Lewis Gun

[Gunner Bailey]

False logic I think - when selecting men to be Lewis gunners I believe that bigger men tended to be picked - after all they had to lug the things forward in an attack even if not firing them.

Any evidence of that logic?

[centurion]

There is already a thread somewhere on the selection of Lewis gunners - go seek.

[Gunner Bailey]

There is already a thread somewhere on the selection of Lewis gunners - go seek.

No I think not. You said I used false logic. I think that puts the obligation on you to prove that Lewis Gun teams were selected by their size and stature. Can you provide any Army instructions that prove this? I think you also need to prove to Dave that the Lewis gun was never used as a hand held weapon whilst the use was walking or running. Dave states that there were V.Cs won using the Lewis in this manner. If Dave is right then you are wrong. Who is right? Go seek.

[centurion]

Up to you mate - its on the forum - you make the effort

[Gunner Bailey]

I take that as an admission that you cannot back up your strongly held statements.

[bushfighter]

It was not just the gun that was a load problem.

An account of the 2nd Loyal North Lancashire's final major attack in France describes how the cornfield that was advanced through was littered with discarded full drum magazines, and that when the gunners started firing they had to manually re-load the one magazine that they had on their guns.

This small insight into operations is not the kind of stuff that is mentioned in jingoistic accounts of Great War battles.

Harry

[Tom W.]

I take that as an admission that you cannot back up your strongly held statements.

I couldn't find any such thread, so...

[Gunner Bailey]

Thanks Tom. I think there was a strong wind from the west...

John

[bmg17a1]

centurion writes:

>...the German Maxim M08/15 which is why the Germans went to the trouble of producing kits so that captured Lewises could be converted to take German ammo.<

Perhaps you could provide a description of the content of the "kit" provided to convert the .303 Lewis is to fire the 7.92 round, a description of how this was done, and pictures as well. I would assume that the "kit' would include the usual complement of drums and other parts and accessories to match the requirements of the German MG squad that would use these LMGs.

TonyE Writes:

I think that argument was done to death in a previous thread!

Well, when I came to this site, i was pelased to find discussions that appears to rely on reseach, hard evidence and confirmation of facts through these means and I thought that my 50 years of experience with many, many different MGs, being the owner of over 100 live MGs and running a business for many years handling, repairing, building any of several hundred types of MGs might be of value to those on this site who do not have any live MGs with which to educate themselves compared to their reliance on written and photographic sources. I am disappointed that the 'alleged" truth of the massive use by German troops of Lewis guns converted to 7.92, which is clearly heavily entrenched in the history of the War and the minds of the experts on this site, cannot be supported except by the flimsiest of evidence. The main proponent of massive use maintained that despite there being hardly any evidence hardware, field and industry records, pictures, personal accounts to support this, that it was true anyway because Col. Lewis said so. Even suggesting, if such massive use was true, the hypothetical requirement of the hundreds of thousands of pieces of equipment needed to maintain such massive use, as is factually supported for the Brit use of the Lewis, was answered by silence. My contributions about what I have discovered by actually handling and trying the parts needed to do the 7.92 Lewis conversion, which clearly indicate that the it absolutely required significant new hardware, parts and accessories to succeed was met with silence.

It is apparent that the defense, with virtually no factual evidence of any sort, of the rather absurd propositon of 10,000 Lewis guns being converted, despite hearing that mechanically it is far more complex and demanding than just having a 'kit', maintaining the pose as an expert is far more important that acquiring new facts and revising the obsolete and incorrect history. Or at least entertaining the notion that the 'expert's resources are inadequate to the task of determining the facts.

While 'centurion' is clearly knowledgeable and confident is his facts, a resident 'expert', since he posts a great deal about everything, his credibility is significantly diminished by his comment above concerning a 'kit' for converting the Lewis carreid by a German soldier. He is way out of his depth and merely parroting unsubstatiated speculation. The credibility of all on the site is compromised by this sort of blind indiffence to rigourous documentation and verification, which i thought was the whole point of such discussions with those who present themselves as knowledgeable resources.

The perpetuation of factually unsupported and erroneous information about MGs and their use should be a thing of the past, especially with the unprecendent exposure and access they receive in the hands of thousands of owners of live MGs in the US but it is alive and well, sadly. I am reminded of Ian Hogg's declaration that the oiler on the Schwarzlose MG was to insure that the rounds would be chambered without jamming. Because it is Hogg writing this, and because it is written, it has the blessing of 'authority' and continues to be passed along withut question. and there are lots of other such squibs. Sad! Perhaps time will lie on the side of historical accuracy with some luck.

