|
JaucheCharly posted:Will there be assault weapons with caseless ammunition on a large scale any time soon? AFAIK people were seriously looking into this during the cold war (hence the G11's genesis) but now there's just no point. Current ammunition works great and there's no real incentive to do anything else so it seems unlikely.
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:Will there be assault weapons with caseless ammunition on a large scale any time soon? Not. There's way too much 5.56, 5.45, and 7.6x39mm floating around for a wide-scale adoption of a entirely new cartridge and rifle to be cost-effective. Caseless ammo doesn't offer a quantum leap in capability relative to the costs of completely equipping land forces Post-Iraq, the US Army and Marines don't have the desire or a pressing need to adopt an entirely new round and rifle. Most European armies are cutting back and don't have the money to do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
The "problem" with cased ammunition is just weight right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:14
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Why is the Expeditionary Force in such a hurry? Is the command structure not aware of their relative strength compared to the Germans? I'm just shocked as to why they'd leave all their supplies behind, when they could probably just dig in somewhere and take the time to reload it. General Tighe (he of the bullet through the arse) has told Atiken that his boys just took one hell of a beating and can't possibly attack again without reinforcements. Without cavalry or air support, they've got no way of finding out how strong the German forces actually are; all they know is that Intelligence was dead wrong to suggest that Tanga had only a token defence (an assessment, incidentally, that was made back in August). They're also starting to run low on food and fresh water; apparently they were planning on appropriating all their immediate supply needs from Herr Dibbler. Also, whisper it, but I think Aitken might not be a very good soldier  He's a cavalryman whose pre-war rank was Colonel and last active service was as a subaltern in the Sudan in 1885 - he's been breveted to Major-General basically because he hasn't died yet, and he's ended up in command of this shitshow in much the same way that fate sent Frederick Stopford to Gallipoli.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Have they tried pairing the heatsinks with the bullets themselves? Might kill two birds with one stone that way. Maybe put it in some kind of case that ejects from the rifle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:Will there be assault weapons with caseless ammunition on a large scale any time soon? Maybe. Heckler & Koch still haven't given up on this: There's already a improved version of the G11, the G11K2, with improved mechanic, improved ergonomics and with the added ability to hold two additional ammunition clips. This means the regular G11K2 gives your 45 times 3 shots (135), which creeps closer to the light machine gun version with it's 300-shot clip. The really funny thing is, without the problems with thermal buildup and what happens if mud gets into that complicated mechanic, the G11-line of caseless weapons would be vastly superior to normal guns: The G11 was 50% more accurate in testing compared to the older G3, for example. (The G36 is essentially a compromise betwee reliability and better accuracy and falls somewhere inbetween.) The LMG11 is interesting, because it is rather light for a light machine gun, but still reaches the same performance as the M249 SAW. The only difference in performance except for the weight is a higher range, because the LMG11 is so light it can get away with having a heavier barrel and still be lighter then the SAW. Too bad all this high-tech makes both the G11 and LMG11 prohibitively expensive, but if you would give these weapons to a small team of highly trained elite soldiers capable of handling them despite their drawbacks, they could gently caress poo poo up pretty drat good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:Maybe put it in some kind of case that ejects from the rifle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The "problem" with cased ammunition is just weight right? "Just" weight, yes. Don't ever underestimate the importance of logistics, which is part of why major armies were keen to switch to 5.56mm and 5.45mm calibres despite the costs. With caseless ammunition you could also simplify weapon designs as there is no need to remove the spent cartridge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The "problem" with cased ammunition is just weight right? Combine what Nenonen and Libluini said and you've got an idea of the advantages. Caseless ammo, at least for the G11, was box-shaped which allows for more efficient stowage of ammo (cylinders leave gaps, boxes don't), the round was a bit shorter as well for the same overall performance, and the weight was less. All of that means more ammo can be carried and more of it can be stowed and packed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Caseless ammunition, if it became common, would be a wonderful throwback to pre-cartridge/paper cartridge days. You'd have to explain to kids why in all those 2D movies guns eject bits of brass to the side. Which, to be fair, is pretty much as good an understanding of how guns work as I've got, so I'm going with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:"Just" weight, yes. Don't ever underestimate the importance of logistics, which is part of why major armies were keen to switch to 5.56mm and 5.45mm calibres despite the costs. With caseless ammunition you could also simplify weapon designs as there is no need to remove the spent cartridge. Right, not trying to reduce the significance of the weight issue; the effort in moving the stuff, plus the limits your soldiers can physically carry (along with all the other poo poo they're packing along) obviously means weight reduction is a big deal. Which is especially important now that everyone seems to have settled in on "high volume of fire downrange to support manoeuvre" as the best way to do war. I just wanted to know if there's some other performance area where cased ammunition seriously under-performs (I guess raw rate of fire is one if the G11 can achieve such a high cyclic ROF).
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
It's maybe worth noting that H&K never really finished the G11 project: what with the Cold War ending, no army was going to shell out a ton of money for a new rifle since there was no longer any existential threat to justify it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Caseless ammo you say? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__4YPXE-KVE The Chassepot rocks because it's cartridges were wrapped in silk, making them both flame proof to an extent and cleaning out the barrel after each shot. edit: also that bayonet is so sexy Rabhadh fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
I think a lot of the rate of fire is because the inside of the gun is clockwork cancer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:It's maybe worth noting that H&K never really finished the G11 project: what with the Cold War ending, no army was going to shell out a ton of money for a new rifle since there was no longer any existential threat to justify it. They need to encase the clockwork mechanism in transparent plastic, steampunk enthusiasts would buy them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
For what its worth, we're thinking right now that the next generation (ie, 2025+) of small arms will have some sort of integrated fire control (ie, integrated range finder coupled with some sort of sensor network that "projects" an aimpoint to the shooter via an optical device) coupled with, most likely, larger caliber rounds fired from more or less traditional platforms. The generation after that (or perhaps in the same era) we're thinking that traditional firearms will be replaced by small guided projectiles ie WRIST MISSILES
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
bewbies posted:For what its worth, we're thinking right now that the next generation (ie, 2025+) of small arms will have some sort of integrated fire control (ie, integrated range finder coupled with some sort of sensor network that "projects" an aimpoint to the shooter via an optical device) coupled with, most likely, larger caliber rounds fired from more or less traditional platforms. The generation after that (or perhaps in the same era) we're thinking that traditional firearms will be replaced by small guided projectiles ie WRIST MISSILES Wasn't there some weirdo who bought Star Wars blaster rifle replicas, rebuild them with batteriepacks and laser diodes and then resold them for 10k bucks? Last I heard, those things could emit a laser burst hot enough to actually burn things, and those were just toys. Maybe laser rifles will be a part of the next generation? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Maybe laser rifles will be a part of the next generation? Like powered exoskeletons, it would take a quantum leap in battery tech. A low power laser specifically for blinding is more practical, but I think there are treaties and conventions against it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Wasn't there some weirdo who bought Star Wars blaster rifle replicas, rebuild them with batteriepacks and laser diodes and then resold them for 10k bucks? Everyone everywhere wants directed energy to be viable but it would take quite literally a revolutionary technology leap (like a vacuum tube -> transistor type thing) to get both power generation and heat dissipation to the point where the thing would be useful as a small arm. For reference there are a number of C-RAM laser demonstrators out and about and they have trouble generating a 50kW beam, barely enough to fry a mortar shell, using bigass truck mounted generators and other bigass truck mounted heatsinks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
You can totally do it with current laser technology, if you tie the enemy down James Bond style.Nenonen posted:They need to encase the clockwork mechanism in transparent plastic, steampunk enthusiasts would buy them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Like it or not the ol' venerable bullet is here to stay for a good long while.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Glass with a nice brass frame and it'd sell millions. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:54
|
|
Rabhadh posted:edit: also that bayonet is so sexy Seriously agree on this. I love that loving rifle too.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:You know, I am legit surprised the steampunk people aren't into my period. I mean, these are the people who invented the revolversword (whether the world needed it or not), why aren't the Dr. Who crowd more into that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
The technology exists to rob a bank with a handheld laser, who wants to be the first laser criminal?HEY GAL posted:You know, I am legit surprised the steampunk people aren't into my period. I mean, these are the people who invented the revolversword (whether the world needed it or not), why aren't the Dr. Who crowd more into that? Steampunk people like the idea of modern technology recreated with older means of power and precision, or just dumb things attached to other things. My understanding is that the main revolutionary power source in the 17th century was threatening captives with a flintlock instead of threatening them with a matchlock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Chamale posted:My understanding is that the main revolutionary power source in the 17th century was threatening captives with a flintlock instead of threatening them with a matchlock.  (Not threatening people, though, has not occurred to them.) HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Chamale posted:The technology exists to rob a bank with a handheld laser, who wants to be the first laser criminal? Surprisingly little cash in banks. The average bank robbery is only around $5000. Whereas if you invent a handheld laser the DoD would give you billions and maybe a medal if you ask nicely enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:Surprisingly little cash in banks. The average bank robbery is only around $5000. Whereas if you invent a handheld laser the DoD would give you billions and maybe a medal if you ask nicely enough. I mean one that would temporarily blind someone and be extremely painful, not something with a military application. Also I think there's an international convention forbidding the use of lasers to blind enemy soldiers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:You know, I am legit surprised the steampunk people aren't into my period. I mean, these are the people who invented the revolversword (whether the world needed it or not), why aren't the Dr. Who crowd more into that? Steampunk has as much to do with corsetry as clockwork in my experience. Also people just don't know what's good. Most fiction is a pale imitation of a watered down version of what happened in our world.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:Surprisingly little cash in banks. The average bank robbery is only around $5000. Whereas if you invent a handheld laser the DoD would give you billions and maybe a medal if you ask nicely enough. Obviously you just have to bring a laser powerful enough to melt a way through the vault door.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Arrath posted:Obviously you just have to bring a laser powerful enough to melt a way through the vault door. Now I want to see an Ocean's Eleven type movie where a plucky team of bank robbers builds a stationary laser underneath a bank vault, pretending to be workers installing a new heating system. Then they spend 1-2 days lazering their way through the vault from underground and steal everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:You know, I am legit surprised the steampunk people aren't into my period. I mean, these are the people who invented the revolversword (whether the world needed it or not), why aren't the Dr. Who crowd more into that? Lack of external power sources, coupled with general ignorance of the period would be my guess. Steampunk is all about what the world might be like if practical steam power was a thing, but not the internal combustion engine for some reason. That and gluing gears and nixie tubes onto things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
Arrath posted:Obviously you just have to bring a laser powerful enough to melt a way through the vault door. You'd be there a while. To keep it on topic, Mosler used to advertise about one of their bank vaults remaining intact after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
I've been scanning things.  This is one way a muster roll can look on the outside. It's really thin, like a hardback magazine. The binding is undyed leather with the title written on it in ink. The gold stamp is the coat of arms of the Electors of Saxony, it may be later but I don't know how much. The ribbons are black and gold, the colors of the Electors of Saxony, and I think they remained tied from the day this was filed until I opened them. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Maybe. Heckler & Koch still haven't given up on this: There's already a improved version of the G11, the G11K2, with improved mechanic, improved ergonomics and with the added ability to hold two additional ammunition clips. This means the regular G11K2 gives your 45 times 3 shots (135), which creeps closer to the light machine gun version with it's 300-shot clip.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Where do you get the idea the G36 is unreliable compared to the G3? It's what my instructors in the Bundeswehr told me. For one thing, it has the weird habit of breaking apart into pieces if you use it in close combat. The G3 was a lot hardier then that. The G36 tends to jam more often, too. According to anecdotal references (stories I heard), a G3 is a lot like the AK47, in that you could dunk it into deep mud, pull it out again and you could immediately shoot again without having to fear a jam. The G36, not so. It still works fine if you clean it regularly, is a lot more precise, has a higher firing rite and a far higher muzzle velocity, but it's not as reliable then the G3. The funny thing is, I was told the G36 uses standard-NATO ammunition, but has a higher muzzle velocity then all other NATO-rifles because it was developed just before some weird agreement forbidding the development of high velocity weapons of that kind. Apparently there's a medical phenomenon related to the shock to your nervous system if you get hit by a bullet. The higher the speed of the bullet when it hits, the worse the shock. If it gets over a certain treshold, it gets to the point where even light wounds can kill you because of the massive shock to your body. So the development of rifles with muzzle velocities above a certain point was forbidden. The bit with the higher bullet velocity is something I've read about many, many years ago and the rest is anecdotes by NCOs and officers, so take this with a grain of salt, please.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
It is probably fair to say the G36 is more finicky than the G3 but there's no practical difference in muzzle velocity/energy between any of the 5.56mm rifles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
bewbies posted:It is probably fair to say the G36 is more finicky than the G3 but there's no practical difference in muzzle velocity/energy between any of the 5.56mm rifles. Well, a bit of googling tells me there's apparently some sort of high velocity munition the G36 was developed for which can reach the necessary speed to kill people with nerve shocks. And the use of this ammunition is forbidden by the Geneva convention. On the other hand, for every source saying yes, this is how it works, I got a source claiming this is just a Bundeswehr-myth. So decide for yourself. On the close-combat issue I can attest with personal experience how easy it is to make the G36 just fall apart.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
By close combat do you mean good old "clubbing guys over the head" with it? Just curious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:53
|
|