- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
NS
Thought you were going to give me a call. No worries. PM if you need my number
H
Thought you were going to give me a call. No worries. PM if you need my number
H
Laser distance air-bursting bullets? What do you think?
- Thread starter NSDreamer
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
NavyShooter said:
Heh without a doubt this is a thread derailment, but in the interest of science I'll admit I learned alot today!
The techniques for gripping/holding the rifle though I think is what I found the most 'revealing'.
-Most important thing I took away though was probably your phone number to call again for another lesson though!- (edit for truth!)
NS-Dreamer
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Points
- 1,120
Old and Tired said:
Which NS.....NavyShooter or NSDreamer???
???
NS
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
You Brad.
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Points
- 1,120
Ah,
Oops....fail! Sorry O&T!!
Now I recognize the face from the avatar!
I plan to do it again....if that's any consolation!
Oops....fail! Sorry O&T!!
Now I recognize the face from the avatar!
I plan to do it again....if that's any consolation!
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Points
- 1,120
From the linked article:
"The Army wants to buy 36 more XM-25s -- which run about $35,000 each -- but the buy isn't fully funded. And the air bursting ammunition costs about $1,000 per round, but Tamilio claims that full rate production will drop the price to $35 per round."
Sounds spendy...
"The Army wants to buy 36 more XM-25s -- which run about $35,000 each -- but the buy isn't fully funded. And the air bursting ammunition costs about $1,000 per round, but Tamilio claims that full rate production will drop the price to $35 per round."
Sounds spendy...
SOES_vet
Jr. Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
NavyShooter said:
Indeed! Yeah, that was what I thought as well. Then again a JDAM is pretty pricey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Direct_Attack_Munition
for an individual weapon 35K is steep but might very well be worth it. As for the $1,000 a round ammo... Yeah they need to work on that!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
is the $35K for the hand-made units? What would it be when/if it enters full production runs? ($1k for hand-made rounds; $35/rd when in full production)
I say it is "priceless" if it can cut the time of an engagement by a fraction and save both fr and non-combatants lives and given (assumption) that it would obviously be a limited issue wpn (won't speculate on which units or how many per Coy/Bn)
my $0.02 CAD ( which is now above par btw)
Chimo!
I say it is "priceless" if it can cut the time of an engagement by a fraction and save both fr and non-combatants lives and given (assumption) that it would obviously be a limited issue wpn (won't speculate on which units or how many per Coy/Bn)
my $0.02 CAD ( which is now above par btw)
Chimo!
A Super-Weapon That Works
February 10, 2011
Article Link
Three months after the first five XM-25 grenade launchers arrived in Afghanistan, and after only 55 25mm rounds were fired in combat, the troops don't want to give these new weapons up. The XM-25s work as advertised, firing "smart rounds" that explode over the heads of Taliban hiding behind rocks or walls, or hiding in a cave or room. Enemy machine-guns have been quickly knocked out of action and ambushes quickly disrupted with a few 25mm shells. Encounters that might go on for 15 minutes or longer, as U.S. troops exchange fire with hidden Taliban, end in minutes after a few 25mm, computer controlled, rounds are fired from the XM-25. While American infantry love gadgets, they are very eager about electronics that help them in combat. The XM-25 is all that, and the troops want more. In response, the U.S. Army decided to let the paratroopers keep the five XM-25s, and to speed up construction of an additional 36. The word has gotten around in Afghanistan, and every combat unit there is asking for XM-25s. Although warned to keep operational details off public Internet forums, XM-25 users are telling stories to other combat troops of a wonder-weapon that actually works.
All this comes after years of testing and debating whether the XM-25 was ready for a combat test. Finally, three months ago, after yet another year of testing and tinkering, the U.S. Army finally sent five of its high-tech, but long delayed, XM-25 grenade launchers to Afghanistan. This was supposed to happen in 2008, but testing kept revealing things that needed to be tweaked. The first troops to get the initial five XM-25s were paratroopers. It was always the plan that another 36 would quickly follow if there were no problems with the first five.
The years of testing and tweaking, in response to troop feedback, paid off. Even the current batch of users had suggestions for improvements, and some of these are being incorporated the next 36 being built. The final production model will have more changes, and there is growing pressure to start mass production earlier than 2013. The troops also asked for a longer range (700-1000 meters) round, but this would probably require some major engineering and testing. But such longer ranges are required in a place like Afghanistan, where there's a lot of open terrain, surrounded by hills and places for hostile gunmen to fire from. Yet even with the current model, it's obvious that the XM-25 gives the troops something they need, and now want. The XM-25 won't win the war by itself, but it will make life much for precarious for Taliban fighters.
