$ ammo = resurrect caseless ammo?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Apple a Day

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,057
Location
Virginia
Will the rising price of metals eventually resurrect caseless ammo technology?
Okay, so the cases take a lot of the heat with them which helps prevent build-up and heat damage in rapid firing. That cuts down on the practicality of common military applications but does anyone see future applications in specialized hunting/target ammo where few shots are fired?
What do you think? Could caseless hunting ammo or pistol ammo become a "sexy" trend in the future?
 
Not without military financial help in it's development. I don't think law enforcement would be all that much $$ help. Ammo would have to get real expensive for that to happen.
 
I think you'll see someone try alternative case material, like the polymer ones we've seen in the past, before we see caseless ammo for the consumer market.
 
The least likely place you will ever see caseless ammunition would be hunting or precision target shooting. These guys are handloading all their ammunition. Well, the serious ones are at least.
 
Renewed Interest....

I could see the high price of ammo generating renewed interest in caseless ammo for government military use.

The problem with getting caseless ammo adapted is the incompatibility issue with most modern firearms.

There are two issues associated with caseless ammo in existing firearms.
First, ignition. the firing pin would likely have to be replaced with a spark plug. Unless the primer and powder could be encapsulated in a material that will burn itself during firing but behave like the primer surface during firing.
Second, Most existing firearms rely on the case to expand into the chamber and seal the bolt breech interface. With caseless every shot would behave like a case head separation.

There are a few hurdles to going caseless, some benefits, some trade offs, We might be at that point in time where the switch makes sense. Perhaps in the coming decades cased ammo will be seen in the same light as muzzle loaded firearms.
 
I've read about the action of the G11.

It was nightmarish.

Since there is no brass case to obturate and seal the action, the G11 must use carbon sealing wipes, described (vaguely) as being not unlike the rotor tips used in Mazda wankel engines. Furthermore, the whole action appears to recoil inside the stock (a little like the AN-94), rounds must be rotated from the perpendicular magazine, et cetera ad nauseam.

Oh, and to prevent cookoff, the ammo had to be made out of denatured hexogen, rather than the more familiar nitrocellulose/nitroglycerine propellants we're familiar with. I can't see that being good for costs either.

I would say, therefore, that G11 technology being revived as a way to reduce the cost of ammo to civilian shooters is slim to none. That it was an HK product is a final and rather gratuitous nail in that coffin.

The 6mm caseless voere technology might be a better place to start, but those rifles haven't exactly jumped off the shelves. I suppose they did get the VPC to throw a hissy fit (about untraceable ammo or something, since apparently murderers never use revolvers), but then that's hardly difficult.

I think the best place to start would be with a plinker in the .22 LR class. Instead of going whole-hog caseless, burying the propellant in the bullet ala the volcanic system might be the ticket. Low power and crummy bullet BCs aren't so much a concern if you're just plinking.
 
I'm with Jorg on this one.... you'll see plastic cases again long before someone tries to reinvent the wheel. Besides, there's no savings if we all have to buy new guns to shoot the new, cheap ammo!

It actually makes a lot of sense. The chamber provides support to the forward part of the cartridge, so why does it need to be made of brass anyhow? The bases, of course, need to be made of metal to support the primer and facilitate extraction.

Anyone have any idea how this worked out when it was tried in the past?

They wouldn't be reloadable... but if they're cheap, who cares?
 
It actually makes a lot of sense. The chamber provides support to the forward part of the cartridge, so why does it need to be made of brass anyhow? The bases, of course, need to be made of metal to support the primer and facilitate extraction.

Anyone have any idea how this worked out when it was tried in the past?

Plastic works just fine for shotgun shells. Seems with some adaptation it'd work just fine for other stuff as well.
 
Out of box thinking again:

Why does everyone assume you need a priming method consisting of a cup, composition, and anvil? Or electric ignition.

A pellet of priming composition set in a recess in the base of the molded "powder" stick and covered with a thin layer of combustible plastic (painted over with nitrocellulose?) might do the trick. No cup or anvil to get rid of on firing. Firing pin just punches the composition under the thin layer and sets it off.

