The first picture is kinda like that in which the grenades take the case with them, with all those holes in the back being what the gunpowder flies out of and sends the grenade
Ah yes the problem of prematurely going off when we don't want to. Such many woes we must suffer as men. Struggling to not bust our payloads early against our will that nature has wrought upon us. Now some prefer to bust in the face, or chest while shouting they are coming. I like to bust in the rear by suprise if I can help it, being the sneaky Devil Dog I was, hoho! Anywho in time we shall overcome this perdiliction and embrace the future! Cheerio my good chaps!
@@Higher-Ground”All right, I've been thinking, when life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade! Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons! What am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager! Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons! Do you know who I am? I'm the man whose gonna burn your house down - with the lemons!
@@Higher-Ground Fun fact, life actually didn't give us lemons, they aren't a naturally occurring fruit. It's a hybrid of a citron and some kind of sour orange, that was created on purpose over a long period of time, somewhere either in India or China (most likely, based on various research).
If you *really* want to get technical about it, since everything needs to be self contained then it would either be the volcanic repeating pistol which used a hollow bullet filled with powder and sealed with a primer cap, or the Austrian "pin rifle" which had a similar set up but put the prime ON the back of the bullet, requiring a large, fragile needle to fire. They both kind of sucked in their own special way. The rifle was *very* fragile and the volcanic constantly jammed on the caps getting into its mechanism
Honestly, I wish more games featured malfunctions. A few have breakage, but almost none will ever give the player a stuck case, stovepipe, double feed or cook off. They also don't seem to understand the damage a gun does. COD used to burn my bacon when a 30-06 would take two shots to down a player, even if it was a head shot.I wish devs would go to a range, or even just watch RU-vid for a bit.
@@crazyjoeshorts5256it just depends on the game. Most people don’t want to play a game only to have a gun do something they don’t want it to. That’s just not fun to most people. I think it could be good in realistic shooters like hell let loose or arma if they don’t have it already. The average player of the average shooter just wants to unwind after a hard day I feel like
Worth noting: they actually fixed a lot of issues with the G11s cookoffs, but reunification killed the project before they could implement it into further testing.
It was a number of things that killed off the G11. Performance of the G11 didnt meet all the requirements they had. They still had issues with it (double hit probability too low, thermal problems and the spontanious ignition of rounds). In 1990, the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed, which puts limits on the numbers of conventional military equipment in Europe and mandates the destruction of excess weaponry. After the reunification they had a surplus of AK-47 and other soviet weaponry they had to consolidate / destroy. After the end of the warsaw pact, there was no need to replace anything immediately. Their major enemy didnt exist anymore. Also, the Bundesrechnungshof - which is a court of auditors (Federal Audit Office) - said that the G11 was too expensive and made no sense in the long run. There was also no chance of NATO standardization. So at the end, the Germans adopted the H&K G36 as their new infantry rifle, which were allegedly inaccurate after shooting many mags - which is true to a certain point: If you shoot any rifle for longer periods of time, they will heat up and get inaccurate. But the G36 wasnt a bad rifle. No soldier had issues with it. The only issue that was complained about was the build in scope. German media and politicians led a smear campaign against the G36. Supposedly it was because H&K did secret exports without the needed permissions. So the politicians in charge wanted to send them a message.
Meh. Careless ammo will always be a gimmick. It’s just inferior due to heat ejection alone (that brass leaving the chamber is taking a TON of heat from the system). The heat sink magazine of Mass Effect 2 is the best simple fix if they find out how to mitigate the utter lack of resilience of careless also.
“Real” in a very impractical, expensive, dangerous way. It is not realistic to expect a caseless-cartridge repeating arm to be viable in any serious capacity with any kind of currently-known propellant. The propellant would have to be immune to ambient temperature even to the extreme, while also detonating correctly and pushing the round down range, AND ALSO operate in a firearm’s feed and extraction system, PLUS keep the projectile contained until firing and release it properly. There are a lot of conflicting requirements there that are simply not met by any truly effective (let alone cost effective) propellant right now.