I'm quite disapppointed by all of this, and realize that the site is not the careful, conscientious, and considerate resource for information that I expected and needed, but more of a place where posters can participate comfortably, accept all without serious question if declared by the resident experts, without really seeking/demanding historical accuracy for its own sake. What's the point of all the discussion then? If what I contributed constitutes beating to death an arguement, then i've wasted my time and yours. My proof is in the mechanics and the hardware and I suppose that the empirical facts are inconvenient, but basing the belief in a propositon that has virtually no evidentiary support becomes a religious experience, not empirical.

The simple fact that no one on this site has any hand's on experience or access to live MGs, a major topic for the War, is understood and very unfortunate, but it is highly disappointing that the contributions of those who do have such experience are met with such indifference.

With all due respect, I suspect that 'centurion', and others, will continue to believe, write, and p[erpetuate the propositon that German soldiers carried a 'kit' to easily convert the Lewis to 7.92. All the more power to him!

Carry on......

Bob Naess

[Tom W.]

I'm quite disapppointed by all of this, and realize that the site is not the careful, conscientious, and considerate resource for information that I expected and needed, but more of a place where posters can participate comfortably, accept all without serious question if declared by the resident experts, without really seeking/demanding historical accuracy for its own sake. What's the point of all the discussion then? If what I contributed constitutes beating to death an arguement, then i've wasted my time and yours. My proof is in the mechanics and the hardware and I suppose that the empirical facts are inconvenient, but basing the belief in a propositon that has virtually no evidentiary support becomes a religious experience, not empirical.

The simple fact that no one on this site has any hand's on experience or access to live MGs, a major topic for the War, is understood and very unfortunate, but it is highly disappointing that the contributions of those who do have such experience are met with such indifference.

Actually, you're dead wrong that "no one on this site has any hand's on experience or access to live MGs."

The "religious experience" was entirely yours, as many people provided tons of emperical evidence--much of which you'd never even heard of despite your eighteen centuries of studying and firing Lewis guns.

What you did at that point is what most people do when confronted with facts that challenge an idée fixe: You simply dismissed them all by entering the mind of Colonel Lewis and telling us what he really meant when he said, for example, that thousands of Lewis guns had been rechambered by the Germans. You invented rationales for why he would've testified as he did, and you provided your own theories, not backed up by any emperical evidence whatsoever.

The least impressive arguments of all were made by you, which was why people stopped engaging you.

There's nothing personal in this. It's just that when someone is wedded to an idea and will stick to it no matter what, those of us with open minds tend to move on.

[trajan]

Hi Bob,

You seem to have made a fair comment, based on your own practical experience of MG's. But I must rejoin, even though MG's are not my thing - I like bayonets! But I am also an academic who works in a university. Which means that whenever I examine essays contributed to me by my students, then for every statement they make I want to see references that I can check to literature than I can access - that is basic scolarship.

Now, my own constant gripe about bayonet studies is that so often statements are made on this forum but more often elsewhere without backing references - this is especially true about bayonet markings. Fortunately there are enough bayonet guys on GWF who will publish their photo's regarding these markings to allow discussion and dissent (and it gets heated sometimes...!). And there are also books by recognised bayonets experts that we can all refer to (and even find mistakes in!).

This is by way of leading me into the problem I find with your specific post. I am not casting aspersions on you or your knowledge but you don't give any references to what you say! So, as far as I am concerned, what claims / denials that Centurion and others make on this matter are - as far as I am concerned - as acceptable as those that you make. I really don't know one way or another, and this is really nothing personal, so Bob, so please don't take it that way. Better instead to take it as a challenge to put your perosnal knowledge and experience on paper and publish it so we can all see it!

Best wishes,

Trajan

[TonyE]

Bob - Please don't think that my comment was posted out of indifference. My point was that you have a firm opinion on this matter as does Centurion, and both sides have aired their views to some considerable extent in the thread last year. I don't think that a further reiteration of the same argument will change things.

I am actually in agreement with you on this matter. Whilst it cannot be denied that the Germans did use the Lewis to some considerable extent the jury is still out on just how many, if any, were converted to 7.92mm. There is stil much to be learned about this.

I fully accept your many years of experience with MGs and I know your name well, but please don't assume that everyone here has no knowledge whatsoever of MGs. I have some small experience of firng,and using MGs, admittedly more with Bren and Vickers than Lewis but I have spent many happy hours with the late and sadly missed Bob Faris out in the desert!

