"For a brilliant attack, it is estimated how many men the machine gun can kill, and launches an attack greater number of men, someone will come to the gun "
by the madness of the Italian General Cadorna. ww1
then 1914 europe france england and even america was draged into the the great war. god im sure glad canada is never in any of these wars. fuck i hate the disrepect to my country
The gattling isnt considered a true machine gun, but none the less it still is classed as one. The ability to fire multiple projectiles from a repeatable action is what makes ssomething a macine gun. Also Leonardo Da Vinci's idea was also hand powered?
Further Da Vinci's idea was just an extension of the Organ gun.
Puckle demonstrated two versions of the basic design: one, intended for use against Christian enemies (excluding Protestants), fired conventional round bullets, while the second variant, designed to be used against the Muslim Turks, fired square bullets, which were considered to be more damaging and would, according to its patent, convince the Turks of the "benefits of Christian civilization."
Great! Poor Maxim didn't profit in his own country. In the Spanish-American War, we realised our mistake. Americans were blown away by the Spanish's Maxims.
Mention it was called "The Devil's Paintbrush" because the early ones fired at 666 rounds per minute! He also invented the silencer.
His Son was an inventor, too. He started the first Amateur radio organization, the ARRL.
I was wondering about the number of bullets that flew through the air with no back stop , Any one know where this demo took place , Stamford Battle area Norfolk ,UK perhaps?
If it were completely impossible for troops to make an impression on entrenched machine-gunners, the war might have ended sooner. Instead, a dedicated attack would frequently take successive lines of entrenchments, only to be repulsed by counterattacking infantry.
There was movement, but it was indecisive. There was always the hope of a breakthrough, although to compensate the enemy made many fallback positions and kept reserves on hand. And so it went.
and the enemy would be advancing (making them easier to shoot) with barbed wire and difficult ground and artillery destroying the terrain in front of your direct body.
Still though, psychologically, the sheer terror of facing such a weapon would probably prevent people from having the presence of mind to do something like that.
The battle of the somme was actualy won by a battalion of helium baloons. They floated mercilessly towards the german trenches, sighting them in great numbers the german forces felt nothing but fear and hopelessness, and retreated. Hence why the Helium Baloon is now considered my country's greatest military weapon.
ok but soldiers are much frigging bigger than baloons that experiment was equvalent to him firing at their heads and the don't blow back and forth in the wind like baloons
The ratio changed along the war. In 1914, there could be 1 machine gunner against 250 people. In the French, infantry, the rule was: A section of 2 MGs for each battalion of some 1,000 men. 3 years later, you'd find indeed 5-6 machine gunners for the same number of men, facing twice as many Germans. You must also take into account that half the MGs would either be destroyed by artillery, break down or have to be maintained in the course of a battle.
Anone with delusions of Honor in warfare or of "cheap shots" and such rubbish needs to see this. This is what war is, cold, callous elliminations of threats to meet an objective. Those who cling to nonsensical ideas of Honor and valour don't win, they end up as shrapnal and bullet riddled corpes lining mass graves.
The idea of attritional warfare *did* make a certain amount of (ghastly) sense.
IIRC, the Allies had approx. a quarter-million more men than the Central Powers did: the Allied generals (somehow) envisioned "trading" casualties on a one-for-one basis.
And if that were true, then they really *would* win. It was merely a matter of mathematics.
But what really made it all possible was: they simply didn't care *what* happened to the men. They were there to be "used" however the generals saw fit.
@unitakira Not really. Some human being has to aim it the weapon and pull the trigger. What kind of human being can kill hundreds of their fellow human beings within minutes? Psychopaths? They would have to be.
@geezzerboy No, they don't have to be psychopaths, that's the trick. All they need to be is well-trained soldiers; much of that training is devoted to conditioning ordinary people to pull the trigger when ordered to or when the situation calls for it. And remember that the guy on the trigger has hundreds of his buddies in the trench whose lives depend on him wiping out the attackers before they reach it. Together, those go a long way to repress the usual human reluctance to kill other humans.
@geezzerboy the thing is that in battle, one sees very little. Also, the other human is trying to kill you, so the point of view is not that of civilian life.
The balloon test was sort of inaccurate. Not only would real troops get closer and easier to shoot, but also real troops had legs and bodies on the ground. Machine gunners could often scythe infantry by aiming at the waist and pulling back and forth in one loooooong burst.
Speaking as a C6 Gunner in the Canadian Army I can tell you now the so called "Scythe" is an ineffective tactic for the following reasons...
1. Waste of Ammunition. You do not obtain the ideal amount of casualties per burst as you would with using the proper "Beaton Zone".
2. It places the gunner and his/her #2 in a perilous position. Upon the first burst the enemy would drop to the prone and be able to return fire and possibly suppress the machine gun.
Long bursts are also bad for accuracy. They heat the barrel and force early barrel changes which cut the firepower of it's allied force by 50%.
If the real troops did get closer they would not be easier to shoot as well. The "Beaton Zone" is at it's widest and most effective at farther ranges. Close Quarters a machinegun looses it's effectiveness greatly. That's why most gunners these days work in pairs and posses a sidearm to protect themselves when the enemy gets too close.
So, you think it was a good idea the machine gun was invented usaf071? Men, husbands friends were killed because of these sick inventions and you think it is good? Well, I don't think so.
Maybe you get a friend, family member or anyone else you love and have them killed by a machine gun or something else, and you tell me how you feel.
Please do so, or don't make comments like, "machine guns are a great invention because they killed lots of people."
How affected, listen; if it wasn't machine guns it would be clubs. Don't blame technology for "men, husbands, friends" being obsessed with killing each other.
hiram maxim invented the machine gun to end war, he considered it the ultimate weapon, and thought that no one would dare fight against it, the same thing happened with the A-bomb, dynamite, and many other wartime inventions. people are suicidal morons, and we will probably never fully eradicate war, people thought nukes were the answer at one time also.
Maxim and Nobel were both out to make a profit for their weapons, actual. The sentiments you describe are most accurately attributed to Dr. Richard Gatling, and even he realized that his gun would probably be used with devastating results. Of course, Gatling's goal wasn't so much an end to war as it was an attempt to limit the number of men required to fight it. Less warm bodies in the camps means reducing the biggest danger in 19th-century warfare: disease.
The reason why so many soldiers died was because the generals were stupid and decided that attritional warfare was best. Yea great idea when the machine gun was used.
The idea of attritional warfare *did* make a certain amount of (ghastly) sense.
IIRC, the Allies had approx. a quarter-million more men than the Central Powers did: the Allied generals (somehow) envisioned "trading" casualties on a one-for-one basis.
And if that were true, then they really *would* win. It was merely a matter of mathematics.
But what really made it all possible was: they simply didn't care *what* happened to the men. They were there to be "used" however the generals saw fit.
that's why you shoot in bursts. and the British version had a colling can. just load the water and you could shoot in rapid fire for a time. the water cooled it all down.
I watch this show on NGC asia. I think the information about maxim is a bit innacurrate. The mechanism show in 01:17 is more like browning's short-recoil system than the Maxim's Leg-like recoil system.
Actually Maxim's invention was first met with scepticism in the 1890's.The american army wasn't too impressed neither were the french.The brits bought them and demonstrated their power in Afghanistan and African colonies of theirs.
Onward Chartered Soldiers, on to heathen lands,
Prayer books in your pockets, rifles in your hands.
Take the florious tidings where trade can be done,
Spread the peaceful gospel --- with a Maxim gun.
- Cecil Rhodes' Chartered Company Volunteers, 1893
0synesthete0 5 months ago
nice job
messisuarez 8 months ago
5 people forgot to put some water in the barrel jacket.
QBJ88 8 months ago
thecommon rattrap we all have used? GREAT!
rod3067 11 months ago
fantastic video! Thumbs up!
creamofcardstv 1 year ago
Gen. Funston mentioned on his book that the Filipinos were using Maxim Machinegun also during the Philippine -American War of 1899.
r2ro43 1 year ago
Sir Hiram Maxim is buried in West Norwood Cemetery, South London.
TheWhitehall 1 year ago
Poor tree! D:
Killermuffin1 1 year ago 2
wth
modern German flag for Imperial German Empire?
JonShootingFan 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
"For a brilliant attack, it is estimated how many men the machine gun can kill, and launches an attack greater number of men, someone will come to the gun "
by the madness of the Italian General Cadorna. ww1
gippobastard 1 year ago
haha "tired of doing all the reloading himself". This man sounds lazy. haha
LordWellington15 1 year ago 4
@LordWellington15 if you think about it, a lot of tech advances are based on laziness, fear, or both.
arrow091 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
stupid nazis burning jews
jackie6gigi 2 years ago
um its world war 1, there were no nazis at the time. germany was just retaliating after its ally was attacked.
nairda55555 1 year ago 4
Fucking soldier, shoot to your mom! xD
quevlsdi 2 years ago
if u guys want to know who made the semi atumoatic wepon it was a mexican with the last name mondragon thats mine to
yellowniggabart123 2 years ago
That's bullshit. A german invited the first semi auto. Mexico fucking sucks.
Redbaron011 2 years ago
"...uppers the fire rate,sensing victory!"
over a tree? yeah is very dangerous :-D
Rex1987 2 years ago
Truly a triumph of war machinery over politicians.
Sir Maxim, you have given us an awesome piece of machinery that we're still in awe of.
-Marine machine gunner.
USMCM249gunner 2 years ago 3
Whatever happens
We have got
The Maxim gun
And they have not.
a0e0roberts 2 years ago 4
what show was this called again
jakndaxter45 2 years ago
died*
00Andreas00 2 years ago
To be fair there is much more woundable mass on n Adult male than there is on a balloon.
asmodeon 2 years ago
then 1914 europe france england and even america was draged into the the great war. god im sure glad canada is never in any of these wars. fuck i hate the disrepect to my country
NorOnt18 2 years ago
Actually, canada did participate in that war, and world war 2 as well.
AtomInTheUniverse 2 years ago
wow
NorOnt18 2 years ago
Canada fought in both World War 1 and World War 2...they were even a part of the D-Day invasions.
Sharkbait132 2 years ago 3
They might have been including Canada when they said England. But they should have said Canada, you're right.
PyramidHeadX 2 years ago
Maxim was german right cause wikipedia says that he is part british part american
uyrhrmt 2 years ago
5:45 In the words of Baldrick from Blackadder Goes Forth: "These sacks will be easy to outwit in a combat situation"
Pseudologic 2 years ago 2
its was still used in the korean war in the 50's
rayd408 2 years ago
Germans are the best . Their innovative ideas changed the world .
LordLebu 2 years ago
Though not necessarily for the best.
Pseudologic 2 years ago
Partly, some of them have been truly horrible
*nods at Marx and Engels*
bettertobealive 2 years ago
This was american invention.
MokomaSusi 2 years ago
Rural England? Machine Guns are illigal in non military hands. Even handguns are illigal.
TeamCrusade 2 years ago
The geramns wehere the first who build a flying plaine ^^
Fuel56 2 years ago
Of course, what ever you say; they were also the first to fuck the whole world up, oh, and the second.
mrrmancunian 2 years ago 2
all people on Earth need say thx for Maxim..greatest and first mashine gun.
vlad9vt 2 years ago
It wasnt the first machine gun. Technically the Gatling, Nordenfelt and Mitrailleuse predated this. Also they were quiet effective.
fp470 2 years ago
the gattling isnt considered a machine gun because of the craining and the first first first idea of a machine gun was from leonardo Davinci
uyrhrmt 2 years ago
The gattling isnt considered a true machine gun, but none the less it still is classed as one. The ability to fire multiple projectiles from a repeatable action is what makes ssomething a macine gun. Also Leonardo Da Vinci's idea was also hand powered?
Further Da Vinci's idea was just an extension of the Organ gun.
fp470 2 years ago
What about the Puckle gun?
bettertobealive 2 years ago
Puckle demonstrated two versions of the basic design: one, intended for use against Christian enemies (excluding Protestants), fired conventional round bullets, while the second variant, designed to be used against the Muslim Turks, fired square bullets, which were considered to be more damaging and would, according to its patent, convince the Turks of the "benefits of Christian civilization."
bettertobealive 2 years ago
Quote - Wikipedia
bettertobealive 2 years ago
Too bad - German flag wasn black-red-gold these days, but black-white-red... Despite of that - very interesting video!
378dnd7s8 2 years ago 2
the german flag was always black,red and gold...
Mortalstrikeyou 2 years ago
What is now Germany was then part of the German Empire, and their flag was indeed black, silver and red like 378dnd7s8 said.
SwingingRingaDing 2 years ago
Great! Poor Maxim didn't profit in his own country. In the Spanish-American War, we realised our mistake. Americans were blown away by the Spanish's Maxims.
Mention it was called "The Devil's Paintbrush" because the early ones fired at 666 rounds per minute! He also invented the silencer.
