gatnerd

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3371
    MEMBERS
  • 192470
    MESSAGES
  • 6
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

LMAO Germany adopts an AR-15   Small Arms <20mm

Started 14/9/20 by QuintusO; 125764 views.
stancrist

From: stancrist

29/3/22

schnuersi said:

This is not correct BTW. The German Army does not issue the G36K to Panzergrenadiers. Actually I am not aware that it is issued to any troops other than SOF. The Crew of a Marder or Puma is armed with MP7.

Are you sure crew armament has not changed to G36K?  The preceding chart shows MP7.

schnuersi

From: schnuersi

29/3/22

stancrist said:

Are you sure crew armament has not changed to G36K? The preceding chart shows MP7.

Pretty sure.
I have never heard or read the G36 with short barrels are a thing in the German army. I also don't know any pictures that would show it.

I know that the German Army did not purchase any G36 with shorter barrels than the standard rifle in the past. The only exeption have been the ones for the SOF but these have been phased out and been replaced by G95k (Hk416) by now.
Since there have been no new purchases of G36 rifles since at least 2015 it is extremly unlikely that all of a sudden G36k appear in the inventory of regular units.
Should a G36 replacement finally be selected and purchased it is possible that there would be short barreled versions for vehicle crews. But I really doubt that. Since the MP7 was developed for precisely this role. Personally I do not see the need to equip AFV crews with carbines or rifles. So far the Army seems pretty happy with the MP7. I personally like it and think its a great weapon. Significantly better than the MP2 (Uzi) it replaces.

stancrist

From: stancrist

29/3/22

I couldn't find any photos of Marder/Puma vehicle crewmen with personal weapons, but did find some pics showing the infantry troop leader with a G36K.

Soldier at far right in photo below.  More pics here:  BW – System Panzergrenadier | TANK-MASTERS – Photos & Journalism | Military Photos & Journalism

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

29/3/22

I'm very much myself starting to strongly believe that there's very little point In 5.56 belt feds, if any at all for line units, and even groups like the 82nd 101st and rangers.

I'm not sure I'm convinced squad level belt feds should go away either though.

I think that it's probably best that we have some sort of "full power" lightweight case belt feds at minimum available at squad level...

I know I'm 100% convinced that schnuersi is beyond wrong about his assertion that you can't have a good gpmg that's under 10-12 kilograms though!

More importantly than than this though, the radical defense self Cooling suppressor exist and absolutely should be capitalized on/used as widely as we can afford to!

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/radical-defense-m249fvs-laser-sintering-meets-lewis-gun/

These will undoubtedly get lighter over time, and there's other potential barrel technologies they may actually dovetail with quite well.

Between things like this radical defense can, other things you can do about heat (which will add weight), and enablers like FWS CS and beyond, it's pretty clear that if we want to get the most out of belt feds we're going to have to find a way to make them lighter.

Luckily this is very possible and has been since the late 70's or early 80's where we saw a belt fed design that tested incredibly well as both a saw and a gpmg, had a 7.62 version, and even the 7.62 version with 24" barrel was about 15 or so pounds (which is pretty close to not even half the weight schnuersi has suggested it's possible to make A gpmg that's worthwhile)

Another thing we're going to have to do though is find a way to economize on gun construction in both cost and in just what production methods and resources are required to put them out.

Put simply, while our ability to laser sinter, cold/warm spray, and other advanced production technologies  like flow forming total potential throughput increases every year there's always going to be more demand for this throughput than there is production capacity.

What we're seeing in Ukraine very starkly illustrates why I say this too!

A very stunning example of why I say this can be seen in the Ukrainian defense forces requesting 500 each of javelins and stinger missiles per combat day!

To give people here a concrete understanding of why this is shocking, our entire production capacity for javelins in a year amounts to a notional 2100 missiles PER YEAR!

In theory we have the ability to short term surge manufacture more but how many more for how long, especially when we haven't even been buying 2100 a year recently is anybody's guess.

Simply put the collective west's production capacity for Military weapons and consumables combined is being strained to absolute breaking by our support of Ukraine in their war (a country that was already awash in a sea of weapons ammunition and consumables!)

What we're seeing in Ukraine has definitely vindicated several of my long held positions, positions I'm not particularly happy about being right about this to say the least though.

What it has showed me and I think should show everyone else is that we don't have the comfortable monopoly on high end force and logistical staying power we have all gotten used to the idea of having.

It is Time for us to get smart and really start looking at how we can do more with less, economize where we can in order to assure we can manufacture enough of our force multiplying high end goodies, and just generally get all around more serious about getting leaner meaner and more efficient.

schnuersi

From: schnuersi

30/3/22

stancrist said:

I couldn't find any photos of Marder/Puma vehicle crewmen with personal weapons, but did find some pics showing the infantry troop leader with a G36K. Soldier at far right in photo below.

I know these pictures. They don't show line troops but one possible configuration and the current state of the Sytem Panzergrenader as part of the IDZ Infantrie der Zukunft (infantry of the future project). So it does not resemble the actual ORBAT.
It could even be a photo taken by a manufacturer to show the current state of his gear.


This picture for example is from Rheinmetall. It more or less shows what the other picture shows but the guys wear green camo. Also all rifles are full length.

If you look at pictures and videos from the units currently deployed as part of the VJTF you see older G36 version, all full length barrel, but more MGs and Panzerfaust.

