The M1937A1 'BREW' LMG (ZB36)

brenMkI.jpg


During the lead up to WW2 the US army was still essentially equipped with WW1 weapons such as the Springfield and 1918 and 1922 BARs.

While much was expected of the M1 Garand teething issues in development and production had delayed its deployment.

Initially intended as a back up programme in case the M1 Garand project failed to deliver a small team at Winchester approached Československá zbrojovka and Enfield regarding their ZB 33 / BREN gun development of the ZB26 and ZB 30 LMG.

It was hoped that developing the ZB33 from .303 to .30-06 would be a relatively simple 'low risk' exercise and so it proved with the Czech and Winchester engineers able to leverage the metric to imperial conversion already conducted for the British LMG.

20 weapons were trialled in 1936 by BuOrd and performed to expectations.

Particularly liked was the QC Barrel, speed of magazine change and ease of field strip relative to the BAR.

It is well known that the BuOrd made what is now considered to be a ridiculous demand on the design and that is that the M1937A1 as it was officially known be compatible with the BAR 20 round magazines and this delayed development for at least 12 months.

The main driver for this 'demand' was the work that had been undertaken on the BAR in order to modernise it and BuOrd were concerned with their being 2 differing 'LMG' magazines in the logistics chain but eventually BuOrd were sold on the better quality 30 round magazines that the gun used and they dropped the 'demand'.

Despite being accepted for service in 1937 production was slow with the first factory at Rock Island producing the first gun and kit in 1939 in fairly low production numbers. While Springfield had driven the design they were far to busy with the Garand production and so production was initially stood up on the Arsenal Island.

It was only with the German and Austrian army invasion of Czechoslovakia in June 1940 and the subsequent declaration of war by Britain and France that signalled the start of the 2nd Great War that BuOrd ramped up orders and several other factory's became involved as the US government began to build up the US Army into a continental force.

The New England Small Arms Corporation and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) where both instrumental in producing the BREW LMG and between 1941 and 1946 they would produce nearly 300,000 weapons.

There had been talk of those companies producing more BARs but it was thought that they, with their modern machine tooling would be better of producing a more modern weapon design such as the M1937A1.

Several variants of the gun were produced - with the A2 version simplifying the rear sight and stock

The A3 (produced from early 1943) shortened the barrel and IBM introduced a plastic stock that was standardised across all production that overall reduced the weight of the weapon by over 2 pounds.

The A3 'Ranger' or 'Stinger' as it was known in the USMC had a forward 'pistol' grip to better allow it to be fired from the hip or even from the shoulder for units on patrol and in the final assault phase and is said to have been responsible for 'several surviving CMOH's' such as those won by Sgt Basilone on Guadalcanal and Okinawa

The A4 was an A3 converted to 7.62 NATO.

The BREW would continue to serve the US Armed forces until it was fully replaced by the FN MAG (M61) during the late 60s but continued to serve in NG units until as late as 1988 and the USMC into the 90s.
 
Looks like USA is using the same LMG as the Chinese.
China was a huge user of the ZB 26 ITTL, chambered in the original 7.92x57mm Mauser.
My great-grandfather consider the ZB 26 to be an excellent weapon. His guerilla unit often used them for ambushes because it was highly portable and had a decent ROF.
Reloading could be done really quickly, especially if there was a dedicated loader.
 

McPherson

Banned
View attachment 551680

During the lead up to WW2 the US army was still essentially equipped with WW1 weapons such as the Springfield and 1918 and 1922 BARs.

While much was expected of the M1 Garand teething issues in development and production had delayed its deployment.

Initially intended as a back up programme in case the M1 Garand project failed to deliver a small team at Winchester approached Československá zbrojovka and Enfield regarding their ZB 33 / BREN gun development of the ZB26 and ZB 30 LMG.

It was hoped that developing the ZB33 from .303 to .30-06 would be a relatively simple 'low risk' exercise and so it proved with the Czech and Winchester engineers able to leverage the metric to imperial conversion already conducted for the British LMG.

