Re: <ot>Bren Guns</ot>

The cyclic rate of the FN MAG is about 750 rounds per minute.  The M60
cyclic rate is about 550 rounds per minute. That's not a substantial
difference.  While you can adjust the gas regulator to of the FN MAG to
get a cyclic rate of about 1000 rounds per minute, this is not a good
idea.  As stated in previous e-mail, the faster a gun cycles, the harder
it is on the parts.  The prupose of the adjustedable gas regulator is to
allow the weapon to stay functional as it becomes dirty.

LMG's are made to be fired on the ground.  Only an idiot (or commandos)
make a habit of doing other wise.  

The M60E3 actually is a decent mg.  But it shouldn't have taken 20 years
since the M60 was deployed for a decent version of it to show up.  Both
of the FN MAG and the PK were designed and depolyed during the same time
periods, and both are far supperior mg's.  

Concerning the M16.  Most people have no idea why the M16 got such bad
rep.  The truth behind it is a pretty ugly story.  In short the US Army
Ordance sabatogued it by changing the type of powder used in the
ammunition.  Why?  They wanted the M14 desinged by Army Ordance to be
the US Army's combat rifle, not the M16.  Almost all the changes that
were latter made to the M16 were to get the M16 to function reliable
with the new powder.  This has been well documented in a couple of
books.	

The Lee Enfield No. 3, No. 4, and No. 5 rifles all took 10 round
detachable box magazines.  I don't know if they could be used in the
Bren Gun.  It's probably mentioned in the book I have about the Bren
Gun, but I would rather the calculate the mass for different spectral
class of stars then look it up to night.

IAS