John Kettler Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Am thinking of a fairly big spherical device which looked like Hero's steam engine, was spin stabilized and was intended specifically for MOUT tasks like wall breaching, bunker busting, etc. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 I think it became the M203 grenade launcher 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 I like this thing better. http://world.guns.ru/assault/as72-e.htm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shlitzzlipzz@hotmail.com Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Originally posted by John Kettler: Am thinking of a fairly big spherical device which looked like Hero's steam engine, was spin stabilized and was intended specifically for MOUT tasks like wall breaching, bunker busting, etc. Regards, John Kettler Was this weapon supposed to spin, and generate lift (like a baseball), such that they could be aimed and fired direct with accuracy? A large sphere of plastic explosive? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted December 2, 2005 Author Share Posted December 2, 2005 shlitzzlipzz, I believe so. I recall it was about the size of a bowling ball, maybe a bit smaller. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Rocket assisted and fin-stabilised, IIRC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGMB Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Biggest misconception of all time: 5.56 bullets and 40mm/(20mm) grenades are the future if combined. OICW and the AICW are ****ing moronic. Logisticaly stupid- batteries, grenades, repalcement parts, etc; heavy- the weapon, the grenade ammunition; impracticle- the fancy computerised weapons system and optics (they break, then what are you gonna do? You run out of batteries? etc). Just a ****ing dumb idea. And besides, 1 guy with a 50 dollar AK47 is still going to have the same chance of killing you as you are of him. [ December 02, 2005, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: Lord General MB ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Gimme an XM177 over those beast anytime. They just seem bulky. It's be neat to have an OICW as a squad attached asset but they are too ridiculous to field in a more common way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGMB Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 "as a squad attached asset" Agreed- maybe as a specialist squad weapon. However, as an individual assault-rifle weapon its just absurd. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 All the bru-ha-ha over electro-optical kit for the infantry amuses me. "You run out of batteries?" Well, I imagine that you're in somewhat less of a pickle than you would be if you ran out of ammunition. "they break, then what are you gonna do?" Use the weapon on point-impact mode (the default) using whatever back-up iron/optical sights that it's fitted with. The only electronic component of the OICW is the range-setting function. The AICW fires its grenades using electrical initiation, so if you ran out of batteries, you might have problems. However, electrical initiation has been used since WWII in infantry weapons. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 :eek: IIRC, the M16 can be fired "normally" with this thing attached. If the safety on the RAW is off, the pressure of the powder gasses will initiate the firing of the RAW (through a tube from the M16´s muzzle brake to the RAW.) The "holder" stays attached to the M16's muzzle after firing the rocket. The rocket is angled downwards to compensate for gravity. A favourite weapon when playing the RPG Twilight:2000 ages ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Now this is ugly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGMB Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 "since WWII in infantry weapons." Yah- in rocket luanchers. Not in personal assualt rifles. The OICW and AICW don't have iron-sights, as far as I've heard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted December 4, 2005 Author Share Posted December 4, 2005 Kurtz, That is indeed the device I had in mind. My memory was correct, too, since the RAW is/was spin stabilized. What is the current status of this weapon, please, assuming you know it? If operational, which service has it? I suspect the Army, since the Marines have the SMAW. Your description of the angling is confusing. Believe most would characterize the projectile as being angled upward. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 I have no idea if it's used or not, or if it ever was. What I meant was that the exhaust is angled downward, forcing the RAW upwards in flight to compensat for gravity - as long as the rocket engine burns. IIRC this enables the RAW to fly in a straight line, at least for short distances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 Originally posted by Lord General MB: "since WWII in infantry weapons." Yah- in rocket luanchers. Not in personal assualt rifles. The OICW and AICW don't have iron-sights, as far as I've heard. The assault rifle component is purely mechanical, so running out of batteries would not leave you unarmed. In any case, a piezoelectric backup could easily be fitted to keep you in the fight with both weapons. The point was that soldiers weren't regularly running out of batteries for rocket launchers. In any case, modern soldiers carry so much battery-powered kit that they could always scrounge some from a less critical system. As for a lack of back up sights, I don't believe that any standard issue weapon would be fielded with optical sights and no backup. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shlitzzlipzz@hotmail.com Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Originally posted by Kurtz: I have no idea if it's used or not, or if it ever was. What I meant was that the exhaust is angled downward, forcing the RAW upwards in flight to compensat for gravity - as long as the rocket engine burns. IIRC this enables the RAW to fly in a straight line, at least for short distances. I seem to recall seeing it in the US Army 'wish-book' in the early 80s. It was touted as flying in a strait line and I believe was a squash head device that could allow walls to be breached. It would also have limited anti-vehicle capability. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGMB Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 I don't believe that any standard issue weapon would be fielded with optical sights and no backup.The OICW doesn't have iron sights, as far as I can tell. Anyway, these guys had it out over the thing pretty exhuastively. http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-4109.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.