The Bren Gun

When I was a rookie the sergesnt instructor on the Bren, told us to close the dust-cover with our walking out finger. It took me a while to work that out.

 

When I was a rookie the sergesnt instructor on the Bren, told us to close the dust-cover with our walking out finger. It took me a while to work that out.
you'll have to explain that one

 

Hi All

Just picked up on the thread, to be honest I have not read all the pages. All I can add to the discussion is from a Chindit point of view in the 1943 operation this weapon was a well liked winner.

On the down side it was a heavy piece of kit to be carrying on 20-25 mile marches each day, but in the jungle it was a deadly weapon. It was often used to rake across the undergrowth using short bursts of fire. Often fired from the hip it devastated enemy positions and used in conjunction with the 3" mortar, provided a tremendously powerful barrage for Chindit troops to work behind.

Hope this is of some interest?

Bamboo.

 

The troops loved it, it was effective and light. The only real problem that some people had with it was that it was too accurate if you were trying to lay down covering fire.
Not often that is a problem with a weapon.
Too accurate? We were taught to shift our aim across the target frontage while getting off rapid double taps.

 

For those interested, John Inglis Co. in Toronto made over 186,000 Bren Guns during the war years.

A superb weapon.

I assume there have been prior discussions comparing the German MG 42 and the Bren.

 

Hi Kevin
Does the guy in the Ferrari not realise if he lets of a burst, the cartridges will fall all over his seats and wreck the leather!!!

regards

Robert

 

At the end of the war I was at an infantry OCTU training to be a platoon leader to fight the Japs. All our tactics were based on a platoon with a Bren and rifles and fire and movement, leapfrogging with the Bren covering the rifles as they move, then vice versa. We learned about the Bren's cone of fire, but never did it in practice. The 2inch mortar and PIAT would also have been part of our armoury.

 

The Bren Great gun. Though I am unable to lift it now. But I did carry it half way across Europe

 

Not sure if this link has been added but some great pictures:


Bren LMG mount - MLU FORUM

 

HI

THat is interesting, I have never seen a round clip for the Bren, a bit like the Lewis.

regards

Robert

 

I believe there was a 100 round circular magazine used with the Bren in the Air Defence role

 

Yep, the 100 round drum magazine did exist. I have had veterans look at mine and swear point blank they never existed [because they never heard of them].

They were adapted from a Vickers K-GO drum magazine which was lent to the development team by Vickers.

They were shipped in wooden transit boxes with 4 mags plus the adapter for the gun itself and a loading tool. [I had a full set but they've gone to another collector]. They were supplied with a variety of Armoured Cars and tanks for AA defence. They were also used by the Commandos for laying down more sustained fire, for example, when using small craft to take men off beaches.

There was no sight for use with the Drum mag, which obscures the normal sights, so for AA defence it appears the used 1 in 5 tracer rounds.

Within the Small Arms Training Pamphlet series, the one concerning the Bren LMG has a couple of suppliments, one of which concerns the Motley AA Mounting, and also has an illustration of the drum mag box.
Regards
Matt

 

Some images of mags and tripods

 

With regard to the BREN Gun:

When I was in basic training, Nov '75, the REME used the 7.62mm rebored LMG. Very good weapon, what everyone wants; simple, rugged, fires under all conditions, environmental and shitty, easy to strip and clean, and as a bonus it was accurate and you could fit SLR magazines on it as well. The practice by some Rambos to put the LMG mag on their rifle was useless as the feed spring was designed to push rounds down and not up. Also with a magazine on the enemy don't know if your actually bombed up or bluffing, belts are a dead give away. And the last thing is because it has a lower rate of fire than the GPMG and especially the MG3, aka MG42, you don't have to carry as much ammo, small point but not if you have to carry it!

 

When all is said and done..The Bren was a damn fine LMG. It stood me in good stead. Specially while out on fighting patrols. (November 1944) amongst the deserted villages around the river Maas.

 

The British Bren, what is the impression on it. Was it liked, effective, heavy, etc. Anybody?
Hi
I was a bren gunner for our section, using 303 ammo (1957 -59) I liked the gun always reliable even in desert conditions (Oman / Muscat and North Aden) my number two didnt much care for it as he had to carry the spare barrel and spare ammo in their magazines.
Very adaptable using either the tripod or firing from the hip using the sling although this was frowned upon and accuracy went out of the wimdow
Mike (rotherfield)

 

When all is said and done..The Bren was a damn fine LMG. It stood me in good stead. Specially while out on fighting patrols. (November 1944) amongst the deserted villages around the river Maas.

I wasn't aware that the Sappers used Brens all that much. I thought they were mainly issued rifles and Stens. Can you expand on this as i'm interested to fill this gap in my knowledge.

 

Aye Kevin,
Owen just asked me to get Brenda out and take some photos that might help.
Look at the ejector on that, the scrubber.

Ejector - Dust cover closed:





~A
.

FAO Kevin

That dust cover (good photos by the way VP) flies forward with the bolt going forward to ensure the gun is 'open' and the spent cases can eject. The force with which they are ejected can cause them to bounce on the ground so hard that they will, in some cases, bounce above the gunner's head. It's quite a positive discharge.

 

I wasn't aware that the Sappers used Brens all that much. I thought they were mainly issued rifles and Stens. Can you expand on this as i'm interested to fill this gap in my knowledge.

In 1940 a Royal Engineer Divisional Field Company would have 2 Bren guns. One in HQ and one in the Bridging Section.

In comparision a Divisional Infantry Company would have 9 and Company HQ would have 14, 10 of which would be in Carriers. The whole Battalion would have a total of 50.

 

Paardon my ignorance, Andy, but wasn't the Carrier Platoon to be an asset of the Infantry Batallion rather than of te Infantry Company? If so this would change your figures a bit.