[Blog]G-36 rifle controversy intensifies

[KlavoHunter]

Is the rifle's performance in hot conditions that great a concern when Germany is gearing up to stand up to Russia?

[Sea Skimmer]

Such short term planning is a bad idea, worse even for a country attempting to limit military spending, and I wouldn't be convinced that if an unusual overheating problem does exists it couldn't also happen within NATO territory which after all includes Turkey and Spain which can both get very hot. The eastern Ukraine is pretty hot too for that matter.

Since Germany is supplying these weapons directly to Kurdish troops in the desert the countries international credibility is also on the line. That's not maybe a big deal, but it also will have some sort of effect on international arms exports. Germany is slowly choking those off politically and from lack of investment, but they remain a big earner for the country right now.

[KroLazuxy_87]

I can't seem to find much information about just how much off zero the rifle becomes... "difficult to hit targets past 100 meters, ineffective past 200 meters, and incapable of effective fire past 300 meters" is the best I could find, but I couldn't locate anything more specific or less subjective - I'd find it difficult to hit targets past 100 meters with any rifle. A measurement of degrees off zero (or x distance off zero over y distance fired) would be nice. Also, does the barrel become loose within the polymer and float around, whizzing bullets every which way? Or does it shift 'predictably' such that a sight adjustment could account for it? The latter seems like a pain to deal with amid a fire fight, but less detrimental than the former.

On a side note: I saw some reports blaming ammunition with too thin jacketing, but many of those claims seem to have been heavily refuted, even going so far as to level accusations of cover-up and scapegoating. Since people are still saying the rifle blows, I'm guessing the defective ammo (though probably not helping) wasn't the cause?

[Thanas]

AFAIK:
1. At first they accepted the explanation of H&K that ammo was defective, but even after new ammo had been ordered it became clear that the problem wasn't the ammo, because in at least one firefight proven ammo was used and the problems still persisted.
2. There is a massive overheating issue in that after a half-hour of combat the plastics become way too hot to touch, some guys got serious burns even when handling them with gloves and couldn't fire the weapons. There was a German report saying that a few years ago a patrol would have been overrun and all killed by the Taliban had they not carried a significant number of G3s which allowed them to continue fighting.
3. As to specific accuracy issues, there is a lot of rumour, ranging from "gun spewing wildly all over the place" to "pulling into x direction" etc. I am not sure a field adjustment would help here except for carrying mobile cooling units, but that is impractical of course.

[Batman]

That doesn't sound like H&K. Their products are often needlessly complex, and they certainly are expensive, but they're usually also reliable as hell.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

That doesn't sound like H&K. Their products are often needlessly complex, and they certainly are expensive, but they're usually also reliable as hell.

Well.... German reliability and complexity didn't work very well in WWII...

[Lonestar]

That doesn't sound like H&K. Their products are often needlessly complex, and they certainly are expensive, but they're usually also reliable as hell.

Reliability doesn't correlate with complex. The Glock line is very simple and has few moving parts compared to many of it's competitors, and it's often referred to as the AK of pistols.

[Batman]

I know that. It's usually the other way round. My point was from what I can tell H&K products were usually reliable despite often being needlessly complex.

[Beowulf]

I can't seem to find much information about just how much off zero the rifle becomes... "difficult to hit targets past 100 meters, ineffective past 200 meters, and incapable of effective fire past 300 meters" is the best I could find, but I couldn't locate anything more specific or less subjective - I'd find it difficult to hit targets past 100 meters with any rifle. A measurement of degrees off zero (or x distance off zero over y distance fired) would be nice. Also, does the barrel become loose within the polymer and float around, whizzing bullets every which way? Or does it shift 'predictably' such that a sight adjustment could account for it? The latter seems like a pain to deal with amid a fire fight, but less detrimental than the former.

On a side note: I saw some reports blaming ammunition with too thin jacketing, but many of those claims seem to have been heavily refuted, even going so far as to level accusations of cover-up and scapegoating. Since people are still saying the rifle blows, I'm guessing the defective ammo (though probably not helping) wasn't the cause?

I've seen unsourced reports online of 2m diameter groups at 200 meters after 7-9 magazines of ammunition. I'm not sure what the normal German standard is for accuracy, but most assault rifles are designed for 2-4 MOA groups, a MOA being about 50mm at 200m. So the accuracy gets 10x worse (or more!). NATO rifles tend to be on the more accurate side of the range (Russian guns tend toward the inaccurate side of the range).

