To: Frank_Discussion; *bang_list; archy
incoming....
2 posted on
12/23/2003 11:26:13 AM PST by
in the Arena
(Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all my FReeper friends..)
To: Frank_Discussion
I hear that the OICW is dead.
3 posted on
12/23/2003 11:28:35 AM PST by
Frohickey
To: Frank_Discussion
6 posted on
12/23/2003 11:29:34 AM PST by
Snake65
(Osama Bin Decomposing)
To: Frank_Discussion
7 posted on
12/23/2003 11:31:18 AM PST by
BenLurkin
(Socialism is Slavery)
To: Frank_Discussion
How far in the near future are you looking, and what branch / units are you looking to write about?
9 posted on
12/23/2003 11:32:39 AM PST by
Steel Wolf
(The Original One Man Crusading Jingoist Imperialist Capitalist Running Dog Paper Tiger himself)
To: Frank_Discussion; Frohickey
I hear that the OICW is dead.
Likely so, and for the obvious reasons - too heavy (and that is far and away the most important reason) and too complex.
The near term answer is more of the same. The biggest advances over the current M16A3 are likely to be in ammunition, not a change in the basic rifle. For all the wildly strident opinions to the contrary, for grunt soldiers (and yes, I know there are diverging opinions even within first line troops, but by and large . . ), the M16 is considered the best battle rifle in the world today.
And the trend in ammunition is directly opposite of what all those wildly strident opinions demand. Instead of going back to a .30 cal rifle like the M1 or M14, the new ammunition designs employ smaller bullets, two or three in a single 5.56mm round to give a shotgun effect that is still disabling out to 300 meters. So for a story set in the next ten years, there's not likely to be any change at all.
Any further changes are likely to be cosmic sighting systems that incorporate low-light-level TV or IR sensors and a remote, helmet-mounted sight so you can shoot with the rifle around the corner, or use the rifle like a flashlight/periscope. The biggest problem with those advances is that the battery life is too limited (weight again). But I expect those will be fielded fairly widely in the next ten years.
Now for the buck-the-trend prediction. The US has gotten arrogant in thinking that only we will have effective body armor. Our troops are carrying body armor that can defeat .30 cal rifle ammo (at least 7.62x39 - AK47 ammo). If we can field it widely now, then in a few years it will become common enough to be an issue.
My prediction is that in 15 years (which is about how long it would take if they started now with normal development, or how long it will take with a panic development starting ten years from now when they see the need - because of problems in real combat) there will be a return to a .30 cal weapon, or even a bit larger, firing a sub-caliber penetrating munition to defeat enemy body armor. It will have a muzzle velocity 50% larger than current ammunition (5000fps) and have a very flat, easy to aim trajectory. It will have fins, ostensible for guidance but primarily so that the round doesn't punch a small hole going in and a small hole going out. How's that for lurching out of the box?
14 posted on
12/23/2003 11:47:12 AM PST by
Gorjus
To: Frank_Discussion; Travis McGee
Howdy. What's the next set of standard issue weapons for the U.S. Armed Forces? I'm writing a short story that includes a battle in the near future. I'd like the story to have a certain level of realism. Thanks, Y'all!
Looks like the XM8, should be the M8 by the time of your fictional future setting.
See info *here* or *here*
23 posted on
12/27/2003 1:24:25 PM PST by
archy
(Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson