The XM8, why??

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Yimmy RE:The XM8, why?? 10/10/2004 12:34:12 PM

Someone asked concerning if the 4.7x30mm centerfire round of the H&K P7 had any relation to the 4.7mm round of the H&K11. I would suggest that the two rounds have no relation, due to on the surface one being caseless, the other being centerfire, and due to the P7's round not being designed by H&K but by Royal Ordance UK.

Quote Reply

ozigrunt RE:The XM8, why?? 10/18/2004 8:45:23 AM

What amazes me about the XM8 is that its gonna be 5.56. This is still controversial and I think there is a case to answer. Secondly, they are not going to a bullpup design despite half they probs been related to trying to have a hard hitting short wpn to fit into veh's etc. Marry in haste, repent at leisure.

Quote Reply

Mike From Brielle RE:The XM8, why?? 10/19/2004 3:08:25 PM

Isn't the G-36 / XM-8 just a plastic (and glass fiber) version of the AR-18 with a little AK-47 thrown in? I would be fine with that except that I actualley think that if you came up with a plastic version of the M-16 with a control rod instead of direct gas you'd be better off for an Automatic rifle because I think the buffer assembly of the M-16 has more potential to be modified to keep the fibration / recoil forces under control than the AR-18/ G-36/ XM-8. I have read articles of modified buffer assemblys on M-16 family of weapons that have no climb what so ever which I believe would be a very good thing in an squad automatic weapon.

Quote Reply

Old Grunt XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 10:11:15 AM

There are certainly a lot of well informed individuals out there. Unfortunately most of your information is either incorrect or H&K propaganda. Here's the real deal. 1. The US is spending a lot of money on the XM8. Nope, the XM8 exists only in the minds of HK and their target audience. At last count there where 12 working copies of the weapon designated by H&K as the XM8( it's the OICW Increment I to the Army). H&K asked for and received permission to conduct testing of the weapon on a us military installation using soldiers. There has to date been no official testing of this weapon system by the US Military. 2. The XM8 is cheaper. Still more H&K propaganda. To date no cost analysis has been done regarding the development,procurement,or fielding of this or any new KE weapon system. Best estimates external to H&K put the cost of the base carbine unit 2%-3% higher than the M16(about what an M4 costs), however the estimated cost of purchase for the multi-configureable system is 300%-500% higher than the M16/M4 and that doesn't include the cost of specialized tools or spare parts. 3. The XM8 is lighter, more durable, more ergonomic, more lethal, more reliable, etc. Says who? All the attributes of the system are on paper only. The first draft Capability Development Document was reviewed only five days ago and there is some serious dispute about it's contents. What this means is that we haven't decided what the new weapon system must be capable of. One of the big disputes is that the majority of the capability gaps this weapon is supposed to close are related to training and ammunition, not the weapon platform. 4. The M8 will be in production sometime this year. Only according to H&K. An Analysis of Alternatives has not yet been coducted which must happen before any new system can be selected for production. Before an AOA can be done there has to be a project. Before you can have a project, you have to have a program. Before you can have a program you have to have an approved CDD, which brings us back to point 3. There has been a serious effort on the part of H&k to create a "bottom up" demand for their proposed weapon system with, in my opinion, the intent to bypass the normal evaluation/selection process of weapon procurement. I have even had a report from one of our units in Alaska that they had received copies of "the" operator's manual for the M8 from a "non DOD source" since they had been selected as the first unit to field the weapon. Bottom line is that the weapon referred to as the XM8 is just another 5.56mm rifle made by H&K that they hope to enter into the competition to replace our current family of small arms should we decide to do so. Having personally handled and fired this weapon I can tell you that apart from looking like the weapon used in the video game "HALO" (according to the H&K rep I talked to "That's not neccessarily a coincidence")it's performance is no better or worse than the M16/M4 family of weapons.

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 11:34:29 AM

If you want to see a gun which looks like it came straight from a PC game, search for the French PAPOP.

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 11:38:25 AM

link Crap source, but the weapon is real.

Quote Reply

Old Grunt RE:XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 12:28:33 PM

Not as far as the Army is concerned. It's just another contender should we decide to replace the current small arms.

Quote Reply

Old Grunt RE:XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 2:13:18 PM

That is exactly what the concept of OICW increment II looks like.

Quote Reply

ozigrunt RE:XM8, The reality 10/20/2004 8:15:15 PM

That's excellent news Oldgrunt. As you can see from my post the whole supposed project had me perplexed. One feature I would like to see in a new personal wpn is a ?mag waiting? feature ? one mag in use and another fitted ready to slide into place (could be side by side or along body -preferable with the empty mag leaving the wpn ed ? no IA). I would rather have two 20 rnd mags rather then a 30 mag. As for the fashion of taping/clipping a mag upside down for ready use, this sux big time. One belly flop on contact and fill the mag with a clod of earth or damage the feed and that?s 30 rnds you won?t use this contact ? and a longer IA. On the same score, a mag that is sealed when in the basics would be an advantage (how many IA?s are damaged/dirty mags). If there is a need indentified maybe a properly constituted project will bring out feature like this. And a 6.5/6.8mm just like the Poms wanted in '56.

Quote Reply

ozigrunt What a prudish program 10/20/2004 8:36:51 PM

I wrote ****ed as in to **** a weapon, a technically correct description, and the program dropped the **** and left 'ed' out in the breeze like a shag on a rock.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT