[critter]

I have some questions about the SAW being used currently by the military forces in Iraq and elsewhere. I understand that it is 5.56, full auto and uses 'boxes' of ammo which are either 200 or 400 rounds and which are linked. (Please correct me if any of those facts are in error.)

Main question. If a soldier fires part of his box of ammo (lets say 100-150 rounds from his 2 or 400 rounds), is there any way of replentishing his ammo supply short of replacing the partially filled box? If not, it would seem to me that I, if I were a soldier in harms way, would want to replace it with a full box after every encounter-just in case!

Comments? Thanks.

[Tom C.]

The M249 Squad Automatic Weapon is the replacement for the BAR of song and legend. 7" twist to stabilize the long tracers. Uses link belt ammo or m-16 mags. We seem to have to major variants: fixed stock, longer barrel for grunts; shorter barrel, folding stock for airborne. Seems to be well liked by the troops. Don't know how excited they get when the belts get short.

[SIGarmed]

The M249 is a gas operated, air cooled, shoulder fired machine gun that is fired from the open bolt position. That is what you can expect from a real machine gun, it is not as light and handy as a rifle like an M16.

You open the feed tray and insert the belt in the proper position after charging the bolt. The ammo box slides into a clip under the reciever. The boxes are mainly disposable. When the ammo runs out you open the feed tray and start all over.

It can also utilize the M16/M4 magazines because it has a mag well on one side of the receiver.

[ajacobs]

The ammo is in 100 or 200 rnd belts. The predomitly used magazine is a plastic 200 rnd unit that is rigid. The 100 rnd canvas bag was created becuase the platic magazine, by virtue of their rigid nature, was being wrenchec of in some applications like cqp and airborne drops. Soldiers do not generally reload the canvas bag ones during a engagement. There is generally only one per saw and they are rarely used. Like the previous esteemed board members it can use both m16 mags and the drum so starting a mission with half a belt is not that big of a problem all though most would start with a full belt. I think you are under the misconception that one of those durms would last an entire engagement. Generally you squeeze off 5-7 rnd bursts with a saw so 200 rnds in reality is really only 30-40 "shots". A saw gunner typically carries 800 rnds and has another 800 on the vehicle or spread out amoung a couple members of the squad.

[Feanaro]

As far as I know, you just have to move on to another box/M16 mag. It would be a lot of trouble to link two belts together in the field, if possible.

[JohnKSa]

One thing that rarely gets mentioned.

Yes, it can use M16 mags. However, it ruins them in the process. They are useless after the SAW empties them.

[ajacobs]

Yes, it can use M16 mags. However, it ruins them in the process. They are useless after the SAW empties them.

That is not my experiance when I was a saw gunner. ALthough they do require strong mag springs.

[JohnKSa]

You've seen a mag used in a SAW, reloaded and then used in an M16 or M4?

[Nightcrawler]

In my experience (I carry a SAW in the Nat'l Guard) the M16 mags feed so unreliably as to be virtually useless. Maybe extra strong mag springs would fix it, but we only have the mags we're issued. Even the new ones with green followers, brand new in the wrapper, don't work that well.

The SAW is an individual weapon, unlike the M240 or M60. The SAW gunner has no assistant gunner and has to carry his own spare barrel. Changing the barrel is necessary for extended fire; with a cyclic rate of somewhere around 1,000 rounds a minute that sucker can heat up fast. The barrels change easy, but reloads are as slow as is typical with a belt-fed machine gun. Best to have two or more buddies cover the SAW gunner while he reloads.

Trigger discipline can allow you to make the most of your ammo, squeezing off two and three shot bursts. Nevertheless, the ammo goes FAST, especially if you're called on to lay down suppressive fire.

[ajacobs]

You've seen a mag used in a SAW, reloaded and then used in an M16 or M4?

Yes it was never a problem for me.

As nightcrawler says though they are not the most realiable way to feed it. You have to slow down the action(rotate the gas port hole) in order for the rounds to move up in positon fast enough to realiably use new mags. I never really fired it enough to need to change the barrel do to heat. Hell the spares never left the arms room except to be cleaned.

[JohnKSa]

Well, I suppose that's why you rarely hear about it... :D

[blades67]

As far as I know, you just have to move on to another box/M16 mag. It would be a lot of trouble to link two belts together in the field, if possible.


