The FN-MAG is operated by gas blowback
The MAG operates via a long-stroke piston system, which utilizes the ignited powder gases generated by firing vented through a port in the barrel to propel a gas piston rod connected to the locking assembly. The barrel breech is locked with a vertically tilting, downward locking lever mechanism that is connected to the bolt carrier through an articulated joint. The locking shoulder and camming surfaces that guide the locking lever are located at the base of the receiver. The unlocking sequence starts after 15 mm (0.6 in) rearward gas piston rod movement to keep the breech block fully locked until the bullet has left the gun barrel and the high-pressure propellant gas pressure has dropped to a safe level.
Cleaning those gas channels is a lot of dirty work but it MUST be done
The MG-42 is recoil operated.
The roller-locked recoil operation functions as follows: two cylindrical rollers, positioned in tracks on the bolt head, are pushed outwards into matching tracks in the barrel extension by the striker sleeve and lock the bolt in place against the breech. In the locked position during firing the rollers rest on parallel surfaces relative to the bore axis on the bolt head ensuring a full lockup. Upon firing, rearward force from the recoil of the cartridge ignition combined with the additional rearward force generated by the muzzle booster start to move the barrel and bolt assembly rearwards for a total distance of 21 mm (0.8 in).
Since they have different operating mechanisms (the thingamajig that loads the next cartridge)
I wouldn’t say that the FN-MAG is a copy. Herstal copied some design elements but not the design.
My dads Mercedes had four wheels, gearbox, motor, steering wheel but it was not a copy of a Ford model T. A Tesla also has four wheels (no gearbox) but it has a steering wheel but it’s not a copy of a Mercedes.
Forgot to mention: The MG-42 has fixed rate of fire " 1,200 rounds/min[5] (varied between 900–1,500 rounds/min with different bolts) Practical: 153 rounds/min", it overheats quickly
on the FN-MAG the rate of fire is controlled with a user-adjustable gas valve
Yep. Steal with pride. Be inspired by the best and try to improve their solution or at least makes sure it is sufficiently different to avoid a patent fight …
Considering all the flying dirt, it looks to me like he just pulled the bipod loose from the ground. Might have buried itself in soft ground after being fired.
The M60 uses elements from both the FG42 and the MG42. The gas operating system is definitely off the FG42, while the feeding mechanism and recoil system are from the MG42.
He is not firing, he is picking up the MG and ripping it out of the ground the, bipod was stuck for sure. His finger is clearly off the trigger here as well. You don’t get that much earth on the leg tips as well if you look at the direction of travel of the dirt it is clearly traveling up from near the legs. My man here is just moving positions in mud.
The German gunner payed for his impressive rate of fire in many ways.
But you really only got average accuracy as a result of its rate of fire. The German gun was good - but several historians and military experts have concluded that their bark was worse than their bite. It was no more accurate, if not less accurate than any automatic weapon of the time. Claims of its accuracy were often influenced by the amount of bullets it could put into any one area at any one time.
GPMGs were not and are not designed for precision. They are designed as area supression weapons.
Wasn’t part of the MG42’s aura of effectiveness from the terror it inspired? For suppression fire that seems like a good thing.
If those same historians & military experts were face in the mud or snow, fearful for their lives with ~900 to 1,200 rpm barking over heads in very close proximity, might they reevaluate their assessment of MG42 effectiveness?
Also wasn’t every 6th round frequently pulled from the belt to slow down ammo consumption? Especially with less experienced MG gunners?
Yeah, take all those historians and experts out of their lounge chairs and put them in a ditch and see if they’re willing to stick their head up into that “bark”!
b-b-b-b-but I have seen Hollywood movies where every single bullet fired by the
“hero” of the plot hits a target when he just swings the machine gun from side to side ???
Nothing defeats “Hollywood Plot Armor” its a billion times more effective than ERA, Chobham, spaced, titanium, tungsten Depleted Uranium or Rolled Steel. The hero with “Hollywood Accuracy” is just as effective in putting the HEAT on the bad guys.
However, I doubt even HPA could quell the T-90/80/72/62’s “jack in the box” these days.
right, however the issue is accuracy and purpose of said weapon.
Honestly, research MK98 and MG42 and see how the numbers relate. Then explain to me why you would take a issued MK98 over a MG42. And spoiler, it would not be because of accuracy.
That should cause a stoppage each time as there would be no cartridge to cycle the action. Then the gunner has to charge the weapon again to get a live round ready to fire. Sounds like a recipe for disaster in combat. I can’t vouch for the MG 42, but I did get to fire the MG 3 as part of qualification for the Bundeswehr shooting cord. That thing burned up ammo real quick. A belt of 15 was gone in the time that it take to do a burst of 6-9 rounds with the M60.
For sniping I would use the 98,
for area coverage the MG 42.
" The MG 42’s high cyclic rate of fire sometimes proved a liability mainly in that, while the weapon could be used to devastating effect, it could quickly exhaust its ammunition supply. For this reason, it was not uncommon for all soldiers operating near an MG 42 to carry extra ammunition, thus providing the MG 42 with a backup source when its main supply was exhausted. Another disadvantage of the MG 42 was that the high cyclic rate of fire led to the barrel overheating quickly during rapid fire. After around 150 rounds of rapid fire, the gun operator would open a side hatch (leading to the barrel) and replace the hot barrel with a new cooler one. Non-observance of this technical limitation renders the barrel prematurely unusable.[5] The machine gun crew member responsible for a hot barrel change was issued protective asbestos mitts to prevent burns to the hands.
The German military instructed that sustained fire must be avoided at all costs. They ruled that the results of sustained fire were disappointing and that the expenditure of ammunition involved was “intolerable.”[6] In the bipod-mounted light machine gun role, MG 42 users were trained to fire short bursts of 3 to 7 rounds and strive to optimize their aim between bursts fired in succession.[6] According to comparative tests by the US military under battle conditions, 5 to 7 rounds bursts with 22 bursts in a minute were most effective.[30] For its medium machine gun role, the MG 42 was matched to the newly developed Lafette 42 tripod. In the tripod-mounted medium machine gun role, MG 42 users were trained to fire short bursts and bursts of 20 to 50 rounds and strive to optimize their aim between bursts fired in succession.[6] As a consequence of factors like the time spent reloading, aiming, changing hot barrels if necessary to allow for cooling, the MG 42’s practical effective rate of fire was 154 rounds per minute, versus 150 rounds per minute for the MG 34.[6]"
My take from this: Effective rate of fire 154 rds/min.
