XM-8 The Rifle of the Future

[USMCDevilDog]

Release date for this rifle is around 2008, so our Armed Forces will be blessed with its presence in about 2 years. It's one hell of a gun and is about to replace every "foot soldier" gun in our arsenal; The M-16 will be gone, the SAW will most likely be stopped and the M40A1 Sniper Rifle will be replaced.

This gun can turn into all of those guns with no tools necessary. It can go from Baseline Carbine to Baseline Carbine with the XM320 Grenade Launcher (instead of the M203), to the Compact Carbine to the, Sharpshooter Variant and finally to replace the SAW, the Automatic Rifle.

Here is the website with all the info., specs, and pictures you want, including pictures of all the different varieties this weapon can take on:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Gear_051104_XM8,00.html

What do you all think about it?

 

[USViking]

I have always read the M-16 was prone to jamming,
and wondered why we did not switch to a copy and
improvement on the AK-47, or the Israeli assault rifle,
which I saw fire up after being rubbed in wet sand.

How does the penetration of the XM-8 compare to the
others, and does it fire a tumbling bullet?

 

[Zhukov]

That's a real slick looking gun.

I saw a History Channel program on future weapons, and they showed a soldier with a rifle kind of like that.

I'm not sure if this gun has the option, the article doesn't say, but the grenade launcher had a pad on the side to program the fuse. That way if there were terrorists in a building, hiding behind the walls and firing out a window, and you knew the distance to the building, you could fire the grenade through the window and pre-program it to detonate in mid-air in the middle of the room.

That gun also had an optical link where you could just stick the gun around a corner or over a wall and see exactly what the gun saw through a helmet mounted display monocle.

 

[Gunny]

I have always read the M-16 was prone to jamming,
and wondered why we did not switch to a copy and
improvement on the AK-47, or the Israeli assault rifle,
which I saw fire up after being rubbed in wet sand.

How does the penetration of the XM-8 compare to the
others, and does it fire a tumbling bullet?

The M-16 was prone to jamming in its original version when issued back in the 60s due to a weapon/ammo snafu. The weapon was originally designed to fire lubricated ammo. The military insisted Stoner modify the design to accept unlubricated ammo; while, at the same time buying huge lots of lubricated ammo. Rather than toss it out, the military issued the lubricated ammo to troops carrying the modified M-16s. That, more than any other factor made the M-16 unrealiable.

Once the forward assist was added and the correct ammo was issued, the weapon was as reliable as any other. Like any other piece of machinery, if you do not properly care for it, it's going to break down. Translation: clean your weapon!

The AK-47 is a stamped-metal bullet-thrower. You can have it. An AVERAGE troop with an M-16 could take you out before you got anywhere NEAR being in range to hit him with an AK-47.

 

[Gunny]

Release date for this rifle is around 2008, so our Armed Forces will be blessed with its presence in about 2 years. It's one hell of a gun and is about to replace every "foot soldier" gun in our arsenal; The M-16 will be gone, the SAW will most likely be stopped and the M40A1 Sniper Rifle will be replaced.

This gun can turn into all of those guns with no tools necessary. It can go from Baseline Carbine to Baseline Carbine with the XM320 Grenade Launcher (instead of the M203), to the Compact Carbine to the, Sharpshooter Variant and finally to replace the SAW, the Automatic Rifle.

Here is the website with all the info., specs, and pictures you want, including pictures of all the different varieties this weapon can take on:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Gear_051104_XM8,00.html

What do you all think about it?

I'd have to see that thing replace the M40A1. This looks like a case of outthinking ourselves. "Jack of all trades, master of none" comes to mind.

 

[Zhukov]

I figure if it's the best assualt rifle we can design that's enough.

All the other add-ons are just gravy.

My marine buddy who was in Iraq scored well on the marksman course, and though he wasn't a sniper he was given limited sniper duties. He was pretty much was just given a M-16 with a fancier scope.

With this gun he could have swapped out the barrels as well.

And even if they do put this into service I'm sure special forces snipers will still use sniper rifles and not the rigged of sniper version of this rifle.

Seems to be just mixing a matching parts. Remove the stock, compact carbine. Swap out the barrels and you've got the same rifle firing the same round, just slightly better suited to the role its being used in: single long range precision or just a lot of lead.

Makes your basic rifleman more versatile. Don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[Zhukov]

I mean, it's not going to replace this thing...

But the M40A1....I don't see why not.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

haha, yeah, I don't see it replacing that thing, no way.

Either way though, it seems like a good weapon.

 

[USViking]

The M-16 was prone to jamming in its original version when issued back in the 60s due to a weapon/ammo snafu. The weapon was originally designed to fire lubricated ammo. The military insisted Stoner modify the design to accept unlubricated ammo; while, at the same time buying huge lots of lubricated ammo. Rather than toss it out, the military issued the lubricated ammo to troops carrying the modified M-16s. That, more than any other factor made the M-16 unrealiable.

Once the forward assist was added and the correct ammo was issued, the weapon was as reliable as any other. Like any other piece of machinery, if you do not properly care for it, it's going to break down. Translation: clean your weapon!

The AK-47 is a stamped-metal bullet-thrower. You can have it. An AVERAGE troop with an M-16 could take you out before you got anywhere NEAR being in range to hit him with an AK-47.

I really glad to know all this.

 

[Hobbit]

I really glad to know all this.

Yeah, and in addition, the AK-47 has terrible recoil and isn't equipped to accept add-ons, such as a grenade launcher.

Leave it to H&K to make a better gun, though I've seen a Colt (I think) prototype of a gun called the OICW that is set to be our true, next-gen assault rifle. It's equipped with the Land Warrior system, a state of the art computer system that revolutionizes the soldier. A hud will allow the soldier rangefinding, GPS, and many other features, including the ability to see around corners via a gun-mounted camera. It is also equipped with an undermounted that fires 20mm explosive ammunition, usually shrapnel based. It has a laser rangefinder on the sights that is keyed directly to the ammunition's fuse, with a + and - on the side that can adjust the distance from the weapon at which the grenade will explode. As stated earlier, this allows the firer to cause the grenade to explode just around a corner, just through a window, or, in the case of weaker walls, on the other side of a wall. It's also capable of full automatic, single or 2 round burst fire (don't know why 2 instead of 3 like the MP5 and Steyr Aug).

 

[pegwinn]

The M16 class of weapon was designed to be an assault weapon for close in fights. When they were prototyping it, they discovered that it was accurate at over 300 yards........ amazing. Once the growing pains were stamped out by redesigns all was well. I prefer the M14 or M1 Garand for Match shooting.

This new system should do alright. But don't look for it to replace the Barret. And I am not sure it'll replace the SAW either.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

Yeah, and in addition, the AK-47 has terrible recoil and isn't equipped to accept add-ons, such as a grenade launcher.

Leave it to H&K to make a better gun, though I've seen a Colt (I think) prototype of a gun called the OICW that is set to be our true, next-gen assault rifle. It's equipped with the Land Warrior system, a state of the art computer system that revolutionizes the soldier. A hud will allow the soldier rangefinding, GPS, and many other features, including the ability to see around corners via a gun-mounted camera. It is also equipped with an undermounted that fires 20mm explosive ammunition, usually shrapnel based. It has a laser rangefinder on the sights that is keyed directly to the ammunition's fuse, with a + and - on the side that can adjust the distance from the weapon at which the grenade will explode. As stated earlier, this allows the firer to cause the grenade to explode just around a corner, just through a window, or, in the case of weaker walls, on the other side of a wall. It's also capable of full automatic, single or 2 round burst fire (don't know why 2 instead of 3 like the MP5 and Steyr Aug).

The OICW was the prototype bed for the XM-8. Here's what it said from the article I posted:

It takes its cue from the M-29 Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), a $10,000 prototypical technology test bed from the late 1990s. The OICW was a combination of "kinetic energy" projector (a battle rifle that fired the Remington .223) and a semi-autonomous, air-bursting 20mm grenade launcher. The XM-8 is the "kinetic energy" portion of the OICW, plus a receiver to which all other components can be attached or removed.

I've seen the OICW more often on the History channel and what not then the XM-8, but from what this says the XM-8 is going to be our weapon. Reading about the OICW though makes me think the OICW would be better, seems its got some good shit on it, technology wise. Only problem is that thing is huge and heavy for a normal combat weapon.

 

[Hobbit]

The OICW was the prototype bed for the XM-8. Here's what it said from the article I posted:

It takes its cue from the M-29 Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), a $10,000 prototypical technology test bed from the late 1990s. The OICW was a combination of "kinetic energy" projector (a battle rifle that fired the Remington .223) and a semi-autonomous, air-bursting 20mm grenade launcher. The XM-8 is the "kinetic energy" portion of the OICW, plus a receiver to which all other components can be attached or removed.

I've seen the OICW more often on the History channel and what not then the XM-8, but from what this says the XM-8 is going to be our weapon. Reading about the OICW though makes me think the OICW would be better, seems its got some good shit on it, technology wise. Only problem is that thing is huge and heavy for a normal combat weapon.

Yeah, the OICW is upwards of 15 pounds. Unacceptable for standard issue. The XM-8 sounds like it will be able to mount the OICW hardware, but make it optional, so that the standard weapon will be closer to 8 pounds with room for expansion.

 

[CSM]

I dunno, guys. I cannot picture any line grunt carrying all that mix and match stuff. Most will get whatever the standard configuration is going to be, some will get the grenade launcher or shotgun add on but that is about it. As for the SAW, I dont like it anyway (liked the old M-60 better).

For me, the M14 was the best...you could really reach out and touch someone, turned into a pretty decent version of a BAR easily, had a pretty good bayonet that was USEABLE and when all else failed, made a darned good club!

 

[pegwinn]

I dunno, guys. I cannot picture any line grunt carrying all that mix and match stuff. Most will get whatever the standard configuration is going to be, some will get the grenade launcher or shotgun add on but that is about it. As for the SAW, I dont like it anyway (liked the old M-60 better).

For me, the M14 was the best...you could really reach out and touch someone, turned into a pretty decent version of a BAR easily, had a pretty good bayonet that was USEABLE and when all else failed, made a darned good club!

I can picture the basic issue going to two out of four in a fire team. The third would get the grenade launcher. The fourth would get the AR. Personally I'd like the over-n-under 5.56 with a shotgun below. But I like stuff that goes boom. I also see a lot of SNCO's & Officers getting rid of M9's and carrying the carbine version.

 

[Gunny]

I dunno, guys. I cannot picture any line grunt carrying all that mix and match stuff. Most will get whatever the standard configuration is going to be, some will get the grenade launcher or shotgun add on but that is about it. As for the SAW, I dont like it anyway (liked the old M-60 better).

For me, the M14 was the best...you could really reach out and touch someone, turned into a pretty decent version of a BAR easily, had a pretty good bayonet that was USEABLE and when all else failed, made a darned good club!

It also makes an outstanding sniper rifle with a few tweaks. Hands down, if I had to select any one "assault rifle" that could "do it all," I'd have to go with the M-14. I'll go hand to hand with THAT against anyone with one of those Buck Rodgers rifles.

(I think this means we're "dated")

 

[USMCDevilDog]

What's so great about hand to hand with an M-14???

 

[Johnney]

Release date for this rifle is around 2008, so our Armed Forces will be blessed with its presence in about 2 years. It's one hell of a gun and is about to replace every "foot soldier" gun in our arsenal; The M-16 will be gone, the SAW will most likely be stopped and the M40A1 Sniper Rifle will be replaced.

This gun can turn into all of those guns with no tools necessary. It can go from Baseline Carbine to Baseline Carbine with the XM320 Grenade Launcher (instead of the M203), to the Compact Carbine to the, Sharpshooter Variant and finally to replace the SAW, the Automatic Rifle.

Here is the website with all the info., specs, and pictures you want, including pictures of all the different varieties this weapon can take on:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Gear_051104_XM8,00.html

What do you all think about it?

that would be real nice in a 7.62 version

 

[pegwinn]

It also makes an outstanding sniper rifle with a few tweaks. Hands down, if I had to select any one "assault rifle" that could "do it all," I'd have to go with the M-14. I'll go hand to hand with THAT against anyone with one of those Buck Rodgers rifles.

(I think this means we're "dated")

"Dated" That is the problem. The M14 and M1 are/were great traditional infantry rifles. You could reach out and tap someone, and were expected to. Modern infantry have more in common with "assault troops" and require a lighter load. I shot the above in matches. Heavy is great on the range and sucks in the field. As to dated........ When the M14 was introduced there were many who scoffed and declared the Garand to be the only true battlefield rifle of note. When the Garand was in general service, the most commonly used sniper rifle in the Corps was the 03 Springfield. We always seem to like the older stuff since it is "proven".

Personally, I have no problem with the M16/M4. And I bet I could make this puppy bark as well.

 

[Gunny]

What's so great about hand to hand with an M-14???

When you get thunked on the noggin with an M-14 you ARE going down.