XM25 actually saw combat trials. The reported results were mixed, with reportedly conventional units appreciating it and Army Rangers looking at it as a burden. I’m personally skeptical to treat any of these public releases as entirely truthful, but it shows the XM25s were certainly issued in select numbers.
It was canceled for some arguably inane safety reasons, and speculatively because of a combat draw down and because the M320 opened up possibles of smart munitions which further tightened the XM25’s niche.
I don’t recall which of the handheld smart munitions guns it was, but one (possible many) had a glaring problem, every shot fired from it is a warcrime.
Exploding bullets below 400g are illegal since 1868. According to the treaty it doesn’t matter what you shoot at but it’s customary to only be illegal against humans and allowed against vehicles and aircraft.
The actual ICRC statement on customary practice is that rounds under that size which are designed to explode on contact with people are considered a problem.
I don’t think the OICW program was ever afraid of legal consequences. The combination weapon concept was simply impractical. Once it was split into two programs, the size of the grenades went up for practical reasons.
Interesting. After I got out, my interest in modern military fell off for a while until the Russia/Ukraine war, so there’s a pretty big gap in my knowledge.
The OICW was split into two projects, a rifle and a grenade launcher. The grenade launcher half evolved into the XM25 which kept the smart feature but enlarged from 20mm to 25mm.
The downside was that it was a rifle sized weapon. Therefore it entirely replaced the rifle of whoever carried it.
The M320 fires the larger conventional 40mm HEDP rounds, but it is able to in theory fire larger smart munitions like the Pike missile. I speculate that the increased versatility, the simplistic design of the base weapon, the fact that it doesn’t entirely replace a rifle, and the ability to fire the larger dumb munitions made it more attractive.
Even more anecdotally, if a 40mm doesn’t do the job, a 66mm disposable dumb fire M72 LAW is the perfect way to deal with the kind of moderate cover that an XM25 is supposed to deal with.
I’m a big fan of the 40mm. I don’t know that I’d like that. I liked having my 203, and knowing there were several others as well, which could be quickly switched to. This thing looks alright more of as a niche carry thing. Like, wanting a couple guys to carry one, but it’s not their primary weapon. I can’t fucking imagine stepping out of an apc or fast roping out of a helicopter with just that. Or maybe I’m just old and stuck in my way, I’m hoping maybe a little of both!
You’re talking to somebody who thinks the M72 or the MK153 is the problem solver needed when a dumbfire 40mm doesn’t work. Personally I am also biased against 25mm smart launchers.
Furthermore, lighter grenades and exploding anti-materiel bullets have been introduced since. These developments have occurred without any objection. The military manuals or statements of several States consider only the anti-personnel use of such projectiles to be prohibited or only if they are designed to explode upon impact with the human body. - ICRC
I see where you are reading on the international legality, but the US and other nations looking at smart rounds weren’t terribly concerned on the legal front. The OICW was canceled because a combo rifle and smart launcher weapon was simply too awkward to be practical. That’s why it was split into two different weapons. Once the launcher was stand alone there was no reason not to increase the yield.
XM25 actually saw combat trials. The reported results were mixed, with reportedly conventional units appreciating it and Army Rangers looking at it as a burden. I’m personally skeptical to treat any of these public releases as entirely truthful, but it shows the XM25s were certainly issued in select numbers.
It was canceled for some arguably inane safety reasons, and speculatively because of a combat draw down and because the M320 opened up possibles of smart munitions which further tightened the XM25’s niche.
I don’t recall which of the handheld smart munitions guns it was, but one (possible many) had a glaring problem, every shot fired from it is a warcrime.
Exploding bullets below 400g are illegal since 1868. According to the treaty it doesn’t matter what you shoot at but it’s customary to only be illegal against humans and allowed against vehicles and aircraft.
The actual ICRC statement on customary practice is that rounds under that size which are designed to explode on contact with people are considered a problem.
I don’t think the OICW program was ever afraid of legal consequences. The combination weapon concept was simply impractical. Once it was split into two programs, the size of the grenades went up for practical reasons.
It’s not an exploding bullet, it’s actually a very small mortar.
Interesting. After I got out, my interest in modern military fell off for a while until the Russia/Ukraine war, so there’s a pretty big gap in my knowledge.
The OICW was split into two projects, a rifle and a grenade launcher. The grenade launcher half evolved into the XM25 which kept the smart feature but enlarged from 20mm to 25mm.
The downside was that it was a rifle sized weapon. Therefore it entirely replaced the rifle of whoever carried it.
The M320 fires the larger conventional 40mm HEDP rounds, but it is able to in theory fire larger smart munitions like the Pike missile. I speculate that the increased versatility, the simplistic design of the base weapon, the fact that it doesn’t entirely replace a rifle, and the ability to fire the larger dumb munitions made it more attractive.
Even more anecdotally, if a 40mm doesn’t do the job, a 66mm disposable dumb fire M72 LAW is the perfect way to deal with the kind of moderate cover that an XM25 is supposed to deal with.
I’m a big fan of the 40mm. I don’t know that I’d like that. I liked having my 203, and knowing there were several others as well, which could be quickly switched to. This thing looks alright more of as a niche carry thing. Like, wanting a couple guys to carry one, but it’s not their primary weapon. I can’t fucking imagine stepping out of an apc or fast roping out of a helicopter with just that. Or maybe I’m just old and stuck in my way, I’m hoping maybe a little of both!
You’re talking to somebody who thinks the M72 or the MK153 is the problem solver needed when a dumbfire 40mm doesn’t work. Personally I am also biased against 25mm smart launchers.
My only regret of my service was not getting to fire the mk 19.
mk19 - only got to fire one when attached to an MP unit. Wouldn’t want to run one for a living but it was fun on the range.
It was cancelled because someone realized exploding bullets were against the Geneva conventions, and these were small enough to count.
Oh honey.
My bad, I was thinking of something else, these are 25x40mm, they’re almost full size.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM29_OICW
20mm, think the Geneva guidelines said anything sub 1inch counts as a bullet and can’t explode.
I see where you are reading on the international legality, but the US and other nations looking at smart rounds weren’t terribly concerned on the legal front. The OICW was canceled because a combo rifle and smart launcher weapon was simply too awkward to be practical. That’s why it was split into two different weapons. Once the launcher was stand alone there was no reason not to increase the yield.