NationStates

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Ideally I'd like to keep the 20x28mm since IMO the larger 25mm plus the 5.56 mm rifle would be far too bulky, the 20mm plus 5.56mm is already bulky and heavy enough as is. I think with CMC/MMC barrels I could shave maybe a pound while an all-carbon fiber receiver, polymer magazines, and replacing the batteries with a methanol fuel cell could shave off another ~3 pounds to go from 18 ibs loaded down to the design requirement of 14 ibs loaded. The 20x28mm grenades not being lethal enough is something I think I can fix using a more energetic filler and making the warhead DIME based, essentially making it RDX or HMX mixed with micro-sized tungsten powder all contained in the grenade's carbon fiber casing (which does not generate shrapnel). The other big complaint with the XM29 was that the 250mm 5.56 barrel was too short and limited the effective range to less than 300 yards but I don't see this as a problem since the infantryman is probably going to use 20x28mm for pretty much all longer ranged engagements with the 5.56 only used perhaps for CQB where the 10" barrel ins't a problem. The last problem is cost, the XM25 cost around 35K a piece and it's only the grenade launcher part without the 5.56 rifle. The grenades themselves are also over $100 a piece which is clearly not affordable if the weapon is to be mass issued. I would argue that the XM29/25 and its ammunition cost was for the LRIP version(s) and that mass producing the weapon and its ammunition would drive its cost down, ideally it would be 10k or less for the entire system which sounds expensive but is actually pretty reasonable when you consider it's a combined rifle, grenade launcher, thermal optic, and FCS.

Rhodesialund wrote:The concept of affordability is only a concern for private entities. For the government, that cost of $100 per grenade for widespread issue ain't even worth a damn drop in a drained Olympic pool.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:

Rhodesialund wrote:The concept of affordability is only a concern for private entities. For the government, that cost of $100 per grenade for widespread issue ain't even worth a damn drop in a drained Olympic pool.

The target was $25 per grenade yet IIRC they ended up costing $150 each (For the XM25). A 40mm HEDP on the other hand is like less than 10 dollars. Take $100 or $150 and multiply it by the hundreds of thousands of them you would be issuing and the numbers add up pretty quickly. So yes, the grenade being 4-6x over its cost target is a big problem.

Rhodesialund wrote:

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Ideally I'd like to keep the 20x28mm since IMO the larger 25mm plus the 5.56 mm rifle would be far too bulky, the 20mm plus 5.56mm is already bulky and heavy enough as is. I think with CMC/MMC barrels I could shave maybe a pound while an all-carbon fiber receiver, polymer magazines, and replacing the batteries with a methanol fuel cell could shave off another ~3 pounds to go from 18 ibs loaded down to the design requirement of 14 ibs loaded. The 20x28mm grenades not being lethal enough is something I think I can fix using a more energetic filler and making the warhead DIME based, essentially making it RDX or HMX mixed with micro-sized tungsten powder all contained in the grenade's carbon fiber casing (which does not generate shrapnel). The other big complaint with the XM29 was that the 250mm 5.56 barrel was too short and limited the effective range to less than 300 yards but I don't see this as a problem since the infantryman is probably going to use 20x28mm for pretty much all longer ranged engagements with the 5.56 only used perhaps for CQB where the 10" barrel ins't a problem. The last problem is cost, the XM25 cost around 35K a piece and it's only the grenade launcher part without the 5.56 rifle. The grenades themselves are also over $100 a piece which is clearly not affordable if the weapon is to be mass issued. I would argue that the XM29/25 and its ammunition cost was for the LRIP version(s) and that mass producing the weapon and its ammunition would drive its cost down, ideally it would be 10k or less for the entire system which sounds expensive but is actually pretty reasonable when you consider it's a combined rifle, grenade launcher, thermal optic, and FCS.

The concept of affordability is only a concern for private entities.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Ideally I'd like to keep the 20x28mm

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:since IMO the larger 25mm plus the 5.56 mm rifle would be far too bulky,

Gallia- wrote:

Rhodesialund wrote:
The concept of affordability is only a concern for private entities.

So wrong it's wrong.

Rhodesialund wrote:

Gallia- wrote:
So wrong it's wrong.

