Denel Land Systems DMG-5 showcased at AAD

DMG-5_7-62mm_machine_gun_Denel_Land_Systems_AAD_2016_defense_exhibition_South_Africa_002

Denel Land Systems, a South African manufacturer that produces a number of defense items from grenades to artillery, has introduced their DMG-5 medium/light machine gun (available either in 5.56x45mm or 7.62x51mm), and their DMG-5 CX vehicle mounted machine gun at the Africa Aerospace and Defence Exhibition in South Africa this week. From Army Recognition

The DMG-5 is a gas operated, air cooled Lightweight Machine Gun capable of sustained high rates of fire. It is available in either 7,62 x 51mm or 5,56 x 45mm NATO Calibres. The DMG-5 is equipped with M-1913 Picatinny Rail Systems to accommodate various User selectable tactical attachments such as optical sights. Night Vision equipment, torches or laser pointers.

The DMG-5 is a well-balanced, light weight weapon system optimised for the modem warfighting environment.

The DMG-5 is fitted with a collapsible ergonomic stock, the front grip is equipped with three Picatinny Rails for the fitment of Flash lights, Laser pointers, etc. A removable Front Pistol Grip is fitted on the Front Picatinny Rail and can be adjusted to suit the operator’s personal requirements and enhance the handling, stability and quick reaction of the Machine Gun during operations. A Bi-pod can be mounted on the same Picatinny Rail as the Front Pistol Grip.

The Feed Cover is equipped with a top mounted full length Picatinny Rail allowing for the fitment of different Sights and / or Night Sights. Backup Iron Sights can be provided but are not supplied with the weapon The DMG-5 is supplied with a full logistic support package, training and a reliable service back-up.

The DMG-5 has a maximum weight of 8.6 kg and has an effective range of 1,500 m with a firing rate from 700 to 900 rpm.

DMG-5_7-62mm_machine_gun_Denel_Land_Systems_AAD_2016_defense_exhibition_South_Africa_001 p1691551

The DMG-5 is meant to replace the 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm Vektor SS-77 light and medium machine gun which has a surprisingly large number of end users to include South Africa, Columbia, Philippines, Romania, Malaysia, and Kuwait among others. It appears to be a similar operating system, with much of the external features being modified to make it more robust and lightweight. Picatinny rails have been added, with an especially aggressive rail on the feed tray cover, a telescoping and folding buttstock, and removal of any fixed sights. The DMG-5 CX is a new addition though, outfitted with spade grips, a heavier barrel, and a chopped pistol grip to make room for the machine gun on a helicopter or other vehicle.

Why the company has a Grippod mounted on the machine gun is beyond me. The flimsy bipod barely works well when used in a rugged environment on a rifle, much less a fully automatic belt fed machine gun. Solid idea, but the things are always breaking when you really need them the most. And especially with any sort of machine gun, light or medium (Heaven forbid some Grippods get put on a 50 Cal M2), where the gun is sometimes being driven into the ground with ungodly amounts of force in the heat of a battle.

Current SS-77 in service mainly with the South African military.

dc16e7972ec2f913bba94089c84752e2

Photos are from Army Recognition, DMG-5 CX photo from Jane’s Defense.



Miles V

Former Infantry Marine, and currently studying at Indiana University. I’ve written for Small Arms Review and Small Arms Defense Journal, and have had a teenie tiny photo that appeared in GQ. Specifically, I’m very interested in small arms history, development, and Military/LE usage within the Middle East, and Central Asia.

If you want to reach out, let me know about an error I’ve made, something I can add to the post, or just talk guns and how much Grunts love naps, hit me up at miles@tfb.tv


Advertisement

  • Major Tom

    I think the grippod might just be demonstration purposes. I’m pretty sure they know outright no serious customer is going to forgo a dedicated bipod for either the 5.56mm or 7.62mm versions.

    On the flipside though, 8.6kg fully loaded? That’s lighter than a 249.

  • dave

    if it aint broke…

  • jono102

    I don’t mind a collapsible stock on a LMG/GPMG so long as it helps with position and hold for firers of different sizes. I’ve used the 7.62 FN Minimi with and without the Mk 3 kit and its collapsible stock makes quite a difference. The adjustable cheek piece is very good for going between iron and optical sights for a good cheek weld and eye relief.

  • Jeremy

    That’s cool, but you know what’s cooler?

    6.5mm LSAT LMG

    • Johannes von’ Strauch

      CT LMG*

      Its not the “LSAT” anymore.

  • John

    Question. Does the buffer spring inside an M4 stock help with the recoil at all? On these, or any gun that isn’t an AR-15?

    • jono102

      Just because it is an “AR-15 style” collapsible stock doesn’t mean it has an AR15 buffer spring assembly inside it. This style of stock is common on a lot of firearms.

  • charlesthatcher

    I’ve used the FN MAG 7.62 GPMG in the southern African bush war. I think that fore grip may be there to prevent burning your hand on the gas cylinder when changing barrels. Grip it with your left hand and change barrels with the right. May be because the weapon is so light, unlike the FN. The bipod is just stupid and looks very flimsy – looks like the one off the R4/SA Galil. Specially useless when firing 7.62 NATO.

    • Tritro29

      The bi-pod is lifted off the Galil ARM but stronger than the R4/5 variant. The fore-grip on the SS77 serves also to protect both the bi-pod when folded and also give a rest position instead of piling it on the gas system when the bi-pod isn’t deployed. In the Russian Army we tended to deploy the bi-pod forward as to have a firmer resting position without making direct contact with the gas system and support surface rather the normal fold back position. With that fore-grip there’s not more second guessing.

  • Paladin

    Some people have more functional concerns. A military buyer, the target market for LMGs and MMGs doesn’t care about aesthetics. Aesthetics has zero impact on their use cases for the weapon system. They care about functionality, and a core component of that functionality is the ability to adapt the system for all of the various people who will be using it, accommodating for shooters of different sizes. Adjustable stocks are a critical component of that adaptability. It’s far cheaper to integrate an already common off the shelf adjustable stock system than it is to design a new one from the ground up.

    TL;DR:

    The military doesn’t give a damn about whether or not it’s ugly. It fills a need at low cost.