HK is complaning about the announcement for the new german assault rifle, because it didn't specify the calibre.
They say that 5.56x45 is insufficiant for the modern battlefield and would like to offer an assault rifle in 7.62x51 in real fucking neato. But the weight requirement is to light for such a calibre rifle.
>assault rifle in 7.62x51 That's called a battle rifle, not an assault rifle.
Brody Collins
What's the prescribed weight? I would bet a sad handjob a commercial AR-10 could hit the mark.
Angel Martin
Why not just bring back the G3/FAL if they were looking for such a weapon? If the 433 is too light the G3 has a good pound or so over it by itself.
Josiah Myers
The listed BAAINBw’s specifications for the System Sturmgewehr (assault rifles system) with accessories:
Version Sturmgewehr long barrel and Sturmgewehr short barrel (conversion must be possible by barrel change) Length of Sturmgewehr short barrel without signature damper (sound suppressor) max. 900mm Length of Sturmgewehr long barrel without signature damper max. 1000mm Caliber 5.56 x 45mm NATO or 7.62 x 51mm NATO Ambidextrous controls for right- and left-handed users STANAG 4694 rails on bottom of hand guard and on the top of the receiver Use in areas with climatic categories A1-3, B1-3, C0-3 and M1-3 according to STANAG 4370 without restriction of functionality (except electrical components) Receiver life should last 30,000 rounds. The barrel life is to last at least 15,000 rounds (soft core ammunition/double core) / 7,500 rounds (hard core ammunition) Maximum weight 3.6kg (without magazine and optics) Accessories in different quantity: Bayonet with sheath and carrying device, signature damper with transport pouch, exercise cartridge device, blank firing bolt mechanism, drum magazine, gun cleaning device, shell casings catch bag, STANAG 4694 rail for side mounting, cover for STANAG rails, flash suppressor caps, magazines, bipod, loading aid, carrying straps, emergency sights, transport bags, angled for grip Spare parts kit. Optional accessories: shot counter, magazine pouches for two magazines
Tyler Hughes
>mounting all the modern equipment on the end of a G3 no
Connor Clark
Because we're not in the 1950's and we don't use the same manufacturing techniques we did back then?
Gavin Gonzalez
Why don't they just beef the HK433 to 7,62x51 up? It shouldn't be to hard, or is it?
The G3 doesn't have the capacity to mount all the shiny modern equipment, and there's been some refinement in the decades between its adoption and today that could make a slightly better battle rifle. Also, I kind of understand where people might be coming from wanting 7.62 NATO back as the bog standard. Intermediate rounds were developed as a response to statistics showing that most engagements occurred well within, IIRC, 400m. Obviously this is too far for handgun calibers but doesn't exactly make full use of the extended range offered by full-power rounds like 7.62 NATO, x54R or, say, 8mm Mauser and 7mm Jap. So they decided to make intermediate rounds that were effective inside that range to save on weight, size, and possibly cost of materials, as well as getting more of a round's full potential out of short barrels for CQB. However, the conflicts that today's armies find themselves in take place with a lot of open space, meaning engagements may regularly take place beyond that 400m range, requiring a little extra juice to extend effective ranges. Additionally, with bullpup rifles gaining traction, it's possible they could see wider adoption, and placing a "full-power" round in such a configuration would give you the same thing it would with intermediate rounds- a long enough barrel to get the most out of a cartridge but also a short enough overall length for CQB. On top of all this, other gear is becoming lighter and smaller, partially waiving encumbrance concerns.
Jack Rivera
>t. man who has never used a G3
The ergonomics are absolute shit and the insides aren't great either.
Henry Ward
> So they decided to make intermediate rounds that were effective inside that range to save on weight, size, and possibly cost of materials, as well as getting more of a round's full potential out of short barrels for CQB.
No. They did it to increase hit rate. What was SCHV.
>However, the conflicts that today's armies find themselves in take place with a lot of open space
COIN in Afghanistan. That's literally it.
Jaxon Edwards
You would really just need someone to make a durable railed handguard, and weld a rail to the top of the receiver.
Nevertheless, as much as I like the G3, not a good idea.
Xavier Phillips
417!417!417
David Rivera
>is HK right about this? No they're just being dicks >do they have Veterans in their ranks? What does that have tondo with anything? >do they listen to soldiers? I doubt it, any complaints are probably relayed through the min of defense. And I'll bet they just want to stick with 556 like every other NATO country cuz why switch? 556 works fine, and 150 rds (or however much they carry) is less weight than 150rds of 762.
