Replacment for the M4
This is a discussion on Replacment for the M4 within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I got this article through the DoD website. It's pretty cool.
Submitted by Eric Daniel
Well, it looks as if the Army has again officially ...
February 8th, 2009 07:44 AM
Replacment for the M4
I got this article through the DoD website. It's pretty cool.
Submitted by Eric Daniel
Well, it looks as if the Army has again officially opened the can of worms that is the debate revolving around a replacement for the M16/M4. With this go around however, the Army says all limitations are off. They say they’re willing to consider any caliber, any operation system, and any configuration.
Given the Army’s track record with sticking with the M16/M4 through thick and thin, as well as the Army’s previous position that it would stick with the M4 until there was a “revolutionary” breakthrough in small arms technology (hand held death rays?) I’m taking this most recent statement with a salt lick, but in as much as they are soliciting ideas, I might as well offer up mine.
On its face, it would seem that there are only three real issues to consider; how big (in caliber) how many (bullets in the magazine) and how to crank it (what operating system do you go with.) Once you settle on those, putting them together is packaging. While there are any number of cartridges and operating systems that offer obvious advantages over the M16’s feeble 5.56mm bullet and wretched gas carrier key operating system, if you wanted a truly revolutionary replacement for the M4, I would put my money on the H&K G11.
For those of you not in the know (not that I am, but I remember when it was developed) the H&K G11 rifle was developed as a replacement for the 7.62mm G3 battle rifle in the 1970s. What the Germans wanted to develop was a weapon with a large ammunition capacity (50 rounds) low weight (< 10 pounds loaded) flat trajectory (no sight corrections at <300m) and a high degree of accuracy in 3-round burst mode.
To meet the burst accuracy requirement there were two ways to go, either fire projectiles simultaneously (shotgun shells or duplex rounds) or fire bullets very fast. The shotgun shell method was dropped because the bullets which would do the job not only generated too much recoil to be effective, but their size put them outside the round capacity requirement, so H&K went with the “shoot really, really fast” approach. This is where the G11 comes into its own as a revolutionary weapon.
H&K realized that the bigger the bullet, the more propellant it would require to drive it, and that propellant would be translated into not only recoil to be absorbed by the shooter but a loss of overall ammunition capacity in the magazine. One solution was to use a smaller bullet. The 4.73x33mm bullet developed for the G11 is smaller that the 5.56mm bullet currently used in the M16 but the high degree of accuracy with the G11 in burst mode makes the G11 as accurate firing 3 shots as the M16 firing one, so the combined effect on the target, with the G11, is greater.
The second issue was dealing with the recoil. As has been documented since the invention of the first shoulder-fired automatic weapons, felt recoil will bring the weapon off target, thus rendering accurate, aimed automatic fire impossible at desirable ranges. H&K’s solution was to eliminate the issue by having the weapon fire a 3-round burst so fast that the bullets were out of the barrel and going down range before the recoil reached the shooter.
Again, how H&K did this was pretty slick. To speed up the firing process H&K eliminated several steps in the firing sequence, specifically locking, unlocking, extracting and ejecting, by going with a caseless ammunition, where the propellant, rather than held in a metal casing behind the bullet, is actually molded around it. This eliminated the need for extracting and ejecting spent casings, as there were no cartridges to extract, since, when fired, the propellant body was consumed and the bullet launched out the barrel. Using a caseless cartridge also enabled H&K to not only make lighter bullets (there was no weight wasted in metal casings) but also allowed them to pack more of the bullets into a given space (since the bullets are square, there’s no wasted space in the magazine.) The net result was a cyclic ROF of 2,000 RPM in 3-round burst mode (in single shot and full auto, the ROF is only 460 RPM.) An additional benefit with going with caseless ammunition was the elimination of additional openings for contamination. Lacking an ejection port, the G11’s chamber remains relatively sterile.
To eliminate the recoil issue H&K “floated” the barrel and action on a secondary recoil mechanism. The effect here was that when the burst was fired, the body of the rifle would remain stationary against the firer’s shoulder, while the action and barrel recoiled down the secondary rail; by the time the action came completely out of battery, where the recoil would be felt by the shooter, the burst cycle would be complete (a recoil spring pushes the action back into battery for the next burst.)
The end result was a weapon that was light, with a high ammunition capacity, and which was capable of firing accurate 3-rounds bursts.
So what happened to the G11? Well, as luck would have it, as the G11 was nearing production capability, peace broke out all over the world and with all the lions-and-lambs group hugging going on, the West German government decided it had more important things to do than buy a bunch of new wunder rifles, (like look for jobs for all it’s new citizens from the East “zone”) so the program was shelved.
Well, if the Army is looking for revolutionary, I don’t think you can get any more revolutionary than this. I just don’t expect the Army to explore it.
Check out the G11 here.
February 8th, 2009 07:44 AM
February 8th, 2009 08:41 AM
I recall the caseless ammo rifles were supposed to be the wave of the future about 20-25 years ago but they were found to be unreliable at best. IIRC correctly, the mechanical were unreliable (Got dirt too quick and it was not easy to field strip it) and the ammo was less than acceptable. The caliber was too small to be effective and it did not stand well real life trials and tribulations.
You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
February 8th, 2009 08:42 AM
I heard the gov't was looking at the Magpul Masada/Bushmaster ACR. I know I want one.
Join the NRA and Gun Owners of America.
February 8th, 2009 08:52 AM
I don't know why they're not using the Sig 550!! Anyone who has used this weapon will agree that this is everything the M4 is not. The fact that Sig took cues from the function of the AK to create a very reliable, solid platform hasn't escaped most armorers and SWAT/CERT team members in LE, either. GREAT gun. I'm in the process of selling several ARs to buy more 550's!
A man in the hands of his enemies is flesh, and shudderingly vulnerable. - author unknown
February 8th, 2009 08:54 AM
Neato. I have to wonder how dirty it's gonna be with all that sealant and stuff. It also seems to be a 50gr projectile, which is a good 10% lighter (and smaller in dia) than the already debatable 5.56. They could always tweak the projectile, though.
I also have to wonder if the sealant on the outside of the cartridge could be compromised just by being scratched, or the rounds crack, powder, and disintegrate with being bumped around. You might be needing those extra rounds...
February 8th, 2009 09:00 AM
The smaller cal round was compensated by the fact that there were 3x50gr rounds going down rage at about the same spot.
February 8th, 2009 09:16 AM
Carry twice as many rounds, but expend 3x as many per trigger pull? I'm gonna leave my assessment at "Neato."
February 8th, 2009 09:29 AM
February 8th, 2009 10:17 AM
How many 2X4's with handles attached are pretty? While the G11 was a amazing design concept , many other weapons systems seem to be a better choice now days.
Originally Posted by SIXTO
.I doubt the M4 is going to be replaced anytime soon. Too many aborted programs already.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
Search tags for this page
replacment for m4
Click on a term to search for related topics.