Canadian OICW concept?

ouroboros

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
1 February 2008
Messages
353
Reaction score
20
Interesting design work by Canadian DRC and Colt Canda. 5.56 lower bullpup weapon with long bolt travel, extreme rearward magazine, downward ejection just forward of the magazine. Upper module is expected to be either a 3 round 40mm or some sort of shotgun with multiple rounds, but there's noise about a 20mm special round module (hence the possible OICW comparison). Image shows the benchtest prototype, with variable handgrip positioning and a single shot 40mm test module.
 

Attachments

  • canada-OICW-proto-colt.jpg
    canada-OICW-proto-colt.jpg
    42.3 KB · Views: 1,035
I understand that the 5.56mm portion uses LSAT cased telescoped ammo and the grenade launcher is meant to be a Metal Storm product with three stacked rounds. Of course, Metal Storm just went bust, so the concept is basically DOA. But it is interesting to look at.
 
Concept reminds me greatly of the Australian AICW, especially with the overslung three round Metalstorm system. The gun module seems more advanced though. Pretty compact for this kind of weapon too.
 
JFC Fuller said:
Wow that thing is ugly....

I remember someone on a Chinese forum made a remark "each new OICW is uglier than the last."

;D ;D ;D
 
The most interesting part of this project to me, is the 5,56mm lower part, using telescoped round similar to the US LSAT project. Being a bullpup, 4-row magazine, including a silencer, gives a very compact assault rifle. Just leave the grenade launcher part at home.
 
Wow, quite interesting. 4 row telescoped magazine.

But including that grenade launcher, you have 3 in 1, a rifle, a grenade launcher, and a shield. Maybe you can use it like a shovel as well, that gun is so ugly.
 
I hadn't seen any mentions of a quad row magazine, but that being the recent trend for a more compact high capacity magazine, that does make sense. If designed in from the beginning, then that means the upper part of the magazine doesn't get necked to fit conventional dual row magazine wells, so the magazine gets even shorter. That said, using LSAT style case telescopic ammo means the ammo is fatter, so a quad row will result in an even wider magazine than conventional quad rows. More like a brick/column rather than a thick bar?
 
ynm said:
Wow, quite interesting. 4 row telescoped magazine.

But including that grenade launcher, you have 3 in 1, a rifle, a grenade launcher, and a shield. Maybe you can use it like a shovel as well, that gun is so ugly.

Do you want looks or effectiveness?

I think this weapon is an interesting solution to the problems of single-shot grenade launchers. That it appears to have a recoil system in built also means it's easier to fire and more effective in it's aiming.
 
ouroboros said:
I hadn't seen any mentions of a quad row magazine, but that being the recent trend for a more compact high capacity magazine, that does make sense. If designed in from the beginning, then that means the upper part of the magazine doesn't get necked to fit conventional dual row magazine wells, so the magazine gets even shorter. That said, using LSAT style case telescopic ammo means the ammo is fatter, so a quad row will result in an even wider magazine than conventional quad rows. More like a brick/column rather than a thick bar?
Four rows without necked, how is that possible? I can not imagine how that will work. Is there any design, image of four row without necked down? As the problem is keeping top cartridges of the two center rows.

@Kadija: I want both, an effective design will look compact and slender, that is the beauty.
 
ynm said:
@Kadija: I want both, an effective design will look compact and slender, that is the beauty.

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath then...
 
When did Metal Storm "go bust"? I thought they were still pitching their "3GL" which is probably the most practical use of the concept.

In regards to the original US OICW program, AAI's OICW looked significantly more compact than the Alliant Techsystems offering, what was the reason for the final downselection to the latter?
 
Metal Storm Australia went into administration in 2012 and was liquidated in 2013. Metal Storm USA filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation) in October 2014. The US website still seems to be live, presumably because the hosting was prepaid.
 
Clobbered, primarily thanks to Rumsfeld, who had his own pet project in mind (the XM25). ::)
 
Grey Havoc said:
Clobbered, primarily thanks to Rumsfeld, who had his own pet project in mind (the XM25). ::)

Thats complete rubbish. OICW as an integrated concept was shelved (then split into a range of components of which XM25 is one) because it was impractical, it was huge yet the kinetic component could only have a short barrel and the original 20mm grenades had insufficient lethality. It was not some Rumsfeldian conspiracy.
 
To avoid derailing the thread, I will just note that the study Rumsfeld used to justify the canning of the OICW and the creation of the XM25 program later proved to have an, at best, nodding acquaintance with reality. We'll leave it at that.
 
Grey Havoc said:
To avoid derailing the thread, I will just note that the study Rumsfeld used to justify the canning of the OICW and the creation of the XM25 program later proved to have an, at best, nodding acquaintance with reality. We'll leave it at that.

No we won't leave it that. You are trying to claim something that is clearly untrue. The integrated OICW was cancelled for entirely sensible reasons.
 
JFC Fuller said:
The integrated OICW was cancelled for entirely sensible reasons.


AFAIK the main reason was they realized that the weight reduction down to required 5,45 kg (12 lb) is impossible with current technology.
 
For the record OICW has not been cancelled. In August 2003 three new projects were established to replace the XM29 OICW. OICW Increment 1 which became the XM8 carbine, OICW Increment 2 which became the XM25 grenade launcher and OICW Increment 3 which was a future concept for a weapon down the road that could combine the two roles (kinetic and explosive) like in the original XM29 but was only to spiral up after Increments 1 and 2 were fielded. Increment 1 was later cancelled in October 2005 due to operational demands (GWOT) and Increment 2 is still funded and in the stage of reaching milestones to secure LRIP. I don't think Rumsfeld had anything to do with any of this.
 
Speedy said:
AFAIK the main reason was they realized that the weight reduction down to required 5,45 kg (12 lb) is impossible with current technology.

That was exactly the reason, it missed its weight targets by a substantial margin (and the feedback about its overall size wasn't great either), getting the weight down whilst solving the lethality issues was going to be impossible.

The original integrated OICW was cancelled, the development contract was revoked. The surviving descendant component of the original scheme is the XM-25, OICW increment 2, for which ATK received a contract in September 2014 to complete the EMD phase within two years to allow for possible procurement in 2016.
 
@Fuller: The 25mm is not powerful enough?
 
Colonial-Marine said:
ynm said:
@Fuller: The 25mm is not powerful enough?
The grenade launcher on the XM29 used 20mm grenades. With the XM25 they moved to 25mm.


They had actually moved from 20mm to 25mm while the XM29 was still under development.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Did they make any complete XM29s with the 25mm GL?

Not as far as I am aware. Even with the 20mm system the XM-29 (integrated OICW) weighed 18 pounds against a target of 14.
 
OICW was directed by the DoA to convert XM29 from 20mm to 25mm in early 2002. While this direction just stipulated 25mm calibre it also indicated a preference to use the same ammo as the OCSW (XM307). It took a few months to respond to this directive and OICW came up with using the same projectile as the OCWS but just with a smaller case (25x40mm) for low velocity. Because it would not be feasible to shoulder fire the more powerful OCSW round (25x59mm). The reason behind the change in calibre was mostly cost based as the 25mm ammo was much cheaper thanks to the more space for fusing. It also addressed lethality concerns from the smaller 20x85mm round.


However this recommendation had to work its way through the chain of command and it wasn't until March 2003 that ATK was directed to cease work on the 20mm ammunition and June 2003 until they were contracted to work on an XM29 25mm and to join GD-ATP's OCSW project to work with them on the common shell for XM25, XM29 and XM307. But then six months later ATK was redirected back to work on their own shell technology as the common project wasn't working out (but in a 25mm shell). But it was not long and XM29 was changed from a block program to a spiral program and subsequently further development was delayed to some undiscovered country.


As to a design of the 25mm XM29 there were images of an OICW with a backwards slanted grenade magazine floating around the last year or so of the project. This could have been a sketch design for such a weapon? Or possibly just a 20mm XM29 with further weight reduction. I haven't seen anything confirmed. Also here is an image of XM8 in its final config before cancellation.
 

Attachments

  • xm29.png
    xm29.png
    18.1 KB · Views: 239
  • xm8.png
    xm8.png
    122 KB · Views: 234
So the US OICW is still in existence as a project then?

Whats happened to the Australian OICW project? Haven't heard anything about it for many years.

I know the Taiwanese adopted an OICW. How did they manage that?
 
Hot Breath said:
So the US OICW is still in existence as a project then?

Whats happened to the Australian OICW project? Haven't heard anything about it for many years.

I know the Taiwanese adopted an OICW. How did they manage that?

The AICW fizzled out along with all the other projects by the company "metal Storm". That company is now bankrupt and defunct.

Oh, and it was the South Koreans who adopted an OICW type design, not the Taiwanese, they did it by using a bolt action method of operation instead of semi-auto. Here's a link
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26T_Daewoo_K11

The PRC has also developed their own OICW clone, the ZH-05 , although its only a single shot,manually loaded version.
http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2014/02/zh-05-oicw.html?m=1
 
AICW was never a Metal Storm project. It was a DSTO project to demonstrate a weapon with a digital architecture. Which was subsequently developed into the EF88 (aka F90). Which has been ordered into production. However without the digital architecture fitted as the after market products with digital features have not emerged at a suitable weight and cost.
 
I note that Metalstorm's website in in the US is still very active. http://www.metalstorm.com

I also note that while the Australian IWS is listed on Wikipedia but there appears to be no mention of it on the Metalstorm website. Without Metalstorm's grenade launcher there doesn't appear to be much hope for the original AIWS.

I also note that the EF88 is listed as the ADF's intended future purchase while the F90 is listed as the "export version" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steyr_AUG#Australian_Variants.
 
Hot Breath said:
I also note that while the Australian IWS is listed on Wikipedia but there appears to be no mention of it on the Metalstorm website. Without Metalstorm's grenade launcher there doesn't appear to be much hope for the original AIWS.


There was never an "original AIWS" and it was never a Metalstorm project. It was just a demonstrator with the objective to show how a rifle can be integrated with a digital fire control system. The grenade launcher element was provided by Metalstorm but even then DSTO did some work on it including providing it with a recoil absorbing spring. Which actually worked very well in reducing the recoil of the 40mm (which had a slightly higher velocity than 40x46mm). Since it was just a demonstrator the sub elements of the weapon weren't required to meet in service standards. There was not any funding or objective within the AICW CTD program to provide monies to Metalstorm to develop their 40mm, three shot grenade launcher. When the EF88 program came to select a grenade launcher element a side loading, single shot unit was selected.
 
Hot Breath said:
I note that Metalstorm's website in in the US is still very active. http://www.metalstorm.com

I repeat, Metalstorm, Inc (the US firm) declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation) in October of 2014. The company is dead; its website is just lingering, probably because there is no one left to shut it off and the hosting is prepaid.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/dc-area-bankruptcy-filings-for-oct-20/2014/10/19/23eab23a-548e-11e4-809b-8cc0a295c773_story.html
 
Abraham Gubler said:
Also here is an image of XM8 in its final config before cancellation.
Do you mean the cancellation/deferment of the XM29 OICW (versus the XM8 itself)? That image is very much alike to the early mock-up XM8s.
aax.sized.jpg
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Do you mean the cancellation/deferment of the XM29 OICW (versus the XM8 itself)? That image is very much alike to the early mock-up XM8s.


I don't know that much about the XM8 (just a dusted off G36 right?) and that image was from a conference slide that I was referring to for the XM29 question. The date of the slides was from mid 2003.
 
They should of made it in 7.62 why keep on with the 5.56......
 
Or maybe DRDC and Colt Canada should have waited for the outcome of the US Army's Small Arms Ammunition Configuration study next year?
 
I think so I don't know how many times the 5.56 hasn't proved it self.......
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom