H&K Vindicated, No Problems Found with G36!

News.Ge reports that a German government commission investigating alleged problems with the H&K G36 found no problems with the rifle. In fact, they got glowing reports from troops who used the rifle in Afghanistan …

For Heckler & Koch, the report on the rifle’s battle efficacy could not have been better. Led by Green party politician Winfried Nachtwei, the commission questioned 200 soldiers to find out whether they had ever been put in danger, or indeed directly harmed, by the gun’s supposed lack of accuracy.

“The mission-experienced soldiers refuted the classification of the G36 as a glitch-rifle,” the commission said in Berlin on Wednesday. The report had already been leaked to Wednesday’s edition of the “Sächsische Zeitung,” in which one platoon commander who served in Afghanistan in 2009 offered nothing but glowing words about the gun’s accuracy. “We always felt in a superior position with the G36, particularly because we could have an impact on the target with relatively little ammunition,” he told the Nachtwei commission.

The commission was careful, however, not to question the scientific tests that had been conducted on the G36, confining itself only to the observation that they had tested “extreme cases” that were unlikely to occur on the battlefield. Christine Buchholz, defense policy spokeswoman for the socialist Left party, was also cautious about the findings. “Of course there are still a few questions,” she told DW. “It might be right that no German soldier was hurt in battle, but they didn’t ask whether all the targets were hit.

The report did criticize the company’s close relationship with the Bundeswehr. Given the German government’s constant attempts at destroying their own arms industry, I can only think they were desperate to find something, anything, bad to put in the report.

So H&K is vindicated and, I hope, the German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen is embarrassed by her over the top response to unfounded accusations.  TFB, as far as I can tell, was the only English-language publication defending H&K. Most publications reacted with glee at the opportunity to give H&K a black eye. We got hold of a full auto H&K G36 and tried to replicate the H&K’s alleged wandering aim without any success …

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Yimmy

    Typical military hating lefties doing their level best to destroy the evil arms indutry!

  • Interesting. I still don’t care for the G36, but I am happy for H&K.

    • Old Fart

      Thumbs up for the still don’t care for the G36 part. H&K are dicks and I think they realize by now how much we hate them back.

      • Robert Powell

        How are H&K dicks? I’ve heard this sentiment before and have never heard any actual claims that might show them to be anything one way or the other. Is it because you can’t buy all their military based weapons? Or is it bad customer service? I’m curious because from my experience it is an asinine thought.

        • Old Fart

          First of all, because they don’t take the consumer market nowhere near serious, which is pretentious and laughable from a marketing perspective. Especially in the US. Secondly, because they always know better than the end user (including many tier one). And third, it is indeed hard to get customer service from them. Which, in my book, counts as not standing by your product. I’m all for a good quality product and don’t mind spending the extra buck, but if a vendor wants my business, it needs to go the extra mile for me to keep coming back. H&K can really go piss up a rope. I’m one of those -I have no doubt- many people who wholeheartedly hates H&K back. To tell you the truth, I’m not even impressed with their product. FN is far more innovative, for instance. H&K missed the boat a long time ago. How can they even still justify their ridiculous price tags? They’re not all that….

          • Pete

            I don’t buy it. I’ve had nothing but good experiences with HK USA customer service. I can’t speak to their customer service anywhere else, but I have used their US customer service 3 times over the last 10 years and have found the service exemplary. Not just not bad, but no-bs exemplary. I too have always heard that “HK, because you suck, and we hate you” line. I’m sure the line comes from somewhere and it’s certainly catchy, but it doesn’t match my personal experience.

            I’ve owned a USP .45 Expert since ~2005 or so. I bought the gun second hand. When I called them to buy some barrel o-rings, they UPS’d them to me for free. When I called because I was having issues fitting a replacement Wolff recoil spring into the captive recoil spring assembly, they UPS’d me 3 cir-clips (1 plus 2 spares) and also a replacement stock recoil spring for free. When I had put a good 10k rounds through it and wanted to have it serviced, I paid to ship it to them, they called me, talked it over, completely overhauled the pistol and serviced the 2 worn out magazines I sent in with it, then shipped it back to me on their dime.

            I don’t know about you, but in my book that’s going above and beyond, especially since I was not the original purchaser of the pistol.

          • Old Fart

            That’s very good for you then (I genuinly mean that from the heart) and kuddo’s to H&K USA. I’ve heard horror stories though from people in private mil, LE etc. H&K can really be a pain in the six to deal with and quite too often they don’t even bother to respond at all. I call that a severe case of the Douche Bag Syndrome.

          • john huscio

            I’d have more faith in FN if they didn’t make the frames of their polymer pistols out of playdoh

          • Old Fart

            Agreed. Perhaps I should have mentioned their machine gun line-up. SCAR is actually a very good platform as well. So are P90 en F2000. These are far more ambitious designs than H&K’s stuff.

          • CommonSense23

            I am curious how you get that they know better than “tier one”. Or how they are supposed to market better to the consumer market with Germany’s horrible export laws. You realize HK cared mored about American gun rights then Ruger ever did right.

          • Old Fart

            H&K has a production line in the USA, which should enable them to work around the German export laws.

          • iksnilol

            Export of intellectual property?

            That’s a b**** aswell.

          • hkguns

            No, he read some crap on the internet and now he’s just farting.

        • Mihoshi

          People allways seem to forget that HK was perhaps the only large gun maker that openly opposed the assault weapon ban.

          But hey, HK doesn’t care about the customer…

          • Old Fart

            Point taken and I respect your comment, I’d like to add that money talks and bullshit walks. How many times have those same customers been screaming, in fact BEGGING for H&K to sell them the stuff we all seem to crave? They won’t release it to the civilian market and dont seem to bother about people wanting to give them their money. That is a screwy business model if you ask me and that is exactly why H&K is in dire straits. They’re so obsessed about agency sales that they forgot that there’s a tremendous civie market share just waiting to be taken. Why should we even bother to in some way reward their own stupidity in the first place? They had their chance to treat us right, they failed miserably. Now compare that to, for instance, IWI. Their marketing people know what they’re doing. IWI saw demand was there, they came, and they conquered. And rightly so! H&K seriously lacks a competitive, market-sensitive enterprise. They just don’t seem to get it.

          • john huscio

            The vp9 is selling like hotcakes….they seemed to have gotten the message.