Linking two belts together is easy and takes less than a minute if you're not in a hurry. It can be done in less than 15 seconds if you are in a hurry.

[Nightcrawler]

Well, generally, your belts of ammo are contained in a soft 100-round pouch or a plastic 200 round box. It wouldn't be difficult to pull the belt out of either one and snap a second one on the end of it. You'd have trouble if you tried to stuff the rounds back in the pouch, of course (they have to be just so or they won't feed), but snapping linked belts of rounds together isn't exactly a difficult task.

[Deadman]

While changing a Minimi box mag might not be as quick as the time needed to change a mag in an assault rifle, it doesn't take that much longer either.


While I've never had the chance to use a M16 mag with a Minimi ( not exactly many M16 mags floating around in the Australian Army ), how does the Beta C-mag fair for reliability when attached to a Minimi?

[Badger Arms]

The M249 Squad Automatic Weapon is the replacement for the BAR of song and legend.Well, yes, it is. In fact, it is a direct replacement of the M-60 although it is not employed in the same manner as the M-60. Strangely, when the BAR was retired there was no Squad Automatic Weapon left to take its place. It was envisioned that the M-15 would take over this role. The M-15 was a heavy-barreled version of the M-14. I'm not entirely sure why but that gun was quickly abandoned and nothing was left in its place. The M-60 was more of a replacement for the crew-served Browning Machine gun and it did an excellent job there. While used as a pseudo-SAW, it was never really suited to that task.

Now we come full circle and the SAW is replacing the M-60 in the infantry. It's really a much better Grunt gun. Unfortunately, the ammo compatibility is a non-issue. As stated before, M-16 magazines work, but are not gennerally well respected by users. If a suicide charge of Koreans were facing me and an empty SAW, I'd much rather shove an M-16 magazine in and take my chances than try to load another ammo box. In regular practice, I don't imagine this happening all too often.

As far as linking belts together... won't the gun get too hot? I'm not a SAW gunner but I'd imagine that after shooting 200 rounds, the time it takes to change the belt might be about the same as the time it takes to reload a fresh belt. Am I wrong? Also, I don't believe that there is an assistant gunner. Do SAW gunners carry an extra barrel?
http://www.scottsdalegunclub.com/Pictures/Machineguns/FNM249Right.jpg

[Blackhawk 6]

Badger Arms,

The M-60 has been replaced by either the M-240G or the M-240B in the infantry. Some combat support and combat service support units had their M-60's replaced with SAW's but not the infantry. In fact, through the mid- to late 90's the M-60 and SAW were serving side by side in infantry platoons throughout the Army.


Kevin

[Al Thompson]

BA, IIRC, we didn't have extra barreels for the SAW. It's an individual weapon. This may have changed, as my unit was issued SAWs in '86.

We used M16 mags often as the 200 round assult packs were scarce at times. They worked OK if the gunner kept his left hand on the mag with some forward pressure. The 100 round canvas bag sounds like a good idea.

[Badger Arms]

Kevin

Thanks for the insight. Whenever I get the chance I quiz the crunchies about their preference for guns. Few of them have anything bad to say about SAW but the M-60 is universally described as being too heavy. Not bad for emplacements, vehicle mounting, or the like but carrying the thing around gets old really quick. As a crew-served weapon, the M-240 series seems much more well-received.

[ShaiVong]

FWIW, my Dad said that the guy who lugged the M60 through the jungle was rewarded by a look of sheer rapture while firing it from the hip at targets.

They would all just stop firing and watch this guy chugging away with the M60, a look of boyish glee on his face.

I think I would try and be an automatic rifleman in the armed forces :D

[Blackhawk 6]

Actually, I have been less than impressed with the SAW. It's bipod is not very durable, the plastic drums tend to fall off at inopportune times and are noisy and it has to be loaded just right or you will get a stoppage.

A new SAW fired under the clinical conditions of a range is truly impressive (which is probably why the Army bought them), but in reality the weapons carried by our soldiers are far from optimim in my opinion.

I have had the opportunity to use both the M-60 and M-240. While the weight of the M-60 is a valid complaint and there were several complaints about the M-60's reliability, I generally found it to be a good weapon system. The M-240 is comparable in weight and I saw as many, if not more, stoppages with the M-240 as the M-60.

In any event, while there is clearly room for improvement, soldiers are well equipped. As is true for all weapons, knowing your weapons limitatations and peculiarities helps you to operate it better.

Kevin

[ShaiVong]

we should start issuing miniguns ala "Predator" :evil:

Electroautomatic rifleman!

Dont start bringing logistics up about weight, power, ammo, firing position and the such! Just concentrate on Jessie Venturaesq soldiers sawing iraqies in half with miniguns!

[Al Thompson]

Actually, I think the 240 is a couple of pounds heavier than the M60. I never had one on the ground, but in an M1 or Bradley, they worked very well (coax). When we transitioned to 11Ms from 11Bs, I ran a range where we shot over 100,000 7.62 rounds. Very few problems noted.

Saws gave us fits on longe range engagements in Europe. We didn't have tracers and 5.56 dosen't give much of an impact signature. Once the tracers were easy to get, this went away. The other problem we had was that they wouldn't hold much of a zero. Once our gunners got used to the idea of moving the beaten zone onto the target quickly, we were much happier.

Despite a lot of the M60 bashing, mainly from Peter Kokalis, most ran just fine. In the '80's they were getting old and worn, but still a reliable pig in my book.

[Jeff White]

The SAW was never designed to be a replacement for the M60. The SAW was designed and purchased to be a Squad Automatic Weapon. The BAR was retired and was to be replaced my the M15. The M15 never was produced in any number and the M14E2 was an interim SAW. When the M14 left the system the Army still had a position for an automatic rifleman. They issued the clothespin type bipod for the M16 to two riflement in each squad. This was to allow him to fire full auto more accurately. In practice most of those bipods never left the arms room.

The FN Minimi was adopted as the new SAW in the early 80s and designated the M249. It was suggested that it replace the M60 at platoon level because the M60 was reaching the end of it's service life and they would need to be replaced anyway. This was met with a lot of resistance within the Infantry community and the idea was canned. As the M60s in the system got so wornout that they couldn't function (at the end, you could actually order a new receiver) they replaced most of the ones in the force with M249s from the divisions that were deactivated during the drawdown. Most MTOEs still call for either the M60 or the M240. As the M240 gets into the system in sufficient numbers the M249s in support units that have been issued in lieu of M240s will be replaced.

There have been some problems with the M249. The adjustable gas system wasn't soldier proof, so the new ones have a fixed gas system. (soldiers were turning them all the way open because they functioned best that way when firing blanks and causing excessive wear). The original buttstock (like in the picture Badgerarms posted) was replaced by a plastic one of a different shape. There is also a collapsible one that airborne units use. The bipod is not very strong and tends to fall out of it's storage space in the handguard and flop around. The feed tray covers are currently having a picatinney rail added to them so that the XM145 machine gun optic can be mounted. The 200 round plastic magazine falls off and lets the linked ammo drag the ground. And no the provision to fire with M16 magazines has never worked right. FN has produced a new PIP version called the MK46 that doesn't incorporate the M16 magazine caability and has some other changes. It's also lighter then the M249.

Jeff

[M1911]

Despite a lot of the M60 bashing, mainly from Peter Kokalis, most ran just fine. In the '80's they were getting old and worn, but still a reliable pig in my book.What does he have against the M60? He seems to imply it was as bad as the Chauchat, but I've never seen his reasoning.

[Al Thompson]

M1911, ya got me. I've fired them from bipods, tripods, hip, shoulder, slung, jeeps, and tanks. Got to ride along when we qual'ed some aerial gunners out of Hueys.

Jams? Every now and again, but certainly not like Peter K. suggests. Towards the last 80's we started to see some serious wear - had to code a few out.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the extra two magazine pouches and 6 magazines for the AR slots. At Hood in the early 80's we used to end up surveying the supply sergents as they could never keep those things secure. Nobody wanted the bipods, everybody wanted some spare TA-50. :D

[Badger Arms]

Despite a lot of the M60 bashing, mainly from Peter Kokalis...I never liked and often disagreed with what Peter has written. While experienced, I don't think he has the skill to objectively deal with many of the subjects he calls himself an expert on. What I've seen of his reads like an editorial in a tabloid.

[Spark]

I prefer the 240 to the 60 hands down. Much better system. Sure, it's a couple pounds heavier, but many fewer problems in the ones I handled.

But given a preference - I'd rather have a 249 any day of the week... sometimes I miss my little trenchbroom. :D