PDA

View Full Version : Lightweight .50-Caliber: Lethality at half the weight



gc
10-04-2008, 04:51 AM
Lightweight .50-Caliber: Lethality at half the weight
Oct 02, 2008
BY Debi Dawson
A Soldier at Fort Hood, Texas, test fires the LW50 lightweight .50-caliber machine gun. Photo by PEO-Soldier
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Army News Service, Oct. 2, 2008) -- As Soldiers training for combat look to lighten their load, they can look forward to the Lightweight .50-Caliber Machine Gun.

The LW50, an addition to the Army's arsenal of machine guns at one-half the weight of the M2 .50-Caliber Machine Gun and with 60 percent less recoil, does not require the setting of headspace and timing. The LW50 provides Soldiers with the punch of a .50-caliber machine gun in the footprint of a 7.62mm weapon system, allowing them to bring .50 caliber lethality to the fight in situations where using a light to medium machine gun is the only available option.

The LW50 is still in the early stages of system design and development and officials at the Program Executive Office Soldier at Fort Belvoir said they expect the weapon to be fielded in 2011. They said a limited two-part Early User Assessment for the weapon was conducted with Special Operations Command personnel in March and May.

The LW50, a technological spinout from the 25mm XM307 Advanced Crew Served Weapon program, is capable of firing all current .50-caliber ammunition in the inventory, including the standard M33 ball; the M8 armor-piercing incendiary; the M903 saboted light armor penetrator; and the MK211 multipurpose round that combines armor-piercing, explosive, and incendiary effects.

"A major benefit of the LW50 is the weight and recoil savings and no requirement to adjust the headspace and timing," said Shailesh Parmar, a product director for Product Manager Crew Served Weapons in the office of Project Manager Soldier Weapons. "The LW50 is expected to weigh less than 65 pounds, including tripod and traversing and elevation mechanism, compared with the M2 system's weight of 128 pounds, a savings of 63 pounds or more," said Parmar. He also noted that the LW50 can be set up faster than an M2 because it does not need ballast to weigh down the tripod due to less recoil.

The LW50's greatly reduced recoil enables Soldiers to use weapon-magnified optics and maintain sight picture of the target, which was unthinkable and potentially painful with the M2. "Lower recoil also means less dispersion of rounds and better accuracy," Parmar said. "That, in turn, makes it easier to qualify with the LW50, allows Soldiers to use rounds more economically, and reduces the logistical burden."

Staff Sgt. James Tyus of the 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery was quick to notice the improvements while training on the weapon at Fort Hood, Texas. "It absorbs more recoil now. Given that, it makes the weapon more accurate. I like it for its accuracy," Tyus said.

The LW50's weight savings, reduced recoil, and increased accuracy allow for its use in places that were not feasible for an M2, such as in light infantry operations.

Once the LW50 is deployed, all vehicles that mount the M2 will be able to mount the new system. Tests have been successfully conducted mounting the system to the Stryker Combat Vehicle and the Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station.

Other benefits of the LW50 include safety and training applications. The LW50 eliminates the need for the operator to adjust the headspace and timing and for any special maintenance tools, reducing the amount of training required. The current LW50 has 131 parts, compared with 244 for the M2.

"It's a very unique weapon. You don't have to worry about timing," said Pvt. Michael Zinns with 1-82 Field Artillery, who, like Tyus, was introduced to the LW50 at Fort Hood. The teardown, too, "is actually a lot easier, and the barrels are much more easily interchangeable," Zinns said.

The Army recently issued a requirement for a lightweight .50 caliber machine gun. Furthermore, Special Operations Command (SOCOM) is developing lightweight vehicles that will need armament. SOCOM recognizes that a lightweight, low-recoil weapon suitable for these vehicles could see expanded use within dismounted units. The LW50 has the potential to satisfy those three needs in one package.

According to the current program cycle, the LW50 could be fielded at the end of FY11. Light units, such as the 82nd Airborne Division, the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), 10th Mountain Division, 25th Infantry Division, and SOCOM forces, are expected to benefit most from the new weapon.

"I think that's what a lot of us look for, a lighter weapon," said Tyus. "I'm really excited about it."

