Serious question...

>>32271565
afaik, battle rifles are primarily designed around controlled mid range fire with a main focus on semi auto accuracy, lmgs are designed around prolonged full auto firing with main focus on volume of fire

>>32271565
Light/Medium machine gun (GPMG)/ Heavy machine gun separated by cartridge size. They are usually crew served with at the least a gunner and assistant gunner. The intent is suppression by volume of fire.


A battle rifle, automatic rifle, or LSW, are used by an individual operator. The tactics on how they're employed (DMR, automatic rifle) usually depend on the particular country's doctrine. Most weapons selected for military service are chosen because they fill a particular role in said doctrine.

>>32271565
LMGs usually use assault rifle rounds, though there are exceptions.

File: Breda_30.jpg (172KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1600x1000px

>>32271700
>>32271723
So just so I know I understand...
>lmg=crew served, more boolets
>battle rifle=individual, less boolets more accuracy

??

have a breda 30

>>32271565
There's a billion different terms for a billion different things. There's even a colt submachine gun in 5.56 even though the text book definition is firing a pistol round.

Modern terms a battle rifle is a rifle which fires a full powered cartridge and is select fire, an LMG is fully automatic, don't know of many with semiautomatic option, which fires intermediate cartridge.

The road up to these modern terms is dotted with every military and company calling what they produce whatever they want.

>>32271757
The guy who said lmgs are crew served is wrong. LMGs in modern terms are designed to be used by an individual.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (86KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1280x720px

>>32271757
For the most part. There are exceptions, but it comes down to how you're using it. Battle rifles are always in full power cartridges. Whether or not they're in full auto isn't really of any consequence (because they're almost all fucking worthless in full auto anyway)

File: type99.jpg (19KB, 650x360px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 650x360px

>>32271799
>>32271860
Sounds complex

>>32271885
It is, it's a nightmare between engineer / military / commercial terms that all call things what they want, building upon years of a lack of standardization.

>>32271799
There is still someone carrying ammo and assisting the gunner whether it's an M249,240,PKM, or otherwise. Thanks for playing.

>>32271980
>someone carries your ammo for the 249
>240 is an lmg
>pkm is an lmg
lol wut?

File: type92.jpg (32KB, 550x280px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 550x280px

>>32272000
Wikipedia calls the 240 an mmg and the RPK an lmg.

>>32272039
I know, I'm saying that person is retarded for saying you don't carry your own 249 ammo, and lumping the PKM and 240 in the lmg category.

Dunno why you brought up the RPK.

>>32272068
Sorry, got PKM mixed up with RPK. It's like trying to remember Scandinavian flags.

>>32272039
With that said, it's important to note before I go any further, I spoke a bit out of context. An LMG CAN in fact have an assistant, but the primary purpose is to be used by the individual. Meaning an assistant is not required in the grand plan. So at the unit level it's all up to how you want to spread out the load, but the point of the LMG is independence in movement.

A MMG / GPMG is simply generally going to be too heavy to carry all the ammunition, barrel, extra knick knacks yourself, and will require an assistant to make the machine gun as efficient as possible to run.