@@MAGEs-of-Anarchy Seems like you didn't understand the point made about real vs feasible, and had to explain why it isn't feasible when there was no need.
the main issue with caseless ammo is that in a normal gun, the brass is practically a heatsink, taking some heat with it out of the gun, IIRC this is the biggest reason the g11 failed (i didnt finish watching up to the point he started talking about the g11 lol, sorry)
@@jehffvredition2026There were a couple of reasons why the G11 failed. First off, the caseless ammo isn't the actual main point of the gun, otherwise it'd be way way simpler than it is. The entire design of the gun is based off of shooting 2 bullets fast enough that they both fire before you feel the recoil which would in theory increase accuracy. The mechanism they used for it is extremely complex and thus it was expensive. At the same time, the 2 hit probability was too low. The other reason was the reunification of germany and some NATO stuff where they didn't allow you to keep too much excess equipment. With so many AKs from east germany and the need to consolidate resources and equipment the G11 was passed over especially as it was quite expensive. The overheating was already an issue that was fixed. But the complex 2 hit mechanism(the concept was quite dumb in hindsight but many nations were trying it out) and issues at the time prevented it from being adopted. If they made a simple rifle with just the caseless ammo they could probably do a good enough job to at least get it out there for trial runs in certain units.
So careless ammunition would require a cooling system, or way to rid the gun of the excess heat, unless you could just use a heat pump to heat the projectile and then shoot the projectile to get rid of the heat.
@@dragonmasterlangeweg7625I... don't think you understand either the point of the video nor how guns work. The whole problem is excess heat: why would you intentionally heat the projectile, which would cause it to fire, which would cause even more heat. So, your solution to stopping a burning building is to pour gasoline on it instead of water or foam. Mkay. Good luck with that.
@@kirbyis4everthe core issue is a heat sink can't dissipate heat fast enough compared to physical removal. It would need to be active cooling which is complex and heavy
@@dragonmasterlangeweg7625 a cooling system effective enough to keep guns from cooking off the caseless ammo would just defeat the point of caseless ammo by taking all that lost weight from brass and just pouring it plus some into the gun itself. add on the fact now the gun has what would be considered a critical component to be powered it just isn't feasible.
Yeah those were rockets though. Little mini rockets and they were notoriously unreliable for accuracy and suffered greatly with judging POI based on distance.
@@natew.-victoryorvalhalla4571tbf making the rounds was outsourced to another company, and done pretty cheaply. A modern version with higher QI would probably be pretty decent
@Yourantsally they still really aren't viable rounds either nor did they really change anything or provide any significant bonus to make them worthwhile
well technically caseless ammo, that only because the "case" for a musket ball is the wad of paper and gunpowder you rammed down first, so not caseless at all
I mean aside from it having a tendency to explode (might be related to it having the magazine on top of the part of the gun that gets the hottest) the G11 was a great platform.. feel like putting the mag in from the back would have helped a bit 😂
A big part of the pre-ignition issue is that removing waste heat from the gun and insulating propellant from the barrel are both features of the brass case itself, so when you take away the case you lose those features.
Couldn't you achieve almost the same effect by enclosing the explosion in the projectile like a rocket? Just as with a case the large part of the combustion would occur within an ejected 'housing' carrying the heat with it, only in this case it'd be the projectile, not the casing.
@@Quotheravingyeah, similar to the gyrojet. Problem with that is you have to them make the bullet bigger to house enough propellant, at least with modern propellant. For the most part you lose the weight and size advantage that caseless ammo is theoretically supposed to have.
Or worse, the bin fuckers who dumpster dive for casings after a comp day at the range so you have to lock the damn bins. Brass goblins are a pest man. Reload your own brass.
it also protects the powder from hot surfaces. it'll take longer for a brass cased round to cook off than a caseless as heat still has to transfer from the chamber to the powder through the case itself. some of said heat is lost and some of it is just never transferred to the powder
I used to believe that too, but upon further research it turns out the brass does not really absorb as much heat as the gunbros community would have you believe. More importantly though, is the tendency of that brass casing to transfer heat to the walls of the chamber. Recently, polymer casings have been developed that ventilate most of their heat out the front of the barrel because the plastic casing material has so little thermal transfer that the heat ends up just flowing through the air as the bullet leaves the barrel.