More on link
February 10, 2011
Article Link
Three months after the first five XM-25 grenade launchers arrived in Afghanistan, and after only 55 25mm rounds were fired in combat, the troops don't want to give these new weapons up. The XM-25s work as advertised, firing "smart rounds" that explode over the heads of Taliban hiding behind rocks or walls, or hiding in a cave or room. Enemy machine-guns have been quickly knocked out of action and ambushes quickly disrupted with a few 25mm shells. Encounters that might go on for 15 minutes or longer, as U.S. troops exchange fire with hidden Taliban, end in minutes after a few 25mm, computer controlled, rounds are fired from the XM-25. While American infantry love gadgets, they are very eager about electronics that help them in combat. The XM-25 is all that, and the troops want more. In response, the U.S. Army decided to let the paratroopers keep the five XM-25s, and to speed up construction of an additional 36. The word has gotten around in Afghanistan, and every combat unit there is asking for XM-25s. Although warned to keep operational details off public Internet forums, XM-25 users are telling stories to other combat troops of a wonder-weapon that actually works.
All this comes after years of testing and debating whether the XM-25 was ready for a combat test. Finally, three months ago, after yet another year of testing and tinkering, the U.S. Army finally sent five of its high-tech, but long delayed, XM-25 grenade launchers to Afghanistan. This was supposed to happen in 2008, but testing kept revealing things that needed to be tweaked. The first troops to get the initial five XM-25s were paratroopers. It was always the plan that another 36 would quickly follow if there were no problems with the first five.
The years of testing and tweaking, in response to troop feedback, paid off. Even the current batch of users had suggestions for improvements, and some of these are being incorporated the next 36 being built. The final production model will have more changes, and there is growing pressure to start mass production earlier than 2013. The troops also asked for a longer range (700-1000 meters) round, but this would probably require some major engineering and testing. But such longer ranges are required in a place like Afghanistan, where there's a lot of open terrain, surrounded by hills and places for hostile gunmen to fire from. Yet even with the current model, it's obvious that the XM-25 gives the troops something they need, and now want. The XM-25 won't win the war by itself, but it will make life much for precarious for Taliban fighters.
More on link
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 4,806
- Points
- 1,260
I am not surprised to hear this weapon is impressing its users. The ability to kill around corners at hundreds of meters is not something that could previously be integrated to the section level.GAP said:
Governments have invested a lot into such systems that can operate independent of vehicles (The XM-307 ACSW, XM-29 OICW and XM-25 IAWS in the US, the K-11 in Korea, and even the CASW here in Canada). All the while, we seem to have forgotten about mounting this capability in to vehicles with the capacity to carry more rounds and/or larger/more-powerful rounds. If the technology is mature enough for man-portable systems, I don’t understand why it is not already operational in mounted systems.
There have been plenty of firefights where LAV cannon fire was able to suppress our enemy to the point that he remained behind walls, earth berms and other obstacles - but the enemy was not fixed and had the freedom to manoeuvre or escape unobserved and safe from our fire. If our LAVs had the ability to put air-bursting rounds over those walls, I am confident we would have been inflicting greater casualties on our enemies while sustaining fewer casualties of our own and bringing a quicker victorious end to our firefights.
- Reaction score
- 36
- Points
- 560
I'm not sure what the hitch is, 35mm AHEAD rounds have this sort of capability, so shrink wrapping into a 25mm package seems to be a no brainer, unless the shock of high velocity fire renders the electronics of the bursting munition useless; or the round passes through the barrel too fast for the arming signal to program the round...
- Reaction score
- 15,129
- Points
- 1,160
It lacks a bayonet mount, enough said!
All this stuff just keeps reminding me of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_d%27Infanterie_de_37_mod%C3%A8le_1916_TRP
All this stuff just keeps reminding me of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_d%27Infanterie_de_37_mod%C3%A8le_1916_TRP
- Reaction score
- 36
- Points
- 560
The French Army breifly joined the craze with their PAPOP G-II ( PolyArme POlyProjectile). The first iteration was the most awkward and user unfriendly thing imaginable, a sort of 21rst century Chauchat, and the second iteration was only a bit better. Current information is lacking, I think it probably faded into the sunset:
http://www.international.gc.ca/arms-armes/isrop-prisi/research-recherche/nonproliferation/declerq1999/section14.aspx?lang=eng
http://defenceforumindia.com/showthread.php?t=3796&page=1
http://fdra.blogspot.com/2010/05/armamento-individual-futuro-proyecto.html (in Spanish, but good illustrations. The version two looks like it has a "squad support" version which seems to have a much larger grenade magazine. See last picture and check the translation.)
For the same overall level of effort I still think a very lightweight AGL combined with programmable fuses and an advanced CLASS type sight would be a much better combination. 30 and 35mm weapons fitting the bill are produced by Russia and China, and the advanced amunition and sight system is well within our own capabilities to produce.
http://www.international.gc.ca/arms-armes/isrop-prisi/research-recherche/nonproliferation/declerq1999/section14.aspx?lang=eng
http://defenceforumindia.com/showthread.php?t=3796&page=1
http://fdra.blogspot.com/2010/05/armamento-individual-futuro-proyecto.html (in Spanish, but good illustrations. The version two looks like it has a "squad support" version which seems to have a much larger grenade magazine. See last picture and check the translation.)
For the same overall level of effort I still think a very lightweight AGL combined with programmable fuses and an advanced CLASS type sight would be a much better combination. 30 and 35mm weapons fitting the bill are produced by Russia and China, and the advanced amunition and sight system is well within our own capabilities to produce.
D
dinicthus
Guest
Why not just put a dialed-in range burst thing on the 40mm grenade? How hard would it be to use a laser rangefinder, add three feet, turn a collar or dial on a 40, then put it in the M203/M79?
I realize it wouldn't yield that "by golly, I sure did that in a fraction of a second" satisfaction that 20k$ weapon systems bring, but, really, it would be simple, integrate easily into existing kit, and pack a heck of a lot bigger wallop than a 25mm grenade.
If the extra five seconds to acquire a range plus two to three extra seconds to spin the dial or collar on the 40 round to the right distance/timer is just way too long, then there are other concerns than not being able to use the wonder toy.
The more stuff you have done by electronics that you could have done by hand, the faster it CAN be, but I bet that 20 grand could be put to far better use.
Too much electronicification just seems overly expensive, overly complex, and overly prone to malfunction, much to the profit of the expensive toy manufacturers.
With a squad member turning the dials on your 40 rounds and handing them to you, the time loss after the initial distance acquisition for your overall 40mm rate of fire vanishes.
Which leaves increased range as the main point of attraction for the 25mm ridiculotron, I'm guessing. Perhaps having longer-barrel M79s would add some range without a great deal of expense in the brain sweat department?
KISS.
I realize it wouldn't yield that "by golly, I sure did that in a fraction of a second" satisfaction that 20k$ weapon systems bring, but, really, it would be simple, integrate easily into existing kit, and pack a heck of a lot bigger wallop than a 25mm grenade.
If the extra five seconds to acquire a range plus two to three extra seconds to spin the dial or collar on the 40 round to the right distance/timer is just way too long, then there are other concerns than not being able to use the wonder toy.
The more stuff you have done by electronics that you could have done by hand, the faster it CAN be, but I bet that 20 grand could be put to far better use.
Too much electronicification just seems overly expensive, overly complex, and overly prone to malfunction, much to the profit of the expensive toy manufacturers.
With a squad member turning the dials on your 40 rounds and handing them to you, the time loss after the initial distance acquisition for your overall 40mm rate of fire vanishes.
Which leaves increased range as the main point of attraction for the 25mm ridiculotron, I'm guessing. Perhaps having longer-barrel M79s would add some range without a great deal of expense in the brain sweat department?
KISS.
- Reaction score
- 15
- Points
- 430
dinicthus said:
The 40 mm grenade is a small enough package at the delivery end of the trajectory as it is. Every addition of components would take away from the projectile's payload. It's easy to propose additional bits and pieces, but if the resulting grenade can't do its primary job on impact, it's all a wasted effort.
dinicthus said:
This suggests you see making the 40 mm grenade launcher a crew served weapon. Your concerns over "time lost" doesn't address the lost capability resulting from doubling the manpower requirement, a much more critical resource in an infantry section or platoon. Now you are affecting a whole lot more than just adding a few seconds to firing a grenade launcher. With six M203s in an infantry platoon, should we be ready to "lose" six riflemen to the role of assistant grenade launcher?
dinicthus said:
Uh, yeah.
D
dinicthus
Guest
No, not suggesting making it a crew-served weapon. I'm stating that for a situation where you felt the need to fire a lot of rounds in a short time, that had selectable burst timers, then one person could be setting the distance things while the other fires them. In this situation, I imagined that the enemy would be behind some wall, thus not providing a direct-fire threat, so the extra man on our side would not be able to provide any effective direct fire back at the enemy either, so instead of the 40mm guy doing everything, while the squad waited, a squad mate could help out, but it would not, by any means, be a full-time requirement.
For the most part, the time/distance rounds would not be needed or used. I understand that adding a timer to the round would diminish its payload, but this is a suggested alternative to an entire extra weapon system that has a great deal of cost and complexity in comparison. Several rounds of tmed burst 40mm ammo added to an otherwise unmodified 40mm system would not carry anywhere near the cost in personnel, weight, or money that the 25mm system would.
But, then, it might not be as effective, either. That is, assuming that the 25mm system had close to 100 percent up-time.
For the most part, the time/distance rounds would not be needed or used. I understand that adding a timer to the round would diminish its payload, but this is a suggested alternative to an entire extra weapon system that has a great deal of cost and complexity in comparison. Several rounds of tmed burst 40mm ammo added to an otherwise unmodified 40mm system would not carry anywhere near the cost in personnel, weight, or money that the 25mm system would.
But, then, it might not be as effective, either. That is, assuming that the 25mm system had close to 100 percent up-time.
Similar threads
