How NATO's M240 Machine Gun Fits Their Tactics
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- It might look heavy on paper but I think NATO's FN MAG is better than Russia's PKM. It's used by many different NATO Countries in a similar way. The strategy and tactics used on the battlefield make this weapon better than many of its counter parts. Sustained high rates of fire achieve a fire superiority over enemy forces.
#M240 #NATO #TACTICS
Thanks for watching spare parts army! What do you think of the M240? Is the Russian army's PKM better in your opinion?
*UKRAINE WAR UPDATE VIDEO TOMORROW all about Russia's beautiful retreat**
They are both good. But aesthetically? Pkm is a beuty its a scaled up ak basically
There was a bot commenting about cute girls but their reply got deleted
My only experience is games, but the mk 48 in BO2 blew everything out the water
@John Grigg yes I will be doing an update tomorrow about Russias retreat and the up coming major conflict in Donbass region
Cheers for covering the 'Gimpy' Cappy (Brit nickname)
The M60 was a great gun too, as long as the armorer didn’t put the gas piston in backwards. Every single M60 problem I had was due to that issue.
It most assuredly wasn't a good MG. Riddled with issues wear only exacerbated. And, yes, I used/carried it in the Before Times.
It was never the armorers that did it, it was almost always somebody who didn’t use the Pig as their main weapon. Having said that, the M60 was a piece of shit that over time WILL shoot itself into being inoperable because it galls its own cams. The 240 is so superior in every conceivable way to the M60 that you can’t even argue otherwise. It’s a crime that the US military was hamstrung by the M60 for 3 decades instead of the 240.
Well sorry you had issues with yours, mine were always gas piston issues since operators weren’t allowed to open and clean the the piston assembly if your armorer was lazy and either didn’t do it or screwed up then it wouldn’t function. All mine were at least Vietnam era and had wear and tear but worked if maintained, even my issued M16A1s were all GM Turbo Hydromatic division and were just as wore out, didn’t receive my first A2 until after Desert Storm. That said even with my highly worn M16A1s I still qualified expert from 1983 to 1992. Side note if you research the M60 development it was inspired and designed after the German MG34, plus the half barrel carbide liner did prevent chamber/throat wear which I don’t think the M240 or M249 SAW have. You don’t like the M60 but I do so we’ll probably never agree.
im glad its still in use and being modernized.
@@socaljarhead7670 Well don’t know your units SOP, but during my time it was safety wired together to prevent operators from opening it up and per -10 that was the armorers job. There were even articles about that in the PS magazine put out every month by the Army. I take it you were a marine so you all do things totally differently than the Army. Saw that first had on the Avengers M3P .50 cal during Sea Range in Korea, we (Army) operators weren’t allowed to even disassemble the carrier/barrel that was -20 level even though we had to clean them, were as the Marines out of Okinawa did everything themselves, and I admit outshot us using the machine gun, but not so with the Avenger and MANPAD Stinger. My first experience with a 240 was the 240C on the M2 Bradley’s, it worked great but wasn’t designed to be dismounted and fired and I retired before any of the units I was assigned to had M240s. I will add that we did have the Original M249 SAWs starting in 1987 and they were cool but way to short of a barrel for me. We will disagree on the M60, but probably had two completely different jobs, mine was Air Defense Artillery (Short Range) so my primary weapon system was the M167A1 Vulcan Air Defense system w/M61 Cannon and later Avenger and Linebacker systems.
I used to be a motor rifle platoon commander in Kazakhstan. We had 4 PK in platoon: 3 PK one in each section and 1 PKS mounted on tripod. We had no optics apart from single NSPU night sight. Our platoon had no RPKs.
The tactics described are pretty accurate representation of our army: fire then flank and finish off.
I was a Dutch infantry sergeant in 1993. We used the MAG in combination with a light enhancement scope. One could snipe at night upto 800 metres.
Good intro to MG theory. My father was a Marine Corps Sargent in WWII. I still have his notes on setting up the MG positions for intersecting fire that he brought back from Guadalcanal. Very similar to those diagrams in your video. I was a Navy Hospital Corpsman in Vietnam, so didn't have much chance to learn about the theory behind the guns.
I just recently enlisted to be a Navy Corpsman, hoping to go FMF (Fleet Marine Forces). Do you have any advice?
@@moon-cyclist4565 Would 'Use your demob option for University afterward to train as mediic or Paramedic' count as useful?
Come to think of it, if that's the direction you want to go others here can probably advise when would be a good - vs - not so good time to let others know that's your aim .... so you can maybe get a springboard start whilst still in?
We in Singapore use the FN MAG for many years. And it is still in use.
My experience with it when I was in the service is that it is heavy but when mounted on an armoured vehicle, it is a very stable weapons platform.