@@bort6414Dude. The heat of the brass cases upon ejection and people literally getting burned by hot brass kinda invalidates your little theory in the beginning
@@richardmillhousenixon I have zero compulsion to discuss this with a narcissistic infant who thinks they can just bully people that they disagree with. If you want my sources, you can apologize for your shitty attitude at any time. Otherwise, we are done here.
@@richardmillhousenixonnot necessarily. A casing doesn't weigh all that much, so it being too hot to hold with your hand (which also isn't necessarily more than 100°C) doesn't mean it is carrying a lot of thermal energy.
The Heckler & Koch G11 is my favorite "impractical gun", mainly of how it looks and it's complex reload. Seeing games get the animations correctly makes me very happy- Ironically the first time I've seen it was Roblox, and they got the reloading animations right.
For those wondering about why the G11 didn’t go anywhere. The short answer is they lost their budget. The slightly less short version is that Germany Reunited and the Soviet Union collapsed, slashing defence budgets, so HK instead decided to develop what we now know as the G36.
Another pro he didn't mention: Caseless ammo would be highly advantageous for space combat, since you can't depend on gravity to eject casings properly.
@@kevinforget549 Sure, but gravity is still required to bring the spent casing to the ground and keep it there. In a weightless environment, those casings are going to keep on going on the ejection trajectory and will then become a potential hazard in all sorts of ways.
@@Grantidge69 well theres already planes like the warthog that dont toss out their spent cases, also in space combat from a ship you would have the same momentum direction of the cases so their velocity would be small as it would also be to any ships flying with you. it would however be more dangerous to the enemy flying at you in the opposite direction. also space is very big and cases are small.
@@Grantidge69 I think that is a positive feature of a weightless environment. You and your buddy can make a game out of trying to dodge the extracted casings.
@@kevinforget549 I was thinking more about rounds being fired *inside* the ship in a small arms engagement where the artificial gravity had ceased to function. 650 rpm = 650 hot brass shells pm, and the kinetic energy on those looks pretty high, on all the gun videos I've watched. That said, and given what we know already about the damage that can be caused by even small particles of space debris to a geo-orbiting spacecraft travelling at 17,000mph or so, ejecting casings out into the void would be short-sighted and irresponsible. Even if they don't hit your wingman during the engagement, they'll still be travelling along their original trajectory forever until they hit something.
@@Drbeattles Except that it didn't. A cook-off caused the gun to fire in full-auto until empty, as the round would enter the hot chamber and, and once it passed the cook-off temperature treshold, the round would fire. In fact the ACR trials has shown that even shooting the magazine directly wouldn't cause the ammo to go off unless it directly hit the primer. Cooking-off was also not an issue with the G11 since the introduction of the High Ignition Temperature Propellant in 1982.
@@MEGATRYANT Adding to to that, the G11 was certified for use by the German military, and was about to start full-scale production, but the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Warsaw Pact dissolving left Germany with 2 options, either spend the money on fully adopting the G11, or spend the money on redeveloping East Germany, and we all know which one they chose.
@@Figwumberton And then the engineers at H&K lost the documentation for the ammo production. So caseless ammo is now lost technology, like the vacuum seal on a Merwin and Hubert revolver.
The heartbreak of Premature Ignition is an issue many marksmen have to deal with. Had a girlfriend leave me over it. I'd go to her range to unload my bullets in her target. I'd start fingering the trigger, really getting things going, she'd be going YES YES then BLAM everything goes off at once. The gun's hanging limply in my hand, she's all mad I made a mess of her target, there's crying and yelling all around. I tell her I can go back to used cased ammunition where things won't be so sensitive but she didn't want to hear it.
They had the problems figured out well enough that West Germany actually did adopt the rifle with its careless ammo for general infantry use in 1989. But before they even started producing them the Berlin Wall fell and Germany reunified. Suddenly the West German government had a bunch of other things they needed to spend money on and the massive pile of Soviet weapons in former East Germany meant the G11 wasn't one of them.
