One caliber vs two, or three . +..
The last several posts shed good light on some long-standing questions.
I have my own prejudices about what might be possible and have voiced them in previous posts in this and other fora.
What I have learned is that we don't know yet what the over-riding issue(s) will be when the opportunity for doing something new arises.
So, we should continue meeting the challenge Gene threw down NINETY+(!!-EEK!!) posts ago. Once we are able to sort out things like trajectory, the range dependency of required, when we need to stop vehicular IED's, etc., we can see where the technical requirements take us.
Overriding considerations like cost, custom, and plain old-fashioned prejudice will certainly influence the final outcome. So, ALL the cartridge families we define, including the current set, should be considered.
Hence, I am prepared to accept a cost-driven solution that concludes the current mix is pretty good. I can also see the set of constraints Tony has outlined leading us to a single plastic-cased cartridge with multiple loads. The "3-cartridge" model is an intriguing variation that should be tested against the needs we define.
In the meantime, I'm hoping to get a revised trajectory statement that accounts for more of the comments that were presented, and to get a draft barrier penetration requirement statement sometime in the next few days.
The last several posts shed good light on some long-standing questions.
I have my own prejudices about what might be possible and have voiced them in previous posts in this and other fora.
What I have learned is that we don't know yet what the over-riding issue(s) will be when the opportunity for doing something new arises.
So, we should continue meeting the challenge Gene threw down NINETY+(!!-EEK!!) posts ago. Once we are able to sort out things like trajectory, the range dependency of required, when we need to stop vehicular IED's, etc., we can see where the technical requirements take us.
Overriding considerations like cost, custom, and plain old-fashioned prejudice will certainly influence the final outcome. So, ALL the cartridge families we define, including the current set, should be considered.
Hence, I am prepared to accept a cost-driven solution that concludes the current mix is pretty good. I can also see the set of constraints Tony has outlined leading us to a single plastic-cased cartridge with multiple loads. The "3-cartridge" model is an intriguing variation that should be tested against the needs we define.
In the meantime, I'm hoping to get a revised trajectory statement that accounts for more of the comments that were presented, and to get a draft barrier penetration requirement statement sometime in the next few days.
Comment