The difficulties of converting a Lewis to 7.92mm are exactly as you describe, not least the modifications necessary to the feed slot. When I was last at the NFC (Pattern Room as was) I checked the converted Lewis they have and found that the magazine fitted was in fact a standard .303 one! I am there again next week and shall look into it in a bit more detail.

All I was trying to say was that I did not think there was much to be gained by repetition, whatever the rights and wrongs of the arguments were!

Regards

TonyE

[42ndRHC]

Hello Fellows, since I own a 1916 BSA and fire it with both blanks for re-enactments and have done a fair amount a live fire with it, here are some real life things to consider.

- They are much more reliable then people think these days. Like any weapons system it is a matter of understanding its idiosyncrasies. Of the system and each individual gun.

- We have put a lot of blanks through it and a good amount of ball, I have not had to replace any of the springs as of yet.

- You will go through extractors though. (You need smart - not necessarily big strong guys - to break the receiver down to replace this quickly in stressful conditions.)

- Bushfighter brings up a very good point - the magazines can be sensitive, to dirt but especially getting out of alignment, i.e. if they bang around in the panniers and get even slightly warped, the mags will jam. Before every event or shoot, I load each pan and use the loading tool to spin it and drop all of the rounds out to make sure it is spinning freely and to check the fin alignmnet, etc. Our crew keeps after the mags at re-enactments.

- They get bloody hot very fast, it is always good to have a piece of canvas or something to grab the radiator buy if you need to displace the gun.

- Not sure on Lewis Gunner selection, but the biggest guys are not always the brightest. We have had my gun break extractors at night and I have watched our crew break it down and replace the exctractor under torchlight and do it quickly. They have to be strong enough to carry it but cool headed enough to quickly diagnose what any stoppage may be and fix it. (Don't loose the alignment pin though if you need to dismount the receiver from the radiator.)

- Firing from hip - with the issue sling yes, not for long without it. Ergonomically it is awkward. And, to reload you really need both hands as the #1, so the #1 would really need to bring it to ground to do this so he can get the mag off and the #2 can place the new mag on, best if everything is stable as this is occuring i.e. on the ground. (It takes a bit more care than putting box magazines in Brens, Stens, M4's, etc. it is a big magazine and you need to keep the balance at you place it on the receiver - not easily done one-handed.) It is fairly easy to swing up over your shoulder to move forward or back. The only way practical to carry it we have found is over the shoulder. Again, firing from the hip could be done, but it is like firing from the hip over distance with any weapon, not exactly accurate - it highlights the old addage bullets do not go where you want them to go, they go where they are aimed

-Conversions to 7.92? I honestly don't know but it would be a whole lot cheaper for me (as an American) to easily convert my .303 Lewis to a .30-06 with the cost of brass, etc. There are simply too many differences in the parts, magazines, etc. I don't have any empircal evidence of it either way but I doubt it knowing what I know to have to convert it as Bob noted above. It is an interesting topic and I would love to see some research on German ordnance returns indicating issue of "foreign" ammunition. My gut feeling aside, it is a topic worth more digging to primary resources - perhaps not easily found.

- Bob you did a great job on my MP43 last year purchased though a dealer here in (hot) Virginia, thanks a bunch!

Cheers Fellows!

[Scalyback]

To go back to the "gunslinger" point.

A MG is an "area denial" weapon. You pray and spray. Taking a position by yourself is an option. However this leads to medal citations not run of the mill events. The weapon is heavy and cumbersome, size does not come into it. I guess medals won this way are of the "warm" nature not "cold".

I have lived fired a bren. I would not want to charge with that and fire at same time!

[TonyE]

......A MG is an "area denial" weapon. You pray and spray........

I think there would be one or two veteran machine gunners who might disagree with the second part of that statemet!

Regards

TonyE

[MikB]

I think there would be one or two veteran machine gunners who might disagree with the second part of that statemet!

Regards

TonyE

I think perhaps anybody who's studied the subject might consider it a bit oversimplified....

When I shot a Bren as a cadet, we were taught to use very short, aimed bursts - prayers were not a compulsory component of that procedure.

Regards,

MikB

PS. Did the 'Butterfly Spring' (perhaps under a different name) temporarily lost by 'Cpl Jones' in the Dad's Army episode actually exist? I couldn't find it in the Lewis LMG section of Col. Barlow's WW2 Small Arms Manual.