Riddle me this

[LRRPF52]

My original post is gone and I don’t remember what it was.

[grayfox]

[Old Bob]

M1 Carbine?

[LRRPF52]

[BluntForceTrauma]

M2 .50 cal Browning? Or you're not talking about crew-served?

I suppose 7.62x51 NATO doesn't count, since it's not a "system."

[GitU1]

Thompson machine gun and the 12 ga pump shotgun?

[montana]

Barrett M107 50 caliber..

M134 Minigun

[LRRPF52]

[grayfox]

So, the conclusion thus far is, in terms of firearm design/engineering and innovation, "military intelligence" related to them is, once again, an oxy-moron...

[montana]

In fairness, it has almost always been private ideas and innovations that military weapons are adopted from.. That said, innovation and new ideas are a political risk, which is why many advanced weapon systems are ignored or shelved until years later..Bureaucracies hate real change..

All bureaucracies are self serving and are like a dug in tick, the longer they are dug in the harder it is to dig them out..Trump is a good example of what happens when a person tries to make real change..

When a new weapons platform is proposed, the threat to institutional jobs, careers, etc will fight back.. The history of the M16 is a perfect example.
Read the book Misfire, the history of how Americas small arms have failed our military by William Hallahan..

The sad part is the American soldier has always been the one to pay for this shortcoming as well as the American tax payer..

[LRRPF52]

[Konocti's Wigwam]

7.62x51

One could argue more 7.62x51 was fired due to the machine guns.

[grayfox]

The problem lies not with generic "Army" per se... it lies with the actual people who are in charge of researching and developing the small arms. As long as they remain in charge, the same lack of innovation will prevail.

Plus, and I add this sadly, I think there must be some deep-seated belief they have in ideas like "tech" wins wars, or "hi tech gizmo's are what we need"... instead of seeking out effective, purpose driven arms and munitions for infantries allow them to defeat the enemy (dare I say, "kill them"?) before them. Infantry does not seem to be very important to them any more... how very wrong could a group-thinker bunch be??? Tools are nice but people, motivated warriors, are what wins territory and wars.

[LRRPF52]

[Konocti's Wigwam]

Ok Riddler, I'll bite...but please riddle me this...

The Military is looking for a replacement cartridge for the 5.56. It is not secret that they're looking at the 6.8 Western and the 277 Fury, both fairly similar cartridges.

But those firearms are pretty costly, not to mention much heavier.

So I have to ponder...why not just replace the barrels on the M4s with 6.5 Grendel barrels, swap the bolts out, and use new mags?

The best I can tell, both the 6.8 Western and the 277 Fury are much heavier, so this begs the question...why doesn't the military convert their M4s over to 6.5 Grendel?

There was some weight concerns over mags vs belts for machine gun fire, but by using poly mags the weight was about the same.

So the $64k question is why keep pushing for 277 Fury or 6.8 Western when converting to 6.5 Grendel seems to check all the boxes at less cost and weight.

KW