Well you know, if you're in charge or a mortar site sometimes you have to give suppressing fire to another mortar site while you sight them in, that's why you'd also get nice long barrels and a drum round on some lugers.
Forgotten Weapons: informative detailed historical documentation while being entertaining and relaxing. The amount of quality videos he can release is nothing short if astonishing.
in theory yes, but most of these old tanks where scraped. :( but many of the FT17's had a 37mm cannon with no machine gun, so they where always machine gun-less
Tanks are actually cheaper then a decent entry level new car and aren’t NFA. This gun is actually probably more expensive then the tank that goes with it.
You probably could work out a buy 3 machine guns and get a free tank deal. I’m actually being half serious too which is the crazy part. Honestly they are pretty cheap especially the Vietnam era stuff. Piss poor gas mileage though and you’ll go broke maintenance wise but honestly if you buy two and have deep fuel pockets you can have a TANK!
The idea of the "tube" is mainly so that you can have quick, gross centering of the sight. lining up the front sight in the center of a circle is fairly easy, but in the heat of battle, but having fast acquisition of a sight picture by making sure the rear sight was without shadow (like on a magnified scope) was easier to some decision makers.
1:45 I had never heard of a Colt 1895 potato digger. I had to stop and look it up, and watched a video of it, and honestly, I giggled way too hard watching it.
Well, I mean, it makes sense the ordinance department wouldn’t extensively test it. You don’t ask the Gun God for a new Commandment, then question Him once it’s delivered.
I wouldn't ask the ordinance department to do test (extensive or not) on any weapon, but I would ask them to write up rules and regulations regarding its use. For testing, I'd rather rely on the ordnance department, much more their specialty.
I never saw anything like that. This is a long time ago, but the 48 series tanks had a similar gun. Actually it looked more like the updated models. The thing that stuck in my head all these years was the guns marked 1919 had the recoil spring and rod in the bolt. You could actually take the bolt out with the spring compressed in it. Needless to say, a dangerous thing to do. Good video. Have not thought about that stuff in years.
Can you see out to aim, without a large hole for others to chuck stuff back in? Also optics at the time were fragile so a simple bit of tube that works under adverse conditions.
That would absolutely work. Iron sights are great because they can be incredibly crude, and work just fine. Especially with an MG, where accuracy isn't a great concern.
I own a 1919A4 along with an MG42 and MG3. I always liked the robust design of the 1919A4. You can actually have an out of battery explosion in one of these (like do to bad headspace) and it really doesn't put the gun out of commission. The gun it is designed so strong, usually if that occurs sometimes it just bends the top cover upwards slightly and a few taps with a mallet will get it running again. It is built like a tank, though somewhat heavy for a WWII MG. Barrel changes can be done 'somewhat easy', but they were not designed for barrel changes in combat. The idea with them as opposed to the MG42 was that the barrel is much heavier (thicker) than say an MG42 and acts as sort of a heat sink, add that with the lower rate of fire and the air cooled 1919A4 really had no need for swapping barrels in combat in most situations. The penalty for this was of course weight. Also the 1919A4 was more accurate than the MG42 so there was no need for it to be a 'bullet hose'. Which mean too that its crew didn't need to carry anywhere near as much ammo as with the MG42. I'm not saying the 1919A4 was better than the MG42, but it was a slightly different concept which in the end worked well. I like them both for what they are.
Sweden used versions of the 1919 in armoured vehicles into the 2000's, which says something about their durability and longevity. Though they were really worn by that time and were later replaced by FN MAG:s configured for vehicles.
I think the differences between the M1919 and the MG42 stem from the difference in infantry tactics. In the US army, the machine gun supports the grunts. In German tactics, the grunts support the machine gun.
I would love to know the story behind the British adoption of the Czech designed BESA machinegun in 7.92mm (now called 8mm Mauser), when we already had Brownings in .303 in service with the RAF. Why did the tankers reject the Browning so hard they adopted a different cartridge instead?
afaik, it's far more compact, and it fires a wider range of rounds (which is a bigger deal for tank, which can't just have a runner bring up different ammo)
IIRC, they adopted the BESA at the last minute in 1938 and decided that it wasn't worth the time and effort to convert it to .303. The Browning was in service with the RAF, but it wasn't in service with the British Army at the time, and the Royal Tank Corps had it's own logistics train from the rest of the army, so the different calibre didn't cause much of a problem. It also meant that captured German 7.92mm ammo could be used as well, of course. The advantage of the BESA over the Vickers that preceded it in tank use was that it was lighter, it didn't have a vulnerable water jacket, and it had a much shorter inboard length.
A thought on the tube sight: with the lack of a cheek weld, could the tube help align the aiming eye properly to find the front sight? You can look through an aperture at a much wider angle than a tube...
A historical note to add. Colt's did produce the 1919 Tank Gun in addition to N.E. Westinghouse. An example obtained from the Colt's factory is at the Institute for Military Technology, with hand stamped markings at the front of the RSP. Also, I have photos from Rock Island Arsenal of a 1919A2 with the Colt's 1919 Tank Machine Gun markings and A2 overstamp. Don't think they made many, as with the 1917s.
Mi nombre es gustavo soy de argentina y mi edad es de 54 años, siempre fui un entusiasta sobre historia y mecanismos de las armas y tenia que buscar en libros o revistas informacion escueta. Yo quiero agradecerte profundamente tu trabajo de instruir y brindar tan excelente material! Didactico y y de una calidad de imagen excepcional! Aprovecho para agradecer en este video no solo x este si no por todo el invalorable material del canal! THANKS!
Much safer but people in the USA and Canada hate it when it’s installed this way because it doesn’t make a face. But yes, way to go Morphy for doing it right. (Doesn’t really matter anymore with GFI’s but I used to insist in kitchens and bathrooms to install this way, as I’m a general contractor and could do so).
Most people grasp over the top of a plug and this you can expose your hand to the hot side and get a shock as well as object and fluids hitting the hot as well exposing the possibility of damage and shock. The ground deflectes this and also shorts if you hit both it and the hot decreasing this possibility. Still a very low risk except with children or liquids.
I remember hearing somewhere that putting a tube to your eye even if it's just your hands ,ahla pretending to be a pirate, does help your eye see more accurately inside of the tube, kinda weird sounding and can't remember where I heard it, but may help explain the tube sight.
I recently saw a home made fully automatic belt fed 12 gauge. He used an m16 lower and an upper that looked exactly like that. Just a steel rectangle block
They put so many of these, in so many tanks. The AOD (Army Ordinance Dept) was so proud of them, they never put 1 in a tank, when they could put 3. Sometimes forward facing, right next to the driver, so they could have a gunner there. To load, and pull the trigger, while the driver aimed with a tiller, and the machinegun like a meter or 2 to the right of his observation prism. For that extra bit of accuracy.
After the (First World) War, they had so many tanks, with patches over the firing ports, quite often in Pairs poking through the frontal armor. Because the AOD just designed Tanks that way, then crews decided they'd rather have more ammo for the main gun in the machinegunner's seat, not to mention more armor in front of that backup magazine, than big holes in the frontal slope to stick useless machineguns out of.
Incidentally, the plan of mounting them in pairs wasn't really all that crack-headded, because they are Air Cooled. (They didn't want to stick a Water Jacket out of the armor, either.) So, the plan was to fire 1 MG, then the other while the first one cooled off. Only firing both when you really needed the firepower, hopefully briefly. So, you don't have to pop hatch, and get out to change the barrels, or pull them in the cab, and try to change barrels with that in your lap. (And the hot barrel in the Driver's lap.) It was just the general idea of casemate mounting them, so that the Machingunner couldn't aim, and had to tell the Driver where to turn, while the Commander is calling orders down from the Turret, AND the main gunner is trying to aim the main Gun. So the entire tank crew is fighting each other for the joysticks, in the middle of a firefight. Those forward machineguns, and the Machinegunner position were the weak link.
I love guns. My father was in the 101st airborne. Bad bad bad bad boy! When he was alive you wouldn't poke him in the chest with your finger. I miss him so much.
There's actually a 1919E1 Cavalry Pack MG for sale on gunbroker right now. It's a bit of a mutt with some E4 parts, but the overall presentation is still pretty interesting.
Molly MacAlister I’m also waiting for that still.. hopefully just delayed. P.S I’ve noticed that I don’t always get all notifications for channels I’m subscribed too, even tho I’ve got the bell on. But I don’t think that is the case with this channel..
Cheers again for another great video on a pretty slick gun, Ian. I don't want to bother you but do you think you could do a video on your NZ issue Martini carbine? Thanks again. Respect from New Zealand.
If at some time you could do a video about the telescopic sights for pre-WW2 Browning machine guns that would be cool. I have an old Ft. Knox manual for the Browning .50 and it mentions the telescopic sight for the .50 with a drawing of it, but really not much more.
4:36 I thought to this day a cook-off is when two people are convinced, they are the better cook as the other, respectively, they cook for a neutral jury and... -you get the idea. As I've heard that sometimes bullets are involved in the described procedure too, but in completely different context, I've learned again something extremely useful from this splendidly informative channel. Thank you so much, Gun Jeezuz!
I've seen a number of that exact pattern. Usually in the form of now de milled side plate chunks. About 1030 A2s were converted from the Tank guns, and all the A2s were converted to A4s, per Ordnance Dept order. So far as I am aware, there is no surviving Browning in A2 configuration.
My understanding is that Ordnance issued the order but it was never completed. Certainly, the 1st Cavalry Div took some A2's with them to the Pacific along with their A4's
It's like ~30 lb and most of the weight is in the rear. With just a pistol grip, no stock, and no select-fire, I think you'd have a mighty hard time bracing it with only a bipod.
I love how logic back then was to put sights on an infantry firearm that go out to 2000 meters, but put a small barrel on the mounted MG because they didn’t expect longer engagements.
The primary mount for the M1919 was the Mark VIII Heavy Tank (aka Liberty). The US would provide the automotive items, the British the 6 pounder gun and ammunition and the hull and the French would assemble the beast. It would then be issued to all three armies for the Spring 1919 offensive. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_VIII_tank Presumably the gun would also be used by the M1917 Light Tank - the US version of the Renault FT en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1917_light_tank
A tank machine gun doesn't need a water jacket because it's not expected to do prolonged suppressive fire. Its purpose is to kill, not to keep enemy heads down.
1:32 well... yes you can put a water cooled Browning machine gun inside a tank. The Australians did it, and thus developed the only pure Australian built tank, complete with a front dong to house the 1919.
Google search: Ford m1918 3 ton tank this gun was to replace the Marlin as its main armament. Cool stuff. America's first indigenous tank adopted for service.
Jai Ridler you have very good taste sir. Very heavy compared to modern guns but so many excellent options and configurations. Also it’s like a Strat Violin, which may not be as well made as modern violins but this is the sound/look of the description. It’s quite simply the dictionary description of machine gun.
Ian, would it be possible for you to do a video on the Winchester 1907? It has a pretty interesting history and it saw some service in military conflicts around the world, used for bank and security transports, and guards for prisons.
I don't think there's any actual official standard for how they're supposed to be mounted, but I have to admit I find it distracting that the power outlet on the wall is in the orientation I consider to be upside down.
Considering it's really just a modification of a water cooled design, it does make sense. Why take the time to re-design the whole system for what was meant to be a short range, short burst firing gun when you could make minimal modifications and have it in service in a much shorter period of time. It's likely also the reason it got adopted so quickly, it wasn't drastically different in mechanics from the already approved 1917 design. All it really had to do was prove it could meet the requirements for the tank gun role.
Do you have anything on Parker Hale aperture sights? My uncle was talking about them once. Some kind of modification for SMLE No 4's or something, but I don't know much about them. A possible video idea for the future, if you come back to England at some point?
Funny how back in those days tank machine guns had sites only good to a 100 yards when pistols would sometimes be sighted out to a 1000 yards.
#recordscratch That can't be real...what kind of liftbro can sight a pistol out 10 football fields?
Well you know, if you're in charge or a mortar site sometimes you have to give suppressing fire to another mortar site while you sight them in, that's why you'd also get nice long barrels and a drum round on some lugers.
@@KevinRhoads It's real
Kevin Rhoads check out some of Jerry Miculeck's 900 and 1000yd pistol shots he's done on his channel.
@@Gamberbro237 Did that work? like did it suppress enemies?
Forgotten Weapons: informative detailed historical documentation while being entertaining and relaxing. The amount of quality videos he can release is nothing short if astonishing.
Just saying, one of the best channels on UA-cam
You can have whatever music you want open in another tab. I actually tried some classical after reading you comment and it pairs very well.
The best channel
Hala Madrid
All hail, gun jesus
I second that notion, move to forward. ✌🙃
Does this mean that somewhere a tank is left machinegun-less?
in theory yes, but most of these old tanks where scraped. :( but many of the FT17's had a 37mm cannon with no machine gun, so they where always machine gun-less
I'd say it's the other way around, this machine gun is tankless.
Ah, they probably just stuck an M73 in there to replace it.
If you're cold, they're cold. Let them in.
If the war ended 5 days after these went into production it probably never saw the inside of a tank.
Shame it's not bundled with a tank.
Rock Island might be able to help you with that...
Tanks are actually cheaper then a decent entry level new car and aren’t NFA. This gun is actually probably more expensive then the tank that goes with it.
But then we'd all be bugging Ian to test fire it on the range.
Buy 1 machinegun and get yourself a FREE tank!
You probably could work out a buy 3 machine guns and get a free tank deal. I’m actually being half serious too which is the crazy part. Honestly they are pretty cheap especially the Vietnam era stuff. Piss poor gas mileage though and you’ll go broke maintenance wise but honestly if you buy two and have deep fuel pockets you can have a TANK!
The idea of the "tube" is mainly so that you can have quick, gross centering of the sight. lining up the front sight in the center of a circle is fairly easy, but in the heat of battle, but having fast acquisition of a sight picture by making sure the rear sight was without shadow (like on a magnified scope) was easier to some decision makers.
Three years later . . .
It's also easier to instantly get rid of parallax
1:45 I had never heard of a Colt 1895 potato digger. I had to stop and look it up, and watched a video of it, and honestly, I giggled way too hard watching it.
Well, I mean, it makes sense the ordinance department wouldn’t extensively test it. You don’t ask the Gun God for a new Commandment, then question Him once it’s delivered.
Probably proof read it though eh.
I wouldn't ask the ordinance department to do test (extensive or not) on any weapon, but I would ask them to write up rules and regulations regarding its use. For testing, I'd rather rely on the ordnance department, much more their specialty.
@@Riceball01 funny
Really glad the guys in Rising Storm added the option swap your M1919's Barrel on the fly...
with no gloves or tools.
I never saw anything like that. This is a long time ago, but the 48 series tanks had a similar gun. Actually it looked more like the updated models. The thing that stuck in my head all these years was the guns marked 1919 had the recoil spring and rod in the bolt. You could actually take the bolt out with the spring compressed in it. Needless to say, a dangerous thing to do. Good video. Have not thought about that stuff in years.
Tube sights were supposed to make it easier to pick up the front sight from the dark inside of a moving and shaking tank.
tube-sight.. looks like they took door-hinge and slapped that on the gun?
Can you see out to aim, without a large hole for others to chuck stuff back in? Also optics at the time were fragile so a simple bit of tube that works under adverse conditions.
Of course there's a reason for that design, but ari was more stating that it looked like a door hinge purchased straight from a hardware store.
Makes perfect manufacturing sense, why make a hinge if you can just order some pre-existing door hinges and stick them on..
That would absolutely work. Iron sights are great because they can be incredibly crude, and work just fine. Especially with an MG, where accuracy isn't a great concern.
Door hinge was the first thing to came to mind when I saw that sight.
Lets get this out onto a tray...nice!
Wrong channel.
wouldnt it be glorious to see them do a video together though?
"Forgotten Rations"
Brandon Obaza
So basically Ian would be there to show what soldiers used to shoot and Steve would show what they used to eat!
Nice!
yess! exactly
I own a 1919A4 along with an MG42 and MG3. I always liked the robust design of the 1919A4. You can actually have an out of battery explosion in one of these (like do to bad headspace) and it really doesn't put the gun out of commission. The gun it is designed so strong, usually if that occurs sometimes it just bends the top cover upwards slightly and a few taps with a mallet will get it running again. It is built like a tank, though somewhat heavy for a WWII MG.
Barrel changes can be done 'somewhat easy', but they were not designed for barrel changes in combat. The idea with them as opposed to the MG42 was that the barrel is much heavier (thicker) than say an MG42 and acts as sort of a heat sink, add that with the lower rate of fire and the air cooled 1919A4 really had no need for swapping barrels in combat in most situations. The penalty for this was of course weight.
Also the 1919A4 was more accurate than the MG42 so there was no need for it to be a 'bullet hose'. Which mean too that its crew didn't need to carry anywhere near as much ammo as with the MG42. I'm not saying the 1919A4 was better than the MG42, but it was a slightly different concept which in the end worked well. I like them both for what they are.
Sweden used versions of the 1919 in armoured vehicles into the 2000's, which says something about their durability and longevity. Though they were really worn by that time and were later replaced by FN MAG:s configured for vehicles.
Lucky man, 3 good belt fed LMG's.
I think the differences between the M1919 and the MG42 stem from the difference in infantry tactics. In the US army, the machine gun supports the grunts. In German tactics, the grunts support the machine gun.
Choo 1982 I had a out of battery discharge with 8mm and it blew the barrel out and cracked the trunnion.
I would love to know the story behind the British adoption of the Czech designed BESA machinegun in 7.92mm (now called 8mm Mauser), when we already had Brownings in .303 in service with the RAF. Why did the tankers reject the Browning so hard they adopted a different cartridge instead?
afaik, it's far more compact, and it fires a wider range of rounds (which is a bigger deal for tank, which can't just have a runner bring up different ammo)
IIRC, they adopted the BESA at the last minute in 1938 and decided that it wasn't worth the time and effort to convert it to .303. The Browning was in service with the RAF, but it wasn't in service with the British Army at the time, and the Royal Tank Corps had it's own logistics train from the rest of the army, so the different calibre didn't cause much of a problem. It also meant that captured German 7.92mm ammo could be used as well, of course. The advantage of the BESA over the Vickers that preceded it in tank use was that it was lighter, it didn't have a vulnerable water jacket, and it had a much shorter inboard length.
It’s a BREN gun not a BRESA
The BESA and BREN are two completely different guns used in completely different roles...
DerKrieger107 whatever, just making things up because you got it wrong. It’s a BREN gun, British design and made.
seems like the long tube aperture would help with alignment, with the eye being able to center a circle in a circle fairly precisely and all.
You didn't say ameliorate. So much for my morning drinking game.
I take a drink whenever Ian says "I should point out" .I should point out that I only play on weekends and evenings.
When you see something made by John Browning you don't ask if it's good or bad, you ask just how awesome is it?
A thought on the tube sight: with the lack of a cheek weld, could the tube help align the aiming eye properly to find the front sight? You can look through an aperture at a much wider angle than a tube...
fab006 I’ve seen inside several older IFV’s and a couple tanks like a Chieftain and there’s a forehead rest on them as part of the swivel.
A historical note to add. Colt's did produce the 1919 Tank Gun in addition to N.E. Westinghouse. An example obtained from the Colt's factory is at the Institute for Military Technology, with hand stamped markings at the front of the RSP. Also, I have photos from Rock Island Arsenal of a 1919A2 with the Colt's 1919 Tank Machine Gun markings and A2 overstamp. Don't think they made many, as with the 1917s.
Mi nombre es gustavo soy de argentina y mi edad es de 54 años, siempre fui un entusiasta sobre historia y mecanismos de las armas y tenia que buscar en libros o revistas informacion escueta. Yo quiero agradecerte profundamente tu trabajo de instruir y brindar tan excelente material! Didactico y y de una calidad de imagen excepcional! Aprovecho para agradecer en este video no solo x este si no por todo el invalorable material del canal! THANKS!
