Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- From: "Airborne!" <reedjudddyer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 14 Jan 2006 16:58:41 -0800
I have been talking with one of the XM-109 technicians since it is
offered as an option on an infantry small unit doctrine and structure
concept I am working on. Current weight is 33lbs, but it is being
developed to reduce the weight. I am told it can lose a total of 11lbs
but w/ unknown effects of the accuracy. The technician and I both feel
the likely weight reduction will be 5-7 lbs, putting in the same weight
catagory as the M240B, w/o needing a tripod for full effectiveness.
Combined w/ the expected compatibilty with the 25mm airfuzed round
(simaler to the 20mm round used by the XM25) makes this a VERY
effective system in it's own right. It is also a very uncomplicated
system, unlike the the other "X" projects, making it more robust and
grunt friendly. Thanks for the felt recoil reduction links, I'll have
to ponder those.
SPC Reed Dyer, OANG
P.S. The XM-109, since it uses shaped charged warheads instead of
velocity based penetrators is effective against nearly all light armor
out to 2 and 1/2 klicks.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Implosives?
- From: Roger Moore
- Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- From: manofsan
- Re: Implosives?
- References:
- XM109 + G11 = ???
- From: manofsan
- Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- From: manofsan
- XM109 + G11 = ???
- Prev by Date: Re: Next Generation Battle Rifle
- Next by Date: Re: Future of Tanks
- Previous by thread: Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- Next by thread: Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- Index(es):
Loading