This gun is a perfect example between the difference between hard facts and soft facts
The hard facts of this gun is it's not quite as good on paper it doesn't have the same rate of fire and it's heavier
The soft fact is how it's used ,its reliability and how easy it is to get ammunition again another great video
now THATS the right way to put it! I wish I thought of phrasing it like that, hard facts and soft facts is 100% what I wanted to articulate with this . I'll add that idea in a future video, very accurate thanks for the feedback on that
@@Taskandpurpose no problem I just glad I was able to give you some constructive feedback
And a lighter higher rate gun can’t have ammo and reliability?
@@MbisonBalrog Not as likely for a lighter gun to be able to sustain fire as much as a gun made from heavier, better quality materials (as mentioned in the video).
@@Starmast3rmusic but with lighter gun you can have more guns and bring to more positions faster. And you can change barrels too
In video games it doesn't make a huge difference if you have a machine gun or a rifle. But when I did my military service in Germany we had a night shooting on folding targets with tracer ammuinition with the full sqad. I was so impressed by the machine gun because it did 90% of the work. I felt usefless 😅
"In video games it doesn't make a huge difference if you have a machine gun or a rifle"
As a machine gunner main in both Squad and Insurgency: Sandstorm I beg to differ from that statement.
I used the MG3. Shooting with it was amazing.
@@fidamdsaini8452 You're the heavy
@@fidamdsaini8452 to be fair squad and insurgency are far more on the realistic side of fps games than most. In call of duty which is far more arcady using a machine gun instead of an assault rifle is basically handicaping yourself, as the machine guns tend to do very similar damage per hit, have just slightly higher rate of fire and have far worse handling, which means that usually you won't even be able to use the mg before getting killed.
When you see the equipment those machine gun teams have with those heavy tripods for stability, traverse & elevation mechanisms, and the fancy tricks they can do because of their training, it looks real impressive. Above and beyond what a typical guy has to learn and realistically do with an assault rifle.
I love how most countries treat the 240 as essentially a crew weapon and the US just gives it to a big farm boy.
Or the shortest guy. Who then endlessly complains about it.
@@jonharper4478 I was that five foot six inch, 130lb PFC. Meanwhile my squad mate who was 6'4" 320lb former college defensive lineman and Jr. Mr. Universe winner was issued an M4 and carried my spare barrel and tripod.
And thats why you apply for big fat Medic, miss me whit that m240 or Gustaf. Prv.Dirtbag recommends.
they should be issued to houston 7/11 night shift clercs
@@kylepilley778 yup, we usually gave It to the smallest guy, like some cruel joke. I’ve been there too bud haha.
Interestingly, the early machine guns were treated as a form of artillery, being employed _en masse_ to provide indirect fire for area denial. Those heavy water-cooled beasts were known to run for hours, non-stop. As the far lighter air-cooled guns were developed, the modern small-unit tactics were employed, though gunners still train to provide indirect fire if needed.
There's a source somewhere that talks about a British Vickers at the end of WWI which was tested with 1 million rounds of constant firing - from what I remember it was apparently fine!
It’s truly great to see you cover the two different methodologies in employment of the GPMG. When you started talking about machine gun theory, I got a little chub. The m240 series machine gun has a special place in every machine gunners heart. I’ve never heard of anyone who’s extensively used a 240 and hated it. Whereas a lot of SAW gunners have a lot of complaints and stigmas.
If anyone's wondering, I believe the extra mass on the machine gun serves at least 2 purposes:
- 1. It reduces recoil while firing.
- 2. It reduces the barrel's susceptibility to overheat by increasing the amount of thermal mass on the gun.
- 3. Makes grunts grunt more.
In my world, where 2 to 3 day patrols in dry, thorn-tree & elephant-grass terrain, at temperatures up to +42C and icy nights down to -4C, the weight & length of an infantry weapon became a significant factor. Contacts were infrequent, terrain & foliage changes really challenging and individual strength & stamina critical. Most contacts required fire and movement governed by well practiced immediate-action drills. As LMG #1 I most frequently fired short bursts, in a moving-crouching or kneeling position, at an unseen enemy. We seldom spoke, operated silently in sections of 8 men with 1 x LMG & 7 x 7.62 FN riflemen. Overheating was thus not an issue & those who carried the LMGs had forgotten the general effects of recoil. Take care. 🙂
It also allows bigger, beefier parts in general, which adds to the service life of the gun - which is nice because MGs will be going through more ammo than rifles.
Actually the M240 choice had been casual. The one exposed is an explanation "a posteriori"
As said, the US army selected the M60, that's more of a "PKM" style machinegun (but way less durable), light and way less apt to sustained fire than the M240.
The M240 had been selected as vehicular MG (where weight has no importance) only due to the utter failure of the domestically designed M73 and M279.
Then the Marines equipped themselves of M240 dismounted from vehicles simply because their M60s were worn-out beyond usability.
Then the Army followed the Marines without even a real competition, because to keep the M60 operative was becoming way too expensive and time-consuming.
The M240 is heavy only because it has a riveted construction and a BAR style bolt. In respect to a monolitic construction (like for the PKM) a riveted one must be heavier for the same durability, and a BAR-style bolt, locking on the rear of the receiver, requires a more sturdy receiver than a rotating bolt. so yes, the M240 is very durable, but made differently it could have had the same durability weighting less.
Also mind that many NATO countries (Germany, Italy, Turkey,Greece, Spain, Portugal...) use the MG3.
@@neutronalchemist3241 true about the other countries using MG3, but most of those are produced under license. And in recent years countries like Norway have moved to the Minimi/MAG mix package or in the case of Italy limiting it to mounted use whilst dismounted troops use Minimi. Personally I find that the lower MRBF and MRBS numbers for the MG3 compared to the MAG make it a much less desirable weapon, especially considering the minimal difference in weight.
I loved the M-60. However, I learned to respect the 240 in my later US Army career. Even though I was a M-249 gunner on paper, I often used the M-240 variants. They are absolute beasts on the battlefeild.
Watching this video takes me back to my 1 week course on how to use the M60 machine when I was a commo chief in a Combat Engineer unit in the 82 Abn, Why they picked me to attend the school I can't remember (it was in 1983) but it was an eye opener in the placing and use of a machine gun.
as an Israeli tanker, I've fired tens of thousands of rounds out of the FN Mag, and I love it! a great piece of equipment.
thats alot of dead palestinians..
@ManuelB1b3r That's what happens when people don't catch up on their history and believe a bunch of BS without taking the time to look into it
@Beaverish Buck Teeth Where were y’all when Hamas was bombing my friend’s house? Ass.
@Beaverish Buck Teeth similtaniously saying 'killing children bad' yet going around to say that ONE of the SEVERAL GENOCIDES that the Nazis commited with millions of deaths (they had more with less) didn't happen. Which obviously killed a lot of children.
You can say that what isreal doing is wrong without saying that all jews should die.
@Beaverish Buck Teeth why don’t you go help them? Keyboard warrior
1:19 I love the pile of spent brass in the foreground and the spare barrel in the background. Like, this gunner came to do one thing, he's been doing it all day, and he's gonna keep doing it until the sun goes down.
I was one of those weirdos that got stuck in weapons squad, but that's because I was in long enough to serve in every role except platoon sergeant. I was eventually sent to Javelin instructor class and armorer qualed, so to weapons squad I went. I weighed about 145 lbs by then, oh let me tell you, on the way to range day, I was the most miserable Joe in the world. Oh, but once we got there... it was heaven on earth. I could hear the voices of angels coming from the end of the barrels, and the voices sounded like baseball bats hitting you. Maybe that was just the PTSD. Anyway, everything you said in this video was accurate, and it brought me back to the days of being a bright eyed SPC and SGT. I enjoy your content Cappy. Don't forget your Motrin.
Outstanding episode. Keep them coming.
We had the MAG 58 in the Royal Australian Regiment in the 1990's and early 2000's (believe they are still in service). My main memory is that they were bloody heavy and the bosses insisted we carry them as though they were a standard rifle.
5:42 made me lol. I’m a husky guy from the Midwest, always wanted to join the military, haven’t yet, still considering…but my Marine uncle always tells me that if I got into the military, I’d probably get assigned 240 gunner and that I’d “hate every minute of it, especially when you have to carry it.” Lmao
Just make sure to miss all the targets consistently with the machine gun. Better to accept short term swearing and shouting over dragging a thing like this around.
Don’t worry it’s a feather next to the 60
@Anton Taylor Lol I probably won’t.
In college I studied IT with a focus in audio/visual technology, almost got recruited by the Navy and Airforce. Trying to tell me they could use “sonar techs” or other telecom operators lol. Soooo I technically could, but still debating if I’d want to.
@@DankBurrito420 join the air force tacp, would be an amazing career.
Coolest jobs enlisted in the military:
USMC Machinegunner
USMC radioman (DEPENDS HEAVILY ON THE UNIT. This applies to ANGLICO and artillery batteries and the like)
USAF TACP
Intel (wherever)
Anything to do with targeting of artillery and airstrikes (hence TACP and radioman)
Be careful if you sign a contract and join. Don't go open! If you know another language other than English and Spanish, MAKE SURE YOU GET TESTED. If you sign an infantry contract, MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ALL THE PULL-UPS in the world
I feel that the power move here is either designing a gun that matches your abilities and tactics, or matching your abilities and tactics to the guns you have.
If one would use the MG3 in 7,62x51 without the "NATO Handbreak" 1500 shots per minute. It has a certain reputation.
1200
I was in the Canadian Forces late 1980 to early 1990's, when I joined we were still using the FN and the old C5 MG. Once we converted to the C6, C7 and C9 family of weapons (the C6 was the US M240) I had to take a conversion course to relearn how to use the C6. One of the items we covered in the course was the SF Kit (Sustained Fire Kit) the MG used a Tripod instead of the built in bi-pod which made the MG way more accurate also the SF kit could be mated with a Mortar sight which then gave the MG indirect fire capability. Test fire on a certain mil and elevation setting record this information and now I can employ the MG in an indirect roll. This was a great Machine Gun, it could burn through ammo but that is why you carried a lot of the 7.62 linked ammo.
The Dutch use these, together with M249 Minimi's. My dad used to be the squads MAG operator during his obligatory military service. He loved it, because it meant he could sit close to the door of his APC, where he had a slide to smoke out of, whereas the rest of his unit had to wait until they got out again. Military service in the 80s was different, man.
Though there is a designation for the reverse-engineered version of PKM (it's called type 80 GPMG) in the Chinese military, the PLA never adopt type 80 in mass quantity. Soldiers had been using older type67 until the type88 machine gun chambered in 5.8 x 42mm replaced its similar role of a general-purpose machine gun. Fun fact: there's also a Chinese version of FN MAG (CS/LM1)which never got adopted.
Former 0331 here. You hit all the important points. I agree 100% too on the NATO strategy being more sound as well. Nothing like two well oiled machine gun teams laying down suppressive talking guns fire on an objective while 0311s maneuver on it.
I have had the unique opportunity to work with PKM's in the past. One big disadvantage with them is the changing of barrels, that is if you even have a spare barrel. It is much slower and more tedious to change than the MAG 58. It is also a much lighter barrel so that it is not capable of the same volume of fire as the MAG 58. Changing barrels quickly is a force multiplier, just throwing that out there. I also did not like having the feed mechanism outside the receiver. Just seemed wrong to me as if it could malfunction easier. Never did, but being exposed like that, it could. I did like how you could change the gas settings by inserting a cartridge and using the cartridge as a handle, that was kind of cool.
The PKM/PKP are some fine machine guns, but as every weapon design reaching almost half a century of age, it has flaws.
I never used it, but from the videos i have seen ppl mag/belt dumping, it can take quite a few rounds before the barrel needs to cool off, changing it seems to be ok, though not comparable with newer designs, especially because you will need some gloves to do it if it got really hot.
Still, it is in the category "old but gold", just as the MG42/MG3 is.
@@DerDrecksack87 Not sure what “newer designs” you are referring to? The NATO MG I am comparing the PKM to is the MAG 58 and it is an older MG. The MAG 58 came out in 1958 were as the PKM came out in 1969, which is based on the PK which came out in 1961, both newer than the MAG 58.
If you have never fired both MG’s, take it from me, the MAG 58 can dump a hell of a lot more ammo than the PKM. As far as changing barrels, you don’t need one with the MAG 58 Flex. Coax, yes, but I am comparing like MG’s. Also, the barrel change is much faster with the MAG 58. The PKM you have to push a slider that locks the barrel in place to the left. That slider often becomes very difficult to move when it gets hot and carboned up. The barrel is also very difficult to slide out depending on the maintenance done on the MG. Hands down the barrel changes on the MAG 58 is way faster and it can handle a lot more ammo before changing barrels.
I think is reare to bump fire a weopon to overheat
I mean you are not in the range
The weight on the other hand.....i think russina did the right choice
@@efirizaki6457 Bud, these machine guns...You dont bump fire them, they are fully automatic, so the gun does the bump fire for you, and in combat, it is more likely that you will have to change barrels, especially considering american doctrine of "keep pouring lead on em til they cant even think. THEN kill them"
I dont know what military doctrine you know of, but both PKM and M240 will require a barrel change atleast once in a drawn out firefight. With the pkm, thats gonna take you a couple of minutes to do, where as with the M240, its literally just "Turn, Pull, toss, Grab new barrel, Insert, Turn. Resume fire"
Thats not including the fact that the barrel is durable enough to put out atleast double the amount of bullets compared to the PKM before needing a barrel change.
Russia did the right choice for its doctrine of "machine gunner is just rifleman with bigger rifle" Where as American doctrine has machine guns in a separate tactic bracket.
@@dierdred_the_gray i be honest
I never got to a gunfight
If the data is in line with what you say then yes but i imaging it otherwise
@Task & Purpose There is a reason why a Weapons Squad Leader and squad members could not be moved/switched around without the Battalion Commanders approval (at least in Light Infantry and PIR's. Love the 240 - the employment and theory of machine gun is one of the most important things the average line squad is NOT taught. The Employment in a patrol base and as FPF's would have been a good topic for this video. Also I believe the only proper replacement for the 240 is the MG338 - and the 6.8mm can replace the SAW in the Automatic Rifle role. Great content brother.
In the British Army we call it the GPMG, because we just have to be different. I think it is the only piece of kit that nobody complains about, and feels universal love from everybody. Not an easy thing to achieve.
That was a great mini-seminar in military science. I would love to have more about the science, tactics and strategy of land warfare. I was a sailor and don't know much about this aspect of the military. Thanks.
Not really a military guy but damn these videos are very educational and entertaining! Keep up the good work!
As a spare parts viewer I automatically liked the video even though Cappy never got promoted for providing it. I hope at least mentioned in dispatches.
M240 was/is a great coax mounted MG on the M60 and M1 tanks. Easy to clean, easy to operate
I fell in love with the GPMG at a UOTC camp in the early 1980s, when a corporal called Wilf from the Devon & Dorsets gave me a wicked grin, 200 rounds of 4B1T disintegrating link, and the fire order "Gun, 200 metres, target to your front, in your own time, f****ing obliterate it."
A couple of years ago I had the chance of firing it again after a gap of 35 years. This time it had an optical sight and a miniature ballistic computer. I was pleased to find I could still tick off two-round bursts.
One thing about "NATO doctrine" -- the doctrine you describe of keeping the M240 in specialist MG squads is a specifically American thing. US MG doctrine has always been very conservative, preserving the distinction between "automatic rifle" (mag fed, fired off a bipod, in the rifle squad) and "machine gun" (belt fed, fired off a tripod, in a specialist MG squad) far longer than most countries. Everybody else was happy to call the squad weapon a light machine gun, and, since the Germans had the idea in time for WW2, use the same weapon in "automatic rifle" and "MG" roles. Practically every NATO army other than the US is, or has been, entirely happy to use a GPMG as a squad weapon, in the same way PKMs are used in the east.
Partly I believe this is because of the extraordinary difficulty the US armed forces have had in fielding a good light machine gun. The first really good LMG, the Lewis, was an American design, but production was all bought up by the Brits and Belgians before the US joined in WW1. The BAR was neither fish nor fowl nor good red herring, designed for the short-lived French doctrine of marching fire, and modified between the wars to make a decidedly second-rate squad LMG. The Browning M1919A6 was another example (along with the MG08/15, Maxim-Kolesnikov and Maxim-Tokarev) of putting an MMG on a bipod (possibly having removed the cooling jacket) and calling it "light", which didn't fool anyone, because it wasn't. The Johnson gun, for some reason, never really caught on, the Marines ultimately replacing them with BARs. The attempt at reverse-engineering the MG-42 failed thanks to sheer incompetence. The M-60, when it came along, was not really in the same league as the MG-42 and its offspring (MG-42/59, MG-1, MG-3) or the FN MAG, or even the AAT-52; making the gas regulator an autonomic sealed system destroys much of the advantage of gas operation, and putting the bipod on the changeable barrel is bloody stupid, nobody needs to carry spare bipods.
The US Army finally got a decent LMG with the Minimi. The current fad for replacing them in the squad with the IAR is, I remain convinced, a harmfully stupid idea and a reversion to the bad old ways of people who believe that an "automatic rifle" does a different job to an LMG.
I was weapons squad in Afghanistan, gunner and AG. Even though my back still hurts from all that weight I loved the 240! Curious to see what the replacement will be though
The weight of the weapon is only an asset when controlling recoil impulses off the bipod. Other than that, 27.6 lbs is downright excessive. The 240 is a damn fine weapon, but is better suited for coax or fixed positions on a tripod. If I'm patrolling, I think I'd rather take the pkm.
It's heavy because it's also used in the sf role and needs that weight for reliability
M240L which is the infantry variant, weighs 21 pounds, not 27.6, which is for the vehicle mounted variants where you dont have to worry about compressing a poor ground pounders spine. Nice job payin attention to the video.
@@dierdred_the_gray Funny, I never had a 240L when I was in. I had a 240B. And I had to carry that heavy 27.6lb fucker all over God's creation. The coax version is the 240C, genius. Got any more smart ass remarks?
Canadian Army infantryman here, you can thank us for revolutionizing the theory of machinegun fire, specifically in Korea when we first started using machine guns for indirect fire purposes and basically writing the machinegun Bible as we call it, a 70ish page document specifically about machinegun fire theory that many NATO countries have now adopted as the basis for their machinegun doctrine.
UK forces used to call in the general.
In SF role it is awesome
We've been through this before.
The PKM does not have a max range any greater than the M240.
Same size bullet, with the same velocity.
It's impossible for one to shoot farther than the other.
The cartridge is larger though 7.62x51 for the M240 and 7.62x54r for the PKM I could see where people get it from
Effective range is not the max distance the bullet will travel.
@@kriminalkeagz153
Yes, I'm fully aware.
The PKM doesn't have a max effective range farther than the M240.
Same BC, same bullet weight, same bullet velocity.
Get it yet? It's physically impossible for the PKM to have a greater max effective range.
What people do is state the max effective range of an M240 on a BIPOD and compare it to the PKM on a TRIPOD.
@@jameson1239
Yeah the size of the cartridge doesn't mean much. There's actually the same case capacity. The external ballistics are identical.
The bullets aren't the same size, just the same diameter - The 7.62x54r bullet is heavier. If you take two bullets with identical diameter and speed, the heavier of the two will fly farther because it has more kinetic energy (And thus is less susceptible to air friction).
But can’t you apply the same doctrine of the M240 to the PKM as well?
My understanding is that the PKM isn't as well suited for that doctrine because it cannot sustain the same rate of fire since the barrel is lighter weight. The new PKM has a heavier barrel for longer sustained fire but it cannot be quick changed. Russian forces do not want to invest in as much training on these kind of machine gun principals so they have the PKM in a different role. They use it as kind of their M249 and their M240. That's what my opinions on it is though, other's might have different thoughts !
@@Taskandpurpose I see! I only formed my opinion based on their weight - PKM needs to be light for infantry to carry on foot, while M240 can be heavier since NATO armies are more defensive and can afford mechanization.
Edit: I was surprised by Marines switch to M27 though, saw your video on that.
@@thomaszhang3101 M27 replaced the M249 SAW not the M240
@@Taskandpurpose you know little about pkm or in my country case m84 barrel can be easily change in the field
@@Taskandpurpose A PKM barrel is easy to quick change. th-cam.com/video/5QMtRP9CzfA/w-d-xo.html There's a little latch on the left forward side of the receiver. Lift up your cover, lift up the feed tray, twice the carry handle, push forwards, grab new barrel, pull backwards, twist down, lower covers, resume.
The PKM is applied for heavier fire dominance and mostly for suppression. The squad leader will usually try to keep with it so he can direct it. The bulk of Russian squad fire is brought by the riflemen using automatic fire from their AK's. For extra fire there are RPK's. The ideal squad is 11 men with 1 PKM, 2 RPK, 8 AK-74, + 3 RPG.
I somehow always ended up with this behemoth. Felt like a fucked up joke at first as I was the smallest dude, but I learned to appreciate the challenge and responsibility. Good to know it's a more timeless and universal weapon system than I thought.
Chris you're knowledge on weapons and military tactics are spot on, great information on the war in Ukraine 🇺🇸..
The only time I've been under fire from a PKM it was massively inaccurate, even at close range (30-40m) (mainly due to the Taliban operator) and my LMG gunner who was the target of the fire had plenty of cover. Unfortunately for the rest of us the target was obscured so we just sprayed and prayed hoping to hit something whilst my section 2i/c just launched 40mm UGL from the standing position hoping for a lucky strike.
Pretty awesome video you hit the nail on the head with how the 240 is used you never disappoint
Good article cappie.
I an ex NZ Army. They used a 7.62 GPMG of British origin. Very heavy, but awesome reliability.
Replaced by minimi 5.56
I really enjoyed your explanation of the m 240 and how it is deployed.
Great stuff worth switching onto. Love it.
M240 is great, its just confuses operators with its open bolt positioning.
Most MG are open bolt, few exceptions so
imagine using an M240. This post was made by the danes
Pretty good summary on our MG tactics. I was a MG squad leader where we integrated the M2 dismount air mobile. To increase effectiveness against light armor. Same tactics, worked beautifully.
I do reenacting for WW2 as a German machine gunner. The tactics you described are almost the exact same tactics the Wehrmacht and the German army today. The major difference is the slow rate of fire for the M240 because Americans prefer the slow rate of fire for ground use (since WW1). The German doctrine of the MG-42 is more like a long range shotgun because the Germans found out the time the enemy is out of cover is very short so a higher rate of fire is needed to hold a chokepoint. With the tripod, its adjustments are fine so I will lay hate down on a fixed area where the enemy is going through because you can't adjust aim as quick as the bipod or AA mount. Also a big use of the STG-44's full auto capability was to provide covering fire when the squad machine gun was down. (Since the MG-42 was the vast majority of the German squad's firepower)
Biggest missed part I feel was comparing the reliability of the PMK. You mention the FN being good with NATO doctrine... but didn't really compare just how the PKM itself would handle if it was used in that same doctrine and method, the goal being the guns, rather than the doctrine here for a comparison many would argue. Yes, doctrine matters, but within that context, is a machinegun that fires longer ranges more accurately and weighs less letting you instead carry more ammo not still better? Or is it not because the rate of fire is lower making it not suppress enemies as well, or the reliability on the PKM is so low that you'd expect constant jams or failures or barrel replacements meaning you can't keep using it to suppress or mow down an area for long enough reliably enough to fulfill the NATO doctrines roll. What is it about the PKM that would make it worse in the context of the NATO doctrine.
I can try to intuit or guess some of that myself, but you didn't really clarify that area well so it's the big question I was left with at the end, having expected you to cover that the entire time only for the video to end without the final more direct comparison (in context) being made.
I got the impression that the PMK couldn't sustain the same volume of fire as the FN. I also got the impression the PMK didn't have the durability of the FN.
"What is it about the PKM that would make it worse in the context of the NATO doctrine?"
I'd also like to know the answer to this question.
@@ddegn Ya, it was that general impresion, finer details not really answered about the reliability or rof of the PKM, or just how those differences along with range and weight could play into the given doctrines and actual usage.
@@ddegn Made in the wrong country. There are several NATO countries that field PK's now. And it has a quick change barrel that works just fine.
