US army testing new combat rifle

[Blackclaw]

http://www.shadowsource.org/dragon/oicw.html

I just don't know about this thing. The firepower of a 20mm cannon is nice for an individual soldier to have and its ability to preset a range detonation is awfully cool, but the thing is big and bulky. It's 18 pounds right now. That's like toting around a bowling ball. The production goal is to get it down to 14 pounds, which is still fairly heavy for a rifle. I'm also unsure of how well the thing will stand up to the rigors of combat. Will it still fire after it gets tossed down a staircase? What happens when it gets wet? What happens when sand gets into its targeting computer? I guess you could always chuck it at an enemy soldier.

[WebMaster]

Its nice, looks cool but little heavy. It does come with two barrels and other gizmos too so I guess its not that bad!

[mmalam]

pretty bulky..!

[Roger Smith]

It is awesome!!!!! :smokingc:

[shankercbe]

"very heavy infantry" :D:

[highsea]

I believe this idea has been scrapped. The M25 over-under was too clumsy, and the 20mm. round was determined to be too light.

The program was split into the M8 program and a seperate 25mm program. The first of the M8's is set to be used in Iraq the last quarter of this year.

I posted a little about it here: http://defencetalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1623&start=50

-CM

[Pathfinder-X]

The OICW project was scrapped in 2002, but the research involved lead to the development of XM-8 rifle.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/xm8_rightmed.jpg

Link: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m8-oicw.htm

[Roger Smith]

The OICW project was scrapped in 2002, but the research involved lead to the development of XM-8 rifle.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/xm8_rightmed.jpg

Link: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m8-oicw.htm


Impressive!!!!!! :)

[Mr. Happyman]

Looks like something out of Halo...

[Revival_786]

Wow, that's one cool gun :smokingc:

Mr. Happyman: Exactly what I was thinking :D

[DRUB]

is it just me, or are there others who basically crap thier pants when thinking of being up against someone with a weapon such as there?

The ability to kill is becomming so much more efficient.

[lamdacore]

Looks more like a futuristic toy to me :D: :smokingc:

[turin]

Consists basically of G-36-components (as well as the rifle part of the former OICW), however wrapped into a new design, also different sight I think. Buttstock seems to be quite massive, so thats good news. The G-36-buttstock tends to have problems with breaking when handled too rough. :o

[berry580]

This things looks good, but whether its as useful as it sounds, I have my doubts.
The gun can fire bullets that'll detonate in a preset distance, it can be useful when the situation is right, but that is simply not good enough.

[redsoulja]

someone explain to me whta berry is saying?

[Pathfinder-X]

He's desribing the U.S OICW(Objective Individual Combat Weapon), but the program has been cancelled a year ago due cost and weight of the system.

[Aussie Digger]

Despite it's futuristic look, the XM-8, from what I've read is not all that futuristic, internally. It uses basically the same rotating bolt system as the current M16A2. There is a report on the weapon in a recent "Popular Mechanics" magazine.

Apparently it's easy to shoot, very accurate, and fires at a relatively high auto rate, but other than that it is no great advance on any other current generation assault rifle...

[highsea]

AD, do you know what month that report was written? The reason that I ask, is that there are some pretty significant differences between the 2 actions.

The XM-8 is a repackaged HK G36, and though they are both gas-operated rotating bolt actions, the M16 vents the gases directly into the chamber (and onto the bolt face), where the XM-8 bolt is driven by a piston and the gases are vented out, so they can't foul the bolt face.

This means a much lower sensitivity to cleaning that was one of the biggest faults of the M16, i.e. the XM-8 is less succeptable to jamming. This should greatly improve the weapon's reliability in sustained firing situations. Also, the piston is unaffected by barrel interchanges, and will still operate even if the barrel is full of water. (not that I'd want to try that one)

The sight is pretty futuristic, I understand. It is supposed to have an indicator that shows how many rounds left in the mag, among other things. That could come in useful.

Also the modular design lends itself to many variations with a quick-change of parts. So the user can go from SMG to rifle to SAW to sniper version in minutes with no special tools. Not that an infantryman is going to be carrying a golf bag of parts around with him, but the armorer can make quick conversions depending on where the weapon will be used. This is another advantage over the M16/M4, which had virtually no interchangability between versions.

The XM-8 may not be a big improvement over other modern weapons like the AUG, but I think it's going to be quite a bit better than the M16, which after all is a 40 year old design.

XM-8 Field Stripped
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/albums/userpics/XM8_strip.jpg

-CM

[Aussie Digger]

It was the October 2004 edition of Popular Mechanics, (I read it in a newsagency just the other day)... I looked online, but the November edition is already up...

I have no doubt the XM-8 will be better than the current edition M-16A2, but it is evolutionary rather than revolutionary and the list of features it has are no big improvement on other weapons, such as the G36 you mentioned, (my personal favourite current gen rifle btw)...

[highsea]

AD, I will look for that edition, thanks.

I guess I had the impression from your post that you thought the XM-8 and G36 were different weapons. I was just pointing out that they were the same weapon in different trim, and that the G36/XM8 gas system was superior to the M16A2. (venting to the forearm rather than the receiver)

Cheers.

-CM

[redsoulja]

i knew he was talkin bout teh OICW but whta problem was he pinpointing out?

[Raven_Wing278]

holy crap...Americans r crazy..they already hav durable rifles that pack a hell of punch..like the M4 carbine and the m-16 assault rifles...that rifle looks lyk its made outta plastic

[redsoulja]

it sorta does look liek tis made of plastic

[mysterious]

Looks can alwayz be deceiving fellow newbies! :smokingc: My belief is that this new toy would certainly add a great deal to individual firepower of the US troops and should be inducted in slow stages to work alongside with the existing ones.

[Aussie Digger]

What's wrong with a plastic rifle? The M-16 contains a lot of plastic and people here have been singinfg it's praises. The Steyr AUG, SA-80 and H&K G36 all use significant amounts of plastic as do heavier weapons like the Minimi light machine gun.

The type of plastic used is very durable, definitely not the "toy" plastic stuff. It is thick, it doesn't corrode, swell or suffer any of the problems that wood or metal suffer from, including over heating, warping etc. It's also waterproof, tough, and light, compared to wood and metal. Why wouldn't you use it?

[gf0012-aust]

holy crap...Americans r crazy..they already hav durable rifles that pack a hell of punch..like the M4 carbine and the m-16 assault rifles...that rifle looks lyk its made outta plastic

Have you ever seen a modern combat rifle? Ever seen H&K's units pulled apart? The current SA-802's (reworked by H&K), the Steyr family, even some of the .50 cal anti-light skins are using poly parts.

There are a significant number of benefits of going to polycarbides - but if you want your soldiers to carry unnecessary weight on top of their existing bergen loads, well, go for your life. Just don't expect them to park and play after a long hike. ;)

[Pakistani Pilot]

XM8 Videos
XM8 videos were shot Feb. 11, 2004 during a test in Las Vegas.
Click to see the videos.

# Overview
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_Overview.rm

# Assembly
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_Assembly.rm

# 30-Round Magazine
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_30Round_Mag.rm

# Dust and Water
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_Dust_and_Water.rm

# Sight Module
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_Sight.rm

# Grenade
Launcherrtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_Grenade.rm

# 100-Round Magazine
rtsp://rm001.infi.net:80/~atpco/realserver/XM8_100_round_mag.rm

All other new weapons videos can be accessed from
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/blackwater/videos.html

[lamdacore]

Ghost Recon 2 is apparently displaying soldiers with the XM8 and OICW.

Aslo, quite a few troops had m16s and m4s.

[Turcain]

And also in Kosovo, they used the new type of anti-tank rifles which has weakened uranium bullets in it, and can damage armor of a tank easily. Bad for crew good for infantry :).

[Hard Ball]

The most probable replacement for the M16A2/M4 Carbine family is the H&K XM8 chambered for the new 6.8X43mm (.270 caliber) which is superior to the 5,56mm (.223 caliber) cartridge currently in use.

[Red aRRow]

And also in Kosovo, they used the new type of anti-tank rifles which has weakened uranium bullets in it, and can damage armor of a tank easily. Bad for crew good for infantry :).

I think you are talking about the Barett 0.50 anti materials rifle. Those buggers pack a helluva punch. However quite bad for stealth since they tend to raise a mini sandstorm when fired :D:

Coming back to the topic. Can somebody tell me that whether the sights used by the U.S. army on the M4 carbine (in Iraq for example) contain IR thermal imaging or are they just plain telescoping sights??

[highsea]

Red Arrow, I believe it depends on the version. The M4A1 has the flat top receiver of the M16A3, with a picatinny rail and removeable handle. The Specops mod kit has variety of sights that can be used with a rail interface system (RIS); IR (requires NVG), telescopic, reflex, laser. There is also a starlight scope (AN-PVS4) that can go on all M16/M4's, either on the RIS or with it's own mount.

[gf0012-aust]

And also in Kosovo, they used the new type of anti-tank rifles which has weakened uranium bullets in it, and can damage armor of a tank easily. Bad for crew good for infantry :).

I think you are talking about the Barett 0.50 anti materials rifle. Those buggers pack a helluva punch. However quite bad for stealth since they tend to raise a mini sandstorm when fired :D:

Coming back to the topic. Can somebody tell me that whether the sights used by the U.S. army on the M4 carbine (in Iraq for example) contain IR thermal imaging or are they just plain telescoping sights??

They use 2 major types, the ELCAN and the ACOG. Both are not just "plain" scopes.

[Red aRRow]

I guess this is the shorter carbine version of the XM8 with a collapsible butt.
Is that the standard XM8 in the background or some sort of sniper version??

[mikier]

foreground is the "XM8 Compact Carbine" (9 in), and the other one is the "XM8 Designated Marksman/Automatic Rifle" (20 in). the carbine basic length is 12.5 in

source: www.hkdefense.us/pages/military-le/rifles-carbines/xm8.html (http://www.hkdefense.us/pages/military-le/rifles-carbines/xm8.html)

the longer one can be used like a "marksman" or as "squad" type weapon.. there is a video of an HK rep shooting this variation on full auto, 100 round (C-Mag), shoulding the rifle with just the shooting hand (weak hand behind his back).

[fraken_14]

so the idea is that this one gun will take the place of many different weapons in the army?

That should help supplies, would make ammo distribution easy.

[Mp5cz]

I had a look, and I think the Halo 2 rifle is based on the French Famas rifle, the smg on the HK MP-7, or the swiss MP-9. the magnum is most likely the walther P99. As for the sniper rifle, well there's not many other things it could be based on but one of the Barrett rifles.
Anyways, I wonder if the 'Gauss cannon' has any future. here's it's description: "Asynchronous linear-induction motor produces bipolar magnetic field to fire 25mm projectile at hyper-sonic velocity."

oh, damn, for some reason it posted this on the wrong forym, sorry :S

[Pursuit Curve]

http://www.shadowsource.org/dragon/oicw.html

I just don't know about this thing. The firepower of a 20mm cannon is nice for an individual soldier to have and its ability to preset a range detonation is awfully cool, but the thing is big and bulky. It's 18 pounds right now. That's like toting around a bowling ball. The production goal is to get it down to 14 pounds, which is still fairly heavy for a rifle. I'm also unsure of how well the thing will stand up to the rigors of combat. Will it still fire after it gets tossed down a staircase? What happens when it gets wet? What happens when sand gets into its targeting computer? I guess you could always chuck it at an enemy soldier.

Also what happens if a trooper runs out of Lithium batteries before he runs out of ammo? Also will you need this system to be run by three guys? One to carry the assault weapon, one to carry batteries, and one to lug around ammo?

[Martin]

XM8 is nice, but it would have been muuuuuch cheaper to adopt the G36...

[Pursuit Curve]

I think that they should simply adopt or ressurect the M14 or FN SLR with 7.62 NATO ammo, it is lethal, it has the penetration and can deal with modern body armour as well as automobiles. It is a hard lesson to learn for troopers when you see 5.56 doing apparently no damage to a target, 5.56 is light, but it just doesn't drop a man like a solid NATO 7.62.

