Objective Individual Combat Weapon enters PDRR

M

Morgan

New member
I want one! For hunting deer, of course ;). http://defence-data.com/current/page8065.htm
oicw002.jpg
9 August 2000

The US Army's next generation personal weapon, the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), has entered the next phase in its development. The US Army Armament, Research, Development, and Engineering Centre (ARDEC) has given ATK (Alliant Techsystems) a 48-month, $95 million contract for the Programme Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) phase.

ATK's Integrated Defense Company will evaluate a broad range of design concepts to ensure that the Army has the best combination of OICW features and performance.

The OICW is a light weight weapon that can fire kinetic energy projectiles and an air-bursting fragmentation munition. It combines new technologies in miniaturised fuzing; integrated fire control; light weight, high strength materials; and munitions effects. The OICW is being designed to replace the M16 rifle, M203 grenade launcher, and M4 carbine. The fire control system (FCS), using a laser range finder, pinpoints the precise target range at which the HE round will burst and relays this information to the 20mm ammunition fuzing system. The sighting system provides full 24-hour capability by employing uncooled IR sensor technology for night vision.

Specific goals fir the rifle include demonstration of hit probability greater than 0.5 out to 500 metres and 0.3 to 0.5 out to 1,000 metres. Effectiveness against personnel and light armour targets, given a hit, will be greater than those of the M433 High Explosive Dual Purpose cartridge fired from the M203 Grenade Launcher and the M855 cartridge fired from the M16A2 rifle. Specific goals for the grenade launcher include a 50% probability of incapacitation at 300 metres for a point target and a 20% probability of incapacitation at 300 metres for a target behind cover.

ATK's OICW team includes Brashear Ltd., Pittsburgh, Pa. (fire control system), and Heckler and Koch (HK) GmbH, Oberndorf, Germany and HK Inc., Sterling, Va. (weapon design and US manufacture). ATK Integrated Defense Company is the prime contractor, with responsibility for total weapon system integration and testing and the system's high-explosive ammunition.

Sharon Boone, OICW programme director, ATK Integrated Defense Company, said the OICW team will be applying lessons learned during the program's Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) phase to ensure that all potential programme risks are resolved before engineering and manufacturing development begins in 2004.

"The ATD programme provided us with an enormous amount of valuable test data on both the weapon system and the ammunition, as well as extensive feedback from users on system design, operation, and training,'' said Boone. "This information will form the basis for our work during the PDRR phase, which will lay the groundwork for final development and eventual production.''


REF XQQAS XQQLD
 
Do they come in advantage camo?

I thought this whole thing was a joke but I guess not. Looks like you could hide behind it for shelter.
What the govmint won't do to put it out of our price range.

------------------
"Keep shootin till they quit floppin"
The Wife 2/2000
 
oh they are a tad pricey to buy:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>For observers encountering OICW for the first time, there is also the question of sticker shock. If the demonstration project is successful
over the next several years, the Pentagon plans to make an initial purchase of 45,000 OICWs, to be in the hands of elite light-infantry
units by 2006. The weapons will cost between $10,000 and $12,000 each, plus $25 to $30 for each 20mm air-burst round.[/quote]
http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9809STMIP.html
http://www.atk.com/defense/descriptions/products/Shoulder-fired%20Weapons/oicw-new.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/2116/oicw.htm
 
My prayer is: God, please save us from our government. Is this a complete sellout to the god of technology or just a communist plot to finish the destruction of our war readiness? How many batteries does this thing take? Could they have made it more complex and fragile?

I have worked with some of the defense contractors (laser related) and it is a Rube Goldberg contraption designed by engineers completely oblivious to combat. The thing is heavy. I was told 14-16 lbs. I wonder if the soldierchicks can carry it? $10,000 too! I was told they pay less than $200 for an M16.

I'm convinced these guys are trying to kill American's not the enemy. I'll take my Garand. No batteries required.
 
And I thought that my M1 Garand and ammo were heavy. Wheeeww! Glad I got my service out of the way in '59-61! J.B.
 
Needs to be made ALOT smaller thing is HUGE!!!!! Bet it doubles as a Shield of some sort. Something like the pulse rifle in Aliens would be alot nicer!

------------------
Dead [Black Ops]
 
I prefer a SIG 550 with a 40mm grenade launcher without hoopy-doopy
laser rangefinders. The time I lob a splinter grenade at them, their
equipment is out of commission.

Hopefully for the poor folks taggling our army, we won't have direct
contact with a mobile 120mm mortar battery. Evil guys will just have
them shelled with some real grenades. Air-burst, and the fragments fly
400m and go through an arm. 100m, and they'll whack a common ballistic
vest or a helmet. 50m, and you better have an M113 between you and the
shell.
 
There are already a number of threads on this money wasting P.O.S.

First of all, the grenades are so expensive that you'll never get to shoot any in training (like the Javelin replacement for the Dragon anti-tank missile - gunners literally will NEVER be allowed to fire a live missile and train exclusively on simulators). This is just the military substituting gadgetry for marksmanship training, plain and simple.

The OINK-W is as heavy as a medium machinegun and about 1/10th as useful. For real - who's gonna hump this ridiculous lump of junk around? If I assigned this thing to my Marines, they'd break it or ditch it given the first opportunity. Guaranteed.
 
I bet we would still get our ass kicked with this thing by some raggedy-ass militias carrying AK47's. I wonder what the Marines would choose this over an old Garand? I guess they forgot the KISS system.

------------------
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats." H.L. Mencken
 
Please keep that POS away from this active duty infantryman. Please, Please, pretty please with whipped cream and cherry on top of that please....

I'd like to meet the braniac that came up with the idea and wasted money on it. How about a better ruck and better boots instead. The M16/M4 with an M203 is an awesome package in the right hands.

------------------
Walk softly and carry a big stick (Yeah I know I stole it)
 
Folks you don't think we are going to throw little dumb bits of metal at one another forever?
Well get used to it,this IS the future, maybe not this weapon but something very similar, its a transitory design much like the garand.
The first thing to do is lose the carbine.
Why do you need a piddly .223 when you have a 20mm cannon at your disposal?
Expensive ammunition? yep. But per unit cost goes down with mass production.
In Vietnam, infantry averaged one Kill for every 200,000 (yes that many,I wonder who counts that stuff?)rounds of small arms ammunition expended, in WW2 it was 20,000 per kill in Korea 50,000. THAT is expensive.
Supressive fire? Thats what the SAW is for.
Its not far off in the future that infantry troops will wear lightweight ballistic armour that will render them nigh invulerable to small arms fire, the only recurse is pinpoint high explosives...
The cost of the program is negligible, I mean c'mon we spent over 2 BILLION on EACH B2 bomber we have. This program wont ever cost half of what a single B2 costs.

To put it in perspective, Imagine this conversation about 1909:

"Colt automatic pistol? What the hell is that?
Ive got my Colt single action army, the greatest sidearm of all time. nothing will ever be better than that."

------------------
Big Guns again
No speakee well
But plain.
--H.C
 
American Rifleman had an article about this latest piece of gimcrackery in the January, 2000 issue. Interesting read if you have access to the back issue. The article refers to it as SABR - Selectable Assault Battle Rifle.

In the article, Sharon Boone mentions that recoil will be handled by an "elastometric recoil mitigation system." Read - instead of the current action spring, it'll have a shock absorber.

It uses one battery - a modified BB2847 unit. Or so they say.

The concept isn't my cup of tea and Lord knows I wouldn't want to have to sling the sucker around. Still, I have to agree with Mulio - wave of the future.

One (of the many) reason(s) I love my Garand is the construction is metal and wood. No plastic. It also fires a big league round.

I have also sworn that I will NEVER own a Palm Pilot. Color me hidebound. :)

Cliff
 
It's highly unlikely they'd adopt the thing as-is, it weight 18 pounds empty! I can't imagine saddling every soldier with the current incarnation. However, with furthur development it could be an outstanding alternative to the M203. Guys, you can fling a 20mm grenade 800+ yards and airburst it above a fighting hole.

A side benefit, maybe better than the OICW itself, is that the lower half is a HK G36! To homogenize parts requirements, we'd ditch the AR in favor of the G36 for typical riflemen.
 
Adapted from something I found somewhere:

THE NEW RIFLE

In the beginning there was a new Rifle.

