Browning says demand for M2 is booming

[TTK Ciar]

Saw this today:

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-war-surging-demand-heavy-machine-gun-fn-browning-m2-2025-10

Ignore the clickbaity title; the article itself admits that Browning is seeing increased sales to their regular customers, not directly to Ukrainians, and they have no idea how much of the increased demand is because of the war in Ukraine.

News of increased M2 sales intrigues me because I vaguely remember, several years ago on this Grate Sight, that the general consensus was that the M2 and similar HMG were nearly useless for air defense, and only better than 7.62mm MG at two things:  Chewing through heavy cover (like adobe) and making the soldier feel really good about using such a big, heavy gun (which may sound dismissive, but is not; morale is important).

My guess is that whoever is in charge of European military procurement didn't get that memo, and that the M2 still has a place due to institutional inertia, so increased spending in military equipment in general also translates to increased M2 sales.

Does that sound about right, or are there other explanations?

Quoting the text of the article here, because there's a soft paywall:

Quote

Ukraine's war surges demand for a 100-year-old heavy machine gun

The war in Ukraine is sparking renewed interest in tried-and-true machine guns, including some dating back to World War II, according to a leading manufacturer.

FN Browning's global demand and production this year for machine guns is expected to double that of 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, a senior representative for the Belgian armsmaker told Business Insider.

"Most countries were simply not interested 10 years ago. Now, we have contracts," said Henry de Harenne, FN Browning's head of communications and a member of its executive committee.

The group, wholly owned by the Belgian government, does not sell directly to Ukraine but counts Kyiv's allies, such as the US, UK, France, and Belgium, among its clients. It also sells to non-NATO states, such as Australia and India.

Business Insider visited its factory campus in Herstal, where the firm produces the M2 Browning heavy machine gun, the FN MAG general-purpose machine gun, and the FN Minimi light machine gun. The FN Mag and Minimi are also known in the US as the M240 or M249.

While other firms around the world make these firearms, FN was the original company to mass-produce such machine guns for NATO and remains their de facto manufacturer.

The company also manufactures rifles such as the FN SCAR and NATO-standard ammunition, including 5.56mm, 7.62mm, and 12.7mm rounds. De Harenne said that overall demand for ammo at FN Browning is now more than four times the demand in 2022.

The M2's rise in Ukraine

The .50 caliber M2, in particular, has re-entered the spotlight this year in Ukraine for its role in air defense.

Mobile crews mount these heavy machine guns on civilian trucks to shoot down slow-flying Russian Shahed attack drones, though the Kremlin is adopting new flying maneuvers that make it harder to hit them.

De Harenne said it's difficult to know if Kyiv's use of machine guns against drones is responsible in any way for increased global demand. Geopolitical hostilities with Russia and tensions with the US have also fueled new political will for defense spending in Europe, which said it plans to dedicate some $930 billion on rearming its militaries by 2030.

But interest in machine guns, old and new, has definitely spiked, de Harenne said. He cited the French Army recently sending in aged M2s left behind by US forces in World War II.

"We take them here, we upgrade them, and we give them a warranty like it's brand new," de Harenne said, adding that FN has so far retrofitted 2,000 of these guns for France.

American inventor John Moses Browning designed the belt-fed heavy machine gun in 1921. By 1945, the US had produced and distributed over 2 million M2s among Allied forces.

FN Browning became NATO's main global producer of the M2 in the 1950s, and over 90 countries still use the heavy machine gun in their modern militaries.

The M2 is a common infantry weapon that fires while mounted on a tripod. From a fixed position, it can bring enemy troops and light vehicles under withering .50 caliber fire — up to roughly 600 rounds per minute — and is accurate against targets a mile away. Ukraine has also experimented with ground robots that carry the M2.

De Harenne declined to say how many M2s and other machine guns the Belgian group is producing and refurbishing, but said it is in the thousands every year.

The race to rearm after the Cold War

FN Browning reported turnover of 1.3 billion euros, or $1.5 billion, in 2024, though this was after it combined revenues with Sofisport, a Paris-based ammo producer that it purchased this year. FN Browning reported annual revenues of 908 million euros in 2023, down 5% from 956 million euros in 2022.

De Harenne said annual turnover was static despite the surge in machine-gun demand due to lower sales in FN Browning's sport shooting division, which is coming off a boom during the COVID-19 pandemic.

He declined to say how much the firm expects demand for machine guns to increase in the near future. But he said its factory campus in Herstal currently employs about 1,600 people and is seeking to recruit another 100 mechanics, machinists, and other staff for ammo production.

Ukraine's drone war is shaping market demand in other ways; de Harenne said governments have been asking more about firearms for countering uncrewed aerial platforms.

Kyiv's troops, for example, frequently use shotguns as a final line of defense against incoming attack drones. FN Browning makes a range of semiautomatic and pump shotguns, such as the FN SLP and P-12.

The company is also working with a third-party artificial intelligence firm to integrate AI into its remote weapons stations for target recognition and precision against drones.

Overall, de Harenne said, the tactics in the Ukraine war and concerns of a Russian invasion have spurred FN Browning's busiest period in decades.

"Certainly, since the end of the Cold War. No question," he said.

 

 

[rmgill]

Defensive positions able to wound light armor with direct fire are nothing to slouch about. 
 

A BMP is not going to want to continue getting peppered by an m2 when the follow up might be a javelin. 

[seahawk]

Air defence is not drone defence. Which also means that we get stabilised weapon platforms on more vehicles and if you have one, you might as well use a M2 instead of a 7.62mm MG, some even go to 20-30mm guns. 

[Ssnake]

On 10/8/2025 at 9:14 PM, TTK Ciar said:

My guess is that whoever is in charge of European military procurement didn't get that memo, and that the M2 still has a place due to institutional inertia, so increased spending in military equipment in general also translates to increased M2 sales.

Does that sound about right, or are there other explanations?

Three words: Remote Weapon Stations

With an RWS, everybody is a sniper. And RWSs are put on practically any vehicle, not the least supply trucks. Obviously that creates a surge in whole weapons. The ar in Ukraine probably also generates demand, though I'd expect a disproportional demand for load-bearing spares - chiefly, barrels.

[Markus Becker]

Ukraine's war surges demand for A 100-year-old heavy machine gun

For another 100 year old machine gun, another. 

Btw, what more modern machine gun designs are there that use .50 BMG? There should be some considering there are at least two Dushka successors, NWS and Kord. Yet I can't remember any other .50 MG other than the M2. 

 

[bojan]

There were attempts, but either stayed local (CIS .50), or went nowhere (FN and French attempts).

On Soviet side NSV was developed to replace DShK primarily in infantry role, it was lighter, cheaper to produce, more reliable*, easier to service* and more streamlined for production (less material waste during production). Kord was developed because NSV production was in Kazahstan (IIRC), so Russians wanted own production. It also incorporated some improvements. There are .50 BMG versions of NSV as well.

*And based on Ukrainian weapons instructor interview that I have posted beats M2 handily in those categories as well.

 

[TonyE]

2 hours ago, Markus Becker said:

Yet I can't remember any other .50 MG other than the M2. 

 

The french did try to make 50.cal replacements in the 1950s called MAC 56 and MAC 58, basically enlarged AA.52s in 12.7:

There was also a 50.cal offered by Madsen-Saetter (Denmark):

[Tim Sielbeck]

5 hours ago, Markus Becker said:

Ukraine's war surges demand for A 100-year-old heavy machine gun

For another 100 year old machine gun, another. 

Btw, what more modern machine gun designs are there that use .50 BMG? There should be some considering there are at least two Dushka successors, NWS and Kord. Yet I can't remember any other .50 MG other than the M2. 

 

M85.

[Interlinked]

18 hours ago, bojan said:

There were attempts, but either stayed local (CIS .50), or went nowhere (FN and French attempts).

On Soviet side NSV was developed to replace DShK primarily in infantry role, it was lighter, cheaper to produce, more reliable*, easier to service* and more streamlined for production (less material waste during production). Kord was developed because NSV production was in Kazahstan (IIRC), so Russians wanted own production. It also incorporated some improvements. There are .50 BMG versions of NSV as well.

*And based on Ukrainian weapons instructor interview that I have posted beats M2 handily in those categories as well.

 

Hello Bojan, can you share it again? I don't know the interview you're referring to.

[bojan]

In Russian:

Short - Headspace and Timing adjustments are painful spot of M2. Headspace less so, but timing adjustment is big issue.

[DKTanker]

3 hours ago, bojan said:

In Russian:

Short - Headspace and Timing adjustments are painful spot of M2. Headspace less so, but timing adjustment is big issue.

New built M2A1s have fixed headspace and timing.  In any case, I never found timing to be an issue.  Set the headspace (If it's your weapon you know how many clicks to back off, no need to gauge it).  Again, if it's your weapon, no need to adjust timing today that you set yesterday or last week.  If you want a light weight alternative with selectable rate of fire which can be fired electrically there is, or was, the M85.

[bojan]

My only experience with it is cleaning few stored one (including one built on 1937. side-plate/receiver...) and fam firing 25 rounds from it, so I can not say anything more about it.

But what you have wrote mirrors local experience with M2 - it takes a while to set, then it is rock solid. But... it was, despite wars in Balkans, nothing close to the conditions those guns have to endure in Ukraine, so I think that point will also have to be taken. What is exact cause of problems there is not totally clear to me - it appears most people are just not trained enough to do it (big surprise...), but worn out guns and mismatched parts could be also potential part of problems (he mentioned guns going out of timing in use, to me that sounds like worn out gun, but again - no real experience with M2). IDK how M2A1 would handle conditions in Ukraine, but he noted that there are no complaints about NSV that also has no headspace/timing adjustment so I guess it would be also very welcome thing.

[TTK Ciar]

On 10/9/2025 at 11:51 PM, Ssnake said:

Three words: Remote Weapon Stations

With an RWS, everybody is a sniper. And RWSs are put on practically any vehicle, not the least supply trucks. Obviously that creates a surge in whole weapons. The ar in Ukraine probably also generates demand, though I'd expect a disproportional demand for load-bearing spares - chiefly, barrels.

Thank you!  That seems like the most likely answer.  I knew of RWS, but didn't realize they were deployed in the numbers cited by Browning.

[Ssnake]

Pretty much all our customers are getting them in the hundreds, if not thousands. For every combat vehicle, there's ten supply and combat support vehicles in need of some stabilized firepower. Most RWSs are sporting 12.7mm HMGs, though there are lighter and heavier variants, of course.

[17thfabn]

6 hours ago, DKTanker said:

If you want a light weight alternative with selectable rate of fire which can be fired electrically there is, or was, the M85.

Wan't the M85 considered to be unreliable?

[Tim Sielbeck]

Yes, but in my experience it was mostly due to operator error.

[seahawk]

11 hours ago, TTK Ciar said:

Thank you!  That seems like the most likely answer.  I knew of RWS, but didn't realize they were deployed in the numbers cited by Browning.

https://soldat-und-technik.de/2025/02/bewaffnung/42128/flw-fuer-218-mil/

500+ just for a first batch for troops deployed in the Baltics. 

[bojan]

11 hours ago, Tim Sielbeck said:

Yes, but in my experience it was mostly due to operator error.

IIRC, wasn't it's installation in the TC cupola on M60A1/A3 also a bit of an issue, making it pull more belt* than it was optimal?

*OTOH Chin ih his book on MGs said that any MG that can not pull fully loaded belt is not worth a damn, and he had plenty of experience with MGs...

[Yama]

On 10/12/2025 at 8:37 PM, bojan said:

There were attempts, but either stayed local (CIS .50), or went nowhere (FN and French attempts).

On Soviet side NSV was developed to replace DShK primarily in infantry role, it was lighter, cheaper to produce, more reliable*, easier to service* and more streamlined for production (less material waste during production). Kord was developed because NSV production was in Kazahstan (IIRC), so Russians wanted own production. It also incorporated some improvements. There are .50 BMG versions of NSV as well.

*And based on Ukrainian weapons instructor interview that I have posted beats M2 handily in those categories as well.

I was never trained for NSV, but those who used it said it is reliable, and very simple to field strip & maintain.

