There's nothing wrong with it in principle, and I think it could be a fairly sucessful idea. The article does touch on the points that scuppered it. Common logistics, the disapearence of the Russian bear, the finnancial crunch brought about by re-unification. All of these laid the G11 to rest.
The failure rate of 1 round in 485 does seem excessive, but that averages out to around 123 rounds in the 60,000 failing. Could have been a bad production run. Not quite sure what the cook-off rate of 150 at 60 rpm means...but I do know that the G11 used a high explosive blend in the propellant to reduce the sensitivity and temperature of it.
I think that logistics is going to be the next big hurdle to overcome in developing a new SAA cart used througout NATO. We still have countries that use 7.62 in their personal weapons to a large extent (Turkey) so there would have to be a very compelling reason to change to not only a whole new cartridge, but to a new weapon system.
While some would be willing to buy off the shelf from other countries designs, a lot of countries would have to start a R&D programme to make a new weapon that would fire this cartridge. Others would be willing to go half way and pay for manufacturing rights to make homegrown versions of the off the shelf weapons. These would have problems which would cause bad publicity. First models are never 90% reliable, let alone 100%. It's not simple world to buy military kit in anymore unfortunately. National pride and partisan politics overshadows almost everything.
That being said, perhaps this could have an application in specialist areas. A caseless gatling system. Much more portable, a light vehicle could carry a much larger ammo load. I think the rate of fire would still have to be limited due to heat production, but you could keep firing much longer.
D