His Son was an inventor, too. He started the first Amateur radio organization, the ARRL.
bashibasouk 2 years ago
silly crap... a six inch target..some of them 7 foot from the ground ....oh please come on...
karlos707 2 years ago
machine gunner looks like Randy Couture
wheaties10000 2 years ago 2
There are the chinese subtitles so I can understand, thank you~~
mp5hero 2 years ago 2
I was wondering about the number of bullets that flew through the air with no back stop , Any one know where this demo took place , Stamford Battle area Norfolk ,UK perhaps?
stormywindmill 2 years ago
for the future im going to name my future son Hiram I like that name
uyrhrmt 2 years ago
where's part 2?
urfriend88 2 years ago
poor tree
nostyle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
☻/
/▌
/ \
This is Bob. Copy and paste Bob soon he will take over youtube
foomboom1 2 years ago
The airplane that could have made him famous if it had flown?
Is that kind of like the time machine I made that would have gotten me famous, had it actually sent anything back in time?
foomboom1 2 years ago 26
one of the greatest battlefield changes since calvary
belito311 2 years ago 3
Those poor sods who put the balloons up running for it! that cant be right, is there no health and safety on a battlefield or what.
lcastillon 2 years ago
If it were completely impossible for troops to make an impression on entrenched machine-gunners, the war might have ended sooner. Instead, a dedicated attack would frequently take successive lines of entrenchments, only to be repulsed by counterattacking infantry.
There was movement, but it was indecisive. There was always the hope of a breakthrough, although to compensate the enemy made many fallback positions and kept reserves on hand. And so it went.
DrCruel 2 years ago
Comment removed
aserer2 2 years ago
How old is this? If you got caught with one of those things in the UK you would be going away for a long, long time.
gingerjames86 2 years ago
This Is Awsome!!!!
skygazer8989 2 years ago
Good illustration of the concept of "enfilading fire."
Rickinsf 2 years ago
the enemy would have bodies and not just heads...
anon2999 3 years ago 4
and the enemy would be advancing (making them easier to shoot) with barbed wire and difficult ground and artillery destroying the terrain in front of your direct body.
0nemest0 3 years ago
That would mean there would be more chances of hitting the target
skygazer8989 2 years ago
Even if they were advancing slowly, it's still accurate how ineffective the machine gun was at an advancing enemy line from the front.
Sharpshooters could drop into the prone position and easily take out the machine gunners.
The gunners would be too focused on the advancing lines to notice a few sharpshooters drop to the ground.
MangaFreakXxX 2 years ago
Still though, psychologically, the sheer terror of facing such a weapon would probably prevent people from having the presence of mind to do something like that.
ZeppelinRules 2 years ago 4
i that the same MAXIM that founded the porn magazine??
jameabeto 3 years ago
The battle of the somme was actualy won by a battalion of helium baloons. They floated mercilessly towards the german trenches, sighting them in great numbers the german forces felt nothing but fear and hopelessness, and retreated. Hence why the Helium Baloon is now considered my country's greatest military weapon.
lozzyloveyou 3 years ago 3
10:00
Clever germans, never thought about it before.
Nefus2 3 years ago 2
poor tree :(
u assholes!!!
hurensohnsBruda 3 years ago
fail
devilzfan812 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL wat am I doing naked ONline at this time?>?? i have no idea!
wow. :( this vid makes me so sad. some1 msg me!! xD H4
1tug1 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IM BOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooOoOoored!!! MSG me on MSN. ID is in my profile. F
cody194805 3 years ago
I love Germans ;)
kuribo1 3 years ago
ok but soldiers are much frigging bigger than baloons that experiment was equvalent to him firing at their heads and the don't blow back and forth in the wind like baloons
dudley2112 3 years ago
The airplane that could have made him famous if it had flown?
Is that kind of like the time machine I made that would have gotten me famous, had it actually sent anything back in time?
DeadEyeCarbiner 3 years ago 4
10:29 - Why couldn't the enemy just go round?
Master1906 3 years ago
Flanking no man's land wasn't a choice
Enemy trenches ran for miles.
There'd be another machine gun team waiting for you in the next section of the trenches.
MangaFreakXxX 2 years ago 3
LOL poor fucking tree.
skrillavilla 3 years ago
use bolistic gelitan or melons on a moving track, that will be a more accurate judge of the maxim
batfsucks 3 years ago
as if there would ever be 1 machine gunner against 250 people. more like 5-6 machine gunners vs the 250 ...
hustlerlankan 3 years ago
The ratio changed along the war. In 1914, there could be 1 machine gunner against 250 people. In the French, infantry, the rule was: A section of 2 MGs for each battalion of some 1,000 men. 3 years later, you'd find indeed 5-6 machine gunners for the same number of men, facing twice as many Germans. You must also take into account that half the MGs would either be destroyed by artillery, break down or have to be maintained in the course of a battle.
Fridomfry 3 years ago
you win this round fridomfry *shakes fist*
hustlerlankan 3 years ago
Well, in my family we have some knowledge of MGs, as men seemed to keep charging facing German or Viet-Minh machine-guns...
Fridomfry 3 years ago
Maxim assisted very much in building Britains empire in East Africa.
Kalydosos 3 years ago
Why did they not use the Imperial german flag?
lamnaa 3 years ago
Anone with delusions of Honor in warfare or of "cheap shots" and such rubbish needs to see this. This is what war is, cold, callous elliminations of threats to meet an objective. Those who cling to nonsensical ideas of Honor and valour don't win, they end up as shrapnal and bullet riddled corpes lining mass graves.
ImperatorZor 3 years ago
I agree the maxim assisted very well in building European empires.
Kalydosos 3 years ago
I would have to say its not a very accurate test because human bodys are olat bigger than those ballons.
ugcsred2011 3 years ago
poor tree , what a waste , good gun though could use one
LongShlong125 4 years ago
The idea of attritional warfare *did* make a certain amount of (ghastly) sense.
IIRC, the Allies had approx. a quarter-million more men than the Central Powers did: the Allied generals (somehow) envisioned "trading" casualties on a one-for-one basis.
And if that were true, then they really *would* win. It was merely a matter of mathematics.
But what really made it all possible was: they simply didn't care *what* happened to the men. They were there to be "used" however the generals saw fit.
CordlessBungeeJumper 4 years ago
Enfilade
Zwerchhau 4 years ago
guns don't kill, politicians do
unitakira 4 years ago 28
LMAO
MrDipper 4 years ago 5
Exactly!!!!
I hate when People say stuff like "Russians are bad or Americans or any other"
People it self are not bad and solders.
you have to blame Politicians and bad government!!!
todlich 4 years ago 5
Sad thing it's just 90% true.
LongShlong125 4 years ago
yes,and stupid people vote for these politicians,so people themselves are not innocent
of course the poor naive people have no idea what the people they voted for are up to
Metallicakicksbutt 3 years ago
THAT is the truth!
gloopy09 3 years ago
@unitakira Not really. Some human being has to aim it the weapon and pull the trigger. What kind of human being can kill hundreds of their fellow human beings within minutes? Psychopaths? They would have to be.
geezzerboy 1 year ago
@geezzerboy No, they don't have to be psychopaths, that's the trick. All they need to be is well-trained soldiers; much of that training is devoted to conditioning ordinary people to pull the trigger when ordered to or when the situation calls for it. And remember that the guy on the trigger has hundreds of his buddies in the trench whose lives depend on him wiping out the attackers before they reach it. Together, those go a long way to repress the usual human reluctance to kill other humans.
colindhowell 1 year ago
@geezzerboy the thing is that in battle, one sees very little. Also, the other human is trying to kill you, so the point of view is not that of civilian life.
walls0stone 1 year ago
The balloon test was sort of inaccurate. Not only would real troops get closer and easier to shoot, but also real troops had legs and bodies on the ground. Machine gunners could often scythe infantry by aiming at the waist and pulling back and forth in one loooooong burst.
Bennanteno 4 years ago
Wrong.
Speaking as a C6 Gunner in the Canadian Army I can tell you now the so called "Scythe" is an ineffective tactic for the following reasons...
1. Waste of Ammunition. You do not obtain the ideal amount of casualties per burst as you would with using the proper "Beaton Zone".
2. It places the gunner and his/her #2 in a perilous position. Upon the first burst the enemy would drop to the prone and be able to return fire and possibly suppress the machine gun.
CaScA 4 years ago 5
Long bursts are also bad for accuracy. They heat the barrel and force early barrel changes which cut the firepower of it's allied force by 50%.
If the real troops did get closer they would not be easier to shoot as well. The "Beaton Zone" is at it's widest and most effective at farther ranges. Close Quarters a machinegun looses it's effectiveness greatly. That's why most gunners these days work in pairs and posses a sidearm to protect themselves when the enemy gets too close.
CaScA 4 years ago 3
So, you think it was a good idea the machine gun was invented usaf071? Men, husbands friends were killed because of these sick inventions and you think it is good? Well, I don't think so.
Maybe you get a friend, family member or anyone else you love and have them killed by a machine gun or something else, and you tell me how you feel.
Please do so, or don't make comments like, "machine guns are a great invention because they killed lots of people."
cchj768 4 years ago
How affected, listen; if it wasn't machine guns it would be clubs. Don't blame technology for "men, husbands, friends" being obsessed with killing each other.
DonBrinkIII 4 years ago 4
hiram maxim invented the machine gun to end war, he considered it the ultimate weapon, and thought that no one would dare fight against it, the same thing happened with the A-bomb, dynamite, and many other wartime inventions. people are suicidal morons, and we will probably never fully eradicate war, people thought nukes were the answer at one time also.
battleaxe12 4 years ago 4
Maxim and Nobel were both out to make a profit for their weapons, actual. The sentiments you describe are most accurately attributed to Dr. Richard Gatling, and even he realized that his gun would probably be used with devastating results. Of course, Gatling's goal wasn't so much an end to war as it was an attempt to limit the number of men required to fight it. Less warm bodies in the camps means reducing the biggest danger in 19th-century warfare: disease.
WatugaConfederation 3 years ago 3
Actually I did read that about Gatling but I had forgotten exactly who I had read it about when I wrote that comment.
marshallferron 3 years ago
wow. We have an AMATEUR tactician here. Grow up and go TRY it.
walkinman86 3 years ago
Grow up and try... what? Death by dysentery? I'd really rather not.
WatugaConfederation 2 years ago
The reason why so many soldiers died was because the generals were stupid and decided that attritional warfare was best. Yea great idea when the machine gun was used.
usaf071 4 years ago 5
The idea of attritional warfare *did* make a certain amount of (ghastly) sense.
IIRC, the Allies had approx. a quarter-million more men than the Central Powers did: the Allied generals (somehow) envisioned "trading" casualties on a one-for-one basis.
And if that were true, then they really *would* win. It was merely a matter of mathematics.
But what really made it all possible was: they simply didn't care *what* happened to the men. They were there to be "used" however the generals saw fit.
CordlessBungeeJumper 4 years ago
in under a minute. yeah thats alot of bullets
nstolpa 4 years ago
lol "Success they just fired 470 bullets" thats a hell lot of bullets....
Congo4life 4 years ago
that's why you shoot in bursts. and the British version had a colling can. just load the water and you could shoot in rapid fire for a time. the water cooled it all down.
MrYumYum16 4 years ago 2
impressive weapon.
ESX90 4 years ago
funny that the tommys shoot down a scotch tree...
hironastaaa 4 years ago
Hiram Maxin has a beutifull name, like mine! lol
Hiram041 4 years ago
Maxim's first machine gun was a modified Winchester Model 1866.
asdfzxcvfu 4 years ago
Imagine what a single artillery round would do to those balloons. Most of the casualties in WWI were caused by artillery.
asdfzxcvfu 4 years ago 4
That balloon demonstration was really informative.
slothafur 4 years ago
I watch this show on NGC asia. I think the information about maxim is a bit innacurrate. The mechanism show in 01:17 is more like browning's short-recoil system than the Maxim's Leg-like recoil system.
speedabit 4 years ago
nice clip as always 7dc.
T2
tunedin2 4 years ago
someone knows which is that tv serie's name?
vipondiu 4 years ago
im not try to put down the maxim/vickers, but in only a few decades weve gone from 450 rpm, to over 3000 rpm (GE minigun)
pagboy529 4 years ago
Vickers were crazily reliable, you could fire for weeks on end without taking your finger off with enough ammo.
Gooner018 4 years ago 3
true, but the only reason i said that was to show how much we have advanced in such a short time... thanks for that info, though.
pagboy529 4 years ago
Actually Maxim's invention was first met with scepticism in the 1890's.The american army wasn't too impressed neither were the french.The brits bought them and demonstrated their power in Afghanistan and African colonies of theirs.
McLarenMercedes 4 years ago
poor tree :(
ChopsticksKilla 4 years ago
looks like an early .50 cal
triple5soulrulez 5 years ago
what a stupid comment you have made
EbuDeyyus 5 years ago 7