Grendel LMG

[BluntForceTrauma]

simulated combat scenarios, so that we'll have some actual test data upon which to make an evaluation.

There have been more than a few conflicts since the invention of the belt-fed machine gun, belt-fed light machine gun, automatic rifle, and assault rifles with full-auto capability upon which a reasonbly informed person can make a reasonable justification for his recommendation based on his own combat experience or that of others.

Shouldn't be too hard unless the military establishments really have no clue? Is my question that difficult? What's the fundamental justification in today's military for a belt-fed SAW as opposed to magazine-fed?

I get that in WWII belted LMGs were novel and even necessary in a world of bolt-action rifles. Nowadays, every carbine has a "happy switch." Still need a belted weapon to put lots of lead fast on a particular target?