          • FourString

            I really need one in California. Maybe I should take a road trip up north……

          • Old Fart


          • Rick5555

            HK is following German Export Laws, pertaining to military type firearms. Germany has these messed up laws when it comes to these things. Even guns like the VP9 holds 15 rounds. When it could easily hold 17 rounds. However, due to German laws….HK was permitted to export that firearm for commercial use. So I don’t blame HK. I blame their govt. It’s some odd sh*t.

          • Old Fart


          • Kivaari

            Blame our government since the re-reading of the GCA ’68, showed they could not be imported. That’s why the MSRs are all made hear, and not assembled from parts.

          • HKGuns

            Apparently you are too old to read and learn. Stop posting crap when it is obvious you know nothing about which you are speaking.

            Keep farting.

        • Kivaari

          The worst customer service has to be Beretta.

          • iksnilol

            I roll with CZ and Sauer for now. Haven’t had a need for customer service yet. *knocks on wood*

          • MR

            Yeah, I’d rather support a company with atrocious customer service that I’ll never need, rather than great customer service that I’m dealing with all the time. I’ve been reading the SCCY forum lately, I guess that’s where that came from.

          • iksnilol

            How is their customer service?

            I am curious even if I’ve never seen a SCCY in Europe.

      • Limousine Liberal

        You clearly have never called HK customer service. They are some of the nicest and most helpful CS reps I have encountered in this industry. But, go ahead and ignorantly propagate bs that you’ve heard around the net…good policy.

        • Old Fart

          You clearly didn’t properly read through my post, otherwise you wouldn’t have missed the private mil and LE part.

        • Kivaari

          We had an issue with an MP5. We loaned it to a neighboring agency and they used defective ammo. A squib load left a bullet in the barrel. Then they hot another round and ringed the barrel. HKs “one week turn around” was about 6 month.

  • Lance

    That’s BIG DUH!!!! Same thing happened in 2007 with our own M-4 carbine, after millions lost in a worthless competition we found out theirs nothing wrong with it either. Seems military weapons maker have too much power now and is making world military waste billions on weapons that nation doesn’t need.

    I already predicted that the G-36 would probably stay in German military service and the hype was all politics to get a politicians own approved rifle adopted glad like what we went threw common sense won in the end.

    • Seburo

      No you did not you lying mall ninja-tard, you were championing the death of the G36 and hyping (overpriced) AR-15 replacements in every website that reported it with every other M4 fanboy.

      • Joshua

        Ignore Lance.

        • He is like a bad car wreck: horrible, but you can’t look away.

          • Colin S

            Lance, the gift that keeps on giving 😀

          • iksnilol

            I feel TFB wouldn’t be the same place without him. You know how the check engine light is always on in your crappy first car? Like, it isn’t a good thing but you sorta miss it when you don’t have it anymore.

      • MR

        I take this as Lance’s comment regarding Steve Johnson’s assertion that TFB was defending H&K at the beginning of this ordeal.

  • Scott Tuttle

    shocked! no wait, the complete opposite of shocked. thats it.

  • Major Tom

    I don’t buy it. This report reeks of the same kind of coercion and lying as when we get “glowing” reports surrounding the F-35 project.

    • Evan

      There’s a difference between troops who used a rifle in combat saying it’s good and Lockheed Martin contradicting pilot reports about the F-35.

      • mosinman

        i’m not saying it happened but it’s a possibility that the soldiers might have been given incentive to give good reviews in one way or another

        • Evan

          I doubt that. Having been in the Marine Corps myself, I can tell you that soldiers will give honest assessments of their gear, whether it be a M16 (minimally acceptable), PVS-7B (junk), AimPoint (completely useless, use your iron sights), gas mask (bulky and utterly pointless), or good stuff, like the M240G, PVS-14s, PEQ-2, etc.

          • Yimmy

            Having also been in the military and actually having worked on a test evaluation side of things, I can tell you that you’re being completely naive.

            What you as an individual may say or think means very little when millions of tax payers dollar have been spent in the development of the platform. Your job as the grunt is to make it work.

          • Evan

            Just because millions of dollars are spent on any given piece of equipment does not mean that said equipment is good. The fact of the matter is, the R&D guys who tell us that any new piece of gear is the best thing since pockets hasn’t actually used that gear under actual field conditions. The Marine Corps is excellent at doing more with less, and we get the job done regardless of our gear, but that doesn’t mean that every bit of equipment we’re issued is some amazing talisman that we couldn’t do the job without.

            The government probably spent millions of the development of ALICE clip adapters. As far as I can tell, the only purpose for that particular piece of gear is to get lost at some point between receiving your CIF issue and returning it when you check out.

            I’m sure they spent a ton of money developing the MOLLE packs with the frames that broke as soon as you looked at them too hard too.

          • Uniform223

            I was in the army myself and I can give an honest assessment that almost contradicts yours… does that mean that I am lying and that I was given incentive and kick backs?

            >M16A2 and M4 = acceptable never had any real issues. Preferred M4 over the musket.

            >Never used an older NVGs so I wouldn’t know. When I was in single monocle NODs were replacing the duel monocle NODs. When I got out there was this new highspeed NOD that actually blended NVG capabilities with thermal imaging into one complete picture. I saw it in an article in Army Times.

            >The Aimpoint also known as the M68 CCO just made shooting so much easier in any condition. It made reflexive firing so much easier and unlike iron sights… do not parallax. Though I always made sure I had my iron sight and my “red dot” coalesced.

            > Gas masks. Yes they are bulky but its just one of those things that is better to have and not need than to need and not have. Everyone has trained with it and everyone has gone through the gas chamber. To say that they are utterly pointless is like saying seat belts in your car is pointless because you don’t intend to crash your car today…

            so does my counter experience/opinions mean that I am being dishonest?

          • Evan

            I’m guessing you weren’t in the infantry?

            I’ve never heard any grunt have anything positive to say about the AimPoint. It’s a red dot with an atrocious reticle that feels like you’re looking through a scope. Most of the guys I knew who were issued them didn’t even bother mounting them. EOTech is a different story, but they weren’t easy to come by in my time.

            The gas chamber “training” is more of a demonstration of gear than anything else. It doesn’t fill me up with confidence. You can feel the CS gas even with the mask. If that was Sarin instead….Even if the M40 field protective mask worked as advertised, in the event of a gas attack, you need to have it on in nine seconds. Ever do that successfully while in full combat gear? Didn’t think so. Basically, if you’re already in full MOPP gear when you get gassed, it may help, but short of that, it’s just useless luggage that belongs at the bottom of your pack.

            The M16 (I was never issued an M4) is acceptable, but just barely. Direct gas impingement is an absurdly stupid operating system, the M855 ammo is inadequate, and I dislike having to clean my rifle twice a day even if I haven’t fired it. I’d prefer something less temperamental and with a piston operating system. That being said, it is very user friendly and as accurate as it needs to be (if not more) for combat purposes.

          • Joshua

            You are a perfect example of why people ignore boots usually when it comes to procurement and it generally gets left to scientifically controlled testing parameters.

            Everything you said sucks is just laughable.

          • CommonSense23

            We had a uplift squad of 11bs come to our VSP to augment our security when we went out. I drew the short stick on having to go conduct a range for them to ensure their weapons were sighted among other things. I noticed the smallest guy had the saw. I asked about that, they said they gave it to him to toughen him up(he couldn’t bench 120). I go ask him how he likes the saw. He says he loves it cause he is left handed, and hates shooting his M4 cause he is lefty. I asked if he had ever shot it standing. He of course says no.

          • Out of the Blue

            Any reason you find direct gas to be bad? I find piston guns, the alternative, to be almost universally front heavy. Then again I find the civvie tavor, a bullpup, front heavy, so maybe it’s technique on my side.

          • Joshua

            He also finds aimpoint to be horrible and has never seen any Marine say they are good…

            In other words he’s FOS.

          • Kivaari

            Odd comments. Gas masks are a nuisance, but they can save your life, even if CS was used, disabling you ability to fight back. When run hard the piston guns fail quicker. DI works well. You cleaned your rifle 2 times a day to insure it worked if needed. That would be SOP regardless of your issued rifle. Field care should not be ignored.

          • Uniform223

            >”I’ve never heard any grunt have anything positive to say about the AimPoint. It’s a red dot with an atrocious reticle that feels like you’re looking through a scope.”

            If the aimpoint (or any type of red dot optical device) is so terrible… why is everyone using them? Either everyone is WRONG or you are…

            >here is a hypothetical for you. You’re about to go out on patrol. Before you leave the wire, hescos, gate… whatever… intel comes down that the enemy has recently been employing chlorine gas. Your CO, XO, Top, PL, and squad lead all give orders and directions to pack or equip gas masks. You feel that its unnecessary because the attacks have been random and too few and far in between. You also believe that they are too heavy and bulky and that you will never get to it in time to make a difference. 45 minutes into the patrol the worse happens. You didn’t think it would happen to you but it did. Everyone scrambles and puts their mask on as quickly as possible but you reach down and realize that you don’t have one…

            What was that quote from Top Gun?
            “The Defense Department regrets to inform you that your sons are dead because they were stupid”

            >Someone here, I can’t remember, who seems to have far more experience than you and I with the weapon said something along the lines of…

            “Its not an actual operational necessity to keep the M4 clean… its just a way for the higher ups to keep their soldiers busy”

            Speaking from experience I’ve been through the sand box. I’ve been in the sand/dust storms. Rarely did I ever break down my weapon and the BCG. I never cleaned it twice a day. I never kept the internals immaculate to run a cotton swab through it to pass some kind of inspection. I just for the most time kept it lubed and wiped down the BCG and it worked fine for me.

            There is nothing really wrong with the DI gas operating system. IMO its just a common misconception and biased stigma. I currently own a used Colt M4-gery (LE6920) and I have ZERO issues with it. I am pretty sure the TFB guys will tell you the same. If you don’t believe me here is these fun little videos.

            The M855 NATO Green Tip wasn’t the best round but it would still get the job done. You don’t hear AQ or Taliban saying anything bad about the round because either they’re dead or… well I can’t think of anything else. The “newer” US Army M855A1 EPR and the USMC Mk.318 are far better rounds.

          • Kivaari

            Good remarks.

          • Kivaari

            What is wrong with the Aimpoint M68? How about the EOTech?

          • iksnilol

            I remember hearing something about people with some eye malfunction or something that can’t use red dots. Supposedly they see it as just a big blury dot or something. Thought of that when he mentioned the big dot. Maybe he simply dislikes them because his eyes can’t use them?

          • Kivaari

            I had issues years ago. I recently bought another QD EOTech to give it a try on my latest M4. I am waiting on BTAF approval for an 11.5 inch barrel. I hope it comes before the snow and ice. I found turning down the brightness helps with the blur, Time will tell. I get them at dealer cost so if it doesn’t work out I can trade it off for something that does work.

          • n0truscotsman

            The Aimpoint was one of the most revolutionary improvements in small arms technology since the brass cartridge (not something I would say lightly).

            I have never heard a peep about aimpoint gripes either. They are definitely a substantial improvement in terms of target acquisition time than irons. The only advantage irons have is that they are not battery powered (and new aimpoints will have the batteries go bad structurally before they are depleted).

            You may laugh, but PVS7s were also a substantial force multiplier when they were first fielded way back when. They definitely gave US forces an edge when everybody else was floundering for some form of night amplification, say they couldn’t access the inferior Gen Is the Soviets guarded jealously.

            Compared to the PVS14 mono, obviously they are inferior. But they are stil a viable option for night vision capability despite the design being nearly 30 years old.

            And nobody likes promasks (or the JLIST for that matter). But they do have their uses when the rubber meets the road and will be an acceptable option until something revolutionary comes along (nanomachine injections? meh, idk).

      • This. I tend to believe the troops when they complain, their agenda is doing a good job and staying alive … I tend not to believe the politicians, who agenda is usually hidden

        • Evan

          Exactly. The grunt in the field has no political agenda. He just wants gear that works. I trust his assessment of any given weapon far more than any government official or corporate spokesman. Von der Leyden has her agenda, HK has theirs, and Gefreiter Meyer in the field is gonna give an honest assessment of his weapon irrespective of either of them.

          • Bill

            I can’t speak to the .mil aspects, but in the LE realm cops will complain about everything, and I’ve been told it’s no different. “Pistol X doesn’t “point” right, and this holster’s too tight and my cuffs are too loose and my Hemi Charger is too fast and girls show me their boobs which is distracting…..”

          • Michael Mabey

            The last portion made me laugh as my agency decided to go with the new Ford intercepter aka the Turus. Due to wanting control in bad weather. At least we have good fire arms sig 226 navy spec in .40, the C8cqb a carbine of a carbine, and the Remington 870. No complaints about the fire arms just the vehicles as needed.

          • Kivaari

            I hope the Taurus has fixed the transmission problems. The Taurus in the 90s fell apart. Cops need a car that can be shifted rapidly from drive to reverse. Going from fast speeds to reverse just tore them apart. The cops were happy to dump the Taurus for Crown Vics. The issue with the CVs were lack of traction when going around corners fast with wet streets. Swapping ends makes it hard to catch the offender.

          • Michael Mabey

            So far most like it. My detachment has only lost one car due to accident but hey up here in Canada we get snow as yearly as October.

          • Kivaari

            Well, I’m not far away from Canada, living 100 miles south in North Idaho. We have the same issues with snow. 6 month winters.

          • Michael Mabey

            Your probably further north than I am. I am 100 mile north of Lake Erie

          • Kivaari

            It gets cold. If I was still doing the job, I’d have every patrol car being a 4×4 SUV. My old agency went to all 4×4 vehicles. If it wasn’t snow it was sand and snow.

          • Kivaari

            You haven’t been involved with the “Three Flags” program where British Columbia, Washington and Oregon jointly participate in the Washington Traffic Safety Commission training. I ran one of the projects in WA. We got together with officers from Canada and Oregon on order to train and come up with new approaches to improve traffic safety efforts. We could not use the term “accident”, as there are no accidents. They are “crashes or collisions”. At one of the events the RCMP put on a “Full Mounty”, where some of their officers did it on video. Several senior executives that had kids with them, had to rush their kids out. A bit much that would get WA cops fired.
            Those Taurus SHO patrol cars simply fell apart. They looked good in the movies about robotic cops, but that’s the only place they looked good.

      • Uniform223

        So a pilot who knows stuff about aircraft and flying in dynamic and even potentially dangerous situations is lying?

        • Bullphrog855

          He sure as hell doesn’t know more than some civilian think tank

          • Uniform223

            Yeah people believe civilian “think tanks”. Its like that simulation put out by RAND back in 08; not a good outcome. Yet when the USAF, DoD, and Lockheed took the same simulation with the same adversaries under the same conditions but plugged in actual and even some classified capabilities of the F-35… it didn’t just end up on top, it mopped the floor.

            Than again we all see it and do it. Like when we’re watching football and we’re getting mad at the TV cause our team is losing because they’re not making the right play or the player is doing something wrong. whats that term again?

      • Joshua

        You would be surprised how biased soldiers can be on firearms.

        • Kivaari

          I served in both the Navy and ARNGUS, and met some very ignorant people while discussing guns.

    • Mihoshi

      Oh hell no. This was overseen by a Green Party politician. Those guys are not exactly big friends of the military industrial complex. If they found nothing serious to blame HK with, you can be sure that there wasn’t anything serious.

  • Darkpr0

    The title might be a little bit over-exuberant. The quotes themselves say the test was not scientific, and the methodology they describe back it up. It’s great (I would argue: vital) that the soldiers are happy, but interviewing soldiers is not an exhaustive scientific study. This is a solid piece of evidence for H&K, but it’s not nearly enough to conclude the existence of or reason for a perceived problem.

    • I don’t think they had tests to say it wasn’t working correctly … if you make an accusation, you need to provide evidence.

      • FourString

        Burden of proof. Too bad the scandal-profiteering media doesn’t adhere to that.

      • Besavius

        The German Defense Ministry had tests conducted which concluded in a lengthy report that the G36 wasn’t working correctly, widely reported in German media this spring.

      • CommonSense23

        Doesn’t the report say that the gun has heating issues, but the troops are still happy with?

        • brainy37

          They’re happy with it, but what alternative do they have to compare it with? Most will never touch an M416 and they have harsh weapon restrictions in their country that they’ll never touch any other alternative in their lives.

          • Tierlieb

            Thanks for the heads-up on how German gun laws work. I’ll tell that to my AKs, AR-15s, vz58 and FAL as a good-night story. Just after I am done telling them they’re getting another short-barreled AK brother. One from SDM, which I had to take in because he wasn’t allowed to go to the US.

        • L. Roger Rich

          Warms them up in the winter

      • The EMI report?

        • Darkpr0

          People keep sniping me on this because I linked to the TFB articles.


          How am I supposed to be mad on the internet?

    • DataMatters

      I don’t suppose it makes any difference to you that the steel chamber extension embedded in the polymer frame would be able to move a little when the rifle gets hot? It is abundantly clear why the zero would wander. Also, the G36 was made to be ‘disposable’ in the sense that the lefties didn’t want surplus rifles falling into some secondary markets in Africa or elsewhere. It was designed to be cheap enough to throw away when each unit’s service life ended. And so this is what you end up with: crap.

      • Darkpr0

        We use steel structures embedded in polymer frames all the time. If engineering polymers were junk and fall apart at the first sign of heat, then why is every gun range a sea of Glocks? Polymers are unbeatable materials when the right polymer is used in the right place. Engineering polymers like polyamides (same material as the G36, if I recall correctly) have been used in high-temperature applications for years with resounding success. If they find that Nylon doesn’t have the high-temp characteristics that they wanted, then they have a truckload of alternatives that will surpass it as necessary. I guess the short answer is, no, generalizing that steel plus any polymer causes a defective product does not really resonate as a good rule.

        • Riot

          He didn’t say in A polymer frame, he said THE polymer frame. It is possible to use an incorrect polymer material and allegations of an out of spec mixture of plastics being used in this debacle.

          • Kivaari

            If that happened, then the lab did not do adequate quality control. A TQM program would ensure this did not go far at all before the batch was detected and production stopped until the correct material was introduced. It is like Tikka T3 stainless steel rifles that shattered into dozens of pieces, because QC was absent.

          • Riot

            I am aware that quality control exists

        • buzzman1

          You purposely skirt the issue that at gun ranges firing is slow and few rounds go down range. In combat large amounts of ammo are fired in a very short period of time. Rifle ammo is going to heat up a weapon faster than pistol ammo. You are quite literally comparing apples to avocados

      • Kivaari

        It seems that putting a sheet steel support in the area of the barrel root, would greatly stabilize the area. The sheet or machined aluminum would have to have “fingers” going away from the area to draw and dissipate heat.

      • Max Glazer

        AFAIK they used polycarbonate instead of glass-filled polyamide, which happens to have a lower softening/melting point.

  • What I’m having a hard time with is reconciling the EMI report with soldier reports and my own (positive) experiences with the G36.

    Here’s what we know, basically:

    1. The rumor that the G36 had accuracy issues goes way back to before 2010.
    2. The EMI report, so far as I can tell (I don’t spracken zee deutsche) is pretty damning sounding.
    3. Ursula von der Leyen is trying to portray her tenure as a “cleaning of house” in the wake of several scandals concerning her predecessors.
    4. I have some experience with the G36 and found it to be fine, accuracy-wise. I wouldn’t call my experience exhaustive, but it was enough to convince me that “something else” might be going on.
    5. The problems that the G36s are reportedly suffering from are not ones that NATO standards apparently test for.
    6. H&K is implicated in a “fox guarding the henhouse” proofing scandal.

    So, is EMI in on it? Did they make their results up? Why? Is von der Leyen just looking for a scapegoat, or has she just been overaggressive? Does the G36 actually have any issue within certain parameters, or is it fine? Where did the rumor come from in the first place? Do the problems, if they exist, affect all or just some of the guns? Did H&K actually defraud the German government via the proofing scandal, or was that a bureaucratic error, or totally spurious?

    The more I dig into this, the less I feel like I know for sure. I expect the real answers, if they come to light, will be messy and make basically no one happy.

    • A year ago:

      “Germany is the world’s third-largest arms exporter and Sigmar Gabriel, the country’s minister for economic affairs, is determined to move his country farther down that list.”

      The German government would probably be happy if they imported firearms rather than manufactured them. They seem to be carrying out their threat.

      I guess if you put a blowtorch to a rifle barrel, heat it up and then conclude, the zero moved … its technically true … but that does not happen in the real world (not usually anyway and is only solved by a heavier barrel or some sort of heatsink).

      • Heating with continuous fire:By design, the G36 will significantly hotter than fire at continuous comparison weapons. “This leads to a decrease in the hit probability when G36 occurs even at low numbers of shots with all the studied types of ammunition and -losen.”

        Outside temperatures:When changing the outside temperatures hit probability Decrease “in partially significant”. The precision problems are most pronounced in the range 15 to 45 degrees Celsius.

        Humidity:“The change between dry and humid environment leads the G36 to such restrictions as a change in the ambient temperature.” The problem, however, presented a significantly slower.

        Sunlight:For side solar radiation forgave the weapon housing and shift on the meeting point of the rifle.

        Ammunition:The accuracy differs between the munitions from, although in some cases by 35 percentage points. The precision problem admit it but even with the best cartridges.”

        15 to 45 C is not exactly blowtorch temps. So either EMI is lying, or the gun has an issue, or nobody can expect any of their rifles to hold zero between 60 and 110 F. Which I find unlikely, since that’s like the difference between direct sunlight and shade.

        • Micki

          Or a bad batch of rifles escaped into the wild, as they sometimes do? Honestly seems like the most likely explanation to me.

          • J.T.

            Honestly, This is what I am thinking happened. A run of rifles got made with the wrong polymer mix and those got delivered to the Bundeswehr.

          • Drambus Ambiguous

            Me, too. It could have even been a supplier-side issue. HK gets a shipment of polymer from whatever pastic company they’re working with. The polymer is substantially similar, but has different additives that significantly change its thermal properties. HK Doesn’t spot the difference. Heck why should they? They probably have nice b2b relationships with their suppliers. A wonky batch of rifles is made…

          • UnrepentantLib

            Indeed, this is beginning to appear to be the most likely explanation.

        • M&S

          Small arms is a sideline for me but I would like your opinion on a secondary possible issue: differential heating.
          When they made the wing spars for the A-12, we had very little in-house knowledge on how large composite structures on stealth aircraft really worked. Specifically that the surface tolerances have to be so tight that you design backwards: skins then structure, because the composites used tended to come out of the autoclave a little or a little short. The meets-in-middle solution to which ‘exoskeloton’ problem being adjustable spar caps made from aluminum.
          Unfortunately, when you put the aluminum in the oven with the substrate and fiber material, it holds heat while the rest of the CFC contracts a lot quicker, as it cools.
          The result, in the case of the ATA, was wing spars that looked perfectly normal but which were in fact micro-cracked throughout in a way which required cut and microscope destructive verification to prove.
          Microimaging techniques for aerospace structures have greatly improved since the 1980s but what if it’s same issue?
          Your imbedded metallic bushing expands and contracts, differentially, until the surrounding ‘plastic’ cracks.
          Rinse and repeat through multiple cycles of thermal embrittlement until the gun isn’t just inaccurate but unsafe as the barrel reciprocates within the fore guard and the bushing, being misaligned due to collapse of the supporting structure, begins to put serious stress on the barrel:receiver structure with the hot gas environment of the chamber just behind it.
          My take: You use suppressing fire to kill what -could- be in the bushes here, here or there because you simply don’t know and can’t put enough explosives downrange to sterilize that way. This is the difference between ‘precision’ for it’s own sake and _maneuver_ for the purpose of denying a competent enemy the terrain space to hold in. Collaterals be damned, victory or loss as movement through the threat space, depends on it.
          Since nobody appears to have died directly from this pooch howl as they did, say. with the early model M16s with their ‘dirty’ stick powder and poor cleaning system and since HK has their own 416/417 as alternatives, where the 416 has a deliberately isolated forgrip -and- bolt from the gas system as a large part of what keeps it from gumming up, why not just fix the problem and forget the blame using a limited issue of the more expensive gun which is kept in-theater as battalions rotate through. And then is issued to the Euro-RDF as the principle first-responder combat unit while the garrison forces simply soldier on while the G36 ages out naturally?
          The real, shameful, issue is two fold: First, ROW body armor and drug use continues to improve their ability to withstand hits and stay in the fight where penetration and terminal energy transfer with 2,400-2,700fps rounds at typical combat distances of under 200m (under 80 meters for urban combats) is just not enough to guarantee knockdown, even when you are using Mk.318/Mk.262.
          And so, if you can’t knock a man down because going short-barrel equates to low MV, as terminal energy; where that same low muzzle velocity and small caliber means your round is also drifting with an angels breath of crosswind, 500m out, where the Afghan enemy knows you can’t even hit him, is not the round itself the true ‘gets the wrong people dead!’ reason for calling the G-36 a failure?
          Hasn’t there been sufficient tragedy as: “But sarge, I shot him five times and he just kept coming!” and “But sarge, I can’t get rounds to group within a 3ft area!” to admit that using 10″ barrel ‘carbine’ weapons with 5.56 rounds, so as to allow shrimps and women to play at being solders is the real tragedy here?
          Ammunition conservation is not in and of itself, a bad idea. Throughout WWII, the presence of large numbers of MG-34 and MG-42 _as base of fire weapons_ was what allowed bolt-gun KAR shooters to maneuver into explosive tossing range as much as defiladed shots.
          When the STG.44 came online, members of the Heer started to think: “Wow! Maybe we don’t need dedicated SAW/LMG anymore!” But they never thought: “Wow! A varmint caliber with less effective ballistic range and wound mechanics than my existing rifle but 30 odd chances to _fail to kill with_, such a deal!”
          Because the 7.62 Kurz uses a 127gr bullet.
          I know, for a fact, that Marines have died because they were using the 5.56. And they train, hard, to take headshots at both near and longest-possible ranges.
          THAT is the unspoken but ongoing tragedy here.

