Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Germany Expands Its Tank Force
SYSOP    4/23/2015 5:54:35 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
Yimmy       4/23/2015 1:23:02 PM
Outdated?  How so?  As in, worn out?
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Probably   4/23/2015 2:01:37 PM

Outdated?  How so?  As in, worn out?

as in, "We don't care to admit that the G-36 is a hunk of Sh!te, but have to have some reason to replace it, with something, that will be better, hopefully."
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       4/23/2015 2:19:22 PM
Good that Germany is turning around some of the declining capabilities.  More active Leopards, is good news in my book.
 
 I was taking a look at the Puma, and while I'm not entirely sold on the "IFV" concept as a whole.. The Puma looks like a nice piece of equipment.  Any idea when they will go into full production
 
 
>Outdated?  How so?  As in, worn out?
 
 There are some really wild complaints out there about the G-36.  But the most credible seem to be about accuracy problems.. particularly during sustained fire.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Constraints of cold war planning   4/23/2015 8:45:30 PM
Many such issues have arisen with Western equipment. Many such complaints, largely all from one cause really.

We use weapons designed to operate in European theatre in the Middle East and surrounding environs.
These weapons were designed around the fact they were going to be used in the eastern European theatre, so thats where they work very well. Drop them into dry super hot dust bowels, shit happens.
Weapons designers didn't envisage that by the 21'st century, we'd be back to fighting colonial wars exclusively, not conflagrations between major powers. Weapons designs with extremely long leed times still reflect this planning shortcoming.
Hence, F-35 is an overmatch for any near peer opponent, but is grossly over capable, over priced and way too hard/expensive to run for 95% of the missions its ever likely to do.
 
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    NGI   4/24/2015 9:18:16 AM
   Not to be attack personally, but what you just posted, if true, is proof of idiocy!  "We designed our rifle for short firefights"  & IF the firefight is NOT "short"?  To sound like Keffler, that is the hallmark of a bad design or design concept....
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       4/24/2015 9:48:15 AM
?????????????????????
 
No PORTABLE repeating operating reciprocating cyclic machine is designed to be operated at hundreds of cycles per minute for hours without cooling or parts change-out. It will melt.
 
How many rounds can you put through a typical air cooled machine gun before you have to swap barrels? (asking because I really don't know that answer. I think it might be as little as 200-300 rounds?)
 
An infantry automatic rifle is a machine gun in that sense? Subject it to prolonged operation without cool-down and it will do strange things like pre-detonate ammunition and melt and deform the barrel rifling?
 
Runaway gun and plugged barrel are two things I know can happen. What happens to the man trying to hold and aim the rifle?
 
And to be fair, the Germans build precision machines. If the G-36 is made 'tight' and seems to work well in cold wet Bavaria for what was expected to be a rapid paced cold war battlefield, what makes anyone expect it would work well in hot dry talcum powder silicate land in what is essentially Wild West style warfare?  
 
I would say that it might not be designed for the unexpected environment, but I can't say it was designed badly.  
 
Now if the bullets don't go where aimed, that would be a major design fault.  
 
JFKY    NGI   4/24/2015 9:18:16 AM
   Not to be attack personally, but what you just posted, if true, is proof of idiocy!  "We designed our rifle for short firefights"  & IF the firefight is NOT "short"?  To sound like Keffler, that is the hallmark of a bad design or design concept....
 
not several mags in a rapid full auto fire ambush situation lasting for hours. 


 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       4/24/2015 9:52:16 AM
Weapons designers didn't envisage that by the 21'st century, we'd be back to fighting colonial wars exclusively, not conflagrations between major powers. Weapons designs with extremely long leed times still reflect this planning shortcoming.
 
Hence, F-35 is an overmatch for any near peer opponent, but is grossly over capable, over priced and way too hard/expensive to run for 95% of the missions its ever likely to do.
 
Keep some Eagles flying around and some Falcons too for the low-balls. The high flyers are the F-35 bait.  
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Machine Guns   4/24/2015 10:38:46 AM
Text book...after 200 RPM barrel change....after firing 100 RPM several minutes barrel change....(M-60 GPMG)
 
Joe Basilone: fire your Browning until the barrel glows red.  Basilone never really saw the need to change barrels, except in extremis....
 
The M-60(e4)-IIRC-could have catastrophic barrel failure if fired to long....the barrel was light, the whole e4 was a "lightened" M-60....so if you fired it too long it could fail, explode?  Other machine guns, just lose their rifling faster than otherwise when red-hot.
 
I still argue it's a bad DESIGN, because you make an assumption that the firefight will be SHORT...unless you can demonstrate that historically, using Wehrmacht data, as the Bundeswehr I'm not buying  into it....For example, the data from WWI-WWII is that the majority of infantry combat occurs within 600 metres or less.  OK, I'd select a round that is "effective" out to 600 metres...build a GPMG for 600 metres around that round & a battle rifle good to 400 metres around that round...but to assume that firefights are going to be of short duration, what's the supporting evidence?  Again WHAT IF, the firefights involve multiple magazines, thru an extended period of time?  I say you have to plan on that & if you don't you've planned/designed badly.
 
As my father said, "Even Beethoven had a few clunker tunes"...Germany & H-K get a lot right, but simply being a German product doesn't guarantee success.
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       4/24/2015 10:57:21 AM
>How many rounds can you put through a typical air cooled machine gun before you have to swap barrels?
 
It depends greatly on how you are using it.  The "correct" version of short, controlled bursts.. a good long while. At least that was my experience with the M249, M240.. even the M60 (if it wasn't being cranky).   Continues fire... is another story entirely.
 
>(asking because I really don't know that answer. I think it might be as little as 200-300 rounds )
 
Purposely (doing bad things) I've put 600 (3 boxes) through a M249 about as fast as I could.. and the barrel was glowing pretty solidly..  Not something that a quick barrel change and repeat would remedy.. Yeah 200-300 is probably about maximum for trying to maintain a high volume of fire..
 
>An infantry automatic rifle is a machine gun in that sense?
 
Ages ago, there was a bi-pod version of the M-16 / M16-A1 that doubled as a squad automatic weapon (light machine gun).. Have no idea how that worked out.. but wouldn't my choice on how to do things..
 
In the U.S. Army, the M249 (SAW) fills that role.. as an automatic rifle and machine gun.  It can be fired from the shoulder (for example) with reasonable accuracy.  I wouldn't want an M16 or M4 attempting to fill that role.  The Heer has the HK MG-4 (I think).. but I have no idea if it's distributed like the M249 is U.S. infantry units..  So.. it maybe a somewhat unfair knock.. if they are trying to use the G-36 like a light machine gun... But that would be a TO&E issue and or procurement issue..
 
The accuracy complaints seem to be rather consistent.  So I guess I'd give credence to that complaint - over some of the other issues that are more murky..  where using the weapon beyond it's designed purpose.. or "user error" could reasonably be argued. 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       4/25/2015 1:34:06 PM
The FN MAG GPMG / M240 needs its barrel changing every 400 rounds.  In the Sustained Fire role, this would be cycling between three barrels. 
 
Before the British Army bought the Minimi-Para LMG sections used the LSW, a long and heavy barrel version of the SA-80.  It wasn't much liked.  But, was okay as a marksman's weapon.
 
Reading on the G36, it would seem the reviever the barrel is attached to, and thus the weapon's sights, is plastic, and bends.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics