autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

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

  • 3202
    MEMBERS
  • 181829
    MESSAGES
  • 26
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

caseless ammo    General Military Discussion

Started 20-Jan by smg762; 2366 views.
smg762

From: smg762

20-Jan

I had a couple of unsurities regarding caseless ammo.

With rounds where the propellent completely covers the bullet, how would the bullet slot neatly in the barrel, as normal rounds do?

is caseless ammo less accurate? Would it make more sense to have an exposed bullet like some of the 556 caseless rounds. Thus the bullet could slot neatly in the barrel.

Finally, its always said that caseless is not viable yet....however the G11 was fully functional.

It was only complex due to the hyperburst feature which was a bad idea. With these factors in mind, could a new caseless rifle be  good idea?

G11 ammo was half the weight of 556

In reply toRe: msg 1
renatohm

From: renatohm

20-Jan

Jim Schatz, who worked for HK in the G11 program, has a word or two about that.

May he RIP.

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2012/armaments/Wednesday13614JimSchatz.pdf

smg762

From: smg762

20-Jan

It seems like many problems such as rifle blowups were due to the G11 rotating chamber. I was thinking if you had a normal magazine and normal chamber?

My point is the g11 was a bad design. A modern design could fix most issues

In reply toRe: msg 3
Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

20-Jan

The Firearm Blog has stories about the Textron caseless guns. There are animations of how they work.  Less complicated than the G11, but not quite AR/AK level.

In reply toRe: msg 3
Red7272

From: Red7272

20-Jan

smg762 said:

My point is the g11 was a bad design. A modern design could fix most issues

it was intended for 1800 rpm with a square flat sided round. The design was fine for the purpose. 

Red7272

From: Red7272

20-Jan

Farmplinker said:

The Firearm Blog has stories about the Textron caseless guns. There are animations of how they work.  Less complicated than the G11, but not quite AR/AK level.

They still don't seal the chamber like an AK does. Polymer cases with conventional guns and round  shape might be the idea for a while yet.

In reply toRe: msg 3
DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

20-Jan

You have no standing to claim the G11 was a bad design.

In reply toRe: msg 3
renatohm

From: renatohm

20-Jan

If you read carefully, Schatz repeatedly points to issues that are 'gun agnostic'.

That's why CT and poly / hybrid cases are closer to adoption than CL.

In reply toRe: msg 3
JPeelen

From: JPeelen

20-Jan

smg762 said:

My point is the g11 was a bad design. A modern design could fix most issues

Can you name any "better" designs for caseless ammunition?  Did anybody seriously try? How could "modern" designs in your view overcome the general problems that a caseless design poses? 

While Jim Schatz doubtless has many valid points  in his criticism, what disturbes me is that over many years as a HK representative he had no qualms to actively promote the G11 design as the future way to go. 

In my view what counts is that Bundeswehr a least tried to do something new, something in the revolutionary tradition of the Dreyse needle rifle or the StG 44 assault rifle. Both had more enemies than proponents in the military establishment. This is a big step ahead compared to todays prevailing attitude: if it fits in an AR15/Ar10 action, it is automatically a wonder cartridge.                   

Edit: the blowups were due to carbon monoxide accumulating in the rather well sealed casing, finally violently reacting to create carbon dioxide. It had nothing to do with the rotating chamber as such. 

  • Edited 20 January 2021 18:34  by  JPeelen
renatohm

From: renatohm

20-Jan

the blowups were due to carbon monoxide accumulating in the rather well sealed casing, finally violently reacting to create carbon dioxide.

Wouldn't a less stringent sealing cause problems too?

TOP