http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/11876041

This is basically a continuation of the grenade part of the XM29, also known as OICW...

I believe this was one half of the argument in another thread.

It's nice to see them using it. It's even more amusing to read the comments about the weapon system on Yahoo.

According to the Internet Layman, this is a weapon system that fires through cover and destroys buildings. I love people.

According to the Internet Layman, a Katana can slice through Tanks and Diamond is the hardest Metal on Earth 2

That is exactly why I love these people. They're screaming about Assange and co. in our governments, steelin' our seekritz but don't actually stop to read what the secrets are.

Even if this has been publically known for how many years?

That depends on the cover and building.

Of course it doesn't really have laser "guidance" so much as a laser range finder. Which the only thing is impressive about that it works well enough for field use.

They expect it to shoot through walls and destroy them utterly.

It's a fantastic piece of hardware. You can actually time the grenades to airburst behind cover, thereby invalidating said cover, just like the Ares CAR-32's.

Finally. They've been making this bloody gun for like 15 years.

Works great in the video games, though. Get the range from the laser, aim slightly higher, boom.

Perhaps they think all buildings are like in california.

They're Internet Laymen; I wouldn't put it past them.

It's an MGL-6 with better range and smaller ammo capacity. Not really all that exciting.

~J

The ranges of the MGL-6 and the MGL-12 have alwas been odd ̣– neither of them is a standard (underbarrel) grenade launcher.

I don’t see this as "smart gun" as depicted in Shadowrun, although it’s a step closer…

It looks more like a Bolt Gun in Warhammer-40K

I see it exactly as a grenade launcher with an airburst link? Although I know perhaps even less about firearms than the average Internet Layman.

Its descended from the weapon development proposal / program that inspired the airburst link in the first place. The idea has been around (and publicised) a long time; it just took quite a while to get it into a field ready package, tested, approved, paid for, and distributed. (Feel free to add in a few dozen beureocratic steps I forgot- the USA has a long history of sucking at introducing new infantry weapons.)

That's what it is. If, by grenade launcher, you mean 'micro-grenade rifle'.

Have you read the description of Smartlink?
It tells you distance to target, drop rate of bullet, number of bullets, where the gun is pointed right now and how much you have to change the weapons direction to hit what you're looking at.

So... I guess this is basically light, high-precision grenade launcher with airburst? Sounds interesting.
When are they planning to have one of those in every squad? Because having more than 1 (or 2) doesn't really seem to make sense. Most other soldiers will still have 'normal' rifles (though those could profit from some smartlinking, too).


I always imagined it as some sort of crosshair displayed into your AR overlay where the gun calculates the most probable impact point and puts an crosshair there.

Or wasn't there something about smartlinked weapons auto-adjusting the barrel slightly? I don't know, I probably read too much different stuff everywhere.

They're planning to deploy one per infantry squad next year.

I would be that surprised if these things turned out to be useful with more than 1 or 2 per squad. The main weaknesses could be CQB*, not being able to carry enough ammo, collateral damage and lack of suppression. If the experiences in Afghanistan shows that those things aren't problematic, it might equal the assault rifle in general purpose usefulness.

* anyone know how well the flechettes for it functions, and/or how many they'll be carrying? I wonder if something like a metal storm round could be developed for it, so each "shell" had 4 shots or something, giving it a much larger ammo capacity.

It's obviously a support weapon, and a good one. Expecially for eliminating enemy support teams and strongpoints (if it's cover penetrating potential is enough).
Though it's no huge development - everyone interested in modern weapons could see that comming.

P.S. I heard a member of spec ops team say, that most of the near-future weapons you've seen in video games, and RPG's are at lest being considered, and some are already in planning/development phase. I'd say that's at least highly probable, as we've already seen microwave guns, systems like metal storm, and remote combat drones. So, 'shadowrun' is pretty much coming true around us. Slowly.

It might not be "technologically surprising" huge, but it is a huge tactical development. Being able to detonate a small grenade precisely just behind or above cover, at very long range, that is a nasty advantage. Infantry is currently very good at cutting down enemies in the open, and getting enemies to keep their heads down. Once the enemy is hunkered down, taking him out is very difficult. Often, artillery or air support is called in to finish the fight, or one party simply exfiltrates. Now, if infantry squads get the ability to accurately take out enemies in cover, that's a whole new game.

Slap biometric access on that thing and it gets really fun.

The only bad part is that it loses a lot of its effectiveness past the ranges you can use a normal GL at reasonably effectively. The gun doesn't become any less lethal, but the shooter does. Generally observing a hunkered down target past 150m or so gets very difficult. Hell, under 150m it can be very difficult. Even if you saw him standing a few seconds ago. Most firefights at the longer ranges consist of a lot of "fire in that general direction and hope the number of bullets whizzing around gets someone" and "wait for him to stand up so I can hit him". In both cases the role of traditional grenade launcher is to lob grenades more or less into areas where you think the enemy is in general. The XM-25, by virtue of not having a user ID'd target, becomes little more than another way to saturate an area with frag.

Its biggest advantage there is range, and that you probably won't miss whichever random piece of cover you decide to shoot, but the trade off is a smaller shell.

Of course, when you DO id a target, the advantage is pretty enormous at longer ranges. In close it really depends on the training level. A good grenadier can put a grenade through a window at 50m without much difficulty, or get it to fall just behind a wall etc. If you don't have time to make good grenadiers, this is alot easier though.

So presumably, where this thing really shines is in that 100-250m bracket where you can still pick out targets, but regular grenade launchers start to lose accuracy.

When I read the blurb my first thought that it was actually old news regarding the OICW.

Play Soldier of Fortune II. It has an OICW, but the lase mode is rather cumbersome and annoying to use in the middle of a firefight. That's awesome because the real John Mullins said in an interview how he thought the real OICW would be too cumbersome and annoying to use in the middle of a firefight. It's like in the game they made it annoying to use and borderline stupid instead of uber in order to try and be more realistic.

There is one level where I would always use it though, where it came in mighty handy. That was the Kamchatka level where the IFF system really helped in the low visibility areas, and where the ability to lase targets and fool around with grenade trajectories was useful in a couple of spots that had emplaced machine guns in buildings.

You know, this might be a pretty good weapon for defeating shooter detection systems. The microphones are generally on visible masts, but I think they're too small a target for useful engaging with ordinary rounds; you still lose the "no one notices they're being shot at until someone gets hit" bit, but pinpointing the source then has to proceed the old-fashioned way.

~J

It worked really well in one of the Ghost Recon games (IIRC?); minimal effort and time let you zero the range and nail anyone behind simple cover.

SAW provides suppressive fire. Heads take cover. Grenade explodes right behind cover.

Seems the application is straightforward.

It's like a GL with Rangefinder and Airburst link.




It also allows mental control of gun functions, including remote trigger, and it highlights perceived targets as well.

So it's a bit more than just that.

Bye
Thanee

It doesn't spot targets, no, and the remote-controlled electronics are really a separate (if complementary) function of the smart*gun*, not the link.

I wonder if not it was the CP2020 "smartlink" that had a laser range finger as part of its package.

Earlier SR smartlink setups used a limited simrig to record body posture alongside other sensors to claculate where the bullet would end up if fired at that moment in time. Now however it seems to have been stripped down to a sensor package on the gun itself and can operate using Goggles or simsense with equal ease (tho only the latter allows for mental commands for reloading and fire mode changes).

I think I read it's everything but light, in fact it's so heavy that the soldier using it has trouble also carrying a rifle, or just enough ammo. But of course, the weapon it really replaces is a mortar, so I guess you could call it light...



I would assume it has some sort of optics. You only need to quickly hit the laze button when the target pops up and get a reading, then you have all the time in the world to fire once the target pops back down. I read that the troops are looking forward to it exactly as a long-range weapon, because regular fire at that distance is so inaccurate, and the Taleban work by just saturating an area from good cover, then relocating really quickly before the coalition forces can get close. If there are many more taleban than coalition soldiers, naturally volume of fire from them is larger, so they can supress more effectively. But if they couldn't just pop back into cover as soon as fire is returned, then that really makes a difference.

My impression was that the idea was not to find the range to the actual target while it's exposed, but rather to take a reading to the cover, estimate the depth of the cover, use the +1m increment button to set the grenade to go off slightly past the cover, and then fire slightly above the cover. Sighting the actual target is only needed to know which cover stuff needs to explode behind.

~J

That's how it worked in the video games, Kagetenshi.

Brainpiercing, perhaps it's light for a grenade launcher? Context is important.

What's the point of having the operator also carry a rifle? Wouldn't a SMG do? At anything outside SMG range, he's just gonna use the mini-grenade, I'd bet.

I'm not sure if that's a point for or against my interpretation…


Specs I find for it are 6.35 kilos, not clear if that's loaded or unloaded; it's not an exact comparison because of the range-and-airburst issues, but the M79 is 2.93 kilos loaded and 0.23 kilos per additional grenade; for multi-shot capability the M32 MGL is 5.3 kilos (also not clear if loaded or unloaded), and the MGL holds two more rounds. So it's definitely not light for a grenade launcher, especially considering that the projectiles are less powerful (25mm instead of 40mm).


For shots after the fourth, maybe? Presumably they're packing spare mini-grenades, but the 40mm grenades are about half a pound each; by volume a 25mm grenade is about 0.001m^2 while a 40mm grenade is about 0.00184m^2, so assuming similar density we're looking at a quarter of a pound for each additional round carried. That looks to be about one minigrenade equaling 15 rounds of M-16 ammo (and the half-magazine to hold them in), which doesn't sound so bad from a marginal standpoint but consider that you're down somewhere in the vicinity of three kilos worth of ammo to begin with simply from the mass of the weapon.

Based on this information, it looks to me like it really comes down to just how good the "blow up people behind horizontal cover" trick is. It has just about nothing else going for it, but if it pulls off that trick well enough (and it doesn't prove to be easily counterable) it may not need it.

~J

Even if the rounds are less powerful, they are MUCH more accurate. If the grenades are going to be exploding a lot closer to the target at longer ranges and bypassing cover, then it will be far more lethal than a 40mm grenade launcher.

The system is only 1 kg heavier than a rifle + M203. An m249 SAW is 7.5kg empty and 10kg loaded, much heavier. I was in the Danish Army and we use MG3s, they're 11.5kg empty, and even uses the heavier 7.62 ammo.

Bottom line is, a 6.35kg weapon isn't especially heavy.



Yeah, the problem of killing people behind cover is 90% of infantry combat, so doing that well would be a really, really big thing.

In a single-target sense, and depending on the time from sighting to firing (and the knowledge of the opponents, and some things like how much room to move behind the cover is there), the grenades could not necessarily be ending up that much closer. But maybe they do, that's what I meant further down about how well it actually pulls off this trick.


Again, a lot depends on whether that mass was empty or loaded, but that kilo is about one 40mm grenade and one 30-round magazine.


Not intrinsically, but we're talking a 6.35 kilo four-round weapon with relatively heavy individual rounds (not counting magazine mass if any you get eight to the kilo); I'm out of my field here so I could be wrong but that feels like a disqualification for "sole weapon" even assuming near-optimal performance, which means it isn't so much a 6.35 kilo weapon as a 6.35 kilo secondary weapon, which seems to me to be rather more especially heavy.

~J

It does seem like a rather small grenade, and hence a confined effect. I think what the US military are hoping for is that the simple possibility of shooting back at ambushing forces, and shooting back much quicker than CAS or arty will ever get there, will act as a deterrant. And even if you have to shoot a few more of these grenades, I think just the fuel for a CAS-run will cost more than the entire gun, so...
I do agree that this might be a big thing: Right now you can't control the country, because you can't possibly patrol the entirety of even just the high-risk zones with enough manpower to throw back or even exterminate any ambushing insurgents. As it is now, a patrol of a squad or two is basically just a target for ambush, and all they can really do if they are ambushed is call CAS or arty. But by the time support arrives, the insurgents have often left, or just moved to another hill from where they keep shooting.

But if a squad sized patrol could kill or disable just a few members of an ambushing force, that's a big thing, because forcing attackers to relocate immediately due to lethal return fire should immediately reduce coalition casualties.

Smartguns now? Jeez. Cybernetics are also becoming more and more advanced, and Japan already has "coffin" apartments. Even if magic doesn't arrive, the future certainly seems to be headed towards cyberpunk.

I hate to break it to you, but Japan had capsule hotels first—cyberpunk pulled from real-life Japan as part of the "Japan's taking over everything!" atmosphere instead of having predicted these things.

~J

I'm pretty sure it'll be the only weapon. They'll have a magazine with flechette rounds for self defense, and otherwise depend on their squad mates for direct fire.

The antitank gunner in a Danish army squad carries both an assault rifle and an 8.5kg Carl Gustav recoilless rifle. Crawling with both weapons cradled in your arms was a bitch. But it can be done, having two weapons.

Oh well, a lot of technology from old cyberpunk works seems to be getting closer. They already have primitive AR.

They've had that for years now. One of the little annoyances I've run into in my hobby projects is that most of the resources I can find on wearable computing haven't been updated since the late '90s or early aughts. You can't even get an EyeTap anymore, to my knowledge.

That said, I harbor lingering suspicion that our current Augmented Reality/Computer-Mediated Reality advances might be a second SHRDLU—strikingly successful implementations of systems within limited contexts that simply don't generalize the way we might hope they would.

But this is off-topic, since the "smart" of the "smart gun" is simply airburst capability linked to a rangefinder and manually adjustable by ±3 meters.

~J

The Metal Storm style weapon system relies on all the ammunition being stacked in a tubular magazine that also functions as the weapon's barrel. It would be impossible to combine that technology with a magazine fed weapon system that relies on a mechanically driven action

As for close quarters combat, realize that long range firefights (between 300-900m) are the predominant engagements in the Afghan theatre of operations, and that room clearing, urban fighting, or even "enemy in the lines" type scenarios are extremely uncommon. To further reduce the need for a close-quarters capable round in this weapon system, the current trend is to load a Soldier with as much equipment as possible - it is extremely likely that the grenadier equipped with this will also find himself armed with an M4 or M16-series carbine/rifle.

A submachine gun is terribly ineffective at range, especially compared to an M4 carbine. As for using the grenade launcher at extended ranges, rules of engagement sometimes restrict all area weapons (anything with explosive or fragmentary ammunition) from being fired into an area or against certain types of targets (structures, vehicles, etc.), which would in effect force the grenadier into the fight as nothing more than a glorified observer / spotter. Equipping him with a rifle or carbine and a limited basic load of ammunition would not dramatically increase his weight but would enable him a much greater degree of tactical versatility.

Huh, I never realized a rifle was considered "tactically versatile". To me, a rifle pretty much does one thing (hurts people) which it seems the XM-25 can do equally well or better. But that's shadowrunner logic, not military policy-maker thinking.
Truth told, as a civilian, I have pretty much no idea what a rifle is used for; 99% of the photos you see of a soldier holding one, he's doing police duty (IE, manning a checkpoint or some such).

I still say if I was gonna be in a situation where a team mate of mine might need to fire an XM-25, I'd want him to have as many rounds for it as possible, and wouldn't complain that he didn't have a rifle to shoot during "limited engagements".

Good point on collateral damage though. One hostage / stray civilian on the wrong side of that wall can make the cover-negating effect an unattractive option.

(An yes, I know the SMG is lousy at range. I figured it was a good pairing- the XM-25 for long range, the SMG for room-to-room and policing efforts. Then again, an SMG might not save much weight over an M4.)

But it hurts people at a wide variety of ranges, and also makes people afraid of getting hurt (suppressive fire). They don't issue volley sights anymore, but in principle you can also get indirect fire if you get a few people together

~J

If the round is too close to arm it will probably make a 25mm hole in his chest.

Never trust someone to build an explosive that won't kill you.