fictitious war...pick your arms

[SHORT-N-SASSY]

[SIZE="3"]Anatomy of a train wreck
[/SIZE]

So your involved in a fictitious war and need to arm yourself with a semi auto rifle. you may choose between the ar-15 and ar10 platforms. for an all around rifle which barrel length do you buy into and what caliber do you pick: 6.5 creedmore; 6.5 Grendel; 5.56; .308; others?

so in this fictitious war i am not restricted by supply train issues but am restricted to platform . . .

Need more info:
What caliber small arms is the enemy using?
Who is the enemy? (Conventional army? Guerrillas/Rebels? Terrorists?)
What is the geography? (Desert? Arctic? Jungle? Mountains?)
Will there be resupply as needed?
Will we be invading another country, or defending against an invasion?

Not knowing any other parameters as Stan mentioned, . . .
I would go 14.5" Grendel with 1/7.5" twist, suppressed with a dedicated reflex-type can that doesn't backblast into the bore, so overall length of the carbine would not be much over a standard M4 profile. . . .

[SIZE="3"]We're in the 2nd decade of the 21st Century. Why would we be limiting ourselves to the AR platform?
I would have preferred the 6.5mm Grendel chambering, but I'll take the 6.5mm Creedmoor, in the upcoming Micro Dynamic Rifle, DMR version ---
[/SIZE]

Ak74n

I can't speak for the OP, but one possibility comes to mind: AR variants are in service with a number of the world's armed forces. The MDR is not. . . .
Of course, the OP isn't clear if he means pick a gun and ammo for use by an army, or a private individual.

What are my restrictions and who am I at war with?

[SIZE="3"]fictitious war ... pick your arms

These Pages are filled with discussions on why the U.S. Military today continues with variations on the theme of the original 1960's M16, and NATO continues with the .223/5.56x45mm . . . a cartridge that some writers have referred to as a "varmint round." That's our "real" world. I saw the OP's choice of "fictitious" as the great escape from that mindset, which has marooned us in the 20th Century: . . .
One need only visit the movies to get a glimpse of future weapons design ---
We've come a long way in the recognition that shorter, more compact is better. . . .
I'd like to think that if we still had the design genius of the late Eugene Morrison Stoner with us today, we might see the reality of today's forward thinkers ---
[/SIZE]

SAS: . . . Looks cool, functioned, and not made to fit the human body. . . . Not picking a fight, just commenting on a belief that in order to be modern, one must make something look different even though its basic level of effectiveness has not changed for 110 plus years (since semi-smokeless powder and jacketed bullets).
LR55

Callahan Full Bore Auto Lock. (As long as there is oxygen in the surrounding environment!)

Vera good choice.

Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.

[SIZE="3"]When I researched the "6.2x34[mm]" shown on the AE-0006+ future assault rifle concept, I found the results --- interesting:[/SIZE]

SAS: . . . Fantasy web sites are probably not exactly reliable sources.
LR55

...but may be appropriate for this thread. After all, we've hundreds of pages of serious debate over alternative military cartridges. The OP appears to have attempted another discussion of the topic but with constraints that avoid much of the nay-saying some of our members are wont to engage in. Some of us who have wearied of the debate took unfair advantage of the OP's less than clear statement of constraints on the debate by interjecting some fantasy and humor. Should the OP want a serious discussion, the best strategy may now be to allow this thread to play out and go to ground for awhile. Then start a fresh thread with at least some of the loop-holes our folks took 'unfair' advantage of to divert the discussion from what I think the desired purpose was.

[SIZE="3"]I really don't think anyone saw this coming. I'm glad we're all OK.


[/SIZE]