AHC: US military adopts OICW-style rifle
- Thread starter Icarus II
- Start date
longsword14
Banned
It was too unwieldy. Ian took a look at gun made for the program at forgottenweapons.
It looks to me like the weapon was a grenade launcher with a rifle attached not the other way around, it looks like the barrel length for the rifle is not much bigger then a long barrel pistol. So if this import enough to have every man carry one you would probably be better off giving a grande launcher to one man along with a pistol and give the rest better riffles.
I think this is a good example of trying the “all singing and dancing” weapon system. Like you see in the F-35. And is a major over reach.
It may be possible to creat a bull pup rifle that has an under-mounted grenade launcher that does not use a clip, but as soon as you put a clip on the grenade launcher you now have a huge weight issue with the weapon itself as you basically are giving you average soldiers two weapons to carry. Add in they have to carry two load outs of ammo and this is just no practical.
So unless you can find a way to cut the weight of the weapon and it’s ammo in half this concept just is not practical.
I think this is a good example of trying the “all singing and dancing” weapon system. Like you see in the F-35. And is a major over reach.
It may be possible to creat a bull pup rifle that has an under-mounted grenade launcher that does not use a clip, but as soon as you put a clip on the grenade launcher you now have a huge weight issue with the weapon itself as you basically are giving you average soldiers two weapons to carry. Add in they have to carry two load outs of ammo and this is just no practical.
So unless you can find a way to cut the weight of the weapon and it’s ammo in half this concept just is not practical.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
South Korea has adopted something pretty similar, the K11. It has issues, but they haven't cancelled it in 9 years of limited service
Deleted member 1487
Have they actually had to use it in combat? Seems like one of those systems that seems fine in peace time maneuvers, but in actual combat would be a disaster.
TDM
Kicked
They have them in place but it's not a wide spread adoption. Going by Wiki there's been a total of 4,000 produced and now in service. Even then they don't even replace the grenadiers in the squad that contains them
Isn't the basic problem here you have very heavy 5.56mm rifle, with supplementary weapon system looking for a job? So you basically end up with a very heavy assault rifle plus another set of rounds and magazines to carry around and supply?
I know what in theory the 20mm air burst grenade is used for, but in reality how useful is it?
Last edited:
TDM
Kicked
Not sure, but according to the Wiki:
In March 2011 it was announced that 15 out of 39 K11s issued since June 2010 (including 7 out of 20 rifles used by Korean forces in Afghanistan) had shown serious defects and the decision had been made to halt production and modify the design. The defects included: barrel movements during firing, defects in the striking mechanism, condensation forming inside the laser reception lens, and defects in switching from single to automatic fire.[9] South Korea's state procurement agency, The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said it has fixed the defects by modifying the designs and improving the shooting control system and will resume its production.[10]
So even it has been it will have been in tiny numbers and has not done well (although to be fair defects in the specific weapon don't invalidate the concept overall)
Various countries have tried to design an all-in-one weapon system and they all hit the same problems: you end up with a heavy, costly, complex to maintain, complex to use weapon.
Even if engineers manage somehow to find an efficient design that reduce the complexity and production cost (start by getting rid of all the embedded electronics...) you still have a rather cumbersome weapon that wouldn't even provide that much more of an advantage over the existing combination of M16+M203, and thus wouldn't justify the ludicrous cost of re-equipping the entire armed forces.
At best, special forces groups may be the target users, but even then, SF people are pragmatics: they wouldn't use something that is not 100% reliable.
Yeah, airbust grenades are definitely a specialist weapon in my opinion, not something to hand over to every grunt.
Even if engineers manage somehow to find an efficient design that reduce the complexity and production cost (start by getting rid of all the embedded electronics...) you still have a rather cumbersome weapon that wouldn't even provide that much more of an advantage over the existing combination of M16+M203, and thus wouldn't justify the ludicrous cost of re-equipping the entire armed forces.
At best, special forces groups may be the target users, but even then, SF people are pragmatics: they wouldn't use something that is not 100% reliable.
Yeah, airbust grenades are definitely a specialist weapon in my opinion, not something to hand over to every grunt.
Have an earlier creation testing and then adoption of the Case Telescoped ammunition by US Forces results in the much lighter LSAT SAW (in 6.8mm) being light enough (5 kgs) to allow half the fire team to be armed with it
The other half are armed with a CTA Carbine (also in 6.8mm) - but instead of a 25mm 'grenade launcher' like on the OCIW have a 40mm GL with a smart GL sight and eventually smart ammo as the technology improves
The 25mm grenade ammo looked very impressive but if you can do that with a 25mm projectile why not with a 40mm?
The other half are armed with a CTA Carbine (also in 6.8mm) - but instead of a 25mm 'grenade launcher' like on the OCIW have a 40mm GL with a smart GL sight and eventually smart ammo as the technology improves
The 25mm grenade ammo looked very impressive but if you can do that with a 25mm projectile why not with a 40mm?
TDM
Kicked
40mm grenades weigh more than 20-25mm ones, so if you are going to expand their usage out from a couple of squad grenadiers you gong to have to be carrying those rounds.
Also since the OICS. XM25 & K11 all have significantly higher Muzzle velocities than hand held 40mm grenade launchers* it maybe that higher Mv is required for the functionally they are going for (and for range if nothing else). I don't fancy firing a 200-220 m/s 40mm round from a rifle even a heavy one like one of these things
*in terms of Mv these 25mm launchers are firing almost as fast as a Mk19 40mm GL
Curent M320 GLs have an effective range of 150m with the 'basic sights' they are using
Given that the Grenades can be fired out to 400m which is beyond the range of most firefights - then the weapon system with a smart sight and with possibly smarter munitions could potentially be deployed to that distance very accurately - no need to exceed the current 75MPS of the legacy 40mm ammo.
Beyond that range - its get on the radio and call up support weapons or use a 60mm Commando Mortar...firing smart ammo - but thats all beyond a section / Squads remit
Also retaining the 40mm allows for effective smoke and other types of 'munitions'
Maybe in future (or even currently) a small short use UAV or even Kamikazi UAV could be deployed from a 40mm giving the fireteam instant 'over the hill' intel
I do not see that happening from a 25mm weapon
And finally the M320 and similiar is dismountable so depending on the threat or mission some or all carbine carrying members of the squad can have the weapon as the situation warrents with out the GL or if a less leathal response is need the M320 can be deployed as a weapon in its own right using 'less leathal' ammo - rubber bullets and tear gas etc
So basically they don't all need to have it but could if necessary
TDM
Kicked
I think the concern might be that in order to do the whole super accurate air burst thing you might need that higher velocity, flat trajectory. Also 400m might be beyond the range of most firefights in some theatres but it depends on the theatre.
Ultimately though I agree with you the 40mm grenade is a more versatile option in terms of payload and potential effect, and at the moment longer range effective support at that size involves something bigger than hand held. But ultimately I think that's the point these are all compromise points between different parameters.
Last edited:
I am of the opinion that if you are engaging beyond effective small arms range then rather than trying to ensure that the small arms can engage to extended ranges which I fear places compromises that detract from their true roll - that is the shorter range fire fight where they should excell and dominate - other weapons that excell at that greater range are used instead.
For example I mentioned the 60mm Mortar - the XM25 (just the 25mm rifle part) is over 6 kgs (and I dont think that includes ammo) - the 60mm Hirtenberger M6C-210 for example is just over 5 kgs and yes I know the ammo is much heavier than 25mm x 40 but it is far more able to dominate a given firefight beyond small arms range than the OCIW and again with the improving smart muntions and sighting systems.
So if you are potentionally going to be exchanging insults at 500-1600 meters - the unit should take a 60mm mortar
And a radio to call in 'the song of my people'
TDM
Kicked
well like I said the Mv might not be just about effective range.
Right but that weapon itself is a compromise in other directions. It's mobile while being carried about, but not very mobile while being deployed. And yeah OK it says effective range 1500m But unless you going to stay there all day chucking lots of rounds down range it's not very accurate (and if you are relying on volume of fire to have your desired effect as you say those 60mm morter bombs aren't light)!
Basically that is a light* but crap** 60mm morter, so since you aim this thing by basically either propping the barrel up in place or holding it manually in place there's going to be no smart mutations / sighting systems (which would be more weight anyway)
*i.e there's a reason why the M224 is 40lbs+ in one piece
**better than no mortar of course!
well yes that solves most issues of course! (or of course a line to some friendly in range chaps with 81mm mortars, or a nice howitzer)
Last edited:
One idea is that the rifle part uses a mag like the P-90, you still have the bullpup in 25mm x 40.
That would require a change in the ammo for the rifle.
That would require a change in the ammo for the rifle.
I just picked a modern version of the British 51mm Mortar (which to your point they did replace with a heavier version of the Hirtenberger with all the bells and whistles - M6(H)-895 which is nearly 4 times the weight at 20kgs!) which the British had used for decades and the 2" before that
Modern Electronics is very light - my i8 phone for example is <.2 kg how heavy would a modern robust computer smart sight have to be?
Anyway we digress
And yes other firefight ending in victory for our boys support weapon systems are available
TDM
Kicked
I don't think its the electronics that's necessarily the heavy bit, but the site/optics. I mean you can already do timed air burst with mortars, but you are going to lose some functionally in comparison to a flat trajectory projectile. No punching one of these through a boarded up window your targets are firing through loophole in, and then setting it off to clear the room behind it!
this is the site on the M223 i mentioned earlier at 1 kg it's not massively heavy by any stretch of the imagination (well beyond the fact that every kg is a kg that has to be carried by someone in the squad of course). The thing is that's a sight designed to be used on a mortar that has an actual stable firing position (ie. stand, plate etc), not one that you are manually holding in place or propping up against a handy wall / sand bag like the lightweight Hirtenburger (I really don't fancy trying to do that kind of hyper accurate targeting and destination in that scenario)
But as you mentioned earlier when it comes to weight it's the bombs they are the killer, we're talking what 1-1.5kg + each
Last edited:
Ive noted in much of the war porn I have been watching for the last 10 years or so that many fire fights are ended only when a heavier weapon such as a Javalin or a 60mm mortar or heavier support elements (Artillery, Airstrike, Apache) are employed
So I have concluded that sometimes the weight is necessary
That being said weight has become an increasing burden - I read a few years back a case detailing a US Airborne Platoon - it detailed the equipment each man carried and then the minimum equipment that the unit had to take with it on a patrol or a morning door kicking mission.
Now spread among 44 blokes this was a lot but it turned out that due to various reasons* the platoon was often deploying with as few as just 20 men and that extra kit was still required but now spread about far fewer men
*Company commander details a squad for additional tasking
Sickness
Leave
Wounded or KIA
Compulsary Health and Safety in the work place course
My knees hurt just thinking about it
Take those modern electronics, ad a huge battery so the soldier doesnt have to recharge every 8 hours, then make them shock, dirt, water, interference etc resistant and suddenly they're not that light any more.