[Slater]

http://peosoldier.army.mil/gallery/LW_XM29_XM8.html

The XM8 is the projected replacement for the M16/M4 series and is basically a repackaged German G-36 (IIRC).

[Andrew Wyatt]

those look photoshopped, the guns are in most cases, exactly perpendicular to the camera, and the lighting looks wrong.

[Kaylee]

no.. the light looks right to me.. and the surfaces are acting on his clothing and such right. That's pretty hard to fake. I think what he's holding is definately real.

Well, real meaning I'm pretty darn sure it exists. I'd lay odds it's a mockup, possibly nonfunctional -- the "optic" on the oncoming shot looks like a piece of PVC pipe painted black on the outside, silver on the inside.


-K

[AZTOY]

It real i saw something about it on The history channel or Future Fighting Weapons.

There testing it now!!

[Andrew Wyatt]

it looks like he's holding something, and they photoshopped the guns over what he's holding.


the backgrounds look funny as well.

[El Rojo]

The only thing about that gun is the .223 barrel is gotta be no more than 10" long and that is a liberal estimate. Very interesting.

[Tom C.]

I thought I saw somewhere where they were separating the .223 and 20mm guns because of weight of 18+ lbs. for the combo gun.
I think the guys in the sand boxes have found again that the .223 is a little lite as a combat round.

[AZTOY]

http://world.guns.ru/assault/oicw1.jpg http://world.guns.ru/assault/oicw2.jpg http://world.guns.ru/assault/oicw3.jpg

XM-29 OICW ammunition - HE (High Explosive) ant TP (target practice) rounds for 20mm unit and KE (Kinetic Energy) 5.56mm NATO round

Caliber: 5.56 mm NATO (KE) and 20x85mm (HE)
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt (KE), unknown (HE)
Overall length: 890 mm
Barrel length: 250 mm (KE) 460 mm (HE)
Weight: ca 5.5 kg empty; ca 6.8 kg loaded
Magazine capacity: 20 or 30 rounds box (KE) and 6 rounds box (HE)

The history of the one of the most ambitious projects in the history of small arms, known as the OICW, or the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, began late in the 1986, when the US Army Infantry School at Ft. Benning published a military paper, named "Small Arms System 2000" (SAS-2000). Despite the current trends towards the caseless and fleschette ammunition and appropriate weapons, researched and developed under the ACR program (see HK G11 and Steyr ACR entries for some details), this paper stated that the conventional small arms already reached its technological peak, and the only way to increase the hit probability in the small arms is to introduce a weapon that will fire explosive and fragmentation warheads, combined with the smart fusing and sighting / aiming technologies. While the most small arms research during the late 1980s in the USA was conducted under the ACR program, the idea first developed in the SAS-2000 was supported by another US military paper, published in 1989 by the US Army TRADOC (Training & Doctrine) center. This paper, called "The Small Arms Master Plan" (SAMP), requested for a family of infantry "Objective" weapons, namely the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), Objective Personal Defense Weapon (OPDW), and the Objective Crew Served Weapon (OCSW). The SAMP stated that such weapons must utilize the latest developments in computers and visual technologies, as well as in the small arms, and combine both high explosive warheads and traditional bullets fire capabilities in a single weapon, that should be fielded circa 2000. Of cause, the timelines and most of the weight and cost requirements set in this paper looked unrealistic from the start, but the development of the Objective weapons began in the early 1990s.

During the early stages of research and development in the mid-1990 one out of the two teams was selected as a winner for further development contract. This team is lead by the US based Alliant Techsystems corporation (ATK), with the Heckler-Koch (Germany), Brashear and the Omega companies (both of USA) as the other team members. The ATK is responsible for system integration, and also develops the 20mm Air Burst munitions; HK is responsible for both the 5.56mm rifle and the 20mm grenade launcher; Brashear works on the sighting equipment and Omega provides the training means. The resulting weapon was type-classified by the US Army as the XM-29 circa 2002, and is scheduled to enter the service during the year 2008 in limited numbers. It will be then consequently upgraded with the new technologies then available. Present plans for fielding the M-29 are to issue four units per one infantry squad of 9 men. Early in the 2002 the XM-29 test weapons were successfully tested with the newest 20mm HEAB (High Explosive Air Bursting) munitions, which will be a major "kill factor" for the M-29 weapon. At the same time the "kinetic energy" part of the XM-29 was type-classified as the XM-8 light rifle, and, in the near future, could possibly replace the current Colt M4 carbines as a standalone compact conventional small arms.

XM-29 OICW Description.
The XM-29 is a combination weapon, which has the 20mm semi-automatic, magazine fed grenade launcher as its primary part, and the 5.56mm compact assault rifle as its secondary part. Both parts are assembled into the single one-man portable unit, with the addition of the target acquisition / fire control system (TA/FCS), which is an essential part of the whole system. The XM-29 will become an integral part of the future Land Warrior system, capable of communicating with the other parts of this system, including the tactical computers and helmet-mounted displays.

The grenade launcher is capable to fire in semi-automatic mode only, and is gas operated. It has a bullpup layout with the detachable box magazine located in the butt of the weapon. The rifled barrel is used to launch the 20mm grenades up to the 1000 meters range with good accuracy. In the standard configuration most of the fire controls for the grenade launcher part are located on the rifle part, including the single trigger for both firing modules. It is quite possible, however, that the separate stock will be developed for the grenade launcher part, so it will be possible to use it without the rifle part attached. The launcher has the provisions for the TA/FCS system to be mounted on its top, and the appropriate interfaces, so the data provided from the TA/FCS can be used to program the 20mm grenade fuses. These fuses, used for the 20mm HEAB ammunition, has multiple mode of detonation, including the direct impact mode and the Air Burst mode. In the latter mode the fuse is pre-programmed to explode the warhead at the preset range, which is calculated during the flight by counting the number of the grenade rotations. This allows do defeat targets without the direct impact, using the blast and fragmentation effect of the high explosive warhead. This is a major advantage over the present small arms, which in most cases require the direct hit on the target to be effective, as it allows for greater aiming errors, and also makes possible to defeat targets in defilade, like the trenches and so. The high explosive warhead also has the advantage of not being dependent on its velocity to be effective, so unlike with the bullets, its effectiveness does not decreased with the increase of range. The disadvantages of this system is the extreme complexity of the electronic fuses, which results in the high price of a single round of ammunition. The present plans stated that the one HEAB round must cost about US $25, and it is still to be seen which will be an actual price when the M29 system will be fielded. It is interesting that the present design of the HEAB ammunition actually has two small HE warheads at the front and at the rear of the projectile, with the electronic fuse module located between them. While the HEAB is considered a primary round for the 20mm grenade launcher, it is entirely possible do develop a low cost, direct hit only anti-armour 20mm round with Shaped Charge warhead, which will be effective against lightly armored vehicles (APC, MICV and alike) and various hardened targets.

The rifle, or "kinetic energy" part of the XM-29 system, on the other hand, is a fairy conventional, short-barreled assault rifle, derived from the Heckler-Koch G36 assault rifle. The basic "rifle" part of the XM-29 has no buttstock and no own sights, and thus can be used separately from the whole system only as emergency, personal defense weapon. While being mounted to the whole system, it can be used for a close quarters work, both defensive or offensive (the 20mm grenade launcher has it minimum range of fire of about 50-100 meters), or as an low-cost, low intensity medium range offensive weapon. Most of the XM-29 system controls are built into the "rifle" part, around the trigger guard.

The target acquisition / fire control system (TA/FCS) is the most expensive and complicated unit of the whole system, since it must combine day and night vision capabilities, laser rangefinding unit, ballistic computer and various interfaces to the grenade launcher and external systems. It is used to find the targets in any light and weather conditions, determine the range to the target, calculate and display the aiming data, so the grenade or bullet could be fired to the desired point of impact, and then supply the data to the grenade launcher, so the range could be preset into the grenade fuse. In the case of damage to the TA/FCS the 20mm grenade launcher still can be used in the direct impact mode, as well as the rifle part of the system.

The current research and testing showed that the XM-29 can be up to 500% more effective than the present small arms, but it is still to be seen if all the requirements will be met in the resulting system, especially regarding to the reliability of electronic components, weight, and, at last but not at least, the unit price.

--
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as40-e.htm

[EchoSixMike]

Too bad they discovered they couldn't get it done in 20mm and it's now 25mm.

That article has so much dated and outright wrong info that I don't even feel like starting. I'll just say that whoever thinks you can get an effective shaped charge round in 20mm diameter vs remotely modern AFV's needs to share the drugs because they're a good batch. The current best fin stabilized shaped charges get about 8 cone diameters of penetration, the best spin stabilized about 3 cd. So at best, you're looking at 60mm penetration with a hole smaller than a pencil, and that assumes the cone is going to be full projectile diameter(which isn't going to happen). A project that has too much money to spend. S/F...Ken M

[gun-fucious]

looks real enough

[BDM]

Wasnt the original problem with the OICW weapon the short batterie life as well as the fact the 20mm air burst ammo for the grenade launcher could be set off by an EMP weapon making a whole unit toast?,electro magnetic pulse,this is used to shut down any thing running on electric power" I dont know if this affects batteries"over large areas.The M16 is gonna be around for some time,The military is not going to make the same mistake they did with the 16 by introducing on a large scale a weapon untested in combat,its not gonna be the end all weapon,not even the M16 was the end all weapon proved by the fact that we still use the M14.

[PeteyPete]

At least they got the size of the thing down..the original design looked like a friggen boogie board.

http://www.atk.com/defense/images/oicw-soldier.jpg

http://www.hkpro.com/oicwcasing.jpg

[El Rojo]

Interesting that whoever labeled that diagram above didn't seem to know that those "clips" are really rifle magazines. I say keep the M14 in service and to heck with that big piece of junk. If you need immediate firepower beyond 7.62mm, call in some 105's or the 155's.

[dave3006]

Bayonet!!!! HA-Ha-ha-ha-ha................................... That's a good one. The gun does look like a bogie board.

[swingset]

As a person who works with Photoshop for a living, I can almost guarantee the first photo is Photoshopped - tell tales on the light areas of the gun contrasted against the darker backgrounds - artifacting that gives away a clip-job.

Also, look at the rear of the optics/reticle - it kind of lines up with his right eye, yet his right eye appears to be to the right of the gun (no shadow or effect of shadow on the scope or gun which would result from his head leaning on the stock for a weld), this means the scope is aimed at his upper left forehead. That could work if he's using the remote, but it's off to the side of his helmet.

Also, look immediately under his trigger finger - no shadow, but the rest of his body has no problems creating shadows.

100% sure it's a photoshop job. I'd stake my paycheck on it.

[meathammer]

One question, which barrel does the laser beam come out of?

[ShaiVong]

http://www.st-ef2.com/screenspop.php?galn=20&scsn=4

http://www.st-ef2.com/screenspop.php?galn=20&scsn=4

[Skunkabilly]

If I take the scope off, can I use it in Limited division?

[Badger Arms]

Shai:

That looks more like the FN2000 than it does the XM8.

http://www.fnhusa.com/contents/guns_525px/fn_tw_f2000_std_r.gif

[ShaiVong]

The little dingus on top in picture 6 reminded me of that gun from Elite Force.

[Futo Inu]

"The only thing about that gun is the .223 barrel is gotta be no more than 10" long and that is a liberal estimate. Very interesting."

El Rojo, on the OICW, yes, but keep going on the frames - the other pics are of the gun the thread subject is about (XM8). It's got a bbl that looks to be some 14-18" give or take.

[Newton]

Troops will be wanting a decent AK-47 even more when they have to carry this oversized TV remote around all day.

Too big, too heavy, too prone to electronic failure, terrible for house to house, and they are still calling them "clips" (see diagram).

Meet the Edsel of the firearms world, and yes, I know I'm calling it before it has had a chance, I'm THAT confident.

[ShaiVong]

Yeah well between battles, it looks like an execellent fly swatter! Try that with your AK!:cuss:

[Marko Kloos]

How about sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads? Is that too much to ask?

[Nightcrawler]

I read an Army Times article on the XM8. There are several versions, and it is based on the G36.

The standard version has a 14" or so barrel.

The "light machine gun" version has a longer barrel and feeds from a 100 round Beta-C mag. It has a folding bipod that looks like it's made of plastic. I don't think it has a quick change barrel, meaning it is practically useless in the machinegun role.

The "marksmans" version with a different optic and an 18" barrel. The article said the 82nd Airborne issued some M14 rifles in Iraq, favoring the range and power it posessed for the wide open spaces of the desert. The designated marksmans rifle is a GOOD idea, and the Russians have been doing it for decades. However, our Army's answer to this problem is an 18" barreled 5.56mm carbine. Note that the 82nd AB could've just as easily acquired 20" M16A4s and mounted optics on them; instead they chose the 7.62mm rifle. The Army apparently thinks putting a scope on an 18" 5.56mm carbine will make it have the same range, power, and penetration as the M14. They're basically taking a good idea and ruining it.

*sigh*

Oh, and I heard they actually hired engineers from Porsche to design the LOOKS of the XM8. :rolleyes:

[redneck]

Does anyone else shudder at the thought of being sent into the desert with a gun that requires a friggin electronics engineering degree to keep running?

Technology will eventually kill us :banghead: Why do we always have to come up with a substitute for capable operators? :banghead:

[Badger Arms]

I don't like the idea of a SCOPE on a military rifle without a sound set of Iron Sights to back it up.

Realize that we're talking about two different systems here. If any weapon makes it to the hand of our troops, it will be the XM-8 and NOT the OICW. The writing is carved into the wall by now. The XM-8 looks like a competent weapon. It's based on a weapon that has been in service for, what, nearly a decade? Problems have been ironed out and it's maturing into a respectable weapon.

And who said that our troops didn't already have tons of electronics devices that they run around with?

Oh, BTW, this argument was intriguing the FIRST time we had it back half a century ago!!!

[Iain]

The OICW is unlikely to be issued to anyone for actual combat use for a good number of years yet. It is an infant technology. Remember how big mobile phones were, and how short the battery life was just 10 years ago? By the time some of the things featured on the OICW are actually issued to troops they will be tiny, unbreakable and very very cool.

Right now the OICW is right up there with light diffusing polymer based fabrics that cause the soldier to virtually disappear - possible (sort of), not necessarily practical.

The XM-8 looks like a winner to me though. Being a euro I do kind of wonder when you guys are going to issue a bull-pup assault rifle though.

[JShirley]

"When one works worth a damn." :D

We'll see what Larry Correia comes up with. Of course, he's enhancing a 50-yr old design...

[Nightcrawler]

Well, St. Johns, many over here seem to overestimate the number of times a soldier has to fire his weapon from his weak shoulder during a typical day. However, switching shoulders does come in handy for peeking around corners, or if you prefer to march on partrol with your weapons facing outwards from your column.

A downward ejecting bullpup would solve this, of course. "But then you can't clear it" some say, or something like that. Of course, there's no reason you can't look up into a downward-pointing ejection port.

Other than that, though, it's mainly because US military small arms doctrine and training revolves around the M16 and switching weapons would be very expensive.

Our answer to wanting a shorter, handier long arm is to cut the barrel back to 14", which severely degrades the performance of the velocity dependant 5.56mm round.

There are some pretty sorry bullpups out there. The L85A1/A2 comes to mind, and the AUG is reportedly fragile (the Aussies don't seem to like theirs). The French FAMAS seems to be a good rifle, as does the Valmet. (However, the Valmet lacks a reversable ejection port, I think.) The South Africans have a bullpup too, but I believe it also can't reverse it's ejection port.

The Israeli Tavor looks promising. If only they'd make it in 7.62x51mm...

[Andrew Wyatt]

if it ejects downward, where does the magazine go?


if it ejects forward, there's no ejection port to look into.

[Iain]

That piece of **** that is issued to my nations soldiers is not exactly typical of the bullpup principle though. It is more typical of something built and designed to a cost.

I think the South African one is essentially an AK action. Heard that the trigger connection is the weak link with the bullpup design though. The 14" barrel will suffer, especially when compared to a bullpup design that can put a much larger barrel in a similar sized package. The XM-8 looks nice and am sure will serve well, but it isn't anything that is that new, the principle of the design is along the same lines as the M16 and its forerunners.

The more radical bullpup design is a fascinating one, maybe it hasn't been implemented all that well yet but I am sure it can be. By the way I think the FAMAS is strangely pretty gun despite the fact that it is clearly ugly.

Then there are the HK G11 caseless ideas along with the bullet rotation design that it shares with the FN P-90. Someone in your military needs to think outside the box a bit, and someone in mine needs to ask the French if we can have the FAMAS.

[Badger Arms]

I think the South African one is essentially an AK action.It's based on the Galil which is, in turn, based on the AK.