Weapon *Life Expectancy*

When'ever you're on exercises with foreign military units then you strive to do everything exactly by the book, so that's a poor example formerjughead. You don't know anything about how they operate within their own institutions at all times when they don't have "visitors". I remember a sergeant not being so happy that his entire squad was wiped out by an attack not at all done exactly according to the rule books, despite his squad doing exactly as they had been taught & told.

Also I highly doubt you never once broke some rules while you served, however minor they might have been.

 

Rusty? The word 'opslijten' = 'worn-out', is uttered quite clearly a number of times.

 

The word you hear is : "We belanden in opsluiten" and it doesn't mean worn out, they are expressing concern for going to detention for what they're doing. So, if this is part of their training why would they worry about going to detention?

So I guess that means we can cross Dutch as one of the possible militaries you served with?

 

Thinking a bit more about this:

So we are discussing whether or not the barrel of a new (prototype for that matter) water cooled machine gun from just post WWI and you use this example as relevant to the discussion? And you neglect to mention initially that it was a captured weapon, that you weren't instructed in the use of, and which may or may not have been in poor condition. Am I the only one that sees a problem with this?

 

You may not have been the first to see it; but, you certainly are the first to put it in such direct terms....

 

Part of their training? I think it's pretty obvious such a thing will never be part of training.

As for being worried about detention; pretty dumb to put the video on youtube then eh? One guy says "Direkt opslijte" then another "Sehr opslijte" I don't hear the word "belanden" at any point...

 

I think you're beginning to realize that water-cooled or not, a WW1 machine gun barrel will not survive 20,000 rounds of WW1 ammunition being fired through it in one go. Have you been reading through WW1 accounts lately? I have, and generally it took just a few minutes of non-stop firing before Maxim guns started overheating, and then ofcourse there are the old stories of urin used as substitute for water we've all probably heard about before...

Also I merely brought forth my only experience of ever rendering an MG barrel unusable (in the sense that the rifling & esp. the throat was all trashed) by firing excessively without any breaks, as an example of how the barrel's of even modern machine guns quickly can be worn out if not properly operated. By comparing a WW1 barrel firing WW1 ammunition will naturally wear out faster under the same conditions, looking past the water-cooling.

 

Thus again demostrating your ability to take minimal facts and draw unwarented conclusions from them. Indeed I'm pretty sure the barrel used above did survive. I doubt it would have been of much use for precision work howver.

When you give proper references (i.e. short titles, page, numbers, and short relevant quotes) I'll be able to decide if this is relevant. So far your record isn't very good. Some questions that need to be answered for instance in regards to the Maxim gusn arer:
1) Are the ones mentioned water cooled?
2) What do they mean by "over heated"?
3) If they were water cooled what was their water supply like?
4) How much water and how effective is the cooling on a Maxim gun compared to a Browning?
In theory after a certain number of rounds if a constant water supply is present a steady state temperature should be reached. What this temperature is would be critical to knowing it's effect on the barrel.

Yet you left out critical aspects of that experience that affected just how relevant it was and ones that impacted the relevance in a negative maner. Furthermore you haven't susbstantiated your claim on the erosive properties of the ammuntion used. Indeed it's been pointed out that the extremely errosive ammo predated WWI.

 

Well I know one thing: the bolt action rifle is going to last alot longer than a semi automatic plus the bolt action is cheaper. And sub machine guns can last very short and very long depending on quality.

 

Is it really? Especially in combat? or if well cared for?

 

The rep I gave you for this post was actually meant to be negative. You really nead to stop posting single sentence rubbish.