[Stuart Galbraith]

I remember reading about one of the SAS mobile patrols in Desert Storm, and they used .50's on the landrovers. One of the armourers said that if you fired enough rounds, you can hear a change in tone that means the gun is about to jam, which means leave it cool off a bit.

Anyway they expended hundreds of rounds trying to teach these SAS troopers the change in sound, but they never quite got it. Whether you would even hear it in combat whilst blatting across the desert at the speed of heat is another matter. But I thought it an interesting detail Id never heard before. Perhaps the armourers were just taking the piss, and wanted an excuse to burn up some rounds on the MOD's account.

[Markus Becker]

1 hour ago, Yama said:

I was never trained for NSV, but those who used it said it is reliable, and very simple to field strip & maintain.

And it should be. The Browning is the 1st super heavy machine gun ever. The NSV ist 3rd generation. 

[bojan]

1st one was German 13mm Maxim TuF

Browning M1921, .50 Vickers and 13mm Hotchkiss continued this path. Soviets tried, but decided against enlarging Maxim MG, weapon was considered too heavy.

Then M2 appeared as as lightweight version of water cooled M1921.  At about same time DShK (or to be more exact drum fed DK) appeared, but for various reasons did not see production until it was converted to belt feed by Shpagin, giving birth to DShK.

Post WW2 Soviets seriously updated DShK with new feed system, leading to DShKM obr.1946. version, which is what people think about when they say DShK.

I would put water cooled ones, Hotchkiss and DK to a 1st generation, with M2 and DShK being 2nd.

NSV would be 3nd, one that did not happen in the west due the abundance of M2s post war (IIRC no new M2 receiver was made from the end of WW2 until 1990s, that many were made during WW2...). Compared to that, Soviet pre/during WW2 production of original DShK was relatively small, so post war they kept producing upgraded version, and switched to NSV because that was economical thing to do, with savings in production compared to the amount they needed covered cost of retooling easily.

 

 

 

 

 

[Yama]

Americans perhaps had somewhat unique solution in using same gun for both aircraft and surface installations. I think other nations either had separate weapons designed for aerial and ground/naval use, or then just didn't bother with HMG's but went straight to 20mm. Did Germans ever field 13mm machine guns for tanks or infantry use?

In a way it also testifies about soundness of Browning design. Finnish opinion was that Browning was the best heavy machine gun (called Colt here), Berezina was very unreliable (but it's possible they just didn't know how to install them properly), Breda was also not seen too effective. MG131 worked well in synchronized installation though.

[Stuart Galbraith]

12 hours ago, Yama said:

Americans perhaps had somewhat unique solution in using same gun for both aircraft and surface installations. I think other nations either had separate weapons designed for aerial and ground/naval use, or then just didn't bother with HMG's but went straight to 20mm. Did Germans ever field 13mm machine guns for tanks or infantry use?

In a way it also testifies about soundness of Browning design. Finnish opinion was that Browning was the best heavy machine gun (called Colt here), Berezina was very unreliable (but it's possible they just didn't know how to install them properly), Breda was also not seen too effective. MG131 worked well in synchronized installation though.

Well, the Germans did the same with the 15cm, using an aircraft gun on a somewhat improvised ground mounting, that seems to have been effective enough. That was something of an expedient forced on them though, lacking lots of fighters, having lots of 151's and suddenly needing a lot of relatively like AA weapons to combat Jabos.

[Markus Becker]

19 hours ago, Yama said:

Americans perhaps had somewhat unique solution in using same gun for both aircraft and surface installations. I think other nations either had separate weapons designed for aerial and ground/naval use, or then just didn't bother with HMG's but went straight to 20mm. 

WRT the concept, the M1921/M2 was the same as the MG 18 TuF. A super heavy MG to deal with the larger aircraft and armoured vehicles. Other nations build such guns too. The USSR as already mentioned but also the UK(.50 Vickers), France(1929 Hotchkiss in 13.2mm) and Italy(Breda-SAFAT) but they were a bit late to the show. Aircraft only got bigger, making cannons the more attractive weapon. 

At this point the US began to fall behind. When their mobilisation began in 1940 the M2 was the most powerful gun that could be fitted into pretty much any compat aircraft, so that would be mass produced until a replacement was ready.