The case of Caseless Ammunition

Wasn't the G11 pretty much ready to be adopted but then the SU collapsed?

>>33368297
Not much worse than the M16, except the M16 failed every test except full auto accuracy.

That's part of the story, yes.
Of course the G11 wasn't a good gun. It was overly complex, the ammunition was fragile and as most other caseless designs, the advantages of using caseless ammo were offset by design limitations.

I think we should retry, but thinking small and simple. For example: could a lever-action rifle work with caseless ammo if the chamber was slightly modified to properly seal the gases?

>>33368297
I have no opinion on caseless ammo, since I will provbably never use any, but the first doc looks very biased to me.

They were written by a guy involved with the Army ACR program, it's no wonder he's got a bad experience with the whole concept. I find it useful for listing the technical challanges of caseless ammo.

File: LSAT_2.gif (69KB, 800x596px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 800x596px

Plastic cased ammo seems more feasible to me.

>>33369276
>first doc looks very biased to me
It was written by fucking Jim Schatz of HK.

>>33368353
Wait, since when did the M16 fail every test? Huh?

>>33368297
Case less ammo in small arms with current technology is dumb, fucking dumb and even if it could be practical, it won't kill the enemy anymore than just normal brass cased ammo.

That rifle looks so fucking bulky god I would hate to shoot that thing. It would be cool and an awesome talking piece but what the fuck that doesn't look good or ergonomic at all.

But as for caseless ammo, I dont think it's necessary.

File: DeniableOps.webm (797KB, 640x298px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 640x298px

>>33371962
But anon, you don't want them to know who shot their boys, now do you?

>>33371962
>LSAT CL
>LSAT Caseless Round
>works like a charm (according to the guberment)