03-12-2012, 02:06 PM
Germany and the Gewehr 1, which was a FAL. The reliability potential of the G3's lack of a gas system is countered by the intricate nature of the rolling lockers. I've experienced good reliability with the HK33, however, shooting exclusively on AUTO, to include short-range work. I find it very easy to fire 2-round bursts with it, which is ideal out to 50m, and using the modern aggressive technique, I have no muzzle climb with it.
The only reasons I say that 5.56 is one of the best cartridges ever developed is because everyone I saw shot with it had injuries that didn't look like anything with a traditional entrance and exit, especially the fatalities. It is not a cartridge to be dismissed as anemic, non-capable, or under-powered.
I do believe that a 7mm could have postponed or maybe even prevented its adoption, but a long weapon like the T44/M14 still wasn't suitable for maneuver warfare. The West definitely tipped the scales away from the submachinegun influence on the assault rifle, failing to learn and internalize the lessons that the Sturmgewehr brought onto the scene, by adopting another battle rifle cartridge. While the .280 Enfield leaned towards rifle performance, it offered more controllability, & lighter weight for the soldier's load.
There seems to have been a definite disconnect between Fort Benning's Infantry Board and the Army Ordnance Corps. Once the bean-counters get a hold of something, you can usually expect a bad outcome. The 5.56/AR15 was a weapon system that escaped the jaws of doom by means of political intervention and huge demand from the SOF community in the early 1960's, and history has proven the decision to have been a sound one.
I think the combination of a 5.56 AR and 7mm LMG + DMR system would have been the most ideal at the time, and would offer a lot of maneuverability advantages today, with lighter belt-fed weapons that have better trajectories with longer endurance over the service life of the system. DMR's and snipers would have a great cartridge that shoots flatter, with less wind drift than the .30 bores, with more ammo capacity per weight.
If an AR10 in 7mm had been adopted in the late 1950's, it could have paved the way for the chambering of the SAW in the 1970's, and the GPMG would have been made obsolete with that introduction of a light machinegun that can duplicate or exceed the .30 bore ballistics for less weight. The AR10 as a SASS has finally been adopted by big green, when we could have had it in a better caliber over 50 years ago.
The only reasons I say that 5.56 is one of the best cartridges ever developed is because everyone I saw shot with it had injuries that didn't look like anything with a traditional entrance and exit, especially the fatalities. It is not a cartridge to be dismissed as anemic, non-capable, or under-powered.
I do believe that a 7mm could have postponed or maybe even prevented its adoption, but a long weapon like the T44/M14 still wasn't suitable for maneuver warfare. The West definitely tipped the scales away from the submachinegun influence on the assault rifle, failing to learn and internalize the lessons that the Sturmgewehr brought onto the scene, by adopting another battle rifle cartridge. While the .280 Enfield leaned towards rifle performance, it offered more controllability, & lighter weight for the soldier's load.
There seems to have been a definite disconnect between Fort Benning's Infantry Board and the Army Ordnance Corps. Once the bean-counters get a hold of something, you can usually expect a bad outcome. The 5.56/AR15 was a weapon system that escaped the jaws of doom by means of political intervention and huge demand from the SOF community in the early 1960's, and history has proven the decision to have been a sound one.
I think the combination of a 5.56 AR and 7mm LMG + DMR system would have been the most ideal at the time, and would offer a lot of maneuverability advantages today, with lighter belt-fed weapons that have better trajectories with longer endurance over the service life of the system. DMR's and snipers would have a great cartridge that shoots flatter, with less wind drift than the .30 bores, with more ammo capacity per weight.
If an AR10 in 7mm had been adopted in the late 1950's, it could have paved the way for the chambering of the SAW in the 1970's, and the GPMG would have been made obsolete with that introduction of a light machinegun that can duplicate or exceed the .30 bore ballistics for less weight. The AR10 as a SASS has finally been adopted by big green, when we could have had it in a better caliber over 50 years ago.