Just saw a mention on the tube about a new assault rifle (XM-8). From
what was shown it looks like a very nice gun with some unusual features in an
experimental weapon. Those features would be: light weight (6 lb was
mentioned), simple to maintain (cleaned in 30% of the time of an M16 or M4),
and simple to operate.
I find it kind of amusing that people are still arguing about why weapon
systems change. It's simple really. They change because the new system does
something the old system doesn't even if the old system does some things
better than the old system. This is true in everything regarding technology
really, from guns to tanks to computers to TV's. VERY rarely does a weapon
system fill it's role so well that we don't even bother looking for a
replacement (ie M2 Browning.50 cal).
Just a quick list of features in small arms that led to a replacement being
introduced (not intended to be all-inclusive):
M1 Garand - semi-auto only, low magazine capacity, wood stock, no quick
easy way to unload it, kicks like a mother when fired, HEAVY for a personal
weapon.
M14 - basically a Garand with a box magazine answering the unloading
problem and the magazine capacity and IIRC the semi-auto problem.
M16 - jams, needs constant cleaning, etc.
Whether people want to admit these are failings of a given weapon is
entirely up to them, but the tactical trend over the last 50+ years can
be summed up as "He who can apply the most firepower wins the engagement", and
I don't think anyone can argue that at typical engagement ranges an M4 can
apply far more firepower than an M1 Garand.
JMO, it's worth what you paid for it.
Bill
> Bill Brush wrote:
Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what *you* were watching this evening. ;-D
Mk
Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what *you* were watching this evening. ;-D
Mk
Take that sandwich out yer pie hole magot!.........)
I admit it, I was watching Mail Call. R. Lee is just a little
over-the-top, but it's interesting to see all the stuff they trot
through
the show. This XM-8 was interesting because it seemed to lack I lot of
the "Gee Whiz cool" techno gadget stuff, unlike the "Land Warrior" system but
from what they showed it's an impressive weapon. Being able to take one weapon
and use it as a CQB carbine, Assault Rilfe, or SAW depending on what you put
on it, is remarkable. The inclusion of iron sights in addition to the IR laser
sights also showed remarkable forethought.
I'd be interested to hear what the grunts who have tested these actually think
of them (paging Mr.Atkinson).
For myself, I'd love to have one tucked away for home defense. :-)
Bill
Not all that remarkable. Steyr came up with a similar system several years ago
when they brought out the AUG.
[quoted original message omitted]
> --- Bill Brush <bbrush@unlnotes.unl.edu> wrote:
FYI, this is also the direct fire portion of the OIWS.
J
I also think that the Stoner system from the late 70s early 80s was a modular
weapon system.
I'd be more accurate, but my books are at home.:P
J
John K. Lerchey Computer and Network Security Coordinator Computing Services
Carnegie Mellon University
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Robert Eldridge wrote:
> Not all that remarkable. Steyr came up with a similar system several
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 09:14:05 -0500, Bill Brush <bbrush@unlnotes.unl.edu>
wrote:
> I'd be interested to hear what the grunts who have tested these
> At 7:33 AM +0200 9/28/04, John Atkinson wrote:
As I understand them, much of the basic shooty bits are G36K type components
that are fairly well tested and developed as most H&K production type items
are.
> wait to get my hands on one. Not terribly likely here in 1st AD.
Did you transfer?