Tank M73 Machine Gun 7.62MM - Part 1 Operation, Disassembly and Assembly (Training film)

Youtube ^ | N/A | N/A

[DemforBush]

Neat little training film about the M73 MG...

[DemforBush]

Ran across this tonight. Thought it might be of interest to folks.

[PGR88]

I like to keep everything on my M60 working well. One never knows when I will have to roll into the neighbor’s yard.....

[DemforBush]

Indeed. Especially if they try to get in close with a shaped charge or a riding lawnmower!

[elcid1970]

The M73 coax machine gun SUCKED! Recoil operated cycling works with the M2 .50 cal, not with that box with a barrel attached! Solenoid trigger don’t cut it, either.

Wasn’t until they came up with a conventional gas operated coax gun that could be detached & fired handheld or ground mount that we had something decent. This was late 1970’s.

[Jet Jaguar]

Active Duty video ping.

[bravo whiskey]

219 wasn’t much better. If you could keep it working during tank gunnery you never cleaned it because than it might not work.

[ozzymandus]

Big step backward from the Browning, from what I’ve read.

[MasterGunner01]

The M73 7.62 NATO tank gun and its big brother, the M85 .50 caliber tank gun, were introduced on the M60 tank. Both guns were an attempt by the Army to get a short receiver gun for its armored vehicles that were using both the .30 caliber M37 and M2 .50 caliber machine guns based on the Browning design. The Army designed the M85 to have dual modes of fire; a slow rate for ground targets and a fast rate for air targets. in reality, neither the M73 or M85 worked reliably.

The Army redesigned the M73 and issued it as the M219, but it didn't work well either. Many parts between the M73 and M219 did not interchange. The M85 never did work (in sand, dust, and unlubricated conditions) and both guns usually broke down after a more than a few bursts to test function. When we gave the Israelis M60 tanks, both the M73 and the M85 were immediately replaced. The M85 by an M2HB .50 Browning on the cupola. The M73 was replaced by the MAG-58 tank gun.

Here's the story from Small Arms Review: http://smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=114

[DCBryan1]

They had a transferable M73 and M85 at Knob Creek a few years ago. <6 on registry. As a 19K, I still hated seeing them. Even with TLC, they are as reliable as a Chautchaut.

[archy]

Ran across this tonight. Thought it might be of interest to folks.

I would have far preferred to have forgotten the near-worthless M73, later reworked and *product improved* as the M219. The eventual replacement by the FN-MAG, known in US circles as the M240, was, at last, a needed improvement.

[archy]

Wasn’t until they came up with a conventional gas operated coax gun that could be detached & fired handheld or ground mount that we had something decent. This was late 1970’s

The Marines played with a modified M60, crossed with some parts and components from the M60D helicopter door gun, and tried that for a co-ax for a while. No soap: the M60 was designed from the beginning to have its barrel slid forward for removal and change, and reworks that instead slid the receiver to the rear weren't very adaptable to the limited space inside some USMC amphibious craft.

We tried modifications from more than a dozen NATO countries, including the French AAT52 and the German MG42/MG3. We finally got the Belgian-designed MAG, aka the M240, and it works.

[archy]

219 wasn’t much better. If you could keep it working during tank gunnery you never cleaned it because than it might not work.

If it ran long enough to get hot [red *cherry juice* hydraulic fluid helped if the temperatures were above freezing] the internal parts would get soft and deform out of shape. Given a second/third gun to strip for internal parts, you could get through the Table Eight gunnery exercises okay, and when our battalion did in 1966, we became the highest-scoring tank battalion in USAREUR. Not because we outshot the tank division gunners in our crapped-out old M60s [except for the three M60A1s we had in HQ company] but because we could keep our M73s going.

[archy]

Big step backward from the Browning, from what I’ve read.

Concur. The M37, which would feed from either side [like the big M2 .50 caliber] was the final version in US service, and it was mounted on many of the M41 and M48 tanks we gave to the South Vietnamese. Even the old M1919A5, which the Germans and Belgians still had on their former US M47 and M48 tanks in the mid-1960s were reliable, if a bit slow on the barrel change...but quicker with practice. You just had to keep your middle finger a bit low after you tripped the accelerator, or your finger would be mashed by the bolt closing home and your fingernail would not grow back, as mine has not after some fifty years.

But the Israelis reworked their .30 Brownings to 7,62 NATO [it takes a bit more than just a barrel change, but not much more] and the final version, the South African MG4, was modified sop as to work from an open bolt rather than a closed one, avoiding overheated guns, burned-out barrels and, oh yeah, mashed fingers. The US Navy did some similar work, and their version even used the M13 linked ammo as used in the M60 and M73/M219.

And those recoil-operated Brownings are a whole lot easier to clean than the M60 or M240 *gas pigs.*

[archy]

When we gave the Israelis M60 tanks, both the M73 and the M85 were immediately replaced. The M85 by an M2HB .50 Browning on the cupola.

Not entirely. Some of the Israeli M48 and M60 reworks mounted the .50 M2 coaxially above the main gun tube, rather than on an external gun mount or in a cupola. There were two reasons for this. One was that part of the Israeli use of the ,50 is as a backup aiming device should a hit from a HE round shatter the tank's primary optical sighting equipment, especially at night when things are likely up close. Very short bursts or single rounds of tracer are fired until they start to bounce off something in the dark, whereupon the gunner lets fly with HEAT or SABOT.

The other reason was that the Israelis lost the majority of their tank commander casualties in the 1973 war to hits by high explosive rounds on the turret, the impact of which took the commander's cupola off and sent it flying, along with the upper half of the tank commander.

The new Israeli Merkava Mark I through Mark IV continue this practice, as do their rebuilds of the M48 and M60, known in IDF service as Magach

The Israelis generally have a couple of MAG58 *roof guns* mounted at the TC and loader's hatch positions. It helps discourage enemy Sagger and other wire-guided AT missle gunners.

[archy]

They had a transferable M73 and M85 at Knob Creek a few years ago. <6 on registry. As a 19K, I still hated seeing them. Even with TLC, they are as reliable as a Chautchaut.

I have been an 11 Echo enlisted loader and gunner [first hitch] while the M73 was in service, and I have owned three French CSRG *Chauchat* 8mm machine rifles. The Chauchat, if fed good ammunition and not the crappy French service rifle ammo meant for bolt action rifles that do not depend on consistant recoil or gas pressure to function, is actually pretty reliable, if uncomfortable to shoot. This is aso the reason that when the French built their 7.5mm Mle 1924 *French Bren* to replace the CSRG and for use in fortifications, they went with the new, rimless cartridge...with more consistant powder charge metering during manufacture.

It's true that in the WWI trenches, the open side of the magazine allowed mud and dirt to get in and plug the mags up, but that is why leather pouches that fully enclosed the magazine were issued, and why multiple magazines came in a metal box not unlike a current-day .50 M2A1 ammo can.

Yes the springs in a Chaychat could be better. And in mine, they were, replaced. The flat zigzag magazine springs were also not exactly state of the art, but those of the US M1918A1 BAR were made the same way.

One word of warning: my positive experiences with the CSRG do NOT include the Model 1918 version in .30-06, as issued to US forces serving with the A.E.F in 1917-1918 before the BARs arrived. Those things had out-of-tolerance barrels, and though some have claimed that a new barrel turned down from a M1919A4 Browning MG barrel can be used to get one up and running, I've not tried it and my experiences with as-issued .30 Chauchats have been gloom, despair, and agony on me. But I'm actually reasonably fond of the original 8mm CSRG versions, so long as their use is confined to well-mowed ranges on sunshiny days.

[MasterGunner01]

The bottom line is that even the Israelis couldn't make the M73 or M85 guns work and so the MAG-58 Tank gun replaced the M73 as co-axial to the main gun and the M2HB replaced the M85. The cupola for the M85 went away and was replaced by the Israeli version. There were two M2 machine guns added to the turret; the TC got an M2 to shoot and another M2 was mounted to the main gun for backup aiming or ranging shots. The loader got a MAG-58 7.62 GPMG mounted by his hatch so he could shoot bad guys. Israeli M60s were very well armed with turret mounted machine guns.