01-01-2016, 04:07 AM
stanc Wrote:We're not talking about military RDT&E...The military will need to use the product. Therefore it will be part of the military Research, Development, Test and Evaluation effort.
Quote:In order to show that the cartridge actually is viable for military use, links do need to be developed and proven to give reliable functioning in a belt-fed machine gun.This continued hammering at the link non-issue only serves to give the impression that a straightforward but expensive engineering development can't be done.
Quote:What I'm talking about is determining if 6.5 Grendel truly is capable of replacing both NATO rounds (or in the case of Paul's proposal, replacing just 7.62)Self evident in both cases but with a slight tactical logistics disadvantage compared to the 5.56 and a significsnt logistics advantage compared to the 7.62 NATO.
shootersnotes.com
"To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
-- Author Unknown
"If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle
"To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
-- Author Unknown
"If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle