New Army Weapon - M16/M4 Replacement

[Hasty8]

if it turns out to be reliable, it could be a competator, i dont know how they got the recoil to be so low, but it would probably decrease the reliability factor

Not "could" but "is". (as far as I know this baby is already the only one in contention. Not sure when the switchover will be made but I don't think they are looking at any other systems.)

This baby is sweet as candy.

Easily modifiable from standard rifle to sniper to machine gun.

I would sell vital parts of my anatomy for one of these puppies.

Actually, a page Ijust found says that the XM8 should begine replacing "existing M4 Carbines and select 5.56mm x45 weapons in the US Army arsenal beginning as early as the fourth quarter of FY05"

XM8

I believe it's designation will simply be the M8 once it is released.

I seriously have a chubby for this rifle.

[teufelhunden]

My only gripe with this weapon is there's no intermediate 16" barrel. I get that whole "the battlefield is changing" thing but if the engagement range increases a squad may be left with only their one or two machinegunners being able to put bullets downrange to a sufficient distance. I mean, that complaint already exists with the M4..

[Hasty8]

Thank God I'll be long out of the Army before my unit gets that abomination.

Cripes, re-fit the M16 system with a piston, slow down the twist to 1-12", and bring back the 55grain bullet. A better rifle, with better terminal ballistics, for pennies compared to an entirely new rifle system.


But do you think they'll ever listen to me?

Understandable however look at these facts Army.

The XM8 Carbine variant (M8 when released I believe) will be 20% lighter than a comparably equipped M4 Carbine MWS and "yet offer additional features and performance unavailable currently in any assault rifle in the world."

As for cost, the M8 will be provided at a lower cost then the current M4 Carbine so as units need replacement there is less cost.

Also, the M8 will be fully field modifiable to sniper of heavy machine gun variants. No current field rifle allows this.

The extensive use of composites creates a rifle body that can take serious abuse from freezing cold to burning deserts.

The M8 will be manufactured in America by H&K. Regardless of how much you like Stoners design H&K are the premier firearm outfitters to the world. I love their MP5, UMp and G36 rifle systems.

There are other benefits as well and I understand your desire to keep to the tried and true but I think Army Development really got it right with the M8. Course, I'll reserve my final comment until I hear from the front-liners and see how they like it.

I happen to have two M1A's byt Springfield. The Socom 16 and the M25 White Feather. I love them. They are tough, ultra-reliable and accurate as a laser but I think the M8 will do well.

Just my two cents.

[SlartyBartFast]

For all the negative comments about the M8 wrt power etc, note that HK has already committed to change the gun to be compatible with larger and more powerful ammunition if the army chooses.

[BlackVCG]

Ya know, soldiers said similiar things about the M14 when the M16 was being rolled out.

Yeah and some of them that feel that way and can dictate which weapon they carry, like the SEALs, still carry the M-14 into combat.

[CaptaiN_JacK]

As for there being no recoil in the first video, I think the narrative guy said the guy was shooting blanks? I might have misunderstood him though.

[Glickman]

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_dust.php

theyve got a few videos of its press videos

looks like this thing strips with 2 pins as well

[teufelhunden]

Yeah and some of them that feel that way and can dictate which weapon they carry, like the SEALs, still carry the M-14 into combat.

If I'm not mistaken, many SEAL platoons use the sniper-ized variant, for the obvious marksmanship benefits. I also believe the USMC has fielded a similiar weapon.. I want to call it the M21.. checking now.

[Glickman]

yep i do believe your correct on the m21 (ghost recon 2 still calls it the m14, although its nearly all synthetic)

[nippinout]

Eugene Stoner did a good job.

I think they should can the XM-8 program and work on replacing the upper receivers on the M-16's with the G3/36 based one that H&K came up with.

[Target Practice]

Course, I'll reserve my final comment until I hear from the front-liners and see how they like it.

Number one, Army IS a "front-liner". He works with stuff like this every day.

Secondly, we DON'T need a rifle that can go 15,000 shots. We need soldiers that will be disceplined enough to keep theirr weapons CLEAN. If you need a weapon that can go 15,000 shots without cleaning, you have other issues.

How much do you think it would cost (in funds AND resources) to retrainand requalify EVERY soldier, armorer, and various support staff, rewrite EVERY piece of literature that has to deal with small arms weaponry, and restock EVERY unit and warehouse?

We don't need a modularly-designed weapon systems. The M-249 SAW is just that: a Squad Automatic Weapon. That's what it's designed for. Same goes for a Barret, an M-2, and an M-4 Any weapon specifically designed for a function will almost ALWAYS perform better than an weapon that is mearly adapted for that function. Why aren't the designs for the M-4, M-249, and M-14 the same? Because they all fulfill different roles, and each is built for the role it is ment to fill.

[Army]

Any componant that is "user" replaced, "user" changed, or "user" swapped, will be quickly lost or broken.

We have specific weapon systems for specific duties now, why would changing to a completely new platforn suddenly be better? Right now, I can leave my rifle in the locker, and grab a 249 while running out the door to the truck, and be well armed RIGHT NOW. I don't have to wait until my rifle gets reconfigured.

I know you're gonna say it........but, YES, sometimes (many times) you don't HAVE the luxury of having the weapon in hand you want RIGHT NOW. So you grab that one the mission calls for NOW, not in a little bit while Joe Schlep is busy finding all the pieces and parts for his whizzo rifle, that he's lost or left in the bottom of his footlocker back at base.

I stand behind 30 years of shooting, fixing, and playing with weapon systems from .22 rimfires to 8" howitzers and everything in between. Gas piston, slower twist, and lighter bullets will give the M16 back it's original lethality.

Besides, that damn thing looks too French!

[xXHavokXx]

I showed this thread to my friends dad who recently retired from the Army after 25 years, he thinks army is a smart guy reguarding his solutions for the m16 system

Personally I would like the see the implementation of the G36 or an existing weapon system or the fixed M16/M4 like Army says. R&D costs alot, waiting costs more and retraining will cost even more.

Whatever happened to the OICw?

[SlartyBartFast]

R&D costs alot, waiting costs more and retraining will cost even more.

R&D goes on all the time, new recruits need trained, and older troops need retraining.

Hell, it's not rocket science to use a weapon. You guys make it sound like they'd have to be retraining pilots or something.

I think Army's misgivings are misplaced. I doubt that soldiers will be field modifying their weapons. The advantage is that when any one weapon breaks, there's a much larger pool of interchangeable spare parts.

And any adoption of another weapon or modification of a current one would entail R&D and retraining.

[teufelhunden]

Whatever happened to the OICw?

Stalled because the damned thing was too big and too heavy. Waiting on new materials or something like that.


Also, as for re-training.. in the long run it's gotta be cheaper to train on one XM8 that probably behaves quite similarly in its 21546 configurations than training on an M16, M249, M60, M21/24, etc..