    • Has there been a polymer doping issue too? If I’m not mistaken TFB mentioned in an article that polyethylene had been used in the instead of the high temp polymer on the trunnion area?

  • Mark

    This kinda backs up what TFB found out when they tested it.

    • Alex (a big H&K fan) and I both expected the G36 to have an issue when we tested it… And it didn’t. Shocked the hell out of us. I was not there for the G36 test, but I shot it afterward, and similarly did not experience any issues.

      On the other hand, it would be really strange if it turned out that the Ernst Mach Institute was in on a government conspiracy to slam H&K, so I have no earthly idea what’s going on, really.

  • Spyco

    It will still be known as the trunion-melter-supreme in my heart.

  • Yallan

    No doubt just a bad batch of polymer, get rid of the rifles manufactured with that batch and no problems.

  • skusmc

    Whats going on? I has confuse. Is it cronyism that vindicated H&K or cronyism that started this whole boondoggle in the first place?

    • MR


  • FarmerB

    More classic politics – on the same day you expect a glowing report to be issued, you release a seemingly damning bunch of rumours and irrelevant scuttlebutt, and the media print two sentences on the first and 5 paragraphs on the second. Like the survey from Nachtwei, the couple of ex-G36 users I’ve talked to had no complaints.
    Something really stinks here…

  • Guest28

    Just because soldiers in the field are saying, that they didn’t notice any accuracy problems, doesn’t mean, that there aren’t any. There is nobody who analyses hits or shot groupings or shift of impacts in the heat of battle.
    In contrast there are scientific tests which are confirming the supposed accuracy problems. The rifle even shifts its point of impact from just lying in the sun.
    The G36 is not the flawless superb German Überrifle.
    During my service time, all of our companies rifles had to be collected and corrected by HK because the trigger group was constructed in a faulty way, so that it could jam up in some way and the rifle emptied its magazine in full auto after chambering a round, even though the safety was set on safe. Of course this wasn’t made public, as there is a tight mesh between Bundeswehr and HK.
    I also noticed shifting points of aim, as well as my comrades. Of course these weren’t regarded as rifle related problems by the instructors, they accused the recruits poor shooting skills instead. This should be kept in mind.

  • mechamaster

    A little bit concern from G36 design for me that I dislike…
    1. The optic rail is so high and look uncomfortable without upgraded adjustable buttstock.
    2. The ‘flimsy’ charging handle feel ( missed that “HK slaps” feature )
    3. The export and civilian variant is get too much “neutered” feauture.

  • Able_Dart

    I’ll just throw in here that Minister Von Der Leyen is now facing a plagiarism and resume inflation scandal, much like her predecessors.

  • HenryV

    In some circles I move in the very mention of the term Green Party would render something null and void.

    At the end of the day all we can hope for is the rifle functions because is it what a servicemen’s survival depends upon.

  • tsuba

    i actually remember a documentary made by a french-german tv channel (ARTE) were they bullshit talk HK, they interviewed an german police captain(working for ONU) in africa
    telling g3 share ammo w/ ak and showing an 7.62×39 case on a devasted village

    • Kivaari

      Yep! Maybe the cop knows little about guns. I’ve met them by the thousands and many young cops are not gun literate. It is just a job to them. Often led by ignorant chiefs that set policy. So many bad issues arise because the chief is an ignorant political appointee.

  • honolo

    lol why people still believe HK bullshit?

    they are total liar

  • Alex D.

    Called it.


    Well, perhaps H&K guys borrowed that infamous software from VW and installed it in the brains of those soldiers before the interview 🙂

  • Shmoe

    I don’t like the idea of only polymer between the sight-base and the barrel, but if it works…

    “…but they didn’t ask whether all the targets were hit.” When, in the history of land warfare, is this ever the case? A laughable statement, if it didn’t show such a serious case of the Dunnig-Kruger effect.

  • Jonas

    The report for the lack of accuracy is hillarious.Weapons are tested carefully before they are handed to the hands of the defense of a nation. I mean how can a weapon, tested constantly (they do that once in a while) have a accuracy issue after some mags of rapid fire and still be in action in afghanistan?
    I don’t believe, that it is unusable for combat, the tests are either a lie for an unknown purpose or the need for accuracy in the test is so over the standarts in other countries

    • DataMatters

      Weapons like the G36 are mass produced. One would think the quality control would be decent, but maybe not. Have you ever seen “lowest bidder” type of equipment? Anything mass produced like that can suffer from problems. The question isn’t whether the wandering zero exists, it is whether it is bad enough to warrant paying for replacements.

    • Brian M

      Jonas, in theory, every weapon is tested and perfected before it is given to soldier. The truth is that agendas, politics, negligence, and shortsightedness often mean that even well-designed weapons have problems, and some weapons have a truly enormous array of serious problems. For example, the SA80 was very unreliable and extremely fragile, but it somehow was approved by England. And after all the upgrades and modifications, it still has notable problems. Even the best testing programs cannot fix all the issues, which is why weapons are updated and upgraded. Most weapons have big problems in their original versions. The history of firearms is filled with failed weapons and terrible designs. And yes, many bad designs did make into service, but they seldom lasted long.

      • Kivaari

        The UK had to hire HK to fix the SA80. The Brit machinists just had trouble building the rifles. Bolts were so out of spec that the rifles just failed. After HK rebuilt them, they worked. What an embarrassment to the Brits.

      • n0truscotsman

        Not only is the SA80 approved for service, but it supposedly has a 15k MRBF, which would make it the most reliable evolution in small arms development since the Maxim!

