Machine gun definitions

[Gazza]

I was in the garden today with a cuppa and had a thought.......

What is the difference between a machine gun, a sub machine gun and an assault rifle? All are capable of being fully auto so technically all are machine guns?
Am I missing the bleedin obvious here?

[20series]

I might be off a bit but..

Machine Gun, designed to give sustained fire from a fixed position.

Sub machine gun, designed to fire pistol calibre ammo

Assualt Rifle, firing rifle calibre ammo in fully automatic/ semi auto

Alan

[Dellboy]

I was in the garden today with a cuppa and had a thought.......

What is the difference between a machine gun, a sub machine gun and an assault rifle? All are capable of being fully auto so technically all are machine guns?
Am I missing the bleedin obvious here?

you forgot the biscuits ?

[meles meles]

How definitively definitive do you want to be?

A machine gun was originally exactly that, a gun that was a machine, i.e. the loading and firing were mechanised but powered by a ooman turning a handle or similar: think Gatling, Nordenfelt, Gardner or Puckle

Following on from that, the use of the power in the cartridge or action to cycle the action took over, think Maxim et al, the machine gun came to be an automated system where the ooman only had to cycle the action once to cock it and then keep the trigger pressed. What we would now consider automatic fire. The machine gun then split into Heavy and Light categories, the former tripod mounted (Vickers, Maxim,) and the latter man portable for rapid re-siting - (Lewis, Bren, MG 34). All fired rifle calibre ammunition.

The sub-machine gun was a light, portable gun that could be carried into the offence - think Sten, MP40 et al, all generally using a pistol calibre round.

The semi-auto / full auto 'assault' rifle combined the function of the Light Machine Gun and the sub machine gun, making both obsolete. They generally fire an intermediate cartridge.

[Gazza]

How definitively definitive do you want to be?

A machine gun was originally exactly that, a gun that was a machine, i.e. the loading and firing were mechanised but powered by a ooman turning a handle or similar: think Gatling, Nordenfelt, Gardner or Puckle

Following on from that, the use of the power in the cartridge or action to cycle the action took over, think Maxim et al, the machine gun came to be an automated system where the ooman only had to cycle the action once to cock it and then keep the trigger pressed. What we would now consider automatic fire. The machine gun then split into Heavy and Light categories, the former tripod mounted (Vickers, Maxim,) and the latter man portable for rapid re-siting - (Lewis, Bren, MG 34). All fired rifle calibre ammunition.

The sub-machine gun was a light, portable gun that could be carried into the offence - think Sten, MP40 et al, all generally using a pistol calibre round.

The semi-auto / full auto 'assault' rifle combined the function of the Light Machine Gun and the sub machine gun, making both obsolete. They generally fire an intermediate cartridge.

Well, I think that clears that up

Dell, I'm trying to cut down on the biccies due to me starting to look like my avatar. Having said that I know where there are custard creams squat

[snayperskaya]

The semi-auto / full auto 'assault' rifle combined the function of the Light Machine Gun and the sub machine gun, making both obsolete. They generally fire an intermediate cartridge.

I wouldn't say the select-fire "assault" rifle has made the light machine gun and the submachine gun obsolete by any stretch of the imagination!.

As an example the Minimi M249 light machine gun is widely used by most NATO countries as well as those of South East Asia and South America and most, if not all, of the worlds militaries still issue SMG's/PDW's as they still have their place and are particularly popular with tank/helicopter crews etc due to their compact size and rate of fire.

[breacher]

Clear answers here - hopefully a few journalists are reading.......

[Laurie]

The semi-auto / full auto 'assault' rifle combined the function of the Light Machine Gun and the sub machine gun, making both obsolete. They generally fire an intermediate cartridge.

The 'intermediate' cartridge is key to the definition of 'assault rifle'. It's incorrect to tag the first generation of NATO rifles (or the German WW2 FG42 for that matter) as 'assault' rifles as they fire full-power cartridges with all their downsides in terms of recoil, gun handling and coping with chamber and barrel heat. In NATO's case, this was a result of the US Army forcing its choice of the T65E3 7.62X51mm cartridge onto all member countries. So the M14, FAL, HK91 etc were just upgraded semi-auto rifles even if some were initially manufactured with a full-auto facility. The prototype FN FAL (Fusil Automatique Legere) chambered in 7.92X33mm Kurz then adapted to the British 280/30 was several inches shorter and pounds lighter than in its final NATO form. As some have quipped the FAL was no longer 'automatique' or legere, but as it was still a rifle should have been renamed the FN F.

Attempts to create a workable squad MG out of them failed even if some armies adopted the FN FALO (Fusil Automatique Lourde) heavy-barrel variant. You got an overweight machine-rifle with a bipod that if used in auto ate its way through magazines of cartridges fast and when the barrel became too hot couldn't be changed as in a proper LMG like the Bren.

[breacher]

Nothing has been rendered obsolete.

In fact, unlike the old days where there was standardised type of weapons in general issue - now there is a dizzying array of weapons on issue - all tailored to the application or mission. Whether self loading pistol, full auto pistol, PDW, SMG, LMG, GPMG, BATTLE RIFLE, ASSAULT RIFLE or whtever, they each have their niche. Nothing remains unused for long - as they found out then they had to rush the M14 back into the field as a DM rifle.