Here's one that goes with an army futures command presentation from this year.

https://youtu.be/a5thfHTbOrg

It's pretty obviously what they want for this particular application which strikes me as them wanting a better Barrett for AMR and etc duties.

The xm25 combined with what they're doing with ivas ngsw fc envg-b fws I and fws cs makes a lot of sense when viewed from the lens of that.

And when you look at the situation now, the technical roadblocks that kinda kept all this from being feasible practical and useful in the past have very much evaporated.

In my view, xm25 redux is even a good thing as it indicates a sea change and a focus on getting more HE down to lower organizational levels.

It's definitely not the only tool I'd want to see given to people but in it's niche it now has the potential to be a pretty good tool.

Hopefully it's followed up by a modernized 40x46 and 40x51 hedp etc including in MV varieties for infantry high angle medium range needs as well as a nice suite of bigger meaner products for weapons platoons and etc.

All in all though, the last four years have been shockingly productive at actually getting some forever on their way projects into the field or over the line to lrip etc. One can only hope that this trend continues over the next four years and we don't go back to nothing but a lot of talk power points and notifications of schedule slippage/cancellations like the 16 years before the last four.

I don't know whose job it is to come up with these fantasy videos (or thinktank recommendations on future doctrine), but damn I want to be a part of that. They get paid for this?

Anyway.

That thought has crossed my mind too.

The interesting thing though is that they went to the trouble to model the Textron guns and the xm25 in that video, which looks like Arma or something.

This is one of those I don't make the news I just report it scenarios.

Tbh the biggest thing that puts me over the top in favor of the xm25 being built is just to stick it to the contractor that was willing to take very large sums of our money for very many years to mess around with the concept but then balked at building it for actual use because muh laws of war...

It would be a well deserved finger in their eye to see US companies making and selling these far and wide to everyone who wants them.

Incidentally though, the way the xm25 thing went down in why I'm more or less certain that the rheinmetal Hydra wouldn't have a chance even if they were stupid enough to enter it in the competition.

Even the US army wouldn't be dumb enough to risk handing another German company another substantial sum of money to potentially get screwed again.

Impressive armor penetration for 43mm and 40mm grenade

At the Army-2019 forum, those present had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the cumulative grenades VKO-25 and GK-94. At a distance of 400 meters, they are able to penetrate 120 and 200-mm RHA and 400mm concrete.

Good work .keep it up..

Two recent Forgotten Weapons videos about the China Lake pump action 40mm and the Airtronic redesign that was supposed to be offered to the USMC multi-shot GL requirement (which Milkor USA eventually won).  

Original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PmCuJU6w0g&ab_channel=ForgottenWeapons

Airtronic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgpoWP-GAbQ&t=2s&ab_channel=ForgottenWeapons

The idea of even considering firing 40mmx53 rounds out of a shoulder-fired gun like this seems like a stunningly bad idea.  I wonder if they didn't mean for it to take 40mmx51 rounds, and something got "lost in the retelling" somewhere.

taschoene said:

The idea of even considering firing 40mmx53 rounds out of a shoulder-fired gun like this seems like a stunningly bad idea.  I wonder if they didn't mean for it to take 40mmx51 rounds, and something got "lost in the retelling" somewhere.

China developed a shoulder-fired launcher to take the NATO 40mm HV rounds (see my web article on grenades). Unless I've missed something, the current western projects are for Rheinmetall's MV loadings.

The relationship goes roughly like this:

40mm LV (180 g at 76 m/s - max 400m)

40mm LV-ER (180 g at 100 m/s - max 600 m)

40mm MV (240 g at 100 m/s - max 800 m)

400mm HV (240 g at 220 m/s - max 2,200 m).

These are ballistic maximum ranges: the practical maximums are about two-thirds of the above figures against area targets, one-third against point targets.

autogun said:

China developed a shoulder-fired launcher to take the NATO 40mm HV rounds (see my web article on grenades). Unless I've missed something, the current western projects are for Rheinmetall's MV loadings.

True, but that has some extensive recoil mitigation.  The China Lake/Airtronic design is literally a pump-action shotgun scaled to 40mm.  With no recoil system, the HV round in particular would be punishing.  MV rounds are manageable (barely), hence my suspicion that the Airtronic mod was to take MV, not HV rounds.

taschoene said:

MV rounds are manageable (barely), hence my suspicion that the Airtronic mod was to take MV, not HV rounds.

I agree.