The super-light Barrett M240LW GPMG, with firearms and weapon expert Jonathan Ferguson
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ส.ค. 2024
- The FN MAG is one of the top 3 machine guns in the world today, according to Jonathan. In 2010, Barrett began a programme of improving the already excellent design focusing on reducing its 27.6lbs of weight. Remarkably, the designers managed to drop this by almost a quarter. Jonathan explains how they managed it.
Barrett M240LW patent: patents.google...
Barrett M240 LW receiver patent: patents.google...
Chapters
0:00 Introduction
1:34 Weight reduction programme
4:20 Barrel details
4:55 Patented two-part receiver
6:01 Metal trimmings
6:33 Markings
7:27 Carrying handle
8:06 Buttstock
10:10 Handguard system
11:17 Bipod system
13:28 Birmingham Nitro Proof
13:40 Object History
16:02 Outro
Subscribe to our channel for more videos about arms and armour
Help us bring history to life by supporting us here: royalarmouries...
Sign up to our museum membership scheme here: royalarmouries...
⚔Website: royalarmouries...
⚔Blog: royalarmouries...
⚔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.
![[Full Episode] MasterChef Junior Thailand มาสเตอร์เชฟ จูเนียร์ ประเทศไทย Season 3 Episode 9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jsjwpd_ER8g/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out an interview with Chris Barrett on the 240LW development here: smallarmsreview.com/the-interview-chris-barrett-part-ii/
And Miles Vining’s article on the LWS variant here: sadefensejournal.com/barrett-240-lws/
I was in the US Army infantry when my unit switched from the M240B to the M240L. It was a very noticeable difference.
I loved the 240L being in weapons. Gun 2 was my baby.
The m240B was an absolute nightmare to carry around. No matter how you placed it on your back while marching, it never felt right 😂
We just got some factory new 240Ls doesn't help me with the tripod or ammo, but I know my gunner appreciates it.
@@MightyRedWolf i feel you brother. I mean for us machinegunners a lighter tripod would be much more comfort, but lets be honest, in a firefight, a hefty stury tripod is just the best to lay down some accurare suppressive fire.
@690409 just let's them send it! AB's and AT's were always thought to carry the brunt. Nah, AG's carry the most. 100x 7.62 weighs roughly 7 lbs, plus your tripod, plus your actual kit, spare barrels, and for my unit being a team lead. God lbs added fast.
Jonathan literal firearm warlock with that clap
So that's what keeper means
👏🏻🧙🏻
He is the keeper of peace and claps warlock cheeks
It was sincerely a delightful surprise bumping into you at the petrol station last week!
Many thanks for the wonderfully informative content and for being a huge voice in UK firearms history!
Haha, hello! Nice to meet you also. You were wanting something on sporting shotguns, if I recall?
@@jonathanferguson1211 Hello again!
Yes indeed (well remembered!), that would be superb please!
Something on the gunmakers making "London Best Guns" and the pinnacle of craftsmanship, artistry, and innovation prior to the First World War (when, sadly, most of the gunmakers and engravers were lost to The Great War and the quality of materials available post 1918 declined), would indeed be most greatly appreciated!
Some of the London gunmakers made a handful of revolvers in the smokeless era too, I believe Purdey & Holland both made some very rare pieces, but I’ve found it very difficult to find much in the way of information on the subject.
Many thanks again and warmest regards
Ben
@@benbeattie4609i for one love this idea
I was a US Army Guard Cavalry Scout, and we had M240L's over 10 years ago.
I enjoy Jonathan's appearance on Cunk On Earth. He did a great job of keeping it together despite Philomena's inane questions!
I, too, have wondered why they spent so much effort on WW1 when they already knew there was going to be a sequel.
Thank you. A career highlight for sure.
The milling reminds a lot of the isogrid used in space applications. It's used because it has an incredible strength and stiffness for the weight, far more than something like a honeycomb structure. Whilst it's obviously far less rigid with the very shallow design used here, it's likely still a great weight vs performance given the depth limits imposed on practical military firearms use. The drawback is the extreme expense which limits it to space applications - likely substantially lower in this design but I'd be shocked if it's not still a very expensive process.
Kinda like the aesthetic of UNSC ships' internal structures in the HALO video games.
@@Seraphus87 haha yes - I immediately thought of the Pillar of Autumn :)
Interesting observation, thanks.
Lots of ARs are machined that way, both uppers and lowers.
Slight correction, the 240 Bravo WAS our infantry standard. It's currently the 240 Lima, basically a cut-down version of the gun
So it's a spare barrel.
We are still hauling around the 240B’s in the Reserve. Would be nice to get the Limas someday.
@@papercartridges6705Do you think that 4 inches of barrel makes a difference? I'm not convinced the M4 stock would survive extended combat service either.
@@zoiders honestly, another 6 inches off the length wouldve been awesome in Afghan, the Bravo is just too long to shoulder comfortably without choking up on the gun, and blocking the ejection port
@@PopeMetallicusShoulder? It's a machine gun. How to tell people you weren't really in the army.😂
The M240L was my favorite weapon the best rate of fire accuracy was amazing with the perfect beating zone she was heavy still but was the perfect weight Rakkasan
Rakkasan!
The PKM is still better. It also proves theres no need for GPMGs to be so heavy. Im hoping to see NATO armies get lots of 6.8 and .338 calibre lightweight machine guns with recoil management systems built in. The sigs are a start
@@Ukraineaissance2014 240l is still better pkm is my second choice I prefer the accuracy of 240l and easy ability to add an optic,peq box,and thermals
@@urdnotdank2642 is seem to remember the poles made an MG that was a mix between the 240 and the PKM in 7.62 NATO and with rails. Id love to give it a go.
Every time I watch one of these videos I'm thrilled to learn something new and jealous of Jonathan for having the greatest job in the world.
''Wake up, the new Royal Armouries video dropped.''
As one of the larger blokes in the platoon I'm often carrying the Gimpy, a lighter one would be lovely, but probably not gonna happen within my service lifetime.
Sadly, I think you're right :(
I'm surprised no arms manufacturer ever machined an isogrid into their receivers. It's a technique from the aerospace industry where a tiling of equilateral triangles is machined away except for small ridges in between the triangles. Greatly reduces weight without much loss of strength and rigidity.
the LWS model with the grip moved forward is a huge improvement knowing how long and awkward 240s are
Editing on the opening is hilarious, great job lads.
Credit to Jack the producer there...
I hope to get a range day video between Ian and Johnathan. Hell, let's make it a trifecta and add in C&Rsenal in there.
Good luck!
I want to see Jonathan at Finnish Brutality. I'd say Desert Brutality too, but I feel his temperate Scottish genes might explode in the southwest heat.
@tarmaque does Johnathan do run and gun, or is he just a flat range guy?
@@williamjeffersonclinton69 Dunno. Probably not since such things in the UK are probably so restricted as to be impractical.
They definitely would. I would also be absolutely hopeless :D@@tarmaque
Love this weapon it looks so good, the machining must have substantially upped the price but it looks so professional.
With the increased price in the UK’s case I couldn’t see it being purchased for anyone other than Special Forces though.
With more use of titanium and a little more machining they could have reduced the weight a little more possibly but that would have pushed the cost higher still for a minimal weight loss so I can see why they didn’t do it.
Great video just wish here in the UK we could have access to firearms even if just at ranges.
I believe the British Army was also in on the overall project (not the Barrett one) for titanium receivers, not certain but don't think they do that, or declare it in any way when they work on SF projects
My uncle had both in his collection
And got to shoot both at CFB border while I was a army cadet with the Queens Own Rifles
It took me a week to stop thinking and smiling
You have one of the most assume jobs in the world
So jealous
Thank you for sharing
God bless
Just saying
Murfreesboro, TN. That is just a 1 hour and 30 minutes from me. Neat! 🤠
Well, that’s a sexy beast, I must say!
