Need help identifying machine gun

Easy One....

The Royal Marine in the picture has the GPMG (General Purpose Machine Gun), designed by FN and sold as the MAG-58. It's been in the system for a long time and many Western nations use it as their platoon level machine gun.

It's currently in service with the U.S. armed forces as the M240. It is the coax machinegun on the M1 Abrams tank and the M2/M3 Bradley fighting vehicle. We've used it in this role since the early '80s. Recently a ground version was issued to Infantry units of the Army and Marine Corps to replace the aging M60.

HTH

Jeff
 
bigm240g.gif


The M240 was adopted by the U.S. Military Armed Forces following a world-wide competition in search for a reliable 7.62 mm NATO machine
gun suitable for use as a coaxial weapon for armored vehicle applications. The Coaxial version of the famous Belgian MAG 58, produced by FN
Herstal, won this competition and the M240 is now being produced by its U.S. subsidiary, FN Manufacturing, Inc.

The reliability of this weapon, 26,000 Mean Rounds Between Failure (MRBF), makes it the world's most reliable machine gun. As a result of the
outstanding performance of this weapon, other vehicle and infantry variants of the M240 are now in use by the U. S. Military.

M240G (NSN-1005-01-033-2714)
NATO EQUIVALENT - MAG 58:

The M240G is being used by U.S. Forces seeking reliability and firepower in the ground application. Night sight adaptation hardware normally
used with this weapon can also be used on all other models in the M240 family.

INTEROPERABILITY:

The U. S. produced M240 family retains all infantry related features and is produced to the same exacting specifications of the original MAG 58.
consequently, all M240 variants have interchangeable components and are interoperable with foreign-produced NATO equivalent weapons.
This has significant advantages in training, logistics support, and tactical versatility. For example, an M240B buttstock and bipod may be
carried in an armored vehicle to enable the tank crew to convert the coaxial weapon to an infantry model in the event that they are forced
to withdraw from a disabled vehicle.

COMMON CHARACTERISTICS:

- Operation Gas Operated
- Head-space and timing Fixed
- Mean round between failure 26,000
- Range: Maximum 3725 meters
- Tracer Burnout 900 meters
- Cyclic rate of fire (Operator Adjustable): Low rate 750 rpm: High Rate 950 rpm
- Muzzle Velocity 2800 ft/sec
- Slap ammunition compatibility Verified

EGRESS KIT:

It enables the use of coaxial or pintle mounted M240 weapons as ground role machine guns for self-defense by dismounted crew members. It
consists of the buttstock, trigger mechanism and bipod illustrated hereunder.

ACCESSORIES:

- Flexible Gun Mount with Standard 200-round Ammo box
- Ring and Post Sight
- Bandoleer Hanger
- Adaptation Hardware for U.S. M122 Tripod
- Flexible Ammunition Chuting
- Buttstock and Bipod for Emergency Ground Use
- Ammunition boxes for 600 and 1200 round capacity
- Armorer's Tool Kit

http://www.fnmfg.com/products/m240/m240g.htm
 
Their version of the MAG-58. I think the Brit militree calls it the L7 if I remember correctly (been a while since over there).

FN design team took a BAR and turned it upside down and made noticable improvements. Good gun, but I still like our Marines with M240s. Go get them, guys.
 
Marine Corps' version is the M240G. Excellent gun. Its 1800 meter max effective range almost equals the Ma Deuce's (1830 m). The thing's a firehose with a cyclic rate of almost 1k, and is tough like a tank. Almost "Marine-proof" but not quite. You know what they say: leave a Marine alone in the middle of a desert with nothing but an anvil and tell him to guard it; come back in an hour, and he'll have broken it.

My understanding is we inherited the Army's surplus M240s that were intended for co-ax mounting on Bradley AFVs that never got built.

Their loss, our gain. Much better weapon system than the M60A3.

I think the Rangers use the M240B, and the rest of the Army still has the "sixties." (not 100% sure of that)

The Brits call their version the GPMG (General Purpose MG - meaning it's used in both a man-carried and a tripod-mounted role), which they pronouncy "Jimpy" -- at least the Royal Marines and Paras I trained with always called it the "Jimpy."

Semper fi,
Bruegger out.
 
The Army Uses the M240 in Infantry Units

Bruegger,

Army light Infantry units also use the M240. Sombat Support and Combat Service Support units still use the M60, although many of them are so worn as to be nearly unservicable. The M249 SAW is replacing the M60 in many CS and CSS units.

Jeff
 
The SAW makes a decent squad automatic, but is really too heavy to be employed in that role (i.e., the base around which the fireteam is constructed). A heavy-barreled version of the M16A2 with a bipod would make a better "true" squad automatic; something more like the famed BAR of WWII and Korea. There’s an excellent couple of articles on this concept in the May (?) issue of the Marine Corps Gazette.

The M249 SAW is a fine piece of machinery (I think of it as the 240’s little brother), but I think it is handicapped by the 5.56 NATO cartridge.

Neither is the SAW a true light machinegun, since the 5.56 NATO lacks the punch out at 800+ meters. The 240G, in contrast, is effective out to 1800m. That leaves quite a gap in weapons systems. And tripod-mounting the SAW almost seems silly, though it can be done. The SAW would make an excellent LMG/GPMG if it just had a decent cartridge like the 6mm SAW that’s been discussed in other threads. With a greater punch, it could even replace the 240s at the Company (Weapons Platoon) level.

Semper fi,
Bruegger
 
Yeah, that makes me feel confident in my gun identification skills. My first thought when I saw it was "M240", and I guess I was right. But anyways, I think I read somewhere that the M240 was replacing the M60, but I'm not sure. Can anyone confirm or deny it?
 
This will show everyone my age but.....

When I went in the Army, the squad automatic weapon was an M16A1 with a clothes pin bipod. We had no real replacement for the BAR until in 1985 we finally started fielding the M249.

Unfortunately the Army took a good light weight design and "product improved" it with the addition of more then a pound with the new butt stock and handguard.

I agree with you that the M249 is NOT a light machine gun. At one time the Army intended to replace the M60 with the M249 at platoon level mounted on an M122 tripod in Infantry units, but there was such an outcry from the field that that plan was dropped.

At one time Colt produced a heavy barreled version of the M16 for use as a squad automatic. The sights that are on the M16A2 now came from that program with some small modifications. Instead of viewing the elevation setting on the left side of the dial as we do now, the elevation was viewed through a window in the rear of the upper receiver. It used an M60 type bipod mounted on a donut looking ring on the barrel in front of the handguard. Colt had almost no success selling these to anyone's military, however I did see one in service with the Honduran Army in 1990. The bipod had been removed and it was being used as a regular rifle. Supposedly the heavy barrels on the original HBAR semi auto AR15s Colt sold in the mid '80s were leftovers from this program.

I really like the M249 in the SAW role, better then I would an M16A2 HBAR. The belt fed M249 allows automatic riflemen to maintain a higher sustained rate of fire.

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top