Innovative B.A.D.S M240 pouch released

Mounting Solutions Plus is a Florida-based company that is announcing the release for export of an innovative M240 belt pouch system that is designed to supersede currently issued 50 round belt pouches designed for the 7,62x51mm NATO M240 general purpose machine gun in efficiency. The company also has a similar design specifically for the Rheinmetall MG3 as well. What differentiates this pouch from existing 50 round “contact” pouches is that it curves underneath the machine gun to the right, whereas with the current 50 round pouch, it simply drops off the left side of an M240 and hangs on the left side, thus off-centering the machine gun. The reason why a pouch like this wasn’t designed in the first place was that the 240 ejects spent cases directly down and would thus be ejecting cartridges into the ammunition feeding device. How the Balanced Ammunition Delivery System (B.A.D.S) surmounts this task is through incorporating a ramp where spent cartridges hit the ramp at an angle and then bounce to the 3 o’clock position of the M240. In addition, because of the extra space underneath the machine gun, the entire fixture now allows a 240 gunner to hold 100-125 rounds instead of 50 in a contact belt.

From the press release-

The new Balanced Ammunition Delivery System (B.A.D.S.) revolutionizes the M240 weapon system. The B.A.D.S. system replaces the current ammo box under the weapon and produces a balanced center of gravity for this weapon. It also allows 125 rounds of ammo to be easily loaded by the gunner within ten seconds while in a standing or sitting position. The increased ammo capacity of the B.A.D.S enables the gunner to engage the target for up to 150% more time on target while on assault, on patrol, or in a hasty defensive position without a need to change the ammo box.

Because the B.A.D.S is balanced, it puts less stress on the operator and the M240 system. Unlike current ammo box designs, the B.A.D.S. ammunition deflection plate ensures spent cartridges are ejected away from the gunner.

Is it innovative? Of course. Does it solve a problem? It does. But does it create more problems than it solves and is it field worthy? Those are the questions that need to be answered about this device. But on the one hand we now have a very nifty and smart solution to a decades-old problem, but on the other, can we now not get in the prone? Also is there no easier way to access the inside of the belt pouch than from the feedway? These are various issues to look at before those going in harm’s way stake their lives on the device.


Infantry Marine, based in the Midwest. Specifically interested in small arms history, development, and usage within the MENA region and Central Asia. To that end, I run Silah Report, a website dedicated to analyzing small arms history and news out of MENA and Central Asia.

Please feel free to get in touch with me about something I can add to a post, an error I’ve made, or if you just want to talk guns. I can be reached at


  • roguetechie

    Is it innovative… No not even close!

    Check out the XM248 and other entries from the SAW competition in the 70’s some time. This is literally a less useful, heavier, and not as good knockoff of the Rodman quick change belt box for the XM235/248.

    The original Rodman box was engineered specifically so that going prone using the bipod, running the gun on the tripod with t&e, and free gunning off the tripod were all unimpeded by the box.

    At least 3 of the entrants had single step quick change belt boxes (rodman, Philco ford, and the company who designed the M60)

  • PK

    That’s a whole lot like the Colt CMG 3 belt bag/box. While I’m happy to see more options, it’s hardly an innovation.

  • Guy

    “Revolutionize” is a bit of a stretch…

  • EdgyTrumpet


    • Phillip Cooper

      Neva Bin Dun Befo.

      Geez, spell it right. 😉

  • John

    Instead of steel, make it with plastic. Cuts down the total weight and still retains functionality. You could also have it fold in the middle for a prone position.

  • jono102

    “Hey lets solve a minor to no existent issue by creating a larger one i.e. We used to have a short 20-30rd belt on the gun but full use of the bipod, now we have 100rds on the gun but limited use of the bipod”.

    It pays to have a short belt or small belt on the gun to maintain some form of mobility than some large box that still gets in the way. We dumped our 200rd plastic boxes for the minimi/249 due to bulk and profile on the gun until we could get 100rd bags. When we went to the 7.62 Minimi we chopped the 100rd belt bags down to 75rd so they didn’t get on the way when on a bipod.

    A MAG/240 is manned by a crew/pair for a reason, a knuckle dragger n.o.1 to carry it and a clued up n.o.2 to keep it fed, watered and on target. In a military context I don’t get the idea of putting over sized belt bags or even worse back pack mounted systems on GPMG’s or LMG’s, Movies and youtube…well maybe