        (or perhaps the MOD is FOS, which is most likely. Talk about extraordinary claims)

    • CommonSense23

      Guess you haven’t heard the problem Eotech is having.

  • dshield55

    I can’t consider this vindication. It’s reassuring that a select group of soldiers are happy with the G36 but there can’t be any vindication unless there was a second independent scientific test that at least was contradictory to the EMI would that proved the gun was problematic.

    • It was four mag dumps, not two.

      • MR

        With time-wasting shenanigans between each pair of mag dumps, followed by more wasted time to “set up” the target for the accuracy test. Time wasted allowing for the barrel/trunnion/receiver interface to cool. An increased sense of urgency would improve the test’s credibility, IMO.

  • DetroitMan

    This is hardly a vindication. I respect the opinion of soldiers, but it’s not possible to test the accuracy of a rifle in combat. You’re shooting at moving targets that are trying to take cover while your own adrenaline is pumping a mile a minute. You keep pulling the trigger until the target is down. No objective assessment of a rifle’s mechanical accuracy can be done in those conditions. If somebody really wants to vindicate (or condemn) the G36, then more scientific tests need to be done.

  • Joe

    Maybe the wandering zero was caused by the use of Eotechs?

  • John

    Yeah, about that test. Why didn’t you do full mag dumps as the German tests simulated?

    • …We did?

      • mosinman

        it only seemed like a few mags though…. and at very close range

        • It was four mags. The EMI report was talking about considerable deviations that should have been perceptible even at 50m.

          • mosinman

            4 Mags doesn’t seem like too much, i personally think 8 would have been better

          • MR

            Especially with the long break taken to set up the target, and allow the rifle to cool down. The “pass the ball” shenanigans between pairs of mag dumps didn’t help credibility, either.

  • Green

    Someone should contact the US Capital Police and ask them why they dropped the G-series and went 416…they were among the first to see the issues with wandering POI/POA

    • Rock or Something

      I’m guessing DC was more dangerous then Afghanistan. 🙂

  • Sulla Felix

    You will note that this supposed ‘vindication’ report went out of it’s way to avoid the very ‘extreme’ conditions that the scientific testing showed the G36 was not up to the task of holding. But then you kind of played your hand in the final paragraph where you rather gleefully point out that you defended H&K as a publication. This article is not so much a vindication of H&K but rather TFB.

    • I dunno, man, we reported on the G36 controversy heavily, and I think in at least one case broke news of the gun having issues to the English-speaking Internet.

  • Brian M

    It’s no vindication. A selected group of people said “best rifle ever”. Of course, the number of them who have been in heavy combat is likely limited, they have limited firearms experience, they’re likely under some kind of pressure to answer favorably. The problems with the G36 are proven and documented. And there are other soldiers who testify to the problems, which have been proven to exist. Note the trend from soldiers throughout history is to love their equipment. The English all loved the FAL, French all loved the MAS-49, Russians all love the Mosin, Americans all love the M4, Norwegians all loved the Krag, Mexicans all loved the Mondragon, Australians all love the AUG, Itallians all loved the BM59, Japanese all loved the Type 38, Turks all love the G3, The Swiss all loved the 550, the Egyptians all loved the Hakim, the Czechs all love the VZ58, the Canadians all loved the Enfield, the Ukrainians all love the AK-74, the Slovenians all love the F2000… In many places, this is compounded by the fact that they know no other. If you do not know what else if out there, you come to see what you have as the best around.

    Additionally, problems tend to be one of two sorts. There are problems which show up in testing that don’t show up in the field, normally due to them simply being not relevant in their practical usage, such as the M14’s automatic fire mode — nobody used it, because it was just not controllable. The Makarov has a slower magazine release system, but because it almost totally obviates accidental magazine drops, and social pistol work is not a time trial match, it makes no difference. Then there are problems which show up in the field that don’t show up in testing, like the Garand biting on thumbs, because M1 thumb was a user error, which of course means that it gets compounded under stresses like those in combat and not found in trials on a controlled range, and SS109’s failure to perform consistently even in ideal conditions against enemy combatants coming about because the round was designed to pierce helmets at hundreds of meters and being too stable and penetrative to reliably adequately upset in flesh.

    The problem may or may not be in every G36 rifle, but the fact is we don’t really know the whole story behind things. We don’t know the whole story behind every single episode. We don’t know the veracity of what is reported and we don’t know what is not reported. It is entirely possible that many instances of the G36 melting were never realized on account of the nature of combat, where the enemy is almost never directly seen, it is rarely known who killed whom, and the chaos decimates fine motor skills. It’s entirely plausible that many soldiers experienced G36 problems but didn’t notice because they thought that they had simply missed in the heat of battle. It’s also possible that flawed memories may make some soldiers think their weapon was causing them to miss when in reality their marksmanship was to blame. It’s entirely possible that it happened to more soldiers than we know, because they never fired another scrutinized round after the firefight where they had melted the gun. We also have to be aware of the fact that soldiers often do carry more ammunition than they are officially allotted to have, so perhaps the problems would not have emerged if they had not gone beyond their allotments, or perhaps they burnt through far more ammunition far more quickly than they realized in combat and then thought that the gun was melting prematurely on them. Regardless, the fact is that the G36 problems are not some new rumor and they have been verified.

    The G36 problems are real and have been confirmed by both eyewitnesses and testing. The problem is perhaps not present in every gun, but the design flaw and therefore the potential is there in every G36, and just because some people had no problems with theirs does not mean that nein, rifle ist fine.

    • n0truscotsman

      Well gee. Thanks for eliminating my reason for putting in my length 2 cents. Well said 😉

  • DIR911911 .

    does this mean there won’t be any surplus g36″s hitting the market anytime soon 🙁

  • Nick F.

    I’m going to have to doubt this one. I’ve met more than enough people who have absolutely hated the rifle to believe that it’s a perfectly fine firearm and that people are just vindictive.