Got to try out the Swedish version of the FN Mag, the KSP58, during my conscripted military service back in the 80’s. Was a fun gun to shot and especially fun at one particular exercise where we as the enemy (lede fi) did a mounted assault from a beach landing. I operate the KSP58 from the top of the vehicle (4x all terrain) to mimic a BMP. I think I used up a couple of hundred blank cartridges that day. Great fun until the evening when you had to clean it in the field!😂
And here I’m, serving in 2023 with KSP58 made in 1971
I don't know, if the museum even has it, but I always been interested in why the M85 machine gun was such a failure, although I've read that it was due to unreliability. it was originally developed as a smaller and lighter alternative to the M2 Browning for use in tanks, while still using the same ammunition. according to Wikipedia the UK at least tested it. nevertheless it's kind of funny that the venerable M2 has survived to this day, while its replacement didn't and tanks went back to using M2s very much like in the Second World War.
There are some pretty good interviews with either some engineers of the time or maybe guys from the trials/adoption process... I wish I could remember where I watched that... They basically laughed about how it was designed and how awful it was because of certain issues that continued to be worked around instead of redesigned... Or maybe it was the designers complaining about the manufacturing changes for cost/ease of production? 🤔 It's been a few years since I watched it, but it was very enlightening on why it was so bad... I believe Ian at ForgottenWeapons also has either a specific video on it or covered some of the issues in another .50 cal video. But I too would like a Jonathan review/background of the system... I could watch the same weapon reviewed by both Ian and Jonathan without ever getting bored or losing interest 😉👍 Maybe just try searching it on youtube and you'll find the video I'm referring to, Although if I remember correctly they covered a few different designs during that video, I wish my memory was better so I could be more helpful! 😒
Nice one, thanks Jonathan and team.
Love you platonicaly Johnathan 🎉
Currently Geissele owns the rights to the LWS package, having purchased it from Barrett
Yep - hopefully there's an on-screen box that says that in the video.
In 2020, Geissele Automatics announced the acquisition of the technical data packages and intellectual property for the 240LW and 240LWS
Very impressive piece of engineering
Another informative video thank you. I will have to arrange another visit as I have not seen this on display
Sadly, like many of the things we show you in this series, it's not on public display :(
I spent 6 years in the Marine Corps carrying an M240B. My back definitely wishes that the weight was reduced.
I think this is probably better. While the milling seems bit more expensive, titanium is that much more expensive. So overall I think this is probably superior.
Between thr FN Mag, the m240B , the M240L, the M240LW, the minimi, then the MAXimi. It feels like there are 7 different paths of the MAG being made lighter then heavier again.
Reminds me of the MG08 and its ilk
The US Army's issued a solicitation for 6.8x51mm conversion kits for the M240B & M240L so I guess they aren't going anywhere yet.
USMC is going down a very different path. Everyone in the squad with the same rifle, magazine fed. Down to the same barrel size, some magazine, same sight, bipod and grip. Everyone on the same piece of equipment.
It's got some interesting implications.
At least if I remember the document in question.
i thought we went away from line infantry doctrines but ok
weirdly enough i think that was a strange ploy to get rid of the m4 and introduce the hk416 without "replacing" the m4
This gun is beautiful
I can not wait for the future where you get to talk about Ray's gun!
It would be great for you to interview someone from the small arm school corp who deals with assessing firearms for the Uk MOD
Very interesting video. As always. ^^
Barrett approves!
Don’t listen to them, you are perfect
11:07 he says fluting on the barrel will help with cooling. I understand this conceptually but has anyone got numbers or a test report on how much it actually changes?
Thanks for covering the history of the M240LW and its design, I was hearing about this gun for a long time, but not in such detail.
0:19 Given that the gun has a KeyMod, and Barret started advertising it about 2007, I would say that there's a typo in the card here.
1:52 Is it though? Titanium is both expensive in its own right and hard to work with, and by going to stamped steel construction one can get a better weight reduction. Barret's approach here makes sense if production volume is expected to be low, but this seemingly was not the case for the FN. But ultimately this story once again shows that you can't design to win a rigged competition.
4:06 Still, about the weight of the Darne machinegun from the 1920s or '30s. Given that a MAG is basically a belt-fed BAR, these would be contemporary designs in their origins. So much for eighty years of evolution. And it still pales in comparison to the more modern designs like the PKM (not to mention the FN Maximi and the likes), which are significantly lighter still.
4:38 There is research showing that even with modern technology there are limitations to the reduction of the barrel length, but arguably machineguns firing from the open bolt are the last to see these detriments play any significant role.
7:47 What would be the benefits of pivoting it forwards?
9:36 I'm not sure how one should grip it for better control. Also, it seems to lack a folding shoulder rest, another useful feature for a machinegun.
10:15 I find it quite amusing that some manufacturers like HK keep pushing it, despite the results of the US comparative trials of a few years past, which clearly favoured M-Lock.
12:08 By the way, could anyone enlighten me on how the M60 bipod was considered by its users? As I recall, that gun had a lot of ergonomic detriments.
14:50 That's in no small part why I'm watching this series: you manage to find interesting pieces from any and all periods and help broaden my worldview on gun design & evolution, so to speak.
0:19 Yes, unfortunately there was a misunderstanding there. This gun was completed in 2019! I've asked for a correction.
7:47 Patent WO2017027072A1 covers this (page 31 and fig. 42 - I'll ask the team to put the link in the description but you can find it with that number).
@@jonathanferguson1211 Thanks a lot for providing a patent number, it's easily searchable, and page & illustration numbers are a great help too (besides, 42 is an answer in and of itself😉)!
The FN Mk48 filled the role the "lightweight" 240's were meant for. The titanium 240's had a ridiculous price tag, IIRC, they were close to 90,000€ each.
I feel like the Maximi would also be a bit more ergonomic than this M240LW, and cheaper to make in large quantities than both of the 240s, being largely stamped.
_PS_ If this 90 grand figure is true, that's utterly ridiculous. Given that Barret considered the competition rigged, I would strongly suspect large kickbacks going the way of the US procurement officials.
That does seem expensive, but how long do the gun last. If they last 50 years with minimal maintenance then it could be worth it.
@@F1ghteR41 apparently the welded titanium Barrett's were around $90k, the FN US Army contract 240L's are about $50,000 USD, while a 2023 baseline 240B is only $6,600 USD.
A Mk48 is around $13-15k USD, is 3.5 lbs lighter depending on BBL length, and has a 70% parts commonality with the M249 and Mk46.
Logistically, I'd take six Mk48's over one M240L any day. But the M240L is considered crew served (2 guys) and is meant for fixed positions, while the Mk48 is man portable with a single operator.
Even then, the M240L does seems a bit pricey vs both a 240B and a Mk48.
Mk48/Maximi was great to carry, but beats itself to death very quickly when used…as a machine gun 🙃
@@2805662 the Aussie Maximi version is sweet , it reminds me of the L2A1 SLR.
Perhaps a Mk48 in titanium would do the trick? However, if money isn't a factor, the SIG M5 in 6.5x51mm hp stainless cased, is lighter than a SAW, and hits farther and harder than 7.62 NATO. Hopefully there'll be a video about that soon.
They also made a shorter version, with the pistol grip moved forward somewhat, and a shorter stock. I believe they have sold the rights to Geissele.
Handguard??!! We never seemed to need one of those! Bipod fitting looks very much like the later Parker Hale type that was sort of styled after a BREN and was used on early L96A1 sniper rifles.
The second I heard "Titanium" I knew it was going to be an expensive gun. Titanium itself is expensive and working with it is a pain in the ass, I've never welded it and I never want to.
Someone in the comments here claims that M240L is worth about 90,000€, which is utterly ridiculous if true. Given that Barret considered the competition rigged, I would strongly suspect large kickbacks going the way of the US procurement officials.
@@F1ghteR41 I doubt its 90,000 considering the original M240 was closer to 7k, I can't find a source for that 90,000 figure, there was a deal with FN to procure a number of the M240L variant for 50 million but they don't specify how many.
@@WarlordEnthusiast Well, the original M240 wasn't made out of Ti, which, as you rightly mention, is both expensive on its own and hard to work with. There ought to be a significant price increase due to that alone, the question is just how big.
@@F1ghteR41 It would be more expensive but I highly doubt 10 times more expensive especially if they're being made in large batches. I would take their comment with a grain of salt.
I've never welded titanium, but I know a guy who has on the regular and he says it's a pain too. Not so much the actual welding, but it's very environment sensitive. One little leak in the chamber and (according to him) it's porosity city. That said, with additive manufacturing _today_ I suspect you could bring the price right down. Easier to 3D print titanium than to weld or machine it.
As a GPMG gunner in the late 80's. Apart from tabbing, there wouldn't have been a great difference with a few pounds reduction in weight when it came to fire and manoeuvre with it.
True, the bipod is similar to M60, but isn't it actually bipod from the M82. Which would make much sense given it is made by Barret :)
Another great video!!
I enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
This should be the new GPMG for the USMC, along with polyner ammo and polymer link and tripod.
The 240 LQ is in fact a sub Xenon micro burst laser in vehicle configuration only at the moment.
US Marines use/used the M240G.
NGSW is not a replacement for M240. It is a notional replacement of M249 for the close combat force.
M240 will be soldiering on for some time as there is currently nothing that can replace it credibly. Also the USMC as adopted the M240L and they are currently fielded. The former PM for the program is a friend.
In Canada, we call the M240, the C6 GPMG, if I remenber correctly.
This gun is basically the same weight as an M60E6 with the longer barrel option. The UKM-2000 is lighter. Unless you're looking to match to existing training on the FN MAG or want some parts commonality with it, you're probably not going to gain enough in longevity/performance to make this a better buy.
There's yet another way here: you can go for the FN Maximi, which is also quite light, and is claimed to have about 70% part compatibility with the Minimis you already have, and the same goes for training.
UKM-2000 is also suboptimal due to it using the MG.42-derived feed system, which adds receiver length and thus weight. Negev NG-7 is lighter and might be compatible with mounting solutions that are of greater interest to the US military.
As a US native who dosen't necessarily love modern small arms from my own country, I am curious as to why the US went with the FN over say an MG3? Was it just the goofy and ponderous weapons procurement process that chose the 240, in lieu of an already arguably lighter and superior existing model? I have always thought of the M60 as a garbage knockoff of the MG3/42, and feel like the 240 is better perhaps in a vehicle role than an infantry weapon. Feel free to correct my assumptions. It just seems strange that we spend millions to refine seven different iterations of a weapon just to bring it to a level of capability that existed essentially 80 years ago...
Well, the M240 was a tank MG first and foremost, so weight wasn't a big deal (a criterion weight of 2 out of 10 per 1970s standards). Given that it was to be used on the M1, which started its development as a joint project with West Germans before the relations soured, there might have been a bit of prejudice against the MG3, and that is besides the point that gas-operated designs tend to be more reliable - although there was some prejudice against them when it came to the use on armoured vehicles.
There was another possibility, however, because there was an examination undertaken in early 1975 by Rock Island Arsenal's John G. Rocha of the Soviet PKT, which found it meritous in many regards but the feed system and some manufacturing aspects. A redesign was proposed to use the M13 link and 7.62×51 ammunition, but the lack of funds for small arms development at the time precluded further development, thus limiting the choice to basically off-the-shelf offerings. If the PKT was redesigned to follow the recommendations given in the aforementioned report, it would have been much better suited to both armour and infantry applications.
I would also like to correct you on the M60, which, if anything, was an FG42 without the single fire option and with MG42 feeding system crudely fitted onto. It suffered from the lack of capable designers due to the long dominance of Browning designs on the US market and messy development history spanning more than a decade. However, it was useful in sparking interest in machinegun development among the American engineers in the 60s and 70s, which resulted in some interesting designs, like Colt CMG series, Roy machinegun (patented US3386336A) and some of the SAW competitors. However, Colt being Colt, it failed to develop both the CMG series and Roy's design further, and the SAW competitiors again fell victim of the lack of funds, and also military favouring a Rock Island design; so it all went nowhere.
As for the M240, it's even funnier than that, because what it boils down to is that the basic gun is but a BAR with a belt feeding mechanism, which, if I recall correctly, the Swedes wanted already in the '30s. Anyway, the one that was implemented is derived from the MG42, so in that sense it is an 81-year-old design indeed. However, there's another comparison to draw here, since there was a machinegun designed by the Darne company in France around the same time as BAR, but significantly improved in the '20s and '30s, with the resulting gun being basically a GPMG, feeding from the belt and weighing but a couple hundred gram more than the M240L seen here. So in this sense the M240 finally reached the level of the early 1930s or so, so in that sense it's closer to a century-old level of capability. There are nuances here, of course, but it's still mighty funny to me that in the postwar years the design as half-arsed as MAG won over anything else in the West by the sole virtue of FN's dominance over the firearms market in the '50s.
Because the MG3 is crap as a light role gun. Always has been. The M60 was not developed from the MG42 it was derived from the Lewis/FG42. M60s were initially intended as disposable weapons like the M3 grease gun that could be produced quickly and put into action faster than they were destroyed. WW3 never came though so they stayed in service longer than they should. A new M60 however is a beautiful gun to shoot and again its much better as a light role gun than the MG42 ever was. All they needed to fix was the bipod. Trying to run a gun at 1400 rounds a minute in the light role is a hiding to nothing. It over burdens the platoon with ammunition and destroys mobility while gaining nothing in lethality. It's a good vehicle mounted gun for fire support but that is where its utility ends. 1:19
@@zoiders I've seen complaints on M60's ergonomics in regards to it being used in the light machinegun role, especially in terms of feeding from the left without a solid cartridge box, so I wouldn't be so bold as to claim it being significantly better than MG.42 or its derivatives in that application.
@@F1ghteR41 And yet you haven't used one. The MG42 is Wehraboo clown shoes. It's horrendous as a light role gun. No one really feeds guns from solid boxes in professional armies. They are too heavy, too bulky and they rattle. All but a few modern guns are left side feed BTW. 9:39
Would be interesting to know how much the FN titanium reciever weighed compared to the Barrets welded steel one
Don't know about the receiver specifically, but the FN 240L weighs just about the same as this one. They're within 1 pound of each other depending upon barrel and buttstock configurations.
@@oldscratch3535 so, that means Barrett's M240LW is technically cheaper of the two since it does not use very expensive titanium for its receiver.
I have a deep yearning to try to shoulder fire this thing.
Barrett sold the 240LW and 240LWS design to Geissele Automatics a few years back.
I love the B and then the L. Plenty of lube and it will keep running.
The only 2 things I didn't like. The B is a heavy SOB. The inability to shoulder fire like the M60.
I hope geissele does something with this
How do I get a job at the royal armoury and end up to handle all the weapons? I love gun history and history in itself
Another Great Video 💯 Thank you 💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥
The Mexican Army Marines and National Guard use them with great effect against cartels
Never understood why you would want to carry a boat anchor Instead of the german G3 and a lot more ammo.
To quote a baby seal if you want to remove a lot of weight from the 240 bring an M60 he like the M60E3
I'd love a barret m240lw VS kac lamg ...
M240 bipod attached to the barrel? How do they change barrel then?
So with tatanuim welded reciever it can be more lighter??
ah man. and i was thinking, i was cleaver with the answer of 42. take away 16 from 58 (M16 and MAG58) =42
interesting video!
i think that's the same bipod the m82 uses
Yeah... a lightweight belt-fed with parts commonality with existing stock? This just screams "SAS purchase."
I wonder if they still use the same gauges as a the regular 240?
Oh wow, this is not something I'd expect would be in the Royal Armouries; thought it was a vaporware prototype
We get lucky sometimes :)
Damn 6 and a half pounds
I bought a British army jungle knife (the big chungus thicc survival knife) today and thats a good few pounds.(for a knife its unreal heavy, makes the Glock FM78 and the Ka-Bar feel like toys)
To think they could take away 2-3 big chonk knives worth of solid steel from a gun is insane
MAG was designed to be basically a belt-fed version of the FN Model D (a demand which was, as far as I know, already expressed in the '30s), itself a modification of the BAR of 1918 vintage, so it's no surprise that it came out to be very bulky and heavy. It's better to think of it as a sort of an M1919 than a gun that came out 15 years after MG42, despite it using the latter's feed system.
Now do the M60A4
Only 9 pounds heavier than the PKM!
Love how the overall objective was to reduce weight, but they still slapped wimpy handguards on it.
Ray Gun: "Phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range." It may happen one day. 🙂
Kinda crazy that Barrett is now owned by Australians
What are dealers in the UK doing running about with squad automatic weapons 🤨
Some UK dealers can basically deal in anything, various reasons for this, I knew one 30 years ago who had the required permits so that when private vessels (usually yachts) came into UK waters he could store their weapons for them until they left UK waters, one large yacht arrived with multiple SMG's on board normally carried by the owners bodyguards
Totally doable. There’s a British TH-cam channel who own full auto vickers guns. He speaks about the process there.
@@louissanderson719 yeah seen that, they have bren guns and rifles too I think
Link if anyone is interested th-cam.com/video/agMgt_boi8o/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9jE1iVuYz0vTdC-d
I'll take a dozen, please 😁
Ray Gun Confirmed...
forgive me for my ignorance but why no sheatmetal construction like let's say the pkm ?
It's an FN MAG derivative. You'd end up with a whole different gun trying to use thinner stampings for the receiver. To oversimplify the parent design in a bunch of plates riveted together. It makes for a long lasting gun that can be repaired extensively at the price of being a chunky boy.
Because it's marketed as a MAG upgrade, and MAG itself was basically a belt-fed version of the FN Model D, itself a modification of the BAR. So in its core it's a 1917 design made (aside from the barrel) with 1930s manufacturing standards at the latest, basically outdated before it came out in the fifties and now reworked with modern technologies to compete with the guns that weren't like a century old.
@@F1ghteR41There is nothing outdated about the MAG. #Wehraboo
@@zoiders And your arguments, besides calling me names, are?..
@@F1ghteR41You are obsessed with one obsolescent machine gun because you are a creepy white supremacist with a Nazi fetish. Meanwhile back in reality everyone who fights actual wars buys the MAG58. 14:30
Quite funny that PKM is still lighter
When I saw Barrett rifle goes on diet,I thought 50 cal.,not machine gun.😮😮😮
The B in M240B doesn't stand for Bravo, it stands for Bingus
A lighter mg just means you carry more ammunition 😅
Seems like a lot of work to make it *almost* as light as the Kalashnikov (PK) 😉
That feeling when you realize an old Soviet gun of wood and steel matched the US Army's low-weight requirements since the 1960s (PKM comes in under 10kg), while FN and Barret have to charge countless thousands of dollars using ludicrously expensive advanced materials and machining technology to make an MAG do the same. 😄
@@genericpersonx333 Which one survives conscripts and which one gives longer, more reliable and more accurate service when not carried by conscripts?