Seeing what PEO-Soldier is bringing to bear in the Global War on Terrorism "inspires and sustains our young Soldiers" as they prepare to deploy to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, said Command Sgt. Maj. Neil Ciotola of III Corps, Fort Hood, Texas. "Many of our first-term troopers and even our veterans who have one tour can look at that and go: 'That's what's waiting for me.' "
http://www.army.mil/-news/2008/10/02/12997-lightweight-50-caliber-lethality-at-half-the-weight/

Ratamacue
10-04-2008, 05:32 AM
Interesting. At first I thought this was just about the XM312, which is the .50cal version of the XM307 and has been around for several years. But the photo in the article looks like an entirely new weapon system.

ZoneOne
10-04-2008, 12:09 PM
Here's one I took, I could pick up the entire thing with one hand.

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/4418/img1204lz3.jpg

The picture from the link shows the stripped down version.

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3033/armymil20081002181225qg4.jpg

LineDoggie
10-04-2008, 04:50 PM
It's also got the slowest cyclic rate for an American Machinegun since the M1918 .30 Chauchat

And we know how well that worked out........

It's hard to lay down suppressive fire at that rate

dobrodan
10-04-2008, 05:12 PM
It's also got the slowest cyclic rate for an American Machinegun since the M1918 .30 Chauchat

And we know how well that worked out........

It's hard to lay down suppressive fire at that rate

Well, combine it with Raufoss multipurpose ammo, and you will be more than happy!

GoSka37
10-04-2008, 06:11 PM
What's the stuff in that little compartment door?

LineDoggie
10-04-2008, 06:26 PM
Well, combine it with Raufoss multipurpose ammo, and you will be more than happy!


Doubtful, as it's still on average putting out 200 rounds less each minute than the Competition is capable of. Competition that is also capable of longer sustained fire I might add.

Simple equation

Would YOU rather be recieving Covering Fire on an Enemy Position YOU are assaulting from:

A). a 300 Round per minute weapon firing Multipurpose ammo?

or

B). a 500 Round per minute weapon firing Multipurpose ammunition?


Thank you, I'll take M2HB, or NSV, or M3P anyday

Chapstique1567
10-04-2008, 06:29 PM
and despite the slow rof, the fact that it can also fire grenade rounds is another added bonus too...

ZoneOne
10-04-2008, 06:49 PM
and despite the slow rof, the fact that it can also fire grenade rounds is another added bonus too...

That's the whole reason behind the slow ROF. It is needed to cycle the grenades.

dobrodan
10-04-2008, 08:45 PM
Doubtful, as it's still on average putting out 200 rounds less each minute than the Competition is capable of. Competition that is also capable of longer sustained fire I might add.

Simple equation

Would YOU rather be recieving Covering Fire on an Enemy Position YOU are assaulting from:

A). a 300 Round per minute weapon firing Multipurpose ammo?

or

B). a 500 Round per minute weapon firing Multipurpose ammunition?


Thank you, I'll take M2HB, or NSV, or M3P anyday

That would depending if the rounds hit somewhere near my position...

ROF has no practical meaning, as long as the rounds hit where they are supposed to...

Also, a lighter gun may mean that the fireteam carrying the gun may be able to carry a lot more ammo...

gc
10-04-2008, 10:53 PM
The lighter gun may accompany troops to more places than whats possible with the M2 now. Say the LW50 can be detached from the Humvee and placed on a rooftop quickly during a gun battle and provide serious firepower from a high ground. But of course it would be ideal if the LW50 can sustain 500rd/min with the same weight.

Waterman
10-04-2008, 11:42 PM
If they are thinking of this as a man portable crew served weapon.....the slower rate of fire would be an advantage....because humping .50 cal ammo is not fun. Slower rate of fire gives you more firing time with the ammo you have-you are less likely to burn it all up at once.

I see it more being used to provide longer range suppressing fire, penetrating firepower (able to engage targets behind hard cover) and superior longer range anti vehicle/anti material performance.

Pistol Prawn
10-05-2008, 10:27 AM
I have heard it being mentioned that this LW50 is useless against low flying helicopters compared to the M2 due to this low ROF. Also suppressive fire is questionable with this LW50.
The M2 has excellent accuracy and very hard hitting capability. Lighter is not always better.
I think there is a place for the LW50 but it should NOT be seen as a replacement of the M2. It should rather be seen as an adjunct or additional weapon choice for the soldiers to call upon for different scenarios.
If its possible to lighten the weight of the 7.62 GAU as in the Dillon product, certainly they can reduce the weight of the M2 without sacrificing the ROF and suppressive firepower of this beast of a weapon, although not by 60pdls.
Any videos of the LW50 in action??

ZoneOne
10-05-2008, 01:36 PM
The LW50 is not going to fully replace the M2, it is planned to augment it and gives troops an extra tool. Primarily Light Infantry units will most benefit.

Gunge
10-06-2008, 04:54 PM
It's also got the slowest cyclic rate for an American Machinegun since the M1918 .30 Chauchat

And we know how well that worked out........

It's hard to lay down suppressive fire at that rate

no offense linedoggie
chauchat was not an American , she was french
we did use them but the nickname was potato-digger
an the rest is hist

Bro Jangles
10-06-2008, 04:59 PM
no offense linedoggie
chauchat was not an American , she was french
we did use them but the nickname was potato-digger
an the rest is hist
wasnt the potato digger the early browning belt fed machine gun?

panzrman
10-07-2008, 03:08 AM
For those of you who may be familiar with it, everytime I see this weapon it reminds me of something from WH40K.

Billy No Mates
10-07-2008, 03:52 AM
wasnt the potato digger the early browning belt fed machine gun?

I thought it was a Marlin design .

RallyPointCebu
10-07-2008, 04:05 AM
Next is Para LW50. WAhahahahah! Cool site to see!

GazB
10-07-2008, 04:22 AM
"A major benefit of the LW50 is the weight and recoil savings and no requirement to adjust the headspace and timing," said Shailesh Parmar, a product director for Product Manager Crew Served Weapons in the office of Project Manager Soldier Weapons. "The LW50 is expected to weigh less than 65 pounds, including tripod and traversing and elevation mechanism, compared with the M2 system's weight of 128 pounds, a savings of 63 pounds or more," said Parmar. He also noted that the LW50 can be set up faster than an M2 because it does not need ballast to weigh down the tripod due to less recoil.

Sounds a bit like a Kord on a light mount. No headspacing or timing issues when changing barrels, light weight weapon (25kgs for the weapon itself + 7 kgs for light bipod mount). Its very effective muzzle brake seems to make it quite accurate for short bursts.

conefire
10-07-2008, 07:05 AM
The rifle caliber medium machineguns (or gpmgs) are doing just fine at around the same weight and with a much more practical rof. Plus they can be used without a tripod if necessary. This thing seems to be the answer to a question that isn't there. For a vehicle weapon the weight of the M2 isn't really an issue and they'de better develop an improved version of that.

D.E. Watters
10-07-2008, 01:02 PM
I thought it was a Marlin design.

John M. Browning designed it, Colt produced it as the M1895, and Marlin-Rockwell later took up production during WW1 under contract and then redesigned it. Marlin changed the gas system to an in-line piston/operating rod instead of the original swinging lever. It was the swinging lever of the original design that inspired the nickname "Potato Digger."

Gunge
10-07-2008, 02:08 PM
i stand corrected
my apologies linedoggie

i could of sworn it was a french design/produced weapon

on the 50. cal
any weight reduction without losing the "punch" of the weapon is a plus in my opinion

thanks for the great info to all

D.E. Watters
10-07-2008, 02:22 PM
i stand corrected
my apologies linedoggie

i could of sworn it was a french design/produced weapon


The Chauchat was French designed and produced. Your mistake was confusing it with the "Potato Digger", which was a completely different weapon.

wiking
10-07-2008, 06:00 PM
Does ROF really matter? you don't fire an MG continiously anyways unless the shyte really hits the fan. Most firing would be 3-5 round bursts in an indirect-fire role.

