New XM8 Assault Rifle Options

[Arethusa]

Uh, have you read the rest of this thread?

[BitBasher]

[otomik]

actually the XM8 is a pretty conservative design because it's not a bullpup. This could be a serious shortcoming given the standard configuration with a 12.5'' barrel, a decrease in stopping power which makes it worse than the M4's 14'' barrel.

What I'm really hopping is that they chamber it in the 6.8mm cartridge (or just about anything heavier than 62 grain 5.56mm) and plastic cased ammunition.
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&t...highlight=natec
http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-8mm_SPC.htm
http://www.gunblast.com/Barrett-M468.htm
(the last link has a photo of a guy that someone should use for their dwarven merc)

[hobgoblin]

hmm, i belive i had read the thread and some of the stuff linked to allso. still i may be suffering information overload...

"The G36, in severely modified form, also is used as a "kinetic energy" part of the US XM-29 OICW weapon." <- from world.guns.ru. it seems i got the timeline wrong, rather then oicw->g36->xm8 its g36->oicw->xm8, sorry for that...

but still, i made the original comment based on the fact that the xm8 looks like a redesign of the g36 and people where only pointing back to the oicw project and ignoreing the existance of the g36 or implying that they (g36 & xm8) where in no way related except for some similarity in looks...

[Arethusa]

hobgoblin, read my post on the second page. I basically outlined the entire history of the XM8 project.

As for the 12.5" barrel, I'm really not sure if the carbine is going to be all that's given out. From what I've read, it seems like sqauds will be issued a mix of full size rifles and carbines to handle current rifleman duties. But, hell, all information on this is fairly unreliable right now. I do know that one of the major parts of the XM8 design is that it can be easily adapted to 6.8 SPC. Guess we'll see how that works out.

[edit]

I will say, though, that I was also disappointed when I first heard about the XM8 and its lack of bullpup goodness.

This post has been edited by Arethusa: Aug 26 2004, 07:52 PM

[Siege]

Has there been a report issued on how quickly an XM-8 can be converted from short to long and all things inbetween?

One of the major selling points was the expandable flexability of the weapon as noted
here. If you look closely, the weapon is equipped with a bipod.

The next question becomes - will soldiers be issued conversion kits in the field or are they stuck using the weapon in issued format?

-Siege

[Arethusa]

There've been theoretical figures, but I've seen nothing I'd believe in.

Also, bear in mind that it's HK selling its own product, but be that as it may, this is still quite informative.

[KillaJ]

My guess would be the lowest level you would be likely to encounter anyone with the tools to change it out would be the company armorer, though I wouldnt be surprised to see it restricted to battalion. I definitely dont think that individual soldiers would have the kit for it, if only for the purpose of limiting the amount of weight they have to carry, which seems to be one of the primary reasons for issuing this weapon in the first place.

[Siege]

According to Arethusa's link, the weapon is designed to be adaptable at the user level - although it doesn't go into specifics regarding how complex the process becomes.

-Siege

[KillaJ]

[Siege]

As mentioned, it is the company hyping it's product - we haven't seen independent evaluations yet.

As to the trooper's need to swap out - I suppose that depends on the situation and the mission. Necessary parts might be stored at Base Exxon for swapping between missions or the squad might carry a singular extra barrel in case the situation calls for the LMG or the equipment needed for the "sniper-lite" role.

I wish I had a more concrete answer beyond this speculation - the M-16 was introduced with FA capabilities because of the "human wave" tactic of the Chinese. In Viet Nam they locked the M-16s down to single and burst fire because troops had a bad tendency to run out of ammo in the field by cranking on FA indiscriminately.

So I suspect the issuing of modifications and tools will depend on how the military responds to the functionality of the weapon and how the troops take to it in the field.

-Siege

[KillaJ]

[Kurukami]

[KarmaInferno]

[Austere Emancipa...]

AR base damage is 8M, and you can just take a look at these two if you feel the world is making too much sense.

[Edit]And maybe even check these out, if you have no respect for your sanity.[/Edit]

[Edit #2]The point being that there's a whole lot more to terminal effectivity than caliber and kinetic energy. SR cannot really handle that sort of stuff, because of the level of abstractness and the difficulty of fine tuning caused by the use of D6s. On the other hand, one could argue that no RPG should delve into that stuff -- very few people know it happens, a small fraction of that knows why and how it happens, and I'm not sure if anyone knows exactly how such things affect the terminal effectivity of small arms in actual combat.[/Edit #2]

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Aug 26 2004, 10:38 PM

[TheScamp]

[hobgoblin]

[FrostyNSO]

I am sorely disappointed that the US gov didn't go bullpup, I think they're more comfortable, more compact, and easier to switch for lefties. Probably worried some of the dumber grunts would end up pointing the wrong end at themselves =)

As far as caliber, seeing as we have billions of rounds of 5.56 stockpiled already, it seems a logical choice. Velocity has more impact on wound profiles and penetration than mass anyways.

[hobgoblin]

if you can turn a bullpup the wrong way you can do it to a normal rifle to. the big flat surfaces goes towards your shoulder, dont care about where the magazine is located...

about the velocity vs mass stuff, equal velocity but more mass will lead to more energy being buildt up and therefor have a bigger punch, atleast in theory. then there is the question if the bullet goes straight thru or begins to tumble inside the target. still, im again going by seat of pants here ;)

[Bossemanden]

[Austere Emancipa...]

[otomik]

The wounding effect of 5.56mm is largely dependent on it's fragmenting and tumbling effect. the fragmenting effect doesn't happen below a certain velocity. with the 14'' barrel of the M4 carbine it's estimated that this tumbling effect will be unlikely past 125 meters, with the projected 12.5 barrel length of the standard XM8 that range falls to a paltry 25 meters.

while the 5.56mm is fast, it loses it's speed quickly (poor ballistic coefficient). There are some alternatives out there now that aren't as fast as the 5.56mm out of the barrel but keep their speed longer (and when you have a cartridge that keeps it's speed it has better long range trajectories, better long range accuracy). People have tried to make designated marksman and sniper rifles from 5.56mm and they all suck because of it's inheriant long range weakness and rapidly falling trajectory (short range police style sniping aside).

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/bullet.html

They could have created something with an even better ballistic coefficient than 6.8mm SPC (something like 6mm Optimum) but their primary goal was increased lethality. I just wish they created something with a smaller caliber to maintain the tumbling and fragmenting effect if possible, and something like a .243 Winchester in a smaller case would mean cheap varmint ammo and cheap deer ammo for all the civies. maybe 6.8mm is a tacit admission that the tumbling fragmenting thing never worked as well as it did on paper.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/...remington_0303/

[Austere Emancipa...]

[Smiley]

Are the specs anywhere? Like the weight, etc.?

Also, I doubt they'll keep that exact finish on it when/if it goes into active use. It'll probably be black, like the M-16.

[Nath]