07-10-2013, 04:39 AM
woohoo Wrote:I can tell you they may notice it, look at it, and test it themselves but that doesn't mean it will go anywhere. The cartridge and platform would have to be far ahead of the current system. It must be a big company that can develop a complete system that blows everything else out of the water.
Just goofing off 5 years ago we dropped $40k into testing several different chamber and rifling designs to increase performance. It takes a lot of money to develop, test and PROVE a complete new system.
The problem I see is the military doesn't know what they want. Someone will have to prove their system and then sell the idea to the military that it IS the system they need.
Everyone at the top is going to want what THEY think they need and they will cast a shadow of doubt on every product that they as individuals don't want.
If company "A" does come up with an idea that the mil can actually agree on. The govt will snatch the design and hand it to company "C" to produce.
Sorry for the negative view but it seems that is the way our government works these days. If it was run like a business it would be a totally different game.
To those Guests looking in on this general Topic, under various titles the past couple years, and, perhaps, concluding that we're essentially where we were at the beginning of these friendly thought-provoking discussions, I would offer in addition to woohoo's Reply, above, the last four sections of Assault Rifles and Their Ammunition, By Anthony Williams http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm: "The Lessons," The Current Contenders," Lightweight Small Arms Technologies Programme (LSAT)," "Future Options." Do join us, and contribute your thoughts, as we anticipate the future of small arms technology.