SMALL WARS COUNCIL
Go Back   Small Wars Council > Small Wars Participants & Stakeholders > Trigger Puller

Trigger Puller Boots on the ground, steel on target -- the pointy end of the spear.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-01-2008   #1
120mm
Council Member
 
120mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 1,284
Default XM25 "good enough"

http://www.military.com/news/article...l?ESRC=army.nl

In a shocking reversal, the OICW crowd simplified the XM25 and are going to release it in the "good enough" stage.

These are the same folks who sat on 120mm beehive round for 20 years because the fusing wasn't "quite" perfect. (Perfect? In a beehive round? Are you kidding me?)

Who was it that said "The perfect is the enemy of the good"?
120mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2008   #2
Ken White
Council Member
 
Ken White's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,060
Default My perception is that someone way up the power

curve got hold of PEO Soldier and told 'em to shape up and get with the program. If so, it was a long overdue grab by the stacking swivel IMO.

That's just one of several reverses from them in the last couple of weeks...
Ken White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2008   #3
sullygoarmy
Council Member
 
sullygoarmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fort Stewart
Posts: 224
Default

Looks like it could fill a nice nitch, especially in an urban environment.
__________________
"But the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet withstanding, go out to meet it."

-Thucydides
sullygoarmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2008   #4
reed11b
Council Member
 
reed11b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Olympia WA
Posts: 531
Default

If they further this so that the warhead technology is useable by the M109 payload rifle, I will be very happy.
Reed
reed11b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2008   #5
SethB
Council Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CenTex
Posts: 222
Default

How useful would this be? The internet is full of speculation, and I've seen a lot of guys complain that they don't want it.

But then, I don't see how different it could be from a 40MM like the MGL that the Marines are using. Actually, it probably is more effective, since the 40MM is half fuse and expends something 80% of what energy it has on the ground.
SethB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2008   #6
William F. Owen
Council Member
 
William F. Owen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
Posts: 3,947
Default

Quote:
Infantry weapons to date have permitted fighters to shoot at or through an obstacle concealing enemy threats, but the Army for years has been trying to come up with a weapon to engage targets behind barriers without resorting to mortars, rockets or grenades -- all of which risk collateral damage
So the XM-25 is to address that specific application? This is problematic to put it mildly. One per fireteam?
__________________
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
William F. Owen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010   #7
DMR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NY
Posts: 4
Default

12 pounds?

Ok let's ask a few questions:
1. What are the dimensions and weight of one mag. How many can a soldier carry before they bulk out=basic load.

2. At twelve pounds plus basic load their is no way the soldier is also going to have a M-4. Pistol becomes a manditory addition. This = Army has to buy more pistols or transfer pistols from someone that has them now.

3. 1 per fireteam would seem to mean either the M-203/320 or the Rifleman have to go. That position will become the XM-25 gunner.

4. At least in the current generation it is two bulky to "tuckaway" somewhere so a soldier could at least carry an M-4 with one or two mags to defend them selves.

So we end up with a every specilized weapon that may go bing for ammo in the average fire fight very quickly and the soldier is running around (you would hope) with at least a M-9 to defend themselves.

If they add them to the current MTOE's in a Arms Room fashion, ie. I'm going to leave the M-320's at home today because we will be operating mounted, then maybe, but for the oppertunity cost I would have to say no thanks.
DMR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010   #8
TAH
Council Member
 
TAH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 115
Default Loss of 5.56 too

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMR View Post
12 pounds?

Ok let's ask a few questions:
1. What are the dimensions and weight of one mag. How many can a soldier carry before they bulk out=basic load.

2. At twelve pounds plus basic load their is no way the soldier is also going to have a M-4. Pistol becomes a manditory addition. This = Army has to buy more pistols or transfer pistols from someone that has them now.

3. 1 per fireteam would seem to mean either the M-203/320 or the Rifleman have to go. That position will become the XM-25 gunner.

4. At least in the current generation it is two bulky to "tuckaway" somewhere so a soldier could at least carry an M-4 with one or two mags to defend them selves.

So we end up with a every specilized weapon that may go bing for ammo in the average fire fight very quickly and the soldier is running around (you would hope) with at least a M-9 to defend themselves.

If they add them to the current MTOE's in a Arms Room fashion, ie. I'm going to leave the M-320's at home today because we will be operating mounted, then maybe, but for the oppertunity cost I would have to say no thanks.
It also means two fewer Soliders in each rifle sqaud capable of shooting 5.56 in support of the operation. 6 fewer per Plt and 18 fewer per company. Adds up quick!
TAH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010   #9
Rifleman
Council Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 499
Default

Seems like one per squad would be a better idea.

And since trying to conduct an enveloping attack with one fire team in a nine-man squad is a usually a fantasty anyway it won't matter that the fire teams aren't balanced.

Maybe a different story if the squad is reinforced but usually they're understrength.
__________________
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper
Rifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010   #10
120mm
Council Member
 
120mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 1,284
Default

Note that in the article they are calling for 36 per battalion. It should be easy enough to figure out at what level they are being deployed based on that number.
120mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010   #11
Rifleman
Council Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 499
Thumbs up Good!

For light TOEs 36 per battalion sounds like one per rifle squad plus three unassigned in the company arms room.

One weapon like that per fire team is just too much in small Army squads. Too many suppression weapons equals not enough riflemen to clear with.

