Heavy Machinegun and its effectiveness

Hi, I do not know if this had been discussed before. But recently I have read from the website on this weapon - QJG-02 14.5mm heavy machinegun. And is wondering if this type of weapon is actually useful in actual battlefield.

As seen, this weapon is not very portable thus the machinegunner must either be land transport (using a land vehicle) or air transport to location.

I believe that the main use for this weapon is against aerial targets, but as we know, most of the attack copters are heavily armoured these days, the fighters and bombers are too high up in the altitude and the only targets that I can see it being effective to a certain measure is the transport helicopters.

And a cheaper alternative the the field of GPMG, LMG and even 12.7mm HMG could do the same job against ground targets. So I am seriously wondering what is the use for the QJG -02? Any comments?

14.5mm machine guns do pose a credible threat to attack helicopter for a distance up to 2 km, and it can be disassembled and man packed, there wouldn't be much a need for it in motorised and mechanised troops, but for airborne and mountain troops, they would be deployed around battalion headquatres to protect second line assets.

lol good for defensive position. prolly has a better range and useful against light armoured vehicles. its every infanteer's dream to have one of those in his own trench lol.

The weapon probably is quite effective against soft targets or even lightly armored vehicles. Although many attack choppers are armored now, most transport choppers can still be quite vulnerable to heavy machine gun fire. While not as sophisticated as aa missiles, the weapon is still a good low cost alternative.

Not to mention, a 14.5mm machine gun has an incredible psychological effect on enemy infantry. No other infantry weapon can possibly summon more fear in its targets. An automatic grenade launcher might be more powerful, but it doesn't produce the same amount of noise and noise matters.

What you guys said is valid and good information. However I am wondering, what 14.5mm machinegun can do, it can be done by 12.7mm machineguns too. And 12.7mm machineguns are more easily portable and faster to set up. Also I believe it will do the same type of damage to transport helicopter as what the 14.5mm machinegun will do.

Cost wise, of course, the 12.7mm is much cheaper thus I really don't see the use of the 14.7mm machineguns. As for the psychological effect on enemy's infantry, I think 12.7mm machinegun would have the same effect on enemy's too.

rhino123 said:

What you guys said is valid and good information. However I am wondering, what 14.5mm machinegun can do, it can be done by 12.7mm machineguns too. And 12.7mm machineguns are more easily portable and faster to set up. Also I believe it will do the same type of damage to transport helicopter as what the 14.5mm machinegun will do.

Cost wise, of course, the 12.7mm is much cheaper thus I really don't see the use of the 14.7mm machineguns. As for the psychological effect on enemy's infantry, I think 12.7mm machinegun would have the same effect on enemy's too.

Click to expand...

The same?

Not the same... do you have an idea how big those monster-bullets are? They're more small autoguns than big machineguns...

Hi.
14.5mm machine guns generally has to be transported by vehicles. It can be moved short distances by foot to a firing position, but the weight of the weapon and the ammunition limits the distance. Spetsnaz used to take a HMG or an AGL with them when conduting ambushes in afghanistan, but that was the lighter 12,7x108mm HMG.
Having manpacked the Browning M2 on exercises, I have to say it is a squad effort and you are not getting very far

14.5x114mm is a more potent round than the 12.7x99mm, having about twice the kinetic energy. Would mostly be used to cover roads, possible heli approaches or dominate areas where you can use the superior range. Is effective against lightly armoured vehicles. Few are 360 proof against 14,5mm. It is effective against most helicopters. Attack helicopters are armoured over most vital areas, but can still be hurt. You can set off munitions, damage sensors, cut hydraulic lines etc.
Would also be very usefull against most "built" positions.(as opposed to trenches)

14.5mm is more potent than 12.7mm, but the 12.7mm is enough for most threaths. Do you want more power or more rounds and a smaller, lighter weapon? But you want vehicles to transport the beast

14.5mm obviously works the best when it is mounted. a well fortified and well placed 14.5mm can also pin down enemy forces

If you're going to mount a HMG on a vehicle (something bigger than a Humvee), I think "man portable" isn't the first concern. It's more of a trade off on weight and # of rounds carried vs. punch.

Armored helicopter are definitely not immune to HMG's. Look at the number of military helicopters lost in Iraq so far, and that's not counting the damaged ones that managed to return to base.

Yes, I acknowledged that 14.5mm rounds packed a lot more power as compared to a 12.7mm round.

However on a whole, we don't just look at the object as singular entity. Rather we must actually look at the weapon as an integration to the troops in many levels. Does one 14.5mm HMG packed as much power as a couple of 12.7mm HMG added together? Will the area of coverage be as much? Also taking into consideration the number of ammunition abled to be carried by the troops, number of people needed to transport these weapons, and the tactical value of these weapon when being hidden or camouflage.

It is a powerful weapon and there is no doubt about it, but with the cost... not just per unit cost, but also ammunition cost, maintenance cost, transportation and logistic cost, spare parts, etc, I believe I can afford more 12.7mm HMG or even alot more GPMG (7.62mm) and the area of coverage will be much higher. Thus I still couldn't see how the 14.5mm gun is useful except perhaps for light armoured vehicle mount, helicopter mount and gunship mount.