By Matthew Cox
Times staff writer

The Army wants arms makers to come up with replacements for virtually all of its infantry weapons, including its lightest machine gun.

The Army will hold an open competition this summer to select a replacement for its M16 rifles, M4 carbines and M249 squad automatic weapons by early fall.

The winning company will be awarded a low-rate initial production contract to produce up to 4,900 weapons systems, and could receive an initial full-rate production contract to make more than 134,000 weapons, according to the March 4 pre-solicitation notice posted on the Internet.

This new family of weapons could be ready for fielding by the second half of fiscal 2006.

The new weapons would fulfill an Army demand for lighter, more durable small arms to replace the aging designs that have long served the troops.

The XM8 was well along in development as the Army’s next weapon, but the announcement means the program will have to prove it can outperform the rest of the small-arms industry.

The Heckler & Koch-made XM8 family of prototypes features a compact model for close quarters, a standard carbine and a designated marksman/squad automatic rifle model with a longer, heavier barrel and bipod legs for stability. Army weapons developers have spent $29 million testing the XM8 in arctic, desert and tropical conditions to replace the venerable M16 family.

The Army’s Infantry Center, the service’s small-arms proponent, has no problem with a new family of weapons for the infantry squad, as long as it includes a light machine gun model to replace the nearly worn-out M249 SAW.

“We see that as our number one need,” said Maj. Glenn Dean, chief of small arms at the Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Ga. “If I only replaced one weapon in the squad, it would be the SAW.”

The Infantry Center’s stance prompted the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisitions, Logistics and Technology in late January to order a competition to decide which commercial weapons maker can best meet this new requirement.

As a result, the XM8 — which does not include a light machine gun variant — is on hold.

“We have halted testing to let the competition be completed,” said Col. Michael Smith, who runs Project Manager Soldier Weapons, the Army office that has been developing the XM8.

Smith said the decision was made to hold off on operational tests slated for October because it’s unclear if H&K will emerge as the ultimate winner.

“It may not be XM8,” Smith said. “Our bottom line is we want the best weapon for the soldier. If someone has a better weapon than the XM8, I’m ready to support them 100 percent.”

Smith’s office has been working on the XM8 prototype as an unopposed replacement for the M16 since late 2003. It was part of a longer-range effort to perfect an over-and-under-style weapon, known as the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, or XM29, developed by Alliant Techsystems and Heckler & Koch.

The XM29 fires special air-bursting projectiles and standard 5.56mm ammunition. But at 18 pounds, it’s still too heavy to meet the Army’s requirements, so planners decided to perfect each of XM29’s components separately, allowing soldiers to take advantage of new technology sooner. The XM8 is one of those components.

The March 4 “Pre-solicitation Notice for the Objective Individual Combat Weapon Increment I family of weapons” invites small-arms makers to try to meet an Infantry Center requirement, which the Army approved in October, for a “non developmental family of weapons that are capable of firing U.S. standard M855 and M856” 5.56mm ammunition.

OICW Increment II deals with the separate development of the air-burst technology of XM29, and OICW Increment III would bring the two components back together when technology is available.

The OICW Increment I requirement is intended to replace current weapons systems, including the M4, M16 and selected M9 pistols for the active Army, the notice states. The special compact, carbine and designated marksman models must share 80 percent of the same parts.

The requirement also calls for the family of weapons to include a light machine gun model rather than the XM8’s squad automatic rifle variant.

Currently, each infantry squad contains two M249 SAWs that serve as light support weapons because of their 5.56mm ammunition and high rate of fire. While very popular with soldiers, the SAW is beginning to wear out, according to the Infantry Center.

“A lot of our SAWs are 20 years old,” Dean said, describing how SAWs are rebuilt, but in many cases not fast enough to keep up with everyday wear and tear under combat conditions. “You see soldiers carrying SAWs held together with the zip ties.”

And despite its light machine gun status, the SAW weighs more than 20 pounds when loaded with a 200-round belt of 5.56mm ammo. “In the long run, we like something more durable and something that is lighter,” Dean said.

This will likely be a challenge since light machine guns are traditionally heavier than automatic rifles so they can handle the heat buildup from the high rate of sustained fire, Smith said, adding that any replacement should be lighter than the current SAW.

The XM8’s squad automatic rifle model is not designed to serve as a light machine gun. It’s not designed for sustained fire and lacks the capability for barrel changes in less than 30 seconds, a key feature in ensuring barrels don’t overheat.

Because of these differences, the LMG model will only be required to share 50 percent of the parts with the other models in the family. Still, the requirement will likely prove difficult for all competitors.

“The light machine gun is a challenge … because of that, we have a level technical playing field for all the contractors,” Smith said.

But that didn’t deter major small-arms companies such as Colt, FN Herstal USA Inc. and Steyr-Mannlicher from saying they were ready to compete when the Army polled the weapons-making community last November in what’s known as a “sources sought” document — to see which other companies were willing to contend with XM8, Smith said.

“The sources-sought shows that the small-arms community had the capability to provide us with a family [of nondevelopmental weapons] so we would take them right into testing,” Smith said.

Even though the Army wants to replace the SAW, it’s not going anywhere in the near future, Dean said.

The Army’s push to grow the force from 33 brigades to 48 modular brigades known as units of action means it will need more SAWs in the short term, Dean said. Currently, the Army is planning to buy another 12,000 SAWs.

Other specific requirements are that each of the models include a common multipurpose sighting system that enables the soldier to rapidly and effectively hit stationary and moving targets at both close range and the maximum effective range of the model:

• 500 meters for the carbine.

• 150 meters for the special compact.

• 600 meters for the designated marksman.

• 600 meters and beyond for the light machine gun.

Also, the weapons must be equipped with limited-visibility fire control with infrared aim light, illuminator and visible red laser pointer. The infrared aiming light and illuminator must be greater than or equal to the capability of the current-issue AN/PEQ-2A.

A formal request for proposal is slated to be issued “on or about” March 23, the notice states. Interested companies will be required to submit four of each type of the four different variants by late spring.

Submissions will be put through a series of tests, to include live-fire exercises, to see if they meet the requirements.

Whether the XM8 comes out on top or not, its achievements in testing influenced the Infantry Center direction in mapping out the requirement for new infantry weapons, Dean said. “It has certainly demonstrated the possibilities of technology available … more so than any other system has done.”

Smith said he’s looking forward to seeing the results of the competition.

“It’s going to give us a family of four 5.56mm weapons … with extensive commonality,” he said. “It gives the commander the capability to configure his weapons based on the mission, with higher reliability than ever before — about four times the reliability over what they had before. That’s in requirement.”

I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped.

The U.S. Army is asking a lot for the new weapons. They are asking for something that  "is all things to all people," a real difficult challenge for the arms makers.

[nelson]

Ha ha

[/nelson]

Wouldn't it be the shits if Toad ended up supplying the US Army with its weapons?
Truly the End Of Days........

B_S

Quoted: Wouldn't it be the shits if Toad ended up supplying the US Army with its weapons? Truly the End Of Days........ B_S

If that happend, I will eat my car.

Quoted: I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped.

How come gas pistons are better? I agree with what you say. The M16 seems to be working god but if it need to be changed then change it

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Its not the M16 family of weapons that's the problem, its the calibre!!!!!

Quoted: I've said it before and I'll say it again: Its not the M16 family of weapons that's the problem, its the calibre!!!!!

+a whole lot

There's an ideal replacement already in production.  It's called the AR-10!  Same rifle--but in a men's caliber.  

They really need to commission my sorry enlisted ass and put me in charge of things. . . oh well.

Quoted: If that happend, I will eat my car.

I've often wondered what kind of vehicle a man like you drives.  Will this be a snack or a 4 course meal?


-HS

I believe this was staged by HK...they just want everyone to submit their literal crap and have the XM8 blow they all away, just so HK can sit back and have a good laugh at those who try to be on par with them.  

Army just wants to give everyone a chance.  They are not going to make the same mistake as last time.  

If the Army did not want the XM8, they would not have tested it as far as they have.

Quoted: ...Army just wants to give everyone a chance...

Or at least give that appearance.

No matter who wins, the losers will be complaining to their Congress members and possibly even filing lawsuits.

The Army is getting ready for that by going through the correct motions.

I hope it goes down the tubes.  No one can point to anything but anecdotes (and some 40 years old at that) saying the M16 is inadequate.  The XM8 doesn't seem to offer much of a functional difference to the M16.

There has to be something more pressing for our Armed Services to spend money on.

Quoted: Quoted: I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped. How come gas pistons are better? I agree with what you say. The M16 seems to be working god but if it need to be changed then change it

Apparently, that is one of the criteria the army has suggested to be a part of the new weapon system.

If the Army Times is anything like the Air Force Times, take it with a handful of salt, because a grain just won't do.

We used to call it the "Air Force Enquirer."

They need to bury that turd once and for all.

[/I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped.
quote]


I bet if the Army just buys an AK-47 it would be cheaper that retrofitting a M16. There is a reason the AK is still being used. It works.

Quoted: The XM8 will be fully fielded by the summer of 2005

Quoted: [/I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped. quote] I bet if the Army just buys an AK-47 it would be cheaper that retrofitting a M16. There is a reason the AK is still being used. It works.

I like the sound of that!!

scar...

I wonder if they have thought of using the graphite-wrapped barrels for the new SAW.  That should keep the weight down, but keep the barrel a lot cooler.

Why not just issue the G36? Isn't the XM8 basically the same thing?

Quoted: I believe this was staged by HK...they just want everyone to submit their literal crap and have the XM8 blow they all away, just so HK can sit back and have a good laugh at those who try to be on par with them.   Army just wants to give everyone a chance.  They are not going to make the same mistake as last time.   If the Army did not want the XM8, they would not have tested it as far as they have.

I agree, this is a done deal

and what they are doing now is trying to overtly 'look at all options' .  It happens all the time in every other sales industry.  It gives the air of objectivity.

There's nothing the M16 can't do that the XM8 can do except look like a plastic POS toy gun in the process, and carry a jacked up HK price.

+1 on the wrong caliber.

Keep the same damn design with a 6.5mm barrel or whatever the hell that new round is and be done with it.  I understand the logistics with multiple calibers in a combat zone, but still...  There's nothing wrong with the M16 design, and the M4 is perfect for the type of war we're in today.  Screw the 5.56mm it sucks cow balls

Quoted: Why not just issue the G36? Isn't the XM8 basically the same thing?

Short answer:  More or less, yes.

The XM8 is a re-packaged G36, which is itself a re-packaged AR180.

Quoted: Quoted: [/I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped. quote] I bet if the Army just buys an AK-47 it would be cheaper that retrofitting a M16. There is a reason the AK is still being used. It works. I like the sound of that!!

We've already seen from the Saiga rifles that an AK platform can be successfully used in multiple calibers.  In fact, the Saiga .223 is amazingly accurate, considering it's an AK.  Very close to a stock AR15/M16 in accuracy.  The Saiga .308 is accurate too.  In convinced the real accuracy weakness in generic AK's comes from poor quality control from some manufacturers, and the cartridge that was used.

With good quality control, and a better choice in cartidge, the AK is a more than adequate firearm.

It is truly sad that Joe "Garage Inventor" American can not legally come up with a gun design without becoming a felon.  There is no incentive for arms mfr's to R&D a design to submit it to the Army when if after all is said and done they can't sell them to Joe Citizen to recover their costs.  The '86 ban insured that the small arms providers for the US Military will be foreign sources.  To me that is treasonous.

Quoted: I've said it before and I'll say it again: Its not the M16 family of weapons that's the problem, its the calibre!!!!!

No, it's M855.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [/I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped. quote] I bet if the Army just buys an AK-47 it would be cheaper that retrofitting a M16. There is a reason the AK is still being used. It works. I like the sound of that!! We've already seen from the Saiga rifles that an AK platform can be successfully used in multiple calibers.  In fact, the Saiga .223 is amazingly accurate, considering it's an AK.  Very close to a stock AR15/M16 in accuracy.  The Saiga .308 is accurate too.  In convinced the real accuracy weakness in generic AK's comes from poor quality control from some manufacturers, and the cartridge that was used. With good quality control, and a better choice in cartidge, the AK is a more than adequate firearm.

????????????????????

Why would we want to be on an equal footing with the very people we will be fighting ? I would want something better than the enemy.
One of the reason America has won past conflicts is we have better equipment than the other guy.  I dont have anything against AK types they are adequate but are they the best we can give to our fighters? NO. We need to improve not settle for adequate . It would be a stop gap measure at best.

u-baddog,

I agree with you on many levels.  That said, please note I said, "more than adequate".  Not just "adequate."

Sure, the AK has some things that need improvement, like a change in the safety, or the sights, etc.  I'm saying it could be a great firearm for our forces with a little reworking.  You'd end up with a gun that's more reliable (requires less cleaning and maintenance) and less expensive to manufacture.  Still, I admit that it probably isn't the ideal firearm for our forces.

Look at the G36 and XM8.  Both of them are much more like the AK than the AR in how they function.  Coincidence?  No.

Quoted: Look at the G36 and XM8.  Both of them are much more like the AK than the AR in how they function.  Coincidence?  No.

Coincidence?  YES.

The G36 is based on the action developed by Armalite to make a cheaper alternative to the AR15; the AR18.  A few other weapon systems utilize the AR18 system such as the British SA80 and some Asian weapons.  

They have nothing to do with the AK.

Hmmmmm, ACR trilas take two?

Quoted: There's nothing the M16 can't do that the XM8 can do except look like a plastic POS toy gun in the process, and carry a jacked up HK price.

How about go 15,000 rounds without cleaning or lube?  

How about the ability to be cleaned in 4 minutes?

Quoted: Quoted: There's nothing the M16 can't do that the XM8 can do except look like a plastic POS toy gun in the process, and carry a jacked up HK price. How about go 15,000 rounds without cleaning or lube?   How about the ability to be cleaned in 4 minutes?

Do you actually believe that bullshit?  You try operating your rifle without cleaning or lube in any one of a number of environments the military is in.  

And the time it takes to clean a rifle is very subjective.  How well do you intend to clean it, how many rounds have you fired, what sort of environment are you in...


ETA:  While in Iraq, we cleaned weapons every time we stopped (of course one weapon system at a time while others pulled security) to get the dust and sand out.  To get my M4 up and running, dirt free, took maybe 3-4 minutes.  If I fire it, it can be different.  

The XM-8 is just an HK gimic.  They had a few good ideas (the G-3 and all the variations of the same system down to the MP-5), but that doesn't make the rest of their crap any good.  I can think of a few other, older rifles, that would kick the crap out of the XM-8.

134,000 infantry rifles sound like a small number - wouldn't millions need to be produced?  Assuming no nukes, I would imagine that if we went up aginst a N. Korea or China we would need infantry numbers in the millions.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There's nothing the M16 can't do that the XM8 can do except look like a plastic POS toy gun in the process, and carry a jacked up HK price. How about go 15,000 rounds without cleaning or lube?   How about the ability to be cleaned in 4 minutes? Do you actually believe that bullshit?  You try operating your rifle without cleaning or lube in any one of a number of environments the military is in.   And the time it takes to clean a rifle is very subjective.  How well do you intend to clean it, how many rounds have you fired, what sort of environment are you in...

Hey, look...the simple fact of the matter is the M16 needs cleaning on a regualr basis and can jam when not clean after a long period of time.  

XM8

Show me an M16 do that...I think we have all read and seen what an AR15 is capable of underwater...

The Army wants a family of weapons all built on a common reciever and changed in the field with minimal tools and time.  Don't try to throw out that bullshit on "oh, the M16 can easily change uppers with 2 pins...you just need an entire upper preassembled...blah, blah, BLAH!"  

The question is, what can the M16 do that the XM8 cannot do better?  

Quoted: The question is, what can the M16 do that the XM8 cannot do better?

What can the XM8 do that the M16 cannot do better?  Disregarding HK propaganda and Army Times bullshit.

They both shoot the same bullet.  They both have the same effective range.  They both have the same capabilities for sights and other upgrades (like MARS).  Blah blah blah.  I never had a reason to doubt my M16 or M4.

Quoted: Quoted: The question is, what can the M16 do that the XM8 cannot do better?   What can the XM8 do that the M16 cannot do better?  Disregarding HK propaganda and Army Times bullshit.

Everything my friend...everything...

My question still stands.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The question is, what can the M16 do that the XM8 cannot do better?   What can the XM8 do that the M16 cannot do better?  Disregarding HK propaganda and Army Times bullshit. Everything my friend...everything... My question still stands.

haha, I disagree... I like my rifle the way it is.  


Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The question is, what can the M16 do that the XM8 cannot do better?   What can the XM8 do that the M16 cannot do better?  Disregarding HK propaganda and Army Times bullshit. Everything my friend...everything... My question still stands.

Mount proper optics

My Money is on a swappable Barrel 6.8 P90..

Quoted: Why not just issue the G36? Isn't the XM8 basically the same thing?