@@Mortablunt Thanks.
@@ddegn Don't take my word uncritically, I'm dredging knowledge from a long time ago.
Being on the gun team gave me some of my favorite memories from my time in. It was so fun competing against the other platoons for the fastest set up time.
"Those are countries that normally can't even agree on what's acceptable to dip your fries into."
CHIPS. THEY ARE CALLED CHIPS.
These are my favorite videos as I really enjoy the mechanics of the weapons, and the tactics used to maximize their use. Thanks for taking the time to explain all this to a smooth brain like me.
Robert Heinlein said “More than 2 people can’t decide where to eat dinner much less any other decision” paraphrased.
in the Canadian infantry every soldier is taught how to operate, maintain and fire the C9 (LMG) and C6 (the FN) as effectively as possible, this makes it so that if the C6 #1 position goes down, someone else in the section or Platoon can fill that position just as effectively as the person serving the weapon, now obviously the longer you are in the position the more experience you get, the more effective you become, but it keeps the MGs going. most times the first courses you go on in the infantry for QL4 is either driver of and MLVW (duce and a half) , Mortar or machine gun, and its not uncommon to go on all three.
also while the C6 is still crewed by two people, it is still part of the platoon and not treated like a detachment, usually positioned in the HQ section of the platoon.....kind of like a half and half between NATO and Russia. the team is normally the base of fire for an attack and can be added to to make a Weapons team from members of the platoon who have other crew served weapons. like the mortars or the 84mm carl G. the platoon in the Canadian armed forces is supposed to be as self sufficient as possible (with in reason of course) which is why a platoon will also have access to all support weapons ( mortar, MG. Anti-tank etc). of course a platoon isn't going to fight alone most times if these weapons are need, the company usually assembles a specific weapons team based on the needs etc etc. I'm just saying the Canadian Infantry Platoon can support its self if needed, and doesn't require detachments or specific groups, but will still use them because "more people better"
I serve in armed forces that use UKM2000. It might looks like PKM but it's chambered NATO 7,62 and has FN MAG feeding mechanism. We use it mostly with EOTECH 512(sometimes with 3x magnifier).
Firing from an open bolt in a handheld weapon such as a SMG is less accurate because the mass of the bolt travelling forward prior to firing. This isn't really a problem with a heavy, bipod mounted weapon.
The real benefit of firing from an open bolt in a belt-fed MG is that it improves airflow and thus cooling.
It also prevents "cookoffs" from occurring as cartridges aren't kept in a hot chamber between shots.
An excellent video explaining the correct way to use a machine gun. I learned a lot.
Hey Cappy,
Just informing you that the Australian military (specifically the army) uses the F98 Minimi and the Maximi machine guns, and, I think that I would prefer the PKM over the M240.
I am Aussie, I'm sure you could guess that.
Germany: * uses MG3 *
In Singapore, our military currently use the FN MAG as our General Purpose Machine Gun.
Nope, my NATO country uses the PKM.
Edit: And I don't see why you couldn't employ the same tactics with the PKM.
Because Cappy kept spouting non-sense throughout the video.
The M240 is a fine gun, but the 7.62x54R is a much better GPMG round. So much less head spacing issues with rimmed cartridges too.
Australian Army stopped using them in squad roles around 2010ish now they’re just support roles as mentioned with the US doctrine
In Sustained fire role off a tripod with a C2 sight max effective range of our MAG 58s was listred at 2400m, and I have personally used it at longer ranges with spotters calling in adjustments on fall of shot. On our Direct Fire Support weapons course in 92 we had 8 guns full sustained fire kit tripod c2 sight 4 spare barrels and went through 24000 rounds per gun over 8 hours without a gun breaking, most in final protective fire missions, 200 rd burst. As a section weapon it was often employed as a LMG in the assult, firing and moving with a 58 sorted the men from the boys, and i still have the scars on my forearms from brass bouncing off the ground down my sleeves. Amazingly accurate reliable weapon.
That was very interesting, I didn't know the doctrine was so in depth. All I remember from when I did the British Army induction course when I was 16 was that NOBODY wanted to carry the GPMG or the Carl Gustav and because I was chunky I always got lumbered with them! LOL
I was both a M60 gunner and M240 gunner. The concepts of walking fire into enemy covered and concealed spaces was my biggest concern for achieving fire superiority in the unexpected encounter (ambush or not). The 240 had a better rhythm of fire but required more effort and fire discipline for controlled precision fire. The 240 with optics and improved recoil, would have been a dream come true. I found that crews that were so well trained that they ran the advance of troops was better than a platoon daddy or squad leader (God forbid an Lt.) giving fire direction. Giving AG's cues on enemy movement was better than direction.
I wish the US had stayed with m60 and developed it more. The m60E6 is one hell of a weapon. That being said the MG68 looks like a beast in its own right
As a former machine gunner, I appreciate this.
Definitely will be applying this to Squad. I always play the machine gunner class and tend to focus on single targets
Yo make more machine gun theory!! as a civilian learning about all te types of fire is crazy i, never thought of using bullets like that.
i never realized cappy was a vampire, he's got some fangs
Excellent. Thanks for making.
Thanks Chris, I work on a military range complex and it’s great to learn more about the 240.
You definitely should have used a clip from the original Red Dawn on the explanation of fields of fire . Would have taken this video over the top . 🤣 Love this channel. Keep up the good work.
Just from some of the material I’ve read, I get this feeling that the PKM is being used as a SAW weapon when something like the RPD should be filling that role.
Back in the eighties the max range of GPMG was said to be 1100 because that's where the tracer burns out, or longer if you could spot the strike. So I don't know where you're getting 800 from.
What are you talking about? MG3 master race! Just pure metal down the range (pun intended).
Wow! Thank you. This video is packed full of useful data for civilians.
You opened up with the "they all use the American M240"
The facts are, you should've started out with the FN MAG and then branched out from there, using British GIMPY second and so on and so on. We've used it since the 1960's, my Dad, who is nearly 80, used it as a Grenadier Guardsman in the mid 60's. That's how old and how damn good it is.
In Afghan, British soldiers were well know to use it as an individual weapon, sometimes firing from the hip, and wade out suppressing numerous positions to give their mates a chance to move. And we also use map predicted fire role as an almost artillery tactic.
The gimpy is a great weapon system especially when apart of a guns platoon mounted on tripods nothing prettier than 1 bit ammo and 20 round bursts at night! 💪
PKM is used in a similar manner to the SAW, also the optic for the the 240/249 mainly is the M145.
Sincerely grumpy old cavalry man
The PKM is, in American parlance, a Squad Automatic Weapon / S.A.W. that fires 7.62mm. As you know, the Russian philosophy is to put as many bullets down-range as possible while they close with the enemy.
So, I'm a Tabletop RPG GM (think Dungeons and Dragons, only we're playing a much more modern game) and I need to be able to think like a Field Officer to some degree when my players come against more formalized military opponents. To that end, this video has been *enormously* informative, and I'd like to ask for more of these kind, covering more tactical docterines etc to help me fill my role. Thanks!
From now on, my machine gun will ALWAYS be named Carl.
Holy crap you have over 600k subscribers now, I remember when you were at 60k
it's been a crazy ride, good to have you aboard for so long ! back then the videos were rough to get through haha I could barely present
I think there is also tactical difference in useing dynamic.
M240 squad tactic is perfect for planned actions, while PKM tactics allow more improvisation since it's kinda close support.
Love the tactics part explained. Please give me some more of this knowledge :)
The mag 58 was a beast. 13kg never forget it. I miss my Minimi (skippy m249) much lighter 7.5kg and very accurate.
I think a key thing you left is the classifications of fire for the 240B i.e respect to ground, respect to target, respect to gun. Also, the weapons squad is mainly an infantry thing. Engineers for example do three squads and each one has 2 saws and 1 240b because often an engineer squad will get attached to an infantry platoon.
interesting I wasn't aware how differently engineers set up thats good to know. could make an itneresting video in the future
Appreciate the nod to Australian soldiers in WWII, the Australian Defence Force often innovates well in combat, during both WWII and in Vietnam new methods of close resupply were created by Australians.
One of my favorite weapons of all time. The operating video has one thing wrong though: the spent casings are expelled thru the bottom, not the side. Only the links go out on the opposite side of the (feeding) belt.
MG-338 is the proper M240 replacement.
The MG-6.8 is part of the NGSW program, so; assuming the MCX Spear is the M4's substitute, the MG-6.8 is gonna replace the M249 SAW.
When I was conscripted into the Australian infantry for VN, we were familiarised with the M60 as well. This day, the instructing corporal demonstrated its shot pattern at a range of 300 meters where most of the rounds seemed to hit all around the distant target. This left us somewhat puzzled until after he'd finished, he looked up from the open sights and said, " "The GPMG is designed for hopeless shots like you lot so that at least one of the rounds is bound to hit one VC at least." for a long lasting laugh to erupt from all of us.
I love this video!! Good stuff.
Though couldn't you just take the PKM and use it with the NATO tactics? You don't have the quick change barrell, but....
the PKM DOES have a quick change barrel!!
Thanks for the informative video. Great as usual. I hope everything goes well backstage too. Hold on!
Excellent video!! You paid attention in the crew served weapons course and it shows. This is a great basic understanding for the uninitiated and would be a great preface for anyone preparing to attend a course.
In the Australian army The M240 is called the Mag58 and it isn’t our primary squad/section machine gun, the f89 5.56mm is the main MG for your infantry section with the Mag58 being used in our support company in a Direct fire support weapon role
Gonna apply these tactics in Onward VR
That desync at the end makes my brain hurt
"Husky privates from the midwest..." That is how I became M249 saw gunner for Afghanistan.