(Sealing the firing pin might be a problem, but it is anyhow. And with open-bolt fixed firing pin methods of ignition, as in some submachine guns, it wouldn't be a problem at all.)

Okay, let's hear the "impossibilities."

Go.
 
Last edited:
this might sound crazy, but im seriously hoping hard that the cost of ammo will cause the price of blackpowder to go way down and become wildly popular.

perhaps even flintlocks! no need for percussion cap... just flash powder, black powder, a bit of cloth, and a lead ball.
 
I suggest that we will see polymer cased ammo sooner rather than later, in fact kinda surprised we have not seen it yet. Also it dawned one me why only use Steel or Brass for casing why not Aluminum is it just too soft?
 
It'd be quite possible to do semi-caseless ammo that's constructed much like (rimless) miniature low-brass shotshells, without the plastic. The brass base would obturate enough to seal, and if the designer plays their cards right, it would hopefully be able to "push through" like in the G11 action. The chamber'd be self-cleaning then, too! Friction could be a problem, but if high-ignition propellants aren't good enough to prevent cookoffs, could do a polymer case. Then you would basically have mini-shotshells, except with a subcaliber bullet encased in propellant.

I don't see caseless ever being that popular on the civilian market, but for military it'd be great. Increased complexity of the ammunition means they wouldn't actually save any money in the short run, but less metal would considerably decrease the weight (the cartridge case is about half the weight for most calibers) as well as some of the bulk, allowing the individual soldier to carry more ammo, and allowing more ammo to fit in a given size and weight crate.

Personally, I'd like to see the XM29 OICW project scrapped, and replaced with a caseless weapon system. The M16/M4 platform is fine for now, and its replacement should offer a huge advantage, in proportion to the huge cost of phasing in a new weapon system. That would be a logistical nightmare. 20mm airburst grenades do not, in my opinion, offer such an advantage. A 40mm "bounding" grenade like the Russian VOG-25P would probably perform just as well, given adequate training. But caseless would have a big enough advantage over the current system. Especially a caseless 6.5mm cartridge, about 120 gr at 2500 fps or so...
 
Why about a controlled burnrate cellulose casing, that flash burned after doing it's job? Anybody tried that?
 
Quote:
Galil.556: Daisy VL flop, no thanks.

What was so bad about it?

Nothing I guess for a quirky, low powered, compressed air ignition, low acceptance rifle that was on the market for maybe 2 years? If it's not convenient, and performs at least as well as what it replaces it's a dead duck. Along these same unconventional lines, is that electronix (sp) system from Remington still around? Even with a conventional case, folks just don't like to change a good thing, i.e. use electricity to ignite a primer when a firing pin has done the job for over 100 years.

An air jet ignited propellant ain't gonna fly, neither IMO do I think people will accept a lump of propellant stuck to a bullet aside from muzzle loading. About the best I think we can do is have a consumable case with an obturating base section, ala M1 Abrams ammo. Even that would seem to be a nightmare, only slightly better than figuring out a reliable and safe mechanism that will obturate using truly caseless ammo in a true "Hi Power" type psi application.

As much as we might hate paying higher prices, metallic cartridge case based small arms ammunition is here to stay cause it's thoroughly proven, reliable to ridiculous levels, and works too damn good.
 
When will someone just do away with ammo, and make a laser blaster like Han Solo had.
All we need to do is resolve the energy crisis.
Imagine... silent (real ones probably won't make that funny sound), clean firing, no reloading. 5Mw out of my hand... priceless.
 
Why couldn't you make the base from brass (like a low-wall shotgun shell) and embed the charge into it? Plug the bullet into the top, and away you go. You would still have a small amount of brass to eject - maybe 15% of what you use now. Reloaders would be able to do their thing by buying charges (pre-molded in various weights) and re-fixing them into re-primed brass bases. You could change bullet weights in the field, just by unscrewing the bullet, and screwing in a different one...
 
A pellet of priming composition set in a recess in the base of the molded "powder" stick and covered with a thin layer of combustible plastic (painted over with nitrocellulose?) might do the trick. No cup or anvil to get rid of on firing. Firing pin just punches the composition under the thin layer and sets it off.

I believe the anvil is necessary because the priming compound needs to be pinched between two hard pieces of metal. I don't think that making a priming system in the manner you describe is impossible, however, it would probably require new priming compounds, however.

My pet idea for an ignition system is to use a conventional hammer that smacks a big slab of piezoelectric material, with the resultant charge being used to ignite the propellant. It's electronic ignition, but without the batteries. If you're feeling clever, put piezoelectric primers in conventional brass cases with the wire leads sticking into the powder area. To reload, just put in new powder and a bullet; there's no need to put in a new primer. Since the primer can be made integral to the case, and of arbitrary thickness, you might be able to run at higher pressures too.
 
I believe the anvil is necessary because the priming compound needs to be pinched between two hard pieces of metal.

An unwarranted assumption. Some fiddle-de-de might be necessary (nitrogen iodide as a component?), but I'll bet a pellet of regular old priming composition would go off by being smacked between two pieces of plastic... presumably combustible. And I think a molded propellant with the primer pellet stuck in the base and covered over with a thin layer of combustible coating would go off.

Don't forget that in current practice, a lot of the approximately 12 in-oz of firing pin energy (minimum for .22LR, IIRC) has to go into deforming the primer cup --or rim.

If such a molded/integral primer "cartridge" were built, I'll bet it wouldn't be too hard to arrange matters so they could be used in a conventional firearm with few modifications except maybe for sealing the firing pin hole in the breech face.... maybe with a rollsock arrangement.


If you're feeling clever, put piezoelectric primers in conventional brass cases with the wire leads sticking into the powder area. To reload, just put in new powder and a bullet; there's no need to put in a new primer. Since the primer can be made integral to the case, and of arbitrary thickness, you might be able to run at higher pressures too.

Kind of obviates the purpose-- to reduce brass consumption. Actually, I wonder if such a method might ultimatately be "shrinkified" to fit in a regular primer pocket. Somebody (I forget who, but someone will jump in with correct data) now has a battery-operated system for firing BP guns. I wonder if it can double as a Tazer...heh.

And actually, the biggest problem I see with respect to caseless ammo is clearing after a misfire or decision to unload the arm, not the technology of manufacture or adaptability to conventional firearms.

(Aside): Many moons ago Herter's had an all-plastic shotgun shell --all pretty transparent blue polycarbonate, but you still had to use a standard 209 in the rear, and you couldn't crimp them, you had to use top wads with a slight roll crimp.. I reloaded them a couple of times, then kind of let it go, since I had plenty of AAs around anyhow. However, the pressure levels in shotguns is much less (what, around 25,000 "psi"?) than in a modern rifle... but it's close to pistol pressures, so maybe full plastic cartridges are a possibility for handguns. I think the .45ACP standard pressure is around 15,000 "psi," if I recall correctly. And Speer used to make plastic cases for firing plastic practice bullets at low (primer only) pressures.

Here's a gun what don't use no cartridge case:
 

Attachments

  • 16 inch breech.jpg
    16 inch breech.jpg
    64.1 KB · Views: 49
If any cartridge is a good case for caseless, I'd say it is 22LR. No one reloads it and the pressures are low. The thermal extraction of the 22 case is also low. The only issue is obturation, which should be less of an issue with the low pressure round.

Considering the number of 22 rounds made every year, it would probably even be cost effective.

The VL worked - sort of. But we've got a 40 year advance on technology. Why not?
 
PercyShelley

Here's my thought for a 22 caseless. Put the priming compound on the heel of the bullet, and have the firing ping strike the bullet at the waist. The 'primer' is part of the projectile and gets expelled. The propellant is consumed.

Conversely, you could put the primer in the base of the bullet, and use a long pin (a la needle gun) that passes through a hole in the propellant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top