Still a sweet bit of hardware 100 years later. Timeless!
John M. Browning is one of my biggest idols.
the long tube on the tubesight was meant to work like having a smaller peep sight but retained the ability to easily obtain a sight picture
points to morphy for installing the outlet right way up
I know right. noticed that halfway through the video
Much safer but people in the USA and Canada hate it when it’s installed this way because it doesn’t make a face. But yes, way to go Morphy for doing it right. (Doesn’t really matter anymore with GFI’s but I used to insist in kitchens and bathrooms to install this way, as I’m a general contractor and could do so).
How come those outlets don't have switches on them?
@@john-paulsilke893 why would it be safer that way?
Most people grasp over the top of a plug and this you can expose your hand to the hot side and get a shock as well as object and fluids hitting the hot as well exposing the possibility of damage and shock. The ground deflectes this and also shorts if you hit both it and the hot decreasing this possibility. Still a very low risk except with children or liquids.
My granddad has one of these sitting in a crate in his attick. I love this country
@Craig Scott its registered
@Craig Scott if i get it i'll have it mounted on the sunroof opening of my 87 4runner
Thanks for sharing correct history on the 1919. 😊
I remember hearing somewhere that putting a tube to your eye even if it's just your hands ,ahla pretending to be a pirate, does help your eye see more accurately inside of the tube, kinda weird sounding and can't remember where I heard it, but may help explain the tube sight.
This gun looks so simple. But fuck it, that's the charm of this gun i think.
I recently saw a home made fully automatic belt fed 12 gauge. He used an m16 lower and an upper that looked exactly like that. Just a steel rectangle block
"awesome it works it adopted" what my now mom and dad said when they got me.
The tube was fitted to the British gun because you can't hold a teaspoon in an optical sight.
They put so many of these, in so many tanks. The AOD (Army Ordinance Dept) was so proud of them, they never put 1 in a tank, when they could put 3. Sometimes forward facing, right next to the driver, so they could have a gunner there. To load, and pull the trigger, while the driver aimed with a tiller, and the machinegun like a meter or 2 to the right of his observation prism. For that extra bit of accuracy.
After the (First World) War, they had so many tanks, with patches over the firing ports, quite often in Pairs poking through the frontal armor. Because the AOD just designed Tanks that way, then crews decided they'd rather have more ammo for the main gun in the machinegunner's seat, not to mention more armor in front of that backup magazine, than big holes in the frontal slope to stick useless machineguns out of.
Incidentally, the plan of mounting them in pairs wasn't really all that crack-headded, because they are Air Cooled. (They didn't want to stick a Water Jacket out of the armor, either.) So, the plan was to fire 1 MG, then the other while the first one cooled off. Only firing both when you really needed the firepower, hopefully briefly. So, you don't have to pop hatch, and get out to change the barrels, or pull them in the cab, and try to change barrels with that in your lap. (And the hot barrel in the Driver's lap.) It was just the general idea of casemate mounting them, so that the Machingunner couldn't aim, and had to tell the Driver where to turn, while the Commander is calling orders down from the Turret, AND the main gunner is trying to aim the main Gun. So the entire tank crew is fighting each other for the joysticks, in the middle of a firefight. Those forward machineguns, and the Machinegunner position were the weak link.
very cool as always
it not cool when its shooting, it gets pretty hot
I love how short it's over all length is.
Love your content, Ian. I would have liked to see more about the internals of this one: the operation of the trigger, sear, etc.
I love guns. My father was in the 101st airborne. Bad bad bad bad boy! When he was alive you wouldn't poke him in the chest with your finger. I miss him so much.
Another great video. Thanks Ian.. i am going to support this channel
I'd be interested in the differences between this earlier model of tank machine gun as compared to the ones used in tanks of WW2.
Once again Ian, you came up with a very cool gun to show us. Keep up the awesome work, love these cool videos.
Please do the history and evolution if the M2 BMG/HMG ... PRETTY PLEASE!
Thank you , Ian .
18.5" barrel, cool. A scout version of a Browning machine gun.
I will never get tired of Ian saying "pataytah digger."
That upside down receptacle is driving me crazy!
There's actually a 1919E1 Cavalry Pack MG for sale on gunbroker right now. It's a bit of a mutt with some E4 parts, but the overall presentation is still pretty interesting.
Does the lack of an inspectors mark mean that this particular gun was not delivered to the military?
wait, how did you make this comment 5 DAYS AGO?!!
@@finalcartoon1044 patreon
@@GLMtr oh, shouldve guessed.
5 day trial period for the comment.
Probably. Didn’t he say it was the first one made
Did something happen to the M1 Thompson video?
Molly MacAlister I’m also waiting for that still.. hopefully just delayed.
P.S I’ve noticed that I don’t always get all notifications for channels I’m subscribed too, even tho I’ve got the bell on. But I don’t think that is the case with this channel..
Nick White no way...I'm going to have a Tommy gun induced stroke
Cheers again for another great video on a pretty slick gun, Ian. I don't want to bother you but do you think you could do a video on your NZ issue Martini carbine? Thanks again. Respect from New Zealand.
If at some time you could do a video about the telescopic sights for pre-WW2 Browning machine guns that would be cool. I have an old Ft. Knox manual for the Browning .50 and it mentions the telescopic sight for the .50 with a drawing of it, but really not much more.
Note that the M1919A2 survived into WW2 and the 1st Cavalry Division took a mixture of A2's and A4's to the Pacific
4:36 I thought to this day a cook-off is when two people are convinced, they are the better cook as the other, respectively, they cook for a neutral jury and... -you get the idea. As I've heard that sometimes bullets are involved in the described procedure too, but in completely different context, I've learned again something extremely useful from this splendidly informative channel. Thank you so much, Gun Jeezuz!
CHALLENGE , Crawfish Etouffee at 10 paces.
I used to have a 1919 converted to a2 then a4. Sold it a few years ago.
CrowTRobot1977 Are you filled with regret?
@@nap8187 full of it, it was a C&R too
I've seen a number of that exact pattern. Usually in the form of now de milled side plate chunks. About 1030 A2s were converted from the Tank guns, and all the A2s were converted to A4s, per Ordnance Dept order. So far as I am aware, there is no surviving Browning in A2 configuration.
My understanding is that Ordnance issued the order but it was never completed. Certainly, the 1st Cavalry Div took some A2's with them to the Pacific along with their A4's
Hell yea gunz at 4 am!
HELL YEA BORTHER
i FUCKING love GUNS
I think that could be hand portable...
I guess you could try it. I don't think it'd be ergonomic enough to shoot unless it was laying on a sandbag, or you carried a tripod around for it.
If you're Jesse Ventura maybe...
@@TheBitwise
What about a bipod ?
It's like ~30 lb and most of the weight is in the rear. With just a pistol grip, no stock, and no select-fire, I think you'd have a mighty hard time bracing it with only a bipod.
get a chainsaw handle for it
Video on 1919a4 please! This was a pretty cool gun. Thanks Ian
I love how logic back then was to put sights on an infantry firearm that go out to 2000 meters, but put a small barrel on the mounted MG because they didn’t expect longer engagements.
Not needed don't put it on. Less cost , less material, less machine time. In war every second and dollar count.
The primary mount for the M1919 was the Mark VIII Heavy Tank (aka Liberty). The US would provide the automotive items, the British the 6 pounder gun and ammunition and the hull and the French would assemble the beast. It would then be issued to all three armies for the Spring 1919 offensive.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_VIII_tank
Presumably the gun would also be used by the M1917 Light Tank - the US version of the Renault FT
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1917_light_tank
Ian, i would love to see a video about that Marlin 1917 MG, a truly forgotton weapon, no?
A tank machine gun doesn't need a water jacket because it's not expected to do prolonged suppressive fire. Its purpose is to kill, not to keep enemy heads down.
Can we have a look at it's big brother aswell?
You've got to love John M. Browning.
i imagen the pipe sight is to make it isier to find the front sight.
Great video.
1:32 well... yes you can put a water cooled Browning machine gun inside a tank. The Australians did it, and thus developed the only pure Australian built tank, complete with a front dong to house the 1919.
Browning or Vickers? I likewise thought of that Aussie tank but assumed they would have fitted Vickers guns to it.
Closer to a million!
Who are these same 8 assholes who give a thumbs down to every video?!?!? UA-cam bots possibly?
Google search: Ford m1918 3 ton tank this gun was to replace the Marlin as its main armament. Cool stuff. America's first indigenous tank adopted for service.
It speeds up cooling on vehicles while driving forward and the bolt is open
I read the title as "Automatic anti-tank MG". Well, one can still dream
So an M2?
Yes, that would have been the Browning .50 I belive that was proposed to be fitted to the projected 1919 Universal Tank.
yeah, M2 was originally intended to shred through tanks.
M1919 to date is still one of my favourite MGs
Jai Ridler you have very good taste sir. Very heavy compared to modern guns but so many excellent options and configurations. Also it’s like a Strat Violin, which may not be as well made as modern violins but this is the sound/look of the description. It’s quite simply the dictionary description of machine gun.
Ian, would it be possible for you to do a video on the Winchester 1907? It has a pretty interesting history and it saw some service in military conflicts around the world, used for bank and security transports, and guards for prisons.
More Browning stuffs !
Well, I guess I found my legit concealed carry
The Death Wish 3 gun!!! I'd be more excited but I was killed in Death Wish 3.
It's the cutest little Gun, Machine I've ever seen.
Spent all this time learning about this gun, just to find out he never shoots it in the video.
Another machine gun you can hip fire as I saw a vid of a G.I. hip firing an M1919 A4
I thought it was going to be some massive machine cannon that you put on a tank instead of its main gun
I don't think there's any actual official standard for how they're supposed to be mounted, but I have to admit I find it distracting that the power outlet on the wall is in the orientation I consider to be upside down.
Cool! Thanks Ian :)
this looks more like the pictures of the 1918 browning.
the metal box with a pipe that protrudes from the side.
I would be nice if it featured the chieftain.
Man... why's that outlet installed upside down?
Edit: or... TIL that this is the correct way for safety.
i hope we get gavel prices on all of these wonderful examples, please?
Strange that it is a closed bolt design when the 1918 BAR is an open bolt design. Especially since the 1919 is belt fed and the BAR is magazine fed.
Considering it's really just a modification of a water cooled design, it does make sense. Why take the time to re-design the whole system for what was meant to be a short range, short burst firing gun when you could make minimal modifications and have it in service in a much shorter period of time. It's likely also the reason it got adopted so quickly, it wasn't drastically different in mechanics from the already approved 1917 design. All it really had to do was prove it could meet the requirements for the tank gun role.
I remember this gun from the GI Joe cartoon/toys, this wasn't the MG Roadblock carried?
It's nice to see things get through without a bunch of red tape and politics involved.
Do you have anything on Parker Hale aperture sights? My uncle was talking about them once. Some kind of modification for SMLE No 4's or something, but I don't know much about them.
A possible video idea for the future, if you come back to England at some point?
Love the Gun but why is that outlet plug bothering me
Why is that electrical outlet upside down?
Like always a good vid thank you gun jesus
Lol.. It sounds like he's saying Morphine auction house... Is Ian trappin?
I guess your font to be walking your fire in with this machine gun
To altar your aim?
(There's a play on words there. Prizes for spotting it. Amen.)
Ian, Cartridges do not detonate in normal operation. They ignite.
If you want to be OCD about synonyms, primers detonate, powder ignites, and cartridges discharge.
So cool.
One of the weirdest things about class 3 is I seen a dual 40mm bofors from a ww2 battleship for 25k and iv seen a m16 for 40k? Uhh?
THE "TUBE SIGHT" SUSPICIOUSLY RESEMBLES HALF A DOOR HINGE BENT TO THE SHAPE OF THE RECEIVER...
I appreciate that Morphy Auctions installs their electrical outlets properly - with the ground/Earth plug facing upward.
That electrical outlet tho