German rifles are hot

[Herr-Berbunch]

They don't make 'em like they used to -

"The Vickers gun accompanied the BEF to France in 1914, and in the years that followed, proved itself to be the most reliable weapon on the battlefield, some of its feats of endurance entering military mythology. Perhaps the most incredible was the action by the 100th Company of the Machine Gun Corps at High Wood on 24 August 1916. This company had ten Vickers guns, and it was ordered to give sustained covering fire for 12 hours onto a selected area 2,000 yards away in order to prevent German troops forming up there for a counter-attack while a British attack was in progress. Two whole companies of infantrymen were allocated as carriers of ammunition, rations and water for the machine-gunners. Two men worked a belt-filling machine non-stop for 12 hours keeping up a supply of 250-round belts. One hundred new barrels were used up, and every drop of water in the neighbourhood, including the men’s drinking water and contents of the latrine buckets, went up in steam to keep the guns cool. And in that 12-hour period the ten guns fired a million rounds between them. One team fired 120,000 from one gun to win a five-franc prize offered to the highest-scoring gun. And at the end of that 12 hours, every gun was working perfectly and not one gun had broken down during the whole period. It was this absolute foolproof reliability which endeared the Vickers to every British soldier who ever fired one. It never broke down; it just kept on firing and came back for more. And that was why the Mark 1 Vickers gun was to remain the standard medium machine-gun from 1912 to 1968."

Weapons & War Machines - Batchelor & Hogg 1976

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Penguin

The Spiegel article says:


The "das" from the last sentence refers to the previous sentence, so it doesn't look like the journalist invented something but refers to the Bundeswehr investigation. Talking about several hundred shots, also leads to the assumption that we are talking about at least 300 shots (mehrere is at least 3). This would add up to at least 10 magazines, which is also the ammo capacity an infantry soldier would normally carry.
I would love it when journalists at least provide a link or a scan of the original sources, today's Focus article from also lacks this...

Yopur Spiegel quotes only mentions "several hundreds shots", at ranges of 300 meters, reducing the precision by one third (btw, one third of what? one third of a 100% hit score? One third of the ordinary hit probability when a firefight starts?)

Now note that this bases on the reports coming up early April. Indeed it was 1st April when the first reports came in, saying what you said: 300 m, longer firing sequences, rducing hit probability by one third.

Now note two things. First, new, additional coverage has been reported, today and yesterday for the most, saiyng that the problems are even worse. Now by reference to the BW internal paper the tlak is of 200 m, and the possibility that the wepaon completely breaks down.

Second, I took info from a board where BW veterans posted, or a soldiers blog it was and they commented on it. There it was posted that it is known by experience that ater having fired 3 magazines, the bullets spray by 1.2 meters at 200 meters. 3 magazines is 90 shots.

It is also reported today that the Materialprüfungsstelle of the BW has started additonal exmainations on a wider scale than the 89 rifles they have examined so far - and of which ALL suffer from the described symptoms.

The Spiegel quote of yours is not clear on whether the BW mentioned "several hundred shots" (by one rifle), or the journalist just had read something in that paper and wrapped it up in a wording by himself that maybe is a bit farther away from the truth. We all know how easily media and journalists do that all the time.

Haplo asked for exact naumbers: rounds fired, time, ranges, spreading patterns - that si what it would be about. An spread to any side of 1,2 meters at 200 sounds like much to me, so I ask about people knowing such data for other assault rifles.

When the Americans got into the operation at Mogadishu to capture Aidid'S cabinet, they were confronted with a battle that they did not expect and that lasted for over 24 hours, with quite some very intense close range urban fighting. Around 1000 Militias got killed and several thoiusand wounded, I think, and 18 Americans. I strongly doubt that their rifles were on the brink of unusability after having emptied just three cartridges, because many of their soldiers saw much more intense firing action. Maybe it was not as close and dramatic like painted in Ridley Scott'S movie (which necessarily condenses time and personal fates to pout it all into a movie), but still... If their rifles woulds have degraded so fast, then i think they would have had much higher losses, and soldiers that became prisoners of the militias.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Haplo asked for exact naumbers: rounds fired, time, ranges, spreading patterns - that si what it would be about. An spread to any side of 1,2 meters at 200 sounds like much to me, so I ask about people knowing such data for other assault rifles.
.

I don't know any scientific data but 1,2 looks terrible to me.
M16 with with a scope,improved more powerful ammo and thicker long barrel can be very accurate above 300 meters.
Regular short one is ok up to 300.

1,2 spread meters look like bad...made in Germany designed in china?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

I don't know any scientific data but 1,2 looks terrible to me.
M16 with with a scope,improved more powerful ammo and thicker long barrel can be very accurate above 300 meters.
Regular short one is ok up to 300.

1,2 spread meters look like bad...made in Germany designed in china?

Mind you, 1,2 at 200 represents the error appearing not before the weapon became "too hot" (after three cartridges). If that claim is right.

In cold, normal condition, all what I find on the web says the G36 is extremely precise at 300-400 meters. The sight has markings for up to 800 meters, but I think they were a bit over-optimistic there.

Maybe before commencing battle we should sign a deal with the enemy so that after three empty magazins of the German shooter the enemy voluntarily withdraws or stops action right in place, until the weapon has cooled down again. Or one could make a gentleman'S agreement: the enemy throws over a bottle of cold water for the rifle (to shorten the time of interrupted combat), and the German answers the favour by trading him a handgrenade.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Mind you, 1,2 at 200 represents the error appearing not before the weapon became "too hot" (after three cartridges). If that claim is right.

Question is haw this was achieved....you don't shoot like in Hollywood movies and expect the gun to work properly.
The issue should not happen when using the gun in controlled manner,that is in semi auto or very short bursts.

cartridges=magazines right?

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

According to an aquaintance on mine in ESTSOF who also use a G36 variant, the problem occurse only when the rifle is put into service in a role that should be filled by an LMG and overheating is a moot issue if proper triger discipline is maintained by troops.

Talking with some other friends who are either just active duty or former members of EDF who have come into contact with the G36 its pretty much the same thing. None of them had noticed the G36 overheating any more than the Galil's our regular troops are issed with and that the whole issue is more than likely a media generated issue based on very little.

^This.
I call bull on the article.
When I was in the Bundeswehr in July 2001 we were the first draftees to get the G36. They came straight from the H&K factories and where not calibrated (once you had figured out where to aim you would still hit almost with every shot though). When we did some shooting where the score for each soldier counted 4 rifles where calibrated by the NCOs and were used by the whole platoon (roughly 30men). We did plenty of shooting with just these 4 rifles and I don't recall any issues with them.

[_dgn_]

What is an "assault rifle" and why this new arm was created ?

During WWII, the German Army needed a new weapon, with high fire rate and great stopping power, used at close or mid-range. It was a compromise between the MP 40 SMG (9mm - close range) and the standard rifle Kar98 (7.92mm - long range). So the Sturmgewehr ("assault rifle") was born.

It was intended as the adversary of the soviet PPSh 41 (71 rounds) as MP 40 had only 30/32 bullets in its magazine and the Mauser 98 only 5 (with bolt action).

Its use ? Close action. By example, in a "Panzerknacker" team : a soldier with its StG44 "cleaned" the back of a T34 from it's accompaniment infantry (generally equipped with a PPSh) while the other soldier used its Panzerfaust to destroy the tank.

A detail : the bullet (not the cartridge) used in the Sturmgewehr was the same as the one used in the standard Mauser rifle or in LMG or MMG (MG34 - MG42). So a large stopping power during close combats, and still much of energy to 300 m : the exact opposite of the 5.56mm ammunition ...

And the "assault" rifle after the war ? Soviets copied it and it was the AK-47. During the Indochina War, heresy about the place of this new weapon in the standard infantry squad started in the French Army. Against VietMinhs with their Kalashnikov, Frenchs could only oppose at the same distance the US M2 or US M3 Carbine (but with a poor stopping power).

So German Sturmgewehrs were given (2 specimens in each squad) in the infantry, but complementary to the collective MAC 24/29 LMG. The "assault rifle" became an individual LMG, but with a closer distance.

And the G36 ? It' s an assault rifle, used inside close range (combat range = 200 m). It's generally the same things for all assaulft rifles.

Recomanded using : single or short bursts. The German soldier wears 5 30 rounds magazines, but in combat situations, complementary ammunition can be given.

If you want fire with a good precision at 300 m (or higher), another specialised firearm is recommanded. But it's trying to increase the firepower of a squad, in order to "stress" (not to kill) the engaded ennemy.

But if you use C-Mags (100 rounds) with full auto (long bursts) for hitting targets at 300 m, it's not surprising that the G36 has a hot hand-shield and a very low precision.

If you want firepower for the good distance, use something which is intended for it : LMG as MG3 or Minimi, generally fitted with heavy barrel.

In 1980, French Military Staff wanted to replace all the various weapons with an unique one and to standardize the ammunition (and to reduce military instruction). It was really a headache for a platoon or campany leader.

In an armored infantry platoon, there was the 7.62 NATO for the 3 mounted MMG & 3 squad LMG, the 7.62 precision bullets for FRF1 sniper rifles, the 9 mm for Mat 49 SMG and MAC 50 pistols, 7.5 mm for the Mas 49/56 rifles. Plus 89 mm rockets for the LRAC (ATRL) and 20mm for the 3 mounted guns.

The weapons were varied, because the targets were varied and at various distances : rifles (combat range = 200 m), sniper rifles (range 300/600m), SMG (combat range = 50 m).

So FAMAS was introduced with its unique 5.56 ammunition. The Staff considered that it has a great fire rate (1000 rounds/min), about like the famous German MG-42 (1200 rounds/min). So the Staff considered that the LMGs were no more necessary in each squad and were removed. But on the battlefield, when the 6 25 rounds magazines for each FAMAS are empty ?

However, it's faster to add another 50 rounds belt to a M-60, an AA-52 or to a MG3. And when the barrel is to hot after constant shooting, only 3 seconds and the second barrel is installed.

It's what one rediscovered during military operations made by France. Rapidly, collective AA-52 (7.62 NATO) LMGs were again used, but for ammunition reasons, replaced by FN Minimis (5.56mm), considered as an individual LMG (standard equipment : with a spare barrel. Naturally ...).

For some years, the German Army didn't have any more experience on the battlefield. Maybe same bad solutions about using of firearms on the battlefield were selected by their Staff.

But reality is increasingly more concrete than the concepts ...

About this particular problem, I read this on the Heckler & Koch site. They naturally defend their products (generally "German quality"), but their analysis is rather interesting.

[MH]

When the Americans got into the operation at Mogadishu to capture Aidid'S cabinet, they were confronted with a battle that they did not expect and that lasted for over 24 hours, with quite some very intense close range urban fighting. Around 1000 Militias got killed and several thoiusand wounded, I think, and 18 Americans. I strongly doubt that their rifles were on the brink of unusability after having emptied just three cartridges, because many of their soldiers saw much more intense firing action. Maybe it was not as close and dramatic like painted in Ridley Scott'S movie (which necessarily condenses time and personal fates to pout it all into a movie), but still... If their rifles woulds have degraded so fast, then i think they would have had much higher losses, and soldiers that became prisoners of the militias.

That looks more like typical case of better training and self discipline vs a bunch of Guevaras.
Not just equipment issue.

[Morts]

Originally Posted by _dgn_

Entire post

OT just a little bit ?

[TFatseas]

I've heard about the "wandering zero" for quite some time; the G36 had issues with melting during sustained fire as well.

The US Secret Service(maybe the Capitol police) bought some and promptly ditched them not to long after. That was a few years ago IIRC.

Look up the US Army XM8 trials and why they failed. They were having the same issues. Not surprising as the internals were the same as the G36.

[Skybird]

For whatever it is worth, I just copy in the message that in identical form got copied today by many news outlets over here. The quotations from an internal Bundeswehr paper, and the reaction by the current head of the Bundeswehr-Verband (kind of a union) I have marked in red, underlined, and bold.

Die Bundeswehr hat durch Untersuchungen beim Gewehr G36 weitreichendere Probleme fest gestellt als bislang bekannt. Wie die "Bild-Zeitung" unter Berufung auf ein internes Papier aus dem Verteidigungsministerium berichtet, haben Prüfungsergebnisse der Wehrtechnischen Dienststelle die Bundeswehr alarmiert. In einem an den Verteidigungsminister gerichteten internen Schreiben heiße es, dass die Probleme mit dem G36 "aus militärischer Sicht einen erheblichen Mangel darstellen und von erheblicher Einsatzrelevanz sind". Laut "Bild-Zeitung" untersuchte die Wehrtechnische Dienststelle der Bundeswehr insgesamt 89 G36-Gewehre. In einer Bewertung heißt es laut der Zeitung: "Alle bisher untersuchten 89 G36 zeigen im heiß geschossenen Zustand eine Veränderung des mittleren Treffpunkts und eine Aufweitung des Streukreises derart, dass ein Gegner in einer Entfernung von 200 Metern nicht mehr sicher bekämpft werden kann. Dieser Sachverhalt stellt aus militärischer Sicht einen erheblichen Mangel an der Waffe dar." Die Bundeswehr veranlasste deshalb weitere Untersuchungen. Das Einsatzführungskommando informierte die Bundeswehr-Kontingente in einem vertraulichen Schreiben über die Probleme. So schreibt das Einsatzführungskommando abschließend über den Umgang mit dem G36: "Ist in einer taktischen Situation das Abkühlen des Gewehrs nicht möglich, und muss weitergeschossen werden, ist zu berücksichtigen, dass bei weiterem Feuerkampf Waffen komplett ausfallen können und/oder dauerhaft beschädigt werden." Der Bundeswehrverband forderte aufgrund der neuen Erkenntnisse eine schnelle Aufklärung. Vorsitzender Oberst Ulrich Kirsch sagte der Zeitung: "Die Meldungen über einsatzrelevante Auffälligkeiten beim Gewehr G36 sind ausgesprochen beunruhigend.Jetzt bedarf es schnellstmöglicher Aufklärung. Ich fordere das Verteidigungsministerium auf, diese Meldungen unverzüglich zu überprüfen und für Klarheit zu sorgen. Jetzt muss festgestellt werden, ob die Waffen tatsächlich für die Einsatzrealität in Afghanistan geeignet sind."

