Objective Individual Combat Weapon

03 April 2003, 15:59

<El Viejo>

I wonder if any of these are being deployed in the war?
Objective Individual Combat Weapon

[ 04-03-2003, 07:01: Message edited by: El Viejo ]

03 April 2003, 16:55

XWind

Wow, what a peashooter! Unfortuneately it seems they won't be field ready until 2009.

Cheers,
XWind

03 April 2003, 17:38

Wstrnhuntr

Wow! The way things are going, soon tanks will become as obsolete as battleships and the "grunts" will become the main means of "assault" on the ground.

An infantry batallion equipped with them, stingers, a 50 cal or two and a cell phone to call in airstrikes can overcome anything.

03 April 2003, 18:11

<KBGuns>

What an obsenity. [Roll Eyes]

Kristofer

03 April 2003, 19:15

dan belisle

Cool! I want one. - dan

03 April 2003, 20:41

<KBGuns>

So let me get this strait. We move from M16s to M4s becasue they are lighter and handier then the M16. The M16 being the unwieldly contrapion it is. But their are problems, the M4 gives up too much velocity with its shorter them M16 barrel. So the next step is ovious, a gun the size and weight of a car door, with an even shorter .223 barrel. What an inprovement! [Roll Eyes]

Kristofer

[ 04-03-2003, 11:44: Message edited by: KBGuns ]

04 April 2003, 05:04

Rock8296

the new 223 rounds move at high velocty and energy, eliminating the need for a longer barrel

04 April 2003, 05:35

Mark G

quote:
Originally posted by Rock8296:
the new 223 rounds move at high velocty and energy, eliminating the need for a longer barrel

No the short barrel on the .223 turns the 3400fps varmint gun, into a 2800fps short range varmint gun. [Roll Eyes]

04 April 2003, 07:04

BECoole

They don't have them working.
Jim Sullivan says they will never work and I agree with the reasons he gives.

04 April 2003, 13:57

<KBGuns>

quote:
Originally posted by Rock8296:
the new 223 rounds move at high velocty and energy, eliminating the need for a longer barrel

Bullshit.

Kristofer

04 April 2003, 15:44

<El Viejo>

Only half of the squad will be armed with these. The 5.56mm is realy a short range sub machine gun application (after a certain sense).

Alliance Techsystems (ATK) has the contract on the smart bullets, at $25.00 per shot.

What if the Marines had been armed with these when they were pinned down by the Iraqis shooting from the cover of buildings?

04 April 2003, 18:49

cas

They haven't got the funds/supply to train right with straight .223 NOW... so what then.. $12K gun and $25 shells. Right...

Bullshit? Physics and facts don't matter on XBox I guess.

05 April 2003, 17:00

<KBGuns>

quote:
Originally posted by cas:
They haven't got the funds/supply to train right with straight .223 NOW... so what then.. $12K gun and $25 shells. Right...

Bullshit? Physics and facts don't matter on XBox I guess.

Shoot SS109 out of a 14.5 barrel, you get about 2850fps. Now fire it thru a 20 inch barrel and you get 3100fps. Now fire thur a 12 or so inch barrel and its gonna go faster then either the 14.5inch or 20inch barrel? I dont think so.

Energy comes from velocity and mass. Yes the 5.56NATO is a high velocity/energy round, but it requires a minimum of barrel lenght to acheive it. From a 4inch barrel it would be neither high velocity or high energy, where as from a 20inch barrel it is. The need for a long barrel is clear.

So how do physics work? Explain to me in you less-is-more new math how you plan to get 3100fps out of a 12inch barrel with a ss109 projectile and stay within presure. [Roll Eyes]

Kristofer

[ 04-05-2003, 08:10: Message edited by: KBGuns ]

05 April 2003, 19:46

Wstrnhuntr

Seems to me that what our military really NEEDS at this point is some cross training with some of our metropolitan SWAT teams and some tear gas grenade launchers so they can conduct "the politically correct war" from house to house.

06 April 2003, 17:31

Major Caliber

it's only a 10" barrel! The key to 5.56mm is velocity, something it doesn't have with less than an 18" barrel.

09 April 2003, 16:32

<El Viejo>

quote:
Originally posted by cas:
They haven't got the funds/supply to train right with straight .223 NOW... so what then.. $12K gun and $25 shells. Right...

.

What if you consider them as a replacement for a mortar round or a 37mm? Although the range is classified, estimates are out to 500 yds. As far as price, the correct analysis would be cost/ benefit. How much does a 50cal round cost the military? If they use 50 rounds to take out a sniper nest, is it cost effective vs one $25 shot? How much does a mortar round cost, or a SMAW missle?

Don't forget economies of scale. As more of these rounds are produced, the cost will fall.

As for the comment about them not working, I don't have a clue, but someone seems to think that they will. If they do, the bad guys are in more trouble than they are in now.

09 April 2003, 17:39

markus

Isn't H&K a german company? I see most of the pictures of troops shooting it are german troops.

I didn't think a German company would be getting very many US contracts anytime soon.

10 April 2003, 09:48

Tony Williams

The 20mm round used in the OICW is designed to have an effective range of 1,000m.

The 5.56mm element of the gun is based on the German HK G36, which is also being explored as the next US rifle under the XM-8 programme.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum

09 April 2003, 22:02

Pete E

Is this not just an updated version of the M16/M203 concept? Personally I would like to see more use made of the 2"/60mm mortar road and maybe spend the time and money on some hi-tech shells for this...

10 April 2003, 00:42

Tony Williams

quote:
Originally posted by Pete E:
Is this not just an updated version of the M16/M203 concept?

VERY updated, in that the key element of the design (and the reason for the high cost) is the rangefinder/ballistic computer/electronic fuze setter which in combination indicates to the firer where to aim to get the shells just above the target, and sets the fuzes to detonate when they get there. It can therefore take out people hiding behind cover or even in trenches.

Exactly the same principle is used in the 25mm OCSW which is intended to replace the 40mm AGLs and many of the .50 M2HBs. Of course, similar technology is now being applied to the 40mm AGLs...

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum

10 April 2003, 00:51

Jiri

Don't put it to the water or mud [Big Grin]

Looks bulky . . .

10 April 2003, 03:05

Tony Williams

quote:
Originally posted by Jiri:
Don't put it to the water or mud

I didn't claim it would work - I just said what it was designed to do [Wink]

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum