Posted on 01/31/2005 5:44:05 PM PST by ijcr
The new U.S. Assault Rifle, the XM8, is a modular weapon that can be fitted with three different barrels (9", 12.5", 20".)
The 9" barrel is for a very compact weapon for tank crews or commandoes. With the nine inch barrel and the butt stock retracted, the weapon has an overall length of 21 inches.
The 12.5" barrel is the standard, for use with the assault rifle or, with the butt stock retracted, it serves as a carbine. The 20 inch barrel is thicker as well and used for the light machine-gun version. There is also a lighter 20 inch barrel for use by snipers.
The assault rifle can be equipped with the new M320 40mm grenade launcher.The U.S. Army is happy with the initial field testing of it's new M-8 (or XM-8) Assault Rifle. One of the major design features of the M-8 that makes it superior to the M-16 is the way it handles propellant gasses.
The M-16 has these gasses going into the receiver, depositing layers of crud from propellant that did not completely burn. The M-8 keeps the propellant gasses out of the receiver and this reduces the cleaning time by about 70 percent. The troops appreciate this. More importantly, the reduced amount of crud in the receiver greatly increases reliability (far fewer rounds getting stuck.)
In fact, the M-8 is designed to fire 15,000 rounds without cleaning or lubrication, even in a dirty (like a desert) environment. Troops are not allowed to let their weapons go like that, but this degree of reliability makes it less likely that rifles won't jam in a sandstorm or after getting dropped in the mud. The M-8 barrel and receiver is also of more sturdy construction, making it less likely that the user will get injured if there's something in the barrel when a round is fired. This is not unusual in combat.
All you have to do is accidentally jam the barrel into the dirt while hitting the ground or otherwise avoiding enemy fire, and then have to return fire. On an M-16, this can often cause the rifle to, well, blow up in your face. This unfortunate event is much less likely with the M-8.
The M-8 comes with a battery powered sight that includes a red-dot, close-combat capability, plus infrared laser aimer and laser illuminator with a backup etched reticule. The sights on the M-8, similar to those which have been showing up on M-16s over the past decade, make it much easier to hit something. The M-8 is better designed for "ease of use" and support troops who don't handle their weapons frequently will find that they can more easily hit something with an M-8. Tests, using people who have not handled a rifle frequently, have demonstrated this.
Because the attachment points for rail mounted devices are built into the M-8, the sight can be factory zeroed. The M-16, because it has rail mounting hardware mounted on it, requires frequent re-zeroing in the field. This is a feature very much appreciated by the troops. The attachment points allow additional sighting devices to be quickly added to the weapon. A new 40mm, single shot grenade launcher (the M320) will be available for the M-8 and can be quickly installed by troops, without special tools. The M-8 is designed for easy left or right handed operation.
Testing will increase, as more M-8s are available, and the plan is that by early 2007, the first of over a million M-8s will begin distribution to all troops in active and reserve army units. One thing that may slow this down is the army research on the use of a new caliber (6.8mm). The new bullet has shown to have better accuracy and stopping power. While troops would be carrying less ammo with the larger round (25 rounds in the current 30 round magazine), they would require fewer shots to take down enemy troops. American troops today are much better trained in the use of their rifles than they were four decades ago. Automatic fire is not often used, with accurate, individual shots being the norm. The M-8 rifle, and possibly a new caliber, are a reflection of that.
Shown (from left to right) are the 30 Remington (a rimless 30-30), the new 6.8mm Remington SPC and 5.56mm used in the M-16. The 6.8mm SPC is under serious consideration as the cartridge for the new army assault rifle, the M-8.
LW is an even more interesting direction without giving the tax payers another bath or giving tax payer dollars to foreigners...imo
She kinda has that look like.... " honey just put the apple on your head and quit your fussin'"
People said the same thing about the M-16 and it's been around for four decades.
Too bad many branches of the military don't want the XM8 at all.
Some of the problems with the XM8 (posted by troy at AR15.com, where several people have actually used the XM8)
-------
- barrels being too short, giving horrible terminal ballistics with M855
- for some reason, XM8 barrels give lower velocity than AR barrels, at all lengths
- no rail system, so none of the refined and proven accessories are compatible. HK wants to supply all accessories, which will all use a proprietary attachment system.
- magazines are plastic, and about 50% wider than AR mags. This means a 3-mag AR pouch barely holds 2 G36/XM8 mags.
- supplied optic is of low quality compared to current commercial offerings (i.e., AimPoint)
- the integrated flip-up iron sights are a joke. You won't be able to flip-up the front sight if the barrel is hot either.
- typically of all HK designs, the optic is mounted far too high.
- the design of the charging handle makes a low-mounted optic rail impossible.
- users will not be able to change ergo items like the pistol grip, front handguards, or stock.
- the selector is too high and out of reach, again, typically HK
- the XM8 is expected to serve as a light automatic rifle, using unreliable, fragile Beta C-mags (yeah, right!)
- the rifle feels overly bulky (and it is)
If you aren't going to support 5.56 any more, all the other countries that use 5.56 are opened up to competition from other armorers, calibers, and weapon families.
Like to lose South America as a market to the Chinese? Think about it.
Something from a soldier who posts on ar15.com:
"Yep we received a brief today at building 4 (US Army Infantry Hall) at FT Benning, and they said it looks like the M-8 will not happen.
The brief was given by the US Army Infantry school ANCOC 1SG."
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=297266&page=3
There have been countless threads there, with posts from people who have used the gun and are in contact with people 'in the know' and the consensus is that it's dead in the water. The HK plant is in a democrat's district and he apparently was the big push behind it. Now it looks like he no longer has any 'juice' and the nails are being picked for the XM8's coffin.
The biggest claim they make (and they make a lot) is the realiabilty advantage over the ar platform. That can be rendered moot by using a gas piston upper for the AR platform.
Gee, guess who developed a gas piston system for the AR platform? None other than H&K, likely covering all the bases if (really, when) the XM8 dies.
exactly. The US isn't going to switch out away from NATO for it's main rifle. That means it's 5.56 until nato changes. And since 5.56 is extremely velocity dependant, the fact that the XM8 is slower with the SAME barrel lengths, means that it's just a big loser in that department. With the cut down barrel lengths, the fragmenting range goes WAY down too.
Now you're talking. Rumor has it FN will import a semi-auto version for us peasants soon.
I'd like to see a modified .270 round for military applications. Nothing better, in my opinion, for reaching out and grabbing deer over a long haul.
Take the .270 and beef it up just a bit and make it do a bit more damage once it penetrates and you've got something mighty fine.
What has brought about this rapid cooling of enthusiasm? From what I have read the reports from the field have been positive.
NATO has changed...ten of the new members are former Soviet Bloc nations and no doubt will hold on to the AK's.
Wether they stick with the 7.62x39mm or opt for the Russian
5.45x39 mm is debatable.
Current US experience in urban warfare shows that the 5.56 falls way short in the penetration dept.
There many positives with the XM-8, it is ambidextrous without conversion,magazines can be clipped together so that they can be carried on the weapon side by side.The butt stock is adjustable and above all reliability.
The important thing we can all agree on, is that our soldiers are armed with the best weapon.How we get there is open to debate.
The sighting system looked too complicated to pass the "throw it in the back of the track" test.
Are you sure that bullet on the left isn't a .50 cal?
5.45 mm sucks.
Good summary list. Thanks.
Well, the 7.62 NATO came about because the .30-06's length made is a bit fussy in cycling a full auto weapon, so a .270 WIN, being a necked down .30-06 is out of consideration. A necked down 7.62 NATO(.308 WIN)to .270 seems viable, but the cases are still as fat as the .30-06(same problem with the beloved .243 WIN), limiting on board ammo considerably, which I'm sure brought about some of the thinking that gave us the 5.56mm NATO.
So....we argue long and hard over the compromise of case size(powder capacity), bullet size(where we should be concerned about sectional density mostly), and velocity(for best trajectory).
Then....we need a weapon that will reliably dispense this fancy new round, we need it to NOT be fragile in any way, and we need it to be compact and lightweight. Oh, yeah, we need it to be managable for women.
Did I leave anything out?
"Did I leave anything out?"
No. You're absolutely right. Things are perfect the way they are and are in no need of modification or thinking "outside the box".
The 6.5 Grendel is a superior round to the 5.56, the 6.8SPC and the .308. It fires a long, thin bullet, which makes for a very high ballistic coefficient. That means it bucks the wind better, making it both more accurate than other rounds and allowing it to retain more energy downrange. The Grendel actually outperforms the .308 past 500 yards in terms of energy delivered to target, and isn't much behind closer in. The lighter weight means that a soldier or a squad can carry far more rounds of it than .308 for the same weight, or the same number of rounds for less weight. Check out http://www.65grendel.com/ for more details about the round, its development, available uppers, etc.*
6.5mm bullets are routinely - and very successfully - used on deer. As such, they are good man-stoppers as well. The 6.5 Grendel, having been developed from the PPC family of rounds is an inherently very accurate round. Specifically, the 6.5 Grendel is an evolution of the 6.5mm PPC optimized to seat 107- to 130-grain match bullets at an overall loaded cartridge length of 2.255 inches (gee, what a coincidence, that length will fit the mag wells of the M16/M4/AR15 family).
Check out http://www.65grendel.com/art001devnotes.htm for notes from the perspective of a shooter who came up with the idea for the Grendel, and from the round’s designer.
* Note, I do NOT work for, or have an interest whatsoever in, any of the companies that produce or sell anything related to the 6.5 Grendel. I just think that it is the best round out there in a practical size, and that it should seriously evaluated by our Armed Forces.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.