Evan Evans
>You would really just need someone to make a durable railed handguard, and weld a rail to the top of the receiver. these PTR's exist, nobody is going to lug around a 20rd 15lb battle rifle that is front loaded
Gabriel Watson
I don't think the average grunt is going to be all that good at engaging targets over 400m no matter what rifle you give him. Seems like this situation is exactly the reason that DMR's exist. Have one or two guys per squad who actually know how to shoot at longer distances and give them a semi auto "precision rifle" chambered in 7.62 NATO.
Christian Hernandez
I said it would be a bad idea to go back to the G3.
But other anons mentioned the inability to mount modern sights and gizmos. I'm just saying that's not really a huge concern, because it's an easy fix.
Yeah H&K is full of themselves. I will now collect my sad handjob.
Levi Robinson
>Caliber 5.56 x 45mm NATO or 7.62 x 51mm NATO So what are they complaining about again?
Elijah Hernandez
>HK: wanna buy the 416 >BW: nah, that shit's too expensive >HK: oh, ok we'll make the 433..OH WAIT how about a 417
Julian Gonzalez
This. Stop trying to make carbines and rifles effective out to 500m+, it's a situation that calls for either a marksman, a machine gun, or something even heavier
Brayden Fisher
they could just engineer a better round instead of changing weapons systems
Jackson Hughes
.224 Valk firing a SLAP projectile?
William Adams
Just buy SCARs lol. Oh thats right, Germany refuses to buy FN because they btfo out of HK in every single trial and the krauts are eternally assmad about it.
Landon Ortiz
But according to it's either Nato caliber. and 7,62x51 piston rifle with rails (no mlok etc) under 8 lbs is no mean feat.
Brody Jones
>They say that 5.56x45 is insufficiant for the modern battlefield and would like to offer an assault rifle in 7.62x51 in real fucking neato.
>Maximum weight 3.6kg (without magazine and optics) >7.62x51 that's gonna be fun to shoot.
So my guess is that Germany is doing the same thing as Sweden. There's a lot of worrying around new Russian body armor that is reputed to be able to stop 5.56 AP, so Sweden's new rifle qual targets have a rectangular zone in the middle that is worth 0 points to reflect that. The fear that 5.56 may have an effective range of 0m has led to a push towards modernizing their fleet of AK4 (G3) rifles, which *might* have an effective range of 150m with AP ammo against the Russians. Might being the operative word, because we all know how spotty information regarding Russian military tech can be.
They just want more money. Ask any veteran if they would want a heavier rifle and less ammunition. Nope.
Robert Reed
Should go back to 6.5x55 Get some ap core in that shit
Connor Howard
>Do they listen to the soldiers and if yes, why doesn't the minister of defense do? In Germany the minister of defense (which is a strong woman who dont need to listen to men and have things mansplained to her) just doesnt listen to the people who know their shit.
Better get pregnancy uniforms for female soldiers
Gabriel Jenkins
Why all the fear of the russians? Chinese are the modern enemy. Russians dont even have a aircraft carrier. And that rust bucket Kuznetsov is not an aircraft carrier.
Gavin Bailey
Germans, the eternally cucked Let's see how they will manage to destroy Europe this time
Charles Johnson
This...
We bombed Syria, and Russia just kind of whined a bit, but it was fine. And no side is really looking to attack the other right now.
The Russia fear imo, is being propagated by boomers (not in the Jow Forums sense of the word, literally people from the baby boomer generation) who lived through the cold war, but don't realize it's over.
Kevin Taylor
>Why all the fear of the russians?
Historical enemy of any European nation.
Countering russian aggression and forms in which it manifests in is not fear, it's just intelligent.
Dylan Flores
>post yfw militaries all go to 7.62x39 for superior performance in urban settings
It's actually you who doesn't realize what's over and what's not.
Soviet union collapsing gave the west 20 years at most, before Russia openly started to go for a competitive superpower status again.
Connor Jones
They don't need a CV to reach the Swedes or Germans. But it's mainly because Russia is a much bigger arms exporter and will cheaply sell those plates (if not just give away) all over including to potential US or NATO foes. So "muh overmatch" applies.
>ergonomics are absolute shit Found the manlet with short arms
Bentley Young
Oh god please....i want i new and nice battlerifle. Something between a Fal, G3, Scar, Ar10....i want HK to create the ultimate 7.62 rifle. A Mini mg 5 for every squadmember.
