Army reveals that the XM25 has been in combat already

[Excalibur]

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.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

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.

[Excalibur]

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

[Nyles]

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.

[Excalibur]

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.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Nyles

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.

Amen. I also agree that it has potential.

Originally Posted by Nyles

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.

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

He then uses an incremental button located near the trigger to add 1 meter to the round's distance, since the enemy is hiding behind a wall.

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

[Nyles]

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.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Nyles

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.