I see that the U.S. Army’s new rifle is having some problems.
Okay, the XM7 per se isn’t having problems, but its bells-‘n-whistles sighting system is.
The fiscal 2024 report on the Army’s Next-Generation Squad Weapon program from the Pentagon’s Director, Operational Test and Evaluation published last week indicates that the XM157 Fire Control smart scope that’s intended to augment the program’s XM7 Next Generation Rifle and XM250 Next Generation Automatic Rifle received negative ratings from soldiers during testing last year.
“The XM7 with mounted XM157 demonstrated a low probability of completing one 72-hour wartime mission without incurring a critical failure.”
On the positive side, the XM7 rifle itself, and its new ammo (6.8x51mm) was very much liked. That’s good. But a rifle without sights is useless (except at very close range). But why isn’t the “Fire Control” system working? I mean:
A 1-8×30 variable magnification direct view optic built by Vortex Optics subsidiary Sheltered Wings, the XM157 incorporates advanced technologies such as a laser rangefinder, aiming lasers, environmental sensors, ballistic solver, compass and a digital display overlay, all of which are designed to “increase the probability of hit and decrease the time to engage”.
The XM157 also features wireless connectivity that will purportedly allow it to integrate with heads-up displays like the Army’s current Enhanced Night Vision Goggle-Binocular, or ENVG-B, and future Integrated Visual Augmentation System, or IVAS, do-it-all goggles, allowing soldiers to survey the battlefield from cover using a live video feed from their weapon optic.
I’m just amazed there isn’t a coffee-making capability included.
Ah yes, the old “advanced technologies” bugaboo. The more technologies involved, the greater the number of potential failure points.
Now I’m not suggesting that we go back to iron aperture sights (as good as they are), and by the way, I see that the XM7 has no provision for any kind of backup sights (which pleaseth me not).
I’m all for giving our boys the best gear possible to kill assholes I mean our country’s enemies. But the shit’s gotta work, FFS.
So what’s the Army doing about it?
Despite the documented issues detailed in the DOT&E report, the Army is still plowing ahead with the system’s development. Indeed, the service released a sources sought notice in late January for “novel technologies or ongoing research that would be beneficial for the XM157 system as a module and/or software that provides enhanced capability.”
Yeah, so instead of scaling back the complexity until we get something that works perfectly, and building it back up from that base, let’s make the system still more complicated than the (non-working) thing already is. That’s a proven recipe for success, of course.
We were always drilled that there are three ways to do things: the right way, the wrong way, and the Army way.
I’ll leave it to you to decide what’s happening here.
Has anyone had iron sights fail? ALthough the revolver sights from Smith & Wesson have “upgrades” to something more rugged, I haven’t had the micrometer sights from S&W fail at all. I’m not rough on my gear though so there is that to take into account.
The same can be said about sights on my rifles. Sure the open rifle sights on my Ruger aren’t the best. The rear is a leaf and the front is a typical post but they will work in a pinch. I put a peep sight on it years ago and that worked well but wasn’t easily adjustable. Now it wears a scope but I still have iron sights as a backup.
The sights on the M1A and Garand are quite good and I wish more rifles employed them.
Actually, yes, I’ve had iron sights fail. Murphy rule fully applies to iron sights as well as scopes.
The old 1911’s had the front sight staked, not dovetailed. I’ve had the front sight fly right off after paying a gunsmith to replace the original GI style sight with a taller more visible sight. Apparently he didn’t stake it properly. I now have my own staking tool.
Also had a Winchester model 94 in .44 mag that kept throwing the front sight off.
Also had a micrometer style rear sight work itself loose and flop around every shot.
So, it happens.
In regards to the comment about the scope, there was a Civil War rifle issued with a coffee grinder built into the stock. So there is a precedent.
+1
Both my M&P and the M&P Pro suffered sight failures. In once case it broke at the base . At least I can say I look at the front sight because I saw it wasn’t there any more.
The Pro 9 front and rear sights moved, not only on my pistol but on a friends Pro 9 at the same IDPA match. We blamed the Glock shooters.
As for the XM157 I see the old cache,”All features, no benefits.” My ACOG worked well, had excellent glass and was usable from contact distance to 350 meters.
All the do dads just add weight and possible failure modes.
“and by the way, I see that the XM7 has no provision for any kind of backup sights (which pleaseth me not).”
Then you literally show a photo of the XM7 with backup iron sights installed.
Some how many thousands of US soldiers fired millions of rounds out to 300-600 yds through M16’s and nobody used scopes.
I heard that during the gulf war over 7000 rds were expended for every enemy that was killed.
Perhaps it’s not the gun but rather the shooters.
“over 7000 rds were expended for every enemy that was killed”
a) That’s called suppressive fire, or
b) that’s what happens when Uncle Sam pays for the ammo, or
c) no one wants to die from lack of shooting back.
Also embrace the power of “and”.
or d) folks already burdened want to lighten their load as much and as fast as possible
> I’m just amazed there isn’t a coffee-making capability included.
Combat arms doesn’t run on coffee anymore. It’s all Rippits and Redbull.
> I see that the XM7 has no provision for any kind of backup sights
They don’t come standard (and yes, they should), but that rail system can (and should) mount backup sights.
The standard AR platform is not going to handle this cartridge, it’s the same size as a 7.62×51. The whole idea of the 5.56×45 was to have a lighter shorter rifle that fired smaller & lighter ammo, so soldiers could carry more ammo.
The 6mm ARC will fit standard AR platforms, gives superior ballistics to the 5.56×45, and is not a lot heavier.
YMMV
I’m a chemical, not an electrical engineer so this may stupid, but it occurs to me that the lasers and wireless connectivity are all radiation emitters that can be sensed and targeted.
Can more knowledgeable readers comment on this?
Yes, yes they can. A valid concern.
I bought into the the 6.8 SPC when it came out. The new 6.8 is not that much better than the SPC. The case is a worked 308 which is larger and more difficult to carry. The SPC was a 5.56 based cartridge. The SPC and the 6.8 both have an effective range in the 400 too 600 range. I will stick with my SPC. The new 6.8 does have more knock down power as it is a heavier cartridge by 25 grains. It is still less than a 270.
I thought this question was solved in the early 1900s with the 30/06 cartridge? It works on Nazis, fascists, imperialists and communists. Germany, Italy, Japan, North Korea, Communist China, Imperial Germany were not available for comment.
> I’m just amazed there isn’t a coffee-making capability included.
Combat arms doesn’t run on coffee anymore. It’s all Rippits and Redbull.
> I see that the XM7 has no provision for any kind of backup sights
They don’t come standard (and yes, they should), but that rail system can (and should) mount backup sights.