I really don't think much would change between the good 'ol M2 and this one when it comes to MG tactics (which were written on stone tablets back in the stone age of modern firearms, on the Western Front 1914-1918)

Ought Six
10-07-2008, 08:02 PM
Colt-Browning M1895 machinegun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1895_Colt-Browning_machine_gun), aka 'potato digger'

Chauchat light machinegun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat)

Jippo
10-08-2008, 07:09 AM
The rifle caliber medium machineguns (or gpmgs) are doing just fine at around the same weight and with a much more practical rof. Plus they can be used without a tripod if necessary. This thing seems to be the answer to a question that isn't there. For a vehicle weapon the weight of the M2 isn't really an issue and they'de better develop an improved version of that.

You can not drive to all places wher you would like to have a "fifty". Fifty can be utilised in very different roles than a medium MG can: for big jobs you'll need a bigger hammer.

Let's face it, M2 has been the pinnacle of development nearly a hundred years ago. It is unpractical and old design, and better heavy mg's have bee around for fifty years. If I have to hump 128lbs somewhere, I rather take an MG with 63 pounds of ammunition than only an M2.

Dragonscript
10-08-2008, 09:33 AM
i've never humped a .50 cal but to my understanding it was a 4 man job. 1 person carried the barrel, someone else the receiver group and a third carries the tripod. The fourth guy carries the ammo and they all have to carry empty sandbags to put weight down on the tripod.

Winger
10-08-2008, 09:42 AM
i've never humped a .50 cal but to my understanding it was a 4 man job. 1 person carried the barrel, someone else the receiver group and a third carries the tripod. The fourth guy carries the ammo and they all have to carry empty sandbags to put weight down on the tripod.

The only time I really saw the .50 humped on anything longer than just a couple of clicks was during ITB or training excercises. Never on a routine patrol. Usually they take the gear as far as wheels or tracks will take them and then hump it up to a higher position impassable to vehicles.

I've seen 3 man teams. One guy with the barrel & tripod & some ammo. One guy with the receiver & some ammo. Third guy with a ton of ammo. Add your other gear and you've got really slow going.

Mortar guys suffer just as much. Baseplate strapped to your back just underneath your pack suxors.

One time we had an officer order a MK19 team to hump it up a hill about 500 meters. They didn't want to break it down and rebuild it so the NCO ordered the strongest Marine to pick it up tripod and all and position it. He did it pretty handily. I was like "wow".

domokun
10-08-2008, 10:11 AM
i've never humped a .50 cal but to my understanding it was a 4 man job. 1 person carried the barrel, someone else the receiver group and a third carries the tripod. The fourth guy carries the ammo and they all have to carry empty sandbags to put weight down on the tripod.

When I had to drag around NSV: 1 guy took the gun and cradle, 1 guy took barrels, sight (if we had removed it and put it into it's bag) and ammo boxes and most unfortunate guy took tripod. Or one guy made 3 trips (and opened up later over his assignment :)).

This new gun has it's uses for SF, in ambushes out of roads where they must deploy by foot, but need additional firepower. In other uses M2 or XM307/312 sounds much better choise. I have not heard about XM307/312 for while is it still under development or has project been axed? Another but unlikely option would be KORD, it at least in theory sounds awesome, but recoil with bi-pod could be bit heavy.

Jippo
10-08-2008, 01:17 PM
This is the XM312.

Quote from the original article:

"The LW50, a technological spinout from the 25mm XM307 Advanced Crew Served Weapon program, is capable of firing all current .50-caliber ammunition in the inventory, including the standard M33 ball; the M8 armor-piercing incendiary; the M903 saboted light armor penetrator; and the MK211 multipurpose round that combines armor-piercing, explosive, and incendiary effects."

LineDoggie
10-08-2008, 01:27 PM
no offense linedoggie
chauchat was not an American , she was french
we did use them but the nickname was potato-digger
an the rest is hist


Ah, ummmm, Mle. 1915 Chauchat was used by the AEF, to the tune of 15,988 (8mm Lebel version & 19,241 of the .30US M1918 version).

Colt Browning Model 1895 & improved Model 1914 were know as the Potato Diggers