The G11 wasn’t really all that. It was awkward and still had the run away issue. Also the method of firing the round doesn’t change much if anything. It only adds another component that can and does fail and can’t get wet.
I know theres at least someone wondering why caseless ammo would overheat and cookoff faster than conventional cartridges. This occurs because brass casings absorb a lot of the heat from firing, and once they are ejected, take it with them. Lacking that pseudo heat-sink means the chamber walls will get hot instead. Granted this only really applies to automatic firearms. Bolt actions and the like would have however much heat transfer as the shooter allows before they cycle the action.
Don’t forget the other big reason to use caseless ammo - theoretically higher rates of fire. The lack of an extraction step during cycling allows for firearm designs that can fire multiple projectiles before the resultant recoil affects the shooter. This was the point of the G11.
while true. the AN94 did manage to figure out that little diddy with pulleys. tho it doesn't seem like anyone really cares about such an idea these days.
@@Drbeattlesbecause the an 94 was made upon a theoretical concept that does not exist in reality. The accuracy is pretty bad along with the cost and complexity issues it has.
@@mitri5389 the AN94 does work but most countries have dropped the idea of two bullets one impulse. The US is going to a heavier, hotter round to increase lethality and armor penetration. It’s just the idea of firing two rounds one impulse isn’t feasible at the moment it seems.
@@Drbeattles you can do research on it and see why it's no better than others like the AK. It's accuracy with hyper burst at 20m is no less than 5cm. 100m 25cm, at 300m its 75cm. The AK 74 at 100m has a deviation of around 10 cm to 15 cm. Combine all the other issues it has and you can see why it's not very well used.
@@mitri5389 sure it could. But it IS the only thing to get past the prototype phase that used the two bullets one impulse idea. Most other guns that were made on such a concept were either just as bad or ultra heavy or something else.
Metal Storm uses magnetic rails to fire rounds, and the barrel is also the magazine, as the rounds are stacked in the magazine and fired in sequence by pulses sent through electromagnets built into the barrel.
And those ones use some kind of sci-fi heat-sinks as removable “magazines” that for some unexplained reason are not reusable, really just gameplay reasons.
Also PCP, but those lack the power for war-time munition. Potato guns are also caseless. I bet we could run a potato gun on a 4-stroke cycle, thus the bullets stop when you don’t add fuel for the next cycle.
Rate of fire is often determined by the length of the casing, so rate of fire can increase A LOT if you design it to reduce the movement from the magwell and the breach
Yeah, this would be a bonus, if we didn't already deliberately introduce features slowing down the fire rate of most of our guns because a super high fire rate isn't actually what we want. If we wanted higher fire rates we'd lighten the weight of the bolt, which is, in fact, usually the main limiting factor in fire rate.
@@Ghelasin Exactly, it's about how it's going to be used. Many aircraft variants of machine guns in WW1 and 2 had much higher rates of fire to get as many rounds on target as possible in the brief moments that a pilot might have a shot at a moving target, so for anti air or anti missile purposes it could be valid
did not know about the temp issue, but makes sense, ejecting the brass when ejected takes off the heat with it, so in a way ejecting it double as cooling for the gun
Seriously the G11 was completed and ready to go but the reunification of East and West Germany drained a lot of funds from the former West German government and the collapse of the Soviet Union bringing an end to the cold war meant that cost of the G11 was no longer acceptable.
... g11 worked, quite well by all accounts. Problems were the cost and the limited storage life on the ammunition. Storage life was plenty long enough for a deployment and it saw field deployment trials with sf units until the ammo ran dry. If they were to bring up production again, they would probably need some sort of additional cooling system but it really did prove itself in the field with the exception of that one issue.
I couldn’t see it lasting long if it was adopted. It was very bulky and wasn’t modular in the slightest. I can’t see it lasting past the 90s at the most because of the lack of customization that army’s like today
It would not have any place in any army today except if entire Germany had to be mobilized for WW3 in the future. The gun was specifically designed for fast plastic injection production lines and conscription army. The "clockwork" inside is really just cut stamped metals.
Consistent obturation is an issue and when it comes to heat, brass cases actually act as a coolant carrying away lots of energy that would otherwise remain in the chamber and bolt.
Reminds me of Borderlands 3 SCAV guns. Though instead of overheat causing uncontrolled firing, character sprays the gun with coolant pistol so they can keep firing once it cools off. Combining these two would mean that you'd need to carry coolant AND ammo to keep control of the trigger in the game. Of course, perks would be either "use less coolant to keep heat levels under control" or "your bullets deal extra fire dmg while overheated".
@@Lurker1991 Borderlands is perfect for that kind of thing. A gun with "5% chance it goes from burst fire to full auto *and doesn't stop shooting* until your ammo runs out" is hilariously perfect for a Borderlands gimmic gun. There are far worse 'glitched out' guns in those games.
I’m surprised you did not mention why caselsss ammunition makes a gun run hotter. For those who do not know, the brass casings acts as a heatsink for a lot of the heat produced by the gunshot, which is subsequently ejected in most modern firearms, as soon as it is fired. Most of what makes a regular firearm hot during firing is the friction created by the round as it travels through the barrel, which transfers heat through the rest of the gun.
That’s why they clarified rifle ammunition though. Self contained larger rounds aren’t as unusual or difficult to design. Grenade launchers are pretty well suited, because a low muzzle velocity isn’t a problem (and in many ways is desirable, as long as it’s not *too* low). There are, however, big downsides, hence it’s not widely copied.
@@edsutherland8266 Muzzle velocity has absolutely nothing to do with anything here.. The issue is heat and nothign else and the reason it's not an issue in UBGLs is because you rarely fire them..
@@bo-dine7971 Yes, it does, quite a lot actually. It’s nothing to do with being seldom fired either. The heat issue is also not the important factor, which is present regardless of being caseless. For a grenade launcher, you need to launch a relatively heavy mass, and unless you want to break your shoulder, it has to be at a low velocity. Even in a crew served automatic grenade launcher like the Mk19 or AGS-17, the firing velocity has to be kept relatively low, so the recoil is manageable. So no, it actually has a lot to do with the muzzle velocities.
@@edsutherland8266aaaand you are wrong. Please let me explain. Every semi or full auto firearm will overheat if you shoot very fast for a long time. Correct? Some will overheat faster than others depending mostly on the cadence. Correct? So why is that even a bigger problem with caseless ammunition? Because the casing of regular ammunition takes a lot of that heat that the propellent produces and caries it outside the firearm when ejected. Without this heat transfer away from the gun, it will get very hot very fast. And there would be many many other example that someone could use to argue about it. Like the main guns of a battleship like the Iowa class. These where pretty much caseless. The projectile was loaded and the powder charges (with no brass casing). Why did they not overheat? Because of the low cadence. If you shoot hose guns every 2 seconds they would overheat for sure. Even your full auto grande launcher use cased ammunition and a relatively low cadence. Yes surely also because the recoil produced to fire faster would be a problem. But caseless ammunition could produce the same problem here. So how do you overcome this overheat problem? You could try to use a cooler burning propellent... Which did not work cause the desired muzzle velocity was to low and it caused reload issues with the gas system. You could add mass to absorb the heat, but who would like to carry a heavy rifle? You could add additional cooling, but your gun would sound like a turbofan engine or you need to carry 5 gallons of water. If we somehow find the propellent that burns as powerful without producing as much heat, that would be a major step forward.
@@psycholocke4090 None of that has any relevance to a low velocity grenade launcher though. We’re not talking about battleship guns at all, so their bagged ammunition is completely irrelevant to the discussion. All grenade launchers rely on one form or another of the high-low principle. They all use a fairly normal type of propellant, they merely use it in a manageable volume for their required velocity. The small charge is initially focussed in a small chamber, which then vents into much larger chamber. As such, the heat transfer to the barrel & breech is actually fairly low. The lower rate of fire is less to do with heat, and more to do with ease of use and accuracy. Nobody wants a high rate of fire, especially on a weapon where a single ammo can of 29 rounds (for the AGS-17) weighs in at 14.5kg. So, again, not about heat as much as it is about usability. Caseless high pressure weapons, whether rifles or artillery do have problems with heat, but that’s where the differ substantially from low velocity weapons.
@@Nugire In the military "weight reduction" doesn't exist for grunts, only capacity increase. You don't turn 7kg to 3kg, you turn 270 rounds to 510 rounds.
This is a similar problem to machining. The hot brass ejecting a gun removes heat from the system, just like the chips of metal leaving a machined surface do. Once you remove those factors in either, the heat has nowhere to go and builds up. In machining, the workaround is using coolant, which I assume is a possible solution for the guns, but that adds weight and complexity that reduces portability and reliability. It's really a complex problem, and I don't know if caseless will ever be worth it. It's funny how so many of our initial inventions have inherent qualities that make them work so well, which we completely overlook until we try to "improve" them.
They got round the round cooking off in the chamber problem. You see a brass cartage is thick at the base to handle the pressure but caseless ammunition relies on the chamber and the bolt head and lugs to contain the 50,000+ psi pressure spike. People don’t realise how old brass case technology is (175 years old) plus it uses expensive copper to make the brass so it was due for a modernisation update. Even brass cased ammunition cooks off in the chamber if it’s hot so it’s cool to see an update on a 175 year old brass case technology.
If you think about it, some tanks and artillery shells usually are caseless, with the propellant and the warhead being loaded separatly and leaving no case behind.
@@jonp8015 I mean future innovations might yet see gyrojet-like projectiles make a comeback, but far more likely we'd solve the heat issues with G11 style caseless ammunition first, either by better heat management systems in the guns, or by a propellant with much much higher cook off temp (or not set off by heat at all, preferably)
@@sternguard8283 Well its a race between chemistry for the propellant and material sciences and energy for the railguns, because the railgun problem is friction and wear, and portable power. Caseless ammo research is at an advantage I think since it has fewer technical hurdles to overcome, and also would be the easiest option for a military to swap to (caseless guns not that different mechanically or doctrinally from cased ammo guns), but we'll have to see. I suspect railguns will end up more as a weapon for vehicles rather than infantry, personally
For large caliber, such as 30mm autocanon and higher, there’s a French company, Nexter, which is keen on creating what’s called telescopic ammunition. It tries to be the best of both worlds. Instead of having the ignition propellant in the back of the projectile, it’s actually surrounding it. That means that there still is a case protecting the barrel from over heating, but also making the ammunition less likely to be damaged, but it also comes with the benefit of a much smaller round . That’s because lots of ammunitions above this caliber uses discarding sabots, which makes 80% of the ammunition empty, appart from the sabot itself, and they decided to make the sabot the carrier of the propellant
Its an interesting little technology dead end. It may have applications in the future, perhaps for drones or other systems that need to be lightweight, but for regular military usage the reliability and durability of brass cased ammunition is a wonderful thing considering the conditions that things get exposed to in war.
May I introduce everybody to the Gyrojet, a series of caseless firearms developed and released in the 1960s. It fired gyroscopically stabilised “microjets” that didn’t require a heavy barrel or chamber to resist the pressure of the combustion gases 🤓
Correct, fewer moving parts and therefore less that can go wrong - no more ejection issues if there's nothing to eject. We just haven't made a *reliable* caseless round and gun system to go with it.
@@kirbyis4ever We have, the G11's 4.73x33mm HITP round is safe and reliable. The gun was pretty much adopted already by the time the Berlin Wall came down and defense budgets suffered a massive cut, killing a lot of ongoing military projects at the time. It's just that since Germany wasn't gonna buy the rifle then, NATO wasn't gonna wait for them and standarnized 5.56x45mm as their common intermediate caliber with the ratification of STANAG 4172 in 1993.
@@insomniagobrrr5542 which I don't like and suspect some governmental boondoggery, especially considering some of the flaws with the weapons we've adopted. The drop issues with the P320, for example.
@@uncledoctor6920 The LSAT project is long gone. It evolved into the NGSW, that SIG won. The LSAT-proper became Textron's bit, using telescoped polymer-cased ammo.
I was listening closely waiting to chime in on the comments about how one of the larger issues with caseless ammunition is heat disapation It's wild to think just how much heat that small part of brass can remove from the weapon
@@averywhitaker3513 brush: an implement with a handle, consisting of bristles, hair, or wire set into a block, used for cleaning or scrubbing, applying a liquid or powder to a surface, arranging the hair, or other purposes. "a paint brush"
@@averywhitaker3513 well you could create a powder brush like a cannon scrubber that attaches to the weapon then use that for maintainance basically all you have to to is make sure the round has compression in the barrel once loaded like an air gun: you could make the breach airtight to fire the round
We could build a heatsink into every shot, we could even make that heatsink protect the propellant and bullet. We already do that with brass/aluminum/steel casing already though.
You mention the heat problem, and that kind of makes sense because when the ignition happens the first thing to absorb the excess heat is usually the case and the bullet, both of which are being ejected and with it a majority of the heat. With caseless ammunition the ignition is going of pretty much in contact with the chamber, the chamber is what is going to absorb the heat the most and it isn't being discarded.
"its generally bad to have rounds go off when you dont want them to" Keyword son, "generally", cuz a shot bullet is a good bullet -someone from borderlands probably
@@fobo3361 I just remember the whole "works for me" when somebody complains to him that gun they got is not firing and he caps complainer right in knee with said gun XD
Another hurdle with caseless ammo is that the case in a conventional round does a lot more than just hold everything together before firing. The case also seals the breech. In a process known as obturation, the case swells up like a balloon under the immense pressure to exactly conform to the shape of the chamber and seal all the leaks where gas could otherwise escape.
French artillery (don’t know for others but probably the same) use auto combustible casing for their shells meaning no casing left behind it’s basically a caseless ammo
To achieve high velocities whilst maintaining the mass of the projectile the hardened explosive (outter shell of bullet) would have to be extremely reactive to ensure an "instant" reaction of the explosive (primer --to--> projectile) which would make the round unstable in storage and especially handling. Heat issues (as other comments talked about) could be negatet by changing the rifle design and making for better heat dispersion. But then still the heat has to go somewhere especially in low pressure environments (like space) so a casing that ejects the heat (together with itself) from the gun is the easier solution but with other drawbacks.
caseless ammo has been around for decades One of the first caseless firearm and ammunition systems produced was made by Daisy, the airgun maker, in 1968. The Daisy V/L rifle uses a .22 caliber (5.5 mm) low-powered external propellant caseless round with no primer.
apart from making space ships easier to clean, caseless ammo would also fix the issue of limited rate of fire. when a case has to be ejected after every single round, the rpm tops out at very roughly 1500 shots per minute iirc
i really liked how in fallout there are caseless weapons but even with the scifi technology most people just use regular guns, as if the caseless was peak of gun technology
There is a class of propellants called electric solid propellants that actually could prevent the premature cook offs. They only ignite when an electrical signal is introduced. The ignition can even be throttled, meaning potentiall you could scale down the energy of the projectile by altering the electrical signal.
Another issue with caseless ammunition is getting a good pressure seal at the back of the chamber That’s why combustible case 120mm rounds have a metal basecap, to seal in the propellant gasses Tanks can use caseless ammunition since they’re usually firing every 5 seconds at best and only carry about 50 rounds so overheating isn’t really an issue
Another benefit is that no ejection port needed which is simultaneously the worst place to get debris and one of the easiest places to get debris in, another downside you alluded to is that metal casings retain a lot of that heat that gets removed when the case is ejected. For you PC builders out there it's like a disposable heat sink
As a child, and as an adult, I'm still amazed by the tech we can't or won't advance, the G-11 videos are how I first experienced this awesome technology.
When this project was introduced, a big thing on the table wasn’t just to protect the gunpowder from premature ignition, but also the ignition of other munitions inside the firearm or wherever your ammunition is stored.