You do know the MAG, as originally conceived and fielded, was also a cheap gun for use by massive conscript armies?
PKM has a long service record affirming it is plenty reliable, durable, and effective in the hands of conscripts and professionals alike.
The only difference is that PKM started at under 10kg because it didn't need to be heavier, while MAG has a mechanism that is quite dense and doesn't lend itself well to weight-reduction without expensive tricks.
Which brings me back to the irony that a Soviet gun of the 1960s pretty much does everything the US Army wants and is spending a fortune to achieve with the MAG.
That said, I am not saying the MAG is a bad gun or the PKM is the perfect gun. They are both good weapons. If anything, I am mostly amused by the US Army never seeming to have a solution to problems that doesn't involve throwing a LOT of money at it. @@aaronleverton4221
@@genericpersonx333 The US actually considered adopting the PKT in the mid-70s (not only as an armour machinegun but also as a GPMG), given the redesign for push-through feed of 7.62×51 from the M13 links and some minor changes to better fit US manufacturing and maintainance practices.
Given the time period, there simply weren't funds available for it, and an off-the-shelf solution was adopted in the form of the M240. The same happened to the SAW programme at the same time, when promisng American designs were ultimately canned in favour of the Belgian gun that was more or less readily available - to much cursing of its future users.
What's Mr. Ferguson's top 3 machine guns anyway, do we know? I wonder if PK is one, or top 5 at least
Why does this arouse me 😅….I think I was dropped multiple times on my head as a baby and ate to many leaded paint chips as a kid watching the original GI-Joe and looney toons series
ACTUALLY, you referenced the wrong cutaway, it has a number AND a star. 🤣🤣🤣
You've lost me there...
@@jonathanferguson1211 ahh that wasn’t a joke?? (Mutters in incoherent Colonial)
No, it's an L46A1 (I had to look that up!) Drill Purpose 'Skeleton' @@mattparker9726
@@jonathanferguson1211 ahh I must have missed the gun you were talking about, when you said cutaway, I thought you meant like the gag. and the star thing wsas cause I was thinking of the SMLE when I wrote it. Also, have you done a video on ArmA 3 guns?
Ah I see. As for ArmA 3, yes, according to my notes, relatively early on so 2021 maybe? Hopefully you can turn it up.@@mattparker9726
Still not as light as the m60e3
Great video, as always just one thing where in the UK give out the silly American weights if you want please give it in kilograms for everybody else who has no idea what that weight means in pounds as we do use kilograms in the UK
Umm I think you will find we also have the option of using pounds weight in the uk, not that it will help as British the pound weight is different to the US pound……….
Multiply in your head by 2.2. Just 2 is close enough for most things you can pickup with one hand. By the way. How many stone do you weigh?
While I am entirely with you on the subject of not using imperial as its a bit backwards and not something taught in British schools in Jonathan's defence I will mention that when it comes to the soldiers burden when on a forced march known as a combat fitness tests the army have always used pounds. They may have updated it by now of course but a lot of the infantry training manual predates 73 when we went metric. Soldiering doesn't change much. Beasts of burden.
@@williampratt1066No it isn't.😂
@@zoiders I stand corrected on that point but still reserve the right to us Lbs or Kg as I see fit😉( Lbs is a measure of weight whereas Kg is a measure of mass)😊
Jesus Hellion Christ, still, carrying a 21lb light mg arounda battle field would create a monster, this person would no longer be a man….that requires many 5 meals a day
There is still a market for a modernised Bren if you ask me. Link is a massive pain to carry.
Please add more studio lighting. Still to dark...
Gun
A Barrett that is automatic and doesn't shoot fiddy cal?! Whut
M240 Ligma
I'm only going to say one thing
Go to the range and shoot it
Assume
But that being said
Right after you do go and shoot the
Stoner LMG
You will never forget the difference
And I would challenge you to get the smile off of your face ❤👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻🇨🇦😁
Just saying
Use a carbon fiber barrel. Even lighter.