Check out Headstamp Publishing’s extensive catalog of excellent books!
In the 1970s when the French Army was looking for a new rifle 5.56mm, they tested a number of foreign rifles alongside development the FAMAS at St Etienne. These included the HK33, the M16, and the FN CAL – and today we are looking at the FN CAL. It already had a four-position selector switch (safe/semi/full/burst), fulfilling one of the French Army requirements. But it did not have sufficient grenade launching capability, and so several examples were modified for trials with unique rifle grenade launching hardware.
Ultimately the HK33 was the best performing rifle, but it was not seen as a politically acceptable option and the FAMAS was chosen instead. I have not seen the trials reports to understand specifically why the FN CAL was unsuccessful, but we know that it was unsuccessful in many other trials, and FN dropped it for the distinct FNC design instead before long.
HK33F Video: https://youtu.be/sKqfAIEkFgg
Many thanks to the IRCGN (Institut de Recherche Criminelle de la Gendarmerie Nationale) for allowing me access to film these trials prototypes for you!
“(…)HK33 was the best performing rifle, but it was not seen as a politically acceptable option and the FAMAS was chosen(…)”
Now I wonder if FN CAL would be equal to HK33 would it then by palatable for French (made by our ally of 1914) or not (non-French)?
“Not-French” was always going to lose.
I about swallowed my coffee cup the morning I read that HK had won the competition to replace the FAMAS; I’d figured that the usual French move of soliciting bids and then copying the best pieces of each design would result in “Anything but what was submitted” winning, and some connected French figurehead being subsidized to actually produce the weapons on French soil…
The 416 procurement marked the end of an epoch, whether or not we want to admit it.
You summed their system up concisely, yet so perfectly.
Is there a grenade range difference in .30cal compared w. .223 ?
Depends on the grenade, more than anything.
There are grenades designed to be fired by 7.62 blanks and ones designed to be fired with live rounds from 5.56 weapons; the ranges, as you might expect, are all different. And, it is the basic design of the grenade that makes for the maximum range possible…
Now, in terms of “Which round is going to be able to provide more theoretical range?”, then it’s going to be 7.62X51, not 5.56X45. However, I believe I remember looking at the various ranges for 7.62 blank-propelled grenades and comparing them to the 5.56 bullet-trap models and they were damn close. It’s all about the energy available to impart, and how you go about doing it.f
So, the real answer to your question is another question: Which grenade?
I think there are a couple of models out there that can be fired by both 7.62 and 5.56 weapons, but the details of that are things I have never really looked into all that deeply.
“(…)can be fired by both 7.62 and 5.56(…)”
You have described TELGREN https://defensionem.com/fn-herstal-bullet-thru-telgren-rifle-grenade/ …Telgren range was up to 400m with a 7.62x51mm and 300m with 5.56mm…
I think that indicates the amount of difference you’re going to see, due to the input energy.
You’re also likely to have somewhat decreased performance from both cartridges due to the tradeoffs in optimization you’re going to experience trying to make both cartridges work.
I think a lot of the bullet-trap stuff started going away once everyone started issuing things like the M855A1 and other heavier projectiles; the necessities of the situation imply that you have to design your bullet trap for a specific load/projectile, and once you’ve done that? Any change is going to stop that specific design from working.
I vaguely remember hearing a safety-of-use message from Afghanistan about not lending cartridges on joint operations due to the potential risk, here. I was talking to one of the QASAS (Ammo quality and surveillance specialist) guys, and he told me that that specific weird SOUM stemmed from a French soldier unknowingly blowing his rifle and himself up due to using some of the 77-grain stuff he’d gotten from the Marines… He also didn’t know for sure if that was at all accurate or truthful; it was what he heard through the grapevine.
So… Bullet-trap mechanisms? Even more reliant on consistent ammo than roller-delay or lever-delay systems in the parent rifle.
To a large degree, I suspect that as things evolve, you’re going to see even less scope for these rifle grenade systems.
Although… It’d be interesting to see what could be come up with in terms of projected nets for capturing/disabling drone systems. I am certain that someone, somewhere is working on that.
I was thinking just the same, are they gonna come up with some grenadelike weapon system that will be used against the dreaded drones.
Even some shotgun pellets like but with nice range and spread could be maybe good
“(…)projected nets for capturing/disabling drone(…)”
You have described https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/russian-brt-setkomet-muzzle-attached-anti-drone-net-launcher-44822767
This is great!
Does it uses blanks, or bullet flies through the thingy?
Notch cutting with file was hilarious but again, if it works its good.