Deleted member 1487
From what I've been able to find quick change barrels were only developed after WW1 during the interwar period, which left WW1 MGs with heavy water cooling mechanisms to keep their weapons operational. Despite having relatively light weight LMGs already in service for the air force, their use on the ground was limited due to their tendency to overheat quickly. Quick change barrels would have dramatically improved performance for all MGs, while making them light enough to be used at the squad level for maneuver in LMG form or easier to displace for the more fixed MMG/HMGs either for retreating, moving to take advantage of a tactical situation, or simply repositioning away from enemy fire. Weapons like the Lewis Gun could have been much lighter and more like the best of the WW2 LMGs like the Bren Gun.
So how would the maneuver campaigns of 1914 have been influenced by the existence of much lighter MGs that could keep up with the infantry, rather than being a more fixed defensive weapon that only became relative offensive and maneuverable late in WW1? Could it have helped with WW1 offensive in trench warfare situations if especially early on MGs could keep up with attacking infantry and also maintain sustained fire so long as ammo held out (with more being able to be carried thanks to the lighter weapons)?
So how would the maneuver campaigns of 1914 have been influenced by the existence of much lighter MGs that could keep up with the infantry, rather than being a more fixed defensive weapon that only became relative offensive and maneuverable late in WW1? Could it have helped with WW1 offensive in trench warfare situations if especially early on MGs could keep up with attacking infantry and also maintain sustained fire so long as ammo held out (with more being able to be carried thanks to the lighter weapons)?