Your view - FN Minimi/M249 - Page 2 - Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History

Pruitt · #16 01 Jan 13, 22:38

Look into the BAR that was re-designed and built by FN in Belgium. This one had a pistol grip and a quick disconnect barrel. If they can get the old BREN to take a blt, i see no reason why the BAR can't take one.

Pruitt

Frtigern · #17 01 Jan 13, 23:13

Thanks, it seems that the detachable barrel and being belt fed were the only things limiting the BAR from being a sustained light machine gun. The FN Model D incorporated the removable barrel and moved the bipod closer to the grip at the end of the gas cylinder making hip or shoulder firing easier. My question is whether the FN Model D was more reliable than the M60 in wet, muddy, sandy or cold conditions? Which LMG (assuming the FN Model D could be made belt fed) would've been better in Vietnam?

According to James Ballou in his book Rock in a Hard Place: The Browning Automatic Rifle, he recounts this story of As one Special Forces sergeant, "Many times since my three tours of duty in Vietnam I have thanked God for... having a BAR that actually worked, as opposed to the jamming M16... We had a lot of Viet Cong infiltrators in all our [Special Forces] camps, who would steal weapons every chance they got. Needless to say, the most popular weapon to steal was the venerable old BAR."[56] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_B...-Ballou_204-56

I wonder what the VC did for ammo? Could they rechamber it for 7.62x39mm or 7.62×54mmR?

Pruitt · #18 02 Jan 13, 01:07

The VC bought it from the ARVN. At least what was not left behind after a battle. The VC never had problems getting ammo for their large assortment of Japanese, French and American weapons.

Pruitt

Crackshot · #19 02 Jan 13, 07:00

Given that the Minimi and it's derivatives is probably the most widely used light machine gun in existence, it must be doing something right.

For a bit of trivia, the ADF manufactures it's own Minimi by Thales. Known as the F89, it rather uniquely uses the FN Mag flash suppressor and a 1.5x scope (the same one used by default on the Steyr/Austeyr) although AFAIK it can also mount other optics (the US ACOG/Holo and Canadian MGO are fairly popular, I understand).

Jay217 · #20 02 Jan 13, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackshot

Given that the Minimi and it's derivatives is probably the most widely used light machine gun in existence, it must be doing something right.

For a bit of trivia, the ADF manufactures it's own Minimi by Thales. Known as the F89, it rather uniquely uses the FN Mag flash suppressor and a 1.5x scope (the same one used by default on the Steyr/Austeyr) although AFAIK it can also mount other optics (the US ACOG/Holo and Canadian MGO are fairly popular, I understand).

Aye sounds like our C9. ours are either iron sight, or the C79 3.4x sight.

Due to the higher zoom it has a love-hate relation, after that 1st burst it is often much easier with the iron sights to have the same sight picture. so while that 1st burst will be tighter it is a bit harder to stay consistent, and you may get a bit of tunnel vision.

Crackshot · #21 02 Jan 13, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay217

Aye sounds like our C9. ours are either iron sight, or the C79 3.4x sight.

The C79 indeed, our troops use the C79 on the Austeyr, F89 and the Mag 58. Not to mention that American derivative, the M145.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay217

Due to the higher zoom it has a love-hate relation, after that 1st burst it is often much easier with the iron sights to have the same sight picture. so while that 1st burst will be tighter it is a bit harder to stay consistent, and you may get a bit of tunnel vision.

How much does it improve accuracy? I imagine it must be quite good deployed in a combat situation, for suppressive fire I mean.

Jay217 · #22 02 Jan 13, 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackshot

The C79 indeed, our troops use the C79 on the Austeyr, F89 and the Mag 58. Not to mention that American derivative, the M145.

How much does it improve accuracy? I imagine it must be quite good deployed in a combat situation, for suppressive fire I mean.

Ahh i enjoy the fact its the same sight for several systems, good convenience!

It makes it much easier to see your beaten zone, however i believe what a few were telling me is after the first shot in the burst you can only see through your unscoped eye as the sight picture is changing to much from the recoil.

I noticed that abit when i was in a trench with one, but when in prone it wasn't bad and i enjoyed it.

Crackshot · #23 02 Jan 13, 23:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay217

It makes it much easier to see your beaten zone, however i believe what a few were telling me is after the first shot in the burst you can only see through your unscoped eye as the sight picture is changing to much from the recoil.

I noticed that abit when i was in a trench with one, but when in prone it wasn't bad and i enjoyed it.

Yeah, I have no doubt the recoil would make it fierce - although, if deployed fairly stable on the bipod (or, in the case of the Mag, tripod) - that might negate some of the accuracy issues, no?

Jay217 · #24 03 Jan 13, 02:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackshot

Yeah, I have no doubt the recoil would make it fierce - although, if deployed fairly stable on the bipod (or, in the case of the Mag, tripod) - that might negate some of the accuracy issues, no?

aye that's been my experience that standing (trench) the recoil was harsh, while prone between my prone body and the bi-pod it was fine for me.

Cant recall if it was the C6 (240) or c9 (249) that we use with a tripod. and when it is used on a tripod if they are zeroed correctly they can hit a moving target every time.