[HammerHead]

"I think that they should simply adopt or ressurect the M14 or FN SLR with 7.62 NATO ammo, it is lethal, it has the penetration and can deal with modern body armour as well as automobiles. It is a hard lesson to learn for troopers when you see 5.56 doing apparently no damage to a target, 5.56 is light, but it just doesn't drop a man like a solid NATO 7.62."


That is true, the killing power of 7.62 Nato is truly awesome. But more and more armies are adopting the lighter 5.56 NAto rounds due to two main reasons

1) The weight of the round ( An average soldier armed with M14 of FAL had 5 mags of 20 rds, which brings a grand total of 100 rds, whereas the 5.56 mags are almost all 30rds, so when a soldier carries 6-8 mags this brings the total to 240 rds. This just means more rds down range during fire and movement or suppression fire)

2) The theory of Infantry combat has evolved scientifically. The theory that a dead soldier is a good soldier still exists, but the stratergist have come up with a better stratergy of wounding personel.
"SCENARIO" This simply means that when you are in a contact against a section size unit you probably have 12-15 weapons shooting at you and your men, You are armed with a FAL, You fire back and manage to score a hit, now the 7.62 Nato does its job and leaves an exit wound the size of a softball as well as taking the life of the enemy, now that leaves one less enemy rifleman to worry about, Great, But you still have to worry about the remaing 12-14 weapons. Now one of your men is armed with a FN MINIMI and is letting off "aimed" 2-3 rd bursts at the flashes, he too manages a hit on an enemy. The enemy drops but is not dead yet, Now because of the light weight of the 5.56 rd it does a lot of internal damage in the target, which unlike the 7.62 produces problems later, the wounded enemy might be able to fight back depending on his/her morale/size etc but his/her accuracy and dexterity is reduced immensly, plus absense of first aid is going to reduce the chances to live later on, so what happens at least 2-3 enemy evecuate the wounded from the firing line. This takes out 4 weapons from shooting at you, keep this up and the enemy morale will drop and they will break contact.


Thats how that theory goes

[Pursuit Curve]

Thank you for the info, I just have a question, The 5.56 ammo wieghs less, and that allows the Squaddies to put more rounds down range, but doesn't that also compute to running out of ammo just as fast or more quickly?
Wounding an enemy is just as inportant as a hard kill, but how does a 5.56 stack up against vested targets or targets that are hell bent on getting close enough to detonate an explosive , driving a vehicle?

I personally would prefer the man stopping 7.62, it requires a trooper to be disciplined, pay attention to the corner stone of the infantry itrade, Marksmanship.

Don't forget that a 7.62 full metal jacket can pass through more than one target, and if it don't kill you, it sure will ensure that an amputation or severe
war ending injury will result.

Putting alot of rounds down range is good, but when they are rapidly depleted through shoddy marksmanship, then carrying more rounds will not matter. Good fire discipline and lethality of rounds. Tht is what matters.

[gf0012-aust]

recently arrived in my emails.

Murdoc Online reports that OICW increment 1 has been formally canceled (http://app.bronto.com/x/trackclick.php?id=17802927_74f2709a_87763&url=http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/002960.html) while the Pentagon reconsiders its plans in light of lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan. The USA may also wish to take into account Israeli lessons learned under related conditions during military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which resulted (http://app.bronto.com/x/trackclick.php?id=17802927_74f2709a_87763&url=http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/small_arms/tavor/Tavor.html) in the new TAR-21 Tavor assault weapon family (http://app.bronto.com/x/trackclick.php?id=17802927_74f2709a_87763&url=http://www.defense-update.com/directory/tavor.htm).

in addition:

USA Pays $8.8M to Swedish Firm for Armor Piercing Bullets
Nordic Ammunition Co. (or "Nammo") in Karlsborg, Sweden received an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 5.56mm M995 and 7.62mm M993 armor piercing cartridges. Nammo subsidiary Vanasverken supplies the Swedish Defense forces, and specializes in armor piercing and sniper ammunition development. Their other specialty is a new non-toxic ammunition cartridge.

[Pursuit Curve]

Thank you for GF, well now, that answers my concerns. But what about infantry combat arms skills? Conserving Ammo and fire discipline, are those skills still taught, or is it fire until the barrel melts?

[HammerHead]

Thank you for the info, I just have a question, The 5.56 ammo wieghs less, and that allows the Squaddies to put more rounds down range, but doesn't that also compute to running out of ammo just as fast or more quickly?
Wounding an enemy is just as inportant as a hard kill, but how does a 5.56 stack up against vested targets or targets that are hell bent on getting close enough to detonate an explosive , driving a vehicle?

I personally would prefer the man stopping 7.62, it requires a trooper to be disciplined, pay attention to the corner stone of the infantry itrade, Marksmanship.

Don't forget that a 7.62 full metal jacket can pass through more than one target, and if it don't kill you, it sure will ensure that an amputation or severe
war ending injury will result.

Putting alot of rounds down range is good, but when they are rapidly depleted through shoddy marksmanship, then carrying more rounds will not matter. Good fire discipline and lethality of rounds. Tht is what matters.


Right on the ball pursuit curve

Ive Vietnam stories where GIs complained that the round is so light that it ricochets of heavy brush, one wouldnt have that problem with 7.62
Also heard a story that during the falklands war a royal marine shot an argie with 4 5.56 rnds, undeterred the argie fired back with his FAL hittng the Marine once and injuring him critically, had the roles been reversed the argie probably wouldnt have survived the first rnd.

I couldn't agree with you more, markmanship is the bread and butter of the footsoldier, this combined with a lethal round like the 7.62 Nato equals a world of hate for whoever down range. The shift to the lighter round only started enmasse after Vietnam which is around 40 years ago wheres the 7.62 (.308 winchester) has been around from the beginning of the 20th century, well not exactly 7.62 Nato but .303 British and .30cal american the statistics between these two rounds and 7.62 Nato is quite similar.

Brit .303
Weight: 11.27 gms
Velocity:731 mps

Nato 7.62
Weight:9.3 gms
Velocity: 838 mps

as you can see both of these rounds are heavy and fast, thus explaining the punching power through multiple targets.

Now compare
Nato 5.56 ss109
Weight: 3.56gms
Velocity: 1005 mps

and
Soviet 7.62
Weight: 7.91 gms
Velocity: 710 mps

Soviet 5.45
Weight: 3.4 gms
Velocity: 900 mps

As you can see both Nato and Soviet small rounds are lighter and faster. I'm not a rocket scientist but from what i grasp i understand that the lighter rounds make up in speed what they lack in weight. which means they go in and out of a target without the target even realising the hit, but the light weight enables the round to richochet once hit, this means they don't ususall tend to exit opposite the place they hit, which means a lot of internal organ/tissue and bone damage which could ultimately end in permenant damage or death. whereas the heavy rounds tend to rip through wood, brick, flesh and bone alike neatly with no problems.

The evolving theatre of war is also another factor, it is said that all future battles will be fought in an urban environment. Urban fighting is fought in close range (100-300 m) thus a rifleman doesn't have the need to utilise the 7.62 rnd which was originally designed to fire from long rifles such as FN FAL, G3 and M14 on the terrain of western europe in case of WW3. The rise of jungle fighting and urban fighting prompted the need for smaller rifles which can be manouvered easily in the bush and building alike, and the rise of 5.56 rose with it because of collaterel damage. Urban fighting always had and will have the innocent civilian scenario which a soldier has to worry about. 7.62 is great, a burst of 7.62 in clearing a room is even great but also is the risk of the round penetrating the wall and killing the neighbours. "new age sensitive" armies try to maintain civilian casualties to a bare minimum so they opt for the lighter round. ANother reason is the growth of mechanised warfare, a rifleman needs a smaller rifle to use from or within an APC/IFV using a 7.62 rifle will be too cumbersome.
LAst but not least traing a fresh recruit who have never fired a rifle before with a 5.56 is seen as better judgement than with 7.62. Firing 5.56 is softer on the shoulders which makes recruits to flinch less when firing thus improving their accuracy. It is ofetn seen as a trade off injury inflicting calibre, ammo supply, range and accuracy


There is a myth going around that ss109 rounds have a copper penetrator inside the bullet enabling it to penetrate light body armour, cannot verify though.

[Pursuit Curve]

Hammerhead, appreciate the tech data man, thank you. Yeah, the 5.56 is a compromise regards penetration of walls and structures so friendlies aren' t hurt. There are lighter versions of 7.62 Nato, but I cannot substantiate that unfortunately, I just wonder how many bad guys hide behind walls and foliage.

[driftder]

Right on the ball pursuit curve

Ive Vietnam stories where GIs complained that the round is so light that it ricochets of heavy brush, one wouldnt have that problem with 7.62...

strange, I don't have that experience - might be your brush or jungle is made of sterner stuff.


There is a myth going around that ss109 rounds have a copper penetrator inside the bullet enabling it to penetrate light body armour, cannot verify though.

the copper penetrator is a urban myth. you might wish to check out this link: http://www.ak-47.net/ammo/ss109.txt. More reliable data is not available as it's type classified.

as for the penetrating power of 5.56, unless its a concrete or cement hardened building, you can still get golf ball size holes in it.

[MilSpex]

Ive heard anecdotes of Marines in Fallujah coming under attack from RPKs and AKs being fired through second floor cielings onto their heads but when it came to returning fire their 5.56 couldn`t penetrate back up through the floor to the insurgents. Apparantly a lot of Marines want a 7.62mm assault rifle. Has anyone else heard this?

[Pursuit Curve]

Ive heard anecdotes of Marines in Fallujah coming under attack from RPKs and AKs being fired through second floor cielings onto their heads but when it came to returning fire their 5.56 couldn`t penetrate back up through the floor to the insurgents. Apparantly a lot of Marines want a 7.62mm assault rifle. Has anyone else heard this?

I could understand the AK's being used through the floor, but if anyone uses a RPG, in an enclosed space, well, the Marines would not have to worry about shooting up through the floor, because the back blast would kill or serverely wound the RPG shooter and his number 2.

I agree though, that the 7.62 should be reconsidered as the preferable round. 5.56 is too light, no matter what its muzzle velocity or light wieght advantages, I just do not think it can deliver the penetration needed for Urban combat.

[driftder]

Ive heard anecdotes of Marines in Fallujah coming under attack from RPKs and AKs being fired through second floor cielings onto their heads but when it came to returning fire their 5.56 couldn`t penetrate back up through the floor to the insurgents. Apparantly a lot of Marines want a 7.62mm assault rifle. Has anyone else heard this?

from what I heard & understand, the terrs were fighting from prepared positions. that is they had reinforced their firing points with sandbags etc. that's why they can still return fire even when their positions are pinpointed and every rifle, GPMG is turn on them. Unless there is a .50 cal or above gun, it's tough to winkle them out. as .50 cal are not that portable and are mostly vehicle mounted. The Israeli experience is for .50 cal in urban fighting as can control collateral damage. Once the enemy is located and suppressed, their infantry will close on the position - breaking and entering through a side wall or corner is best but waste lots of C4. as a result, the ole bazooka is making a comeback though they call it by other titles now - bunker busters.

however with the Russian RPG-7 types, one disadvantage is inability to fire from enclosed positions as they have a massive back blast. so if they are using it, that means from roof-tops. which means they can be silhoutted or sky-lined. which means 40mm or mortar fire if available can be use to counter.

Fighting in urban ops is like fighting in space or air - you need a 360 perspective.

[MilSpex]

I could understand the AK's being used through the floor, but if anyone uses a RPG, in an enclosed space, well, the Marines would not have to worry about shooting up through the floor, because the back blast would kill or serverely wound the RPG shooter and his number 2.

I agree though, that the 7.62 should be reconsidered as the preferable round. 5.56 is too light, no matter what its muzzle velocity or light wieght advantages, I just do not think it can deliver the penetration needed for Urban combat.

Not RPGs but RPKs, ie light machine guns.