This is an actual picture showing troops in training.
The first thing that strikes the eye is the fact that the equipment and clothing is far less uniform than in the addvertisements. The soldiers also lack all the fancy electronics. The rifles are pretty standard G36. Not even flashlights or lasers mounted.

schnuersi

From: schnuersi

30/3/22

roguetechie said:

I know I'm 100% convinced that schnuersi is beyond wrong about his assertion that you can't have a good gpmg that's under 10-12 kilograms though!

Don't get me wrong. From a technical point of view it is certainly doable. I am just not convinced that this translate into a effective weapons system build and used in mass. The past strongly suggest that a system that is actually adopted and build will be in the 10-12 kg range if its supposed to be a good GPMG.
For any product you can have it: high quality, fast and cheap... but only ever two of these. Traditionally in the defense sector the first two where picked. Nowadays they ask if cheap can be picked twice. Of course the resulting products of such a mentality are crap.

roguetechie said:

Luckily this is very possible and has been since the late 70's or early 80's where we saw a belt fed design that tested incredibly well as both a saw and a gpmg, had a 7.62 version, and even the 7.62 version with 24" barrel was about 15 or so pounds (which is pretty close to not even half the weight schnuersi has suggested it's possible to make A gpmg that's worthwhile)

Which one?
Also how high was the ROF. Remember when I talk GPMG i talk German style. 20 or better 25 rounds per second.
Heat is far less of a problem compared to the gun not withstanding the stress or shaking itself appart. The heat problem is solved as far as I am concerned. Has been for a long time. The quick exchangeable barrel did that.

roguetechie said:

Another thing we're going to have to do though is find a way to economize on gun construction in both cost and in just what production methods and resources are required to put them out.

That is pretty theoretical for my taste.
Who is we? For starters. There are conciderable intrests at play.

roguetechie said:

Put simply, while our ability to laser sinter, cold/warm spray, and other advanced production technologies like flow forming total potential throughput increases every year there's always going to be more demand for this throughput than there is production capacity.

These techniques are all awefully expensive. Mostly because they are slow. Compared to traditional methody.
While it is true that capacity could be increased to the point where mass production of rather simple things like gun parts is possible it will not be eonomically viable. The investment would be huge. This needs to be payed for. Also i would need to ensure a steady stream of new orders so the production capacity is constantly required or it will disapear much faster than it was build up.
 

roguetechie said:

Simply put the collective west's production capacity for Military weapons and consumables combined is being strained to absolute breaking by our support of Ukraine in their war (a country that was already awash in a sea of weapons ammunition and consumables!)

The question you would need to ask is: why is this the case.
The answer is: because nobody wanted to pay for a different situation. This has not changed. As soon as the Ukraine situation has been solved and doesn't make the headline every day anymore things will go back to the way they have been befor.

roguetechie said:

What we're seeing in Ukraine has definitely vindicated several of my long held positions, positions I'm not particularly happy about being right about this to say the least though.

Same with me.
 

roguetechie said:

It is Time for us to get smart and really start looking at how we can do more with less, economize where we can in order to assure we can manufacture enough of our force multiplying high end goodies, and just generally get all around more serious about getting leaner meaner and more efficient.

Here is the problem. "We" have economized. To the point where everything is so slim and optimised that there is nothing left really. Its cheaper to buy stuff from abroad, its more efficient not to hold large stocks, you have better return on investment if you investment is clsoe to zero.
What is needed is to rethink our understanding of economy and globalisation. In the last decades there was a sole focus on buisiness admistration. How to earn more money faster. The entire field of macro economics was mostly ignored. We need to get back to look at the entire system and develop long term strategies. A holistic approch is needed. Without such a change everything will go back to how it has been befor and all mistakes made will be made again.

Mr. T (MrT4)

From: Mr. T (MrT4)

30/3/22

What Ukrainians are requesting and what they might eventually use are two wholly different things. At present they want it all , planes ,tanks, drones ,antishipping missiles ,nukes, on the other hand . one wonders where are all their soldiers.

Conflict is a month old, by now Ukrainas should have drafted and put through 2-3 week course way more than a million men in addition to 300+ k they had under arms day one, its military is by now basically supported and supplied by NATO, has all the intel and targeting data NATO can provide 24/7 way beyond what Russians have, was the unlimited budget we pay for, safe havens for training supply and superior gear to the Russians ! And yet They are still losing ground every day to what we are led to believe is an incompetent force of 200k spread thin on an extremely long front. 

Ukraine even before all this had more small arms than most of NATO Europe combined, the same goes for Tanks. Ukrainian stock is larger than the whole of Nato Europe they really don't need all the shit they are requesting.

EmericD

From: EmericD

30/3/22

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

And yet They are still losing ground every day

Hum, you would probably have difficulties to demonstrate that point...

Mr. T (MrT4)

From: Mr. T (MrT4)

30/3/22

While Ukraine is absolutely and decisively winning the information war, on the ground the winning is modest at best. A much larger Ukrainian force from day1 has been unable to maneuver and bring their numbers to bear in any place. By now i reckon they have a 5:1 or more advantage in numbers and are still not able to maneuver at all.  

By any measure, they are still losing ground south while not taking much of anything North all while having extraordinary numerical, technological and intelligence superiority. Even if Russians now pull out around Kyiv to concentrate on Donbas it's hardly a good result for having such a numerical superiority.

EmericD

From: EmericD

30/3/22

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

By any measure, they are still losing ground south while not taking much of anything North

I don't know how one can draw such a conclusion with a map that is a "snapshop" of the situation.

So, the Ukrainian Army should have been capable to push the Russian Army up to Moscow by now?

TOP