Bren vs Spandau

The bren was used the same way.

First, the MG42 is not an LMG. It's a GPMG. The MG34 served as the German LMG. Second, the Bren fills the role of a squad automatic weapon while the MG42 is given to designated MG squads. There's a world of difference. Again, it's like comparing the BAR to the Browning 1919. At face value, you would think they fulfill the same role. They do not.

As a fan of his I hated these videos. This argument is particularly stupid given all of the politics behind military adoption of weapons. Numerous times throughout history countries have picked up and continued to use inferior weapons because of bribery and back-alley dealings.

Now guess which one did a better job.

The eternal Anglo himself said in the video the gun wasn't good for suppressing

>Not everyone copied the MG42
There are countries to this day using almost exact same copies using different calibers

And if you count Brittish commonwealth countries as "everyone" you're fucking retarded

Actually, the Commonwealth adopted the FN MAG which was built from the MG42 platform as their current GPMG.

Oh and the MINIMI which also was built from the MG42 platform.

Yes, because it was an lmg, like the bren?

>because it was an lmg
It wasn't an LMG.

Ahh, I understand.

So what would be a better suited comparison in terms of British equipment?

This just makes his arguments even more retarded

>hurrr look bren gun was used a lot by these african shitholes and other countries who cant afford modern guns it stood the test of time unlike the MG42
>UUUH WHUT DO YOU MEAN COUNTRIES STILL USE MG42 COPIES TO THIS DAY? UHH IRRELEVANT NOT EVERYONE USES IT

>less recoil makes bullets more powerful

Technically, the British didn't have an MG to fill that role during WWII. They did still use the Lewis Gun and Vickers on occasion though and they would come the closest.

Literally anyone who is anyone uses an MG42 variant today.

Also, I should mention that the MG34 is also technically an GPMG, but it was used as a SAW because Germany made so fucking many of them and the MG42 filled the GPMG role better.

How much Linybeige does this hyperautist have to spam before mods finally start deleting threads?

Pretty sure there's been at least one active most of the time for weeks.

Both the Mg-42 and the Bren were used in the light role. However, the MG-42 was ALSO used by the Germans in what they called the 'Schwere' heavy role (which is what is know as the 'sustained fire' role in modern armies). The Bren was certainly NOT 'used in the same way' as a Schwere MG-42.

>First, the MG42 is not an LMG. It's a GPMG. The MG34 served as the German LMG.

The MG-42 was also utilized as a LMG.

>Second, the Bren fills the role of a squad automatic weapon while the MG42 is given to designated MG squads

The MG-42 (to be used in light role) was issued down to the section level same as the Bren was. The MG-42 was issued to 'designated MG squads' to be used in the Schwere role.

The MG-42 and Bren did fulfill comparable 'light role' functions, although doctrine was slightly different between the allies and the axis. The difference is the MG-42 could be utilized in the 'Schwere' (Sustained Fire) role while the Bren couldn't (the Vickers = Schwere MG-42)

It wasn't an 'LMG', but it was used in the Light Role as an LMG. GPMG means it can do both; Light Role and Sustained Fire (Schwere).

I'm getting triggered now.

>Technically, the British didn't have an MG to fill that role during WWII. They did still use the Lewis Gun and Vickers on occasion though and they would come the closest.

The Vickers could and was used in the SF role by the British during WW2 in designated MG units. The difference is that the Vickers is a 'pure' MMG and could not also be used in the Light role like an GPMG.

>obvious clickbait shill
Fuck off lindy, stop shitting Veeky Forums you ugly cocksucker