DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Guns » Read Ahead: Duck! It Won’t Do You Any Good…

Read Ahead: Duck! It Won’t Do You Any Good…

FL_xm25_092608.jpg

I know you guys are prob­a­bly notic­ing that we’ve had a good amount of weapons con­tent on DT for the last few months.

Part of the rea­son is because after report­ing one gun story, you tend to get tid­bits of infor­ma­tion on another, then another from that, then another from that.

When I spoke with Rich Audette on the Army’s search for a new car­bine a cou­ple weeks ago, he men­tioned to me that the Army was ready to test shoot a new weapon that could rev­o­lu­tion­ize infantry com­bat as we know it (my words not his…but his were close).

I just wrapped up the story and put it to bed, and we’re going to post it tomor­row morn­ing at Military​.com, but I wanted to give you all a head’s up here.

Army to Test Air Burst Weapon for Joes

For once it seems the Army is actu­ally turn­ing fic­tion into science.

After nearly a decade in the shad­ows — with bil­lions spent on ear­lier ver­sions long since aban­doned — the Army is hurtling along to field a rev­o­lu­tion­ary new weapon to Joes a lot sooner than any­one had ever imagined.

It’s a weapon that can take out a bad guy behind a wall, beyond a hill or below a trench, more accu­rately and with less col­lat­eral dam­age than any­thing on the bat­tle­field today, offi­cials say. It’s called the XM25 Individual Air Burst Weapon, and by next month the ser­vice will have three pro­to­types of the precision-​​guided 25mm rifle ready for testing.

“We’ve done a lot of test­ing with this and what we’re see­ing is the esti­mated increase in effec­tive­ness is six times what we’d be get­ting with a 5.56mm car­bine or a grenade launcher,” said Rich Audette, Army Deputy Project Manager for Soldier weapons.

“What we’re talk­ing about is a true ‘leap ahead’ in lethal­ity, here. This is a huge step,” Audette added dur­ing a phone inter­view with Military​.com from his office at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.

Born of the much-​​maligned and highly-​​controversial Objective Individual Combat Weapon — a 1990s pro­gram that sought a “leap ahead” bat­tle rifle that com­bined a counter-​​defilade weapon with a car­bine — the XM25 has only recently gained new momen­tum after the Army for­mal­ized a require­ment and released a con­tract in June for a series of test weapons. 

– Christian

Share |

September 25th, 2008 | Guns | 409235 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/09/25/read-ahead-duck-it-wont-do-you-any-good/Read+Ahead%3A+Duck%21+It+Won%27t+Do+You+Any+Good...2008-09-25+20%3A15%3A00Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Breaking: Names are Being Named | Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Jimbo Jones says:
    September 25, 2008 at 3:40 pm

    I know noth­ing about ammo and hand held weapons but it sounds very cool — unless your on the receiv­ing end of it! One other thing, that camo that guy and his gun have got is freakin awe­some!
    Great post Christian! (betya didnt expect that from me lol) Keep up the great work!

    Reply
  2. FISHERMAN27 says:
    September 25, 2008 at 3:54 pm

    How does it go through a hill? Or into a bunker I don’t get that part? Can u explain please?
    Sounds wicked!

    Reply
  3. Foreign.Boy says:
    September 25, 2008 at 4:10 pm

    FISHERMAN27,
    No it goes over the hill or through a bunker ‘slit’(?). Supposedly there is a way to set the det­o­na­tion delay after the laser range finder’s range has been set.

    Reply
  4. AhzeeDahak says:
    September 25, 2008 at 5:13 pm

    The impres­sive part of this weapon is the inte­gral time machine. The one drag­ging us all the way back to when this was news.
    The XM25 that the Army is ‘ready to test shoot’ had six pro­to­types deliv­ered back in 2005, and they went through lim­ited field and com­bat test­ing back in 2005 as well.
    The XM25 shares its gauge and fus­ing abil­i­ties with the bril­liant XM307. The XM307 that just got can­celed, so we could buy more Ma Deuces that weigh sev­enty pounds more. The air­burst fus­ing capa­bil­i­ties weren’t as reli­able as they wanted, and the reduc­tion in rate of fire led the Army to pre­fer the M2s already in ser­vice. The XM25 seems des­tined for can­cel­la­tion at the hands of the SAW, in a vir­tual repeat of big brother’s swan song.
    Too bad, since it’s a good idea.

    Reply
  5. jeff says:
    September 25, 2008 at 5:37 pm

    When is the army going to give every sol­dier one of those laser pis­tols like they had in the orig­i­nal bat­tlestar galac­tica series? Now that would be cool! ;-)

    Reply
  6. gsak says:
    September 25, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    (quot­ing the comics)
    DILBERT: The project was mov­ing along well until Management changed our cod­ing lan­guage and method­ol­ogy.
    DILBERT: Now our time­line is rep­re­sented by this M.C. Escher print of an end­less stair­way.
    DILBERT: This deep-​​sea sub­ma­rine is look­ing for out morale.
    POINTY-​​HAIRED BOSS: Would this be a bad time to add a few features?

    Reply
  7. sglover says:
    September 25, 2008 at 8:57 pm

    Sounds bril­liant. So now we can blast away at towns that we’ve “lib­er­ated” and kill lots of civil­ians whom we never saw (hid­ing as they were behind those walls we’re mag­i­cally behind or around or some such).
    Then we can scratch our heads when those ungrate­ful wogs insist on car­ry­ing on their par­ti­san war with even greater feroc­ity. Jeez, don’t the sav­ages read the brochures for our gad­gets?!?! Sez right here, “min­imzes col­lat­eral dam­age”!
    But I’m sure it’ll be a great toy to have after we’ve blun­dered our way into a war with **Pakistan**. It’s aston­ish­ing how quickly the same nation that pro­duced big pic­ture guys like Marshall, Kennan and Eisenhower has devolved into a kind of strate­gic retard.

    Reply
  8. William A. Peterson says:
    September 25, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    Oh, the col­lat­eral dam­age, on a per-​​round basis, won’t be so bad, with this thing…
    It’ll be a lot less than you’d get from a 40mm Airburst round (which would be a lot eas­ier to design).
    Of course, that means that the shrap­nel from it won’t be enough to pen­e­trate a Kevlar vest, but so long as the enemy co-​​operates by not actu­ally try­ing to defend against it, it should be of mar­ginal util­ity, at least…

    Reply
  9. Skyler says:
    September 25, 2008 at 10:04 pm

    How are some of these ridicu­lously stu­pid com­ments allowed on here?
    “So now we can blast away at towns that we’ve “lib­er­ated” and kill lots of civil­ians whom we never saw…“
    Are you seri­ous? Why are you even on this forum? All that com­ment really deserves is a blunt STFU.
    and
    ”…the shrap­nel from it won’t be enough to pen­e­trate a Kevlar vest…“
    And this guy must be an expert on the sub­ject. I guess you know more than every­one else to even sup­pose that it may work. You know everything.

    Reply
  10. stempel says:
    September 25, 2008 at 11:28 pm

    Are you guys kid­ding? Shrapnel can pen­e­trate kevlar a lot eas­ier than bul­lets. It trav­els at an extremely high velocity

    Reply
  11. stempel says:
    September 25, 2008 at 11:29 pm

    Are you guys kid­ding? Shrapnel can pen­e­trate kevlar a lot eas­ier than bul­lets. It trav­els at an extremely high velocity

    Reply
  12. gsak says:
    September 25, 2008 at 11:45 pm

    I’m more inter­ested in things like:
    Are the bat­ter­ies stan­dard alka­line, or pro­pri­etary recharge­able? Home many spares would I be required to carry and how much do they weigh? What are the silly require­ments for bat­tery replace­ment (3 bars out of five? 2 bars?). How does the ammu­ni­tion stand-​​up to repeated cham­ber­ing and re-​​chambering dur­ing weapons turnover?
    I guess what I’m get­ting at is this… I could prob­a­bly suck it up with most any weapon, but when equip­ment starts get­ting com­pli­cated, so do the pro­ce­dures.
    And that is the type of stuff that I’d really have to tough-​​out every day.

    Reply
  13. Mitchka says:
    September 26, 2008 at 1:45 am

    Let’s NOT sell this weapon to any­one out­side the USA. I don’t like being in cover, and then to be on the receiv­ing end of some­thing like this.

    Reply
  14. Jimbo Jones says:
    September 26, 2008 at 3:18 am

    “Sounds bril­liant. So now we can blast away at towns that we’ve “lib­er­ated” and kill lots of civil­ians whom we never saw (hid­ing as they were behind those walls we’re mag­i­cally behind or around or some such).
    Then we can scratch our heads when those ungrate­ful wogs insist on car­ry­ing on their par­ti­san war with even greater feroc­ity. Jeez, don’t the sav­ages read the brochures for our gad­gets?!?! Sez right here, “min­imzes col­lat­eral dam­age”!
    But I’m sure it’ll be a great toy to have after we’ve blun­dered our way into a war with **Pakistan**. It’s aston­ish­ing how quickly the same nation that pro­duced big pic­ture guys like Marshall, Kennan and Eisenhower has devolved into a kind of strate­gic retard.
    Posted by: sglover at September 25, 2008 08:57 PM“
    2/​10 for that trolling effort Son. Needed alot more thought put into it though as Pakistan is clearly in the wrong with its con­tin­ued allow­ing of safe havens and ISI sup­port for the tal­iban there­fore the post makes you look like a twat. Protip: You have to think before you troll, A bet­ter idea for you would have been to say how attack­ing Pakistan could have dragged the Indians into the con­flict there­fore increas­ing the chance of a nuclear exchange — then you would have cre­ated a ‘India vs Pakistan’ high-​​jacking of the thread. That is all.

    Reply
  15. Wembley says:
    September 26, 2008 at 6:58 am

    Might have niche appli­ca­tions, but it’s a bit of a light­weight com­pared to 40mm grenade launch­ers. And it’s had so many tech­ni­cal prob­lems get­ting this far­that you have to wonder.

    Reply
  16. Sam O'Grady says:
    September 26, 2008 at 7:54 am

    What would a bat­tle look like between 2 equal armies who both had this weapon that met on a neu­tral bat­tle­field? (In other words, one side has not dug in and con­structed fixed armoured fight­ing posi­tions.)
    Fighting into posi­tions & pro­vide cov­er­ing fire as well as many other infantry sol­der tech­niques might be a thing of the past.
    My pre­dic­tion is that we would need more robots, more fight­ing vehi­cles, more air power/​missiles, etc., and less infantry in this type of sce­nario.
    Can you imag­ine WWI where both sides had these? No more trenches, just run out and engage and get it over with.

    Reply
  17. anon says:
    September 26, 2008 at 8:09 am

    Your arti­cle does not explain any­thing about how this weapon is sup­posed to work.

    Reply
  18. Vstress says:
    September 26, 2008 at 9:15 am

    I’m sur­prised noone has said any­thing about the fact that this weapon looks really quite poor in close com­bat! Maybe if we recham­ber the round for shot? I don’t know, but it seems to me this might be a replace­ment for the machine gun — who’s trac­ers usu­ally leave him exposed to counter-​​fire. I don’t see it replac­ing much else!
    I pre­sume the rifle will still remain strong for years to come!

    Reply
  19. coolhand77 says:
    September 26, 2008 at 9:54 am

    Yah, that would be about a 4 gauge shot­gun shell (1 inch bore). Not a bad idea. Bring back the H&K bullpup semi auto shot­gun with brass cased tung­sten shot…wait, it almost IS!

    Reply
  20. Mike P says:
    September 26, 2008 at 10:08 am

    Interesting gun… though with all of these future/​smart weapons, I really think that these are all like con­cept cars that won’t ever get mass pro­duced the way we see them.
    I agree with Vstress when he says that the rifle will most likely remain strong for years.
    Simple is key. Simplicity in design and use, then stop­ping power. Well, in the heat of things, I assume stop­ping power would be the first pri­or­ity… But sim­plic­ity leads to greater accu­racy, I would imagine.

    Reply
  21. Brian says:
    September 26, 2008 at 10:11 am

    Anon,
    It has a laser rangefinder. The tar­get is hid­ing behind a low wall. You point the laser at the wall and it deter­mines how far away it is (say, 100 meters). You press a but­ton on the weapon and it sets the det­o­na­tion for 101 meters. You aim and shoot the grenade directly over the wall. The grenade will explode just as it passes the wall, thus deny­ing the effects of cover.

    Reply
  22. Zeus Hanover says:
    September 26, 2008 at 3:42 pm

    I used to be in the 82nd Airborne (3–505 PIR) and did a tour in Asscrackistan. To the peo­ple who say that this is too com­pli­cated to be used effec­tively in com­bat I think you should refa­mil­iar­ize your­self with mod­ern weapons, the TOW Missle with an ITAZ (nomen­cla­ture is prob­a­bly wrong… as is my spelling of the word “nomen­cla­ture”) sight­ing sys­tem is an extremely com­pli­cated piece of equip­ment that we have sucess­fully impli­mented in stress­full com­bat envi­ro­ments dozens of times. Fixing a weapon jam on a M2 50 cal mid fire fight is also a pretty “tech­in­cal” and not exactly easy task. The infantry is used to per­form­ing com­pli­cated tasks in strss­ful sit­u­a­tions, I dont’ think that “this weapon is too com­pli­cated to use” is a valid argu­ment. I havn’t used this piece of equip­ment but I am will­ing to bet that it oper­ates in almost exactly the same way as a stan­dard M4, you sight the tar­get, paint it with your lazer, prob­a­bly press a but­ton once you have the tar­get aquired, squeeze the trig­ger, tar­get dies. Your really only adding 1, maybe 2 steps to the process. The sight­ing sys­tem prob­a­bly runs off of a few AA bat­ter­ies which can be car­ried in your pocket; and I am will­ing to be that one set of bat­ter­ies lasts atleast a week. I am also will­ing to bet that if the sights go down that you can still fire this weapon man­u­ally with­out using all the fancy fea­tures built into the sights. Trust me, this weapon will go into pro­duc­tion, I’ve been out of the Army since 2003 and I remem­ber that way back then they were work­ing on this and had been for sev­eral years.

    Reply
  23. Chad says:
    September 26, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    Well, I guess this com­ment is for some of the nay-​​sayers and such. The rea­son the 25mm was cho­sen rather than 40mm was due to recoil forces and veloc­i­ties (at least that’s what I heard). The m-​​203 and the blooper used a low veloc­ity 40mm grenade, not the High veloc­ity type used in the mk. 19. You must be an absolute mon­ster to fire the HV ver­sion from a shoul­der stocked weapon. The LV ver­sion gave good shrap­nel effects but was extremely lim­ited for tra­jec­tory and veloc­ity. Don’t get me wrong, I love my 203, but it doesn’t have the range they were look­ing for. By going with the 25mm they could use a pro­jec­tile that was com­pat­i­ble with cur­rent can­non ammu­ni­tion, rather than start­ing the design process all over. The 25mm was also found to cre­ate much larger pieces of shrap­nel than the 20mm orig­i­nally pro­to­typed for the oicw pro­gram. Bigger shrapnel=better wound­ing. The 25 mm also gives a fairly high velocity/​flat tra­jec­tory with­out break­ing your col­lar­bone. In other words, you don’t have to lob it so much, and you won’t get hurt every­time you shoot it(which means you don’t flinch and achieve greater accuracy).

