Army Testing German Rifle?

H

Hard Ball

New member
I picked up an interesting rumor during a recent trip to Washington DC. The Army is procurring a small lot of H&K G36 rifles for evaluation. The G36 is the new .223 caliber rifle adopted by the German Army in 1996.
 
the U.S. Military tests all new Military Rifles that com out. so the H&K G36 giting into the testing is not new.

------------------
US NAVY SEALs HOOYAH!!!!!!!!
 
The Joint Small Arms tests at Benning in the early '90s pretty much ruled out a new cartridge firing rifle. The results were that nothing made much of a difference in hits out to 300m. The movers were very difficult with the rifles provided. This is one reason that the bursting munitions concept is ahead of the pack.

Scary thought - I *think* the M16 series is just a couple of years from becoming the longest issued rifle. IIRC, the Springfield lasted over 30 but under 40 years. Anybody got the facts?

Giz
 
The Army ordinance board has it's head so far up its...

If they were actualy, suddenly, smart enough to procure the G36, I'd die of a heart attack.

Someday soon I expect to see the M16A6. A more delicate version with more parts, more optics mounts and semi-only.
 
I thought the M-16 already held that record.
Either way - no standing army today has such an old and crappy weapon...

(Flame suit on!) :D
 
Want another one?

The US helped Israel develope the Galil. Not just $$, manufacturing know-how and reverse engineering of the Kalishnikov.

I did not have any big problems with the M16A2s, the M16A1s were worn slap out. My M60s were on the edge of reliability, but my M2 HB .50 cals (none made after 1952) had very few problems. The M249s were decent replacements for the M16 in the SAW role, but could not hold a zero. Hmmmmmmmmm

Steel, walnut and a Browning design holding up - aluminum and plastic not doing too well. Is this a trend? :D

Giz
 
The M249 in its original verion with the gas selector that allowed 1100 RPMs was a much better gun that the new version that only allows a standard rate of fire...
But yeah - I was just talking about that today regarding the M2 - NO ONE is even THINKING of replacing the Mighty Ma Duece!

John Browning... Good Guy.
 
If we need to replace the 16 with something better why not replace the 50 cal. with someting better. Just a thought.

Have a good day.

Turk
 
The only change I could think of would be adding the fixed headspace and timing kit that FN makes.

Some of the South African HMGs look good, but the M2 IS good. Why change?

Giz
 
Giz,

A HMG the size or smaller than the M2 but firing a 20 or 30mm round would be much more effective on hard and soft targets.

It's hard for me to believe with todays technolodgy one couldn't be developed.

Anyone know what the Bradley has as its main gun?

Turk
 
Bradley's have M242 Chainguns firing 25x173(? on the length). Great gun, but big. They have a mounting that fits on a hummer. They also have a 30mm gun, called the ASP. Fires the same medium velocity round as the M230 chaingun on the Apache, and fits on a M2 tripod. Both of these are big, and are not really manportable, but they are more effective. FN tried to market a 15mm MG a couple years ago, no sales. When the multipurpose ammo like Mk211 Raufoss came out, the market for something new went away. 50 caliber is better than 20mm or 23mm past something like 600m due to it's better ballistic shape. You can also carry more rounds. Modern body armour makes HE much smaller than 30mm pretty useless vs troops IMO, and so there is no advantage to 20 and 25mm low and medium velocity guns. And the long barreled door knockers like the M242 are big and heavy, due to recoil. But they do have effective Sabot rounds. TANSTAAFL. You want performance, you have to pay for it with size. Semper Fi...Ken
 
Ken,

Your post makes a lot of sense.

Things change over time I've used Ball, AP and Incendary in an M2 and I did a quick search of the Mk211 round has a zirconium penetrator??? what ever that is.

very informative post.

Turk

"""armour-piercing incendiary ammunition is the new Mk211 Raufoss round that uses a zirconium penetrator to ignite flammable material after impact and explosion at the target."""
 
Zirconium is a standard compound in many munitions, the APAM, CEM and a few other submunitions use for increased incendiary effects.

EchoFiveMike, body armor does reduce the effects of frag, but arms, legs and faces are not normally protected. Also some of the newer munitions, the frag is designed to penetrate body armor. The salesmen for the 20 mm OICW round take body armor with them to all the conferences to show the holes in the armor from the test firings of the airbursts. Also against armor, 50 cals lose effective killing capability after several hundred meters. KE has just drop off to much too penetrate. Larger rounds with shape charges since they don't rely of velocity are as effective from the point of arming till they hit their Max range. A hit on a BMP3 at extended range with a 50 will only suppress. A hit at extended range with a 25 mm HE/DP will have some good effects.



[This message has been edited by STLRN (edited September 13, 2000).]
 
Also, the Mk211 rounds has a C-4 (incorrectly noted in the TM as A-4) pellet behind the penetrator, to cause a post penetration explosion when it hits a harder targets
 
One of the other things that the M2 allows you to do is dismount the gun. That is a flexibility advantage that the 20/25/30 mm guns do not have.

Interesting to see that the "Raufuss" (SP?) was type classified. Viewed some literature on it when the EOD guys were getting Barretts and was impressed. Are the rounds being loaded in belts for the M2?

Giz
 
I hate to beat a subject to death, but why not repeal the stupid gun control laws, and let the garage machinists come up with the innovative designs they always have served our country with. If their ideas aren't wholly accepted, many times parts of their ideas are. My gripe about many modern weapon systems are that they are uncomfortable to carry. My M16 was moderately comfortable, but an AK sucks to lug around. IMHO the M1 Carbine was the best carry weapon, and second would be the Garand. The carbine was weak, but I'd like to see some work on the garand concept. Steel and wood are nice, but with all the new manufacturing techniques and newer metalurgy, seems like we could bring the concept back. The M14 was a failure due to good intentions. They didn't improve on the Garand, they just modified it and made it heavier. You sometimes can committee a great design into a POS. I dunno. I just feel confident in the big ol'e hunka steel. The 5.56 is just a mite weak. Even with good hits, the soon to be departed don't usually go down like they do with 7.62. I like the dead to stay dead.
As for Ma Duece, what's to improve? That's a mighty formidable foe. I love the M2, and so do most guys when their getting attacked by a hind D!
 
Personally I don't think there's any pressing need to replace the M16. It's a fine weapon that is very versatile and I just don't see the G36 or anything else out there right now that is worthy to replace it.
 
y'all have heard of the OCSW, haven't 'cha?

OCSW The design forms part of the Objective Family of Small Arms, which includes the
Objective Individual Combat Weapon,a personal weapon, a sniper weapon, and other
mission-specific types. The OCSW is planned to replace most of the US Army's M2 0.50-caliber
(12.7mm) heavy machine guns and MkE19 grenade launchers, and may also succeed a
proportion of the M60 machine guns.
http://www.securityarms.com/20000911/galleryfiles/693.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top