HK G11 caseless ammo + 2,100 rds/sec - AMAZING RIFLE

[wacki]

http://www.hkpro.com/g11.htm

This is from 1980, why aren't we using this? What is wrong with it? It's amazing, the 3 round burst sounds like a single shot.



Video included!!!!!!!!

[PSE]

i'd say #1 cost, #2 HK rifles are not produced domestic, #3 cost!

[wacki]

The MP5's the Navy uses is made domestic. The OICW the US might be buying is HK as well, they are going to build a factory in the US.

Cost? The gun has fewer moving parts and the ammunition doesn't require brass. I'm not so sure cost was the problem. Maybe the cost of replacing all of our M-16's was a problem.... Still this is one amazing weapon.

[shaggy]

As I recall, the ammo is not waterproof. At least not enough to meet mil spec. The caseless ammo is a neat idea, but IIRC there were problems with the ammo and making it reliable after being soaked or submerged in water for any extended period of time.

[Warbow]

Weren't there problems with overheating, or something?

[shaggy]

Ther may have ben overheating problems, but I seem to remember the caseless ammo as the major problem behind the G11. I actually have the issue of SOF from the late 1970's/early 1980's where it was featured, buried in storage somewhere - I'll have to see if I can find it next time I clean out the garage.

[Jseime]

i heard the gun got so hot they had rounds going off in the chamber i could be wrong but thats what i was told

[MLC]

My understanding was that HK entered the G11 in NATO small arms and ammunition trials in the mid-late 70's.
That is when the first problems arose in their prototype g11's.
The trials resulted in the adoption of the Belgian SS109 and the onset of the M-16A2 in the US, the FAMAS in Frenchyland and the L85 in the UK etc.
Germany was rightfully unwilling to replace their 7.62's with the 5.56.
Their plan was to iron out the bugs in the G11 and adopt it in the late 80's/early 90's. The reunification of Germany is basically what sunk the G11's adoption as an issued military rifle. With the cash strapped East German Army needing to be brought up to speed Germany looked to HK for a cheaper 5.56 rifle and ended up with the G-36.
*edit with an apology for hinting at 5.56vs7.62*

[Marko Kloos]

MLC is correct...the unification of Germany cost a lot of money and blessed the German military with a few hundred thousand surplus AKs.

We got to field test the G11 in 1989, and the intention was to introduce it as the German MBR for front-line units. The unification came in 1990, and that was that. It was a way cool concept, easy to shoot well.

[Handy]

The MP5's the Navy uses is made domestic.

And where was this happening? In a van, down by the river? (Hint: HK has, to this day, no US production facilities).

[smince]

Slightly off-topic: I seem to remember a "Police Official" stating that 'we need to do something about caseless ammunition. We will not be able to tell what someone was shot with!' (?)

Could be political?

[PSE]

cost can show its face in a number of ways. from the actual price of replacing the M-16 that are being pumped out here in columbia SC, to replacing the magazine holders on the web gear. everything that has anything to do w/ the 16 would have to be changed. BFA'a, armory racks, cleaning kits, slings, basic training manuals, PMI's would have to be retrained, ect., ect.
you cant just toss a new rifle to the troops and expect them to march on.
look how that turned out when the 16 was introduced. and it was FAR less radical than the caseless monster.
the tendancy nowdays is to lab test and call something viable. you can freeze caseless ammo w/o problems, yes, but what happens when you take frozen caseless in a mag while fighting in an arctic climate and shove it into a hot weapon?
we have no shortage of fine cartridges in this world, what we CAN use is some fine weapons to shoot them out of.

[too many choices!?]

That would make the ultimate close quarters assault rifle!!!!!!!!!! I read on the "net" somewhere that it can make one ragged hole on the 3round burst setting out to 100yds or so!! If the ammo concerns could be ironed out it could make a great main battle rifle design. The idea of a two shot string(two shots can't really be a burst...and three would be a waiste)of 308 or 6.5mm hitting at or really close to the same point of impact out to 100yds is awesome.

The reasons the U.S doesn't have one of these in poduction yet are numerous but I can't miss an opportunity to point a finger at the OICW program and what will now be the M8(xm8).
The m8 will not require a major redesign of the training program we use like the G11 would. New maintanance/field stripping, new layout of controls and all the other familiarization with a new weapons system from scratch(figuring out how to" grunt proof "it like the early m-16).This totally futuristic rifle(even by todays standards) that has been here sice the late 70's is probably the future. .

When I frist heard of the G11 and its amazing abilities I thought it was a revolutionary new design and after a little research found out that different working incarnations of it existed since the 80's and was blown away !

[Handy]

The G11, an M-16 firing duplex ammo and an AUG variant already competed with more standard M-16s back in the late '80s ACR program. The rifle did well, but the military wanted a certain percentage GAIN in combat accuracy over the standard rifle. The G11 was better, but not by the amount of required improvement. Having seen that such an improvement, even with 3000 rpm bursts, wasn't feasible, DOD killed the program.

[Telperion]

I'd have to argue with the "fewer moving parts" point:



Also, the high cyclic rate applies only the the 3-round burst. The action sort of internally recoils, and it has to slow down for sustained automatic fire.