I know its a stupid question, but i wanted to get a feal for what the other people here thought.  Once you all weigh in ill tell you why i wanted to know.

What sort of light Machine Gun?

Simply put, the best known machineguns of the era are the Gatling, and the Maxim.  

Non of the 2 lightweigth.  The Gatling needed a carriage to move the 41 kg heavy weapon.
The Maxim at 27 kg for the gun itself could be moved by 2 sturdy men. 1 carrying gun and watercanister, the other munition and the tripod.

Skoda had the M1909 8mm machinegun, also 41 kg+

Colt had the lighter- at 15 kg- M1895 "Potato digger" , with the tripod it was 27kg+

In other words, a light machinegun is still, without extensive investment in the early days, at least 25 kg combatready, and not ment to be handfired.

thats the glory of the question lol, I already know what was the lightest one otl, and the year it came into service.  Im asking for opinions, not facts (technicly facts would let me do what i want to, butthe reality is it proly wasnt possible)  In other bad news anyone look up 1902 Aircraft? I just flew a 1903 wright flyer with a 75 horse engine... but thats for my first news story(trust me you will love it).

Technicaly possible.
Thanks to my hobby I'm a kind of expert on diminishing weight on mechanical parts without losing strength.

You can build a Gatling out of aluminium with steel barrel liners and choke rings around the barrel. That should make it possible to slice that weight in half.
Also diminishing the amount of barrels and restict firing rate to about 250rpm can help you slice the weight even further.

With the Colt as base, I think you can get a 1909 LMG with a caliber of .303 inside  10 kg.

But it will get ridicolously expensive. Compare it to custom build Holland & Holland hunting rifles with gold inlay.

Diminish caliber even further and 8 kg becomes possible. But no-one will accept a small caliber.... not for that pricetag. Not even N-verse France...

Quote from: maddox on September 25, 2007, 01:03:13 AM
Technicaly possible.
Thanks to my hobby I'm a kind of expert on diminishing weight on mechanical parts without losing strength.

You can build a Gatling out of aluminium with steel barrel liners and choke rings around the barrel. That should make it possible to slice that weight in half.
Also diminishing the amount of barrels and restict firing rate to about 250rpm can help you slice the weight even further.

With the Colt as base, I think you can get a 1909 LMG with a caliber of .303 inside  10 kg.

But it will get ridicolously expensive. Compare it to custom build Holland & Holland hunting rifles with gold inlay.

Diminish caliber even further and 8 kg becomes possible. But no-one will accept a small caliber.... not for that pricetag. Not even N-verse France...

Ya what i came up with was a 26 pound MG that someone built in 1907, and your right it was stupidly expensive for the time.  I was thinking more along the lines of striping a maxim of everything it didn't realy need and trying to mount one on an airplane ^.^.  It would have to be a 2 person plane though, and tbh none of my pics are of 2 person planes.  then there is the cooling problem... let me use a 1911 modle MG and it can work though(even though ill most likley still end up crashing the plane=P)

somthing along these lines honestly, just cant seem to find any weight info on it its suposedly a 1895 model

Ahoj!
Maddox, the 27 kg is the gun itself, without mount nor water. All guns in "ready to fire" condition tipped the scales at 36-42 kg.
A machine gun section was 7 men.

German troops had harnesses, with chain&hook, which they used to carry the MG about. Hence the legends of "German gunners chained with padlock to their guns".
Another method was to have a guy to grab each of the four legs of the MH08. As it was customary to cover the gun with a blanket to protect it from dust, this gave birth to legends of "Germans pretending to be stretcher bearers but they actually had a machine gun there, not a wounded bloke!".

Of course, the Baltikum sells the Madsens (10kg) to everybody, but they are not so reliable and have small magazines.
http://www.landships.freeservers.com/new_pages/madsen_mg_info.htm

Borys

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_Automatic_Rifle

Probably the best light MG of WWI, it shows how long that it took to get the concept right.

Aircraft have to be at least the 1915 level before they can mount a belt-fed .30 caliber gun... they are just too heavy. My M2 in Iraq weighed right at 100 lbs with a 100 round belt.

Madsen machine gun, 10 kg empty weight
--1902
--Expensive to make, subject to jams, dirt, etc
--Reduced range and rate of fire compared to Hv MG
--Clip feed in 25, 30 and 40

Hotchkiss M1909, 12 kg empty weight
--strip feed

Lewis Gun, 13 kg empty weight
--1911
--drum feed in 47 or 97
--Works fine without cooling cowel, will save a little weight

Chauchat, 9kg empty weight
--1915
--clip feed in 20 round
--large amounts of stamped metal used in weapon, quality control issues

M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle, 9kg empty weight
--clip feed, 20 round

Maschinengewehr 08/15, 18 kg weight
--Water Cooled
--Belt feed
--very reliable weapon

Maschinengewehr 08/18, 15 kg weight
--Air Cooled

The above two weapons are in a sense an attempt to create a medium or univeral machine gun that doesn't really work out till we see the  Maschinengewehr 34 and its up grade the MG42 at 12 kg / 19 kg with tripod and 11.5kg for the later weapon with a bipod. 

So yes a 10kg LMG is very possible in this time period, but it will have some issues.

Michael

Ahoj!
The Chauchat had problems with shoddy US ammo.
From what I've read on the web, especially by a certain Bob Lemke (his father was a Storm Trooper in WWI), the Chauchat wasn't bad. It was just poorly used by badly trained US troops with faulty US ammo - that's where the black legend in the English reading world comes from.
Borys

It's a low tolerance weapon; it works just fine as long as nothing goes wrong.  A good or perhaps high quality weapons are able to work through user error, dirt, mud, misfires, etc. 

Michael

Ahoj!
To answer the OP - if you are thinking of a gun on a balsa&paper plane, do not take the gun weight in mind. But that you have to strenghten the construction of the contraption to fire it.

Borys

I thought it was because the clip was open to the elements and dirt that caused the problems in the trenches.  That problem seems to be universal to that type in both French and American service.  In ideal setting (open fields) that is was designed for, it is a fine weapon I've heard.  Problem is that it wasn't used in ideal conditions for most of the war and certainly not by the Americans who I believe detest this weapon.

Ad for a weapon of early aircraft....um, these line wooden poles aren't really designed to take that kind of stress.  You could probably do it, but you'd have to place it at the center of balance and then in a position so it won't hit the props (since many aircraft were pushers that won't be a problem), but then the engine and frame need to be strong enough to take the rapid recoil for a period of time without breaking the aircraft, or the mount (and thus dropping the gun).

So far the only weapons on aircraft have been grenades, bricks, small bombs, 3" shells, pistols, and one rumored fixed bolt action rifle (not a good idea).

QuoteYa what i came up with was a 26 pound MG that someone built in 1907, and your right it was stupidly expensive for the time.  I was thinking more along the lines of striping a maxim of everything it didn't realy need and trying to mount one on an airplane ^.^.  It would have to be a 2 person plane though, and tbh none of my pics are of 2 person planes.  then there is the cooling problem... let me use a 1911 modle MG and it can work though(even though ill most likley still end up crashing the plane=P)

Aircraft have to be at least the 1915 level before they can mount a belt-fed .30 caliber gun... they are just too heavy. My M2 in Iraq weighed right at 100 lbs with a 100 round belt.

The Wright B could carry two people comfortably in 1908, it should be possible to replace one with a MG without a problem. If your interested in such a plane contact the nearest Swiss Embassy for further information...  

Ahoj!
I think you got carried away with "comfortably".
:)
And I'm pretty sure they would not take two of "leedle me" :)

Borys