U.S. Army Soldiers Test New Weapons in Germany
By U.S. Army Sgt. W. Wayne Marlow / 1st Infantry Division Public Affairs



GRAFENWÖHR, Germany, Oct. 4, 2005 – Soldiers with the 1st Infantry Division got a sneak peek at the Army’s future when they fired three experimental weapons at Grafenwöhr Training Area here.

The new weapons are upgraded versions of a grenade launcher, a machine gun and a semi-automatic rifle. The systems are produced at Picatinny Arsenal, an Army installation in New Jersey.

Army Lt. Col. Kevin Stoddard, project manager for crew-served weapons at Picatinny, said soldiers were getting a chance to fire “the next generation of soldier weapons.” He said the weapons were built from the ground up with feedback from soldiers after each step. The final result was the weapons that were fired Sept. 24.

With optical and thermal sights and little kickback, the weapons proved easy to fire, and most soldiers hit the targets on their first attempts.

“These weapons allow soldiers to get their first round on target, quickly engage the enemy and move to the next target,” Stoddard said.

Army Spec. Jason Enriquez, an infantryman with B Company, 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Regiment, was the first Soldier in the area to fire the XM25, a semiautomatic weapon. He had glowing reports on its capabilities.

“It was totally smooth and light. It shot fantastic,” he said. “It moves your head and snaps you back. I never felt a kick like that before, but it was smooth. It wasn’t rough.”

The XM25 is equipped with a ballistic computer, thermal sights and zoom capabilities.

Like Enriquez, Army Spec. Matthew Krupa also found the weapon easy to use.

“The accuracy was amazing,” Krupa said, a tanker with Headquarters and Headquarters Troop, 1st Battalion, 4th U.S. Cavalry Regiment. “The site was perfect, very advanced.”

Having the XM25 in Iraq would have proven beneficial, Krupa added.

“It would be good for getting people behind walls or ducking behind cars. It would have helped a lot,” he said.

Also tested was the XM312 machine gun, which shoots, handles and maintains like a light machine gun. Army Spec. Jay Teller and others were amazed at both the accuracy and steadiness of the XM312.

“It has a site, and it doesn’t move much because there isn’t much kick, so you can keep your eye right on the crosshairs,” said Teller, who serves as a scout with C Troop, 1st Bn., 4th U.S. Cav. Rgt. “It’s a very easy weapon to shoot.”

The ability to lay the first round on target is what impressed Teller the most.

“It would have been very beneficial downrange. There’s zero time for the bad guy to see what’s going on,” he said.

That also means a more optimal use of ammunition, noted Army Spec. Jonathan Calvin, a fueler with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 121st Signal Battalion.

“It conserves a lot of rounds because of the accuracy. You would be able to hit your target every time,” Calvin said.

Also tested was the SM320, a low-velocity grenade launcher that either attaches to a host rifle or is fired as a stand-alone weapon. Although none of the Soldiers had used it before, most scored hits on their first try.

Stoddard said he expects the fielding of these advanced weapons to begin in 2008.

“It conserves a lot of rounds because of the accuracy. You would be able to hit your target every time,” Calvin said.

Um, that's a bit of a stretch.

CMOS

Quoted: “It conserves a lot of rounds because of the accuracy. You would be able to hit your target every time,” Calvin said. Um, that's a bit of a stretch. CMOS

It better than 100% accurate, its 115% accurate!

Does it have one of those Faraday coils so you can just shake it back and forth to recharge? K-Marts aren't always open at the front.

I think the worst concept in the world is outsourcing military and law enforcement arms to foreign countries.

Keep it American made.

Quoted: Quoted: “It conserves a lot of rounds because of the accuracy. You would be able to hit your target every time,” Calvin said. Um, that's a bit of a stretch. CMOS It better than 100% accurate, its 115% accurate!

My AR hits where the barrel is a aimed every time. If I could just get the bullet to go where I want it to every time.

Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome.

I'm gonna turn this into an experimental weapons picture thread, if that's okay with everyone.

I think I even have some of the guns in question.




Nevermind. Fricking image host crapped out on me. I'll just tag this for later.

I am still skeptical about electronics-based weapons systems.

EMP and electronic warfare being able to nullify ground troops would be too risky.

Quoted: I think the worst concept in the world is outsourcing military and law enforcement arms to foreign countries. Keep it American made.

Why? I don't see the point as you're locking out tons of very fine weapons. Doesn't the military require companies to manufacture the weapons in the US?

I have seen the future, and it is clunky.

That thing needs about 20 years of more development.

How about hypervelocity rifle rounds? Think we can mass produce a semi-auto rifle for general purpose use with bullets that can crack Mach5 consistently?

Quoted: That thing needs about 20 years of more development.

By then we will have plasma rifles in the 40 watt range.

Quoted: for the first time in history a soldiers battle load wil contain more weight in batteries than ammunition

All we need is a little plutoninum.

Quoted: That thing needs about 20 years of more development. By then we will have plasma rifles in the 40 watt range.

All we need is a little plutoninum.

Quoted: I think the worst concept in the world is outsourcing military and law enforcement arms to foreign countries. Keep it American made.

Kinda hard to.
NFA fucked over American arms development but good.
86 FOPA ended it.

Every great machine gun/firearm ever invented has been created by an individual tinkerer.
Now we see shit like this - wonderful.

...little kickback...

How old is the person writing this?
KICKBACK???

wish they would test them ON the Germans

Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome.

A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes.

Quoted: Does it have one of those Faraday coils so you can just shake it back and forth to recharge? K-Marts aren't always open at the front.

I'm not sure when battery phobia became such a big issue. Under that thought we shouldn't use anything that uses a battery, no tanks, planes, humvees, crusie missiles, aimpoints, eo-techs, radio,GPS, etc.  We need more spears and horses.

Quoted: wish they would test them ON the Germans

You still living in 1944?

Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes.

Exactly.
The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step.
The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight.

Quoted: I think the worst concept in the world is outsourcing military and law enforcement arms to foreign countries. Keep it American made.

The 25mm is made by ATK(Amercian), the other is made by General Dynamics (American). I think the grenade launcher is made by HK but I'm not 100% sure on that.

What soldier would want to lug that brick around?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes. Exactly. The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step. The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight.

Agreed on all counts. At least some of the development cost of the OICW will go to something good.
I believe they are working on some 25mm ammo for close range engagement. Flechette I think.

Seems really big and bulky.  Think they could slim er down a little

“The accuracy was amazing,” Krupa said, a tanker with Headquarters and Headquarters Troop, 1st Battalion, 4th U.S. Cavalry Regiment. “The site was perfect, very advanced.” . . . That also means a more optimal use of ammunition, noted Army Spec. Jonathan Calvin, a fueler with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 121st Signal Battalion.

yeah buddy!!! when i test an infantry rifle i want a treadhead and a gas jockey to test it!!! hahahahahaha go army!

tag for later

Quoted: “The accuracy was amazing,” Krupa said, a tanker with Headquarters and Headquarters Troop, 1st Battalion, 4th U.S. Cavalry Regiment. “The site was perfect, very advanced.” . . . That also means a more optimal use of ammunition, noted Army Spec. Jonathan Calvin, a fueler with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 121st Signal Battalion. yeah buddy!!! when i test an infantry rifle i want a treadhead and a gas jockey to test it!!! hahahahahaha go army!

Yeah, they're "testing" the rifle.  Please.  
They allowed a couple of soldiers to try the weapon.  Very similar to what they did with the XM8.
Besides, they have to "idiot-proof" it before the USMC piggybacks another Army innovation.  

Didn't I see pretty much the same rifle used by the space marines in Aliens?