[Thanas]

Finally, data was printed in todays newspaper (so no online link for now):

Bundeswehr demands a chance of 90% hit if temperature changes +30°C over ambient temperature.
The G 36 only manages a 7% chance of hitting the correct target.

[salm]

So, can somebody who knows something about guns tell if these are realistic demands and if the G36 is crap?

[Sea Skimmer]

Realistic is impossible to determine with such an utter lack of context or actually useful information. Which somehow doesn't surprise me one bit that after YEARS of nothing but basically unsubstantiated shit vs blatant ass covering, that such useless information would be what is released. Or just made up, lets not rule that one out either.

I mean god, any of you ever look at that fire fight which is sometimes cited as the original source of some of this? 28,000 rounds fired and no bodies found one.... the info which meant nothing on its own since the Taliban, and the NVA, and US Army, and you know, pretty much everyone who fights and didn't get physically overrun in an assault or cut down directly in front of a major fortified position, take the bodies with them. But because the troops were super elite paratroopers the German media swallowed down a claim from just three guys, whom IIRC were not even named, that they were missing and ran out of ammo because the guns overheated, and not say because poor leadership led to excessive automatic fire.... Which you know, another example of information that's just functionally useless. I've seen people insist the G36 is complete crap from experience, and people presently in the German Army who think this is all bunk, or at least certainly bunk in European conditions. The only thing that can resolve this is real firing trials, and real information on them. 'hit the target' is not a useful specification with literally no context.

[Thanas]

Context given is accuracy at 200 meters if aligned properly with target.

[Sea Skimmer]

Context given is accuracy at 200 meters if aligned properly with target.

But what sized target? And is this with a human aiming or a bench device? And what's ambient temperature? And what model of the gun? And how was the temperature rise accomplished? No gas operated weapon is going to put every single round through the same hole. Was this with new guns, or ones taken from service with worn rifling?

The range helps a little, but sorry on a topic like this with a weapon this prolific I do not see any value in such basic numbers. It answers nothing. I've seen Bundeswehr officers denouncing these reports online, and in one case pointing out that qualification training is usually conducted with a single rifle passed person to person, to reduce the number of loaded weapons on the firing range vs everyone using there own gun, and that they shoot all day like this without problems. That's no numbers info, but frankly a way more useful tidbit then information like this.

A very small amount of money, a few dozen guns taken from random service units, and 25,000 rounds of ammo would answer this easily. Until someone does that and actually publishes a useful summary report we've got nothing.

[KroLazuxy_87]

A very small amount of money, a few dozen guns taken from random service units, and 25,000 rounds of ammo would answer this easily.

Agreed. A well controlled, well measured, repeatable testing would be very informative.

Until someone does that and actually publishes a useful summary report we've got nothing.

I'd actually be surprised to learn that this hasn't already been done. However, I wouldn't bat an eyelash to learn that the results of this testing were not distributed outside the manufacturer or military brass.

I wouldn't say that we've got nothing. The complaint about the rifle seems to hinge on the problem occuring at specific conditions. Just because I've never had my phone's lithium-ion battery catch fire doesn't mean it didn't happen to other people.

[Thanas]

So the full 372 page report is kept under wraps, but here is what has been quoted in the media:


1. According to the highly-respected newspaper of record FAZ the plastic is so shitty that if you put the rifle on its side and expose one side to strong sunlight the receiver will actually deform.
2. Munition might account for some percentage of errors, but even with testing high-quality bullets the problems remain
3. G36 in general runs hotter than assault rifles of other nations when tested against each other.
4. Humidity: The rifle performs significantly better in humid regions (like Germany) and very badly in very dry climates. This to me is consistent with the idea of a rifle designed for northern Europe.
5. The rifle performs best at ambient temperatures of around 15°C (like Germany), less well with very high ambient temperatures (like Afghanistan). See above.

And then we get to the bizarre:

The magazine Stern reports , citing a secret report of June 2014th. According to this report, the Bundeswehr Research Institute of the Bundeswehr found evidence of a structural defect in the plastic housing. The gun contains therefore the inferior additive polyethylene. This could lead to deformation of the hot gun, they say. Polyethylene is cheaper than the polyamide material from which the gun is made otherwise. As a result, especially the precision ability is limited. In application areas in hot regions this could be dangerous for the soldiers.

In the H&K delivered Abnahmedemonstrator of 1993, with which the German army was convinced of the practicality of the weapon, on the other hand, contained no polyethylene

I'm not sure I believe this leak for it would require H&K to knowingly cheat the Bundeswehr when lives of soldiers were at stake. And this would open them up to criminal charges. Why would H&K knowingly risk their entire company this way?

One possible explanation according to Sueddeutsche Zeitung is that the plastic could long have been replaced by better, more heat-resistant plastic for the low additional cost of 10€ per rifle, but nobody wanted to sign off on the extra cost. I find that to be extremely plausible considering the otherwise demonstrated incompetence of the Bundeswehr when it comes to buying new weapons.

H&K further claims now that most of the problems are the result from using the rifle like a light MG, in short spraying the enemy instead of firing short bursts.

But the main problem is that the report is under wraps, though this has not kept the army from leaking all over the press.

[Dominus Atheos]

In the H&K delivered Abnahmedemonstrator of 1993, with which the German army was convinced of the practicality of the weapon, on the other hand, contained no polyethylene

I'm not sure I believe this leak for it would require H&K to knowingly cheat the Bundeswehr when lives of soldiers were at stake. And this would open them up to criminal charges. Why would H&K knowingly risk their entire company this way?

What are the chances that at some point during the phases after this someone in H&K and/or the government said "Hey! We can save 10€ per rifle if we switch this part to cheaper plastic, and our test at the (german) firing range indicate this will have no adverse effect!" and the other side said "Sure thats a great idea lets do that!"

And then contracts were signed to that effect?

[salm]

Or somebody thought that implementing some planned obsolescence would be a good idea. We´ll probably never find out.

[KroLazuxy_87]

In the H&K delivered Abnahmedemonstrator of 1993, with which the German army was convinced of the practicality of the weapon, on the other hand, contained no polyethylene

I'm not sure I believe this leak for it would require H&K to knowingly cheat the Bundeswehr when lives of soldiers were at stake. And this would open them up to criminal charges. Why would H&K knowingly risk their entire company this way?

What are the chances that at some point during the phases after this someone in H&K and/or the government said "Hey! We can save 10€ per rifle if we switch this part to cheaper plastic, and our test at the (german) firing range indicate this will have no adverse effect!" and the other side said "Sure thats a great idea lets do that!"

And then contracts were signed to that effect?

Any idea where H&K is getting their plastic? Even if H&K is molding the plastic themselves instead of contracting out for the plastic housing to be made by a third party, they still have to receive the raw plastic from somewhere. I rather doubt H&K is manufacturing their own plastic.
Whether they're making the plastic or ordering it, they should be checking each batch as routine quality control. (Maybe even more so if they're contracting it out)

Seperately, here's a bit about H&K's response:
Heckler & Koch Fires Back At G36 Audit Report

In response to the recent EMI/WTD 91 audit report on the G36 rifle’s thermal issues, Heckler and Koch has issued a statement rebuking the claims made by the Ernst Mach Institute about the rifle. The statement has been machine translated into English and replicated below:

[Mediocre-at-best translation. See link.]

In my estimation, Heckler and Koch is lashing out in an attempt to salvage the G36’s reputation. I have for several years known about the G36’s lack of a direct metal connection between the barrel and the sights, something that I strongly suspected would cause POI shift issues with polymers of higher coefficients of thermal expansion. Two days ago, those suspicions were confirmed. The G36 suffers from an issue stemming from its very architectural design.

Heckler and Koch will have a very difficult time refuting this, and it sounds like they know it, too.

[Lonestar]

I believe that most firearms that make significant use of plastic in, say, the frame use their own molds. Certainly, that's the case with handguns. I suppose it's possible that "80%" recievers arrive from somewhere and HK drills/mills it out the rest of the way.

[Pelranius]

Have the Saudis and Spanish had any trouble with their G-36s (which IIRC, are license produced)? I haven't seen anything in the news yet.

[Lonestar]

I'm not really convinced that those guys use them often enough that problems would appear. Additionally, neither of those countries are what I would call forthright with problems they might have.

Anyway, it appears that the German government was actively trying to cover it up and find the leaks, at the behest of HK.

[Thanas]

Allegedly there is a 120cm drop over 100m distance, after quick-firing single shots for 2 minutes (0.5 shots per minute). This was the result of bad ammunition.

Without that bad ammunition it is supposed to be a 10cm drop.

EDIT: from second mag only 50% of shots hit the target, from third only 30%.

EDIT 2: It looks more and more like this whole thing is nonsense, as the G36 wasn't designed to be used in full auto. Soldiers from Afghanistan (link in German) don't remember any problems. Link. The main problem seems to be that the test were using it as a light MG, especially to hold the enemy down via blasting at him. This was not the regular usage of the G36, as the Bundeswehr got other weapons for that.