20 weapons were trialled in 1936 by BuOrd and performed to expectations.

Particularly liked was the QC Barrel, speed of magazine change and ease of field strip relative to the BAR.

It is well known that the BuOrd made what is now considered to be a ridiculous demand on the design and that is that the M1937A1 as it was officially known be compatible with the BAR 20 round magazines and this delayed development for at least 12 months.

The main driver for this 'demand' was the work that had been undertaken on the BAR in order to modernise it and BuOrd were concerned with their being 2 differing 'LMG' magazines in the logistics chain but eventually BuOrd were sold on the better quality 30 round magazines that the gun used and they dropped the 'demand'.

Despite being accepted for service in 1937 production was slow with the first factory at Rock Island producing the first gun and kit in 1939 in fairly low production numbers. While Springfield had driven the design they were far to busy with the Garand production and so production was initially stood up on the Arsenal Island.

It was only with the German and Austrian army invasion of Czechoslovakia in June 1940 and the subsequent declaration of war by Britain and France that signalled the start of the 2nd Great War that BuOrd ramped up orders and several other factory's became involved as the US government began to build up the US Army into a continental force.

The New England Small Arms Corporation and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) where both instrumental in producing the BREW LMG and between 1941 and 1946 they would produce nearly 300,000 weapons.

There had been talk of those companies producing more BARs but it was thought that they, with their modern machine tooling would be better of producing a more modern weapon design such as the M1937A1.

Several variants of the gun were produced - with the A2 version simplifying the rear sight and stock

The A3 (produced from early 1943) shortened the barrel and IBM introduced a plastic stock that was standardised across all production that overall reduced the weight of the weapon by over 2 pounds.

The A3 'Ranger' or 'Stinger' as it was known in the USMC had a forward 'pistol' grip to better allow it to be fired from the hip or even from the shoulder for units on patrol and in the final assault phase and is said to have been responsible for 'several surviving CMOH's' such as those won by Sgt Basilone on Guadalcanal and Okinawa

The A4 was an A3 converted to 7.62 NATO.

The BREW would continue to serve the US Armed forces until it was fully replaced by the FN MAG (M61) during the late 60s but continued to serve in NG units until as late as 1988 and the USMC into the 90s.

If we are doing this; then Rock Island is tinkering with something that looks like the BT-5 and Springfield is doing work on the ZB50 and the ZB53.

Not unhappy with the PoD at all. Keeping to the Mauser bullet would help more, but it is what it is.

would 300,000 be enough?

Nope. Since I expect it to be a section gun at the squad level, 400,000 is the absolute minimum. Roughly 352,000 BARs were made and there were never enough of those. Add 453,000 Browning M1919s as platoon weapons, and you could argue that 500,000 squad automatic weapon units might be more likely with a ZB53 clone being necessary for the platoon level weapon.

One thing i will note, the 750-800 billion bullets the US spent in fighting WWII and Korea, will be closer to 1 trillion bullets.

As for the clankity clankity POD to go with "BREW"; (more likely known as the Springfield "BRAM" M22) I expect that would be the BRAM M23 (BESA clone).

Just my take.

McP.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

The A3 'Ranger' or 'Stinger' as it was known in the USMC had a forward 'pistol' grip to better allow it to be fired from the hip or even from the shoulder for units on patrol and in the final assault phase and is said to have been responsible for 'several surviving CMOH's' such as those won by Sgt Basilone on Guadalcanal and Okinawa
Nitpick, the MOH could only be awarded once per person during WW2. The law was passed shortly after WW1 that limited it:

Otherwise great POD/scenario.

would 300,000 be enough?
Only 250k BARs were made in WW2 and they were issuing 3 per squad by the end of the war:
No. built351,679
  • 102,174 M1918
  • 125 Monitor Machine Rifle
  • 249,380 M1918A2


More than two Bren type LMGs would probably be overkill for a WW2 squad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks like USA is using the same LMG as the Chinese.
China was a huge user of the ZB 26 ITTL, chambered in the original 7.92x57mm Mauser.
My great-grandfather consider the ZB 26 to be an excellent weapon. His guerilla unit often used them for ambushes because it was highly portable and had a decent ROF.
Reloading could be done really quickly, especially if there was a dedicated loader.

