Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
red oct

Next Generation U.S. military weapons

Recommended Posts

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this (OCSW) will be replacing the M-60 heavy machine gun<span id='postcolor'>

No it won't. The M-240 is already doing that.

BTW, the M-60 is not a "heavy machine gun" as you say. It is a GPMG General Purpose Machine Gun, or Medium Machine Gun.

Here is a quote from the FAS site on the OCSW

The OCSW is the potential replacement weapon for the 40mm MK19 Grenade Machine Gun and the caliber .50 M2 Machine Gun.

Note the word POTENTIAL smile.gif

Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your right about that, btw if anybody is interested in know more about the Crusaider or other spiffy armor, theres some nice info of it in the url i posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Objective Crew Served Weapon (OCSW)

The Objective Crew Served Weapon (OCSW) is an integrated machine gun system which couples the firepower of air bursting munitions with optoelectronic fire control to provide all-environment operation and enhanced lethality. The OCSW is an ultra-light, two-man portable, crew-served weapon system incorporating state-of-the-art electronics, advanced materials, and small arms technologies. This unique weapon permits a high probability of incapacitation and suppression of enemy soldiers up to 2000 meters away and has a high potential to damage lightly armored vehicles, water craft, and slow-moving aircraft beyond 1000 meters. The OCSW is the potential replacement weapon for the 40mm MK19 Grenade Machine Gun and the caliber .50 M2 Machine Gun.

ocsw_atd.jpg

The crusader isnt a tank, its an artillary platform, and the new generation of tanks will be (codenamed) XM8 "light tanks" that can be parachuted, they have the same (but much smaller and auto-loaded) 105mm guns from the early m1's and they can fit 5 into a C5. They were supposed tom come online in 1997, but the commanche was also supposed to come online next year, but they anly have 2 prototypes of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, actually that project was scraped, but it looks like exactly what they need, instead of developing new ifv's, that will be hardly any backup to the m1's at all, they could have droped those babies in instead. They spent 1.3 billion on it, youd think they try and get SOMETHING from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OCIW or what ever sure looks nice but i have my doubts about it. What if it breaks down? Im more knowledgable about aviation then rifles and alike but bear with me. When the Dutch Airforce had F-104's the spend lets say 5 hours in maintenance for every hour of flight time.... the advent of the F-16 double this because of it (quite usefull) electronics. What u dont put in it wont break and knowing the slightly less then gentle way this weapon will be handled in combat its prone to be more likely to breakdowns. Electronics have never handled rough treatment as well as mechanics do and i see this thing likely becoming a real "Hangar Queen" to use a aviation term. I.e. operators will be spending allot of time fixing it ..... more so then using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scooby

Nice weapons for such places as afganistan and Iraq where you are fighting against alot inferior opponent who cant put up against fight but in such scenario as WW2 I am somewhat sure that OICW would be too complicated weapons system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice weapons for such places as afganistan and Iraq where you are fighting against alot inferior opponent who cant put up against fight but in such scenario as WW2 I am somewhat sure that OICW would be too complicated weapons system.

well for being "inferior" they sure kicked the shot put of the soviets...

as for the weapons reliability.. who knows.. i pity the idiot who would try to say its crap.. seeing as how its prototype.. nobody knows about it.. I think if it malfunctioned it would be easy to fix.. its modular.. if teh 20mm part breaks.. pop in another.. if the top part breaks.. pop on another..

as for that machine gun *THING*.. man thats an ugly looking thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scooby

Thats because US bombed them first for long time before sending own men in. Taleban was also mostly fighting against their "own (being opposition)" which resulted into alot of taleban fighters changing their side to opposition side.

You cant always get new part and just "pop on another" when it comes to WW2 like war where suply works how it works and when it works. Not like in some pitfull conflict such as Iraq or Afganistan where own troops can operate almost however they want.

I wasnt saying it was a bad weapon, how could I know. It just seems to be far too complicated to work for longer period of time at harsh conditions. More suitable for such operations as Iraq or Afganistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just seems to be far too complicated to work for longer period of time at harsh conditions

some time ago the same was said when some cook suggested the idea of replacing pack mules with a motorized vehicle to help an army move better wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×