Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: New XM8 Assault Rifle
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Arethusa
Uh, have you read the rest of this thread?
BitBasher
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
was not HK mixed into with the OICW project? whats stopping them from useing what they have learned in the G36 and then when the us military comes talking they take some of the internal design of the G36 and stuff it into the XM8?

When poeple post without reading the thread at all: Film at 11. nyahnyah.gif
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.
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
QUOTE (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

Hmm, maybe I should check out all the links before I run my big mouth eh? smile.gif

That being said, how often would your regular infantry guy need to go from regular rifle to LMG? Would it be often enough to warrant carrying an extra barrel? The extra weight would seem to defeat the purpose of the lighter weapon, though you would have more flexibilty I suppose.
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
QUOTE (Siege)
I wish I had a more concrete answer beyond this speculation

Eh, who needs facts, I find speculation to be far more entertaining. biggrin.gif

I say give them all LMG's and just airlift crates of ammo to them! Then again I was a tanker... ohplease.gif
Kurukami
QUOTE
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)

I found myself thinking the same thing. On the one hand, it does make it so that the Army doesn't necessarily have to obtain completely new ammunition stores -- isn't the caliber's the same as the .223 round that the M-16 currently uses?

On the other hand, I now understand better why assault rifles do a base damage of 7M... biggrin.gif
KarmaInferno
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll)
QUOTE (FlakJacket @ Aug 25 2004, 01:01 PM)
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Aug 25 2004, 06:13 PM)
Observations include:
[SNIP H&K SALES PITCH]

Heckler & Koch hired you on as a corporate shill or something? wink.gif

I, for one, welcome our new assualt rifle overloads!

I do too!

Er...

How exactly do you over-load an assault rifle? Get a troll to squish extra rounds in?

indifferent.gif


-karma
Austere Emancipator
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]
TheScamp
QUOTE
I, for one, welcome our new assualt rifle overloads!

I'm sure it has plenty of inanimate carbon rods, as well.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (Arethusa)
hobgoblin, read my post on the second page. I basically outlined the entire history of the XM8 project.

sorry i must have eiter forgotten about it or missed it somehow frown.gif

well i stand corrected...
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 wink.gif
Bossemanden
QUOTE (FrostyNSO)
Velocity has more impact on wound profiles and penetration than mass anyways.

True, but mass is better at defeating air resistance. I guess it depends on what range one is expected to fight at.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (FrostyNSO)
Velocity has more impact on wound profiles and penetration than mass anyways.

On penetration, maybe. A few simple calculations imply that when size and construction of the projectile remain equal, kinetic energy is a good estimate of penetration potential. However, the 6.8mm SPC is likely to penetrate almost exactly as well as the 5.56x45mm -- it has about 1.5x the muzzle energy (~2,000 ft-lbs vs ~1,300 ft-lbs) and about 1.5x the frontal area.

As far as the relative importance of mass and velocity for wound profiles goes, weeeelll, maybe it's better we don't discuss it much further until everybody who cares has read at least this and the pertinent bits here, or has otherwise acquired Terminal Ballistics 101-level knowledge.
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 Emancipator
QUOTE (otomik)
maybe 6.8mm is a tacit admission that the tumbling fragmenting thing never worked as well as it did on paper.

It seems to me that many instances that have a lot of say on what the US armed forces are armed with don't know a god damn thing about how terminal ballistics work. Even Field Manuals talk about hydrostatic shock, FFS. Considering how varied the performance of many ammunition types are, especially compared to how they're claimed to perform by the makers and designers, I don't think it's reasonable to assume the tumbling and fragmenting don't actually happen/work well just because they [whoever that is] decided to go with 6.8mm SPC.

I don't see why ammunition for the 6.8mm SPC couldn't be designed which would tumble and fragment in flesh as readily as the M855. As long as it has a good, solid penetrating point at the tip, having a weak cannelure shouldn't be a problem (right?). It might suck against building materials, shattering against even against light interior walls once it starts to tumble, but the M855 already has that feature at close ranges. Armor penetration shouldn't be compromised, as long as it hits point-first at a reasonable low angle.
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
QUOTE (Smiley)
Are the specs anywhere? Like the weight, etc.?

Read the thread... this link has been already posted twice by me and Siege (who seemingly didn't read the thread completely either): http://world.guns.ru/assault/as61-e.htm
FrostyNSO
Location of the shot is the most important factor. Another big factor is the individual being shot. Some guys might get shot and just aren't impressed. The best shot at dropping a guy is if you hit him somewhere in the upper spinal column, or the ocular cranial cavity. Anywhere else and you can't guarantee anything.
otomik
QUOTE
So what happens to the OICW? Totally scrapped or reserved for special forces or whatever?
though i totally agree with what cray74 said, one could add that the OICW XM29 has failed and that they've opted for more incremental improvements by splitting the up the components, the rifle part has become the XM8 and the 25mm cannon part is the XM25 (much more doable and will be compatible with the XM307 (which is also being developed in .50BMG).

http://www.gdatp.com/products/default.htm

the XM25 is still stupid, but it's the government and once you get enough momentum on a project it's difficult to cancel (not that the V22 Ospey and Crusader artillery system aren't COOL). the modular nature of the XM8 means you can probably put a programable single shot 25mm grenade launcer on there later, maybe a digital ammo counter for the optics and laser painter/range finder.
Atrox
QUOTE (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 =)


The French are quite happy with their FAMAS, true. But do ask the Aussies about their experiences with the Steyr AUG.
Wear asbestos.
I'm not even going into the L85; the problems with that weapon don't relate to the bullpup design.

OTOH, Bullpups have a few problems of their own. To name just one, the G36 is available with a cylindrical 100-magazine. Though originally intended for the lMG36, at least KSK has used it on the regular rifle. The same kind of magazine is likely to be adopted by the US Army for the LMG variant of the M8.
That thing simply wouldn't fit next to your cheek, and I wouldn't want to carry an MG with less than 100 rounds on tap. There's a reason weapons like the Bren Gun and BAR went out of style. It's called sustained fire capability.
By the same token, the regular mags can be clipped together as shown . Again, don't think that would be a comfortable fit on a bullpup.

Remember, this isn't just an AR. This is every automatic rifle-calibre infantry weapon in the US arsenal. In the long run, it'll replace the M16/M4 ARs, the M249 SAW, and possibly even the M24 sniper rifle.
The reason? Ease of supply. One action for every weapon in the service. And if the supply store runs out on carbine barrels, you get a full-sized one, or vice-versa.
FrostyNSO
I loved the FAMAS, but I've never tried the L85 and only used the AUG a few times.

I don't really see the XM-8 replacing the SAW though.
hobgoblin
bipod, longer barrel, 100 round cylinder magazine, thats the xm8 in lmg config right? the question is, do you want a bigger caliber with that or do you want the ability to grab some extras form your fallen squadmate over there if needed?
Arethusa
QUOTE (Atrox)
The French are quite happy with their FAMAS, true. But do ask the Aussies about their experiences with the Steyr AUG.
Wear asbestos.

Though true, the problems with those rifles arise not from the fact that they're bullpup. Rather, their problems arise from the fact that they suck— though I know a Brit marine armorer who stands by the modern L85A2 as a finally competent weapon. Still, you do raise valid drawbacks to the bullpup format. I just don't feel that they're significant enough to offset the drawback of a standard issue 12.5" barrel and reliance on the traditionall craptacular reliability of beta-c mags, even if these new ones are supposed to be better. And as for clipped mags, well, there's a reason you don't see that done outside of SWAT teams and the like.
Siege
QUOTE (Nath)
QUOTE (Smiley @ Aug 27 2004, 06:54 PM)
Are the specs anywhere? Like the weight, etc.?

Read the thread... this link has been already posted twice by me and Siege (who seemingly didn't read the thread completely either): http://world.guns.ru/assault/as61-e.htm

nyahnyah.gif

-Siege
Young Freud
QUOTE (Arethusa)
QUOTE (Atrox)
The French are quite happy with their FAMAS, true. But do ask the Aussies about their experiences with the Steyr AUG.
Wear asbestos.

Though true, the problems with those rifles arise not from the fact that they're bullpup. Rather, their problems arise from the fact that they suck— though I know a Brit marine armorer who stands by the modern L85A2 as a finally competent weapon. Still, you do raise valid drawbacks to the bullpup format. I just don't feel that they're significant enough to offset the drawback of a standard issue 12.5" barrel and reliance on the traditionall craptacular reliability of beta-c mags, even if these new ones are supposed to be better. And as for clipped mags, well, there's a reason you don't see that done outside of SWAT teams and the like.

The reason the Aussies had the problem with the Austeyr was because ADI, Australian Defense Industries, built them not to Steyr's specifications. Apparently, the newer batches is more in line with their Austrian counterparts, especially in regards to material specifications. And the AUG appears to have a future in the Australia military as the Department of Defence's Defence Science and Technology section is using an AUG as the base for it's Future Combat Weapon project. And both Steyr and ADI, seperately, are making a AUGA3 model.

BTW, Beta makes C-Mags for the Steyr.

And, Arethusa, don't you mean the Heckler & Koch L85A2 biggrin.gif
Seriously, that British armorer is right, the new L85A2 is completely a whole new weapon. I've seen a data sheet on what modifications they did to the old Enfield, and it's way past the changing the plastic the handguards were made of. While I don't have the full list in front of me, I'm talking redesigning and heat-treating the bolt, firing pin, bolt carrier, and breech block, a more ergonomic and lower-profile charging handle (as not to deflect brass back into the gun), redesigned magazines, stronger springers, widening the gas system, etc. After the H&KA2's experience in Afghanistan (positive, with most jams being attributed to improper cleaning (oil and sand don't mix) and nothing too serious) and the reports of reliability problems with the M4 (even more than the L85), H&K went to work designing the HKM4 SOPMOD upgrade, basically apply the similar techniques used to make the L85A2 (since both rifles use a similar Stoner-designed gas system). To reitirate, the L85A2 might look like the old Enfield L85, but it's a whole new weapon on the inside.

As for magazines, the Russians have dusted off the old SITES Spectre 4-stack concept and are now making double-high-capacity magazines for the Kalashnikov rifles and the Abakan. 60 round magazines, with no modifications to the gun. It'll be interesting to see if an American or European company reexamines the 4-column magazine in light of this.
Raygun
QUOTE (Atrox)
Remember, this isn't just an AR. This is every automatic rifle-calibre infantry weapon in the US arsenal. In the long run, it'll replace the M16/M4 ARs, the <a href='http://remtek.com/arms/fn/minimi/' target='_blank'>M249 SAW[/URL], and possibly even the M24 sniper rifle.
The reason? Ease of supply. One action for every weapon in the service. And if the supply store runs out on carbine barrels, you get a full-sized one, or vice-versa.

The XM8 will not be replacing any belt-fed machine guns, like the M249, nor will they replace sniper support weapons like the M21. They're going to replace rifles used in the same roles as the M16 and M4 series and that's about it. They may be used to supplement the automatic rifle and sniper support roles, but the weapon systems are way too different to wholly replace the M249s and M21s in their respective roles.

QUOTE
Though true, the problems with those rifles arise not from the fact that they're bullpup. Rather, their problems arise from the fact that they suck— though I know a Brit marine armorer who stands by the modern L85A2 as a finally competent weapon.

There was an article in Small Arms Review a few months back that interviewed British soldiers in Iraq and compared the improved SA80/L85A2 to the G36, which is what would likely have replaced the SA80 had the MOD chosen that route. They basically seemed to come to the conclusion that the MOD wasted a shitload of money. The rifle still had a lot of reliability problems in the desert (one of which was apparently exacerbated by the new safety HK installed, which would stick in the "off" position), and at what the MOD spent for the A2 rebuild (@ 460£, at that time about $750 US per rifle), they could have spent just a little more and bought an entirely new set of G36 rifles and ended up with simply better rifles in every respect.

At any rate, I've heard both good and bad about the SA80A2. Most of it seems to come down to cleaning, which is the same problem the US had with the M16 during Vietnam. Anyway, if I can find the SAR article, I'll post it. Until then, there's this.

Personally, I can't wait until the US starts issuing the M8. Way better weapon system than the M16, IMHO. I also can't wait until HK starts making them here in the US so I can buy one.
KillaJ
The assault weapons ban lifts in what, 2 weeks? Do you firearms gurus expect civilian versions of any of these weapons to be hitting the streets soon? I sure like the looks of that G36 carbine...
Siege
Ya know - I don't see why not.

As nifty as the gun is, it's not significantly scarier than an AK-47, a MAC-10 (or variant) or even 30-06 hunting rifle with scope.

If I end up going on a shooting rampage (hey...you...Homeland Security guy...relax, it's all hypothetical), I could stock up on weapons at Sprawl-Mart and make one hell of a mess.

The only thing I'd have to get at a gun shop - extra magazines for my handgun. A 12-gauge shotgun may not be as spiffy as a space-age Trooper's toy, but it will still ruin your day in close quarters.

In a hallway, it'll ruin your day and the two guys on either side of you.

-Siege
BitBasher
I expect it'll make no difference except to collectors... I do know I'm about to run out and buy some hi-cap mags though.

Incidentally, I may be wrong but I think the import ban on assault rifles is wholly separate from from the "assault weapons ban" and is not about to expire.
KillaJ
QUOTE (BitBasher)
Incidentally, I may be wrong but I think the import ban on assault rifles is wholly separate from from the "assault weapons ban" and is not about to expire.

Ahh BitBasher, you just ruined my whole day. frown.gif

Maybe I could find one of those rubber ball shooting replicas...
Raygun
HK broke ground on a factory in Columbus, Georgia last year. If the XM8 is accepted (and it's a pretty sure thing, IMO), it has to be manufactured in the US. Thus, they invest in a factory here.

You'll be getting honest-to-God, American-made Heckler & Koch firearms here pretty soon. It would be nothing short of stupid for them not to market a semi-auto XM8. It would be even dumber not to market HK416 (HKM4) uppers. HK91 (semi-auto G3) HK93 (semi-auto HK33), HK94 (semi-auto MP5 carbines), all that cool shit that used to be imported from Germany in the 80's... It's gonna kick ass.

As long as Kerry doesn't get elected, anyway.
Siege
Snicker - I'll drive down and take photos of the HK plant.

And once the FBI turn me loose, I can send them to you. grinbig.gif

-Siege
FrostyNSO
I'm looking at the FN FiveSeven. Just to try it out...may have some trouble finding the ammunition however. That's assuming the ban lifts, who knows what'll happen in dumb*ss California anyways.

On a side note, it'd be nice to see a FN2000 floating around in Nevada somewhere.
FrostyNSO
Anybody hear Kerry talking about "Haves, and Have-nots"?

I dunno about everyone else, but I don't want a guy who quotes Marx leading the free world.
JaronK
I don't know about you, but I'd rather have a president that's read major political theorists than one who hasn't. But that's not very relevant, now is it?

JaronK
Siege
We're wandering a little far from the topic thread guys.

-Siege
otomik
the bush family is so blue blood, it's all political theatre. kerry brags about europe liking him better and speaking french (that's just retarded and bush is probably laughing at his incompetence in political theatre).

I bet Kerry reads machiavelli way more than marx.

now about the XM8, i think they are concerned about lack of stopping power. it's possible they'll switch to 6.8mm but it's also possible they'll just switich to a heavier 5.56mm bullet instead of 62 grain SS109 (special forces has been using a 77 grain and i've even heard of experimenting with 84 grain).

I would also be possible to keep more velocity by switching to polygonal rifling (HK has experimented with this in the past) and rifling that turns at a progressive rate along the length of the barrel.

http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=167591
MYST1C
QUOTE (Smiley)
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.

Actually, the gun is expected to be colored in some sort of brown once it enters service.
The reason: The new ACU camo pattern of the Army doesn't contain any black and the new boots are brown as black is too easy to spot while in movement.
Consequently, equipment shouldn't be black either.
otomik
http://www.camo-store.com/army_combat_uniform_acu.htm
wonderful, this just after we gave all the army grunts black berets to silence their beret envy.

brown rifle, kind of ugly, can of krylon doesn't cost that much and is more versatile and can make cammo patterns.
Chance359
At least theirs is better than the crap they are trying to issue to me. New Air Force Uniform survey

Please as a favor to a fellow dumpshock member take the time to let them know how wrong this is.

Back to the topic, I was looking forward to getting an M4 as the Air Force phases out the M16A2s. The Army getting a new toy gives me something else to look forward to.
FrostyNSO
OMG I'm glad I got out before that thing came in. I feel for ya man.

Legion combat shirts are way more comfortable, and look pretty cool I might add.
KillaJ
Nevermind, I'm a jackass... frown.gif
Got a little further into the survey and realized it was aimed at AF personnel.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012