On at 10:00 (Mail Call) at the History Channel is going to be a segment on the XM-8 Advanced Battle Rifle.

Xythlord

XM-8 Advanced Battle Rifle?

Oh. You mean the plastic ray gun with realistic lights and sounds.

Yup that would be the one.

Actually the more that I look at this rifle the more I am impressed. I have been following the development of this since it was the OICW and without actually firing it (haven't had that pleasure yet......but I am hoping ) I love it. Something I found out tonight that I didn't know but find interesting is that this little baby has Semi / Burst / and Full Auto. Seems the Military thinks that Full Auto would be useful again (which is a full 180 doctrinal change from the M16A2).

Xythlord

A plastic Raygun? Where do I get one?

How easy is it to control your firing in full-auto? Can a trained user reliably fire a single round or three rounds on full auto, or is it more of a "one to six depending on weather and what you had for breakfast" kind of thing?

~J

The current XM-8s apparently have a cyclic RoF of 750. With any halfway decent trigger, and I'm sure this baby has a great one, you should be able to squeeze off 1 round at a time on FA easy. 1 round is usually the easiest. Trying to get off exactly 3 rounds is much more difficult, you might get some 2s and 4s every now and then. If you're well trained with the particular weapon, you should be able to do 3 as well.

When the cyclic RoF gets really high, or if you've got a lousy trigger, it gets more difficult. I couldn't get off a single round with the KK-62 LMG no matter how hard I tried, but that's got both 1000rpm RoF and a good old fashion MG action.

Also the versatility of the weapon looks very promising to say the least. With the Carbine, Assault, Match grade, and Machine Gun versions of the same weapon, and all of these versions a few simple parts and attachments away, this is truly a multi purpose weapon. Of course it could just turn out to be a jack of all trades and master of none. Also the side loading GL is actually able to handle the longer 40 mm rounds that the M-203 cannot load

I do hope this conversation will lead to converting this weapon for inclusion in Shadowrun games. I don't enjoy shutting down threads that otherwise have nothing to do with the game.

Auh, but this is gun talk! Besides, this couldent get converted, its too munchkin!

thats weird that they're calling it a Battle Rifle now, I suppose it's proper designation of Assault Rifle is just too un-PC (Battle Rifle describes a .308 like the FN-FAL, G3, M14, not a .223). Also I hate the term "war fighters" instead of soldiers, warriors, etc.

for conversions I'd say it would use the same stats as the G36 it's based on, even has similar barrel lengths for the various versions. 40mm grenade launcher probably won't last long until it's replacemed by a 25mm system (hopefully with integrated electronics so we can stop talking about the XM29 and XM25).

Actually I am curious about converting a couple of features of the XM-8 to Shadowrun.

First off, the rifle uses a red sight aiming feature. I don't think that anyone has this converted yet but I would like to see what people think. My knee jerk response would be to have it similiar to a laser sight without the telltale "beam". This would eleminate the need for the "UV or IR laser sight".

The second thing is that the XM-8 is convertable with a change out of buttstock, barrel, foregrip to 4 different configurations (similiar to the AUG-CSL Weapon System of 2nd edition). Anybody got any ideas how to do this as an option in weapon design from CC (or Rayguns?)

I remember trying to do some stats earlier for the XM-8, but it's impossible to do them accurately and canonically, as you simply cannot get an Assault Rifle that light. It'll be very heavy and expensive, and magnificently useless compared to the monstrosities you can create with the Firearm Design rules in CC -- the latter because most RL weapons don't have much in the way of recoil compensation, mostly because it's difficult to achieve except with a muzzle brake, which has problems of its own.

The basic XM-8 carbine:
8M, SA/BF/FA
Concealability 5, Weight 4kg
Ammo 30©
Mounts: Barrel, Under
Top-mounted high-power "Laser Sight" (red dot sight), Easy Breakdown
Price: 2,965 (1,600 using Firearms Prices the Sensible Way)

You could make it 0.3kg lighter by using Ceramic Components-3, but otherwise that's as light as an AR with a Laser Sight gets. Most of the price (1,400) comes from the High-Power Laser Sight.

Colt M4A1
8M, SA/FA, Conc 5, Weight 4kg, Ammo 30 ©
Mounts: Barrel, Top, Under
Price: 1,340 (750)

The only way to make these into effective SR weapons would be to add a lot of RC (RC Design Option, and Gas Vents if you don't want to sound suppress the gun). To make them true to life, you'd have to tweak the price, weight, concealability and max levels of certain things: Weight Decrease (more levels available, in addition to lower starting weights for all weapons), Bipod (lower weight), Extended Clip (higher cap, lower DP cost), Laser Sight (lower DP cost).

As much as I love the XM-8, I gotta wonder how long before it'll be introduced. I mean I've been sitting on post with my '16 for for the better part of a year now, but I was supposed to be issued a M-4 roughly eight months ago. Of course I am in the Air Force, so that might have something to do with it.

Hopefully if the Air Force adopts the XM-8, they'll order enough for everyone so new troops don't show up to their new base only to find that they aren't qualified on what that squadron uses.

If you can aim with both eyes open with a diopter sight, you're a better man than most. It's damn near impossible. If you've only got diopter sights, you're better off not looking through the sights in most situations where keeping both eyes open would be best. We always flipped up the open (notch) night sights on our RK-62s in MOUT.

Bushmaster Carbon-15, now thats a lightweight rifle.
http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/carbon15/
3.9lbs/1.77kg

they also make a .223 pistol if you're a Fallout gamer, which would actually be an interesting shadowrun weapon if you wanted a pistol that could realistically pierce body armor (not to mention the CZ-52)

That's still pretty massive for a pistol. Could easily be considered a Concealability 4 (the Concs for XM8 and M4 above are so high because there's no way to canonically make them less Concealable). The FN 5-7 should fare pretty well against soft body armor as well (regardless of the suckiness of FN 5-7C in SR canon), and you aren't going to making a big hole in tissue with any of these.

Perhaps what would be best here, in order to preserve an end result closest to canon, is to design 4 different guns, add together the costs for all 4, and make that the total price of the gun. This is done on the AUG-CSL and the HK G38, it seems. With 4 different gun configurations designed, you prettymuch solve the problem of having 4 different stat sets. This is also done on the two mentioned above. Next, since the XM8 seems to be able to fire different sizes of ammunition, as a GM, you could require your players who make and use this gun to have a different type of ammo for each configuration.

I was watching Mail Call, and I remember them saying that it fired 5.56mm in assault rifle mode. Maybe it fires 7.62mm (or perhaps 9mm rifle rounds; this is Shadowrun, after all) in a SA rifle configuration. Carbine could use a lighter 5.56mm. Maybe 7.62mm in machine gun configuration. Give it a top-mounted high-powered laser sight for the red dot, and then give it an optical magnification scope in the same place.

Something to remember, I think, is that the guns in the books don't always follow the rules. If you want to make it lighter, say by adding more levels of weight reduction, hey, why not? Why not just let it stand at each configuration's individual weight though?

For a .223 pistol from Fallout, take a sport rifle and give it a barrel reduction with clip loading instead of internal magazine, and you now have a rifle the size of a heavy pistol, in terms of concealability. Increase power by 2 and specify that the gun is the shape and size of a pistol in its description. BOOM! You now have a pistol with concealability 4 that does 9S with SA firing.

Remember how you got the pistol not long after you got the sport rifle in Fallout games? Makes sense right?

The rule about not being able to use smartgun systems with vision systems always has bothered me. It's stupid! To me, it's conceivable that one's Limited Simsense Rig would still know where the gun is pointing, unless it's an electronig magnification, even if one is looking through a scope. I think the creators of the game put the rule in to keep snipers from killing everyone. I think I'll discard it in my games as a House Rule.

I missed that episode, so just in case, was there any information on how the military is planning on dealing with the fact that all of their new rifles will be completely incapable of engaging long range targets? The XM8 sounds wonderful for most urban combat, but I'd hate to be stuck with the thing in any environment where range could become a debilitating factor.

actually the latest intel is that they merged the designs of the DMR (designated marksmans rifle) and AR (automatic rifle) into the DMAR, which combines their features (bipod, heavy 20'' barrel). i think it was a smart move.

future modifications may include a ammo counting device, ala Aliens.
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/blackwater/xm81.html

They'll be in a hurry to change back to M855s as soon as Austrians, Belarussians, Belgians, Bulgarians, Chinese, Danish, Ethiopian, Fijian, etc etc soldiers enter the battlefield, however. Damn the Final Act Of the International Peace Conference!

Although if these agreements meant anything, there would be no M193s or M855s either. Or is it that it's just a weird coincidence and an accident that they tend to fragment when they hit humans at common engagement ranges? Sort of like it's a coincidence and an accident that VX is lethal?

[Edit]Crap, nevermind, the US never signed that. They are free to use as much fragmenting and expanding small arms ammunition as they please, as long as they are not incendiary (or if they are, they must also be armor piercing), explosive (ditto), or cause undetectable fragments.

Looking on the bright side: Finland never signed it either, not having existed at the time. Yay![/Edit]

The "superfluous injury" bit is truly BS, yes. It's not as though you ever get to choose whether you just put a small or a fucking huge gaping hole in the enemy on the battlefield.

However, the linked agreement simply bans all expanding and fragmenting ammunition in small arms. The wounding potential of such rounds does not matter in this context. JHPs and open-tip ammunition are explicitly banned: "To prohibit the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope, of which the envelope does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."

And, re-reading the ratification information, the US has ratified this. There's really no excuse there. Unless I'm seriously misunderstanding something, it would be a clear breach of these declarations to use any such ammunition against another signatory state, such as China, Iran or Serbia -- unless of course some of these have "un-ratified" the agreement since 1899.

[Edit]I love the attitude in the memo you linked. "It's okay to use JHP ammunition as long as it's expansion reliability is below ~90%!" "Well it wasn't really designed to expand, so it doesn't count!" I'm really starting to like my VX comparison.

Pitiful last-ditch attempt to save the thread: Do the megacorps have similar agreements limiting the use of forced in armed conflict? Is Explosive Ammunition for small arms banned in the Desert Wars? What about chemical and biological weapons?[/Edit]

where? the USA isn't on that list, it did sign the 1907 Hague Accords, not the 1899. the 1899 Accords also banned bombing from balloons and "similar methods", that would mean all arial bombing is illegal.

Germany is on that 1899 list and they used a fragmenting .308 for many years

when the US fought china, iran and serbia i don't think they recognized them or declared war on them, so in theory we could have used all the hollow points we wanted.

USA is clearly listed as a signatory on 29.07.1899 (July 29th 1899) of the Final Act Of the International Peace Conference. I do not rule out the possibility that the site in question is in error. However, I have not found any other source listing the signatories, and I would expect the International Committee of the Red Cross to get their facts straight on such matters. (Check this for the beginning of the list and the reference, the list continues, including the US, here.)

The ban on bombing or launching projectiles from balloons or similar methods is only for 5 years from the Hague Conference of 1899. (Declaration (IV, 1), to Prohibit, for the Term of Five Years, the Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons, and Other Methods of Similar Nature, 26 Martens Nouveau Recueil (ser. 2) 994, 187 Consol. T.S. 456, entered into force Sept. 4, 1900.) The follow-up was to last until the 3rd peace conference, which never came, so it is (sort-of) still in effect -- but that was never ratified by the US.

Several nations that use fragmenting rifle ammunition are on that list, which was my point exactly. Nobody really does seem to give a fuck about these old agreements. Thus it would be no surprise if EX-Explosive ammunition for small arms was the norm in the 2060s.

for Desert Wars, everything is very carefully measured and ratified on a per-campaign basis, as i recall. furthermore, all but the last battle of a given war's campaign is conducted with non-lethal munitions. so, in that case at least, it'd depend.

beyond the Desert Wars (i really liked them better before they were defined and pussified, sigh), i imagine that the Corp Court has a set of detailed rules that were written with an eye towards limit collateral damage. the limitations would be geared less towards what you could shoot people with, and more towards who you could shoot with them.

I watched the one-handed demo of the XM-8 with the 100 round mag and thought, "wow - the samurai munchkins are having wet dreams now."

-Siege

Having watched the vid-clip of the 100-round drum demo, I get the sneaking suspicion some troopers will simply opt for the "automatic rifle" variant as a bigger, badder version of the standard assault rifle.

Which raises concerns of fire discipline and how willing the Army is to release the components for that particular configuration.

-Siege

there used to be an automatic rifleman who carried a M16A1 and more ammunition then the average grunt with the M16A2, i think they did away with that with the M249. is there something inherantly wrong with drum magazines that they can't be made reliable? (i've used one in an SAR-1, a lotta fun, worked for me, there are some four column mags that hold 60-rounds, maybe those would work better)

I'm a little bit confused about the 9'' barrel version, is that to be a SOF colt commando/xm-117 type thing or a PDW (cuz sometimes i see with this the pad buttstock and other times it is shown with retractable stock). M4s replaced some M9s, i wonder if they are continuing this trend, it would make a lot of tankers happy (those not already grabbing AKs).

I'm sure there will be a lot of soldiers envying the DMAR and the Compact 9'', grass is greener effect. personally I think i'd prefer the Compact in house to house ops or when crammed in the back of an APC or when i'm behind a desk most of the time because of "my rare and mysterious ability to type", i'll gladly let anybody that prefers the extra weight and bulk have the DMAR as long as they have the skill to make use of it.

electronic ammo counters, bayonets, 100-round magazines, etc. honestly i don't have the experience to say what would be useful in real life, i'm just a college student with a .22 pistol and many hours of FPS gaming experience.

i've also heard about the double action trigger. i can't think of any other rifles that use it except for the excellent SITES Spectre smg. wouldn't it just go unnoticed most of the time unless you need to double strike a hard primer? what is US military condition of carry anyway?

Standard carry condition is loaded mag in the well, bolt closed, empty chamber.

If cartridges adopted were logical, we'd have .45 in our pistols, 6mm Optimum in our rifles, 9x90mm MEN in our long range rifles and HMGs. so many compromises...

we're not hearing enough about 6.8mm, we've never had a better opportunity to ditch 5.56mm and i think we're going to have it for a long time now. the good news is it won't be M885.

What was the matter with 7.62mm again?

~J the forgetful

Assault rifle round. 7.62x39mm, used in the AK-47 and the Vz.58.

~J

7.62x39mm Soviet
Pros
-about optimimal in power/recoil balance (esp AKs with muzzle break)
-good stopping power, perhaps it could be better

Cons
-45k psi is relatively low pressure, inefficient weigh/space/materials
-poor ballistic coefficient, loopy trajectory, long time of flight (bad long range)

I think the only military that has been stupid enough to try to use 7.62x39mm as a general purpose round was the Iraqis with the Tabuk Marksman's Rifle. RPKs are also lacking in range for a LMG.

Raygun has Fackler's report of modern military rifle terminal ballistics
http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/basics/pmrb.html
I guess i don't entirely agree with Fackler's report but i don't know enough about rifle terminal ballistics to make an effective argument. handgun terminal ballistics are much simpler.