  • Mettball

    the Ministry of Defence made a statement

    There is a .pdf- file (overview of the new report) that still says:

    Quote: […]Kernaussagen der Untersuchung:
    in den wissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen festgestellten
    Präzisionseinschränkun-gen des G36 bei schussinduzierter Erhitzung und
    sich ändernden Umweltbedingungen stehen nicht in Zweifel. […]


    […]Central statement of the investigation:

    accuracy restrictions, that were determined in scientific
    investigations, induced through heating up by shooting or by changing
    environmental conditions, still are beyond doubt.[…]

  • Kivaari

    Remember all the complaints about the M16. Almost all of the complaints were caused by the ammunition having horrible powder that increased the rounds per minute and fouled. With corrections the M16A1 came on scene and it performed well for 20 years (and is still going around the world). The “improved” M16A2 has been going strong since the ’80s. A2s have issues, that don’t effect function, including weight and length. I loved the A2, but as my age has climbed, and surgeries failed, I’d take the light weight A1., with the rear sight apertures being changed to the A2 small and large. Now the M4 and M4A1 (my choice) are hear, and they are great carbines. With over 50 years of service the rifles have proven themselves. The G36 is either a bad or good rifle. I know I can’t figure it out by the material published on TFB. Is the G36 good or bad? I’m still wanting to know. Soldiers are not a reliable source for information regarding small arms. The US Army has done a great deal to ensure the troops have a good rifle. As everyone should notice, they never stop research, and do much deeper studies and testing than most people ever see. The Germans do the same.

    • n0truscotsman

      Sofrep had an article about the G36 in Peshmerga service. They seem to be finding it adequate.

    • Zebra Dun

      Jamming and loss of battle sight zero are two different events, one makes a weapon stop working the other makes a weapon stop hitting.
      One wastes bullets the other wastes men.

  • May

    The plural of anecdote is not data. If I look hard enough I can find someone who’ll say a good word about a Jimenez 25, that still doesn’t mean I’d ever trust one of them.

  • Uniform223

    mass media negative association is there tactic.
    If they could push around enough bovine fecal matter that “out weighs” fact and meaningful/experienced backed opinion…
    whats that saying about “if you keep telling a lie” and “if enough people believe in a lie”?
    fire arms are also a victim of this tactic.

  • Nick

    I cannot see how the positive interviews with a cohort of 200 soldiers, especially when their combat experience with the weapon is undisclosed, can be called a “vindication.” The positive anecdotal feedback contained in these reports does not address the serious charges made by other German investigators that have been relayed in TFB, most notably that HK in an ill conceived and probably illegal cost saving measure added polyethelene to the mandated polyamide material of the rifle. Such an addition seems likely to cause the very wandering zero and other problems documented in previous German studies. If the testing done by TFB was done on a G36 whose receiver had not been adulterated with the addition of polyethelene then none of the problems described in previous reports are likely to manifest themselves. This recent report does not settle the matter and it seems more investigation is needed, this piece would be more accurate if it reported “HK gets some praise from an unscientific German government study.” Please stay on the story TFB, I think there will be more news, and controversy, to come.

  • n0truscotsman

    Used to be in the “HK hates you” camp as well, but Andrew’s piece pretty much vindicated HK imo.

    There are a lot of obstacles in their way when they introduce products to the US. That no doubt explains their investment on US shores.

  • MichaelZWilliamson

    Good to hear their overpriced knockoff of the AR18 is as sound as their overpriced knockoff of the CETME. 😉

  • buzzman1

    I think this is a case of the German govt hiding the truth to prop up a company. Besides they need the money to make welfare payments to the muslims they were trying to kill a few years ago.

  • walter12

    I am sure that there never was any problems with the German firearm. The Germans, though very stupid in allowing Muslims to enter Germany, and they will regret it forever, do not make junk. The MG 42 machine gun was such a marvel that it was used up into the early 2000s across many countries.

    • iksnilol

      Correction, is still used.

      Also, I doubt the scary mooselims are doing more bad than other groups.

  • Weaponized_Hotdog

    I’m gonna need a full auto G36 to verify these claims…..

  • Old Fart

    I stand corrected for the better part! Customer service experience is a whole other matter though… It seems to me that H&K has some ‘preferred customers’, the rest have to join the long waiting line…

  • Joshua Samuels

    It’s good to hear that the end users liked the rifle, but what about the fundamental engineering question of having the steel barrel and the steel mounting points for the sighting system connected not with steel, but with polymer that has a different modulus of elasticity and different coefficient of thermal expansion?

  • James B.

    It seems like the G36 might be having a similar issue that the M16A1 did: a good enough weapon, but not sufficiently idiot-proofed in the hands of relatively inexperienced soldiers.

  • Brad Ferguson

    It would seem easy enough problem to solve. As the G36’s wear, replace them with the HK 416.

  • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

    well Afghanistan isn’t the hot bed of action it once was. the issue wouldn’t appear to till a sustained fire fights. which those soldiers aren’t.

    • PaulLibertarian

      Absolutely as the German army avoided combat operations, they have been in no comparable actions such as Wanat or Sangin. G36 is ok as a police or peacekeepers weapon but I would take a HK416 or even M4 any day.

  • Colin

    They are covering HK ass here, HK met the requirements laid out by the Ministry of Defense which apparently did not cover the situation that occurred. As i understand it the barrel is mated to the receiver by polymer trunnions, under prolong firing the polymer is heated and becomes somewhat elastic and the barrel shifts in alignment and on cooling the trunnions become rigid again, but the weapon now needs to be zeroed again.

  • Zebra Dun

    I am visualizing a Sgt Schultz somewhere in Afghanistan standing at attention, looking at the horizon and saying, “I know nothing, I see nothing” Yes Sir, No Sir Three bags full Sir.
    Want to test it?
    Take a Squads worth of them out and do a realistic combat test and shoot them to destruction.
    It is the only way to be sure.

  • n0truscotsman

    I recommend reading this http://weaponsman.com/?p=20989

    There is also a study that has been cited on TFB multiple times about the engagement time differences between the two. Anybody who has engaged targets in a competition or military setting can tell you the time differences are measurable. There is no disagreement.

    You do know you can change the aimpoint reticle brightness right? And that is not even considering that the reticle is 2MOA (they make a 1MOA now), which is more than accurate for the 500 meter engagement range.

    I agree that compared to PVS14s, the 7s suck. But do pray tell, what better alternatives were there in the 1980s??? you had the option of:

    1.) Not having NVGs at all. Ask the Iraqi Army how well that worked.
    2.) Trying to beg the Soviets access to their Gen I PVN57Es or BN2 binoculars. Those are atrocious compared to a Gen 3.

  • The Brigadier

    I lived in Europe when my father was assigned to a unit in Germany. I was a young kid and had fun. With stuff like this going on in Deutschland now I’m very glad I live in Texas.

  • CavScout

    I hope TFB is embarrassed for jumping on the band wagon with this too.