Never did fire the BREN. It was still in service as the 7.62 L4 all those years ago and seemed to be well liked. The L7A2 is a superb piece of equipment though. However in the defensive, sustained fire role it could never match a Vickers.
I got to use a 7.62 mm Bren while in the Australian army. Very nice weapon.
Yeah the LMG. Very nice.
Interesting. Great chat.
Wow! I've been waiting for someone to make a video about that gun. I guess it's not surprising that it would be you guys.
Nice Video !! Great information ! Keep up the great work !👍
Hope you don't mind me asking,..But did Ian's videos kick start you into doing your own .? Just wondering.
Brens came with a spare barrel in a carrying pouch with other spares. Unlikely they were carried in rifle section advances, but they'd have been available when tripods weren't.
The Bren magazine catch was thought to be too easy to release accidentally, so the locking pin makes sense when you could just clip a new belt on to the tail of the previous one.
The guys at Enfield should've just added the MG42 belt feed mechanism to the BREN and it would've been great GMPG. Basically only a L-shaped lug (to leave enough space for Brens top locking) with a knob to work the MG42 feed pawls needs to be added at the back of the Bren bolt carrier for that. And channel for that knob to move in could be moved quite far back on the stock like on the American M60 machine gun.
An interesting idea. In such an arrangement what would you do about the locking shoulder? It seems like it would be in the way.
If they put the lug on the back of the bolt carrier as you're describing, the bolt carrier would had to have been extended quite a bit as the bolt normally sits right at the back of it. This would have required the receiver to be extended as well. That slot in the receiver for that lug to travel in would have to be covered by a long top cover, which goes against what they seemed to be aiming for with the more compact top cover. It's hard to tell from this video, but I'm guessing that the bolt carrier didn't have enough mechanical advantage over the 'turret', in addition to the excess friction.
@@JumpSeeker Yes the top cover would be longer than on the Taden and other prototype but not much longer than on the MG42 or M60. The FN MAG also has longer top cover. I agree that the lack of mechanical advantige over the turret was probably the problem with the Enfield prototypes.
@@lordsummerisle87 The channel for the operating knob would start from behind the location of the locking shoulder.
@@hendriktonisson2915 Ah I see, so the feed lever with its drive slot would be above the locking shoulder, with the vertical arm of your L-shaped lug running the entire height of the receiver. Yes that seems like it would work, though I agree with Jumpseeker that the both receiver halves would have to be significantly lengthened, which would cause a commensurate increase in weapon weight and the manufacturing setup would have to be modified. It's not absolutely clear but I wouldn't be surprised if Enfield were trying to find a way to either retrofit Brens into Tadens or at least reuse a lot of the tooling. Something similar to the M1/M14 debacle.
@royal armouries: I was at my friends property and someone brought a Title2 bren gun (civilian legal machine gun in the USA). He let us shoot it and my best friend got a hard lesson on how different open bolt guns are than closed bolts. before he fired the rifle, buttstock down (it was on a bipod) barrel into the air he proceeded to rack the bolt back, become confused as to why it locked open and defeat the bolt lock and allow it to slam home (instantly firing the newly chambered round, as an open bolt is designed to do). Needless to say he was surprised. Thankfully no harm came of it because the other firearms rules were being followed (pointed in safe direction, etc).
That said, I'm careful to explain open bolt guns to new shooters whenever someone shows up with one. They are fairly rare in the USA because the ATF considers any open bolt firearm to be a "machine gun" so the only open bolt guns *are* machine guns. And since no one would go through all the paperwork and expense for a semi auto gun they are not common.
Good stuff 👍
When you started talking about why the gun didn't catch on, I thought you were going to say that the parts for the feed system working on vertical movement, converted by a non connected piece moved by the bolt, therefore causing jams, but what you said sounds worse.
It would have been better to ratain the BREN's gas system, sights barrel and modify the receiver to be able accept spade grips or butt stock. The bolt carrier group can be redesigned for a rotating AK style bolt, put a cam stud/roller on top and fit a MAG 58 style feed cover. May as well copy the MG42 trigger mech while your at it too and you have a solid GPMG
Nice to see a non American video about military fire-arms. Even though it was a useless bit on kit, the machining looks absolutely perfect. the M42 is also only fully auto but, even at 1300 a minuet, a good gunner can fire 3 round at a squeeze.
As a former UK vet , the two best weapons I've used are the SLR and GMPG , both 7.62 , both capable of taking a beating while still working. Also both had the simplest stripping down , cleaning and reassembly .
The Gmpg when fired from either it's bipod or SF mount , was a joy to fire. You always felt safe , like it would never let you down
Once a vet always a vet, there are no former vets. I did blankfire system development at ROF Blackburn, we belted up two batches of 2500 blanks then fired the first belt without a break, left it for ten minutes to heat soak, fired another 2500 and checked at the end that the projector was still working. We got the barrels bright orange and burned the surface off, but the GPMG just kept going. Our armorer did clean them between uses though.
This might just have worked if they did something like what the Russians did with the RP-46. Imagine a completely standard Bren gun onto which you simply stuff a belt feeder instead of a magazine.
instead of a reworked BREN Britain ended up with a reworked BAR
I don't get why, having seen how awkward the belt feed mechanism was on these guns, the plant manager didn't just tell the designer to use a mechanism type that is proven to work well already.
First off, thanks for your informative video. My comment is directed to the last few minutes where you describe your confusion over the unattached feed tray.
I believe that they intended to:
a. Open top cover,
b. Remove feed tray,
c. Withdraw top cover pin and remove the top cover,
d. Insert an (imaginary?) magazine housing which is held in place by the top cover pin.
This would allow rifle magazines to be used.
The only evidence I have have for this flight of fancy, is that the sights are still offset so as to view around a non existant top mounted magazine.
That SAR 87 to Jonathan's left definitely needs a vid.
On the normal Bren, when the safety catch is moved to A - there is a visible change in the position of the trigger (from memory I think it moves further to the rear).
hi, Johnathan !!!
good video ... 😉
I'm waiting for a day when he gonna explain that G36 looking thing on the wall.
That day is coming, dw.
Sterling Armaments sar 87
Czechs have developed the ZB vz. 52 which was capable of being both magazine- and belt-fed.
It looks like a Bren and PKM got hammered drunk and this is the result of a night of filthy relations....
That one with the shoulder stock is massive, looks over 5feet long
It would be interesting to see the BSA X-16 which was also a Bren to belt fed conversion. And the little I've read about the X-16 it sounds like it worked extremely well but was too costly to produce compared to the FN MAG. It would be neat to compare the engineering difference as they are a British company as well.
Similar with the EM-2 except for that part about working extremely well.
When I was employed on nuclear sites in Germany in the eighties, we had the LMG (basically the bren gun). We carried 600 rounds in magazines in a large metal box. One man carried the gun, the other guy the ammunition. It was not expected that we would exhaust the ammunition. We were trained to change the barrel but weren't supplied with replacement barrels.
You don't need an engineering degree to notice how overly complicated that belt feed system is.
The bad thing about these:not using saint Browning's design like the FN MAG did(which is basically a belt feed BAR
You and Gun Jesus (Ian) keep this interesting
My grandad use to use a bren in WWII he told me no end of stories about how good they were
This is the last breath of the bren. So cool!
I notice it has offset sights like the Bren, even though there was no longer any magazine to obscure the centre line. Was that an oversight, or did the column component of the feed mechanism obscure the view?
Great stuff as always. No offense but I love these along with Ian’s videos to relax and go to sleep. It’s fascinating topics I love but both of you are very calm presenters that just lets my mind relax. Thank you!
What is the rifle on the right hand end of the rack, next to the number 320 ?
I remember when I was a kid in the early 80s and I would watch all the old 40's war movies with my Grandad. Always thought, why did everyone else have a MG with a belt and the UK a magazine. Would be so much better to put a belt on the Bren! Now I know why....thank you. I do wonder though if more R&D was done could it have been possible to do a belt fed Bren well?
In some ways a besal(emergency bren) shortened receiver in .280 British. Using 30 round mags that were compatible with the EM2s similar to the C1/C2 compatibility.
Is the trials board report on that competition available online or no?
I’d guess the demand wasn’t that pressing. Belt fed guns were needed for tench warfare and for fighting from defensive positions. By 1942 Britain was largely fighting a more offensive, mobile war for which the Bren was ideal.
Well we can somehow consider that the Vz.59 is that gun done right, so could be said that it wasn't a bad idea, just not well implemented.
I would like to have seen the top cover open and the action moving to show the belt feed function on the TADEN MG. Other than that, very good video, enjoyed it, thanks.
Imagine if someone broke into his house and all they hear is "hey its Johnathan here.....with a couple of machine guns."
I guess even Colonel Montmorency wouldn't want this Bren Gun.
Another brilliant video! As sad as I am that the TADEN turned out to be pretty rubbish, at least we got the L7 out of it.
Jonathan, something I only discovered very recently was that Brens could use drum magazines (they were fitted into double mounts, like Vickers Ks (may even have been the same mag??). Have you seen these and how they operated/fed?
ruclips.net/video/vMKn3BBaC_U/видео.html
See video related, operated like pan magazine on DP28 or Lewis gun I'd imagine
Losing to the FN MAG is no surprise, considering how many countries also adopted it.
Very interesting video. One comment is that, at times, the interesting specimens under discussion sort of get lost among all the interesting specimens in the background. Too much to keep sorted.
Bit off topic but does anyone know what the gun on Jonathan's left with the ar top rail an angular stock is.
Sterling Armaments sar 87
My uncle Jack was a bren gunner at Tobruk, he had no fingerprints from changing red hot bren barrels.
Sounds like that would have been a bonus if he'd ever ended up as a PoW😅
can somebody pls tell me what that chunky black assault rifle next to Jonathtan on his left side is? Looks like the lovechild of an Sig Stg 57 and a FN FAL with an 80s carrying handle on top!
We could always just show you in a future video...?
Oh well, i would appreciate that very much...
Nice!!
@RoyalArmouries Have you ever done a video on the Anzio 20mm rifle?
Post war the Czechks experimented with A gun they could the ZGB that was magazine fed, but with an insert in the magazine well could be belt fed
I would guess that the reason they did the feed assembly in the top cover is for ease of repair if parts of the assembly broke, they could just swap it.
most interesting.
Would putting 250 round belts through it have caused the barrel to over heat very quickly? I know in fixed defences you’d swap them out but if your in fire and move situation my guess they get very hot
Having always enjoyed Jonathan's slightly pedantic manner, this is another nice bit of history and engineering wrapped up in one.
Not relevant in a big way but the mention of a Brown Bess unit being taught to use the middle finger on the trigger: same here on Lee Enfields and mad minutes. First finger and thumb hold the bolt knob, middle finger works the trigger.
maybe the removable feed tray was so they could sell the gun in different cartridge sizes, just change the feed tray and barrel and away you go?
Just speaking to the feed mechanisms, the peculiarities Jonathon mentions are pure Vickers. The Vickers doesn't use a pin as such to lock the top cover, but its still not intended to be lifted as part of the reloading drill, you shove the tab on the end of the belt through the feed black. The cover only gets lifted for some remediation of stoppage drills. Likewise the shaft, its exactly how the Vickers drives feed pawls at the top of the gun, form the barrel extension 4 inches below and otherwise isolated from it. You can't use the German style feed system, or the Browning type with a Bren. Not even the Czechs could do that, in fact they did exactly what Enfield did, took the drive up the side of the gun, they did it in a different way and with rather more elegance, but still same solution to same problem.
I think I can see why they went with the semi-rotational transfer mechanism, they were looking for a way to shorten the breech area of the gun and so did not want a vertical slot for a transfer bar to run in. It would probabely have worked fine if they had used needle roller bearings to reduce friction.
I've no clue what you said but it sounded great
Fantastic video. The feed mechanism on the X11 doesn’t seem that unique, well as I understand it (which could be wrong!) but seems very similar in operation to the Vickers/Maxim which takes the recoil force from the cut out in the recoil plate, converts it to rotary motion which then operates the slide and actuating pawls in lateral motion?
indeed, FN MAG and the german MG3 are hard to beat designs, both do the job
Weird feed system. Almost like they took the already strange Hotchiss Portative and just made it worse by putting an extra piece in the middle vs. that direct camming arm.
So, the designers never considered looking at the reference collection for ideas?!
i loved the gpmg but i hated fireing blanks due to the spacer did not work which always jammed the gpmg
Is one of these the belt fed weapon shown in the Pathe video 1951 rifle trials?
Yes, the gun at the rear, the Taden Gun is the one on the tripod in the video.
@@dogsnads5634 Finally...Been driving me mad for years watching that video.