Revisiting Daisy's V/L caseless 22 cal firearm - has it's time finally come?!

For those who don't know, back in the 60's Daisy produced a pretty awesome gun that was one of the first to utilize caseless (no brass) ammunition. It was a 22 cal that could shoot a bullet from 22gr up to 55gr from speeds of 1,000 to 3,000fps - it all depended upon the amount of "powder" pressed onto the base of the bullet.

Now this round didn't use traditional smokeless powder, it was more a mix of high explosive and gun cotton (a nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine NC/NG combo w/ possibly a little binder - a couple % to make it harder and more stable at room temp). The charge was actually ingenious and was pretty solid hard though it could be scrapped off with a knife or a very thick/hard thumbnail, but normal handling didn't result in any of these issues.

The rounds were safer than normal 22lr in a fire as well. They just burnt and wouldn't "cook off" as there was no brass to trap the gas build up. They just melted from the outside in.

One awesome aspect was the size. For a 32gr bullet with a charge to fire it at 1400fps, the round was about 55% the length of a normal 22lr and about 1/2 the weight. They also made military rounds that were the same size of a 40gr LR (length) but slightly heavier b/c they used a 54-56gr round that would fire 3,000-3,200FPS and all in a package the size of a 22LR (weighed about 20-25% more IIRC), which is NOTHING compared to a 5.56 round with a 54-56gr bullet

22LR hyper-V - 40gr projectile (1,450fps @ muzzle) = 3.185 grams
M855 ball - 62gr projectile (3025fps @ muzzle)= 12.31grams
M193 ball - 56gr projectile (3,250fps @ muzzle) = 11.79grams

I suspect a V/L round with a 55gr projectile at 3,000-3,200fps would come in at 4g (possibly 4.2g) but would be the same physical size as a 22LR. The reason you can get so much more energy from such a small amount of propellant is due to the chemical bonds of the explosive (it is an explosive unlike smokeless powder which deflagrates but kind of explodes in a confined area but it is still more like a VERY fast burn).

Testing of the Daisy showed extremely limited barrel wear even when using the explosive charge. Now you might be asking why you have never seen these, well look harder, they are out there as well as the ammo! (it is a little pricey now!). See the ATF stuck it's nose in and said Daisy wasn't licensed to sell firearms so after 6 years of production, Daisy stopped. Why they didn't get a firearms license is beyond me or at least create a subsidiary that only sold that weapon (and maybe 25 & 30 cal variations - that is where it would get REAL interesting due to the cubed effect of "powder" volume!!)

So now here is why they need to re-visit. They now have explosive polymers that leave behind no residue. The NG/NC charge could be pressed into a "cup" of this polymer so that it didn't suffer from the "flaking" and it would be waterproof (the original was very water resistant to begin with).

I could just see something like this used in the same setup as the FN57 where the rounds are loaded perpendicular to the barrel, allowing for something like 100-300 round mags depending on the gun (a rifle could hold 300 rounds easily) and it would be light - no brass!!.

There are at least 3 ways that these rounds can be fired, one is with a firing pin (embedded primer in base of casing). Another is via electronic "spark" or charge (single small LiPo could fire 1,000's or rounds very easily and the same "spark" could fire a 22cal or a 20mm vulcan, it doesn't matter). Third is a more traditional method which relies on heat - a charging/firing pin is drawn back and when released compresses air (to say 2000F) which fires the round - each round fired re-charges the firing rod/spring (much like a gas operated AK/AR that ejects the casing) and in the same motion it loads a new round - the loading would work the same regardless of the firing mechanism.

I know they have "telescoped rounds" and caseless ammo, but I've been very disappointed when I've seen all of them, especially when it comes to price. There is no reason to spend 3-10x the cost of traditional ammo for these new breeds, when Daisy was making them cheaper than 22lr back when a brick of 500 was less than $5! The catch was it was for civilian use, not military.

The interesting thing is that there is ready made equipment to manufacture the identical rounds that Daisy made, the only difference would be that the projectile would need a little tweaking b/c it needs a "knub" for the charge to be pressed onto, so it holds tight to the round (IIRC 300-400psi was the pressure to compress the charge onto the projectile - explosion pressure was north of 1500psi IIRC as well, so a large safety margin). You have to understand that there would be no air in the charge to compress & heat causing ignition, so compression isn't much of a problem in that aspect.

I think it would be awesome to be able to have the same gun that could shoot sub-sonic rounds (say 800fps) as well as 3200+fps with the same setup, just using a different round. I suspect it's more than possible that we could see speeds greater than 4,000fps, maybe 4,500fps, but there might be a need for some kind of chamber insert to fire the "standard rounds" then remove it to fire the hyper-V rounds (b/c the charge might be larger in diameter so the bullet always sits at the same freebore/throat area).

How many of you would want a gun that could do all that? I think that would be the most versatile gun you could get, capable of making long shots with plenty of speed (especially if projectile size could push 77-85grains like some NATO rounds).

The upside to this is that ammo could be made in a small shop that doesn't need any of the brass forming equipment (which is the main cost of the process). The propellants are cheap as well, very inexpensive, probably less so than many smokeless powders.

daisy just didnt want to deal with the firearms end of the buisness there a airgun company and whall it was a really cool little gun it never made the same sales as there airguns so droping it was not a big loss

im fairly shure daisy got the idea to make this gun from spring air guns they ignite excess oil and spit a pellet out like a rifle at 1500+fps

Caseless has been attempted before with the H&K G-11 as the most prominent example, IIRC it was leaving too much residue and still required a primer which needed to be ejected.

If we perfect the caseless rounds it would have several benefits however, It would remove the ejection from the fire cycle reducing malfunctions (Stove pipes) and with electric ignition it would pretty much be a pulse rifle, Just give me my M41 Pulse Rifle already fam! I'm ready! and one effect would be increased rate of fire as well depending on the operation method I.E. Direct Impingement, Long stroke gas piston, Short stroke gas piston etc.

In the Army we were told the NLOS-C would either come with Liquid propellant or a Railgun, Both might be better suited and both employ caseless rounds, Even tradional artillery uses caseless ammo except the 105mm which uses Semi-Fixed ammunition (You put the round on the shell and insert it into the howitzer), The only downside is that you have to swab the bore after firing since it would still leave residue from the propellant bags, Liquid propellant was supposed to eliminate the need for that but it never went anywhere, Railguns of course are almost ready to be fielded in the Navy.

I honestly think railguns will be the future of small arms especially for sniper/anti-material rifles due to the extremely flat trajectory and range.

But in the intermin a caseless projectile would have tremendous benefits but for military service it may not be ready yet due to increased complexity (See Ian McCullum's YouTube channel Forgotten Weapons on the G-11) and fragility of ammo when it comes in contact with oils and elements.