Talk:Light machine gun

Light vs general purpose

I think we have to differentiate between LMG's and general-purpose machine guns, any one have plausible distinction criteria? Oberiko 13:15, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think the classification of all MG's blurs at the edges. Certainly an LMG and its ammo can be identified - carried without great strain by a single soldier, tends to be issued one to a squad, , needs only a bipod, and is used for extra weight of firepower in short bursts and may also be referred to as a Light infantry support weapon.

The GPMG seems to be capable of and is normally used for extra firepower in bigger amounts hence belt fed rather than a magazine. Portable but heavy, with the extra ammo needed spread across the gunner and another soldier. Issued at 1 per platoon, so more less common than the LMG.

Heavy machine guns tend to be big, probably carried on a vehicle or semi-permanently mounted needing two or more soldiers and a vehicle to move around eg the Maxim heritage (Vickers) and 50 cals. GraemeLeggett 16:13, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

why is there 30s and 40s section?

The primary difference between light/medium/heavy MGs in modern practice is caliber. LMGs fire standard rifle cartriges (5.56/ 7.62x39/5.45x39/ 5.8 CHICOM etc.) MMGs (and GPMGs for that matter) typically fire a full- powered (i.e. non- intermediate) .30 caliber cartrige (7.62x51/ 7.62x54R etc) and HMGs fire a high powered 50 caliber round (.50BMG/12.7x108 etc) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.163.20 (talk) 13:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

LMG vs. SAW

I red both the articles but what is the exact difference between them? I thought that what some armies call SAW others call LMG.--Nikhil Sanjay Bapat (talk) 16:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The difference is that LMG refers to its technical definiton alongside other machine guns (medium, heavy), whereas SAW refers to its tactical use at the squad level. This means that all light machine guns are squad automatic weapons (because they are never found in mounted roles), but not all SAWs are LMGs because most (if not all) general purpose machine guns (GPMGs) are used in bipod- mounted infantry support roles.

I would argue with the suggestion that LMGs are never found in mounted roles: for me (perhaps predictably, as a Briton) the quintessential LMG is the Bren which was often mounted on various things: whether armoured cars, or the colloquially-named "Bren Gun Carrier" (officially the Universal Carrier, or whatever it was called), often twinned in various AA roles and which always had mounting points for tripods and other structures. Other guns e.g. the Lewis, various flavours of Hotchkiss, the Vickers GO etc were similarly employed.

Anything else I could add would be rather speculative beyond the SAW seeming to be a predominantly US term. An observation is that it may specifically refer to a smaller-calibre weapon such as the SA80 LSW rather than a traditional rifle-calibre weapon like the Bren but honestly I think it's just a sort of management-speak approach of calling something established by a new name to make it look new and exciting. That's perhaps more divisive than necessary but there may be some mileage in it in that the US never had an LMG prior to the Minimi: the BAR, as good a weapon as it was, was still basically an automatic rifle; the M1919A6 was a medium (or, generously, general-purpose) machine gun with a stock and bipod bolted to it in a similarly stop-gap manner to Germany's WWI MG08/15 but certainly wasn't any sort of LMG. The M60, whatever else I may say about it, was a GPMG in the mould established way back by the MG34. So it would seem that the arrival of the Minimi was given a new name either because it was a new thing (being the arguably sub-calibre 5.56 rather than a traditional 303/308/7.92/whatevs) or because it was a new thing for the US and therefore needed new terminology because "not invented here", etc. Whilst that last point may be seen as potentially a bit antagonistic that's not the intent, just an observation that it isn't without precedent.

But as it is, I dunno. I suspect that ultimately the answer is that they're the same thing, and in that case I would be inclined to go with the more long-established terminology. But I would say that, wouldn't I? "Bloody woman", etc. :p --Vometia (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

As near as I can tall, SAW is a subset of the thing generically called LMG, distinguished by use (a specific application) & user identification, but not much else. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 17:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Selected examples

Can we keep the lists to selected examples please, and not start lists of every LMG anyone has ever heard of. I suggest the lists are confined to the mass-produced LMG's used for sustained periods by the major powers. We are really only trying to give examples, so they need to add something to the article for the reader. Cyclopaedic (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Add a link and a name

Could you create a link to French language(https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusil-mitrailleur) and add in the history section the name of the first Frecnh prototypes to be used in WWI ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacqueline Chomsky (talk • contribs) 12:36, 16 January 2019 (UTC)