New US Army Rifle

[Ramar]

I apologize if these are old news that I'm posting. I guess I'm to lazy to search such. I will have to post and then edit to get the photos included. When I copy and paste only the text comes up and when I try and go back to add a photo I loose everything I've previously entered
Ramar
9190491905


New U.S. Army Rifle!!! GO USA !!!
I hope our military can afford to buy them.
image001 11.jpg
The XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System has a range of roughly 2,300 feet - and is to be deployed in Afghanistan soon.
I would call it the "Equalizer." Some call it the "Punisher".
The rifle's gun sight uses a laser range finder to determine the exact distance to the obstruction, after which the soldier can add or subtract up to 3 meters from that distance to enable the bullets to clear the barrier and explode above or beside the target.
Soldiers will be able to use them to target snipers hidden in trenches rather than calling in air strikes.
The 25-millimeter round contains a chip that receives a radio signal from the gun sight as to the precise distance to the target.
Lt. Col. Christopher Lehner, project manager for the system, described the weapon as a 'game-changer' that other nations will try and copy.
He expects the Army to buy 12,500 of the XM25 rifles this year, enough for every member of the infantry and special forces.
Lehner told Fox News: "With this weapon system, we take away cover from [enemy targets] forever. Tactics are going to have to be rewritten. The only thing we can see [enemies] being able to do is run away."
image002 7.jpg
Experts say the rifle means that enemy troops will no longer be safe if they take cover. The XM25 appears to be the perfect weapon for street-to-street fighting that troops in Afghanistan have to engage in, with enemy fighters hiding behind walls and only breaking cover to fire occasionally.
The weapon's laser finder would work out how far away the enemy was and then the U.S. Soldier would add one meter using a button near the trigger.
When fired, the explosive round would carry exactly one meter past the wall and explode with the force of a hand grenade above the Taliban fighter.
The army's project manager for new weapons, Douglas Tamilio, said: ''This is the first leap-ahead technology for troops that we've been able to develop and deploy."
A patent granted to the bullet's maker, Alliant Tech systems, reveals that the chip can determine how far it has traveled. Mr. Tamilio said: "You could shoot a Javelin missile, and it would cost about $69,000. These rounds will end up costing $25.00 apiece."
They're relatively cheap. Lehner added: "This is a game-changer. The enemy has learned to get cover, for hundreds if not thousands of years. Well, they can't do that anymore. We're taking that cover from them and there's only two outcomes: We're going to get you behind that cover or force you to flee." The rifle will initially use high-explosive rounds, but its makers say that it might later use versions with smaller explosive charges that aim to stun rather than kill.
image003 9.jpg
What one of the revolutionary bullets looks like that can be pre-programmed to explode to hit troops that are hiding.

[mikeym1a]

I have mixed feelings about this. It seems to be effective in battle, but what if our government turns them on us?

[Taylor]

good grief,I straight-up don't like it.How can you even call that a rifle?

[Garyshome]

Interesting. I don't want anyone using that weapon against me.

[Lead Fred]

766 yards, geez is that all. My 1871 45/70 can do that, with cast already

[dancingbear41]

It would appear that it has been around a while, a quick search of YouTube revealed the usual glossy hype:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOwn1hkqh_8

Considering there are videos that are three years old, it makes you wonder how successful it has been.

What would be the best alloy for a cast bullet for this?

Simon.

[Bad Water Bill]

What would be the best alloy for a cast bullet for this?Simon.

LINE O TYPE:bigsmyl2:

[dancingbear41]

[smilie=l:

[10x]

Now close counts in horse shoes, hand grenades, and this rifle.

[Bad Water Bill]

IIRC first round can punch a hole in the wall etc and the next one takes out all inside the room.

Way cheaper and quicker than calling in air support.

BANG click BANG

All done.

[bruce drake]

That version of the rifle was killed off 3 years ago. We use still portions of the rifle program but as separate entities. The sights and the smaller grenade launcher are still being developed but the rifle used specific magazines separate from the AR15 series of rifle and the costs alone in replacing magazines in the weapon systems currently in the armed forces would have been astronomical.

Bruce

[perotter]

Last Feb one of them blew up because of a double feed, but the solider using it wasn't killed. Funding for it was eliminated last June. I wonder how these weapons standup against a EMP.

[Artful]

Most design spec's for anything used by military incorporate EMP hardening.



U.S. Army Suspends Search for New Battle Rifle

The Army announced last week it was suspending its search for a new rifle to outfit all soldiers after program administrators concluded none of the competitors trying to replace the current weapon offered a more reliable rifle for combat.

Now the $1.8 billion program sits in limbo, with the competitors weighing protest options and lawmakers steaming over what they see as the Army dragging its feet over finding a more modern alternative to the M4 carbine.

The standard issue rifle for the Army began during the Vietnam era with the M-16, which gave way through the 1990s to the M-4 carbine that troops now carry, made by Hartford, Conn.-based Colt Defense LLC.

Testing for a replacement began in 2012, during which the Army began rating each candidate’s weapon for accuracy, reliability and durability. It did not move onto the next phase of testing, which would include environmental and operational tests, instead saying none of the rifles passed muster.

None of the rifles the Army tested demonstrated an improvement over the M4, according to a June 13 release from Program Executive Office Soldier – the Army’s main office for testing, purchasing and deploying weapons and equipment.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/06/foghorn/lawyers-pols-may-drag-army-into-new-rifle-kicking-and-screaming/


Lawyers, Pols May Drag Army Into New Rifle Kicking and Screaming
By Nick Leghorn on June 21, 2013

The Army put the brakes on their individual carbine competition last week. They’d been conducting ongoing trials to find a replacement for the M4/M16 that have been the main battle rifles for over 50 years. The reason they stopped was that none of the guns met their established average reliability requirement, so they sent the guns back for more work. As much as I was disappointed that my beloved SCAR didn’t make the cut, I was extremely happy to see that the military procurement system was working based on actual performance instead of political pressure. Looks like I spoke too soon . . .


From US News and World Report:


Now the $1.8 billion program sits in limbo, with the competitors weighing protest options and lawmakers steaming over what they see as the Army dragging its feet over finding a more modern alternative to the Vietnam-era M4 carbine.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sent a letter to Army Secretary John McHugh earlier this week, criticizing the cancelation of what he says is an essential upgrade. He also pointed to inconsistencies in an Army that uses a decades-old rifle design, yet has changed its battle uniform three times since 2006.

“The Army continues to prioritize modernization of other non-essential equipment over its small arms,” he wrote on Monday.

“If the rifle squad is the foundational element of the Army, and small arms are the rifleman’s primary weapon,” he wrote, “[why] would we not take steps today to ensure that we are equipping our force with the most effective small arms and ammunition available?”

I don’t think Senator Coburn quite understands the difference between “newer” and “better.” The rush for an “improved” battle rifle is how we ended up with the full auto monstrosity of the M-14 instead of something that worked, and how the M-16 made it into the field without being fully baked.

Just because something has better promotional materials doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s actually better. The Army’s standards might be too high, but at least they have standards this time. And while we need a newer battle rifle, the M4/M16 can hold the line quite nicely until a proper replacement is found. Emphasis on ‘proper.’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM25_CDTE


Five of the weapons were deployed with the 101st Airborne Division in Afghanistan in October 2010,[13] along with 1,000 hand-made air-burst rounds. The soldiers reported that the weapon was extremely effective at killing or neutralizing enemy combatants firing on US troops from covered positions. The US troops have nicknamed the weapon, "The Punisher."[14] First contact was 3 December 2010. As of February 2011, the weapon had been fired 55 times in nine engagements by two units in different locations. It had disrupted two insurgent attacks on observation posts, taken out two PKM machine gun positions, and destroyed four ambush sites.

In one engagement, an enemy machine gunner was wounded by or so frightened of the XM25 that he dropped his weapon and ran away. The units with the XM25s had no casualties during the nine engagements. The weapon was called "revolutionary" and "a game-changer." One platoon leader commented that engagements that would normally take 15 to 20 minutes were over in just a few minutes. They performed flawlessly with no maintenance issues. Soldiers were so pleased that they carried it as their primary weapon without carrying an M4 carbine as a secondary. There were no complaints about its weight, but improvements to the battery life and a range increase to 1,000 meters were being sought. Each round was hand built at a cost of $1,000 each, but the cost is expected to be $35 per shot when in full production, scheduled from 2012.[15]

The US Army ordered 36 more of the rifles in January 2012.[16] On September 12, 2012, Alliant Techsystems received a $16.8 million engineering and manufacturing development contract modification for the XM25. The contract funds the continuing design, integration, production, and testing of fully functional systems to ensure the weapon's final design meets performance requirements and is production-ready prior to fielding. ATK will be supporting another army XM25 forward operational assessment scheduled for 2013 with a 36 gun battalion set of new pre-production prototypes.[17]

On February 2, 2013, an XM25 exploded during a live-fire training event. The primer and propellant ignited as the result of a double feed, although safety mechanisms prevented the round’s warhead from detonating. The gun was inoperable after the explosion and the soldier received minor injuries. In response, the army removed the XM25 from service in Afghanistan. ATK noted that there were nearly 5,900 rounds fired between failures.[18]

The misfiring caused the army to delay the decision to move the XM25 into full-rate production, pending changes to the design of the weapon and ammunition, operating procedures, and training techniques. Testing continued at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, where developers incorporated 130 design improvements. Despite the incident, Pentagon budget proposals included $69 million for 1,400 XM25 systems. The army planned on a total of 10,876 units, two per infantry squad and one per special forces team. The post-Afghanistan strategy emphasizes the effectiveness of "the soldier and the squad."[19]

In June 2013, the Senate Armed Services Committee eliminated all funding for the 1,400 XM25 systems the army wanted to purchase from the 2014 budget. The malfunction in February raised concerns about the safety and effectiveness of the weapon. The "unreliable performance" of the weapon led to funding being cut, as well as the recommendation to review alternative air-burst weapon systems.[4]

In August 2013, the army revealed that the XM25 may move to low-rate initial production (LRIP) by August 2014. The weapon is currently in the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase and not yet ready for fielding. By August 2014, it is expected to reach milestone C, starting LRIP for 1,100 weapons and needed ammunition. Low-rate production would lead to type-classification, resulting in removing the "X" from its designation. Improvements are being made concerning the fire control system, battery life, weight, and magazine size. Following milestone C in 2014, the system will go through initial operational tests and live-fire tests in 2015. The XM25 is expected to be combat-ready by the end of 2015, and be fielded with all brigade combat teams, as well as the Army Special Operations Command, special forces detachments, and ranger regiments. Automated production will reduce the price of the system to $35,000 for the weapon and fire control system, and $55 per round.[20]

However, the Senate Armed Services Committee eliminated all funding for the XM25 in its revision of the Pentagon's budget in June 2013

[MtGun44]

Doesn't sound to bad for an extremely complex system like this. Certainly, I wouldn't want to be on
the receiving end of this, but if we go back to the ORIGINAL meaning of the 2nd Amendment, there was
to be NO standing army and all of the normal military weapons were to be in the hands of the
ordinary citizen's militia. Now the only thing we have is a semi-auto version of the rifle/carbine but
NONE of the heavy weapons like cannon that were the normal stuff of militia in the first century
of our existence. When the militia showed up to help George Washington, they brought their
weapons, including cannon, with them. There was a whole unit of militia that bought the
EXTREMELY expensive Henry lever action repeaters to the battle at Gettysburg and made
a real difference.

There needs to be a steady push to get all normal weapons, up through anything that
an infantry company would have, back in the hands of citizens. I think if there is every a REAL
need for the 2nd A, (God forbid!) the Nat Guard units will be on the right side, and they have the
full compliment of equipment. I understand that in Switzerland all the weapons up thru
mortars and 20-30 mm class AA guns are in the hands of civilians. We used to be able
to buy 20mm semiauto antitank rifles in this country, in my youth they were available,
but I couldn't afford one. This was the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment, and we
need to get it back.

I absolutely hope and pray we never ever do a rerun of the War Between the States. That was a
hellish thing and we should learn from it to do whatever is needed to avoid it.

Bill

[Hardcast416taylor]

I still like the Raufus (sp) round for the .50 cal. for dealing with a problem behind a wall.Robert

[seaboltm]

seems like I saw something like this in a popular mechanic magazine in the late 90's, almost 15 years ago. The army has toyed with many ideas over the years. This is a good read and give some background on how we got to where we are today small arms wise:

http://www.thegunzone.com/spiw.html

[Artful]

We used to be able to buy 20mm semiauto antitank rifles in this country,
in my youth they were available, but I couldn't afford one.
This was the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment, and we need to get it back.

I absolutely hope and pray we never ever do a rerun of the War Between the States. That was a
hellish thing and we should learn from it to do whatever is needed to avoid it.

Bill

Amen Bill

you can still purchase "Destructive Devices" which is where cannon are classified in most Free States.
Black Powder Cannon not at regulated as Smokeless Cartridge ones are.

How do you like this one
http://www.anzioironworks.com/20MM-TAKE-DOWN-RIFLE.htm
Single shot Version
http://www.anzioironworks.com/20incase1.jpg

Features:
3000 yard range
1600 grain bullet
3300 ft per second
Only weighs 39 pounds
Takes 20mm Vulcan ammo (percussion primed)
http://www.anzioironworks.com/images/bulletsizes.jpg
223, 308, 50, 20mm
Only $6,800.00
Magazine fed repeater
http://www.anzioironworks.com/images/20mm022standingatangle-FP.jpg
Only $9800

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9NxHj1R04g
Ammo cost
http://www.gunbroker.com/Ammunition/BI.aspx?Keywords=20mm

I wish someone would make an American copy of this one, as we can't import from South Africa
http://www.vincelewis.net/20mm.html

[Love Life]

The M203 does the job well enough as it is. Properly train your grenadiers and they can sink a 40mm HEDP grenade in most places. Then there is the mark 19 machine. A full auto, belt fed, 40mm grenade launcher.

We always looked at this weapon in the op as an answer to a question nobody asked.

[Artful]

MK 19 was deployed 1968 for the Southeast Asian War games, It was the answer for brown water navy boats in ambush situations. It was also popular with Arty fire bases when Charlie came for midnight visits I'm told.

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/usa/mk19-e.html


Development of the Mark 19 (Mk.19 in short) grenade machine gun was initiated by US Navy in 1966, after the initial experience gained during Vietnam war. Since about 1962, US forces in Vietnam used several multi-shot 40mm grenade launchers that fired low velocity 40x46mm M406 grenades originally developed for M79 single-shot weapon. Among these, most notable was the Mark 18 belt-fed grenade launcher, developed by Hughes corporation; this was a hand-cranked weapon that provided significant short-range firepower to riverine crafts and marine infantry. However, all such weapons lacked effective range, and US Navy decided to develop a new, automatic, self-powered weapon around the high-velocity 40x53mm M384 grenade (which was originally developed for US Army's M75 automatic grenade launcher, used on UH-1 and AH-1 combat helicopters).

Development of Mark 19 automatic grenade launcher began in July 1966, and by October 1967 the first three working prototypes of the new weapon were ready for official field trials. The production Mark 19 Model 0 grenade launchers entered service in Vietnam in early 1968, on board of riverine crafts and UH-1 Huey gunship helicopters belonging to US Navy. In around 1971, the basic design was slightly improved, and type classified as Mark 19 Model 1; these weapons were manufactured by US Naval Ordnance Station Louisville. In around 1974, US Navy attempted to produce more streamlined version of the basic design, known as Mk.19 Mod.2, but this development never went past prototype stage, and in 1976 work began on simplified and more robust improved version of the Mk.19, which was type classified as Mark 19 Model 3 (Mk.19 mod.3) in 1981. The manufacturing contract for Mk.19 Mod.3 weapons was granted to Saco Defence (now General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products - GDATP). By the year 2000, at least 25 thousands of Mk.19 mod.3 grenade launchers were in service worldwide, mostly with all branches of US armed forces.

And on the European field it was supposed to remove dismounted russian infantry from the hordes of T-54's that were expected to roll thru Germany.

This looks like fun in 40mm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJhv7PfDFcw

[Artful]

Biggest problem for these over 50 cal toys is ammo costs. $200 tax on the gun but also on some of the ammo.
- if you have explosive charge there a $200 tax on each shell and that tax money goes poof when you pull the trigger.

90mm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s6_vufc1ns

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7_M4ejKJV0