It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

XM8: the future gun of the U.S. millitary

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow

Originally posted by Kozzy
The XM8 is the assault rifle component of the OICW. It is basically a lighweight modular 5.56mm assault rifle. It's barrell length is 12.5 compared to the 18 inches for the M16 inches long, which cuts a lot of the range and stopping power. Bad freakin idea.


The XM8 don't need to have shorter barrel. As I already said you can exchange it quickly and you can use also 508mm (m16) barrel.


Yes, but still...12 inches as the normal barrel.

And going to the 6.8x43mm round is stupid. 5.56x45mm can have good stopping power and range, the bullet just needs to expand on contact with flesh and a decent shooter can hit targets at 400 meters with it. We have already have so many bullets and rifles in 5.56mm, why change?




posted on May, 9 2004 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kozzy

Originally posted by longbow

The XM8 don't need to have shorter barrel. As I already said you can exchange it quickly and you can use also 508mm (m16) barrel.


Yes, but still...12 inches as the normal barrel.

And going to the 6.8x43mm round is stupid. 5.56x45mm can have good stopping power and range, the bullet just needs to expand on contact with flesh and a decent shooter can hit targets at 400 meters with it. We have already have so many bullets and rifles in 5.56mm, why change?


Why change to 6.8x43? You already said it :

It's barrell length is 12.5 compared to the 18 inches for the M16 inches long, which cuts a lot of the range and stopping power.

When 5.56x45 is fired from the short barrel, after 200m it becomes a pretty weak round. Bigger caliber bullets are not so barrel-length-sensitive. 6.8mm fired from 318 barrel will have much more killing power above 250m.
Plus it also has more stoping power - if you shoot a adrenaline running guy with 5.56mm he will not stop - he could run another few meters and kill you.
6.8 is havier than 5.56 but with new plastic cases, the 6.8 magazine will have the same weight as a 5.56 magazine (with metal cases).

[Edited on 9-5-2004 by longbow]



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 08:30 PM
link   
The entire change is not worth the money, why not just have a 18 inch barrel and a 5.56mm round instead of switching over, something that will cost BILLIONS of dollars. Also, a 12.5 inch barrell and 6.8x43 will further reduce accuracy and range, the new round is slower which makes it harder to shoot with at a distance.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Perhaps it is just me, but with all the talk about the decrease in range, it should be pointed out that most fighting has been taking place (suprise suprise) in urban enviornments. Thus, it is an adaptive messure - with the ability to be fixed for long range fire.

As for the lethality of the 223 NATO round - it has a lot more to do with how the bullet yaws. That is what inflicts most of the damage, it twists once inside of you, carving out your flesh


This is why we called the bosnians skinnies - they were so skinny that the bullets didn't have time to yaw once they were hit, and instead went right through.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 09:58 PM
link   
The bullet needs sufficient velocity to yaw and expand, the shorter barrell cuts down on this.


My main point is that the switch from 5.56mm to 6.8 will be ass expensive.



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kozzy
The entire change is not worth the money, why not just have a 18 inch barrel and a 5.56mm round instead of switching over, something that will cost BILLIONS of dollars. Also, a 12.5 inch barrell and 6.8x43 will further reduce accuracy and range, the new round is slower which makes it harder to shoot with at a distance.


Remember XM8 is very modular weapon you don't need to exchange whole weapon just some parts when going from 5.56 to 6.8. How much would it cost? 150-200$ per weapon? It is 150 milion $ for whole US army. I don't think it is that much.
The new 6.8mm ammo costs are irrelevant because army want already to manufacture new lighter ammo with plastic cases so why don't switch to 6.8 now?
The next reason is like I said better stoping power of 6.8 so it is better for close combat - you are able to knock down the running guy with one shot.
The 18 inches M16 is similar in performance with 12.5 6.8, but you have problems with m16s length when you are in the car or close quarters. Some troops in Iraq have been complaining about M16 length.



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Stopping power has a lot more to do with the bullet size and velocity. I haven't seen any tests to show it's a better stopper then the 5.56



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kozzy
Stopping power has a lot more to do with the bullet size and velocity. I haven't seen any tests to show it's a better stopper then the 5.56


Of course it has better stopping power. 6.8mm is biger and heavier than 5.56mm don't you think? So it must have better stoping power.



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Stopping power has to do with the size and deepness of the would created, plus whether or not it hits any nerve centers. I know the 6.8 will have more power, but it we can get the same kind of terminal ballistics with the 5.56mm, all the bullet has to do is expand after hitting the target.

Basically my main point is, the M8 doesn't offer that much more capability then the M16. Sure it's shorter and lighter but the entire switch over would cost to much to be worth it.



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
www.hk-usa.com...

Read this page.. it's the comparison page bewteen the XM8 System and the M4/M16 MWS

start reading costs, and barrel lengths, etc.. I'll say it's a helluva difference. XM8 looks like a helluva gun, but the external appearance needs some change, looks like a kids toy.



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
The computer is advanced yet not that compex, it will be extremely difficult to crash, the military would not put a soldier on the battlefield with this weapon only to have it fail at the last minute and then the soldier is screwed.

Shattered OUT...



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 11:56 PM
link   
On a side note, here is something that may well effect the XM8 product....a larger size cartridge: the new Remington 6.8 SPC.
The M-8 Assault Rifles New 6.8mm Cartridge

Good read and quite informative.




seekerof



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   
They should have went with this design:



I always thought the pulse rifle from the movie Aliens was an interesting weapon.

The XM8 is cool nonetheless. :-D

Finding new ways to kill people has never been so profitable (sarcasm)! ...and entertaining.


[Edited on 5-13-2004 by EmbryonicEssence]



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

there has been a fine discussion on this gun a time ago. If anyone has info to add, that's the best place to put it



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Found this thread on round types being discussed within this thread:
5.56mm vs 7.62mm




seekerof



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
lol i c what u mean EmbryonicEssence
but then there'd be the copyright thing or we could just shoot the lawyers



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Well, the X-M8 is basically like the M16, in a short while it will lose the X and just be M8, it has 3 basic configurations, everything a soldier needs, and I think they got rid of all the computerized add ons.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 07:22 PM
link   
From what I have read, I think this weapon will be great for our troops. I am prior military and I can tell you a weapon with more stopping power is definitley needed. The M16 is nice for accuracy, but does not have great stopping power. I also think a 45cal hand gun should also be standard issue. From what I have read from some military sites I visit the 9mm is not the greatest for close combat fighting. They say a 45cal works much better. They say it has more stopping power.



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 01:02 AM
link   
I think the U.S should stick with the M16, its been with them long enough and has proven to be Reliable, Accurate and Great to fire.





posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Does any1 have any direct info on the gun? like calibre, effective rang ect.

I know im asking for alot but I'm realy interested to know.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join