More wrong than a girl and a guy kissing?

Gallia- wrote:
More wrong than people going into the wrong gender bathroom?

Affordability originated in military organizations.

Rhodesialund wrote:

Gallia- wrote:
More wrong than people going into the wrong gender bathroom?

Affordability originated in military organizations.

Yer right, let's just make bathrooms unisex.

Me wrote:The studies noted the similarities between boarding school dormitory layouts and apartments/flats, and communal bathing areas in schools and unisex public restrooms typical of Gallan society-at-large, although there was no direct evidence to link either cases.

Free-Don wrote:Galia makes me want to make 20x30mm and 20x45mm bolt actions as a standard grenadier weapon. Kicking aside my current use of squad level rifle grenades, squad level 60mm mortars, and specialized crew-served anti-material rifles.

Gallia- wrote:
too late scrub

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Galla#Education

Gallia- wrote:Now you've discovered why XM29 didn't work.

Make the 20x28mm into 25x40mm for lethality and range.
Make the XM25 weigh half what it does.
Put an M4 carbine underneath.

That's the only way XM29 will be an adequate service rifle.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:My questions is what can I do to make the 20x28mm grenade "acceptably" lethal?

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:the complaint I heard was that the fragments didn't have enough energy to penetrate soft body armor yet the XM25 with the slightly larger 25x40mm would probably have the same problem yet I've never heard that complaint brought up

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:The setup I have now is XM8s issued two per fireteam (firetram leader has a 40mm UBL) with an XM25 issued to the grenadier and a SAW to the machine gunner. What this would do is replace the two XM8s and the XM25 with XM29s. I could also issue XM29s to the two rifleman and keep the XM25 for the grenadier.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Maybe attach an MP7 to an XM25? Basically from what I've read soldiers in Afghanistan said they used the XM25 without any kind of sidearm (M4 or M9) since at pretty much all combat ranges the 25mm is superior to the 5.56 or any other rifle round in terms of inflicting casualties. The KE part, in this case the underlung rifle or PDW, would be just for CQB (room clearing) where the grenades probably wouldn't be a wise idea. So maybe issue the XM25+MP7 combo to NCOs and rifleman and give the grenadier an XM8 with a UBL for lobbing smoke?

Laritaia wrote:fundamentally the OICW concept doesn't work, the resulting weapon is just too big and too heavy

metal storm could have been the savior but it turned out not to work with high pressure rounds

Laritaia wrote:metal storm could have been the savior but it turned out not to work with high pressure rounds

Gallia- wrote:It does work, it just needs lighter gats.

Or muscle enhancement.

I doubt PITMAN would struggle with a 25mm assault rifle.

Rhodesialund wrote:

Laritaia wrote:metal storm could have been the savior but it turned out not to work with high pressure rounds

>Metal Storm

Nice vapormeme you got there.

Laritaia wrote:

Gallia- wrote:It does work, it just needs lighter gats.

Or muscle enhancement.

I doubt PITMAN would struggle with a 25mm assault rifle.

there aren't really many ways to make the gats that make up the OICW lighter then they were, tinman/pitman/ironman/landmate/full cyberization are probably the only way to achieve the dream.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:But how will I complete my 90's retro future military without the OICW? I'd go with hyperburst flechettes but that is so 1980s.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Too 1950s. I need things full of buzzword salads containing words like "future" and "warfighter" and "integrated and "network-centric" and "objective". Words that flag officers and pentagon bureaucrats get off too when they're put on spiffy powerpoint slides.

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Too 1950s. I need things full of buzzword salads containing words like "future" and "warfighter" and "integrated and "network-centric" and "objective". Words that flag officers and pentagon bureaucrats get off too when they're put on spiffy powerpoint slides.

Laritaia wrote:

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:But how will I complete my 90's retro future military without the OICW? I'd go with hyperburst flechettes but that is so 1980s.

concentrate on psy troopers instead

The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Too 1950s. I need things full of buzzword salads containing words like "future" and "warfighter" and "integrated and "network-centric" and "objective". Words that flag officers and pentagon bureaucrats get off too when they're put on spiffy powerpoint slides.