Now, if the Army squad would just get rid of one of the SAWs. One light machine gunner, one grenadier and six or seven riflemen would be better. Balanced fire teams made better sense in the days of the BAR and M1, especially in big USMC squads.
__________________
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

Last edited by Rifleman; 10-15-2010 at 07:37 PM.
Rifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010   #12
Uboat509
Council Member
 
Uboat509's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 681
Default

It looks like one per squad but I still don't see the point. According to Wikipedia the system weighs 14 pounds but it doesn't say if that is loaded or empty. I am guessing empty. It gives the weight of the Target acquisition/fire control but does not say if that weight is included or not. Logic would suggest that it is included in the weight of the system but since this data apparently comes from the company who is trying to market it to the military, logic may not apply. There is no weight given for the ammo. There has been no data that I have seen on the effective burst radius of the round. I also have questions about what will happen when the highspeed optics fail. I would like to know what secondary weapon the gunner is supposed to carry. Most importantly, I would like to know why we need this. This appears to be a very narrow niche weapon. It appears that it can only really do one thing that the M203 can't. Is it really worth the cost or could that money be better spent elsewhere?
__________________
“Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”

Terry Pratchett
Uboat509 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2014   #13
Compost
Council Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggus View Post
The one glaring ammunition issue that I can see that would benefit very quickly from minimal changes is in relation to 40mm UGL ammunition. I'd like to see a longer range 40x46mm round adopted, such as the MEI Mercury. It is probably the best stand-in for the old 51mm mortars as used by the British Army of yesteryear, and it imposes a very modest weight penalty for nearly twice the range.
Brit Army revealed intention to test 40x46 Extended Range and compatible ammunition back in Oct 2013. See: http://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOT...3:TEXT:EN:HTML

Meanwhile US Army has seemed with little publicity to be perservering with XM-25. Junior members of ABCA may have been simply waiting a decision or decisions by the seniors.

However it is worth noting that on 12 Sep 2013 Australian Munitions – a subsidiary of Thales - released a media statement regarding an agreement with STK of Singapore “ to cooperate in Australia and New Zealand for the development, manufacturing and marketing of ST Kinetics’ world-leading 40mm low velocity, extended range, and air bursting ammunition. " http://www.australian-munitions.com....0Australia.pdf

Six weeks later on 22 October 2013 STK announced sale of 40mm HV ammunition to Canada, and also that STK 40mm LV airburst (possibly LV/ER airburst) ammunition had been selected for the US Army Foreign Comparative Testing program. http://www.stengg.com/press-centre/p...40mm-solutions

Have not found any recent internet mention of ABCA interest in 40x46mm LV/ER or 40x51mm MV ammunition.

Last edited by davidbfpo; 09-21-2014 at 03:20 PM. Reason: Copied at author's request from Platoon Weapons thread
Compost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2014   #14
kaur
Council Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,007
Default

New CG M4 is coming. According to rumors it has smart sight, that recognises rocket type, estimates the distance to the target, finds right point of aim etc. Sounds like a headache for HK.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Land/Wea...arl-Gustaf-M4/
kaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2015   #15
Compost
Council Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 171
Default Is XM-25 charging or staggering forward ?

Project was/is planned to continue until at least Spring 2016:
see
'Army’s XM25 Gets More-Powerful, Streamlined Optic’', Army Times, 14 Oct 2015,
http://kitup.military.com/2015/10/ar...reamlined.html
Compost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2015   #16
Compost
Council Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 171
Default 40mm LV/IRAP deconflicted to beyond 2018

April 2015 RFI to be followed by 2016 market survey and 2018 EMD program,

see http://www.stratvocate.com/grow/find...5QKN-16-X-02V3

Training needs are being considered:

Medium Caliber Ammunition: The Target Practice Day Night Thermal (TP-DNT) cartridges are 40mm grenade training cartridges. The low velocity variant is for training with the M203/M320 grenade launchers; the high velocity variant is for training with the Mk19 grenade machine gun. Both cartridges will provide the Warfighter with a non-dud producing, environmentally friendly training cartridge that provides a visual impact signature seen day or night, by the naked eye, through night vision devices,and thermal weapon sights. These cartridges will replace the 40mm Target Practice, M918/M385A1 (Mixed Belt) cartridges and the 40mm M781 cartridges. It is expected that the unit price for high velocity cartridges will be lower than the Mixed Belt cartridges. Funding for FY 2015 activities transitions to PE 0654802/Project EC1. In FY 2018 funding is in place to start an Increased Range Anti-Personnel (IRAP) Program which will extend the range of conventional 40mm Low Velocitygrenades from 300 meters to 600 meters.

Extract from DoD FY 2016 President’s Budget Submission – Army Justification Book of R,D,T & E,
http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/Offi...orms//vol4.pdf
Compost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2017   #17
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11,219
Default Army Kills Contract For Shoulder-Fired Airburst Weapon

Via Twitter and the opening passage:
Quote:
U.S. Army‘s senior leadership has ended an agreement with Orbital ATK Inc. that spanned two decades over the XM25 25mm airburst weapon, a move that could put the troubled weapon system’s future into jeopardy.
Link:http://taskandpurpose.com/army-kills...burst-weapon/?
__________________
davidbfpo
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
On PBS: The War Tom Odom Historians 29 10-04-2007 11:57 PM
Here's the Good News SWJED Media, Information & Cyber Warriors 4 06-19-2007 07:04 PM
'Good News' from Northern Iraq SWJED The Whole News 0 05-23-2006 06:47 AM
Good News From Iraq DDilegge The Whole News 4 11-03-2005 02:25 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9. ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Registered Users are solely responsible for their messages.
Operated by, and site design © 2005-2009, Small Wars Foundation