The Japanese type 96 and later 99 LMG, BREN gun and the 'BREW' were all derived form the Czechoslovakian ZB 26

The Japanese weapon was not a copy as such but was developed after being on the receiving end of Chinese ZB 26s and the Type 97 Tank Machine gun was a licence copy of the ZB 26.

Salute to your Great Great Grandfather!

would 300,000 be enough?

That was just those built by those 2 companies - more were built by others including Rock Arsenal (it was all back of a cigarette package stuff anyway)

The existing BAR 'estate' including rebuilt ones would carry the burden in the early battles alongside the gun and even late war it was not uncommon to see an infantry Squad having both weapons.

If we are doing this; then Rock Island is tinkering with something that looks like the BT-5 and Springfield is doing work on the ZB50 and the ZB53.

Not unhappy with the PoD at all. Keeping to the Mauser bullet would help more, but it is what it is.



Nope. Since I expect it to be a section gun at the squad level, 400,000 is the absolute minimum. Roughly 352,000 BARs were made and there were never enough of those. Add 453,000 Browning M1919s as platoon weapons, and you could argue that 500,000 squad automatic weapon units might be more likely with a ZB53 clone being necessary for the platoon level weapon.

One thing i will note, the 750-800 billion bullets the US spent in fighting WWII and Korea, will be closer to 1 trillion bullets.

As for the clankity clankity POD to go with "BREW"; (more likely known as the Springfield "BRAM" M22) I expect that would be the BRAM M23 (BESA clone).

Just my take.

McP.

Given the efforts in producing the Garand and existing logistics and weapons I cannot see the USA moving from 30-06 to a 7.92 Mauser round for the same reasons the British didn't - not a 'would't' but 'highly unlikely'

As for the Name - BRuno-Enfield-Winchester after the 3 groups involved in its development.

And slightly tongue in cheek ;)

As for the BESA etc - I get why the British went for it - they needed a modern COTS AFV MMG that could replace the Vickers and needed it quickly - because 'OMG Hitlers actually insane'

The USA has the M1919A4 MMG - did the ZB 53 have QC Barrel?

Google fu - "The ZB53 is a gas operated, air-cooled, belt fed, selective fire, weapon that fires from an open bolt. The barrel is heavily finned and can be changed quickly to provide sustained firepower. It is fitted with a conical flash hider and a carrying handle"

I guess that's a yes - so as a weapon with superior sustained fire I guess it does make more sense than the M1919A4 which had no QC barrel for land (as a tripod mounted MMG) and possibly AFV use - although this would likely require conversion to 30-06 (a metric to imperial conversion) which might take time and have issues.

But otherwise yes!

As for numbers I agree but there would be less need for 2 or 3 per squad like with the BAR and I can envisage the M1918A1 and M1922 BAR serving alongside the 'BREW' particularly early war.

Nitpick, the MOH could only be awarded once per person during WW2. The law was passed shortly after WW1 that limited it:

Otherwise great POD/scenario.


Only 250k BARs were made in WW2 and they were issuing 3 per squad by the end of the war:
No. built351,679
  • 102,174 M1918
  • 125 Monitor Machine Rifle
  • 249,380 M1918A2


More than two Bren type LMGs would probably be overkill for a WW2 squad.

I didn't know that about the CMOH - what did they do when someone did something to win it twice - add a Bar?

(Just checked - the wearer gets a 'bar' - so it can be awarded more than once - the bearer just gets the one medal though but adds a bar! This limitation was repealed in 2014)

It happened very rarely for the British Commonwealth's VC but it could be awarded more than once (again just checked and its the same 'Bar' system)

And agreed with a better LMG - less need for so many weapons.
 
Top