Quoted: Quoted: “The accuracy was amazing,” Krupa said, a tanker with Headquarters and Headquarters Troop, 1st Battalion, 4th U.S. Cavalry Regiment. “The site was perfect, very advanced.” . . . That also means a more optimal use of ammunition, noted Army Spec. Jonathan Calvin, a fueler with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 121st Signal Battalion. yeah buddy!!! when i test an infantry rifle i want a treadhead and a gas jockey to test it!!! hahahahahaha go army! Yeah, they're "testing" the rifle.  Please.   They allowed a couple of soldiers to try the weapon.  Very similar to what they did with the XM8. Besides, they have to "idiot-proof" it before the USMC piggybacks another Army innovation.

hahahaha let the mayhem begin!!!

seriously though, that ti sight is shit hot (or cold-do they still have to use that subzero technology?). i hope they can reduce the size...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes. Exactly. The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step. The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight. Agreed on all counts. At least some of the development cost of the OICW will go to something good. I believe they are working on some 25mm ammo for close range engagement. Flechette I think.

When it was still the OICW it was only a 20mm round, and it got killed largely because the 20mm round was too feeble to be effective.  They cobbled a new 25mm round togeather with the projectile from the OCSW and a shorter case.  Hopefully the larger projectile has more bang, but I somewhat doubt it.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes. Exactly. The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step. The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight. Agreed on all counts. At least some of the development cost of the OICW will go to something good. I believe they are working on some 25mm ammo for close range engagement. Flechette I think. When it was still the OICW it was only a 20mm round, and it got killed largely because the 20mm round was too feeble to be effective.  They cobbled a new 25mm round togeather with the projectile from the OCSW and a shorter case.  Hopefully the larger projectile has more bang, but I somewhat doubt it.

It sure isn't a 40mm, but then the M203 doesn't have the ability to drop them through windows (very often) or explode at a preset distance over the target.  I think the added accuracy, firepower and functionality will make up for the desire for a bigger bang.

Quoted: I have seen the future, and it is clunky.

Musta read my mind, brother.....  That thing looks awkward as hell.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes. Exactly. The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step. The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight. Agreed on all counts. At least some of the development cost of the OICW will go to something good. I believe they are working on some 25mm ammo for close range engagement. Flechette I think. When it was still the OICW it was only a 20mm round, and it got killed largely because the 20mm round was too feeble to be effective.  They cobbled a new 25mm round togeather with the projectile from the OCSW and a shorter case.  Hopefully the larger projectile has more bang, but I somewhat doubt it. It sure isn't a 40mm, but then the M203 doesn't have the ability to drop them through windows (very often) or explode at a preset distance over the target.  I think the added accuracy, firepower and functionality will make up for the desire for a bigger bang.

Don't forget that it's semi-auto , so you don't have to send one, you can "double-tap" and send 50mm's of love down range accurately and quickly. It would be interesting if it had a rudimentary MRSI(multiple- rounds- simulatneous- impact) capability.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's send it back to the lab and see if the boys can make it larger and more cumbersome. A semi-auto 25mm grenade launcher roughly the size of an M4 is large? Cumbersome no doubt, but so is an M249, bigger tools require bigger tool boxes. Exactly. The decision to un-hitch this from the 5.56mm carbine was a good step. The grenade launcher/rifle itself is probably as small as it can get, and given the value of the computerized sight, I'd say its worth the size/weight. Agreed on all counts. At least some of the development cost of the OICW will go to something good. I believe they are working on some 25mm ammo for close range engagement. Flechette I think. When it was still the OICW it was only a 20mm round, and it got killed largely because the 20mm round was too feeble to be effective.  They cobbled a new 25mm round togeather with the projectile from the OCSW and a shorter case.  Hopefully the larger projectile has more bang, but I somewhat doubt it. It sure isn't a 40mm, but then the M203 doesn't have the ability to drop them through windows (very often) or explode at a preset distance over the target.  I think the added accuracy, firepower and functionality will make up for the desire for a bigger bang.

Well there is a minimum.  The OICW 20mm was killed in part by manniquin tests that reveiled that it didn't have enough fragment size or velocity to kill most of the time in airburst mode.  A old GI steel pot would save most lives, a maniquin dressed in IBV and current kevlar helmet showed only what would probably be only superficial wounds to the face, arms and legs.  The only real "ensured" kills were from direct hits in point detonate mode or with the HEDP shaped charge round.

Although on the other hand the 20mm HEDP made short work of Level IV body armor.

The other part that killed it was that discovery that ranges and cross winds in Afganistan were too much for a projectile going only 750fps.  And this 25mm version seems to have been saved by the short range Iraqi street fighting, and since its no longer considered as a replacement for ALL rifles like the OICW was.  They can leave it behind when they go to a place like Afganistan, perhaps switching it for the Barrett XM109 that uses the (barely)supersonic 1100fps full charge 25mm OCSW round.

Quoted: Quoted: I think the worst concept in the world is outsourcing military and law enforcement arms to foreign countries. Keep it American made. Why? I don't see the point as you're locking out tons of very fine weapons. Doesn't the military require companies to manufacture the weapons in the US?

Yes, but there are ways around that requirement.

Quoted: Quoted: Does it have one of those Faraday coils so you can just shake it back and forth to recharge? K-Marts aren't always open at the front. I'm not sure when battery phobia became such a big issue. Under that thought we shouldn't use anything that uses a battery, no tanks, planes, humvees, crusie missiles, aimpoints, eo-techs, radio,GPS, etc.  We need more spears and horses.

Sure, all those things are nice to have in battle, but a well-trained solder can function without them if need be.  If the battery in your rifle fails, will it still work?  Can the soldier still defend him/herself and their group?

Quoted: “It would be good for getting people behind walls or ducking behind cars. It would have helped a lot,” he said.

That's what M14s are for! And if an M14 craps out on you, you don't have to get new batteries.

Quoted: Quoted: “It would be good for getting people behind walls or ducking behind cars. It would have helped a lot,” he said. That's what M14s are for! And if an M14 craps out on you, you don't have to get new batteries.

M14s (and 7.62) aren't that much better for heavy brick walls and nothing sort of a .50 is going to punch through an engine block or a tranny.  A volley of 25mm frag would be just the ticket.

Quoted: U.S. Army Soldiers Test New Weapons in Germany By U.S. Army Sgt. W. Wayne Marlow / 1st Infantry Division Public Affairs www.defenselink.mil/transformation/images/photos/2005-10/articles/ai20051004a1.jpg GRAFENWÖHR, Germany, Oct. 4, 2005 – Soldiers with the 1st Infantry Division got a sneak peek at the Army’s future when they fired three experimental weapons at Grafenwöhr Training Area here. The new weapons are upgraded versions of a grenade launcher, a machine gun and a semi-automatic rifle. The systems are produced at Picatinny Arsenal, an Army installation in New Jersey. HUMONGO SNIPPAGE Also tested was the SM320, a low-velocity grenade launcher that either attaches to a host rifle or is fired as a stand-alone weapon. Although none of the Soldiers had used it before, most scored hits on their first try. Stoddard said he expects the fielding of these advanced weapons to begin in 2008.

And the much vaunted/infomercial-marketed XM-8 is no where to be seen.  Like a dream, like a vapor, it blew away... or melted!!!  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Does it have one of those Faraday coils so you can just shake it back and forth to recharge? K-Marts aren't always open at the front. I'm not sure when battery phobia became such a big issue. Under that thought we shouldn't use anything that uses a battery, no tanks, planes, humvees, crusie missiles, aimpoints, eo-techs, radio,GPS, etc.  We need more spears and horses. Sure, all those things are nice to have in battle, but a well-trained solder can function without them if need be.  If the battery in your rifle fails, will it still work?  Can the soldier still defend him/herself and their group?

I think they're essential. People need to quit thinking everything is a one-man / lone-wolf operation.
Combined Arms folks.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: “It would be good for getting people behind walls or ducking behind cars. It would have helped a lot,” he said. That's what M14s are for! And if an M14 craps out on you, you don't have to get new batteries. M14s (and 7.62) aren't that much better for heavy brick walls and nothing sort of a .50 is going to punch through an engine block or a tranny.  A volley of 25mm frag would be just the ticket.

25mm HEDP would be better for the engine block.  But otherwise its better to shoot over the wall with the 25mm airburst.  Assuming the 25mm can produce enough fragments that are large enough and fast enough to be lethal.  Its 20mm version could not, and since we usually have considered the russian 30mmx29 grenade to be marginal- and IT is bigger than this...

I hope it comes with a site-adjustment tool.  

Or do you just move to another location and everything is fine?