Read on Twitter
If we're going to talk SWW tactics then we must so some ground clearing.
That means discussing the Bren v MG34/MG42.
I know this leads to heated arguments on here.
But I am now going to tell you what British Operational Researchers thought.
1/
That means discussing the Bren v MG34/MG42.
I know this leads to heated arguments on here.
But I am now going to tell you what British Operational Researchers thought.
1/
The obvs thing to state is that MG34/42 is belt fed and uses rimless ammunition.
While the Bren is mag fed and uses rimmed ammunition.
Rimmed ammunition has a tendency to roll over itself & can create problems with feeding into the firing chamber.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2015/10/cartridges-rims-rimmed-vs-semi-rimmed_26.html
2/
While the Bren is mag fed and uses rimmed ammunition.
Rimmed ammunition has a tendency to roll over itself & can create problems with feeding into the firing chamber.
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2015/10/cartridges-rims-rimmed-vs-semi-rimmed_26.html
2/
Importantly the cyclic rate of the gun is not the only way to think about the tactical possibilities that it presents.
Increased fire = carrying more ammunition. More ammunition means hot barrels. Hot barrels need to be changed and cooled.
3/
Increased fire = carrying more ammunition. More ammunition means hot barrels. Hot barrels need to be changed and cooled.
3/
And so a straight comparison between the mag fed .303" rimmed Bren and the belt-fed 7.92mm rimless MG34/42 is not possible.
UNLESS of course you are in an Operational Research unit where you go out of your way to work these things out...
4a/
UNLESS of course you are in an Operational Research unit where you go out of your way to work these things out...
4a/
Nice free paper on Army Operation Research Group (AORG) in 21 Army in Normandy and beyond by Terry Copp here:
4b/ https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol3/iss1/9/
4b/ https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol3/iss1/9/
So in September 44 the AORG got round to comparing the rate of fire of the Bren against the MG34/42.
And what they found won't impress MG42 nerds... because
5/
And what they found won't impress MG42 nerds... because
5/
After the AORG analysed mag v belt-fed weapons in various roles: defence; attack - firing to kill; attack - firing to neutralise; with a tripod, against moving targets or even used in the AA role that belt fed was only a 10% advantage over the Bren...
6/
6/
Would you change logistics infrastructure for a 10% advantage? Would you do that knowing there's not enough manpower? Need a standing army in Europe after the war & don't want to waste lives in infantry attacks when the result could be achieved with artillery?
Monty neither.
7/
Monty neither.
7/
And so reigniting the great machine gun debate begins once more... 
Now we're really getting into it!
hahahahahaha
And I broke my own rule already - which was not to reply! I'm a silly boy!
hahahahahaha
And I broke my own rule already - which was not to reply! I'm a silly boy!
