Have you ever fired it?

It's real unique to look at, but I think its unusual appearance (and mechanical design) is part of its beauty.

It is actually a very appealing gun and you are lucky to own one.

Americans will always Trash talk the axis-allied weapons. 07:44 this guy is honest tho. Looks are not important. you can see it is Minimalistic and light weight. "grip looks funny" the grip is comfortable that's what's truly important. you can see it is designed for a good grip and comfortable wrist position...gun stock ends up looking "weird" but who cares. these days gun makers are getting it ...and you see all kinds of grips to accessorize AK's and M4's the AK designs invented front grips earlier then the US ( especially during the Vietnam war with the slippery plastic m16's of that time ) I even saw an american gun channel calling the AK ugly. they just don't like that the enemy made a good weapon. they want to be superior in everything.

Every gun has an idea behind it. Even if it's just adding a fixed bayonet, fixed magazine, a bipod, or even just some cut out on the stock, that means there were some intentions behind it, for its role. Even if you use out of service weapon, that doesn't mean you are obsolete. SKS, RPD, M1911, M3, M1 carbine, Nagant revolver, Mosin Nagant, M1919, Maxim, DP,... There are a lot of them

I view the feed system similarly in “concept” to the Italian Breda 30. Where the assumption is that immediate squad members help maintain the rate of fire by siphoning off ammunition to keep the rate of fire up and alleviate the strain on the gunners. Obviously this was a bit of flawed thinking. Since it’s hindered with the fixed attached system and the chaos of combat. However the idea did have merit. It’s just when the war came about it made it obvious the machine gunners needed to be more independently self sufficient then not. Since they ideally were more support the infantry then the infantry support it.

When I was a kid this gun was in MoH: Rising Sun and I loved using it so much because its such a wild looking thing. As an adult and knowing how it works its even easier to appreciate

you uh, you alright there buddy? you ok? you need to talk to someone?

ah yes it is a nice looking

You're sick

True, it's good in theory but not very reliable in the grit and dirt of actual combat.

Cartridges were need to be lubricated before put into the hopper. Prone to dust

It wasn't. It was unreliable due to needing to oil the cartridges with caused tons of issues because of dust and debris. It was unbalanced because all the ammo was on one side. Plus reloading on the move was pretty much a no-go, and because ammunition was in an open hopper it could fall out when you were on the move.

​@@AirLancer compare to what? gun was invented in 1922, does all world had much better guns at that time? especially in biggest economic countries such as France or Belgium or Germany? no need to compare gun which made hundred years ago to modern weapons that's nonsense

@@AirLancer Doesn't the hopper retain the clips? It's not as graceful as a detachable magazine, but there's certain logistical advantages in being able to keep a light machinegun running with just ammunition on normal clips, rather than having to make sure the gunners have belts or magazines, the latter which can be pretty expensive.

@@nonnon1649 I think the British Lewis machinegun and the Danish Madsen machinegun would be the strongest competitors at the time (and they are good), but that's pretty much it. The Madsen (1902, it was very ahead of its time) is pretty heavy and clunky, and very expensive, but it was basically indestructible and it used an odd, but functional detachable magazine, which could be 20, 35, even 40 rounds long, depending on caliber and setup. The Lewis (1914) has a high capacity magazine which is appealing, it's a bulky and expensive one, which is open at the bottom, but it does give you 47rds, and the gun is good at staying cool. Japan would basically copy the Lewis machinegun in the 1930s. The American BAR (1918) has potential, but it just isn't properly set up as a light machinegun, the 1918A2 model adds a bipod, a crap one, as well as a number of features which are of dubious merit. You can work with this gun if you put in the effort, but the 1918A2 doesn't come around until 1938, so it's out. The remaining big name light machineguns of the period are the Chauchat guns, the 8mm Lebel ones are workable, but it's really just Better Than Nothing, they're awkward to shoot and the magazines are as robust as a single use aluminum baking pan. The .30-06 variant of the Chauchat machinegun outright did not work at all. I don't personally consider the German Maxim 08-15 a _light_ machinegun. You see some very good and promising designs like the Czech Zb.26 and Russian DP-27, but those are still a number of years off So by 1922, you could arguably do better than the Type 11 for a light machinegun, but you could also do a LOT worse, and the oddball design has some logistical advantages.

The Japs spent decades prior to WW2 on research and development of naval and air weapons. But they were very lacking with regard artillery, armor, and infantry light weapons. Their ruck sacks, shoes, cartridge belts were similar to those used in the American Civil War.

agree

Only 5-6 bullets in a clip and 4-5 clips in that slot as far as I see. Am i wrong?

I can already picture the memes of players heaping clip after clip into the hopper because the TTK is so long now.

Bald Egg same, I came cause I thought this gun looked amazing and here there are calling it ugly

Same

The buttstock looks awkward but I've shot one and it's actually very comfortable to shoot. Recoil and muzzle rise is mild as it shoots at a fairly slow rate.

We never carried special equipment to load any machine gun, it's a matter of opening up the feed tray putting the next belt in close the feed tray and fire, what special equipment are you talking about???

Brazilian armed police units STILL use the Madsen today! The "Enfield" Cal. .30 is still in Danish service in Greenland. Maxims are in current use in the Ukraine, as are the Mosin-Nagant, PPSh-41 (and even the infamous Sturmgewehr!)

The M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle "BAR". Chambered for the .30-06 Springfield cartridge, though the limited capacity of its standard 20-round magazine.

I think it's just similar logistical thought.

For me it is second only to the Bren in favorite WWII LMGs