Grendel LMG

[stanc]

Just cuz everyone's doing it the way everyone else has always done it doesn't make it smart.

Granted. However, I would say it's a strong indication that they at least think it is smart.

Still want to know WHY.

Paging LRRPF52. Please pick up the white courtesy phone, LRRPF52.

And what's the real difference between an IAR and an AR. Heavy barrel? That's it?

Nope, not the barrel. The 21st century "infantry automatic rifle" is pretty much the same as the 20th century "automatic rifle."
It's nothing more than a name change, probably (IMO) to have a three-letter acronym to go along with SAW, LMG, MMG, etc. :eek:

Somebody please justify belt-fed in a modern infantry squad in 2017. "Everybody else does it" is not a justification.
"Well, you really need 200 rounds on-board for those scenarios when you need to do a 200-round burst." THAT'S a justification. Not a very good one, but at least it's an attempt.
Or, "Mag changes every 30 rounds slows weapon too much and puts unit at tactical disadvantage."
Or, "Need physically heavier weapon for less round dispersion at range."
Somebody please think through the fundamental premise and articulate it.

I have a better idea. Somebody build a Grendel IAR, then when Sharky gets his Grendel LMG built, everybody get together and take turns shooting Grendel LMG, IAR, and carbine at a variety of stationary and moving targets in simulated combat scenarios, so that we'll have some actual test data upon which to make an evaluation.