JohnRich 4 #1 August 1, 2004 In the news: "The U.S. Army's pursuit of a weapon to replace the aging M-16 rifle is still on track despite a failed congressional attempt to pump nearly $26 million into the federal budget for manufacturing the weapon in 2005. "Military and legislative officials said last week that development and testing of the new XM8 assault rifle will resume later this month and run through December..." Full Story More on the XM8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyIvan 0 #2 August 1, 2004 Looks like a "Super Soaker" to me. __________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zennie 0 #3 August 2, 2004 I looked at the pictures and thought "Man that looks like an HK G-36" sure enough a little later is says is was influenced by the G-36. Nice to see we're coming into the 21st century. - Z "Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #4 August 2, 2004 I -still- think it's a stupid name for a weapon -- unless you're planning on offing the spouce. quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #5 August 2, 2004 How about calling it the "LMN8?"witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #6 August 2, 2004 Do you know if there will be a civilian version available?-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonto 1 #7 August 2, 2004 Glad it's not a Bullpup. I'm left handed and don't enjoy them much... tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #8 August 2, 2004 QuoteHow about calling it the "LMN8?" I once competed in crew (rowing, not parachuting)against a boat called "Captain Slog's Starred 8"... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #9 August 2, 2004 QuoteDo you know if there will be a civilian version available? Why would there be? We both know full auto is denied citizens post 1986. If you mean a semi-auto knock off, well I'm sure someone could make it, if there were a demand.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 187 #10 August 2, 2004 QuoteLooks like a "Super Soaker" to me. Gee, someone with one of those would definitely have it over a skilled rifleman with an M-1 Garand. It really looks kewl, and that is important. Blue skies, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #11 August 2, 2004 With so much going on in the world, this system is probably being tested in action. Hope they don't get in too big a rush like they did on the M16.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #12 August 2, 2004 QuoteDo you know if there will be a civilian version available? Dollars to donuts "no" would answer that question. HK no longer produces the SL8-1 or the USC for the US civilian market, so I really doubt this rifle will become available. (Special Weapons started making conversion kits to improve both the SL8 and the USC about the same time importation of them ceased) If it does become available, it wouldn't be for at least 10 years possibly when other subcontractors start building it. I shot the XM8 in February and wasn't impressed. It seems to me that even before any trials or testing, everybody has accepted this as the replacement for a weapon system that is not broken. The only real concern about the M16 I have read lately is that the 5.56 NATO cartridge is underpowered and isn't resulting in kills. Remington (in cooperation with others) have created the 6.8 SPC as a highly lethal replacement for the 5.56 which will only require upper-reciever conversions for the current stock of M16. See Barrett. Problem solved--cheaper than replacing an entire weapons system from the inventory. As far as the XM8 goes, it's a plastic rifle, that can be crushed and rendered useless rather easily. It utilizes an optical sighting system, with no iron-sight backups. If your optics break, you're spraying and praying. Did I mention that this rifle is STILL in the SAME 5.56 cartridge as the M16? Oh yeah, it also currently has zero upgradeability outside the current model variations from HK. Due to HK's traditional stance on proprietary systems, it's likely to remain that way. This is in opposition to the 20+ companies which build thousands of parts and configurations for the M16/AR-15 systems, all at competitive prices, since there actually is competition. That brings me to another point... While they are making a huge investment in a new plant in Georgia with hundreds of new employees, HK is still a German company owned by the Brits. Interestingly, Tony Blair and the Brits have been amazing supporters since 9/11. Could this golden egg be payback? hmmmmm. mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #13 August 2, 2004 ummm yea.. by the M4.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #14 August 2, 2004 Quote I shot the XM8 in February and wasn't impressed Neither was I or anyone else who shot it. The big thing, which you mentioned, is the caliber. The other noteable short coming is the lack of a way to secure items(Tac lights, lasers,etc) that we already have to the weapon. Supposedly they have one that has a rail system but we haven't seen it. The optics is a biggy, we have and use more optics than we have weapon systems to put them on. I have a SPC on my team and so far we are happy with it. 6.8 seems to be working so far and it seems like an easy upgrade to the existing M4 but until then the 7.62 is the caliber of choice for reach and knock down power."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #15 August 2, 2004 I just hope this thing doesn't get shoved down your throats. At least some units will be able to get away with not adopting it as a TO, but those are in the minority. On a positive side, HK's aluminum (not the plastic interlocking shit) magazines are probably the best I have ever seen. They're freaking bulletproof. Also, the HK M4 gas-system replacement system functioned flawlessly, even immediately after dunking a smoking-hot rifle into a barrel of water. It's not a new design, but they have a pretty nice package going there. If you can get your hands on a Springfield SOCOM, shoot it! The muzzle brake is amazing and makes the gun a dream to shoot! I think it's the pinnacle of the M1A/M14 design. mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #16 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow about calling it the "LMN8?" I once competed in crew (rowing, not parachuting)against a boat called "Captain Slog's Starred 8" ... I don't get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #17 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteLooks like a "Super Soaker" to me. Gee, someone with one of those would definitely have it over a skilled rifleman with an M-1 Garand. It really looks kewl, and that is important. Blue skies, Winsor I know, I found myself wondering what the hell the need for a different rifle firing the same 5.56mm rounds would be. Stupid bureaucrats. Someone's probably just gonna get rich of the deal, that's all the reason they ever usually need. Why don't we stop pussying around with .223 anyway and arm our guys with rifles that'll really rip up the enemy fuckers? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nightjumps 1 #18 August 3, 2004 5.56 = 7.62 = Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bch7773 0 #19 August 3, 2004 a question though... didn't NATO decide that 7.62 caused too much kick for full auto rifles? i know the ak47 does 7.62 fairly well, but thats 7.62 russian not NATO rounds. MB 3528, RB 1182 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #20 August 3, 2004 If I recall correctly, the 5.56mm was selected for reasons of tying up enemy troop by having to care for wounded comrades, and that it was lighter and the troops could then carry more round. I don't recall exactly WHERE I read this, though...sorry!!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #21 August 3, 2004 You're right about the reasoning behind the adoption of 5.56mm. The idea was that a wounded soldier takes up the time of at least a couple of dozen colleagues whereas it only takes 5 minutes to burry a dead guy. In the cold war attritional style combat this was the key factor – plus as a bonus you could carry around twice the number of rounds. This theory no longer holds true however as the West finds itself fighting zealots and engaged in short wars where tactics rule the day. This requires a weapon which allows you to kill and move on… not one which means you have to use your medics to care for their wounded. Even if you don’t care for their wounded, they’re not a drain on your enemies military as we’re fighting people that don’t have very good medical support structures in place. I think for the time being the US is stuck with the 5.56 round because of it’s NATO treaty obligations… but then NATO was set up for the same reasons behind the 5.56 – combat the Russians… that’s not really a concern anymore. I personally don’t see why on earth they’re even considering making this change. If a change is required then start from the ground up and re-think the situation the US finds itself in. Up the size of the projectile slightly or go down the sabot route. Go caseless: the technology’s there, it solves the weight issue of a larger round, and it allows some truly revolutionary weapon layouts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #22 August 3, 2004 They are working on a caseless weapon. The military is interested in the aplication as a piece of stationary or shipmounted artillery. Last year I read a paper on this cube about half thesize of a VW bug, and the ungodly hail of projectiles it put into the air. If I recall, HK is putting serious R&D into this area, as I'm sure some others are, but I haven't heard of anyone seriously considering it, yet. Anyone have the name of the box I'm talking about? (as it's 4am, I don't recall)witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #23 August 3, 2004 It's "metal storm" isn't it? - logical progression of the phalanx and goal keeper systems. H&K have been working on the G11 caseless weapon or ages - back when I stopped keeping up with industry developments it was supposed to be just about there... Inject some govt. money and they may come up with a reliable system... reliability is likely to be the issue though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #24 August 3, 2004 Bingo. For the curious but not terribly interested: http://www.cnn.com/2003/BUSINESS/06/26/australia.metalstorm/ http://www.metalstorm.com/ did HH put in a new automatic url shortener? I like it. Note to self: check announcements forum every few years witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #25 August 3, 2004 The problem I see with MetalStorm is replacing the "block" once you've shot it out. I think there's still some more bugs to work out in that respect before it's a good replacement for the Phalanx system. For the moment, anyway, the chain gun still holds the high cards.... We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