Exactly so!  It's just a dandified HK G36…

And the G36 is just a 'rip off' (same guts) of the Armalite AR-18!…

And the AR-18 was Eugene Stoners follow on design for a 'better' M-16 with a gas piston that was turned down by the Army  in the 60's…

Ain't life funny!

FWIW… the British ARmed Forces are 99.9% likely to adopt the HK G36 family @ 2012.

ANdy

Quoted: Quoted: Why not just issue the G36? Isn't the XM8 basically the same thing? Exactly so!  It's just a dandified HK G36… And the G36 is just a 'rip off' (same guts) of the Armalite AR-18!… And the AR-18 was Eugene Stoners follow on design for a 'better' M-16 with a gas piston that was turned down by the Army  in the 60's… Ain't life funny! FWIW… the British ARmed Forces are 99.9% likely to adopt the HK G36 family @ 2012. ANdy

I know there were problems with the SA80 (another AR18 action), but isn't the G36 as step back from a bullpup rifle configuration?

As regards to the AK vs M16 action debate…

Two of the best and most rugged military assault rifles are the FNC and SIG 55X series… both are based on the AK action.

US wants a 'better' assault rifle?… easy. Buy the rights to the SIG55X series… they have a level of durability, reliability and accuracy the HK XM8 can only dream of.


SIG552 'Commando'


Personally I see nothing wrong with the M4/M16 family… the idea that you can go 15,000 rounds without cleaning on the XM8 is a crock o' shit. Show me the soldier who does not clean his weapon very chance he gets and I will show you a piss poor soldier.


ANdy

Currently, each infantry squad contains two M249 SAWs that serve as light support weapons because of their 5.56mm ammunition and high rate of fire. While very popular with soldiers, the SAW is beginning to wear out, according to the Infantry Center. “A lot of our SAWs are 20 years old,” Dean said, describing how SAWs are rebuilt, but in many cases not fast enough to keep up with everyday wear and tear under combat conditions. “You see soldiers carrying SAWs held together with the zip ties.” And despite its light machine gun status, the SAW weighs more than 20 pounds when loaded with a 200-round belt of 5.56mm ammo. “In the long run, we like something more durable and something that is lighter,” Dean said.

Am I missing something here? Why not just build more M249s?  I loved my original FN SAW that I had in Korea and the new ones are supposed to be better.

Quoted: Quoted: I hope it dies an inglorious death. Purchase pistoned uppers for existing rifles (lowers) and be done with it. No retraining. No buying expensive new rifles. No buying new mags by the millions, and all the dough spent on aftermarket whizz-bangs can still be used and not scrapped. How come gas pistons are better? I agree with what you say. The M16 seems to be working god but if it need to be changed then change it

Doesn't blow all that carbon down the gas tube into the bolt carrier.

HK might still have someting else to offer with the HK-M4... basically an M-4 design with a gas piston upper.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why not just issue the G36? Isn't the XM8 basically the same thing? Exactly so!  It's just a dandified HK G36… And the G36 is just a 'rip off' (same guts) of the Armalite AR-18!… And the AR-18 was Eugene Stoners follow on design for a 'better' M-16 with a gas piston that was turned down by the Army  in the 60's… Ain't life funny! FWIW… the British ARmed Forces are 99.9% likely to adopt the HK G36 family @ 2012. ANdy I know there were problems with the SA80 (another AR18 action), but isn't the G36 as step back from a bullpup rifle configuration?

At long last they have solved the problems with the SA80, they basically replaced 80% of the rifle with better parts!!!

However, the problem with the SA80 is it cannot be shot off the left shoulder in an urban combat situation, everybody bitches about that. All the British Special Forces and Marine and Army Force Recon & Pathfinder units are issued with M16/M4 (and the Diemaco versions) and refuse to use the SA80.

The SA80 is also VERY heavy and has poor balance, and although it is exceptionally accurate, it is generally seen as a flawed concept now.

ANdy

Quoted: At long last they have solved the problems with the SA80, they basically replaced 80% of the rifle with better parts!!! However, the problem with the SA80 is it cannot be shot off the left shoulder in an urban combat situation, everybody bitches about that. All the British Special Forces and Marine and Army force recon units are issued with M16/M4 (and the Diemaco versions) and refuse to use the SA80. The SA80 is also VERY heavy and has poor balance, and although it is exceptionally accurate, it is generally seen as a flawed concept now. ANdy

They ought to go back to the L1A1.