Bofors/Bren gun combination

[Inhapi]

Hello all,

 

While watching this journal reel:

 

 

I saw that a Bren gun was attached atop a bofors gun (phoney war period). Why would they do it ?

 

Reasons i can think of:

1. Subcaliber training

2. Have another gun when the enemy gets really close (I think that in 1939 rifle caliber mg's were still tought of as being a bit useful in AA defence role ?)

 

I guess the ballisitcs of the Bren and Bofors are sufficiently different to say that the Bren is not a ranging machine gun , or am i mistaken in this ?

 

Does anyone have more information on this ? Was this an officially sanctioned modification ?

 

thanks,

 

Inhapi

[TonyE]

Similar thing here with this norwegian Bofors from the same timeperiod, although with a Colt watercooled MG instead. In this case it was intended as a more economical way of training, if it was the same for the brits i don`t know though.

[nigelfe]

At first sight training, which invites the question as to what was used as a target, presumably drogues as per full bore training. There may have been training sights or sight adaptors to support the very different performance of .303 and 40mm projectiles. No obvious benefits for actual AA engagements.

[rmgill]

Shorter ranged subcaliber training.

[DougRichards]

Hello all,

 

While watching this journal reel:

 

 

I saw that a Bren gun was attached atop a bofors gun (phoney war period). Why would they do it ?

 

Reasons i can think of:

1. Subcaliber training

2. Have another gun when the enemy gets really close (I think that in 1939 rifle caliber mg's were still tought of as being a bit useful in AA defence role ?)

 

I guess the ballisitcs of the Bren and Bofors are sufficiently different to say that the Bren is not a ranging machine gun , or am i mistaken in this ?

 

Does anyone have more information on this ? Was this an officially sanctioned modification ?

 

thanks,

 

Inhapi

 

It was fairly recently that the .50 was used as a co-ax on a Stinger installation, a weapon that in the 1990s was much more outmoded for AAA than a Bren was in 1939 / 1940.

[rmgill]

It was fairly recently that the .50 was used as a co-ax on a Stinger installation, a weapon that in the 1990s was much more outmoded for AAA than a Bren was in 1939 / 1940.

 

What's the minumum arm distance on a stinger?

 

What if the HIND is that close? It gives you SOMETHING to throw...

[DanielStarseer]

It was fairly recently that the .50 was used as a co-ax on a Stinger installation, a weapon that in the 1990s was much more outmoded for AAA than a Bren was in 1939 / 1940.

 

The Avengers (Humvee w/ pedestal mount air defense) that still survive in one form or another retain their 50-cal M3P (or maybe it's an M3M, can't remember exactly offhand), even those highly-modified Force Protection-Whatever variants that Boeing is trying to push new variants as...

 

I do recall either an old 1990s Armor magazine, or another, mentioning US trials with reduced-range plastic training ammo being used with M2s, and shooting at scaled drones to simulate WP aircraft...

 

Add the fact that the Avenger system couples its 50-cal into a powered turret with a fairly capable FLIR + a LRF (and can even receive remote cueing from offboard assets), and I'll wager that 50-cal would be quite a bit more capable (figuring in its ~1000rpm rate of fire and those newer frangible ammo types like MK211/NM140, but granted we didn't have those rounds in any number back in the 1990s)

than a majority of early-WW2 mounts incorporating single, or even double, British-pattern .303"-type MGs,

even against some of the supposed fast-movers we have today

(it was the North VietNamese that managed to down US jets and certainly helos with manually-operated guns of even 14.5mm & 12.7mm),

so suggesting a power-operated turret with a single 50-cal aided by a FLIR system & LRF can't hold its own against modern-day (even 1990s era) helicopters and various ground attack aircraft would be rather risky if it's your aircraft going up against them (and that's not taking into effect those Stinger pods).

[Chris Werb]

At the time, the reason for the M3 installation was that targets could pop up within the Stinger's minimum range - as this is only 200 meters, that seems a bit unlikely. However, if it did happen - for instance a Hind popped up on an Avenger in a woodland glade - the Avenger would otherwise have been stuffed. Another explanation is that the M3 is substantially immune to countermeasures. However, the vehicle needed some kind of provision for local defence against enemy ground troops, recce vehicles etc. An M3 could really beat up a BRDM.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Chris Werb