[kawasaky]

It is important to stress the difference between the tactics of the German and the American/British rifle squad,as it is rooted in their respective doctrines that influence tactical and operational level.
The basic tactics of the German rifle squad differ from those of the American/British squad, mainly in that the German unit is built for tactical purposes around the employment of the squad's light machine gun.

Technical requirement for such an approach were met with the construction of the MG34, and later furthered with even better and easier-to-handle MG42. It is light enuff [especially considering its firepower], easy to change bolts and barrels [although it was much easier to do it on 42 than on 34]. Then, it was all-around MG: LMG while attacking, fired from the bipod, or heavy MG while dug-in, and fired from the tripod. Belt or drum (belt) fed, makes no difference, surely it was a revolutionary weapon and considering it's effect in the field it is worth the 3 men crew. It isn't even a crucial issue as one may believe, just because of the mentioned tactics of the German rifle squad. The commander will use an MG as the squads primary weapon in middle/long range shoout outs, while other weapons (1xsmg; 6xkar) serve as it's protection and not the other way around (generally speaking, of course).

[Blackstump]

Interesting comments !!.. just reading a book call the Path of Infinite Sorrow the Japanese version of the Kokoda Track ...    they  respected the bren....  it was portable and firable by one man ( yes there was a support crew). it wasnt  a sustain fire mg... a vickers struggled to do that.. but it was an early lmg... deadly accurate as good as the lee enfield ... bipod... gas blowback an ROF... exchangable barrel... which brings me to my point.It can sustain a  resonable fire and can do it all day... by todays standards  its not a lmg, more a heavy assault rifle, The BAR has its place as an auto rifle but not much more.... for mine theres no comparison between the two... the German mgs of ww2 have influenced everything since so they were the real cutting edge for todays versions

[Tippi-Simo]

Lahti-Saloranta M/26

[Cheomesh]

From my personal experience, hanging drum mags put extra wear on the magazine well.  I cannot speak for top mounted drums though - probably had their own problems.

Though it doesn't quite fall into the "Magazine MG" discussion the IJA Type 92 fired a 30 round stripper clip kinda thing.  Check it out:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_92_Heavy_Machine_Gun

If it had a more modern looking handle, it would be totally retro sci fi.

M.

[US_Brake]

I think they introduced them to increase firepower for firepowers' sake. After the introduction of rapid fire SMG and HMG it was just a matter of time before a effective rapid fire platform at medium range was developed. The supression of a two man BAR team (with extra barrels) would be more effective than the same two soldiers with bolt action rifles. However, I doubt suppression was a big factor in the thinking of the decison makers. They wanted a simple rugged light mobile MG that was capable of killing groups of entrenched enemy infantry quickly.

[WillKnott]

Nice little history on the BAR.  Its obvious the BAR was intended to be fired mainly in short bursts.  At the time it was introduced it was state of the art and received well.  I would hardly think that in most cases, all the automatic rifles used by all participants in WWI and WWII and beyond would consider it a useless weapon.  In addition to several stories about the impact of automatic weapons, the end of this video even talks about a guy who used the Thompson, BAR, and finally mortar shells to win the MOH.

Link


Im sure if  you asked anyone who had to use it, they would have preferred a few more rounds though. I have often wondered about that many times myself.  I suppose it was to keep its weight down and keep its mobility high.