U.S. Army Unveils 'Revolutionary' XM25 Rifle in Afghanistan

[Guest Paniolo Cowboy SASS #75875]

Off Topic topic ...

 

U.S. Army Unveils 'Revolutionary' XM25 Rifle in Afghanistan

 

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/24/...tan/?test=faces

 

 

"The XM25, designed by Minnesota's Alliant Techsystems, has been in development for about seven years and the first prototypes have been doled out to combat units in Afghanistan this month. The 12-pound, 29-inch system, which costs up to $35,000 per unit, is so sophisticated that soldiers are proficient users literally within minutes." (per U.S. Army)

 

In my opinion, at 12 pounds this new rifle has a lot of heft to it compared to the M16 or even the M14. It is considered a "weapon system."

 

 

[Marauder SASS #13056]

Very interesting!

[Jack Houston # 35508]

Don't see what caliber it is!

Hope it's not just another .22 !!

[Guest Paniolo Cowboy SASS #75875]

The XM25 Rifle in action ...

 

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4438880/xm-25-rifle-in-action

 

According to this, close is not only for horse shoes and hand grenades anymore ....

this weapon has "air burst" capabilities.

[Grayrock, SASS #64093]

a high-tech rifle that can be programmed so that its 25-mm. ammunition detonates either in front of or behind a target,

 

25mm- isn't that about a 1.00 caliber?

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

Read the story closely....25mm. Damn, I sure hate to lose or break one of these. Kinda expensive

[pony racer # 39210]

If you read the stories and watch the various videos this is about giving the infantry a new man portable weapon system that mimics the good parts of a 40mm Mk-19 but stays one man portable and has better targeting and direction capabilities.

 

It is not built to replace the battle rifle.

 

But i am sure would be a welcomed addition to our modern infantry units when they are not being supported be heavy weapon capable units.

[Mordis]

Hmm apon watching the video i didnt see any other place to insert a magazine for a small caliber cartridge. It makes me wonder if it will only be firing the 25mm shell or if this is just the test phase of HE component.

[Slowhand Bob, 24229]

At $35,000 per unit for the govt, I figure this bad boy would cost an individual at least $2,000 and that is out of my budget for this Christmas. I really like the non lethal concerns that are being addressed here, now we can fight wars without hurting anyone so that the enemy can live to plant ieds another day!

[Adirondack Jack, SASS #53440]

It's designed to be a "one per squad" weapon to take the place of mortar fire, and do so much more intelligently.

 

Enemy shoots at ya from behind a wall several hundred yards distant, ya lazer range him, program the shell to go off 3 feet behind the wall, and let er rip. In the end, it's like having a guy run up and toss in a grenade, but without the risks to the operator.

[White Buffalo Chip, SASS #64713]

So where does the bayonet fit??

 

WBC

[Irish Red OToole, #48939]

Looks pretty interesting. A little pricey but I'd lug one around a battlefield.

[Solo_Sam]

This is interesting because I had actually thought this project was dead, and I'm surprised to see it made it all the way to production.

 

The XM25 started off as the OICW, which had an attachable 5.56mm carbine and the grenade launcher on top. I remember reading about it for the first time in 1998 or so. Over the years it changed acronyms a few times and eventually they just gave up on the idea of attaching the carbine. The carbine is now called the XM8 and is in developmental limbo. I've heard the XM8 is dead, but they also recently announced trials for an M4 replacement carbine so you never know...

 

12 pounds is pretty heavy, but that's why its a one-per-squad weapon. On paper, each squad already includes two grenadiers who use 40mm underbarrel grenade launchers. Whether they add to this or swap one 40mm for the XM25, I do not know. In Iraq the 40mm's were gathering dust because combat was increasingly infrequent and people were having crocodile tears about collateral damage. In Afghanistan the situation is much different, and I say give each squad all three grenade launchers and let them go to town.

 

I'd like to add that I am also thankful that Mr. Gates places a higher priority on buying weapons that are immediately useful to the infantryman in the present conflict, rather than buying high-ticket air superiority fighters for a hypothetical future conflict (which drones have already rendered obsolete).

 

-Solo Sam

[Steel-eye Steve SASS #40674]

This is interesting because I had actually thought this project was dead, and I'm surprised to see it made it all the way to production.

 

The XM25 started off as the OICW, which had an attachable 5.56mm carbine and the grenade launcher on top. I remember reading about it for the first time in 1998 or so. Over the years it changed acronyms a few times and eventually they just gave up on the idea of attaching the carbine. The carbine is now called the XM8 and is in developmental limbo. I've heard the XM8 is dead, but they also recently announced trials for an M4 replacement carbine so you never know...

 

12 pounds is pretty heavy, but that's why its a one-per-squad weapon. On paper, each squad already includes two grenadiers who use 40mm underbarrel grenade launchers. Whether they add to this or swap one 40mm for the XM25, I do not know. In Iraq the 40mm's were gathering dust because combat was increasingly infrequent and people were having crocodile tears about collateral damage. In Afghanistan the situation is much different, and I say give each squad all three grenade launchers and let them go to town.

 

I'd like to add that I am also thankful that Mr. Gates places a higher priority on buying weapons that are immediately useful to the infantryman in the present conflict, rather than buying high-ticket air superiority fighters for a hypothetical future conflict (which drones have already rendered obsolete).

 

-Solo Sam

SS that is my recollection also, though it was my understanding that recently the XM8 did well in a sand test, though it was my understanding that it had more to do with the fact that the XM8's magazines were brand new and all the other entrants used standard, already issued, GI m16 magazines. It was my understanding the XM8's furniture had serious durability issues and that is why it's in limbo. If they were to adopt a new rifle I wouldn't be surprised if it would be based on the FN SCAR or HK416 systems.

[Captain Lee Bishop]

I’ve shot a few of the predecessor rifles to this design, and other than the XM-8 they were heavy as heck. The Army has been for years pressing for heavier things for soldiers to carry while saying it’s more ergonomic so that makes it okay. I don’t care how well a pack sits on your back, if it weights twice as much, it’s going to suck no matter how it fits. Same thing with the helmets. Pick up a Kevlar in one hand and an old M-1 steel pot in the other and see the difference.

As for the weapon itself, they don’t take into account how badly “Joe” can screw stuff up. There’s a reason weapons today at best have simple night vision and dot sights. Even those often get schwacked and need to be replaced. Expensive optics on something like that? I promise you not EVERY soldier will wind up with one in such a case. As for the launcher though, it’s a good weapon, I watched one being tested. It’ll likely replace the M203 eventually.

Also, note the soldier in the photo is wearing a multi-cam uniform. It’s not the issue “ACU’ digital pattern, but certain units are now fielding this commercial camo pattern. I’ve seen Stryker crews rolling down I-5 near Fort Lewis wearing that stuff now.

[Lone Dog, SASS #20401]

How many 203s or ancient tech 79s could be had for that much moolah?

That whiz-bang programmable ammo and launcher ain't ever gonna hold up in actual combat. Most esp in a sandbox. We also don't need a new rifle. Re-stocked M-14s which are already being fielded will suffice.

 

Can you say boon-doggle?

[Guest Pukin Dog, SASS#55356-Life]

Looks to be a good weapon system to me.

 

1) No extensive training needed to use

2) Not every soldier is issued one, its a one weapon system per platoon eh? Give it to the smartest most competent man and it will work out great.

3) After 7 years, I'm sure they tested it in the sand, mud, cold, heat etc.

 

I'm interested about how they lock it down if it falls into enemy hands. Does the weapon have to be "logged into" for it to work? There must be a method to disable it (or at least the computation part of the weapon) if inevitably this happens.