I really would like to know more details about the test conditions for those 89 rifles. Without knowing that, all this news is just a hint indicating an unwelcomed truth, but not solid infomation.

[Dan D]

The blog „Augengeradeaus“ (Eyes front!) which focuses on German military and security issues covers the whole story (in German).

Kein Aprilscherz: G36 (2)
Kein Aprilscherz: Wenn das Gewehr heißläuft

[MH]

Originally Posted by TFatseas

Look up the US Army XM8 trials and why they failed. They were having the same issues. Not surprising as the internals were the same as the G36.

I did some looking and it seems that the gun had some heat issues with polymeric materials(hence wondering zero problem i guess) and battery life.
It also looks that improvement had been made but the gun was still canceled for unclear reasons.
I did not find any mention of mechanical or barrel issues.
Also i'm curious what are the requirements to pass sustained fire test for a gun.
I think that on full auto i would be able to destroy barrel of almost every gun very quickly that is if it doesn't jam first....which probably is the criteria here.

[Stealhead]

It all largely depends on how a rifle is fired any what I like to call "combat rifles" M-16,G-36,G-3,FNFAL,AUG,AK-47 type of weapon is designed to allow automatic fire but only in short bursts and for short lengths of time.If you take any of these weapons and fire on fully automatic at any length it is going to heat the barrel very fast and start to have a negative effect on the weapons functionality and if you keep it the internal workings of the weapon will get so hot that it will not function until cooled down another area prone to over heating is the bolt if that gets too hot it will seize.

A combat rifle is designed more to allow rapid semi automatic fire a well designed one should have no trouble putting down 80~90 rounds per minute of rapid semi auto (that about 4 or 5 magazines for most weapons 20 or 30 per mag).Ideally you only want to fire 20~40 rounds per minute in a fire fight or your ammo will soon be low.The machine gun and the squad automatic weapon are the firearms that are designed for automatic fire.A machine gun has a much heavier barrel and on most they can be removed when hot and replaced with a cool one on top of that MGs have much sturdier bolts and feed mechanics allowing them to be able to handle sustained automatic fire.That being said even MGs perform better when lower RPMs are used and even a MG will over heat if pushed too hard.

The German Army uses the MG-36 as a SAW it is nothing more than a normal G-36 with a heavier barrel (but not as a true MG) and using a 100 round dual drum type magazine.I am better that the German troops are finding the MG-36 to a slight bit of a let down as in combat it turns out to be nothing more than a G-36 with a lager magazine but lacking true sustained automatic fire capability.Might be why they started fielding the MG-4 as of late which is a true belt feed MG.

The other issue is the pansy 5.56mm SS109 round used by NATO it has been found to be very disappointing in combat conditions it has very poor wound ballistics at long and medium ranges concern for this round began in 1993 with US troops in Somalia where complaining that the bullets just where too weak and not having effect requiring several rounds to put a man down.The reason that Germans are getting G3s with optics in Afghanistan is to give them a wepon with some actual stopping power at longer ranges.The Taliban has learned that they can stay outside the effective range of 90% of a NATO units 5.56mm weapons they make much use of the PKM which fires 7.62x54mm rounds is effective well beyond the range of 5.56mm they also use lots of RPGs which again can be fired from outside 5.56mm engagement ranges they just take RPGs and fire them barrage style and then rake a NATO unit with PKM fire then they disengage before the NATO forces have time to bring down superior fire support.

You will see in the next 5 or 6 years some nations either going back to older rifles but with improved construction like the G-3 or FNFAL and issuing them to a portion of squads or going with one of the many 6mm range rounds currently available that provide better stopping power and range but still allow some degree of controllability for rapid fire.Some elite US military units are also making use of heavier grain 5.56 rounds 70 grains over 45~60 grains which is what the SS109 has the 70+ grain rounds have proven to be much more effective in combat over the lighter grain rounds.

H&K makes some well designed weapons but sometimes I think they have a little too much pride and they get so caught up in themselves and they over look things that actually would make a better weapon.

energy of a few different rounds

SS109 5.56mm 1,303 ft·lbf (G-36,M-16,M249)
7.62x51mm 2,584 ft·lbf (G-3,FNFAL,MG3,M240)
7.62x39mm 1,529.4 ft·lbf (AK-47)
6.8mm SPC 1,694 ft·lbf (nothing military yet)
6.5x47mm Lapua 2,277 ft·lbf (nothing military yet)

[Platapus]

Trying to change an M-60 barrel in combat conditions is a world of fun.... not.

We used to think that it would be better just to carry an extra m-60 with you and switch out.

Anyone remember the "LC-80"?