Army reveals that the XM25 has been in combat already
 

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/...an/?test=faces

Hmmm, this really surprises me. After all the years of hearing about "awesome" new weapons systems (G11, OICW, XM8, etc.), I've become numb to caring about them. I tend to expect that they won't turn out to be as cost-effective or necessary as the contractor hypes them to be, and that they'll die long before they reach the field.

But if the XM25 has actually been used in combat in Afghanistan, already...wow. It'll be interesting to see whether it proves effective. If so, it means that the OICW program wasn't a complete waste.

EDIT: OK, I exaggerate somewhat...they haven't said specifically that soldiers have been using XM25s to kill Taliban yet, just that the weapons have been issued to combat units on deployment.

I want one

That looks like a bit of an improvement over the original OICW prototypes, but I still think the weapon, while sporting impressive capabilities, seems a bit unwieldy to me. Personally, I wouldn't want to haul that in the field.

I think its more a weapon theyd carry in their vehicle and deploy if needed, not just haul around all day.

I wouldn't want to carry it around either, but it's really not any heavier than an LMG and a pretty significant advantage if it really does what it says on the box.

It's apparently being used by SF units. How often do SF use vehicles? Those guys do 12-mile runs with over 100 pounds of gear just to pass selection. So I imagine they'd have to lug around their XM25s. Though I would also guess that they'd give them to guys at the remote outposts overlooking hostile territory.

...which is what remains to be seen. And being skeptical of the manufacturer's claims is always a healthy mindset.

But the fact that the Army has enough confidence to start putting XM25s in the field is significant. That's a lot farther than the OICW and XM8 ever got. Also, they're already talking about issuing them to regular infantry and Airborne units, not just SF, in the next year (though we can't be sure they're serious yet).

I was referring less to its weight and more to its ergonomics. It may weigh the same (or is only slightly heavier) than an M249, but, to me, it looks about as comfortable to shoot as a rifle mounted inside a suitcase. Granted, I could be wrong. I've never held it and likely never will. I'm just saying it looks like an impressive... but awkward... weapon. :p

Would be awesome if they can miniaturize this thing into near the size of an M203 so it can be mounted on a rifle, because a man who gets to hold the XM-25 might not be able to carry a rifle.

Sadly, that's not on the horizon anytime soon. The OICW already failed to do this, but even a decade later, the tech isn't compact enough yet.

My big problems are these:

(1.) The XM25 is technically complex, which means more difficult to maintain in the field (most likely).

(2.) It's still friggin' expensive ($35K per unit). Even with the reduced costs of placing a bulk order, there's no way the Army is going to be able to issue these to every combat unit in Afghanistan.

If the technology in this thing can withstand being shook around, bang around and near explosions.

Oh, I'm not saying that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread and that they should be made general-issue yesterday, I'm just saying that I think it has potential. Believe me, a Carl Gustav is also a sonofabitch to lug around, but when it's necessary, someone does it, and they also carry a rifle or carbine.

I think a very relevant question about this weapons system is whether it will penetrate an Afghan mud wall. Based on my experiences over there, I am VERY skeptical of that. That said, if it can be effectively fired OVER the wall and still inflict casualties, then I can think of dozens of instances where it would have very quickly ended firefights that ended up lasting several hours.

I was about to say that too. The system that shoots the ammo can be very advance, but if the ammo doesn't deliver, then the weapon is useless.

Amen. I also agree that it has potential.

Apparently, it can be fired over walls effectively. But here's something that is pointed out in the article:

Are mud walls always going to be that wide? And can you accurately estimate the wall thickness without an overhead view?

Good rule of thumb is that they're going to be at least a foot thick, if it's a grape hut significantly more. But then again, no man-portable weapon is effective against a grape hut.

Alright, that makes sense then. But if the round detonates too soon over the wall, I imagine that would reduce the damage it does. I also figured that the width of the wall is going to vary considerably in any given area and firefight.

Then again, I'm assuming that Alliant Techsystems and H&K have already thought about this, interviewed GIs who have been to Afghanistan, and carefully estimated the average thickness of mud walls. Whereas I'm mostly talking out of my ass. :D

The XM8 was actually fielded in very limited numbers in Iraq from what I've read.

http://image50.webshots.com/50/3/33/...7nguBkK_ph.jpg

http://img.wm-team.org/pmc/Chris_XM8.jpg
This guy's dead BTW.

So the XM8 had been at least been field tested. I wonder what the results were.

This guy in the photo supposed to be some kind of Private contractor?

I think so.

if you look closely he's standing right next to the two hands holding the swords

Oh, yeah, I totally forgot about this. But now that you post it, I remember it from HKPRO boards. Thanks for the reminder.

Chris Neidrich, He was a PMC with Black Water and was killed several month's later.

here's another XM8 pic
http://travel.webshots.com/photo/147...67807848nguBkK
http://image50.webshots.com/50/3/33/...7nguBkK_ph.jpg

This makes me think maybe it doesn't matter much that the XM25 has been sent to units in Afghanistan.

That being said, we don't really need a new infantry rifle right now. We don't necessarily need the XM25, either, but it at least has potential to be useful...again, assuming it does what it's supposed to do.