I posted this thread in the Rifle forum, but it seems more appropriet here.
I was wondering if the .338 Lapua would make a good belt fed GPMG cartridge. The improved range would be a plus for helicopter mini-guns, snipers, and long range direct fire support. 101st experience in A-stan was targets out to 1,500 yards minimum, resulting in overdependence on mortars and air-support. The added penetration would also be useful for future MOUT warfare.
I'm under the impression the M2 required sandbags to steady the tripod and in the absence of a support pod was pretty useless. A .338 GPMG would be much easier to set up, it may not be all that heavy either. The M240 is unusually heavy for its calibur, the HK21 weigh just 20 lbs. I think with a light weight design in mind, it may be possible to produce such a GPMG at around 30 lbs. It may be heavy, but you can crew it with a 3-4 man fireteam and dividup the weight.
The 82nd jumped into France with the Browning 1919 firing the 30-06. The weapon weighed 31 lbs with a 14 lb M2 tripod. I believe this was managed by only two soldiers and could be setup to fire much quicker than the M2. A .338 GPMG could be used in a similar manner while providing far superior firepower, probably capable of suppression out to 2,500 yards.
Since the 7.62 NATO is no longer the mainstay infantry ammunition, there's no reason a GPMG need to be tied to this ammo. If it makes sense to build a more powerful GPMG, would the Lapua Magnum be a good choice? Any case taper, over-bore issues
I was wondering if the .338 Lapua would make a good belt fed GPMG cartridge. The improved range would be a plus for helicopter mini-guns, snipers, and long range direct fire support. 101st experience in A-stan was targets out to 1,500 yards minimum, resulting in overdependence on mortars and air-support. The added penetration would also be useful for future MOUT warfare.
I'm under the impression the M2 required sandbags to steady the tripod and in the absence of a support pod was pretty useless. A .338 GPMG would be much easier to set up, it may not be all that heavy either. The M240 is unusually heavy for its calibur, the HK21 weigh just 20 lbs. I think with a light weight design in mind, it may be possible to produce such a GPMG at around 30 lbs. It may be heavy, but you can crew it with a 3-4 man fireteam and dividup the weight.
The 82nd jumped into France with the Browning 1919 firing the 30-06. The weapon weighed 31 lbs with a 14 lb M2 tripod. I believe this was managed by only two soldiers and could be setup to fire much quicker than the M2. A .338 GPMG could be used in a similar manner while providing far superior firepower, probably capable of suppression out to 2,500 yards.
Since the 7.62 NATO is no longer the mainstay infantry ammunition, there's no reason a GPMG need to be tied to this ammo. If it makes sense to build a more powerful GPMG, would the Lapua Magnum be a good choice? Any case taper, over-bore issues