[kannonfyre]

The world has been using rifles fed by metal cartridges for about 130 years already and the latest generation of bull pup weapons seems to be following this trend.

Any ideas about when we'll be using caseless ammo?

Any predictions about when we'll eschew projectile weapons for energy weapons? How far along are we to reliable and effective caseless ammo?

[Badger Arms]

Funny how the Germans are always a few steps ahead. Caseless had been tried and failed. There is no mechanical reason why caseless ammo is superior. Mechanically, the need to extract and eject misfires and the need to unload the chamber without pulling the trigger make an extraction/ejection mechanics necessary. Caseless ammo gave the promise that it could eliminate these parts, but reality is that you have duds anyhow. We'll stick with Brass and Steel for a while. I seriously doubt that anything will replace the case. Perhaps plastic or aluminum cases.

Bullpups are a compromise weapon. Many modern guns are bullpups, but the last large-scale bullpup was the AUG. Singapore, I believe, has said they will use a bullpup. Israel has said so also, but still shows a preference for the M-16 style gun.

The next move to look for will be a rework of the 5.56 cartridge to increase lethality. We aren't going to ditch it anytime soon.

[Kor]

...is that when ejected, they carry a LOT of surplus heat out of the gun with them. Think back to the last time a smoking, red-hot cartridge case from your buddy's rifle leaped down the back of your shirt - and then think about how all that heat would be staying in the rifle, every time it was fired, getting even hotter and hotter with every round fired, if it weren't carried out by the cartridge case.:uhoh: It's not that big a deal with a gun that has a slow rate of fire, like a bolt-/lever-action rifle, but a gun that will be rapid-fired in semi-auto or full-auto NEEDS to get rid of the excess heat via the cartridge cases.

[Marko Kloos]

The advantages of caseless are less bulk and weight per round, making for high capacity and lightweight loaded magazines.

The problems, as discovered by HK and others, are increased chance of cook-offs, and lack of thermal transfer outside the gun via ejected brass (as pointed out). It's a neat idea, and we'll get it to work sometime in the future, but for now the disadvantages of caseless ammo are not outweighed by its advantages.

[Nightcrawler]

You're not going to see anything resembling a practical energy weapon, one that could be carried by an individual soldier, anytime soon. I've researched it quite a bit. Most of what you see in movies is just Hollywood nonsense. Real lasers and particle beams, and also plasma weapons, would be excessively complex and we simply don't have the technology to power something like that in a package small enough for a soldier to carry.

[El Tejon]

kannon, we're a lifetime (70-80 years) away from any change in current ammunition.

There is a strong built-in resistance to CDI/"Iwannacoolgunvirus" in the militree. Any new idea must be inherently suspect as something that does not work can get people seriously killed.

All kinds of goofy stuff gets built here in my state. A fraction of that finds its way into service and as it goes through the militree funnel.

The "Iwannacoolgunvirus" antidote of reality (and REMF inertia), coupled with inane federal legislation that interferes with tinkering and experimentation which is vital to scientific advancement, will prevent any radical change for decades if not a century or more.

[gun-fucious]

i wonder when we will see a polymer/aramid matrix case

[kannonfyre]

Just as WWI brought crew served machine guns into wide usage and WWII ushered in the birth of the assualt rifle, do you guys think that a non-nuclear WWIII or a pan european war will result in technological breakthroughs in rifle cartridge technology or even new service weapon design?

[UnknownSailor]

I've always wondered how the H&K G11 would have fared in service. Too bad re-unification made it too expensive to adopt.

[Badger Arms]

It wan't re-unification that caused the death of the G-11, it was a failed design from the onset. The lockwork of the gun was a dizzying array of levers, cams, stampings, moldings, millings, and crunchintinky things that were supposed to reliably feed claymation ammo into a recoiling barrel at 1600 RPM while twisting it through 90 degrees on each of two axis... My God, they got THAT CONTRAPTION to shoot a few times. They were good. Imagine taking that monster into battle?

Mr. Grapevine:
The "Iwannacoolgun" condition is not a virus. The resistance of the US Military Brass to change is what caused thousands of Marines to die carrying the inferior M1903 rifle when they could have had Garands. It caused the death of many a soldier in Korea who could have had an improved Garand in the M-14 if they'd gotten off their stalwart behinds and worked on the situation. In excess, the Iwannacoolgun condition is what gave us an untest, inferior design with the AR-15 and prevented us from replacing it with POTENTIALLY better designs like the AR-18 and Stoner 63. Stoner himself questioned why they stuck with the 5.56x45 cartridge he designed and felt it should have been improved in some ways before production. It was a demonstration round. It still needs refinement.

Without "Cool Guns" We wouldn't have any of the following improvements -- each lambasted by someone like you in the past. I'll list them in order leaving out a few my memory will certainly not allow me to recall:
1) The caplock musket required expensive precussion caps that would increase the logistical burden on the soldier.
2) The Rifle was slow to load and encouraged aimed fire which was against the doctrine of the time: Massed fire.
3) Breech loaders required expensive metalic cartridges.
4) Repeating rifles were too expensive to produce during war.
5) The Garand in .276 required a caliber reduction and was intolerable.
6) The boat-tailed 30-06 ammo went too far... we need a flat based so we don't have to redesign our ranges. (oh my gosh how ludicrous)
7) The FAL is inferior to a gun that is based on the Garand.

Okay, I'm bored. El Tejon, do you plan on taking a flintlock smoothbore into battle? At what point do you say, "I want a NEW gun?"

[GooseGestapo]

gun-fucious;

Bought any shotgun shells in past, oh, 35 years or so? (plastic/metal)
How about any CCI Blazers ?? (aluminum)

Several years back (actually 15+) a company brought out some .38spl that were polymer/metal case headed ammo. It was reloadable with bullets similar to the CVA powerbelt bullets- the bullet snapped into the case by an extension with a groove(ok, a small knob). Power was limited to nominal .38spl. ballistics due to materials.
The heat and pressure of high pressure/energy ammo limits material choices. The latest developments always seem to be adaptations of "old" developments -such as the GE minigun using "Gatling" gun technology. I expect to see amazing developments over the rest of my life span, but most will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Such as new .17rimfire using old/new developments such as polymer tipped (ballistic tip/ v-max) bullets and new powders (Hodgdon 'Lilgun).

[Riphalman]

Agree, the current battle cartridge could use a little tweaking. No mention of the 7.62x39? Old and outdated. Outlived it's usefulness....or still a viable alternative?

[Correia]

Badger Arms! BRAVO! :D

[Kharn]

that were supposed to reliably feed claymation ammo into a recoiling barrel at 1600 RPM while twisting it through 90 degrees on each of two axis...

The G11 only rotates the ammo 90 degrees through one axis when inside the spinning chamber:
http://www.hkpro.com/image/g11feed.jpg
http://www.hkpro.com/g11.htm

Kharn

[Badger Arms]

Agree, the current battle cartridge could use a little tweaking. No mention of the 7.62x39? Old and outdated. Outlived it's usefulness....or still a viable alternative?Well, it certainly has a place in Kalashnikov's heart. He still feels it superior to the 5.45x39 and 5.56x45 rounds. As for me, I don't think it has the Ballistic Coefficient to act effectively as a suppression weapon. It also lacks penetration. You can defeat the 7.62x39 with most body armor, helmets, and modern equipment. The SS109 round offers penetration superior to, IIRC, any small arms ammo available.

When we limit our discussion to LIKELY ammo, we have to stick to three cartridges. These are the 5.56x45, 5.45x39, and the 7.62x39. In all likelyhood, the latter is unlikely to succeed. The American round needs to be able to penetrate well AND incapacitate when fired from a 14" 1-in-7" twist barrel in cold weather at high altitude and 300 yards. The SS-109 will NOT do that. Strangely, the Russian round will despite the lower power.

Kahrn: You are correct, I was confusing it with the FN-90. Here's the mechanism I was speaking of:


http://www.hkpro.com/image/g11bolt.jpg

WOWWIE!!! Now check out this video and watch the gun jump off the shooter's shoulder after each 'burst!" Oh yeah, and pay attention to how awkward the reloading cycle is. Not exactly my idea of a practical weapon. Compare to the second link with is the HK G36 firing.

G11 firing, jumping, and frustrating the poor soldier. (http://boards.hkpro.com/video/G11-1-128.mpg)
G36 firing sequence. This guy looks relaxed and happy. (http://boards.hkpro.com/video/G36.MOV)

[cheygriz]

I believe that in the next 20-30 years we will see chrome lined ceramic barrels and plastic cased ammo.

To enhance penetration, I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of high velocity discarding sabot round appeared, made from either depleted uranium like the tank shells, or another dense metal harder than lead.

Perhaps a .14 or .17 caliber in a .223 sabot, with enough velocity to achiece it's lethality from velocity alone.

Much will depend opn the advancements in gunpowders. If the chemical companies can develop a powdewr that will drive the M855 ball bullet the same velocity from a 14 inch barrel that a M193 ball bullet gets from a 24 inch barrel, the problem will be solved for a couple of decades.

[Badger Arms]

CheyGriz:

It would be nice to have the advantages of the disposing sabot in a rifle but many factors preclude this. These rounds have been tried and abandoned. The main reason is that they are inaccurate. There is no way to get the sabot to detach in a repeatable, consistant manner. It is also CRITICAL that the projectile be perfectly ballanced and perfectly centered in the sabot. These things are impossible. Rifles accomplish this by squishing and cutting the bullets to fit the bore. Sabot rounds have unreliable terminal effects also. In tests, some rounds 'fish-hooked' dumping their energy quickly and effectvely. Other rounds punched tiny holes completely through the target. A final reason I'll relate is that the disposed pieces of the sabot cause injury to friendly forces nearby.

Ceramic barrels? Not likely. We already have steel-lined Graphite barrels that are light, strong, accurate, and dissipate heat better than steel. We'll likely stick with steel for the time being.

Gunpowders are not going to advance any time soon. They don't need to. Modern gunpowders are capable of creating unsafe pressures and velocities in modern firearms. Within the limits of these firearms, powders are at their best now.

[Onslaught]

I'm sure it's a LOOONG time coming, but my guess would be that the "linear electromagnetic accelerator" (Rail gun) will be the "next big thing" that finally replaces metallic cartridges... This type of weapon propels a solid "rail" or long, skinny nail-like projectile at incredible speed using electromagnetic propulsion.

http://home.insightbb.com/~jmengel4/rail/rail-intro.html
http://www.powerlabs.org/railgun.htm

They already exist, but they fill a room the size of an airplane hangar. (TLC Rocks!)

[El Tejon]

Badger, just make sure the "new gun" works before you take it to war. See, e.g., the M16, the SA, etc., inter all other cool guns.:p

The "Iwannacoolgunvirus" is when looks trump substance. It's deadly. "Cool guns" have gotten a whole mess of people killed seriously dead. (Yes, there's an inverse, see, e.g., the Henry rifle. The Civil War could have been over sooner if my ancestors would have shot down Cledus and Jasper with these instead of frontstuffers and lives would have been saved).

I'm all for innovation, even the goofy stuff coming out a few counties to my south. However, let's make sure it works. If this means more money for R&D and less for the sofasitters/mouthbreathers, that's a bonus.:D