    Reply
  24. snuffy says:
    September 29, 2008 at 9:31 am

    I don’t see bay­o­net lug on that piece. With a min­i­mum effec­tive range of 16m I’d think you might want that.

    Reply
  25. txzen says:
    September 29, 2008 at 8:25 pm

    I you hit some­one with a 25mm x an inch or what­ever it is designed to go 600meters accu­rately, if it will fire it will hurt who­ever gets hit, even it doesn’t go off. And I seri­ously remem­ber OICW hav­ing a flechette round that was going on with it. 50meters with like 16 darts or some­thing, that would be a room cleaner.

    Reply
  26. bier451 says:
    September 29, 2008 at 9:10 pm

    I want one! 25mm rocks!

    Reply
  27. 4evrgr8ful says:
    September 30, 2008 at 2:49 am

    Hi.Forgive my imposition.I stum­bled here from read­ing an arti­cle re Iraq Vets detained @ Bragg. I guess u could say curios­ity brought me here.I am a civil­ian and extremely curi­ous about how enlisted folks feel about the war, and about the upcom­ing elections.Regardless of anyone’s opin­ion I’d like to say “Thank You” to u all for your ded­i­ca­tion and sacrifice.Our coun­try is endebted to u and your families.Where-ever u find your­selves u can know someone(actually lots of peo­ple) pray for u and yours. God bless and keep u
    safe always.

    Reply
  28. Rhyno327/lrsd says:
    October 3, 2008 at 9:24 am

    The XM-​​307 would have been a good addi­tion for troops on foot. Its not all that heavy, and hav­ing that kind of fire­power with you is worth a real hard look. Its rate of fire isn’t that of the M2, but you will bust ur back hump­ing that thing around. Just not prac­ti­cal. Hk con­tin­ues to field weapons that are well made, reli­able, but can­not get a major con­tract. Wat sur­prised me about the “shoot test”, was the M-​​8 had the least amount of stop­pages. The prob­lem is the poly­mer stock, which tends to heat up espe­cially on full auto.

    Reply
  29. angel says:
    October 23, 2008 at 1:20 am

    That’s OK!But take a closer look fol­low­ing link,It’s great to DVD and PSP
    con­verter for mac!
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​r​i​p​p​e​r​-​s​u​i​t​e​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​s​u​i​t​e​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​c​o​p​y​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​c​r​e​a​t​o​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​i​p​o​d​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​i​p​h​o​n​e​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​m​p​4​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​a​p​p​l​e​-​t​v​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​p​s​p​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​t​o​-​b​l​a​c​k​b​e​r​r​y​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​m​a​c​-​d​v​d​-​a​u​d​i​o​-​r​i​p​p​e​r​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.macd​v​drip​per​.org/​h​o​w​-​t​o​-​e​d​i​t​-​d​v​d​-​t​r​i​m​-​v​i​d​e​o​-​c​r​o​p​-​t​a​k​e​-​e​f​f​e​c​t​s​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/,
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​i​p​o​d​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​a​p​p​l​e​-​t​v​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​p​s​p​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​m​p​e​g​4​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​m​4​v​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​3​g​p​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​m​p​g​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.vob​con​vert​er​mac​.com/​v​o​b​-​t​o​-​a​v​i​-​c​o​n​v​e​r​t​e​r​-​f​o​r​-​m​a​c​.​h​tml

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I wonder if anyone noticed: This attack happened right after...
      freefallingbomb
    • Keep it Simple
      To the poster "Zandor" : You wrote: "Your last post...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      Part III : You wrote: "These airbags are made similarly, so the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      To the educated guesser: Part I : …………...
      freefallingbomb
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      Only two companies in the world are...
      Frank Hols
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Dear Designer; It is somewhat strange that the German Armed forces...
      Zandor
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      The first priority is to get a reliable...
      Brian
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I've seen them to. Believe me, I hate those 19 just as much as...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      You are funny.
      Zandor
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Wow after reading these varied comments, I am surprised and educated. I...
      John
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage