G
Guderian
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
Opinion is split on it. Looks bad ass though.
The U.S. Army has halted operational testing of its shoulder-fired, 25mm airburst weapon after a soldier suffered minor injuries when the weapon "malfunctioned" in Afghanistan.
"An XM25 experienced a double feed and an unintentional primer ignition of one round," Army spokesman Matt Bourke stated in a March 7 written release, describing the Feb. 2 incident. "The Army subsequently removed all XM25 prototype weapons and ammunition from theater for root cause analysis and corrective action."
The XM25 Counter-Defilade Target Engagement System has already completed one 14-month battlefield assessment and was in the early stages of a second assessment when the double feed and primer ignition occurred during a live-fire training exercise.
"The round involved was a 25mm high-explosive air burst round, though the warhead did not detonate because of safety mechanisms," Bourke said. "The gunner training on the weapon system received superficial injuries, was medically evaluated, and returned to duty."
The XM25, which some troops call the Punisher, has created both excitement and skepticism in the infantry community.
The weapon features a target acquisition system that calculates the target range with a push of a button, and transfers the data to the electronic fuse built into the 25mm round. When fired, the projectile is designed to explode directly above targets out to 600 meters, peppering enemy fighters with shrapnel.
Despite its boxy shape, infantrymen who have fired the XM25 in combat say it's effective at engaging enemy forces hiding behind the short mud walls commonplace across Afghanistan.
But the XM25 has also received its share of criticism from door-kickers who say the five-shot, 14-pound weapon system is more of a burden than a benefit to combat units. In March, elements of 75th Ranger Regiment refused to take XM25 with them for a raid on a fortified enemy compound in Afghanistan, sources familiar with the incident said.
After an initial assessment, Ranger units found the XM25 too heavy and cumbersome for the battlefield. They were also concerned that the limited basic load of 25mm rounds was not enough to justify taking an M4A1 carbine out of the mission, sources say.
XM25 is an offshoot of the Objective Individual Combat Weapon program the Army began in the mid-1990s to increase firepower effectiveness. It was then known as the XM29 -- an over-and-under system with a 5.56mm carbine on the bottom and the 20mm airburst weapon on top.
The XM29 suffered its own range mishap Sept 29, 1999 when a prototype blew up at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., spewing shrapnel in all directions and injuring two technicians.
The OICW program stalled in the face of technical challenges that made the 18-pound weapon too heavy and bulky. The program ended up costing about $100 million.
The XM25, however, will continue through its "Engineering, Manufacture & Development" phase where the system will be further refined and improved, Army officials say. It's unclear how this latest mishap will affect program officials' plans to begin fielding the XM25 in the fall of 2014.
The U.S. Army has halted operational testing of its shoulder-fired, 25mm airburst weapon after a soldier suffered minor injuries when the weapon "malfunctioned" in Afghanistan.
"An XM25 experienced a double feed and an unintentional primer ignition of one round," Army spokesman Matt Bourke stated in a March 7 written release, describing the Feb. 2 incident. "The Army subsequently removed all XM25 prototype weapons and ammunition from theater for root cause analysis and corrective action."
The XM25 Counter-Defilade Target Engagement System has already completed one 14-month battlefield assessment and was in the early stages of a second assessment when the double feed and primer ignition occurred during a live-fire training exercise.
"The round involved was a 25mm high-explosive air burst round, though the warhead did not detonate because of safety mechanisms," Bourke said. "The gunner training on the weapon system received superficial injuries, was medically evaluated, and returned to duty."
The XM25, which some troops call the Punisher, has created both excitement and skepticism in the infantry community.
The weapon features a target acquisition system that calculates the target range with a push of a button, and transfers the data to the electronic fuse built into the 25mm round. When fired, the projectile is designed to explode directly above targets out to 600 meters, peppering enemy fighters with shrapnel.
Despite its boxy shape, infantrymen who have fired the XM25 in combat say it's effective at engaging enemy forces hiding behind the short mud walls commonplace across Afghanistan.
