New Army Weapon - M16/M4 Replacement

[Alpha]

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..

ACtually I heard the XM-8 was based off the kinetic energy part of the OICW. OICW was a retarded idea.. Right up there with exoskeletons. They're trying to get way too much ahead of time, and while having a lasertag-looking gun that can shoot a 20mm air burst grenade that can be blind fired around corners seems cool, it all just adds for more things to go wrong.. I dont know..

I also heard that BArret was putting togethor a new upper for the 16 series. Think abotu it, most of the issues in M16/M4's are all in the upper reciever. The lower is pretty nice.

However, the new barret upper is a larger caliber then the current 5.56, and the military wants a rifle that will use the same ammunition as they already have.. I mean seriously, who knows how much the endless supply of ammunition is.

I just checked, the barret's designation is the M468. Looks like it has a parir of top mounting picatinnys, and a built in SIR onto the handguard. The caliber is 6.8mm..

The best improvement is the caliber of the weapon.. Think about it. Back when the XM16's were in prototype stages during the cold war and during vietnam, there was a shoot to wound philosophy. The added lethaliy of the new cartridge is what makes the M468 so great, but the fact that there are millions of stockpiles of 5.56mm ammunition are whats holding it back.

The OICW and all those new projects are missing the biggest acronym of all.. KISS.. Keep it simple, stupid.

The XM8 is an all in one... And I can't say becuase I've never shot one, but it makes a bit more sense to have a sniper rifle made for snipers, a squad based weapons for SAW gunners, a basic rifle for riflemen and a different SMG for specops.

You can't take out the engine block of a technical a mile away with a 5.56mm plastic rifle. You need somethign specialized for the task. This all just sounds like something that looks good on paper but would never stand its own in combat. They need field soldiers to design the new replacement rifle. People who know what they need, and how to integrate it into a rifle.

My .02

[SlartyBartFast]

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

I got the impression that the XM8 was developed to incorporate the lessons and development for the heavier monster so that useable weapons could be released quicker until the lighter materials were available for the other variant.

For a positive army troop review, read:

http://armedforcesjournal.com/blackwater/xm81.html

Seems the M4 has serious disadvantages compared to the XM8

[Destructo6]

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.

HK would probably charge them the same for the upper as they would for a complete XM8, so what's the difference? And why settle for half a G36, when you could have most of a G36 (XM8)?

ACtually I heard the XM-8 was based off the kinetic energy part of the OICW. OICW was a retarded idea

The OICW was renamed XM29 before it was decided to develope the components separately. The "kinetic energy weapon" of the xM29 was a slightly modified G36. The XM8 is a somewhat modified G36. The OICW/XM29 is a great idea. As always, the devil is in the details.

[HoppysMag]

its a great weapon system and a good idea. is it a better idea than modifying the m16? time will tell.

the seals still carry m14's as a slightly modified base gun. not the m21 sniper.and the modified m14's we use now, arnt m21's. just for the record.

stoner was a genous, asmuch as i disliked the militarys choice to use the 223 as its primary round in almost everything ( i feel we need more, larger caliber weapons in squads)as i dont agree with switching to the 9mm. ( if anyone knows the story of why we switched to 45 you might agree) but anyway. i say give this new XM8 a trial period, and not jump into it like we did with the m16 in nam.


alot of gun companys < H&K< Stoner< Garand.... never forget it.

[Hasty8]

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

While I agree that Army is a front-liner I doubt he has been personally involved with any testing to date. As such, he probably knows about as much as we do.

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.

Why must we settle for one or the other when what we need is both. A weapon that can go a long time between cleanings and properly trained soliders.

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.

Uh, dude, you already have one.

The Stoner designed M16 is the basis for the SPR and the M4 Carbine and with the addition of a RIS and a clip you have the capability for long, sustained bursts of fire and a grenade launcher.

Going further back the M14 was the base for the M14NM, XM21 and the M24. The M24 is still in use today.

Hell, even the M249 and the M16 are somewhat modular as you can use m16 ammo clips in the M249.

All the XM8 family does is allow for a wide variety of firearms to share the same internals. Yes, barrels are somewhat swappable but it's not like they are going to be sending soldiers out into the field with a XM8 Carbine and extra barrels for heavy assault and sniping but the ability is there.

This system will lighten the soldiers load which makes the soldier more mobile and also gives our forces the ability to handle a wider variety of situations.

All this nay-saying against the XM8 is trully odd to me, considering that the M16 is truly a rather horrible firearm the was wholly opposed by the Ordnance Corp yet was still adopted by the Sec of Def.

The M16 was supposed to have the same Effective Area Target range as the M14 (460m) but was really only accurate out to 215m.
The first version jammed almost continually unless extensive cleaning was done and they had to essentialy change the gunpowder to prevent further jamming.
A second version was needed to handle such issues and expended cartridges not hitting left-handed soldiers in the face.

And let's not forget my personal favorite additions. The "Foward Assist Handle" or what I refer to as the "Better Use This Or Your Gun Won't Fire in Battle Cuase IT Ain't Fully Loaded Even Though You Loaded In A Fresh Clip and Cocked The Mother" handle which came out in 1963.

Now, to go back to you claim about the downside of having to retrain the military. Looking back on your coveted M16 this had to happen a number of times.

First in 1962 when the first 1000 AR15 rifles went to South Vietnam.
Then, in 1963, the US Army purchases 85,000 XM16E1 rifles and 19,000 US AF M16 rifles. The US AF M16 rifles are the only AR-15 based rifles to have th "Forward Assist". Two different classes are now required.
1966 - Colt is awarded a contract for 840,000 new rifles which are adopted as the M16A1 on 2/28/67
65-67 - Whoopise! First, the originally specified DupontIMR powder is replaced with standard ball powder by the military. The ball powder creates tremendous fouling which leads to significant jamming. What compounds this problem is that because Colt marketed the rifle as being "low-maintenance" almost no cleaning supplies were purchased for the rifles. This is dealt with in 67-70 when the barrel, chamber and bolt are chrome lined and new powder loads are put into rotation.

More re-training.

The continued list of new releases and retrainings on the M16/M4 family of weapons is legion as is it with just about any weapon system.

I would also like to point out that during the transition from the M14 to the M16 a lot of similar claims were made and yet, for the most part, the M16 became a very good weapon.

I think the XM8 will prove to be just as good, if not better.

[nippinout]

HK would probably charge them the same for the upper as they would for a complete XM8, so what's the difference? And why settle for half a G36, when you could have most of a G36 (XM8)?

We don't necessarily need H&K making the upper.

Changing a component of an existing weapons system is a better solution than to switch to an entirely new unproven weapons system. The M-16 has gone through decades of use and refinement, why stop now? Many changes have been implemented into the M-16 since the days of Vietnam, and phasing in a new upper receiver could be the next one in line.

You need to procure and store less parts, less training, and less documentation with just a change to a weapon than to throw it out and get an entirely new one.

The worst thing that a soldier can have is a weapon he does not trust. The American soldier trusts the M-16.

[Automaggot68]

How is this new at all?
When I was somethign liek, 13 I read about it in Popular science.
My Buddy's Dad who was in the Army at the time, said nearly the same thing ARYM and Target practice said.

Damn. I wish i had more to add, but I dont know a damn thing about that weapons system.

[SlartyBartFast]

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.

I agree. If you need a weapon that can go 15,000 rounds without cleaning or lubricating and only needs it's barrel replaced every 20,000 rounds you do have one HUGE issue. It's called WAR.

Because we all know that you have ample time in combat to strip and clean your weapon or find a replacement.

XM8 is supposed to clean 4 minutes instead of the current 14.

And all that means is that with the same disipline you are even MORE sure that the guns will function well for combat because they aren't approaching the critical point before being cleaned.

I know that I'd want a weapon that needs more cleaning and took longer to clean if I was going into battle with it.

I think the old guys are just pouting because the recruits will beat all their old disassemble/reassemble blind-folded time records.

According to the article H&K was alternating between submersing the gun in water and burying it in sand between shooters at the demo.

[Hasty8]

I believe in one test they even froze it in a block and it fired immediately upon being broken out. I cannot verify this yet but I have karnak running on it.

[logamus]

i think gunser good!!!

[Glickman]

I believe in one test they even froze it in a block and it fired immediately upon being broken out. I cannot verify this yet but I have karnak running on it.

how strong is the polymer though? $50 says itll break if you bang it against a tree

btw i believe its not 15k shots without cleaning, its 15k shots before it needs a barrel change

[SlartyBartFast]

how strong is the polymer though? $50 says itll break if you bang it against a tree

btw i believe its not 15k shots without cleaning, its 15k shots before it needs a barrel change

Sounds like a good bet to me. I'd probably bet you 50,000 if I knew you were good for it. If AGD can design a frame that can support a Miata, I think that HK can design a gun that will withstand battle abuse.

You really think that the thing would have got this far if hitting it on something would break it?

And if you'd just read the article I linked to you wouldn't BELIEVE, you'd KNOW that it's 15k round, no lub, no cleaning. 20k before changeout.

http://armedforcesjournal.com/blackwater/xm81.html

[HoppysMag]

to specify

"It needs little maintenance. H&K officials say the XM8 can fire more than 15,000 rounds without need for lubrication or cleaning, even under the most extreme operating conditions. "

and to who said it before, soldiers would still be made to clean his weapon as a disciplinary thing. but when it doesnt have to be cleaned as often its less likely to jam and cost a soldiers life.

[SlartyBartFast]

But considering the number of twits who seem to shoot themselves while 'cleaning' their rifles back at camp, maybe the army wants a weapon they can keep out of soldiers hands until they absolutely need it.

[HoppysMag]

But considering the number of twits who seem to shoot themselves while 'cleaning' their rifles back at camp, maybe the army wants a weapon they can keep out of soldiers hands until they absolutely need it.

im sorry iv never heard of that. can you give me an example? in boot you dont get live ammo except at the range.