M16A2 To be replaced "NO Good" -1 reply

Please wait...

Ensign Riles Advanced Member

No! I'm Spamacus!

426,537 XP

17th June 2003

0 Uploads

39,480 Posts

1 Threads

#261 16 years ago

Having the OICW become the standard infantry issued weapon wouldn't be a good idea. I doubt they could bring down the cost anytime soon and I couldn't trust all those parts or electronics out in the field. Simplicity is generally the key to a durable weapon. AK-47 is a perfect example.




Σl.Ðestructo

People say I post too much

50 XP

12th February 2004

0 Uploads

1,449 Posts

0 Threads

#262 16 years ago

i agree a reliable weapon is better then the techie ones, like the oicw would cost so much they could only afford to give one per 5 or six soldiers, and why need electronics to make them aim better? what is training for? if they cant shoot straight why don't they just go back to the range and Practice?




[MsK*]MastaH'Killa

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

8th December 2003

0 Uploads

9 Posts

0 Threads

#263 16 years ago

IMHO, the army should replace the m16s with m4's and XM-8's, then give certain SF platoons the XM29, for like experimental purposes just my 5 cents :)




indecisive

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

6th August 2004

0 Uploads

4 Posts

0 Threads

#264 16 years ago

Usually what happens is the army will choose certain units to test things out like the land warrior systems. As far as the Army getting rid of the m16.. they have been doing that for a while anyway. In my last two units i have used the M4 with all the cool attachments like m68 and acogs.. peq2 infared laser device..harris bipod legs.. and surefire lights.. 82nd and most rapid deploy units have been using the m4 for awhile. people that have been using the m16 for the most part until just recently havent really needed anything new. the marines have been using the m16a4 for a while and i dont believe they will change anytime soon. As for talking about the OICW and whatever else.. i dont see them being implemented in large scale anytime soon.. i would almost prefer something on the 7.62 range opposed to another 5.56..




{SDK}Sgt Deadeye

Deadeye6 on BF2

50 XP

23rd May 2003

0 Uploads

42 Posts

0 Threads

#265 16 years ago

FIrst off to adress the 5.56 issue the army wants to begin using it over the 7.62 because if an enemy is hit by a 7.62 round it tends to kill them and the other enemy dont tend to care a bit, but if you use a 5.56 round and hit and enemy and they begin to scream in pain the other enemy troops will begin to panick and hopefully run away from fear. Really what would you rather have 3 dead quite guys or 3 wounded screaming in pain guys think about that.

Next the cost of the XM8 is going to be cheaper then the M4A1 and M16.

They have also made a weapon like the AK 47 you can submerge it in water give it a quick shake and fire.it can be buried in sand and all it needs is a quick shake and bang it fires.

It also has 5 different modes 1.Assault Rifle 2.Close Quartes SMG 3.Assault Rifle with new Side Loading Grenade Launcer 4.it can even be made into a SAW by replacing barrel and adding a 100 round mag 5.My favorite the Sharpshooter model These can all be changed in under 20 minutes in the middle of battle without any tools

It is also lighter then the M16, it can be fully auto. One of its biggest features that no other gun has is it is ambidextrous it has safetys, fire modes and clip relases on both sides which one side locks while not being used.

The aimpoint ontop of the rifle doesnt ever have to be calibrated or recalibrated unlike aimpoints now on the M4 you need to recalibrate about every week

Lastly for the sniper version think about this right now ots kinda bad for our snipers and MGs right now having to run in to say a defend the town scenario if you could give them both a XM8 normal but with a sharps kit and a Machine gunner kit they assault get into position bang there set.

Heres some videos http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8.php this is an overview

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_assembly.php this is an assembly

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_30round.php this is the 30 round mag demo

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_100.php this is the 100 round mag demo

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_grenade.php this is the new grenade launcher

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_sight.php this is the sight

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-xm8_dust.php this is the dust and water demo

phew i think thats all i got well i hope this vlears everything up and dont try to tell me im wrong i got this all from Heckler and Koch I LOVE THIS GUN THEY BETTER BRING IT IN. :deal: :deal: :bows:




colonel_bob

Here & There

50 XP

4th June 2004

0 Uploads

6,685 Posts

0 Threads

#266 16 years ago

Hmm... It looks kind of like the assault rifle used in Halo or those Command-and-conquer games...




WiseBobo

Most loved forum member.

50 XP

9th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,668 Posts

0 Threads

#267 16 years ago

The point in war is to kill your enemy.

The 5.56mm cannot accomplish this.

DEAD MEN CANNOT FIGHT.




WiseBobo

Most loved forum member.

50 XP

9th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,668 Posts

0 Threads

#268 16 years ago

Well crap, can't edit me post. Well anyways, here you fellers go: http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html Read absolutely everything on that website before you go on arguing how wounding is more effective than killing.




indecisive

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

6th August 2004

0 Uploads

4 Posts

0 Threads

#269 16 years ago

I can tell you that us using 5.56 is alright with me. the basic load of 210 rounds is already heavy enough especially when i carry about 14 mags instead. and that with itercept body armor, water, m67 grenades, smoke grenades, and squad equipment like breach kits, AT4s, claymores, litters, and maybe some 7.62 to carry for the gun teams.. maybe add an ASIP radio.. you can imagine how much weight. our 240s use 7.62 belt fed and that is fine enough.. 240 isnt really as portable as you'd like it to be so the larger ammo is alright. i would in no way prefer an AK over the M4 because of the diverse use of the m4.. picatanny rail mount allows you to add anything to it... like 40mm grenade launcher, surefire lights, bi-pod legs, scopes, aimpoints, paq4/peq2, shot gun mod, verticle hand grip, and more...i dont see the xm8 being used by rapid deploy units anytime soon... by the time the army is finished with the m4 there will be something else ready to employ.. now all that shit that i stated before is going to get in the way of having to change my weapon around to some other mod.. point of having a squad with two fire teams of a team leader rifleman, saw gunner, grenadier, and another rifleman is that you dont need one guy with the ability to change his weapon..




WiseBobo

Most loved forum member.

50 XP

9th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,668 Posts

0 Threads

#270 16 years ago

Any opinion on the 6.8mm currently under testing?