But the XM25 has also received its share of criticism from door-kickers who say the five-shot, 14-pound weapon system is more of a burden than a benefit to combat units. In March, elements of 75th Ranger Regiment refused to take XM25 with them for a raid on a fortified enemy compound in Afghanistan, sources familiar with the incident said.
After an initial assessment, Ranger units found the XM25 too heavy and cumbersome for the battlefield. They were also concerned that the limited basic load of 25mm rounds was not enough to justify taking an M4A1 carbine out of the mission, sources say.
XM25 is an offshoot of the Objective Individual Combat Weapon program the Army began in the mid-1990s to increase firepower effectiveness. It was then known as the XM29 -- an over-and-under system with a 5.56mm carbine on the bottom and the 20mm airburst weapon on top.
The XM29 suffered its own range mishap Sept 29, 1999 when a prototype blew up at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., spewing shrapnel in all directions and injuring two technicians.
The OICW program stalled in the face of technical challenges that made the 18-pound weapon too heavy and bulky. The program ended up costing about $100 million.
The XM25, however, will continue through its "Engineering, Manufacture & Development" phase where the system will be further refined and improved, Army officials say. It's unclear how this latest mishap will affect program officials' plans to begin fielding the XM25 in the fall of 2014.
G
Guderian
Guest
"Despite its boxy shape, infantrymen who have fired the XM25 in combat say it's effective at engaging enemy forces hiding behind the short mud walls commonplace across Afghanistan."
One must within weps of a squad. consider the xm-25 as the "BAR [in ww2] or M60. heavy and carried by one trooper.. it saves the day in many a situation.
Squads are assault and pickers. teasers and firepower. Even if US squad org must be changed to add ONE[1] trooper with xm-25] it is worth it in lives saved.
when the time is right they work together to take down any force.
Adaption is evolution. Afghan is environment US must adapt to.
You dont fight a tank battle in tight streets is extreme example of such.
The short mud walls are example.
Keep the enemy focused on teasers.. and hit with xm-25 and bangs. off axis.
ASSAULT.
Few nations on earth train troopers to resit such.
As i said im an armchair guy. But im smart and know weapons 1st hand.
would i want an Xm-25 in my squad even with even just 12 rounds. hell yes.
He can always go to a SMG or spotter when xm is empty.
gudie
One must within weps of a squad. consider the xm-25 as the "BAR [in ww2] or M60. heavy and carried by one trooper.. it saves the day in many a situation.
Squads are assault and pickers. teasers and firepower. Even if US squad org must be changed to add ONE[1] trooper with xm-25] it is worth it in lives saved.
when the time is right they work together to take down any force.
Adaption is evolution. Afghan is environment US must adapt to.
You dont fight a tank battle in tight streets is extreme example of such.
The short mud walls are example.
Keep the enemy focused on teasers.. and hit with xm-25 and bangs. off axis.
ASSAULT.
Few nations on earth train troopers to resit such.
As i said im an armchair guy. But im smart and know weapons 1st hand.
would i want an Xm-25 in my squad even with even just 12 rounds. hell yes.
He can always go to a SMG or spotter when xm is empty.
gudie
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guderian
Guest
And i worry that the sun will explode.
Get out there and put the hammer on target. 15 years from now xm-25 will be old hat.
Backpack Particle cannons or man mobile flechete chainguns will have guys saying is it safe?
15 years is nothing i was there 15 years ago yesterday
There is NOTHING humanity cannot do.. and i classify this as a near absolute.
Get out there and put the hammer on target. 15 years from now xm-25 will be old hat.
Backpack Particle cannons or man mobile flechete chainguns will have guys saying is it safe?
15 years is nothing i was there 15 years ago yesterday
There is NOTHING humanity cannot do.. and i classify this as a near absolute.
Last edited by a moderator:
As for the ammunition question, while the gunner will carry the bulk of the ammo, the rest of the squad would carry the remainder. Much as we did in Vietnam for the 60mm mortars, almost all non-mortar personnel carried one 60mm round and would hand it off to mortars at the end of the day or when needed. That would mean a mortar squad would have 75-100 rounds within the company to utilize. So if every squad member carried one 25mm round, the gunner would have a backup supply readily at hand.
G
Guderian
Guest
Facman.
exacltly 1 or 2 rounds is what. one grenade?
Carrying rounds for platoon mortar did not exist in 1901.
Yet it is a given. in 2001.
Technology is geometric. by 2050 all weaps we use now will be antiques.Yet the squad continues.
The 25gunner. the "twofive "
will be integral.
Technology creates new weapons from our desire to do it right, and we adapt. 'Necessity is mother of invention'
We are very good at that.
[as far as we know]
I am proponent of Small US mil worldwide. say 3 corps.
But each corps container has units at front end of tech. noone with brains screws with it.
The enemy whoever they are. doubt their plans as soon as US mil is mentioned as opponent.
USN CVNBG's are example.
--------------------------
On land
"Medina ridge"
Medina Ridge was one of the few battles during Desert Storm in which American forces encountered significant Iraqi resistance and found it extremely difficult to advance. The Iraqi forces were well-deployed such that they could not be seen by American forces advancing until after they had cleared the top of the ridgeline. This defilade position gave the Iraqis protection from the powerful long-range direct fire of the M1 Abrams tanks and the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles. The American units found it necessary to engage an entrenched enemy at close range, which resulted in higher damage to the American armored units.
During the battle, the American forces suffered only one fatality (due to friendly fire), while destroying 186 Iraqi tanks and 127 armored vehicles. Only four Abrams tanks were hit by direct fire and disabled; none were destroyed. Thirty-eight of the Iraqi tanks were eliminated by U.S. Army AH-64 Apaches and U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt IIs. 2nd Battalion, 1st Field Artillery conducted counterartillery fire missions and destroyed the Medina Field Artillery batteries in the process.
-------------------------
The job of Defense Dpt is to create so much doubt that potential enemies stay potential..fear.
that is power. not million man armies
Gudie
Why do i support alliance with US as australian?
im not stupid
exacltly 1 or 2 rounds is what. one grenade?
Carrying rounds for platoon mortar did not exist in 1901.
Yet it is a given. in 2001.
Technology is geometric. by 2050 all weaps we use now will be antiques.Yet the squad continues.
The 25gunner. the "twofive "
will be integral.
Technology creates new weapons from our desire to do it right, and we adapt. 'Necessity is mother of invention'
We are very good at that.
[as far as we know]
I am proponent of Small US mil worldwide. say 3 corps.
But each corps container has units at front end of tech. noone with brains screws with it.
The enemy whoever they are. doubt their plans as soon as US mil is mentioned as opponent.
USN CVNBG's are example.
--------------------------
On land
"Medina ridge"
Medina Ridge was one of the few battles during Desert Storm in which American forces encountered significant Iraqi resistance and found it extremely difficult to advance. The Iraqi forces were well-deployed such that they could not be seen by American forces advancing until after they had cleared the top of the ridgeline. This defilade position gave the Iraqis protection from the powerful long-range direct fire of the M1 Abrams tanks and the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles. The American units found it necessary to engage an entrenched enemy at close range, which resulted in higher damage to the American armored units.
During the battle, the American forces suffered only one fatality (due to friendly fire), while destroying 186 Iraqi tanks and 127 armored vehicles. Only four Abrams tanks were hit by direct fire and disabled; none were destroyed. Thirty-eight of the Iraqi tanks were eliminated by U.S. Army AH-64 Apaches and U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt IIs. 2nd Battalion, 1st Field Artillery conducted counterartillery fire missions and destroyed the Medina Field Artillery batteries in the process.
-------------------------
The job of Defense Dpt is to create so much doubt that potential enemies stay potential..fear.
that is power. not million man armies
Gudie
Why do i support alliance with US as australian?
im not stupid
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 12,709
- Reaction score
- 7,463
- Age
- 61
Added to index as XM25 Smart gun
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 12,709
- Reaction score
- 7,463
- Age
- 61
Cleaning was broken images -