ZOMBIE FORUMS :: View topic - Weapon debate part deux: The XM-29 OICW

This improved reliability can be credited to differences in the XM8s operatmig system from the one in the M16, the Army officials said.

For instance, a thin gas tube runs almost the entire length of the barrel in all of the

M16 variants. When the weapon is fired, the gases travel back down the tube into the chamber and push the bolt back to eject the shell casing and chamber a new round.

The XM8's gas system instead is connected to a mechanical operating rod, which pushes back the bolt to eject the casing and chamber the new round each time the weapon is fired. So there's no carbon residue constantly being blown back into the chamber, reducing the need to clean the weapon as often.

“What happens is you don't get gases blowing back into the chamber that have contaminates in them,” said Lt. Col. Matthew Clarke, the head of Product Manager Individual Weapons.

The XM8 also has a much tighter seal between the bolt and the ejection port, which should cut down on the amount of debris that can blow into the weapon when the ejection port's dust cover is open, Smith said.

The XM8 is part of the Army's effort to perfect an over-and-under style weapon, known as the XM29, developed by Alliant Techsystems and H&K. It fires special airbursting projectiles and standard 5.56mm ammunition. But the XM29 still is too heavy and unwieldy for Army requirements.

Instead of scrapping the XM29, the Army decided to perfect each of XM29's components separately, so soldiers can take advantage of new technology sooner. The parts would be brought back together when lighter materials become available. The XM8 is one of those components.

check the Type 86s as proof that i dont' love *all* bullpups, that thing is just horrible, it looks and feels like a cheap toy (i've handled some but nothing more, it's like some crappy prop a school drama society would use, i wanted nothing to do with it) and the best thing i've heard about it is "only the Chinese could make an AK47 that jams

I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time.

That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later.

last i heard it's single shot/3rb in the M4 style, only squad automatic weapon (SAW) operators are allowed full auto

I do, of course, see SOME uses for the OICW. A squad could finally have a designated grenade man, but he can still shoot a rifle caliber weapon if the enemy gets too close.
I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time. That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later.

General Gir wrote:

Um... Thats what the grenade part is for... and they are planning on giving ALL of the soldiers (that have the gun) the grenade part... they plan on making it standard procedure to use it to clean rooms before entering with the air burst rounds if there are suspected hostiles. Though I've seen the time it takes to set properly and I doubt it woll work that way once the enemy has engaged... I'm not stopping for 15-30 seconds to sight in, range, set and fire while getting shot at thank you very much.

Also this grenade will NOT replace the 40mm grenades or hand grenades... this is more for urbanized warfare as opposed to field battle. It also won't be able to really take down a door or vehicle like the other nades can.

Author:	General Gir [ Wed Jan 21, 2004 7:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Weapon debate part deux: The XM-29 OICW
Hello again, everyone. After having much success with the M14/M16 debate (and finding out that alot of people own more firepower than some third world countries), I was looking for a new topic. But what to bring up? The ol' 1911 vs M9 debate? The M60 vs the M249? Then I thought "hey, instead of looking to the past, look to the future." Thus, the XM-29 debate. Before I begin, to prevent any confusion, here is the link: click here, or the rest of this post will make no sense So, what's your opinion? To keep from talking out of my ass, I'm going to let you all be heard before I say anything. Is the XM-29 a waste of time and money, doomed to fragility and complications, or a powerful new weapon of warfare for our troops?

Author:	Labrat [ Wed Jan 21, 2004 11:51 pm ]
Post subject:
If it hits you in the right place, a bullet is a bullet and your just as dead. The only difference is if you are gonna get an open-casket or-closed casket for your funeral. I say, stay with whatever works unless you think you can get a big advantage over the enemy. As our enemy currently does not wear body armor just lob enough bullets at them without the gun jamming. I'm not pickey. Some of its stuff, like the HE rounds and electronics, sound interesting. I would like it to be tested in Pineland for the next 5 to 10 years. After that try it overseas for some of the shorter missions to see what they think. Its more special forces stuff than GI.

Author:	Cenwood [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 3:24 am ]
Post subject:
The M16 has had its day. Its old, it jams, and the belief that "A bullet is a bullet and every bullet always kills/immobilises anything in one hit" is fairly naive. A more reliable weapon with more stopping power would be nice, and one that allows you to acquire targets faster and from longer ranges and make them dead quicker is even nicer. Nicer for whoevers using it, of course, but as this is a gun discussion not a polictical discussion, so Ill stay away from that aspect. All I can say is FUCK MAN GIMME ONE. Edit: Hmmm...in retrospect, kickass as the electronic targeting systems seem to be, can the weapons be aimed without them? Doesnt it have a normal set of sights anywhere? And PLEASE tell me it still fires mechanically. It seems to me if the electronics break down or in the event of any kind of EMP, the weapons is near useless.

Author:	Asmodeus [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 3:57 am ]
Post subject:
The OICW is a poor idea. Too much technology and electronics in the scope system for it to have any practical use on the battlefield. You'd need to have a fucking electrician in every platoon or troop to fix broken OICWs in the middle of combat, or have to teach the soldiers how to repair damage. The OICW basically pisses allover one of the important things to go by... the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid.) rule. Now, I am not saying "Let's stick with the M16 series", because, dispite my love for that rifle, we do need to move on. But surely you have seen this? http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military-le ... times.html http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military-le ... s/xm8.html The HK XM-8 rifle. This weapon has already been tested under countless situations, with basically no jamming. HK USA wrote: This improved reliability can be credited to differences in the XM8s operatmig system from the one in the M16, the Army officials said. For instance, a thin gas tube runs almost the entire length of the barrel in all of the M16 variants. When the weapon is fired, the gases travel back down the tube into the chamber and push the bolt back to eject the shell casing and chamber a new round. The XM8's gas system instead is connected to a mechanical operating rod, which pushes back the bolt to eject the casing and chamber the new round each time the weapon is fired. So there's no carbon residue constantly being blown back into the chamber, reducing the need to clean the weapon as often. “What happens is you don't get gases blowing back into the chamber that have contaminates in them,” said Lt. Col. Matthew Clarke, the head of Product Manager Individual Weapons. The XM8 also has a much tighter seal between the bolt and the ejection port, which should cut down on the amount of debris that can blow into the weapon when the ejection port's dust cover is open, Smith said. The XM8 is part of the Army's effort to perfect an over-and-under style weapon, known as the XM29, developed by Alliant Techsystems and H&K. It fires special airbursting projectiles and standard 5.56mm ammunition. But the XM29 still is too heavy and unwieldy for Army requirements. Instead of scrapping the XM29, the Army decided to perfect each of XM29's components separately, so soldiers can take advantage of new technology sooner. The parts would be brought back together when lighter materials become available. The XM8 is one of those components. So, I say... forget the XM-29, long live the XM-8!

Author:	ollie [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 9:07 am ]
Post subject:
to summerise my position (oh you know this is going to be long) I'm with Asmo on the OICW, there is a reason that only a few men in each platoon have support weapons (machine guns, grenade launchers, sniper rifles etc) and this gun is basicly a support weapon, not a weapon for every soldier. now I wouldnt' object to it being added to a platoon on that basis, as a medium between the already mentioned support weapons to give more flexability, but there are reasons that not every guy is equipped with the biggest bang possable as for a replacement for the M16, go bulpup, it's the way forward, most rifleman combat is within the 200m range anyway, without going over what i said in the other thread too much (hyeah right) they have the stopping power, accuracy and maintance qualities of conventional longarms, but at a reduced weight and size, both very important to the guy who has to lug it around and to the space needed in helicopters/apcs to transport the troops around I might be wrong (not likely) but i think i'm correct in thinking the OICW has a carbine length barrel, not good for power/accuracy with a 5.56mm round, a bullpup would allow a 20 inch M16 barrel to sit in a 30 inch gun, not the 40 inch gun it's currently in, the OICW looks closer to a 14 inch, that's close to the minimum a 5.56mm round is rated as being able to be fired from (much less that 12 inches and teh round hasn't had time to spin properly and flies off cource randomly after a short distance) as for adopting a german designed rifle, well, the M60 machine gun was a (not very good) mix of WW2 German MG42 and FG42 (paratroop machine rifle) which took decades to develop before being dropped into Vietnam. Why didnt' they just use some of the vast stocks of MG42s from the war? Germany and other nations are still using the MG42 in NATO 7.62mm (rather than WW2 German 7.92mm) on vehicles and on the ground as the MG3 (looks the same as the MG42) it worked 60 years ago and it still works now (think the Browning M2 .50cal, classic design that still works) but America had to make their own version, you can say that this should be about guns, not politics, but i'm afraid it's inescapable... Caseless ammo is the next step, G11 style, but lets not go off topic OICW as a limited issue support weapon (if it really is, by some weird chance, great, then issue more widely) and replace the M16 with a US domesticly designed Bullpup (take direction from all the forward thinking nations with their bullpups, but pretend it was all your idea in the end etc) air, artillery and vehicle support do all of the long range and big bang work in today's combined arms operations, the guys on the ground need something that will work under all conditions and not be too heavy/bulky so that they can get on withtheir jobs. Combined arms is lots of people and services acting together all doing their own job as part of an overall operation, not physically combining them into one tool that can do every job a little bit, but none really well (done)

ZOMBIE FORUMS http://forums.kyhm.com/

Weapon debate part deux: The XM-29 OICW http://forums.kyhm.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=5150	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Rupert The Guerilla Rat [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 1:50 pm ]
Post subject:
It doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Too complicated, fragile, heavy, etc. The XM8 looks promising though. The only improvement I can think of is backup iron sights.

Author:	Lifyre [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:
Ok, I've seen live fire demo's of the OCIW and all that jazz. It's impressive. That said I hate the weapon. It's heavy, bulky, complicated and if one things goes wrong you can't even really use it as a club. This might be a good spec ops or support weapon but not every soldier needs Air burst rounds... I'm not familiar with the bullpup but the Russian AN-94 looks to be a decent gun. I'll defer to an Ollie type person for some expert opinions on it though. Here's a link. http://world.guns.ru/assault/as08-e.htm [edit] hmm on second look it would need alot of work before it would make a servicable US weapon...[/edit]

Author:	ollie [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:23 pm ]
Post subject:
it's an interesting gun, and teh fact that the Soviet Army was looking at using it says a lot for it's reliability and ease of use, but other than the political problems of it being a Russian design, it's just too far away from standard western gun designs to really be taken seriously ie the 2 round burst feature is at odds with western 3 round burst designs, and the recoiling barrel is just too out there to drop on an army still lamenting the replacement of the M1, also the barrel's a little short for my tastes, being about half way between the M4 and M16 in length, it might be fine for teh 5.45mm round, as i have heard less on it's performance issues etc, but i would advise any army to pick a bullpup gun for their next upgrade, then after that a caseless bullpup, one step at a time, i just feel, for all it's innovations and qualities, the AN-94 is a sidestep, not a real progression in firearms technology, sure, you can be different, but why do that when you can be better? my little bullpup essay is on this thread below my essay on Guerrilla Warfare, also in that thread are pictures of the SA80 with it's new grenade launcher and the carbine version of it, set for tank crews and prehaps some second line troops, needless to say i feel they are, and have been for some decades, the future of infantry guns, blah blah read what i wrote there so i don't infect this thread EVEN MORE etc that site has a breakdown diagram and stat listing of the OICW and i note the barrel length is only 10" but quite how they have done this and still managed to make it shoot straight i don't know, unless theyv'e mad eth rifling of the barrel so tight that it imparts the right amount of spin on the bullet at the expence of the barrel wearing out very rapidly, which i expect is the case. a few more inches of barrel would give it a few more years of life, but a few hundred dollars for a new barrel is nothing compaired to the list price of that monster back on bullpups for a second, again using that site as a convienent source, check the Type 86s as proof that i dont' love all bullpups, that thing is just horrible, it looks and feels like a cheap toy (i've handled some but nothing more, it's like some crappy prop a school drama society would use, i wanted nothing to do with it) and the best thing i've heard about it is "only the Chinese could make an AK47 that jams" ugh, basicly

Author:	General Gir [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:34 pm ]
Post subject:
Great points by everyone. I agree that the OICW is a waste of time and money. A good support weapon, maybe, but not for the average soldier. I whole heartedly think that a bullpup design is the best way to go. The XM-8 looks very interesting. I say, anything to replace the M16 is good. Hell, if we weren't so politically tight-assed, I'd use an AK-47! I'm sure you've all heard of soldiers in various wars (Vietnam, Iraqi Freedom) that have scrambled to pick up an AK from a fallen enemy, just because their M16 jammed and/or couldn't be carried in an armored vehicle. I do, of course, see SOME uses for the OICW. A squad could finally have a designated grenade man, but he can still shoot a rifle caliber weapon if the enemy gets too close. I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time. That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later. Quote: check the Type 86s as proof that i dont' love all bullpups, that thing is just horrible, it looks and feels like a cheap toy (i've handled some but nothing more, it's like some crappy prop a school drama society would use, i wanted nothing to do with it) and the best thing i've heard about it is "only the Chinese could make an AK47 that jams Ewwww.....

Author:	ollie [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:
General Gir wrote: I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time. last i heard it's single shot/3rb in the M4 style, only squad automatic weapon (SAW) operators are allowed full auto, I mean you can't trust every guy not to just empty his gun the first time he spots a target can you? what are they? trained soldiers or something? General Gir wrote: That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later. by new do you mean old, ie the HK and Pancor (and others) designs much reliant on flechettes? again, why sidestep when you can advance?

Author:	General Gir [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: last i heard it's single shot/3rb in the M4 style, only squad automatic weapon (SAW) operators are allowed full auto Heh, my mistake. I recently saw something on the History Channel for the OICW, and it showed it firing in full automatic mode, sans grenade launcher. Kinda reminded me of a rifle caliber MP5. I'll try to find some info on the new shotgun being tested...and no, it's not the Pancor Jackhammer, or some newfangled Flechette weapon. It's a good ol' shotgun, just made with lighter, stronger materials.

Author:	ollie [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:
anything more than 10 rounds needs a drum really, the 12 gauge model comes with a standard 8 round (+1 etc) clip, you could make a double stacking clip i supose, the rim of the shell is a little bit of a problem tho. 10 rounds is standard for the .410 version and i havent' seen a drum for the Saiga, tho it would be easy enough seeing as the AK range (that it's based on) has them etc, they look odd on the tilt tho anyway, load it with special ammo and you've got a good squad support weapon, 12 gauge is getting close to 20mm, the cal of the OICW grenade launcher...

Author:	Eronarn [ Thu Jan 22, 2004 8:02 pm ]
Post subject:
Saiga doesn't have any drum clips (yet), the highest used that I know of is 20-round and that was a custom-made clip.

Author:	Asmodeus [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:47 am ]
Post subject:
I'll take a USAS12 any day of the week. :D

Author:	Hatemonger Grey [ Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:14 am ]
Post subject:
Cenwood, you cant talk warrie with us when you cant even cope with the idea of giving a naughty child a tap on the backside.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Lifyre [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:10 am ]
Post subject:
General Gir wrote: I do, of course, see SOME uses for the OICW. A squad could finally have a designated grenade man, but he can still shoot a rifle caliber weapon if the enemy gets too close. I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time. That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later. Um... Thats what the grenade part is for... and they are planning on giving ALL of the soldiers (that have the gun) the grenade part... they plan on making it standard procedure to use it to clean rooms before entering with the air burst rounds if there are suspected hostiles. Though I've seen the time it takes to set properly and I doubt it woll work that way once the enemy has engaged... I'm not stopping for 15-30 seconds to sight in, range, set and fire while getting shot at thank you very much. Also this grenade will NOT replace the 40mm grenades or hand grenades... this is more for urbanized warfare as opposed to field battle. It also won't be able to really take down a door or vehicle like the other nades can.

Author:	Clay_Allison [ Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:01 am ]
Post subject:
Lifyre wrote: General Gir wrote: I do, of course, see SOME uses for the OICW. A squad could finally have a designated grenade man, but he can still shoot a rifle caliber weapon if the enemy gets too close. I also see it being used as a room broom. A fully automatic 5.56mm weapon will clear out a room in no time. That reminds me...the army is testing a new shotgun. But more on that later. Um... Thats what the grenade part is for... and they are planning on giving ALL of the soldiers (that have the gun) the grenade part... they plan on making it standard procedure to use it to clean rooms before entering with the air burst rounds if there are suspected hostiles. Though I've seen the time it takes to set properly and I doubt it woll work that way once the enemy has engaged... I'm not stopping for 15-30 seconds to sight in, range, set and fire while getting shot at thank you very much. Also this grenade will NOT replace the 40mm grenades or hand grenades... this is more for urbanized warfare as opposed to field battle. It also won't be able to really take down a door or vehicle like the other nades can. I'll clear rooms with a 14-in barrel breaching shotgun, thank you. Hell with un-soldier-proof gadgets. Urban warfare should be done with Bullpup Rifles and Sawed-Off Shotguns, beyond that, communication, training and tactics will win the day.

Author:	ollie [ Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:44 am ]
Post subject:
watch out for the exploding gas-canisters tho that was some good tv, snipers and mchine gunners set up on surrounding houses hosing the place down with tracer followed by a Royal Marine assualt squad going grenade and full auto-happy, 3 burns injured Marines, 6 (all) dead Iraqis, no need for space age guns, just hardcore troops.

Author:	Cenwood [ Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:11 am ]
Post subject:
Come onnn, someone probably said the same thing about automatic rifles, tanks, mortars, and laser-guided rockets when they were being development. I do agree with you that the standard issue rifle for each soldier does need to be kept nice and simple, but that doesnt mean anything more complicated then a brick doesnt have very useful combat applications.