And then came the Assumptions.
And the Assumptions were without form.
And the Rifle was without substance.
And darkness was upon the face of the Privates.
And they spoke among themselves, saying, „It is a crock of s**t, and it stinks.“
And the Privates went unto their Seargents and said, „It is a pail of dung, and we can‘t live with the smell.“
And the Seargents went unto their Lieutenants, saying, „It is a container of excrement, and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it.“
And the Lieutenants went unto their Generals, saying. „It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide its strength.“
And the Generals spoke among themselves, saying to one another, „It contains that which aids in plant growth, and it is very strong.“
And the Generals went to the Military Advisors, saying unto them, „It promotes growth, and it is very powerful.“
And the Military Advisors went to the President, saying unto him, „This new rifle will actively promote the growth and vigor of the armed forces with the powerful effects.“
And the President looked upon the new Rifle and saw it was good.
And the new Rifle became General Issue.
And this is how s**t happens.



------------------
I see no elephant in my cellar. If there were an elephant in my cellar, I would surely see it. Therefore, there is no elephant in my cellar.

http://www.ety.com/tell/why.html
 
I believe this system is good for police to perform anti-terrorist task. It is not good for military. A military weapon should be simple and easily to use. In the field, you could have carried your weapon for days and still put your life on it, period! You rely on the weapon rather than the weapon relies on you. Remember, in the Normandy landing, soldiers were drowned due to heavy gear. Dont' they learn the lesson for the past?
 
I briefly consulted on this project when the USMC was wondering why they had spent over 4 million dollars along with the Army's 70+ million to date, and only had two wooden mock ups to show for their trouble.
I gave it a thumbs down.

To rehash some of the retardation that has gone into the conceptualization of this boondoggle:
The laser is line of sight.
The trajectory of the grenade is rather like a softball getting lobbed towards the target.
There is still no provision for adjusting the range and inclination of the weapon to compensate for drop. As a result, whether or not the soldier or grenade know the range to the target, accurate delivery of the projectile with a suitably flat trajectory past 50 yards is still out of the question.

To achieve any sort of accuracy at the ranges they are "shooting for", the grenade will have to leave the barrel at 2000+ FPS.
The projectile weight is about two ounces.
This is roughly the equivalent of 4-6 times the recoil of a twelve gauge slug, or about the same as a fifty BMG.
Can you say "tripod required"?

The grenades produced to date do not have electronics that will survive the accelleration to these velocities. Hence, all of the demo pieces they have run out are flown by wire, with very limited range.

Pretty pathetic so far, but then you look at the weight of the contraption, and realize that it is three pounds heavier than a belt fed FN-FAL Heavy barrel automatic rifle in .308. Snicker. I have an FAL Heavy, and believe me, it is NOT designed to be shot offhand.
Sorry folks, but the average grunt is not going to hump this around, the average chick grunt has a hard time with anything more than HALF of that weight, and "elite" troops do not and will not need it because they have (gasp) MARKSMANSHIP SKILLS.

There is a lot more on another thread on this Forum.


[This message has been edited by MAD DOG (edited August 10, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Let me see the M-14 was to heavy and we can carry more ammo with the M-16 in Nam DAH!!did I miss something who,s going to carry it and the enemy will get them for free by picking them off the battlefield cause our troops can,t move!!!!!!!!!!!Originally posted by Destructo6:
It's highly unlikely they'd adopt the thing as-is, it weight 18 pounds empty! I can't imagine saddling every soldier with the current incarnation. However, with furthur development it could be an outstanding alternative to the M203. Guys, you can fling a 20mm grenade 800+ yards and airburst it above a fighting hole.

A side benefit, maybe better than the OICW itself, is that the lower half is a HK G36! To homogenize parts requirements, we'd ditch the AR in favor of the G36 for typical riflemen. [/quote]
 
This is typical U.S. government (not just the military). Ignore things for 20 or 30 years, then decide we need an outrageously expensive, technologically ambitious, crash program to develop The Next Big Thing.

What the military *should* have been doing is have a small but persistent group of engineers, scientists, machinists, and soldiers perform careful, persistent, quality R&D on battle/assault rifles. Plenty of T&E in realistic field conditions, and plenty of research on problems and solutions already experienced by our troops (as well as our allies). At this stage in the game, we need evolutionary development, not revolutionary. A mildly better cartridge than 5.56x45, mildly better ergonomics than the M16, a somewhat more rugged "chassis," a quick-detachable scope, etc.

Perhaps with the introduction of the OICW they'll be issuing anabolic steroids to the 11Bs so they'll have the muscle mass to carry the thing? ;)



[This message has been edited by Ivanhoe (edited August 11, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top