Chuck Jennings
Member
Army sets sights on XM8, a lighter, more-reliable rifle
Sunday, March 21, 2004
BY WAYNE WOOLLEY
Star-Ledger Staff
After nearly 40 years, the Army is ready to replace the M-16 rifle, a weapon introduced in the jungles of Vietnam and still carried by troops in the deserts of Iraq.
The replacement, called the XM8, is under development at Picatinny Arsenal in Morris County and is being tested at Fort Benning, Ga.
Developers say the rifle with the futuristic-looking curves is a marked improvement over the M-16 because it is shorter, lighter, easier to clean and unlikely to jam in a firefight -- an M-16 shortcoming illustrated in the ambush that wounded former POW Jessica Lynch and killed 11 of her comrades in Iraq.
"This will be a major shift," said John Roos, a weapons analyst who recently test fired the XM8 for the Army Times. "You don't shift weapons every year or even every decade. The M-16 in its most basic form is a Vietnam-vintage weapon. Replacing it is a big deal."
And in an age when some multibillion-dollar Pentagon weapons systems have been criticized on Capitol Hill, the M-16 replacement is relatively cheap with $5 million in development costs.
Heckler & Koch Defense Inc., the company that helped develop the XM8 and that expects to build it, says each weapon will cost about $600. That's about $20 more than an M-16, which is used by all military branches, and about $300 less than the M-4, a compact version of the M-16 that is issued to most Army infantry units.
Col. Michael Smith, the top Army officer in charge of developing rifles and improving older models, said his team aimed to overcome some of the M-16s shortcomings with the XM8.
"We took a hard look at all our lessons learned from the past," said Smith.
Some of those lessons came from soldiers who struggled to return fire through the windows of trucks and Humvees in Iraq.
"The M-16 is extremely difficult to fire from a vehicle," Smith said. "The M-4 is only a bit easier."
That's because the M-16 is a few inches longer than a yardstick. The M-4, which has a collapsible stock, can be squeezed to 30 inches long.
A soldier armed with an XM8 will have a weapon that can be reduced to 20 inches, thanks to a choice of easily switched barrels. Most variations of the rifle -- except for the machine gun and sniper versions -- are shorter than 30 inches.
Smith also drove his development team to make the XM8 as light as possible to ease the load of troops who go into combat weighed down by more than 50 pounds of body armor, electronics and other basic gear.
XM8 prototypes weigh about 6 1/2 pounds, and Smith wants the weapon to shed almost another pound before limited production begins in September, and soldiers could begin getting them by the end of this year.
By comparison, the M-1, the military standard in World War II, weighed more than 10 pounds, and the M-16 weighs about 9 pounds.
To Smith's way of thinking, the biggest improvement in the XM8 over the M-16 is a firing system less prone to jam in harsh conditions.
In preliminary tests, XM8 prototypes fired 15,000 rounds with no misfires and without being lubricated or cleaned. That's because the gun is designed to expel most of the carbon created by the small explosion that launches each bullet. The M-16 tends to trap the carbon as well as sand and grit inside the weapon, leading to misfires.
The combination of Iraqi dust and improper maintenance caused nearly all of the M-16s carried by Lynch's 507th Maintenance Company to jam when the unit's convoy was ambushed in Nasiriyah on March 23 last year, according to an Army study made public in July.
Smith said the XM8's developers worked to make the weapon impervious to sand and easy to clean. The XM8 can also be cleaned in less than four minutes, compared with 12 minutes for an M-16.
"We believe that all soldiers should enjoy the advantages of the best weapon possible," he said. "Every soldier is a rifleman. ... He should have the rifle and the tools that work."
If independent experts have a quibble with the XM8, it's that it fires the same diameter 5.56 millimeter bullets as the M-16. Those lack the stopping power of the heavier 7.62 millimeter slugs fired by the Russian AK-47, the rifle favored by Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban.
"The M-16 just doesn't reach out and tap the bad guys who are firing with a weapon that has a heavier round," said Roos, a former Army officer.
Bruce Canfield, a military historian and weapons expert, said small-arms designers moved away from the bigger bullets, which have greater range, after World War II and Korea because battle records showed most kills took place at 300 yards or less. The need was for weapons that could fire more bullets. Smaller bullets, which weighed less, were the answer.
"Anything you do with the weapon is a tradeoff," Canfield said. "If you're going to have lighter weight, you're going to have less firepower."
Although the Army's plans now call for the XM8 to fire the smaller, lighter bullets, Roos said the Army has not ruled out the possibility of changing the weapon at some point to allow it to fire larger-diameter 6.8 millimeter rounds.
No matter what bullets the XM8 fires, its appears to have avoided the fate of the RAH-66 Comanche scout helicopter: The Army canceled it last month after spending $7 billion over 21 years without fielding a single operational aircraft.
The XM8 was created during the development of the XM29, a rifle that also fires grenades with pinpoint accuracy. The Army awarded a $105 million contract to Alliant Techsystems in the mid 1990s to develop the XM29, but that rifle is years behind schedule because it weighs about 18 pounds, about 4 pounds heavier than acceptable for the average infantryman.
Rather than waiting to get the XM29 finished, Smith said, the Army chose to develop the XM8 with parts of the other gun that work. It will continue to develop the more elaborate weapon for release in perhaps five years.
Roos, the weapons analyst, said the idea was to move as quickly as possible to replace an outdated weapon.
"They simply said, 'Let's not wait 10 more years for 100 percent of the weapon,'" he said. "'Let's do it now with 45 percent, because what we have so far works.'"
Wayne Woolley covers the military. He may be reached at [email protected] or (973) 392-1559.
Copyright 2004 NJ.com. All Rights Reserved.
CLICKY
That quote sounded kind of scary to me.
Sunday, March 21, 2004
BY WAYNE WOOLLEY
Star-Ledger Staff
After nearly 40 years, the Army is ready to replace the M-16 rifle, a weapon introduced in the jungles of Vietnam and still carried by troops in the deserts of Iraq.
The replacement, called the XM8, is under development at Picatinny Arsenal in Morris County and is being tested at Fort Benning, Ga.
Developers say the rifle with the futuristic-looking curves is a marked improvement over the M-16 because it is shorter, lighter, easier to clean and unlikely to jam in a firefight -- an M-16 shortcoming illustrated in the ambush that wounded former POW Jessica Lynch and killed 11 of her comrades in Iraq.
"This will be a major shift," said John Roos, a weapons analyst who recently test fired the XM8 for the Army Times. "You don't shift weapons every year or even every decade. The M-16 in its most basic form is a Vietnam-vintage weapon. Replacing it is a big deal."
And in an age when some multibillion-dollar Pentagon weapons systems have been criticized on Capitol Hill, the M-16 replacement is relatively cheap with $5 million in development costs.
Heckler & Koch Defense Inc., the company that helped develop the XM8 and that expects to build it, says each weapon will cost about $600. That's about $20 more than an M-16, which is used by all military branches, and about $300 less than the M-4, a compact version of the M-16 that is issued to most Army infantry units.
Col. Michael Smith, the top Army officer in charge of developing rifles and improving older models, said his team aimed to overcome some of the M-16s shortcomings with the XM8.
"We took a hard look at all our lessons learned from the past," said Smith.
Some of those lessons came from soldiers who struggled to return fire through the windows of trucks and Humvees in Iraq.
"The M-16 is extremely difficult to fire from a vehicle," Smith said. "The M-4 is only a bit easier."
That's because the M-16 is a few inches longer than a yardstick. The M-4, which has a collapsible stock, can be squeezed to 30 inches long.
A soldier armed with an XM8 will have a weapon that can be reduced to 20 inches, thanks to a choice of easily switched barrels. Most variations of the rifle -- except for the machine gun and sniper versions -- are shorter than 30 inches.
Smith also drove his development team to make the XM8 as light as possible to ease the load of troops who go into combat weighed down by more than 50 pounds of body armor, electronics and other basic gear.
XM8 prototypes weigh about 6 1/2 pounds, and Smith wants the weapon to shed almost another pound before limited production begins in September, and soldiers could begin getting them by the end of this year.
By comparison, the M-1, the military standard in World War II, weighed more than 10 pounds, and the M-16 weighs about 9 pounds.
To Smith's way of thinking, the biggest improvement in the XM8 over the M-16 is a firing system less prone to jam in harsh conditions.
In preliminary tests, XM8 prototypes fired 15,000 rounds with no misfires and without being lubricated or cleaned. That's because the gun is designed to expel most of the carbon created by the small explosion that launches each bullet. The M-16 tends to trap the carbon as well as sand and grit inside the weapon, leading to misfires.
The combination of Iraqi dust and improper maintenance caused nearly all of the M-16s carried by Lynch's 507th Maintenance Company to jam when the unit's convoy was ambushed in Nasiriyah on March 23 last year, according to an Army study made public in July.
Smith said the XM8's developers worked to make the weapon impervious to sand and easy to clean. The XM8 can also be cleaned in less than four minutes, compared with 12 minutes for an M-16.
"We believe that all soldiers should enjoy the advantages of the best weapon possible," he said. "Every soldier is a rifleman. ... He should have the rifle and the tools that work."
If independent experts have a quibble with the XM8, it's that it fires the same diameter 5.56 millimeter bullets as the M-16. Those lack the stopping power of the heavier 7.62 millimeter slugs fired by the Russian AK-47, the rifle favored by Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban.
"The M-16 just doesn't reach out and tap the bad guys who are firing with a weapon that has a heavier round," said Roos, a former Army officer.
Bruce Canfield, a military historian and weapons expert, said small-arms designers moved away from the bigger bullets, which have greater range, after World War II and Korea because battle records showed most kills took place at 300 yards or less. The need was for weapons that could fire more bullets. Smaller bullets, which weighed less, were the answer.
"Anything you do with the weapon is a tradeoff," Canfield said. "If you're going to have lighter weight, you're going to have less firepower."
Although the Army's plans now call for the XM8 to fire the smaller, lighter bullets, Roos said the Army has not ruled out the possibility of changing the weapon at some point to allow it to fire larger-diameter 6.8 millimeter rounds.
No matter what bullets the XM8 fires, its appears to have avoided the fate of the RAH-66 Comanche scout helicopter: The Army canceled it last month after spending $7 billion over 21 years without fielding a single operational aircraft.
The XM8 was created during the development of the XM29, a rifle that also fires grenades with pinpoint accuracy. The Army awarded a $105 million contract to Alliant Techsystems in the mid 1990s to develop the XM29, but that rifle is years behind schedule because it weighs about 18 pounds, about 4 pounds heavier than acceptable for the average infantryman.
Rather than waiting to get the XM29 finished, Smith said, the Army chose to develop the XM8 with parts of the other gun that work. It will continue to develop the more elaborate weapon for release in perhaps five years.
Roos, the weapons analyst, said the idea was to move as quickly as possible to replace an outdated weapon.
"They simply said, 'Let's not wait 10 more years for 100 percent of the weapon,'" he said. "'Let's do it now with 45 percent, because what we have so far works.'"
Wayne Woolley covers the military. He may be reached at [email protected] or (973) 392-1559.
Copyright 2004 NJ.com. All Rights Reserved.
CLICKY
That quote sounded kind of scary to me.
