PDA

View Full Version : The Army has a new gun to bring to the knife fight



afroloq
12-01-2010, 06:42 AM
It's been in testing since 2008 but it looks like it's finally being put to use

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2008/09/340x_xm25-1.jpg

WASHINGTON (AFP) – It looks and acts like something best left in the hands of Sylvester Stallone's "Rambo," but this latest dream weapon is real -- and the US Army sees it becoming the Taliban's worst nightmare.

The Pentagon has rolled out prototypes of its first-ever programmable "smart" grenade launcher, a shoulder-fired weapon that uses microchipped ammunition to target and kill the enemy, even when the enemy is hidden behind walls or other cover.

After years of development, the XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System, about the size of a regular rifle, has now been deployed to US units on the battlefields of Afghanistan, where the Army expects it to be a "game-changer" in its counterinsurgency operations.

"For well over a week, it's been actively on patrols, and in various combat outposts in areas that are hot," said Lieutenant Colonel Chris Lehner, program manager for the XM25.

The gun's stats are formidable: it fires 25mm air-bursting shells up to 2,300 feet (700 meters), well past the range of most rifles used by today's soldiers, and programs them to explode at a precise distance, allowing troops to neutralize insurgents hiding behind walls, rocks or trenches or inside buildings.

"This is the first time we're putting smart technology into the hands of the individual soldier," Lehner told AFP in a telephone interview.

"It's giving them the edge," he said, in the harsh Afghan landscape where Islamist extremists have vexed US troops using centuries-old techniques of popping up from behind cover to engage.

"You get behind something when someone is shooting at you, and that sort of cover has protected people for thousands of years," Lehner said.

"Now we're taking that away from the enemy forever."

PEO Soldier says studies show the XM25 is 300 percent more effective than current weapons at the squad level.

The revolutionary advance involves an array of sights, sensors and lasers that reads the distance to the target, assesses elements such as air pressure, temperature, and ballistics and then sends that data to the microchip embedded in the XM25 shell before it is launched.

Previous grenade launchers needed to arc their shells over cover and land near the target to be effective.

"It takes out a lot of the variables that soldiers have to contemplate and even guess at," Lehner said.

If, for example, an enemy combatant pops up from behind a wall to fire at US troops and then ducks behind it, an XM25 gunner can aim the laser range finder at the top of the wall, then program the shell to detonate one meter beyond it, showering lethal fragmentation where the insurgent is seeking cover.

Use of the XM25 can slash civilian deaths and damage, the Army argues, because its pinpointed firepower offers far less risk than larger mortars or air strikes.

The result, the Army says, is "very limited collateral damage."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101201/sc_afp/usmilitaryweaponsafghanistan

Gregory
12-01-2010, 06:51 AM
Gene Simmons made these in Runaway (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d6Djog2B-c&t=0m45s).

GelfXIII
12-01-2010, 06:53 AM
Give me an AK-47 anyday. You can rub dirt in it and it doesn't need batteries.

Ryudo
12-01-2010, 06:54 AM
Excellent.

Zeppe
12-01-2010, 07:14 AM
Give me an AK-47 anyday. You can rub dirt in it and it doesn't need batteries.

AK-47. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room! Accept not substitutes.

Magnum V.I.
12-01-2010, 07:26 AM
Give me an AK-47 anyday. You can rub dirt in it and it doesn't need batteries.

Wholly Dependable. Absolutely atrocious at precision shooting.

GelfXIII
12-01-2010, 07:32 AM
Wholly Dependable. Absolutely atrocious at precision shooting.

But it shoots really big bullets.

Kevin T Brown
12-01-2010, 07:43 AM
But it shoots really big bullets.

A LOT of really big bullets. So who needs to aim?

Stupendous Man
12-01-2010, 07:57 AM
That's freaking awesome.

This reminds me, what happened to Future Weapons? That show was cool.

BriRedfern
12-01-2010, 07:59 AM
Raining firey death from above. RIGHT above.

afroloq
12-01-2010, 08:07 AM
A LOT of really big bullets. So who needs to aim?

Aiming is for sissies

Doc Randy
12-01-2010, 08:51 AM
I'm glad I don't have to carry that bigass thing.

afroloq
12-01-2010, 09:13 AM
I'm glad I don't have to carry that bigass thing.

Have you seen or carried an M249? try that and then get back to me.

Kevin T Brown
12-01-2010, 09:22 AM
Aiming is for sissies

Well, as long as DADT is around, there are no sissies in the armed forces!!!! (So think the Republicans......)

DaveCummings
12-01-2010, 09:36 AM
It almost reminds me of that gun Gary Oldman was demoing in the 5th Element.

Doc Randy
12-01-2010, 10:04 AM
I'm glad I don't have to carry that bigass thing.


Have you seen or carried an M249? try that and then get back to me.

Heh. The Saw isn't so bad in comparison because you at least don't also have to carry an M4/M16 at the same time.

The thing is, I think the ultimate goal is to have one of these in every squad. So who in the squad of 9 is going to get it? You going to give it to a grenadier and take away his M4/M203? Or are you going to give it to a rifleman and take away his weapon? I suspect someone is going to have to carry this in addition to their personal weapon. Just more shit to hump around. :)

I'll probably end up having to stuff extra ammo for the damn thing in my aid bag at some point.

BriRedfern
12-01-2010, 10:14 AM
I'll probably end up having to stuff extra ammo for the damn thing in my aid bag at some point.
I am not implying this is untrue, or even that I have a problem with it, but, strictly speaking, is that legal?

afroloq
12-01-2010, 10:17 AM
I'll probably end up having to stuff extra ammo for the damn thing in my aid bag at some point.

proof that the Army stuffs.

Marcdachamp
12-01-2010, 10:21 AM
That's pretty badass.

Doc Randy
12-01-2010, 10:26 AM
I am not implying this is untrue, or even that I have a problem with it, but, strictly speaking, is that legal?

All army line medics carry rifles for personal protection. You can carry and operate larger offensive weapons, but when you do, you lose any Geneva Convention protections (which doesn't matter because the people we are fighting don't believe in the Geneva Convention protections for medics and medical units anyway.)

FYI - medics don't wear the big Red Cross symbol anymore. With the exception of the aid bag, medics today look exactly like the soldiers they are with. Blend in. Why give the enemy an easy target to aim for.

afroloq
12-01-2010, 10:30 AM
All army line medics carry rifles for personal protection. You can carry and operate larger offensive weapons, but when you do, you lose any Geneva Convention protections (which doesn't matter because the people we are fighting don't believe in the Geneva Convention protections for medics and medical units anyway.)

FYI - medics don't wear the big Red Cross symbol anymore. With the exception of the aid bag, medics today look exactly like the soldiers they are with. Blend in. Why give the enemy an easy target to aim for.

You can blow the shit out of someone, stitch them up and do it again...yeah...you are THE MAN.

BriRedfern
12-01-2010, 10:58 AM
All army line medics carry rifles for personal protection. You can carry and operate larger offensive weapons, but when you do, you lose any Geneva Convention protections (which doesn't matter because the people we are fighting don't believe in the Geneva Convention protections for medics and medical units anyway.)

FYI - medics don't wear the big Red Cross symbol anymore. With the exception of the aid bag, medics today look exactly like the soldiers they are with. Blend in. Why give the enemy an easy target to aim for.

Thanks for the info.

The current enemy not allowing special consideration to medics is lousy, lousy, lousy. Not suprising, but no less lousy.

Wigner's Friend
12-01-2010, 11:00 AM
Heh. The Saw isn't so bad in comparison because you at least don't also have to carry an M4/M16 at the same time.

The thing is, I think the ultimate goal is to have one of these in every squad. So who in the squad of 9 is going to get it? You going to give it to a grenadier and take away his M4/M203? Or are you going to give it to a rifleman and take away his weapon? I suspect someone is going to have to carry this in addition to their personal weapon. Just more shit to hump around. :)

I'll probably end up having to stuff extra ammo for the damn thing in my aid bag at some point.

I really don't know if this quote answers your question but, if it does, could you contextualize this for somebody uneducated about day to day operations?

“It’s potentially an arms room weapon, where you go in and say I’m going on this type of mission, I therefore need this type of capability,” said Brig. Gen. Pete Fuller, the commander of PEO Soldier. “So, you take [the XM-25] versus something else.”

COTE
12-01-2010, 07:46 PM
It's been in development since 2000 at least. It's killed some of the testers unfortunately

leafinsectman
12-01-2010, 07:49 PM
What about those missiles that Stark designed in Iron Man 1? Get to work on those.

COTE
12-01-2010, 07:49 PM
And I've done foot patrols with a saw and a 240b (separate) occasions. You don't really notice the difference. It's hot. Mission sucks. Your kits heavy. Oh well

George Relish Pants
12-01-2010, 07:55 PM
Thanks for the info.

The current enemy not allowing special consideration to medics is lousy, lousy, lousy. Not suprising, but no less lousy.

They never have. We and our direct allies are pretty much the only countries that even observe said conventions.